Ender

nsacpi said:
The plan for a mid-market team has to be based on getting a significant amount of production during the pre-free agent years from the guys graduating from the farm system. But even a good farm system will leave some gaps unfilled, and that's where on a selective basis you pick up a few guys at the market rate.
Click to expand...

Of course, but those players we pickup for market rate should not be players that are likely to produce 2 WAR or less, otherwise it's a huge waste of money. Take 2018 for example, we will be paying Neck and Kemp around 30 mil in that year to most likely produce less than 3 WAR combined (and that's being friendly, good chance we get less than 1 WAR at the rate they are going). Combine that with 3-4 WAR or so from Ender and you have a 7 WAR OF. If we combined that 30 mil together and signed a FA for 30 mil we'd likely have a 4-5 WAR player, and could have a Mallex/Peterson combo in the other OF spot for almost double the WAR. I'd much rather see us spend market rate on impact players.

It's not that the Markakis signing is a huge deal by itself, it's the lost opportunity cost from signing him that's a problem. Paying market value for guys like Markakis that have no true upside is always a problem because you lose flexibility. I don't see us competing for a .500 record until 2018 at the earliest really, and don't see a playoff hope till 2019 so neither the Markakis or Kemp moves bother me that much. But it does amuse me to see a bunch of people that think we are going to compete next season okay with us spending a quarter of our payroll on guys who won't be producing much of anything.
 
Forever Fredi said:
Markakis has been in the league twice as long as Freddito.
Click to expand...

Well yeah, but AJ has been in even longer and had a rep as a horrible teammate for most that time. Experience does not equal leadership, I'd say someone like Jeter was more of a leader 2-3 years in than most players are after 10. I've never heard or considered Markakis as some sort of clubhouse leader on the Orioles. If all you want is a decent guys with experience just keep grabbing guys like Frenchy for a mil or so. That gives you the same vet leadership without tying up payroll for 4 years.
 
I have still yet to see how the Markakis signing has adversely affected the Braves. I know we are all waiting for him to regress, but he's been the same player for the last 5 years now.
 
Enscheff said:
I just can't agree that the Markakis signed was all that bad. Sure, the Braves were going to be bad. But they needed someone to occupy space in RF, and Markakis was there for $11m per year. The money they have to Nick hasn't hindered the team in any way from making moves they wanted to make. I can see the point saying "they shouldn't have spent any money in RF", but what negative effect has it had?

While his power coming back was always questionable, despite the spin the FO put on it, he has been a steady presence on an unsteady team. He gets on base, he is decent defensively, and he has been a model teammate from all accounts.

The real question becomes: what next? Markakis is good enough in the OF of a team has 4+ WAR players out there next to him. The Braves don't have that. Currently they have a 0-1 WAR lawn ornament in LF and a 2-3 WAR defensive whiz next to him in CF. That OF is not good enough to be a .500 team, and if the presence of Markakis in RF prevents the team from upgrading the OF, then the signing becomes bad no matter what. Same reasoning why I'm against the Kemp deal. There was no reason to commit to a bad player in LF and RF and leave the team nowhere to improve production in the OF.
Click to expand...

The only thing I disagree with is tying the two deals together. I'm right with you on Markakis, and I think most people really are too when you step back and look at it objectively. He's been pretty much who he's always been (minus a little pop), and he's performed up to his contract. Not bad, not great - the type of signings most organizations hope are their worst. The player doesn't necessarily turn into an All-Star, but he earns his money and can be helpful when surrounded with good players. Perhaps most importantly (as you mention) his contract doesn't keep the organization from doing other things to help the team win.

The problems tend to come up because "he's not Heyward" or "he's not J-Up" or whomever. That has nothing to do with him. I'm just glad he's not Melvin.
 
Markakis a leader? That's hilarious. Dude spends his offseasons hunting when he should be training and working out. He was never a leader in the Orioles. He came up as a really good player and got lazy.
 
clvclv said:
The only thing I disagree with is tying the two deals together. I'm right with you on Markakis, and I think most people really are too when you step back and look at it objectively. He's been pretty much who he's always been (minus a little pop), and he's performed up to his contract. Not bad, not great - the type of signings most organizations hope are their worst. The player doesn't necessarily turn into an All-Star, but he earns his money and can be helpful when surrounded with good players. Perhaps most importantly (as you mention) his contract doesn't keep the organization from doing other things to help the team win.

The problems tend to come up because "he's not Heyward" or "he's not J-Up" or whomever. That has nothing to do with him. I'm just glad he's not Melvin.
Click to expand...

I link the Markakis and Kemp moves because a team could compete with Kemp in LF or with Markakis in RF. A team can not compete with both of them in the starting lineup.

A team simply can't win with 2 below average OFers flanking Inciarte. And that's the exact the lineup the Braves have committed to for the near future.
 
