Nick Markakis

[TexasCheesehead]

I was completely dumbfounded yesterday when I learned that Nick Markakis has 2,131 hits at just 34 years old. He's silently creeping closer and closer to the 3,000 hit mark and I had no clue. He's never even been an All Star before.

 

My question -- if Nick Markakis somehow reaches the 3,000 milestone, would that change the way HOF voters view the feat in the future? He'd almost certainly be the only player to ever pass the mark and NOT make the Hall of Fame case. He still has a long way to go, but you can't deny he has a legitimate shot at 3k with the way he's playing at this his age right now.

[homer]

Yeah I had no idea he was hitting over .330.

[MrTPlush]

I don’t think he really has a legitimate shot. He is 34 and still (realistically) 5-6 years away from getting there. Assuming he gets starting ABs and plays decently.

 

Amazing how close he will get though. Could easily see him end over 2500 and he has never really been that good.

[pacopete4]

I don’t think you can collect 2,500 hits and not be that good.

[splitterpfj]

I'll be shocked if Markakis actually makes it to 3,000 hits, but if he does, I believe he'll be elected to the HOF, and I would have no problem with that.

[Eye Black]

Coming into this year Nick Markakis was on pace to become the highest WAR hitter of all-time to NOT make an All-Star Game appearance and to NEVER receive an MVP vote. It is actually pretty difficult to accumulate the numbers he has without at least one of those things happening at some point. The current leader in this category is Mark Ellis at 33.6 career WAR without accomplishing either distinction (Markakis currently sits at 32.0 career WAR).

 

Regardless, he has likely ruined this fun fact now since he appears destined to make the All-Star Game this year.

 

Nick Markakis’s early career statistics are actually quite similar to those of Christian Yelich.

[MrTPlush]

I don’t think you can collect 2,500 hits and not be that good.

 

Well I was inferring to elite...or close to elite. Outside of 2007-2008 he has been rather average. Somehow in 2008 he managed to not make the ASG or receive an MVP vote despite a 7.4 WAR.

[TexasCheesehead]

He's accomplished this by being remarkably consistent (on a year-to-year basis) and avoiding any real injury. He's always been an above-average starter and really racked up some big stats pretty quietly. I thought Adrian Beltre snuck up on me when I realized he had a shot at 3,000, but Markakis is on a whole new level. It might be unlikely, but if he can keep averaging his standard at-bats for another 5 years till he's 39...we might be talking about him hitting 3k in 2022-2023.

[jerichoholicninja]

Unless he plays till 44 like Ichiro, I highly doubt he gets 3000 hits.

[DHonks]

He's been a great player for a while--yet he might have been better if he were a pitcher. What a great success

[rickh150]

2700 seems possible.. maybe 2800. He's at an age when ABs will get fewer very quickly.

[JohnBriggs12]

2700 seems possible.. maybe 2800. He's at an age when ABs will get fewer very quickly.

 

Except he's having his best or nearly his best year(his 2008 was very good too) at age 34. While the trend is toward the game getting younger, there's always been exceptions.

[Baldkin]

https://www.mlb.com/news/nick-markakis-has-a-real-chance-at-3000-hits/c-275175746

[xisxisxis]

His two best years of the last six+ have been in 2014 and 2018. Both years he was in the last year of his contract.... Coincidence? Markakis put up 2 really great years when he was 24/25 YO and expectations were high that he would be be a perennial All-Star, but it looks like those were his peak years as he's been mostly a 2 WAR player since. Not horrible, not great.

 

Maybe if he just signs one year contracts he will easily make it to 3,000 hits...

[reillymcshane]

Markakis is a really weird player.

 

Back when he was in his 2nd and 3rd seasons, I thought he was going to be great. In his 3rd year, at age 24, he hit .306 with 48 doubles, 20 HR, 99 walks, .897 OPS. You'd think he was going to be an all-star. Instead, that was his peak, and he declined in just about every way. His defense faltered, his power subsided, his batting average dropped. I think he had some back issues, which never kept him off the field - but sapped him of his ability.

 

Markakis went from a 6.0 fWAR at age 24, to never producing more than 2.4 fWAR over the rest of his career. He just became a solid, 1.5-2.0 WAR type guy. Nothing bad about that, but nothing great.

 

Expecting big things, Baltimore gave Markakis a major contract extension, so the team had no real choice but to keep playing him. Again, he wasn't bad - and it's not like Baltimore produced many good players to challenge him. So the team just kept trotting him out there everyday.

