Markakis extension on hold

[Sports Guy]

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

LOL..>Are you serious?

Who generally makes more money....Second baseman or OFers?

And Nick has another year of service time.

[tywright]

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.

Thanks for clarifying my thoughts

[tywright]

LOL..>Are you serious?

Who generally makes more money....Second baseman or OFers?

And Nick has another year of service time.

A second baseman who can hit and has a ROY and MVP generally will make more than a young OF with potential and 3 years of service.

[Sports Guy]

A second baseman who can hit and has a ROY and MVP generally will make more than a young OF with potential and 3 years of service.

Would you care to make a wager that when Nick signs, if he signs for 6 years, that he will sign for at least 20 million more than pedroia?

The contract of Pedroia means nothing...it will have no impact on things.

The only way Nick signs for anywhere close to this contract in terms of overall dollars is if he signs for 4-5 years.

[Sanfran327]

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.

Because all of this is true, it kind of makes me wonder why a good player would want to sign an extension before he'e eligible for FA in the first place. Part of it comes must come from fear of injury, and others may feel like they want to get paid in the event that they don't continue to improve, but for a player like Nick, what's his motivation? He can wait three more years (not an eternity), then go anywhere else he wants, and get PAID. I just don't see his motivation. In Pedrioa's case, he signed a deal that really doesn't effect his FA status too much, which seems foolish to me on the part of the Sox. Why would they CHOOSE to over pay for a guy that's not likely to earn $40M over the next six years of his career? Does anyone think he definitely would? I know there is risk on both sides (player and team) in any contract, but sometimes I don't see a player or a team's motivation with some deals that are signed before a player's FA years.

[Mackus]

Would you care to make a wager that when Nick signs, if he signs for 6 years, that he will sign for at least 20 million more than pedroia?

The contract of Pedroia means nothing...it will have no impact on things.

The only way Nick signs for anywhere close to this contract in terms of overall dollars is if he signs for 4-5 years.

Take out the first year, and then I might take you up on that bet. If you assume that Pedroia basically would've have gotten like $.5M in 2009, it basically becomes a 5/$40M contract. 3 arb years and 2 FA years, just like Nick is about to sign. So we'd then be talking about a 5/$60M deal (using your +$20M mark). I think he'll probably sign longer than a 5-year deal, but if he signed it for 5 years, it'd probably be in the $50-60M range (which is reportedly what they offered over 6 years, so they are already getting close to that).

I'd be absolutely fine with anything up to the 6/$70-75M range. That's the 3 arb years for about $20-25M total and then 3 FA years at about $15M per year.

[Lucky Jim]

Because all of this is true, it kind of makes me wonder why a good player would want to sign an extension before he'e eligible for FA in the first place. Part of it comes must come from fear of injury, and others may feel like they want to get paid in the event that they don't continue to improve, but for a player like Nick, what's his motivation? He can wait three more years (not an eternity), then go anywhere else he wants, and get PAID. I just don't see his motivation. In Pedrioa's case, he signed a deal that really doesn't effect his FA status too much, which seems foolish to me on the part of the Sox. Why would they CHOOSE to over pay for a guy that's not likely to earn $40M over the next six years of his career? Does anyone think he definitely would? I know there is risk on both sides (player and team) in any contract, but sometimes I don't see a player or a team's motivation with some deals that are signed before a player's FA years.

1. People - in general - are risk averse. It's a basic tenet of behavioral economics. As such, injury and decline play a role. NM may be confident, but he can't guarantee his value will improve. Even if the risk of a catastrophic injury is remote, is it worth the wait?

2. People value money now over money in the future. As such, there is a strong incentive for Markakis to put money in his pocket now, even if he might get more later.

3. There's a symbolic/signaling value in having a team buy out your arb and FA years: they've marked you as their franchise player. This is intangible, but certainly present.

[tywright]

Would you care to make a wager that when Nick signs, if he signs for 6 years, that he will sign for at least 20 million more than pedroia?

The contract of Pedroia means nothing...it will have no impact on things.