Markakis was a much better, more explosive athlete early in his career. He lost all of that pretty quickly. Him and Matt Wieters spend their offseasons hunting. It's no secret. But go ahead and explain how a guys power dropped off the table, as well as his size and athleticism.
 
auyushu said:
No, he's not a quality major league hitter. The past two seasons combined he has been a league average hitter by every metric known to man, and when you include his defense that makes him barely above replacement level. Every year unknown guys come up from AAA and produce 1-1.5 WAR, it's fairly common, there is no error in my logic there. We had Adonis Garcia come up and produce .9 WAR in 200 ABs last year, his production was at a higher rate than Markakis for the minimum. Guys like him and our old friend Charles Thomas from back in the day are perfectly capable of holding down the fort for 1 WAR or so for a couple years before fading into obscurity, it happens all the time, and did happen in 2015. Anthony Recker has been a good example so far this year.

What you are saying here goes entirely against what the front office has claimed for 2017, and what half the posters on this board are claiming for 2017. They claim we are going to be .500 and compete (and I know you aren't part of that storyline here 77). And in that cause Markakis is a lost opportunity cost for 2017 and 2018 in a major way (and so is Kemp). I don't think we compete until late 2018 at the earliest really, so neither move bothers me that much. But if I truly thought we had a chance to compete these two deals would really tick me off, as they pretty much ensure our offense won't be that great if both players are here.
Click to expand...

Well, I think Markakis is a pretty decent MLB hitter, all things considered. I don't think the Braves could have gotten his level of performance from the minors certainly. I think all things considered they acquired a hitter at his fair cost.

This offseason will be very interesting as it will reveal quite a bit about what the front office is really trying to do. I don't see 2017 as necessarily the crossroads, but perhaps the front office feels the pressure and will make it one.

The Kemp deal could be signaling that or it could simply be the front office announcing that its mlb payroll in the short term is not particularly relevant. I don't know.

I want to see what else they do.
 
atl717 said:
Markakis was a much better, more explosive athlete early in his career. He lost all of that pretty quickly. Him and Matt Wieters spend their offseasons hunting. It's no secret. But go ahead and explain how a guys power dropped off the table, as well as his size and athleticism.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't know... That whole neck surgery thing maybe? God forbid players do some fun things during their TIME OFF. I fail to see how hunting a lot facilitates you being out of shape. This is such a dumb post in so many ways.
 
atl717 said:
Markakis was a much better, more explosive athlete early in his career. He lost all of that pretty quickly. Him and Matt Wieters spend their offseasons hunting. It's no secret. But go ahead and explain how a guys power dropped off the table, as well as his size and athleticism.
Click to expand...

So you're the guy that calls me for stuff when I'm on vacation.
 
atl717 said:
Markakis was a much better, more explosive athlete early in his career. He lost all of that pretty quickly. Him and Matt Wieters spend their offseasons hunting. It's no secret. But go ahead and explain how a guys power dropped off the table, as well as his size and athleticism.
Click to expand...

Looks like if I just work out all of the time and never, ever hunt I can be just as good of an athlete at 35 as I was at 20. Who knew.
 
His power faded way before the neck surgery. I've seen Markakis since he was drafted. I live in Baltimore. He has always been a good guy. But he's just not a guy who spends most of his off-season training like an elite athlete. That's kind of important. He's always had a great feel for hitting, which he still has. But he doesn't create the same type of bat speed anymore. You guys are talking like he's 37.
 
chop2chip said:
I have still yet to see how the Markakis signing has adversely affected the Braves. I know we are all waiting for him to regress, but he's been the same player for the last 5 years now.
Click to expand...

If the team was competing in 2017 it would be valuable resources and a roster spot taken up by a slightly overpaid below average player. For a mid market team that wants to compete spending market value or slightly higher for a meh player isn't the best way to go about it. Your 1-2 WAR players should be made up of your pre arb or arb guys. That's the ideal scenario so you aren't wasting your payroll on them. Spend the big bucks on the actual good players since money per WAR is generally not as high.

Since the Braves aren't competing (at least I don't think they will) it's not that big of a deal.
 
Southcack77 said:
Well, I think Markakis is a pretty decent MLB hitter, all things considered. I don't think the Braves could have gotten his level of performance from the minors certainly. I think all things considered they acquired a hitter at his fair cost.
Click to expand...

That says more about the Braves current OF prospects in the minors than anything. But he's given the Braves a 743 OPS while the league average OPS for a RF is 773. And that's with below avg to bad defense.
 
atl717 said:
Markakis a leader? That's hilarious. Dude spends his offseasons hunting when he should be training and working out. He was never a leader in the Orioles. He came up as a really good player and got lazy.
Click to expand...

Dude, I know this is a joke. If not, you need to GTFO.
 
Can we get this thread back on track and talk about Ender!!

lets throw a number at what game his streak will end..

I say 64..

//really, I think it goes to 22
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top