At least you can’t say we aren’t timely here at Connolly’s.

Not only were we discussing Nick Markakis’ contract situation Wednesday, but then you had a chance to chime in on whether Dustin Pedroia’s new six-year, $40.5 million deal might affect the Markakis negotiations.

Here’s my take: It doesn’t help his cause, but there are enough differences (service time, position, etc.) that it probably won’t be a major factor, either. Also -- and this is just a hunch -- I bet the Orioles feel even more confident today that they made a strong offer to Markakis last week.

I have debated this upcoming topic with a few others, and I want your opinion. It won't happen, of course, but that's part of the fun of bar arguments (you had no chance at dating MaryAnn or Ginger, either.)

As much as I like Pedroia as a player -- he lifted the Red Sox on his shoulders last season and absolutely deserved the MVP -- I still don’t think I’d trade Markakis straight up for him. Take the emotion out of it, O’s fans, and it is a tough call.

I think Markakis’ upside is higher, and although good leadoff guys are hard to find, I’d rather have a legitimate No. 3 hitter. I also love having a right fielder with that kind of arm for a decade, but Pedroia’s superb, up-the-middle defense and leadership certainly is key, too.

If Pedroia were a shortstop, I might lean toward him. But I’ll take Nick despite Pedroia’s impressive hardware (an MVP and Rookie of the Year in consecutive seasons, the first American Leaguer to do that since some fella named Calvin).

Is Pedroia-Markakis a tough call for you?

Here’s a bonus question: What 25-or-younger player would you trade Markakis straight up for? Off the top of my head, I say the short list starts with shortstops Hanley Ramirez and Jose Reyes (David Wright turns 26 this month, so I am not counting him). I’m sure there are other candidates, but I don’t want to make this too easy for you. If you need to check out ages, here’s a great Web site to help.

Daily Think Special: Would you trade Nick Markakis straight up for Dustin Pedroia?

Bonus Think Special: Which 25-and-under players would you trade Markakis for?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 9:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (43)
                    

Pull up a stool and get your calculators out. Get your wallets out, too. This might not be your money, but in a sense it is.

Every time I am on a radio talk show or someone finds out what I do for a living these days, I get asked about Orioles right fielder Nick Markakis. I get it. Everyone out there wants Markakis signed to a long-term deal.

In today’s paper, we have a story that negotiations between Markakis, who is under the club's control through 2011, and the Orioles have stalled and likely won’t be picked up for six weeks or so.

Apparently, the Orioles have made a good offer, but it is less than what the Markakis camp was hoping for. Therein lies the eventual negotiation process.

All of this is Monopoly money to us. Fifty million, 60 million, 70 million. It’s incomprehensible to normal folk. And I think we all agree that no one, in any entertainment field, should have his or her own gross national product.

That said, those numbers -- and higher -- are the reality in Major League Baseball. So let’s put aside the "no ballplayer's worth millions" argument, because in this day and age that’s what they get paid. Whether you like it or not.

The Orioles have never agreed to a contract larger than the six-year, $72 million deal they gave Miguel Tejada in 2003. I don’t know that Markakis is looking for more than that, but it’s probably not too far off.

I want to know what you think is the right price for the 25-year-old right fielder. He is the club’s best player, top marketing tool and most stable young building block. He probably isn’t near his peak and would be giving up three years or more of free agency in exchange for long-term security in an Orioles uniform.

He is seemingly healthy and loves to play the game, but you can’t discount that injuries could happen to him -- like anyone else.

Keep in mind Markakis enters his first year of arbitration as one of the best right fielders in baseball. He made $455,000 this season, but will get millions in arbitration this February -- a rough guess, and that’s all this is -- is $4 million or so for 2009.

For comparison’s sake, here’s a list of some young, promising hitters who have agreed to extensions since 2006. Some play different positions from Markakis and others were at different levels in service time when they agreed to deals. It’s impossible to pinpoint a perfect comparison, but this may give you an idea of potential market worth. (All ages are as of the end of this calendar year.)

