Markakis extension on hold

[TonySoprano]

Just wanting to make sure that I don't owe anyone legal fees????

I wouldn't pay the bill if I were you.

[Crazysilver03]

Cause it's the Orioles. Nothing is ever, ever easy...unless you include blowing games into the equation.

According to the Sun, it was Nick's side who walked away from the table

Thank you TonySoprano.

I am sick of seeing everyone bashing MacPhail for this one. If Nick's agent doesnt want to talk, then it falls on them, there is nothing MacPhail can do about it.

[Sports Guy]

Thank you TonySoprano.

I am sick of seeing everyone bashing MacPhail for this one. If Nick's agent doesnt want to talk, then it falls on them, there is nothing MacPhail can do about it.

He could offer a deal that actually has a chance of being signed.

[Lucky Jim]

I wouldn't pay the bill if I were you.

Consider it pro bono work, B. That way you get your money's worth.

[Mackus]

He could offer a deal that actually has a chance of being signed.

You mean like the one he offered?

He offered somewhere in 6/$50-6/$60M range apparently. 6/$50M is on the low side, but 6/$60M would be a very strong opening offer.

There is no blame here, because there is no problem here. Not everything is so dramatic.

[Lucky Jim]

You mean like the one he offered?

He offered somewhere in 6/$50-6/$60M range apparently. 6/$50M is on the low side, but 6/$60M would be a very strong opening offer.

There is no blame here, because there is no problem here. Not everything is so dramatic.

Nope. Well, not until it hits this board.

[Lucky Jim]

Or, you know, they don't feel that this is urgent because they're close. They'd like a bit more info about the market. And the holidays are looming.

I don't think there's any particular urgency. These things rarely get done early.

[Sports Guy]

You mean like the one he offered?

He offered somewhere in 6/$50-6/$60M range apparently. 6/$50M is on the low side, but 6/$60M would be a very strong opening offer.

There is no blame here, because there is no problem here. Not everything is so dramatic.

There is no chance that he signs for 6/50-60...If they are saying 50-60 million, it likely means somewhere in the middle..No chance that gets signed.

It is incredibly naive and really, just down right stupid, to think he would.

[Moose Milligan]

Thank you TonySoprano.

I am sick of seeing everyone bashing MacPhail for this one. If Nick's agent doesnt want to talk, then it falls on them, there is nothing MacPhail can do about it.

He could offer a deal that actually has a chance of being signed.

Bingo.

I don't want to read too much into things, but IMO it sounds like this is the 2nd time in two off seasons the O's have irked Markakis.

"I wouldn't say [it's been] tiring, but it's been a long, drawn-out process," Markakis said by phone today. "It just goes back and forth. For the most part, like I've said 1,000 times, you want to come to something that is comfortable for both sides – something good for the Orioles and something good for myself and my family."

Long and drawn out...of course. :rolleyestf:

"In many respects the talks have been productive, but we've reached a point where we felt it would be beneficial to see how the market develops," Murphy said. "From our point of view, we expect to revisit these discussions. We felt that taking some time and seeing how the market shapes up may help us along in finding some common ground. And Andy agreed."

Of course...give MacPhail a day, he'll take a week. Give him a week, he'll take a month.

SG nails it...really, of all people the Birds should be trying to stiff on a few million, Nick shouldn't be one of them.

Hypothetically, say it doesn't get done this offseason. Say Nick, at the very least has a 2009 performance .300/20/100 and is wanting more next season...with MacPhail dragging his feet with crappy lowball offers and continually dragging things at a snails pace?

It's got every signal that it could turn into a vicious circle.

C'mon, Orioles. Make a statement, sack up and sign him.

[Crazysilver03]

He could offer a deal that actually has a chance of being signed.

You mean like the one he offered?

He offered somewhere in 6/$50-6/$60M range apparently. 6/$50M is on the low side, but 6/$60M would be a very strong opening offer.

There is no blame here, because there is no problem here. Not everything is so dramatic.

Sorry if I dont take SG's or JTrea's extreme views here, but I want MacPhail to get the most economical deal for Markakis. JTrea would very well go 10 years at 120M for Markakis now because it would get "Teixeira to sign here."

MacPhail could sign Markakis by making a ridiculous contract offer, but I would rather he not, especially with all contracts coming down.

Right now, there are articles about the Cardinals having buyer's remorse for resigning Lohse at 4/40.

[TonySoprano]

I understand that, but you're right that it didn't come across at all in my post. Why would Nick's team walk away if it was just over the last 10% of the value of the contract? And why would we let them if it was over that amount of money?

I don't know where the 10% figure started. For clarification, this is what was reported in the Sun paper.

This time, the sides moved closer but are still considered millions of dollars apart.

[Sports Guy]

Or, you know, they don't feel that this is urgent because they're close. They'd like a bit more info about the market. And the holidays are looming.

I don't think there's any particular urgency. These things rarely get done early.

So, you mean if Nick agreed to the contract offer, he wouldn't have signed it? We would have said, forget about it..let's wait?

What happens if we decide to trade BRob and it just drags on and on like Bedard and BRob did last year? What if AM continues to not be able to walk and chew gum at the same time and you piss Nick off?

