The revisionist history on this topic is hysterical. That signing was lambasted to no end and the critiques each year grew.
GDT 5/3 - Weird Lineup Today
- Thread starter Southcack77
- Start date
The revisionist history on this topic is hysterical. That signing was lambasted to no end and the critiques each year grew.
CyYoung31
Shift Leader
What revisionist history? Please provide examples, because I’m pretty sure no one’s stance has changed on the matter.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
One other aspect, which I mentioned a couple days ago (c/o TC), is that he’s being thrown a lot more pitches in the zone, and (importantly, given that fact) swinging at a much higher percentage of pitches in the zone. Given his performance so far (more LDs, fewer GBs), I’m guessing the former rate starts to decline, as pitchers adjust to Markakis’ newfound aggressiveness, so it’ll be interesting to see how Markakis in turn adjusts.
It was lambasted because I'm sure people like you thought Nick was a good player which he was not when we signed him and hasn't been while he's been here.
He was a below average player signed to market level prices who has played like a below average player. The 4th year was heavily criticized because of owing money to a below average/old player when it could be better used at the time. And low and behold the Braves had zero money to make add anyone this offseason. So what exactly have we gotten wrong?
Orphan Black
Approaching Buddy Hernandez Territory
This might be true, but I don't think pitchers adjusting will affect Markakis. The guy has 20 walks to 12 SOs, and from what I've seen he's really worked the count way more than he has the past three seasons with the team. He's on a pace to walk more than 100 times which he has never done, and hasn't come close to since he has been on the team. I don't know that he has to adjust because he has already been working the count.
Nick has been worth his contract over the life of the deal. Market value is not the best outcome obviously but what was the alternative? The criticism was so over the top and still is. The fact that nick might have his most productive year in that fourth year is just the universe working in amazing ways
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
So critics were “dead wrong” because they were ... dead right?
If you are actually trying to argue that fans thought the braves would actually get market value from the signing then you are purposely being deceitful
Through the first 3 years Nick has 3.3 wins and we paid him as a 4.5 win player. So slightly below which is to be expected as he got older and gradually declined.
I'm glad Nick is having a great start offensively and our new analytically inclined FO has helped him out on defense. But Nick is who most people thought he would be. And most issues people have is not with the player but with the FO who signed him, the reasons they did, and the length they signed him for.
Shrug.
I consistently said it didn't make sense to sign him during the rebuild, but that having a guy produce almost exactly the value of his contract was far from the worst problem the Braves had.
You, on the other hand, want to extend Markakis based on 100 good PAs after wanting to kick him off the team a few weeks ago. And then you accuse others of revisionist history? Seriously?
Believe me, we will revisit how that turns out.
Last edited:
For Preston Tucker which was based on Tucker having a good 1st week of games....
the only thing i'm sure of in this whole thread
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Hardly. Most “critics” of Markakis on this board have maintained that he’s a decent player being paid roughly fairly while also maintaining that he was a needless expense for a team in full-on rebuild, whose age likely meant that his decline arc would likely be a cosine to the team’s ascendancy.
I sincerely hope he keeps his current pace and the fourth year becomes the boon, and not the bite it was assumed.
Just mindboggling thethe wants to double down and wants him to sign an extension.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
So basically you’re proposing that his selectivity, already good, has improved to great, and it’s forcing pitchers to throw him more hittable, in-the-zone pitches, as the alternative is a base-on-balls. An interesting theory, for sure; but I’m not smart enough to judge the validity of its proposed causality.
Like I said to thethe, I just hope that—unlike previous Aprils—he keeps it up.
It's so comical I had to add him to my sig lol.
CyYoung31
Shift Leader
You need to add “The revisionist history on this topic is hysterical” part.
I only get 500 characters, unfortunately.
I never wanted to kick him off the team. I wanted to capitalize on potentially a young piece who was finally getting a chance. There is a still a chance that Tucker is a productive player.
So please continue to twist my statements.