482 replies to this topic

[PatrickDougherty]

Grantland weighed in on Markakis vs. a similar RF whose name has been thrown around here: Aoki

 

http://grantland.com...c-brand-values/

 

General conclusion is if they're going to give you the same production, why pay more for Markakis?

[BSLChrisStoner]

Grantland weighed in on Markakis vs. a similar RF whose name has been thrown around here: Aoki

 

http://grantland.com...c-brand-values/

 

General conclusion is if they're going to give you the same production, why pay more for Markakis?

Yeah, FanGraphs had a similar argument the other day. Some of the arguments I take with a grain of salt, because the issues Markakis faced in '13 do not seem fully recognized ... but I generally think the conclusions are pretty fair.

I like Nick, I want him back. I expect him to be back.

I'm a bit puzzled about the idea of possibly giving him 4 years. I just don't think he has that market.

Would be pleased if they could come together on a 3 year deal, since the 2 year deal I was hoping for seems unlikely.

[PatrickDougherty]

Yeah, FanGraphs had a similar argument the other day. Some of the arguments I take with a grain of salt, because the issues Markakis faced in '13 do not seem fully recognized ... but I generally think the conclusions are pretty fair.

I like Nick, I want him back. I expect him to be back.

I'm a bit puzzled about the idea of possibly giving him 4 years. I just don't think he has that market.

Would be pleased if they could come together on a 3 year deal, since the 2 year deal I was hoping for seems unlikely.

Yup agreed. I like him and all, but I'm kind of meh on extending some sort of lifetime achievement bonus to him.

[dude]

Grantland weighed in on Markakis vs. a similar RF whose name has been thrown around here: Aoki

 

General conclusion is if they're going to give you the same production, why pay more for Markakis?

 

...and there's more guys too.  Jamie Murphy is trying to sell 'every day' but the Orioles could probably sign DeAza to a 3/20- deal with an option and then add Rickie Weeks as a compliment against LHers and get more production at leadoff.

 

There's the Carl Crawford factor....anyone looking for a leadoff CO could go talk to the Dodgers and they'd likely eat a huge percentage of that deal (3/62M)....including the notion that Crawford might restructure to get an everyday leadoff job that he doesn't have in LA.

 

I like Nick and none of this is supposed to diminish the role he can play, but there isn't a lot of need out there and there are options for teams to go to, other than Nick.

[FFH]

 

There's the Carl Crawford factor....anyone looking for a leadoff CO could go talk to the Dodgers and they'd likely eat a huge percentage of that deal (3/62M)....including the notion that Crawford might restructure to get an everyday leadoff job that he doesn't have in LA.
 

I realize he has fallen off, but I think Crawford would be a huge get.
He did hit .300 last year, and his game works in OPACY. I also think he still has, for the most part, the physical gifts that made him a top FA, and he can play actual leadoff.

[dude]

I realize he has fallen off, but I think Crawford would be a huge get.
He did hit .300 last year, and his game works in OPACY. I also think he still has, for the most part, the physical gifts that made him a top FA, and he can play actual leadoff.

 

.....so I like talking about this stuff (even if we aren't allowed to because, you know, we don't actually get to make the phone calls)

 

Crawford should be trivial to add.  Think back a couple of years when Orioles fans were dying to see the Os be aggressive with him and Boston went crazy with that contract.  He's got a limited role in LA and isn't playing full time or leadoff.  Would he like to get out of there and into a full-time role at leadoff?  I'm guessing he would.

 

LA could choose to run their best OF configuration with Kemp in RF, Puig in CF and an Ethier/VanSlyke platoon in LF.  

What does LAD need?  Catcher, a quality starter, a defensive OFer and a RH bullpen arm.

 

So looking at Crawford's contract, it's just straight dead-weight.  He's owed 62.25M over the next 3 years.  Let's pretend Crawford wants to help himself get out of LA.  He could tack on a 4th year at 3.75M....bring the total value to 66M and take a 6M SB and flatten it at 15M per year.  Let's say the Orioles agreed to eat 24M of that 66M, so the Dodgers pay the 6M SB and include 9M per for 4 years.  Carl Crawford is now 4/24.

 

The Orioles match up well with LA for trade.  Lets meet all of the needs listed (without 'why', although we can go back there.

 

So the Orioles trade Wieters, Miguel Gonzalez, David Lough and Tommy Hunter for Crawford (+the cash) and SOMETHING(S)

 

Right now, the Dodgers are getting huge value and the Orioles are saving LA money and taking a player they don't want.

 

What would that SOMETHING(S) have to look like to make the deal work for the Orioles?

[Cisc-O's]

What about Michael Saunders? I think he would be a good fit.

[SportsGuy]

Yup agreed. I like him and all, but I'm kind of meh on extending some sort of lifetime achievement bonus to him.

And remember, he was, at best, worth what we paid him the last 6 years.

This shouldnt be a case of we have been underpaying him for years, so we are going to give him extra now.

So, there is no need to overpay.

I wonder if the 4 year framework was accurate...I'm surprised this isn't done by now if 4 years are on the table.

[RShack]

I wonder if the 4 year framework was accurate...I'm surprised this isn't done by now if 4 years are on the table.

 

I'm guessing they're disagreeing about the size of hometown discount... with DD being less romantic about it than Nick's agent would prefer...

[Mark Carver]

For the first time since free agency began this offseason, the representative for outfielder Nick Markakis will speak with teams other than the Orioles about his client's employment opportunities in 2015.

Markakis' agent, Jamie Murphy, confirmed Monday that he has decided to attend this week’s general managers meetings in Phoenix and already has set up individual meetings with multiple teams to discuss Markakis.

http://www.baltimore...1110-story.html

[Coker]

It would certainly be a little weird not having Markakis patrolling RF next year. But we can't overpay for him - there's no need for it. O's don't owe him anything, and he doesn't owe the O's any ridiculous hometown discount.

