Markakis extension on hold

[Sports Guy]

I really don't get this.

Lets say the offer was 6/55. If they just add an average of 1.5 million a year to it it gets us in the ballpark of where the offer should be. Not a whole lot more then what they offered, but a world away from offering Nick a contract that is less valuable than a player he is better than and younger than in Rios.

Let me take something back....If Nick wants to sign for 6 years, then putting 55-60 million on the table, that is fair offer but likely not enough.

When you include his signing bonus and his buyout, Rios is due 57.3 million in his first 6 years of his deal.

For Nick, that number likely needs to be in the 60-65 range for 6 years.

Now, 2 questions come to mind:

1) Is the money closer to 50 million or 60 million? If it is closer to 50 million, it is a bad offer IMO...If it is closer to 60 million, its not a bad offer but its clearly not enough...Either way, they have to offer more and they should know that.

2) If Nick wants to beat Rios' offer and he wants to sign for 7 years, then we are likely 1 year and 15ish million apart, which is a big difference.

[tywright]

Which is basically what I said too.

As I said, that is a complete joke of an offer...Fairly significant meant exactly what i said it did.

For them to think he is going to sign for less than Rios(unless Nick wants less years, which doesn't seem to be the case), is a joke.

Seem out of touch with reality.

Compared to Pedroia's new deal, it's not a joke of an offer. The Rios contract is a bad deal for the Jays in retrospect.

[Lucky Jim]

Let me take something back....If Nick wants to sign for 6 years, then putting 55-60 million on the table, that is fair offer but likely not enough.

When you include his signing bonus and his buyout, Rios is due 57.3 million in his first 6 years of his deal.

For Nick, that number likely needs to be in the 60-65 range for 6 years.

Now, 2 questions come to mind:

1) Is the money closer to 50 million or 60 million? If it is closer to 50 million, it is a bad offer IMO...If it is closer to 60 million, its not a bad offer but its clearly not enough...Either way, they have to offer more and they should know that.

2) If Nick wants to beat Rios' offer and he wants to sign for 7 years, then we are likely 1 year and 15ish million apart, which is a big difference.

I think that if the offer is $55m or above, it's a fine initial offer. It clearly sets the table to surpass Rios.

[Sports Guy]

Compared to Pedroia's new deal, it's not a joke of an offer. The Rios contract is a bad deal for the Jays in retrospect.

Pedroia has nothing to do with Nick.

And whether the Rios contract is bad or not, that will still be the contract Nick points to.

[Mackus]

Its not like the Orioles said 6/$60M is their final offer (or whatever they offered). Thats a fine opening offer. Anybody who thinks they should come in with their best offer right away clearly knows nothing about negotiations.

Bottom line is this is all utterly irrelevant as long as Nick gets signed, which I still think is likely. Once I think its unlikely, I'll start getting worried and angry. But for now, I won't be saying stupid things like "this is unacceptable" or that "the Orioles are a joke".

[MikeAD]

Compared to Pedroia's new deal, it's not a joke of an offer. The Rios contract is a bad deal for the Jays in retrospect.

It doesn't matter if the Rios' deal was bad for the Jays. In fact it might help. Nick and his agent can point to the fact that the Jays were making Rios the face of the franchise/future and they did what it took to keep him. Now the Orioles need to do the same.

And we can't compare Pedroia's contract to Nick's. Two different players, two very different situations.

[Sanfran327]

I think that if the offer is $55m or above, it's a fine initial offer. It clearly sets the table to surpass Rios.

Pedroia has nothing to do with Nick.

And whether the Rios contract is bad or not, that will still be the contract Nick points to.

I think Markakis is a better player than Rios... Both sides should be comfortable with that exact contract, especially considering its a year (or two?) after Rio's deal. I'd be extatic if we could get that done with him.

[MikeAD]

I think Markakis is a better player than Rios... Both sides should be comfortable with that exact contract, especially considering its a year (or two?) after Rio's deal. I'd be extatic if we could get that done with him.

The time difference is a wash. Rios got the extension before last season but Markakis is two years younger, but came into the league one year before. So if we extend Nick now, its at about the same point.

[Sports Guy]

I think that if the offer is $55m or above, it's a fine initial offer. It clearly sets the table to surpass Rios.

Why waste time?

It is what it is...We know what we have to put out there...All you need to know is how many years does Nick want to sign for...It sounds like he is open to signing for 6-7 years...You KNOW Nick isn't going to sign for 6/50-55...Its just not happening...You have to offer more than what Rios has over 6 years, which is 57 million.

If the Orioles offered something like 6/60-65, that would be a better offer IMO.

But whatever, as long as it gets done...Just don't see the need to fart around with this. It should have been done anytime over the past year.

It has to get done this offseason.

[TonySoprano]

Its not like the Orioles said 6/$60M is their final offer (or whatever they offered). Thats a fine opening offer. Anybody who thinks they should come in with their best offer right away clearly knows nothing about negotiations.

They didn't come in with their best offer right away, but one that was described as "lowball." If Schmuck is correct, the Orioles have improved since then.

[tywright]

Pedroia has nothing to do with Nick.

And whether the Rios contract is bad or not, that will still be the contract Nick points to.

Pedroia's contract definitely has some impact even if he was still pre-arb. Playing different positions doesn't mean a thing either.

[Mackus]

They didn't come in with their best offer right away, but one that was described as "lowball." If Schmuck is correct, the Orioles have improved since then.

I wasn't including that initial offer in this round of discussions. You are correct that the reports were that the offer was way too low earlier in the year, and I do believe those reports. Its good that they've come in with something respectable this time. As long as Nick isn't being unreasonable, and I doubt that he is, I expect this to get done before they go to arbitration.

[Mackus]

Pedroia's contract definitely has some impact even if he was still pre-arb. Playing different positions doesn't mean a thing either.

Different positions certainly does means a lot, but it doesn't mean that the two have no similarities and that the contracts have no bearing on each other, which SG implied before.

[Lucky Jim]

Why waste time?

It is what it is...We know what we have to put out there...All you need to know is how many years does Nick want to sign for...It sounds like he is open to signing for 6-7 years...You KNOW Nick isn't going to sign for 6/50-55...Its just not happening...You have to offer more than what Rios has over 6 years, which is 57 million.

If the Orioles offered something like 6/60-65, that would be a better offer IMO.

But whatever, as long as it gets done...Just don't see the need to fart around with this. It should have been done anytime over the past year.

It has to get done this offseason.

It's a matter of opinion. I think that's too high for an initial offer, unless you plan on blowing the Rios offer out of the water. I doubt we do. And don't think we should.

Everything else - the timing, the past year - is white noise and utterly irrelevant. You may think it should have gotten done, but it's neither here nor there. Signing him last year would change nothing except for the slight opportunity costs inherent in any negotiation (i.e., time sunk in this that could be spent elsewhere.) But, just because those exist doesn't mean their substantial - and in fact they're likely not.

[Lucky Jim]

They didn't come in with their best offer right away, but one that was described as "lowball." If Schmuck is correct, the Orioles have improved since then.

I don't consider that tentative offer early in the year part of the same negotiation. That's just me.

In this negotiation, this is our opening offer, and it's solid. It positions to the contract to exceed Rios's, but not extravagantly. Which is spot-on. Rios is overpaid, but it's still the benchmark.