Braves sniffing around on Markakis; Official 4 years 44 million.

[Enscheff]

Markakis makes some sense once the JUp and Gattis trades are complete. He is durable, can play RF competently (though not at Heyward's level), and should provide an OBP around ~.350 with some decent pop (10-15 HRs). He is literally a poor man's Jason Heyward, but without the recent platoon split Heyward has shown. He would slot in very nicely at the top of the lineup.

The problem is obviously going to be the price. He has already turned down a 4 year deal from the O's for $10M-$12M per year, and I don't think the Braves should be trying to top that offer. If he can be had for around 4/40 I think he would be a solid addition.

[yeezus]

Markakis makes some sense once the JUp and Gattis trades are complete. He is durable, can play RF competently (though not at Heyward's level), and should provide an OBP around ~.350 with some decent pop (10-15 HRs). He is literally a poor man's Jason Heyward, but without the recent platoon split Heyward has shown. He would slot in very nicely at the top of the lineup.

AND without Heyward's upside, which is still substantial.

[50PoundHead]

I've always thought he might be a fallback option for the Braves, but it's all going to depend on price. I don't like his trend line. If he's turned down $10 MM per year from the O's, I don't see him as being a fit for us.

[clvclv]

The word I heard this morning is that the negotiations fell apart after the Orioles started waffling on the fourth year. The offer on the table apparently stood at 4/$50 million.

[50PoundHead]

I think the thing is if we didn't view ourselves as contenders with Heyward, why would we invest in Markakis? I get the financial implications and all that, but it just wouldn't seem to make that much sense to sign Markakis except that someone has to stand in RF.

[Hawk]

I think the thing is if we didn't view ourselves as contenders with Heyward, why would we invest in Markakis? I get the financial implications and all that, but it just wouldn't seem to make that much sense to sign Markakis except that someone has to stand in RF.

It lends itself greatly to the theory of the Braves desire to move Heyward having little to do with finance.

[Enscheff]

It lends itself greatly to the theory of the Braves desire to move Heyward having little to do with finance.

No, it means the Braves could afford to spend $10M for a RFer, but can't afford to spend $25M on a RFer no matter how good he might be some day.

It's a little silly how some posters insist on making the Heyward trade anything more than the simple fact "the Braves couldn't afford the asking price of a RFer that wasn't a consistent middle of the lineup producer". Freeman has proven to be that consistent middle of the order bat, so he got the big bucks. Heyward hasn't yet proven it, so he didn't get the same money from the Braves.

Seriously, does every damn thread have to be turned into a Heyward bitchfest?

[Hawk]

Seriously, does every damn thread have to be turned into a Heyward bitchfest?

Yes, because he was a crucial component of the team and beloved by the fanbase -- and the move to trade him precipitated the 're-tooling' era that we find ourselves in now. And there haven't been any moves since. So it's a fairly natural line of debate.

Also, don't you find it contradictory that the team moves Heyward under the flimsily evidenced auspices of 'He wanted big bucks' but subsequently involves itself in the process of spending those big bucks anyways?

Saying that the Braves didn't see Heyward being worth the money is essentially the same thing as saying they didn't want to pay him $25MM.

[yeezus]

Yes, because he was a crucial component of the team and beloved by the fanbase -- and the move to trade him precipitated the 're-tooling' era that we find ourselves in now. And there haven't been any moves since. So it's a fairly natural line of debate.

It's a very relevant topic still in everything that happens after it.

[nsacpi]

Also, don't you find it contradictory that the team moves Heyward under the flimsily evidenced auspices of 'He wanted big bucks' but subsequently involves itself in the process of spending those big bucks anyways?

Are you referring to kicking the tires on Lester?

[50PoundHead]

No, it means the Braves could afford to spend $10M for a RFer, but can't afford to spend $25M on a RFer no matter how good he might be some day.

It's a little silly how some posters insist on making the Heyward trade anything more than the simple fact "the Braves couldn't afford the asking price of a RFer that wasn't a consistent middle of the lineup producer". Freeman has proven to be that consistent middle of the order bat, so he got the big bucks. Heyward hasn't yet proven it, so he didn't get the same money from the Braves.

Seriously, does every damn thread have to be turned into a Heyward bitchfest?

I want to make it clear I'm not griping on the Heyward trade. I'm just saying that Markakis at 4 years doesn't make a ton of sense given his recent performance trend and the likely AAV of what it would take to sign him.