The only way Nick signs for anywhere close to this contract in terms of overall dollars is if he signs for 4-5 years.

Of course he's going to sign for close to $55M - $60M. But that's not the point. The point is how much Nick will get per year in his arb years and then his FA years that are bought out. Then compare that to Pedroia's.

Pedroia will receive a $1.5 million signing bonus and a $1.5 million salary in 2009 (PRE-ARB). Then he will be paid $3.5 million in 2010, $5.5 million in '11, $8 million in '12 (ARB years avg of $5.67M), and $10 million in both 2013 and '14. The club option for '15 is for $11 million, or the Sox can buy him out for $500,000.

So if Markakis gets $6 to $8 for his arb years and $9-11 for his FA years, the maximum total contract is $57M plus whatever the signing bonus is.

If he gets $12M during FA years, like Rios did, then its $60M.

I'll take the bet, if you don't include the signing bonus

[Sports Guy]

Of course he's going to sign for close to $55M - $60MM. But that's not the point. The point is how much Nick will get per year in his arb years and then his FA years that are bought out. Then compare that to Pedroia's.

Pedroia will receive a $1.5 million signing bonus and a $1.5 million salary in 2009 (PRE-ARB). Then he will be paid $3.5 million in 2010, $5.5 million in '11, $8 million in '12 (ARB years avg of $5.67M), and $10 million in both 2013 and '14. The club option for '15 is for $11 million, or the Sox can buy him out for $500,000.

So if Markakis gets $6 to $8 for his arb years and $9-11 for his FA years, the maximum total contract is $57M plus whatever the signing bonus is.

You can basically already guess about what Nick's arb years are going to be....

3.5-4 million next year, 7-8 the year after and 10-12 the year after that...That is if he went year by year. he will be somewhere in the 20.5-24 million range.

Rios signed for 12.5 a year in his FA years...Nick will probably want something more along the lines of 13-15 million.

So, if he signs for 6 years, i would say 60 million is the least amount with 70 being about the most.

If he signs for 7 years, make that 73-85.

End of the day, the orioles have already offered 50-60 million...They aren't going to go back to the Pedroia deal and lower the offer based on that.

Nick will get something comparable to Rios, not pedroia...you can guarantee that.

[Sanfran327]

1. People are risk averse. Injury and decline play a role. NM may be confident, but he can't guarantee his value will improve. Even if the risk of a catastrophic injury is remote, is it worth the wait?

2. People value money now over money in the future. As such, there is a strong incentive for Markakis to put money in his pocket now, even if he might get more later.

3. There's a symbolic/signaling value in having a team buy out your arb and FA years: they've marked you as their franchise player. This is intangible, but certainly present.

I get that, but (as our organization has demostrated for the last 15 years or so), there is no guarantee beyond the scope of that contract. Signing NM to a contract and buying out his remaining arb years may appease him, but it does not guarantee that he'd want to sign another one after that deal. We're watching it with Roberts right now. I'm just saying, we can throw money Nick's way, but that does not mean anything. I have to think that when you make a deal with any player that you have to think of the possible ramifications it may have on the team for a few years past the deal. It puts a lot of pressure on AM to make this deal, because what it's doing is starting the clock on improving the team if he wants to keep NM beyond that deal. I understand that 6 years is longer than 3, but how much money are those 3 extra years worth? And can we realistically expect to be legit contenders in this division year in and year out within the next 6 years?

This is what I'm starting to take into consideration when I wonder why it's taking AM so freakin' long to get a seemingly "easy" contract taken care of. It's not just NM's production and the years in the deal that he has to worry about; it's the years beyond it and the direction of the entrire organization during that contract that he also must consider. If we continue to suck for six years, we've wasted our money and NM's time.

[Mackus]

End of the day, the orioles have already offered 50-60 million...They aren't going to go back to the Pedroia deal and lower the offer based on that.

Oh absolutely, you are right here, and I don't think anybody is expecting them to pull back their offer and make a smaller one.

