Email a copy of 'Which Free Agents Will Be Offered Arbitration?' to a friend
Loading ...
By Tim Dierkes | at
Email a copy of 'Which Free Agents Will Be Offered Arbitration?' to a friend
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows scroll to top
JacksTigers
I could not be happier with how this turned out.
jb226 2
I was thinking about this a bit last night. A lot of focus has been on how middling free agents won’t result in compensation (because who is going to offer them ~$12.4MM/yr?) and that is for good reason. But isn’t the flip side of that coin that arbitration offers that used to be somewhat risky become gimmies?
It used to be that you had to offer arbitration, which would almost always result in a raise from whatever the base is. Now you just have to offer $12.4MM, unless I’m missing something. Anybody who is coming off a contract more than that amount and who hasn’t completely fallen apart would be downright insulted by that offer, guaranteeing both the compensation and that the player will move elsewhere (which is typically what a team wants when they offer arb under the current system). Use Roy Oswalt as an example. Tim thinks the Phillies would be wary of offering him arbitration, and with good reason. Now imagine the new rules were in effect; is there much chance they wouldn’t go “here’s $12.4MM, lulz” and watch him walk? Same with people like Buerhle. They already make more and there’s no reason to believe they wil take a pay cut, so it’s basically automatic.
I don’t think this is a big deal by any means, I just don’t believe I have seen it mentioned yet.
Mike Lynch
In your example Oswalt will probably get a pay cut. If the 12.4M option was offered to Oswalt this year he would probably end up taking it. It would be “show you I’m healthy” option to get another multiyear deal.
martinfv2
jb raises a great point. Oswalt is a good example. I am curious though if there is a “maximum cut” salary rule in there.
martinfv2
jb raises a great point. Oswalt is a good example. I am curious though if there is a “maximum cut” salary rule in there.
Double D
Why are some players still under the old rules? I thought these changes were across the board…
Mike Lynch
Double D, this year’s offseason is based on the last CBA not the new CBA agreement. This offseason still has the Type A/Type B FA which you have offer arbitration to in order to get compensation (Other than the Type A’s that were re-classified as Type B’s).
The qualifying offer to receive compensation goes into effect next offseason.
Double D
thanks, but it’s still odd they they reclassified some relievers, such as Madson, which screws the Phils. Why bother doing that? Change everything or nothing this year.
Steve_in_MA
Its to protect teams that have made deals in reliance of the old rules. The split is intended to make sure that everyone gets what they bargained for during this offseason, and the new rules get fully implemented afterward. They’re trying for a smooth transition.
Mike Lynch
Also it really doesn’t screw the Phil’s and may actually help them as they will still get a 1st round pick and a comp pick when a team signs Madson, it is just the team that signs him doesn’t have to give up their 1st round draft pick.
I think that they really wanted to put all of the Type A’s in Madson’s category put the Phillies would’ve gone ballistic if they were the only team to lose their 1st rounder since they signed Papelbon prior to the CBA changes. As a compromise the left the top tier type A’s alone.
Mike Lynch
Double D, this year’s offseason is based on the last CBA not the new CBA agreement. This offseason still has the Type A/Type B FA which you have offer arbitration to in order to get compensation (Other than the Type A’s that were re-classified as Type B’s).
The qualifying offer to receive compensation goes into effect next offseason.
Brv Rocks
The Braves will not offer Alex Gonzalez arbitration. They are too afraid that he would accept it.
carpengui
Maybe, but given the shortstop market right now, they might actually be able to trade him, too. Frankly, having him as a fall-back option would not be the worst thing in the world: better to play from a hand of strength than not.
So yes, I bet arb is offered to Seabass (and I also bet he declines – he knows what Barmes just got, for instance).
MY QUESTION: What’s the deadline on acceptance of these arbitration offers made to your own free agents?
Brv Rocks
It was just reported by the AJC that the Braves will not offer Gonzalez arbitration. No more pouty face flailing away at the plate next year. Yippppeeeee!!
carpengui
Huh. I sit corrected.
Mike Lynch
Alan, the players have until Dec. 7 to accept or decline the arbitration offers
carpengui
Excellent – thanks.
carpengui
Maybe, but given the shortstop market right now, they might actually be able to trade him, too. Frankly, having him as a fall-back option would not be the worst thing in the world: better to play from a hand of strength than not.
So yes, I bet arb is offered to Seabass (and I also bet he declines – he knows what Barmes just got, for instance).
MY QUESTION: What’s the deadline on acceptance of these arbitration offers made to your own free agents?
Steve_in_MA
I think its an absolute given that the BoSox will offer Ortiz arbitration, since they’ve already made him a contract offer. What is there to lose if we are willing to have him back? If he declines and walks, we get two compensatory picks. If he accepts, we either work out a one-year deal (maybe with an option), or go to arbitration, where he gets a one-year deal.
Steve_in_MA
I think its an absolute given that the BoSox will offer Ortiz arbitration, since they’ve already made him a contract offer. What is there to lose if we are willing to have him back? If he declines and walks, we get two compensatory picks. If he accepts, we either work out a one-year deal (maybe with an option), or go to arbitration, where he gets a one-year deal.