New York Mets shortstop Jose Reyes, 25, signed a four-year, $23 million deal in 2006.

Mets third baseman David Wright, 26, signed a six-year, $55 million deal in 2006.

Cleveland Indians center fielder Grady Sizemore, 26, signed a six-year, $23.5 million deal in 2006.

Philadelphia Phillies second baseman Chase Utley, 30, signed a seven-year, $85 million deal in 2007.

Toronto Blue Jays right fielder Alex Rios, 27, signed a seven-year, $70 million deal in 2008.

Florida Marlins shortstop Hanley Ramirez, 24, signed a six-year, $70 million deal in 2008.

Detroit Tigers first baseman Miguel Cabrera, 25, signed an eight-year, $152 million deal in 2008.

Now you are on the spot.

What is your top value for Markakis? What should the Orioles offer and then feel confident they did their best if he doesn’t accept? I’d say length of the deal is probably in the five- to seven-year range, so go with six years. How much dough is right for a six-year deal for Nick?

Daily Think Special: How much is just right for Markakis?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 9:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (57)
                    

We’re sticking with football today, because I know many of you are pumped up about the Ravens right now.

And also because we don’t have a whole lot to share with you on the baseball front. I’ve worked the phones much of today and the only real thing I have to show for it is a dying cell phone battery. There are some little pieces of info, but nothing exciting.

As the band Calexico wrote (cool group, check them out here ), “No news, no new regrets.” Such is the hot stove season in Baltimore so far.

So let’s stick with the NFL for another day. Take a hard look at the AFC. There are only five teams with a record of 8-4 or better: The Tennessee Titans (11-1), the Pittsburgh Steelers (9-3) and the 8-4 trio of the Ravens, New York Jets and Indianapolis Colts.

The Ravens are 0-3 against that group, losing by field goals to the Titans and Steelers and getting clobbered by the Colts (31-3).

Right now, those five would make the playoffs in the AFC, as well as the 7-5 Denver Broncos in the weak AFC West.

I guess you can’t count out the 7-5 New England Patriots and Miami Dolphins, who are both one game behind the Jets in the AFC East. But I feel confident in saying that those eight are the only teams that have a legitimate shot at making the playoffs in the conference.

Here’s my question: Of that group, who is the best? As a Ravens fan, which club do you fear the most?

The Titans likely will have home-field advantage throughout the postseason and we all know that a stifling defense, a power running game and a steady veteran QB can be the ticket for a Super Bowl run.

But I am still not convinced the Titans will win the AFC, despite being the most balanced team so far. After watching the Steelers embarrass the Patriots on Sunday, it’s obvious their defense is a force as always. And a healthy Willie Parker has to make them a favorite.

The Jets are too inconsistent for my tastes and the Broncos are porous defensively. As for the Ravens, you have to love what you are seeing, but they do have a rookie quarterback and a beat-up secondary.

Yes, there are four weeks to play. But I want your early thoughts. If you had to pick now, which team represents the AFC in the Super Bowl?

Do you believe in the Titans? Are you a homer and deep-down believe this is the Ravens’ year? Can you type Pittsburgh Steelers at the end of the question without feeling a little queasy?

Daily Think Special: Pick your AFC champion and explain why.

Posted by Dan Connolly at 6:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (16)
                    

Thanksgiving is over and I am hoping you are all over your tryptophan hangovers. Had to carry Putin and Ken F. out of the bar with their heads buried in cranberry sauce. Embarrassing, I tell you.

The bar is open all week and we are talking some football today.

Let’s get this part out of the way first: The Bengals are terrible. Revoltingly terrible. So you have to keep that in mind when you analyze the Ravens performance Sunday. They may have had a little more trouble with an actual NFL team.

Still, the Ravens needed to win in Cincy because the remaining games on their schedule aren’t gimmes. At the halfway point, we all counted Sunday’s contest in Cincy as a Ravens’ win. And there is something to be said for winning the games that you should -- especially on the road.

