GDT: 4/3/'17 - Bravos (J.Teheran) @ Mutts (Syndergaard), OPENING DAY! 1PM EST

[nsacpi]

In the end it doesn't really matter because the Braves are still rebuilding. However if they were serious about contending in 2017 like they said originally then it would be an issue. It's not that Nick has been bad. I would agree that he's been worth his contract so far. The problem is that a team like the Braves shouldn't really be paying market value for a 1.5 WAR player.

Thing is they have to pay market value for anything not provided by the farm. The three guys in the rotation, Markakis, Sean Rodriguez, etc. The trick going forward is two-fold: first a larger part of the team's production has to be generated by guys in their pre-free agency years or guys on team friendly extensions; second we have to get decent value out of the guys we are paying market rates on.

[thewupk]

Thing is they have to pay market value for anything not provided by the farm. The three guys in the rotation, Markakis, Sean Rodriguez, etc. The trick going forward is two-fold: first a larger part of the team's production has to be generated by guys in their pre-free agency years or guys on team friendly extensions; second we have to get decent value out of the guys we are paying market rates on.

I agree that it's a necessary evil at times. But the higher you go up the WAR tree the better bang for your buck you get. The 1-2 WAR range is the absolute worst but sometimes that's where you have to live.

[nsacpi]

But the higher you go up the WAR tree the better bang for your buck you get. The 1-2 WAR range is the absolute worst but sometimes that's where you have to live.

This is generally true. But I think it reflects in part the fact that there is also more risk from the really high value signings. Due to length of contract, putting all your eggs in one basket, etc.

We will have some interesting calls to make with outfield and third the next couple years. There will be a transition from Kemp, Markakis, Garcia. Some of it will be internal--Acuna, Dustin Peterson, Ruiz, Riley. But I suspect we also make a big external acquisition or two medium-sized ones at those positions.

[50PoundHead]

I didn't like the Markakis signing (more for length than AAV) but it was a necessary evil. We probably should have gone full tank mode when the Johns broke up the band, but guys like Markakis are decent bridge guys. I totally agree that the 2017 expectation was a crock from the get-go.

[Enscheff]

The Braves roster has a list of problems that is at least 20 issues in length. Markakis is towards the bottom of that list.

Paying market rate for a 1-2 win player is a good move compared to some of the horrid roster decisions made the last couple seasons.

[The Chosen One]

I didn't like the Markakis signing (more for length than AAV) but it was a necessary evil. We probably should have gone full tank mode when the Johns broke up the band, but guys like Markakis are decent bridge guys. I totally agree that the 2017 expectation was a crock from the get-go.

I mean honestly not tanking more at the end of 2015 then not tanking more at the end of last year was tough.

[jpx7]

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but I really don't understand why Markakis gets so much hate. He's been a good player for us based on b-ref's stats which I personally prefer. At worst he's lived up to his contract. He's not blocking a prospect, so I just don't get the hate. He's a decent piece to have.

I was not being sarcastic. But this fairly well sums my feelings:

The problem is that a team like the Braves shouldn't really be paying market value for a 1.5 WAR player.

Whether you think the Braves can/should be trying to compete this season or not, Markakis doesn't really fit the roster.

If the Braves are still rebuilding, I'd pretty much rather have any cheap, reasonably talented body out there: anyone who might conceivably be with the team beyond entering their contention window—even if the likelihood of sticking is low, or even if that player is more likely to be a bench option once the team is legitimately good. Keeping Mallex Smith and slotting him in RF would've been a good example of this (and he's conveniently gone, but before he was traded Smith represented a prospect Markakis was blocking).

If the Braves are trying to win, then Markakis—even if he represents "market value" in a context-free sense—is not good use of a market-value contract for this roster. He hits reasonably well for average, and posts solid OBP, but otherwise doesn't bring things to the table that the 2017 Braves need: his defense is subpar, and they're already carrying a bad defender in LF; he's slow, which is a bit more glaring on a roster with really only two players possessed of any fleetness (Inciarte and Swanson); and, compounding his other deficiencies, he's seriously weak in the power department. On a reasonably-stacked roster, he'd be a nice sixth- to eighth-best hitter, providing decent on-base skills and generally not donking things up too much without costing too much. On this Braves roster—no matter how you think they're positioned for 2017—he just doesn't make much sense. I'm also not especially sanguine that he'll net much on the trade market, even if the Braves do (rightly) decide to trade him mid-season.

But I truly do not hate Markakis. I've actually been a bit of fan since he was drafted, and I think he's currently a useful type of ballplayer to have on certain rosters (even if that utility is diminishing with age). What I hate is that this Braves front-office thought that he's the sort of player that represented a smart use of resources at the outset of a full-on rebuild.