As MLBTR's Arbitration Tracker shows, there are 22 remaining arbitration cases that have yet to settle. Among those, some of the most likely to go to hearings are those of the Indians and Braves. GM Chris Antonetti of Cleveland says that his club is highly likely to see at least one hearing, while Atlanta counterpart Frank Wren has insisted that all three of his team's cases will not be negotiated further. Here is the latest on those arbitration situations:
- The Indians are at a standstill with reliever Vinnie Pestano, tweets MLB.com's Jordan Bastian. With the sides' positions standing at $975K and $1.45MM, respectively, a hearing set for this coming Friday could be needed to provide resolution.
- Meanwhile, progress has been slow in talks with fellow Cleveland reliever Josh Tomlin, Bastian tweets. Though the sides are positioned across a seemingly minor gap ($800K vs. $975K), they would go to hearing on February 14th if resolution cannot be reached.
- For starter Justin Masterson, both he and the team will be closely watching the still-unresolved arbitration case between Homer Bailey and the Reds, Bastian writes. The two have had similar production levels and face similar spreads in their filing figures. Additionally, either could look to the other as a comp in extension negotiations. Bastian previously reported that Masterson and the Indians were set for hearing on February 20th.
- If nothing changes the position of the Braves, then the team is headed to three hearings in one week over mid-February. As David O'Brien of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports via Twitter, Freddie Freeman ($5.75MM vs. $4.5MM) is scheduled for February 11th, Jason Heyward ($5.5MM vs. $5.2MM) for February 13th, and Craig Kimbrel ($9MM vs. $6.55MM) for February 17th.
I dont know how far ATL moved, correct, nor do you, Heyward may have offered to meet halfway but was rebuffed, anyway this is all moot now after his extension.
There are only 3 arb years so $1.8m is wrong, its half that, but nevermind…
My point being it reflects badly in how an organisation treats its players.
Most big league clubs hate going to arb and do all they can to avoid it, for obvious reasons, including small market teams.
We’ll agree to disagree.
The 1.8is correct and the reason to not just give in. If you were to just give in on an extra $300,000 each year it would be cumulative. $300,000 year one, that extra plus $300,000 again the next year. Ends up being $1.8mil and a good reason to not give in.
Sorry, I meant that if they could have worked it out beforehand, the difference would likely have been split down the middle. Yes, arb hearings themselves are winner take all.