Snit and Braves agree to two-year deal

NinersSBChamps said:
I liked Markakis from the beginning that is true. It was because he was a capable proven MLB player. The team was crap so how is that his fault? He got 11 million a season. That’s a lot, but not a lot when you consider salaries of other players. He’s been solid since day 1 and had himself a good season. I get that you don’t want to throw any money at him, but unless there is a legit upgrade to be had, then the Braves need to keep every option open. I don’t know what the market value for him is going to be, but I imagine it would be something near what he just got done receiving from the Braves. Maybe both sides can come to agreement on a year deal worth something around 12 million. If Nick likes it here and there is no reason that he doesn’t then maybe there is room for both sides to get what they want. Aside from Freeman is there really a single player who makes that much annually? Julio, maybe?
Click to expand...

I suspect Neck gets around 6 million a year for two years. He's just not a good hitter anymore despite having a really good 1st half.
 
NinersSBChamps said:
I suppose Freddie has been a waste of money too then?
Click to expand...

We were paying Freddie loyalty hush money to wait out until the rebuild was over considering we were wasting his prime years. We gave Markakis a contract when he was already exiting his prime years.

Plus he was coming off of neck surgery which was already a risky investment for a team that was mid tier payroll at best.

Conparing the two are not anywhere close. Freddie by comparison is underpaid compared to his market value since we signed him to a sweet deal early.

We essentially paid Markakis for “leadership” qualities. We could have just done that by signing veteran bench players like the Duda types to mentor young guys.
 
Ronald Rump said:
We were paying Freddie loyalty hush money to wait out until the rebuild was over considering we were wasting his prime years. We gave Markakis a contract when he was already exiting his prime years.

Plus he was coming off of neck surgery which was already a risky investment for a team that was mid tier payroll at best.

Conparing the two are not anywhere close. Freddie by comparison is underpaid compared to his market value since we signed him to a sweet deal early.

We essentially paid Markakis for “leadership” qualities. We could have just done that by signing veteran bench players like the Duda types to mentor young guys.
Click to expand...

How could you equate Duda with Muk when it comes to laidership
 
Not a surprise with Snit, he did better with the bullpen and lineups in the 2nd half, and fans would bitch regardless of who is manager.

Unless Braves whiff on every outfield option, no need to bring back Nick.
 
Let's close the book on Markakis's deal shall we?

Braves paid Markakis 44 million over 4 seasons. He produced 5.7 WAR.

That was worth somewhere between 45.6m and 51.3m in value depending on how you value a win (between 8 and 9 million dollars) over that time period.

the Braves rationale for signing him was to add to veteran, professional presence to the organization and to fill a spot where they had no obvious internal answers with a credible major league player. They hoped that the rebuild would be short enough to where he might have a direct role in returning the team to the playoffs. They got what they bargained for on both counts.

I've never really understood what the big duck deal was about Markakis. There was basically no opportunity cost to his being on the roster. the Braves were not in a position where they were harmed by not having a better player in RF during the rebuild. He did have a major positive impact on contending when it did matter.

This is a deal that pretty much worked out the way the market figured it would. No real winner or loser. Absent there being any mathematical winner, you might just leave it to the clubhouse. And the clubhouse loved Markakis and valued him greatly.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have a link to video of the AA press availability today? Or a transcript? or audio?

Anyone have tips on where these are usually archived or found?
 
Ronald Rump said:
We were paying Freddie loyalty hush money to wait out until the rebuild was over considering we were wasting his prime years. We gave Markakis a contract when he was already exiting his prime years.

Plus he was coming off of neck surgery which was already a risky investment for a team that was mid tier payroll at best.

Conparing the two are not anywhere close. Freddie by comparison is underpaid compared to his market value since we signed him to a sweet deal early.

We essentially paid Markakis for “leadership” qualities. We could have just done that by signing veteran bench players like the Duda types to mentor young guys.
Click to expand...

There's some truth to that, but as a bit of a Markakis signing defender I did understand the logic at least a bit. We had no other MLB-quality starting OFs close to ready at the time, and as part of the "wait it out" deal with Freddie they probably told him they'd do their best to surround him with as much MLB-level talent as they could so he wasn't like Realmuto in Miami. If you think about it, that probably explains them taking Castro back in the Stanton deal - his isn't a "terrible" contract, and he does at least give J. T. someone else that isn't going through huge growing pains in the lineup with him.

I'm with Southcack here - it's essentially been a "no harm, no foul" deal (to the dismay of plenty of folks) and probably helped keep Freddie a little more happy for a couple of pretty dark years otherwise. If they'd needed the spot to promote someone who was ready, they could've eaten a bit of the money and shipped him off at just about any point.
 
Last edited:
On its own I thought the Markakis signing made a lot of sense. An above average, high character, leadership guy at a position of need for a young team and he didn't break the bank. That's a lot of positives with one signing.

The problem is that we packaged bad contracts with valuable trade pieces to clear payroll before we signed him. I would have preferred they use his money for some of the bad contracts they traded away, so we could have had more valuable trade returns.


On topic, I'm glad to see Snitker rewarded for a job well done.
 
salmagundy said:
What a way to return to being able to get on internet. Lost elect on the 9th and along with it cell phone, water(no elect for well), no data, no text. A total loss of outside communication and waste of time. Thank you Hurricane Michael!!!
Click to expand...

What area you live in. He was a bitch of a storm.
 
The Braves will be lucky if the next FA cOF they sign provides the same WAR/$$ ratio Markakis provided. While many questioned the timing of signing a player like Markakis, most understand his contract was never an issue for the organization.

Signing Snit was pretty much a no-brainer. AA really had no other choice after he led the team to an unexpected division title.
 
To get back to thread subject, which wandered far and wide, there is one name that I haven't seen mentioned to replace Chuckie is Dave Righetti from SF.

Another is Jim Benedict. I would be hard pressed to back this signing but he might be good for our young guns.

Another consideration might be Derek Lilliquist formerly of the Cards.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top