Is Nick Markakis still an everyday player?

[AlbionHero]

Interesting. How much actual team building experience do you have, that leads to this feeling?

Well, not real ones but I do play simulation based video games like Out of the Park a lot where you run a team simply based on the pure stats. I think playing those types of games make me look the players more as easily replaceable parts that need to put up a specific amount of stats more than real people.

[Reboulet'sStache]

Interesting. How much actual team building experience do you have, that leads to this feeling?

Does fantasy baseball count?

[El Gordo]

Well, not real ones but I do play simulation based video games like Out of the Park a lot where you run a team simply based on the pure stats. I think playing those types of games make me look the players more as easily replaceable parts that need to put up a specific amount of stats more than real people.

I'm sure it does but there is a difference between reality and virtual reality. Most successful businesses have a Human Resources dept. Why do you suppose that is?

[El Gordo]

Does fantasy baseball count?

Not in my book. How much does anyone's fantasy resemble real life.

[Reboulet'sStache]

Not in my book. How much does anyone's fantasy resemble real life.

Hugh Hefner's probably does.

[El Gordo]

No more or less than anyone on the other side of the argument does?

In other words no one really has any idea what they are talking about. I would concur with that.

[Scrat1]

In other words no one really has any idea what they are talking about. I would concur with that.

OK, if you concur with that, why are you posting here? Why discuss anything at all?

[Frobby]

As I mentioned in my previous post, citing Nick's 2014 numbers as if this is his baseline ability is disingenuous. It's the most he has been worth in four years. There's no reason to think that's what he's likely to produce over the next several years, especially considering it took 700 PA to accumulate. The average of his past four years, 1.45 fWAR, gives much more weight to RebStache's argument.

So the standard by which you can be viewed as a fringy regular is if he produce a few negative WAR seasons in a row? That can't be right.

And what are all of these players paying for this production? Assuming what you are saying is right. The problem is you eventually reach the point where teams don't give you long term contracts at what is basically the market rate for your production. Instead they promote minor league players and let them give them whatever production they can. They sign one year platoon players' date=' etc. Nick, based on his production over the last two years, has reached the point where it's unclear whether he should be looked at as the kind of player you seek out as a major league regular. Where the regular starter money risk vs reward is worth it.[/quote']

You guys are misunderstanding the context of my statements. I am not arguing right now that Nick should get a four year contract, or that he's worth $10 mm/yr. I'm merely arguing that there's no basis for Keith Law's statement that he's not even sure that Markakis is a regular right now.

And if I may say so, I don't consider 2014 to be Nick's high water mark over the last several years. That would be 2012, which unfortunately was interrupted by injuries. Last year was an OK bounce back season from 2013, but nothing special. As a Nick fan, I'm hoping that he is still capable of having some future seasons that are better than 2014, but I certainly wouldn't assume that for purposes of evaluating what contract he should receive. I also wouldn't expect 2013 to be the norm.

[Reboulet'sStache]

You guys are misunderstanding the context of my statements. I am not arguing right now that Nick should get a four year contract, or that he's worth $10 mm/yr. I'm merely arguing that there's no basis for Keith Law's statement that he's not even sure that Markakis is a regular right now.

But there is a basis for Keith Law's statement.

The standard under which we judge if a player is perhaps not a major league regular anymore, let alone definitively, shouldn't be 3 negative WAR seasons in 4 years. That's just an incredibly high standard.

Markakis had a negative WAR season in 2013. In 2014, he needed to have his best fielding year in a long time, and rank in the top 5 in all of baseball in plate appearances, to even post a 2.1 WAR year. Now I'm not sure what you believe is the minimum level of production for a season for you to be a legit major league regular, as you seem to not like a 2 WAR year. But whatever number you have it at, Markakis, realistically, could easily be there going forward, based on his last two years.

[weams]

But there is a basis for Keith Law's statement.

The standard under which we judge if a player is perhaps not a major league regular anymore' date=' let alone definitively, shouldn't be 3 negative WAR seasons in 4 years. That's just an incredibly high standard.