I think the point most are making is that the Pedroia deal makes it more likely he'll probably end up accepting something closer to what the O's already offered (let's average out the gap and say 6/$55M) than what numbers we've been throwing around for months (6/$70M).

So if the O's offered 6/$55M, he countered with 6/$75M, I think in light of this Pedroia deal, they probably end up around something like 6/$60-62M rather than just splitting the difference.

[Lucky Jim]

I get that, but (as our organization has demostrated for the last 15 years or so), there is no guarantee beyond the scope of that contract. Signing NM to a contract and buying out his remaining arb years may appease him, but it does not guarantee that he'd want to sign another one after that deal. We're watching it with Roberts right now. I'm just saying, we can throw money Nick's way, but that does not mean anything. I have to think that when you make a deal with any player that you have to think of the possible ramifications it may have on the team for a few years past the deal. It puts a lot of pressure on AM to make this deal, because what it's doing is starting the clock on improving the team if he wants to keep NM beyond that deal. I understand that 6 years is longer than 3, but how much money are those 3 extra years worth? And can we realistically expect to be legit contenders in this division year in and year out within the next 6 years?

This is what I'm starting to take into consideration when I wonder why it's taking AM so freakin' long to get a seemingly "easy" contract taken care of. It's not just NM's production and the years in the deal that he has to worry about; it's the years beyond it and the direction of the entrire organization during that contract that he also must consider. If we continue to suck for six years, we've wasted our money and NM's time.

I'm really not following you here. Sorry. Unless your point is simply that we're not guaranteed to contend within six years.

The answer to which is: we're not guaranteed to contend ever. It's a calculated risk. But these contracts play to the advantage of both parties: they allow the O's to get high level production at below-market costs. It offers Nick his first big payday now, rather than down the road, and thus minimizes his risk.

My philosophy is: you buy at market prices (i.e., FA) when it's the difference between winning and not winning. But you always buy at below-market prices.

[Baltimoron]

Nick will get something comparable to Rios, not pedroia...you can guarantee that.

Alex Rios was no where near as valuable a player as Nick Markakis when he signed his deal and he signed it 2 years ago.

If not for the current economic state, which is reflected in the dollars in Pedroia's deal, Nick would have gotten a much larger deal than Rios.

Nick signing for what Rios got would prove the relevance of recent contracts (such Pedroia's deal) to an assessment of a deal for Nick and refutes this nonsense about Pedroia's deal having no relevance to Nick's situation.

[Sanfran327]

I'm really not following you here. Sorry. Unless your point is simply that we're not guaranteed to contend within six years.

The answer to which is: we're not guaranteed to contend ever. It's a calculated risk. But these contracts play to the advantage of both parties: they allow the O's to get high level production at below-market costs. It offers Nick his first big payday now, rather than down the road, and thus minimizes his risk.

My philosophy is: you buy at market prices (i.e., FA) when it's the difference between winning and not winning. But you always buy at below-market prices.

I guess that's pretty much the bottom line... it's just hard to get yourself out of the gutter when you've been so far down for so long. The statement in the spring training location thread says a lot. "Things always take forever with the Orioles" or whatever it was. Our whole organization sucks; not just the ML team. We've got a few good players, sure, but I think we're going to have a very hard time getting anyone to come here to turn it around. It's going to take a good-faith gesture from guys like Roberts, Markakis, Jones, Wieters, etc, to stay with us and help turn it around. I just hope that we have some stand-up guys that are willing to be part of a project like that.

[TonySoprano]

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.

This is all part of the same negotiation even if the talks are weeks apart. Or are either of you going to tell me that the talks they are going to have six weeks from now are not part of this negotiation either? We're talking about ongoing negotiations for a new contract starting next year. The players in this show are the same then and now. While the "low ball" may be "water under the bridge" now, but it sets an unfortunate tone.

Maybe if the Orioles had started with their latest offer in July, they could have finished the deal by now, two months into the offseason. In that way, it's one less thing on MacPhail's plate in January when he should be finalizing the roster.