Would you have signed Nick Markakis for 4/$44M?

[MurphDogg]

Simple question, do you think the Orioles should have signed Nick for 4 years, $44 million?

[Can_of_corn]

Poll it!

[MurphDogg]

Poll it!

Sorry fella. I didn't design the forum. It takes a second to set up the poll.

[birdcrazy]

If you have that money to sign Ubaldo, you have to have it for Markakis. That said, it can be argued that Markakis's last contract was worse than Ubaldo's. They really overpaid for him the last few years.

[Can_of_corn]

If you have that money to sign Ubaldo, you have to have it for Markakis. that said, it can be argued that Markakis's last co tract was worse than Ubaldo's. They really overpaid for him the last few years.

In the long run they got their moneys worth. He had sufficient surplus value the first few years.

[Yardball85]

I love Nick, but it wasn't the fiscally responsible thing to do. Good job DD.

[mskrulz]

It's easy to say NO you wouldn't have and NO you wouldn't have spent it on Cruz either but if you don't spend the money orfind similar production then YES you should have spent the money!

[24fps]

3/33 with a vesting option was at the very, very top of my comfort zone and some of that was the lifetime Oriole factor. This was only one guaranteed year more at that AAV but I think DD was right to back off of the fourth year.

[Loophole]

He probably wouldn't be worth it on a $/WAR basis but that isn't the most important thing in the world. Unless Dan gets creative with some trades I'm not sure Nick wasn't the best OF deal left on the market.

I'm in the camp that blames his horrible 2013 on the wrist injury. I do really think he took a step forward on defense this year. His value isn't tied into skills that decline quickly or drop off at his age. He's an average player you can rely on to get you 600 PAs a year, and that's valuable. I think he'll be a 2.0-2.5 WAR guy for at least the next three years and that makes him a good piece to have on a playoff contender.

[LookinUp]

Yes. In a vacuum, it's not that much of an overpay. I never loved Markakis, but he was one of ours. This was at the top of what I'd pay for him.

[AlbionHero]

No. 2 years/22 mil would have been fine, but those last 2 years we'd likely be throwing a guy out there everyday giving no production.

[Number5]

Not a simple question for me. It is a trick question.

[video=youtube;jcw54z9AhNY]

Can't decide, really. I would not have been over the top upset if the Orioles signed him to 4/$44, but I am not at all upset that somebody else did, either. I will miss Nick, but I do really think that this is an overpay. I'm fine with how it turned out so far, but I would like to see the money spent in a good way to bring some good players in.

[atomic]

Not a simple question for me. It is a trick question.

[video=youtube;jcw54z9AhNY]

Can't decide, really. I would not have been over the top upset if the Orioles signed him to 4/$44, but I am not at all upset that somebody else did, either. I will miss Nick, but I do really think that this is an overpay. I'm fine with how it turned out so far, but I would like to see the money spent in a good way to bring some good players in.

It isn't an overpay at all. That is the bottom of what guys who play everyday and are pretty consistent and produce get in free agency.

[Can_of_corn]

It isn't an overpay at all. That is the bottom of what guys who play everyday and are pretty consistent and produce get in free agency.

Will Nick be productive for all four years?

[atomic]

Will Nick be productive for all four years?

Well he is probably as likely as any free agent. Most don't produce their whole contract.