Players Affected By Arbitration Decisions

Tim, I agree that these guys showed good foresight in predicting the market, but at the same time, do you think that these players would have accepted arbitration all the way back then, not knowing what they know now?

I'm surprised that Abreu isn't getting any love so far. He has good patience at the plate, hits for a high average and gets a ton of RBIs. Whoever signs him will get a pretty good bat.

I'm not so sure declining arbitration on Moyer was a great move, I really doubt arbitrators would have given him much more than he ultimately signed for ($6.5 guaranteed that will likely turn into $7.5 million with performance bonuses that will also trigger a salary of around 9 million in 2010 when he turns 48).

With arbitration, they'd have him for one year at probably equivalent money without the albatross of paying $9 million two years down the road. That way they could hit the free agent market and sign Charlie Hough and Jesse Orosco for 2010.

Cinco Ocho - Abreu isn't getting any love because he's expensive and wants to start.

I could see him heading to LA if the Dodger can't get Manny back, but I don't see Manny signing anywhere else...

As for Varitek... I'm not sure what he was thinking by not taking the $10-12M he would have gotten from the Sox in arb.

Boras may have landed Teixeira the deal he wanted, but he screwed Tek with that decision...

Now the Sox can get him back for half of that.

I agree with nrmax88, I think its pretty obvious that these free agents would not have accepted arbitration. Peter gammons said the union was advising against their members accepting arbitration.

Only 2 people who were offered arbitration accepted. So even guys like Varitek, did not accept eventhough most people think it was a big mistake in hindsight.

I also have to wonder, if what we are assuming (that players would get a raise in arbitration) is really the case.

Arbitration is not a guaranteed raise, the team and the players agents offer what they think is fair salarys given their playing experience and quality, etc. Their salary is compared to players salary's of similar experience, etc.

We have very little players who were in this situation the players listed above in and actually accepted arbitration. Its pretty rare, that they cannot do better on the market then in arbitration.

I agree with others. Most of the good players (Dunn, etc) would have declined at the time.

Baseball may very well have its first sign and trades this winter.

Is 1yr/$14mil for Pat Burrell worse than 3yr/$31 mil for Raul Ibanez?

pmc765,

I am pretty sure that a player can only get a X% of a cut in arbitration, what that % is, i don't know. It is what ticked Mark Prior off with the cubs because Hendry went to arbitration one year asking for that cut on the cubs end.

Every time i hear his name now i just wish MLB had a slot bonus in place for the picks, becuase he would never have been a Cub.

It is hard to call Dunn "good foresight." Maybe in relation to after the season but go back a few more months and it is the opposite. I do not think it took hindsight to know that varitek was nuts to not accept arbitration. One of the more interesting side effects of the economic climate is that teams are definitely charging players negative values for having bad defense.

"Doesn't the CBA limit the percentage an arbitrator can cut a player's salary? So, if the limit is 20%, doesn't that mean Varitek could not be awarded less than $8M?"

Not for free agents. The 20% max cut rule only applies to players with less than six years of service time. However, there's an obvious problem with offering arbitration and then submitting a salary figure that would be more than a 20% cut: you're likely to lose unless the player asks for a ridiculous raise.

What gets me about it though, is that some of these teams that didn't offer arb were going to fill the position anyways.

The Cardinals need a starting pitcher, now that Looper is gone. If they don't get one of the big guns like Sheets, Lowe, or Ollie Perez, then not offering arb to Looper looks like a bad decision. Especially in light of the Lohse extension and if they give out a multiyear deal to a mediocre pitcher (i.e. one who is not significantly better than Looper).

Same with Phillies/Burrell or Moyer, ESPECIALLY Moyer since that would've effectively brought Moyer's price down as other teams might not be willing to give up the draft pick for Jamie.