They are 8-4 now -- better than we all expected -- with four games to play, three at home. Better put a circle on your calendar now for Dec. 14. The AFC North crown may be passed out that day. And as much as you hate the Steelers, you have to admit it doesn’t get much better than facing them at home for a chance at a division title

I think the 34-3 demolition of the Bengals sort of serves as a microcosm of the season for the Ravens -- at least in the good ways. The surprises of the season all were present and accounted for on Sunday.

But what are you most excited about after Sunday’s performance? And what is the biggest key for the next four weeks?

Joe Flacco’s continued excellence? Le'Ron McClain’s emergence? The beat-up secondary’s strong play? Mark Clayton looking like the Mark Clayton the Ravens thought they drafted? Or is it something else?

Daily Think Special: What was the brightest spot of Sunday’s bashing of the Bengals? Will that trend continue during the next four weeks?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 7:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (31)
                    

Welcome to Connolly’s, where anger and apathy meet head on and drink a frothy beer together. That’s what I got anyway from Wednesday’s conversation about your feelings if the Orioles did little this offseason.

I think the consensus is that the main priority is signing Nick Markakis to a long-term deal, that way you know you have one excellent player to cheer for. And if that doesn’t happen this winter, you’ll be really miffed.

(Note to Jeff: Markakis’ agent is not saying he is waiting to see what the Orioles do this offseason before he talks extension. That’s absolutely wrong. He and the Orioles talked this week about Nick’s contract. It might not get done, but it is in discussion. I promise.)

There also was a strong contingent that said you were sick and tired of being sick and tired every offseason while watching the Orioles play runners-up for guys who could have helped this team.

And then there’s the group of you that has given up. Those who have thrown their orange foam fingers in the air and fully expect nothing. They are never disappointed, anyway.

Lots of emotions on this one. It’s really not good to see, either. But completely, utterly understandable. That’s what happens when you lose for 11 straight seasons.

My take is that the Orioles and Andy MacPhail will earnestly try to improve this club this winter. But nothing significant might happen – especially with free agency. Baltimore is not a desirable place to play because of the recent history, and a lot of good teams have a ton of money to spend.

But don’t hang your head in shame yet. It’s still November. There are two solid months left in the offseason.

See, I am trying to be optimistic for you. And I’m going to stick with that theme.

Because this is our first Thanksgiving in the bar, we’ll do the cliched, traditional, "What are you thankful for?" deal. But make it sports-related. And in this calendar year.

Are you most thankful that the Ravens have given you something to cheer for in what was supposed to be a lost season?

Are you most thankful that you had a chance to watch Michael Phelps make history?

Are you most thankful that the Yankees spent $200 million and finished in third?

I’ll let this one run for a while.

Daily Think Special: What are you most thankful for in the sporting world in 2008?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 5:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (10)
                    

I am going to have to draw a line down the center of the bar.

A.J. Burnett bashers to the left, A.J. backers to the right.

Is Burnett the supremely talented righty who won 18 games for the Toronto Blue Jays this season and is ready to assume the primary leadership role in a rotation?

Or is he the 31-year-old guy who has had trouble staying healthy over the years and isn’t a good bet to be both effective and injury-free in three, four or five years?

Apparently, we’re not sure here at Connolly’s, based on your conversation Tuesday. Don’t feel badly. I am not sure Major League Baseball execs know for sure, either. But someone will make the investment. Burnett is that good when he is on. And starting pitching is that in demand.

The bottom line for Orioles fans is that Burnett would like to pitch near his Monkton home, and he’s more proven than anything the club has. But he’s not throwing around discounts, either. My prediction is if he gets a five-year deal, it’s definitely from someone else. I think it would be a real departure for the Orioles to even go four years.

Here’s what I was wondering through all of the discussion. What’s your thought if the Orioles do nothing but add a defensive-minded shortstop – such as, say Cesar Izturis or Adam Everett – and a back-of-the-rotation starting pitcher?