What will the excuse be then?

[Frobby]

Here is a detailed analysis of several other players who signed long-term deals before they were arbitration eligible:

Let's review some of Nick's comps - all these players were signed long term at least three years before they would have been eligible for free agency. I'm only looking at the years in which these players would have been arbitration eligible ("AE") or free agent eligible ("FA"), since that's the position Nick will be in now.

Grady Sizemore (signed 3/06 after his first full big league season, in which he hit .289/.348/.484 as a 22-year old):

AA1 - $ 3 mm

AA2 - $ 4.6 mm

AA3 - $ 5.6 mm

FA1 - $7.5 mm

FA2 - $8.5 mm (club option; $500 k buyout)

Curtis Granderson (signed 2/08 after 2nd full big league season, in which he hit .302/.361/.552 as a 26-year old)

AA1 - $3.5 mm

AA2 - $5.5 mm

AA3 - $8.25 mm

FA1 - $10 mm

FA2 - $13 mm ($2 mm buyout)

Alex Rios (signed 4/08 in second year of arbitration eligibility after he hit .297/.354/.498 as a 26-year old; was a super-2 in 2007 )

AA2 - $4.2 mm (inlcuding $3.5 mm signing bonus)

AA3 - $5.9 mm

AA4 - $9.7 mm

FA1 - $12 mm

FA2 - $12 mm

FA3 - $12.5 mm

FA4 - $12.5 mm

FA5 - $13.5 mm club option ($1 mm buyout)

Evan Longoria (signed 4/08 as a rookie, after delaying his service clock 2 weeks to delay free agency by a year)

AA1 - $2 mm ($2.5 mm if arbitration-eligible)

AA2 - $4.5 mm

AA3 - $ 6 mm

AA4 - $7.5 mm club option ($3-4 mm buyout)

FA1 - $11 mm club option

FA2 - $11.5 mm club option (can be $14 mm based on MVP voting)

So, distilling all this down:

AA1 - $2.5 to $3.5 mm

AA2 - $4.2 to $5.5 mm

AA3 - $5.6 to $8.25 mm

FA1 - $7.5 to $12 mm

FA2 - $8.5 -$14 mm

FA3 - $12.5 mm (Rios only)

FA4 - $12.5 mm (Rios only)

FA5 - $13.5 mm (Rios only)

Overall, I'd expect Nick to be on the high end of this spectrum. Sizemore was signed after his first full season, therefore there was more risk involved. Granderson was signed after his second full season, therefore more risk involved, and because of his age, he has less upside than Nick. Rios has more service time than Nick (which favors Rios), but he's also older and has a bit less upside. Longoria has huge upside, but because he was signed so early and before he had any established major league track record, is also risky. Add to all this the fact that the salary structure always goes up in MLB.

So, for Nick, I'd say:

AA1 - $3.5 - 4 mm

AA2 - $5 - 5.5 mm

AA3 - $7.5 - 8.5 mm

FA1 - $10-11 mm

FA2 - $12-13 mm

FA3 - $12-13 mm

FA4 - $13 mm

FA5 - $13.5 mm (club option, $2 mm buyout)

So, overall, 7 years, $63-68 mm, with a $13.5 mm club option for 2016 ($2 mm buyout).

Now that I've done the math, I fully agree with SG that 7/$70 mm would easily get this done. We could probably get it done for a bit less that that. Given Nick's age, I'd rather have a longer contract than a shorter one.

Later in that thread, I said that while 7/$70mm was fair, I'd go to 7/$80mm if I had to.

If you look at how I derived those numbers, you'll see that 6/$55 mm is very fair, arguably even generous. For a 6-year deal, I would have said the range was $50-55 mm. So if the O's are talking $55-60mm for six years, that's definitely a market-level price. I'd go a little higher if I had to, and I'd certainly go to 7 years if Nick insisted (in fact, I'd prefer it, given his age).

I wonder what Nick is saying he wants?

[Sports Guy]

Well, I'm hoping that the Orioles realize that Markakis is going to sign for between 60-65 million if the contract is six years. I'm hoping his side realizes the same thing.

Doing this comp is relatively straight forward, isn't it? Am I missing something?

My point is exactly what you seem to be implying. One side or the other is either WAY off in what the market value for Nick's services should be OR there is something else going on.

If his side believes that 6/80 is fair or mgmt thinks that 6/50 is fair, then we're completely screwed because neither position is defendable IMO.

Well, Nick may want 7 years for 73-85 million, which is better than Rios' deal.

[Sports Guy]

Here is a detailed analysis of several other players who signed long-term deals before they were arbitration eligible:

Later in that thread, I said that while 7/$70mm was fair, I'd go to 7/$80mm if I had to.

If you look at how I derived those numbers, you'll see that 6/$55 mm is very fair, arguably even generous. For a 6-year deal, I would have said the range was $50-55 mm. So if the O's are talking $55-60mm for six years, that's definitely a market-level price. I'd go a little higher if I had to, and I'd certainly go to 7 years if Nick insisted (in fact, I'd prefer it, given his age).

I wonder what Nick is saying he wants?

If you include the signing bonus and buyout, Rios is making 57 million for the first 6 years of the deal...We have to beat that.