 

And playing everyday was a talent that Markakis had kept. Since his 2nd season, he's played in 155 or more games every year but one. Give him credit for that - he's been durable.

 

To everyone's surprise, Markakis got a large FA contract from Atlanta four years ago. You can argue that the signing was foolish, but Markakis just kept plugging along - hitting .280ish with his power further diminishing. Again, Atlanta - like Baltimore before them - just kept playing the guy as he was owed a lot of money and they had few other options.

 

His nice 2018 aside, I'm not sure he can reach 3,000. Right now, he needs about 870 hits to reach 3,000. The issue is that he's going to have to keep playing everyday for the next few seasons. Even if he hits .300+ this year, does anyone really think that's his ability going forward? I doubt it. They'll see it as an aberration, and look at 2013-17 - when he hit .270-.280ish.

 

Let's just say Markakis finds a team to give him a 3-year deal and regular playing time this off season - let's speculate as to if he could get 3,000 hits:

 

2018: 100 more hits

2019-21 (ages 35-37): 160 each season (480 total)

2022-23 (ages 38-39): 100 each season (200 total)

Total: 780 hits

 

This means he's still 100 short. And this is assuming he can be an everyday player for the next three seasons, and then a semi-regular for a couple of more years - until age 39. Very few guys do that. Not saying he won't, but it'll be tough.

 

If he could manage to get to this point, I could see him hanging on for a couple of more seasons to reach 3,000. But most guys fade earlier than this - so I don't see him getting there.

 

However, if he did reach 3,000, I'm not sure he'd make the HoF. His numbers just aren't that good. But I won't freak out if he would get in.

 

The one way he'd make the HoF is if his new found hitting prowess keeps going for a few years. If he hits .300+ for a few more seasons, it's a lot easier to justify voting him in the Hall with 6-7 .300+ seasosn and a career batting average of .295 - as opposed to one who hit .300 a few times and his a life time BA of .285 or so.

[owbc]

Consistency is definitely worth something. Many HOF careers have been derailed because of injury. One doesn't accumulate 31.1 bWAR by accident. That's only 3 behind Prince Fielder's career total.

 

I doubt he makes it, but there's always a couple outliers who keep hitting into their late 30s. Lets see if he is still putting up a .750 OPS in 3 years.

[sveumrules]

I remember hoping back in 2003 that the Rays would take Rickie Weeks at #1 so Delmon Young would fall to us at #2.

 

Guess we should have been pining for Markakis the whole time.

[bigredrobbo]

Since All-Star voting is less about quality and more about popularity, I would place more emphasis on numbers that aren't subjective. As Shakira said, almost, hits don't lie!

[Outlander]

My question -- if Nick Markakis somehow reaches the 3,000 milestone, would that change the way HOF voters view the feat in the future? He'd almost certainly be the only player to ever pass the mark and NOT make the Hall of Fame case. He still has a long way to go, but you can't deny he has a legitimate shot at 3k with the way he's playing at this his age right now.

Well thanks to the steroid/PED era he would always have company with Rafael Palmeiro and Pete Rose as well as long as he is alive.

[TexasCheesehead]

My question -- if Nick Markakis somehow reaches the 3,000 milestone, would that change the way HOF voters view the feat in the future? He'd almost certainly be the only player to ever pass the mark and NOT make the Hall of Fame case. He still has a long way to go, but you can't deny he has a legitimate shot at 3k with the way he's playing at this his age right now.

Well thanks to the steroid/PED era he would always have company with Rafael Palmeiro and Pete Rose as well as long as he is alive.

 

I said not make the hall of fame 'case', meaning not be seriously considered.

[danzig6767]

Since All-Star voting is less about quality and more about popularity, I would place more emphasis on numbers that aren't subjective. As Shakira said, almost, hits don't lie!

I don't care if Markakis manages to reach 3000 hits, he doesn't belong in the HOF unless he can repeat multiple more seasons like he's having this year.

 

In a seven year stretch from ages 27 through 33, he posted a sub-.800 OPS in six of those seven years and he doesn't do anything else special on defense or the bases to add to his hitting.

 

I'm in the camp of in general preferring guys who make the HOF that were special for at least some stretch of time or consistently really good over players who were mainly just pretty good over a long enough stretch of time to hit or get near certain statistical milestones.