I ask, because that’s a real possibility. I think most of us who cover the club wouldn’t be surprised if the Orioles finish their Christmas shopping with a shortstop, a third/fourth starter and an empty bag where Mark Teixeira or Burnett would have fit.

The truth is Andy MacPhail has tried to keep expectations tempered this offseason. He has said he’ll explore the market for upper-echelon players with special circumstances – read, Teixeira’s and Burnett’s ties to the area – but is concentrating more on strengthening the organization’s core.

It’s very possible that 2009 could be worse than 2008. Given that idea, are you OK with minor ripples this offseason but no splash? Or will you be angry if Teixeira, Burnett or both end up elsewhere?

Daily Think Special: Would you be angered if the Orioles have a quiet offseason?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 6:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (108)
                    

Had a chance to speak to Darek Braunecker, A.J. Burnett’s agent, on Monday. He said several interesting things, and at least one I didn’t have room for in Tuesday’s story about the free-agent right-hander/Monkton resident.

I first met Braunecker in 2005 when Burnett was a free agent in the process of leaving the Florida Marlins and the Orioles had a little interest. Ultimately, Burnett signed a five-year, $55 million deal with the Toronto Blue Jays that was widely panned as a tremendous overpay.

Of course, Burnett opted out of that deal at the end of the 2008 season, after he went 18-10 for the Jays, and will strike it rich again. Timing is everything in the baseball business, and Burnett and Braunecker have had impeccable timing.

Braunecker is one of the nice-guy, straight-shooting agents. That’s why I was intrigued by one of his statements instead of immediately dismissing it as agentspeak.

Braunecker said one of the big differences between the Burnett of 2005 and the Burnett of 2008 is his genuine interest in being a staff leader this time around. Part of the change has to do with Roy Halladay, the Blue Jays ace and one of the most respected pitchers in baseball. Halladay’s work ethic and his leadership really affected Burnett, Braunecker said.

Burnett told me the same thing earlier this year in Toronto. Now, Braunecker said, Burnett would embrace the opportunity to lead a young staff if that opportunity arose.

“He was an unfinished product [in 2005], still developing and maturing,” Braunecker said. “Now you are talking about a much different product … I don’t know how much influence [a leadership possibility] would have on his decision, but if indeed that responsibility presented itself, he is prepared and fully willing to fulfill that role.”

That, of course, fits with what the Orioles are looking for. Whether he is that kind of guy now that he is older (he’ll be 32 by Opening Day), I don’t know.

But here’s a near certainty: Burnett will get four years on the open market and possibly five. Braunecker said contract length is only one factor, but he also said a five-year deal is available if Burnett wants it. The Orioles have never signed a free-agent pitcher for longer than three years. Four would be a stretch; five would be a miracle.

If Burnett signs a five-year deal with anyone, he’d be 36 in the final year. No question he is talented – among the most talented in the American League – but he has pitched 200 innings or more only three times in his big league career (he threw a career-high 221 1/3 innings in 2008). Is he worth the long-term risk? It might be the only way you get him.

Daily Think Special: Would you give A.J. Burnett a five-year contract?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 8:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (65)
                    

We should be able to sell those Purple Passion drinks aplenty at the bar today. A 2-for-1 special. I’ll throw in the purple and black umbrellas just for fun.

There are many good things to highlight after Sunday’s 36-7 Ravens victory over the Philadelphia Eagles. The defense played superbly, Le'Ron McClain had a career game and I’m almost getting sick of lauding Joe Flacco.

No one in the bar this weekend predicted such a blowout, but the closest was Ravenator (28-10). So open tab for you today, big guy (or girl. Hard to tell with the beak on).

I admit I was surprised that the Ravens’ D handled the Eagles’ offense so easily. But what shocked me was Eagles’ head coach Andy Reid’s decision to bench Donovan McNabb. He looked terrible in the first half, and has played terribly recently, but he is still McNabb.

And the Eagles weren’t buried yet when McNabb was pulled. Reid sad he was looking for a spark in Kevin Kolb, and now he likely has an inferno of controversy on his hands.