[clvclv]

No, it means the Braves could afford to spend $10M for a RFer, but can't afford to spend $25M on a RFer no matter how good he might be some day.

It's a little silly how some posters insist on making the Heyward trade anything more than the simple fact "the Braves couldn't afford the asking price of a RFer that wasn't a consistent middle of the lineup producer". Freeman has proven to be that consistent middle of the order bat, so he got the big bucks. Heyward hasn't yet proven it, so he didn't get the same money from the Braves.

Seriously, does every damn thread have to be turned into a Heyward bitchfest?

Thank you.

No matter how much bitching people here want to do, we've ALL known since the Freeman contract and other extensions were handed out last winter that...

WE WERE ONLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO RE-SIGN ONE OF HEYWARD OR UPTON UNLESS THE CONTRACT DO-OVER FAIRY TOOK B. J.'S CONTRACT AWAY.


Let it die already, geez. If you think Heyward was worth trying to extend INSTEAD of Justin, that's fine (and wrong) - you're welcome to have your own opinion. If you think there was a chance in hell we were ever going to be able to keep both without a new owner, new revenue structure, and a suddenly sold-out stadium for the next ten years, you're just not very bright.

[Hawk]

WE WERE ONLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO RE-SIGN ONE OF HEYWARD OR UPTON UNLESS THE CONTRACT DO-OVER FAIRY TOOK B. J.'S CONTRACT AWAY.

And now we're going to re-sign zero of those two (in all likelihood).

Riddle me that, batman.

[nsacpi]

Thank you.

No matter how much bitching people here want to do, we've ALL known since the Freeman contract and other extensions were handed out last winter that...

WE WERE ONLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO RE-SIGN ONE OF HEYWARD OR UPTON UNLESS THE CONTRACT DO-OVER FAIRY TOOK B. J.'S CONTRACT AWAY.


Let it die already, geez. If you think Heyward was worth trying to extend INSTEAD of Justin, that's fine (and wrong) - you're welcome to have your own opinion. If you think there was a chance in hell we were ever going to be able to keep both without a new owner, new revenue structure, and a suddenly sold-out stadium for the next ten years, you're just not very bright.

You might be right. How do you interpret our meeting with Lester and his agent in light of the above?

[The Chosen One]

It lends itself greatly to the theory of the Braves desire to move Heyward having little to do with finance.

You don't call out and trash someone as prominently connected to the Braves organization on twitter as Heyward did and expect to keep your job.

[GovClintonTyree]

You don't call out and trash someone as prominently connected to the Braves organization on twitter as Heyward did and expect to keep your job.

What?

[50PoundHead]

I think Markakis is a decent player, but if we sign him to a 3- or 4-year deal, we're crazy. MFII is right. The last two years of the contract may be Melvinesque.

I don't know if the Braves were in on Torii Hunter, but at $10.5 MM, I thought he would have been a decent one-year option.

[The Chosen One]

What?

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/m8h7e2

I knew that once Wren was canned and Roy Clark was brought back that the writing was all over the wall.

[clvclv]

I think the thing is if we didn't view ourselves as contenders with Heyward, why would we invest in Markakis? I get the financial implications and all that, but it just wouldn't seem to make that much sense to sign Markakis except that someone has to stand in RF.

Agreed.

The only thing I could fathom that would make them feel that way was that they've got information that leads them to believe we CAN extend Justin. IF that were the case and there are legs to the Gattis-to-Houston rumor I saw that could bring back Fowler plus, it makes some sense. However...

CF- Fowler, RF- Markakis, LF- Justin, 1B- Freeman, 3B- Johnson, 2B- Peraza, SS- Simmons, C- Bethancourt

probably projects to be much more consistent than we ever were last season.

If Gattis nets you Fowler and Colin Moran we could be cooking with gas.

[yeezus]

Agreed.

The only thing I could fathom that would make them feel that way was that they've got information that leads them to believe we CAN extend Justin. IF that were the case and there are legs to the Gattis-to-Houston rumor I saw that could bring back Fowler plus, it makes some sense. However...

CF- Fowler, RF- Markakis, LF- Justin, 1B- Freeman, 3B- Johnson, 2B- Peraza, SS- Simmons, C- Bethancourt

probably projects to be much more consistent than we ever were last season.

If Gattis nets you Fowler and Colin Moran we could be cooking with gas.

I don't agree that replacing Heyward with Fowler and Markakis makes us more consistent or better.