If some other team comes in and blows him away - so be it. Good luck wherever he ends up. 

[Matt_P]

The widely held sense was that they were nearing a four-year agreement worth in the neighborhood of $10 million to $12 million per season shortly after the World Series ended. But an agreement never came, and the sides have not had any meaningful discussion in roughly a week.

 

If so, then not offering him a QO was incompetence. Just a terrible decision. And the Cuddyer signing makes it so much worse.

[FFH]

 

.....so I like talking about this stuff (even if we aren't allowed to because, you know, we don't actually get to make the phone calls)
 
Crawford should be trivial to add.  Think back a couple of years when Orioles fans were dying to see the Os be aggressive with him and Boston went crazy with that contract.  He's got a limited role in LA and isn't playing full time or leadoff.  Would he like to get out of there and into a full-time role at leadoff?  I'm guessing he would.
 
LA could choose to run their best OF configuration with Kemp in RF, Puig in CF and an Ethier/VanSlyke platoon in LF.  

So the Orioles trade Wieters, Miguel Gonzalez, David Lough and Tommy Hunter for Crawford (+the cash) and SOMETHING(S)
 
Right now, the Dodgers are getting huge value and the Orioles are saving LA money and taking a player they don't want.
 

I'm not sure that he is worth all of that....even with LA taking on salary, he's only worth a little more than 4/24 going forward. With Wieters they either get an AS premium position player whom they afford long term going forward, a starter whose pitching style really fits well into Dodgers stadium, an ideal NL OFer, and a reliever who could really do well in that ballpark as well.
It would depend on what else they would be willing to package with Crawford...

[dude]

It would depend on what else they would be willing to package with Crawford...

 

....right...that was point.  You can get Crawford for 4/24 for nothing.  LAD can woof about 'return' but they'd have to release at least one of those guys, eat the whole deal and get nothing in return.

 

That package has big value to LAD.  Big value.

 

So if you are giving them big value AND helping them on one of their challenges....what else is LA giving up?

 

They are likely going to protect Seager and Urias.....but everyone else should be in play for something like that.  

That's when you get to talk about guys like Joc Pederson.

[Mackus]

If so, then not offering him a QO was incompetence. Just a terrible decision. And the Cuddyer signing makes it so much worse.

 

I agree.  If they were offering 4/$40M before, then not offering the qualifying offer was stupid.  I have always assumed that they were in the 3/$27M - 4/$32M range, in which case Nick may have preferred the one year $15M offer and taken it.

[clapdiddy]

I agree.  If they were offering 4/$40M before, then not offering the qualifying offer was stupid.  I have always assumed that they were in the 3/$27M - 4/$32M range, in which case Nick may have preferred the one year $15M offer and taken it.

With Cuddyer signing a two-year deal with the Mets, it sure seems that not offering the QO to Markakis is looking dumb.   Liriano also turned down his QO.

[Mackus]

With Cuddyer signing a two-year deal with the Mets, it sure seems that not offering the QO to Markakis is looking dumb. Liriano also turned down his QO.

I don't think Nick is as good as Cuddyer, but that doesn't really matter. All that matters is if Nick and his people would have thought he was worth as much, and could get a better offer than 1/$15M even with a pick attached.

I'd still be surprised if anybody else offers Nick 3/$30M. I'd be less surprised if Nick and his people think they can get 3/$30M, in which case they would've turned down the offer. If you think he was going to turn down the offer, then you definitely make it. If you think he was likely to accept it, then i wouldn't have offered it. Personally, without being able to know what numbers the two sides were discussion previously, I think he would have been likely to accept the offer. But if the two sides were discussing a 4/$40M+ deal, then no chance would he accept it.

[dude]

If so, then not offering him a QO was incompetence. Just a terrible decision. And the Cuddyer signing makes it so much worse.

 

I'd guess there's one of 2 things going on in the Cuddyer situation that make the Markakis situation apples to steak.

 

Option 1....watch for another deal between the Mets and Rockies.

[Matt_P]

Even if there is no comparison between Cuddyer and Kakes (highly unlikely), Connolly reported that the Os and Kakes were talking about a four year deal paying between $10 and $12 million per year. If the Os were willing to offer anything more than 4 and 35 and the two sides still couldn't come to a deal then they needed to put the tag on Kakes.

 

I think Kakes should get more than 3 and 30 without the tag. I'd rather have Kakes than Cuddyer. Cuddyer is too fragile for my taste. But the Mets aren't well run. Who knows what they're thinking?

 

Cuddyer received 2 and 21. Seems like he really wanted to get out of Colorado and that he would have accepted the QO if he couldn't find another deal. I don't think it's a bad deal for him. I don't think he'll get six million next year.

[bnickle]

Nick would've accepted the offer. 100%. He prefers to be here. Hed be willing to risk the extra 15 mil  and gamble on himself on a one year deal. If you know he is going to accept and you refuse to pay him 15 mil a season what can you do. I refuse to believe the Os offered 4/40 or more than that. It would be done by now.  Maybe 3/30, but not the 4th year.

 

 

Obviously, weve raised his value on the market some by not tagging him. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets 4/40, maybe even a 4/44 offers. I just cant criticize the Os too much. I would have tagged him and then tried to work out a long term deal and accepted paying him the 15 for 1 year. It's clear DD put his foot in the sand at some set number on Nick that he just wasn't going to pay him in '15. It'll be interesting to see if PA gets involved if it seems more likely Nick is getting close to leaving. If there is a 4/44 deal out there in FA don't be surprised if PA steps in and matches.