Me, I thought it was an awful decision made by a desperate club. Bottom line is that the Ravens’ defense was clicking, and when it is, life is tough for any opposing quarterback.

But maybe I am wrong here. I know this isn’t a Baltimore issue, but I want to hear from all of you football people out there. Were you surprised by Reid’s decision? Do you think Kolb gave the Eagles a better chance? Obviously, it didn’t work out numbers-wise, but was it worth the shot?

Daily Think Special: Did Eagles’ coach Andy Reid make a mistake by yanking Donovan McNabb? As a Ravens’ fan were you glad to see it?

Bonus Think Special: What impressed you most about Sunday’s Ravens‘ win?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 9:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (41)
                    

We’re going Moose-free today after Friday’s enlightening conversation about whether you’d support Mike Mussina if he made it to Cooperstown -- and went in as an Oriole.

It’s those days when the bar is at its best. Lots of differing opinions and facts tossed around like paper coasters. Great stuff. Beers on me.

We’re switching sports today and going with what is quickly becoming a tradition. The weekend prediction for Sunday’s Ravens game.

The Eagles (5-4-1) come to town hurting both physically and mentally. At first glance, this looks like a game the Ravens (6-4) have to -- and should -- win. And I think they will.

However, this isn’t a slam-dunk. Philly could win, especially if Donovan McNabb can pick apart the Ravens’ secondary.

One thing I have learned over the years while following the NFL is that the better team doesn’t always win. Oftentimes, it’s the most desperate one. And the Eagles are about as desperate as any club right now.

If they fall to 5-5-1 (they are already 0-3 in the ever-important divisional matchups), they are likely done for the year. They are probably done anyway, but right now the Eagles still have a shot at the postseason. So desperate is the right word.

The Ravens sure could use a win to put themselves in excellent position for at least a wild-card berth, but they’d still be OK if they lost Sunday.

The Ravens are a 1-point favorite as I write this, and I agree it is going to be a close one.

Here’s my thought: Ravens 17-16.

Daily Think Special: Who wins Sunday’s Eagles-Ravens’ showdown? What’s the final score?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 7:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (17)
                    

Let me get my cape on. I am morphing into Captain Obvious here.

Really, can there be another discussion at the bar than Mike Mussina today? He is one of the more polarizing sports personalities of the last couple decades around here.

In the 1990s, he could do no wrong. Than he left in 2000 for the free-agent dollars and championship allure of Gotham City. And some of his biggest fans turned against him, feeling that he turned away from them first.

We’ve been over this one a bunch of times before. And pointed plenty of fingers. We can rehash more if you like, but let’s look at this from a slightly different angle. Before we do that, though, let’s get to the obvious discussion first.

One of the best national (and local) debates of today is whether Mussina deserves to be a Hall of Famer. I met with a bunch of the local members of the Baseball Writers Association of America Wednesday (they voted me chapter president, the saps. So I expect all of you to now refer to me as President Barkeep. If you do, I’ll sneak ya a free El Presidente brew) and the subject came up.

I’d say the group was torn. He was not the most dominant pitcher of his era (maybe not even in the top five), but his longevity, 270 wins and low ERA in an offensive time is pretty impressive.

I think I’d lean toward putting him in. Others said no.

I want your opinion on that of course. But we also go beyond the obvious at Connolly’s.

I want to know if you think he’ll wear the Orioles bird if he goes into the Hall? (His career was split 10 years to eight in favor of Baltimore over the Yankees. It’s so close though, that he’ll probably be allowed to pick instead of having the Hall decide.)

But here’s what I really want to know: If Mussina goes into the Hall as an Oriole, would you go support him at his induction ceremony, since he might be the last in a long time to represent this city in Cooperstown?

I’m really interested in hearing about this one.

Daily Think Special: Would you attend Mike Mussina's Hall of Fame induction ceremony?

Bonus Think Special: Will he go in at all? And if so, will it be as an Oriole?

Posted by Dan Connolly at 6:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (63)