Markakis had a negative WAR season in 2013. In 2014, he needed to have his best fielding year in a long time, and rank in the top 5 in all of baseball in plate appearances, to even post a 2.1 WAR year. Now I'm not sure what you believe is the minimum level of production for a season for you to be a legit major league regular, as you seem to not like a 2 WAR year. But whatever number you have it at, Markakis, realistically, could easily be there going forward, based on his last two years.[/quote']

If Nick Markakis is not an everyday player, then he's done. He is only 31. He is not going to platoon.

[Frobby]

But there is a basis for Keith Law's statement.

The standard under which we judge if a player is perhaps not a major league regular anymore' date=' let alone definitively, shouldn't be 3 negative WAR seasons in 4 years. That's just an incredibly high standard.

Markakis had a negative WAR season in 2013. In 2014, he needed to have his best fielding year in a long time, and rank in the top 5 in all of baseball in plate appearances, to even post a 2.1 WAR year. Now I'm not sure what you believe is the minimum level of production for a season for you to be a legit major league regular, as you seem to not like a 2 WAR year. But whatever number you have it at, Markakis, realistically, could easily be there going forward, based on his last two years.[/quote']

I think if Nick had played in the first half of 2014 as he did in the last four months of 2013, his status as a regular would have been seriously threatened. I don't think it take three negative years out of four, and I don't know why you are implying that I said that. For now, however, Nick is the opposite, a guy who has had one negative year and 8 years of production of at least 1.7 rWAR and 1.6 fWAR. I think you are living in fantasyland if you think it's likely that Nick will play at a level that jeopardizes his status as a regular in 2015.

[weams]

I think if Nick had played in the first half of 2014 as he did in the last four months of 2013, his status as a regular would have been seriously threatened. I don't think it take three negative years out of four, and I don't know why you are implying that I said that. For now, however, Nick is the opposite, a guy who has had one negative year and 8 years of production of at least 1.7 rWAR and 1.6 fWAR. I think you are living in fantasyland if you think it's likely that Nick will play at a level that jeopardizes his status as a regular in 2015.

But Keith Law and his smugness believes that. And he has a following. And a Marrow recipe. http://www.reluctantgourmet.com/cooking-with-bone-marrow/

[Reboulet'sStache]

I think if Nick had played in the first half of 2014 as he did in the last four months of 2013, his status as a regular would have been seriously threatened. I don't think it take three negative years out of four, and I don't know why you are implying that I said that. For now, however, Nick is the opposite, a guy who has had one negative year and 8 years of production of at least 1.7 rWAR and 1.6 fWAR. I think you are living in fantasyland if you think it's likely that Nick will play at a level that jeopardizes his status as a regular in 2015.

You said Nick would need a few more years in a row with a 2013 type of performance. Which would seem to imply that only if Markakis had 3 out of 4 years with a negative WAR, would you say he was no longer a regular.

Law didn't say it was "likely," he said it's not clear. You said there was no evidence why someone could say it isn't clear that Markakis deserves to be a regular starter going forward. And that just isn't true. Anytime you have a negative WAR year, and then follow that up with a year in which you need your best fielding year in 4 years and as many at bats as about any player in MLB, just so you can put forth a 2.1 WAR season, there is at least legit reason why an intelligent person could say it's not clear if Markakis is going to be a productive enough player into his 30's to be an everyday starter going forward.

[Can_of_corn]

But Keith Law and his smugness believes that. And he has a following. And a Marrow recipe. http://www.reluctantgourmet.com/cooking-with-bone-marrow/

Roasted marrow is so good. And a breeze to make at home.

[Oriole1940]

Nick is a loyal and long tenured Oriole. With that said, he shouldn't be paid like he is 27. His injury history and power numbers would suggest that signing him to a four year deal at the projected dollars mention would be counter productive for a .280 hitter that hits 15 HR's and drives in 60

IMO Nick does not have an injury history, unless you count a time he was hit, probably on purpose, by a d*** Yankee. He is penciled in the lineup card Every day, and rarely lets the team down. If the Orioles do not win the WS in 2015, it will not be because Nick is playing right field. He is in my book, Mr. Reliable, and by the way, a current Gold Glove winner.