NOV. 5: This year’s cutoff is set at precisely 2.115 days of service, MLBTR has learned.
OCT. 10: This year’s cutoff point to determine Super Two status will be unusually low, per Adam McCalvy of MLB.com (via Twitter). While an exact cutoff point is yet unclear, McCalvy reports that Josh Hader, who has two years and 115 days of MLB service time (abbreviated as 2.115) will be eligible for arbitration this winter. In essence, that means that Hader is about to become a very well-compensated reliever. That would’ve been the case in the 2020-21 offseason anyway, but he’ll now tap into that earning power a year early. It’s also worth noting that this cutoff point will place Miami’s JT Riddle, who finished the season at 2.118 years of service, into arbitration eligibility as well.
A 2.115 cutoff would already be the lowest Super Two threshold in the past decade. The previous lowpoints in that span came in 2010 and 2013, when the cutoff was 2.122. Last year, it settled at 2.134. If the threshold is any lower this season, others could also be impacted. Arizona’s Luke Weaver (2.112) and Oakland’s Matt Chapman (2.109) are the most notable names within reasonable distance of Hader’s 2.115.
Super Two designation is one of the innumerable quirks to the ever-confounding arbitration system. For the unfamiliar, Major League players earn “service time” for every day spent on an MLB roster. One year of MLB service is defined as 172 days — despite the fact that there are more days than that in the regular season. (This year’s season was 186 days; again — hooray for quirks!)
Upon reaching three years of service time, all players become eligible for salary arbitration. Prior to that point, teams are effectively able to set (most) player salaries at any rate they wish, so long as it is north of the league minimum. Many teams have formulas they use to determine pre-arbitration salaries, and it’s quite rare for pre-arb players to earn even $1MM (barring a long-term extension). Arbitration is the first point at which players and their agents can begin negotiating with teams regarding their salary, though arbitration prices still typically fall shy of open-market value.
The “Super Two” wrinkle further complicates matters. The top 22 percent of players (in terms of total service time) with between two and three years of service also are considered eligible for arbitration and termed “Super Two” players. Any player who falls into that service bucket and spent at least 86 days of the preceding season on a 25-man roster or the Major League injured list become eligible a year early and then go through the arbitration process four times.
In the case of Hader, he’s now in line for a fairly considerable salary. He has 37 more innings, eight more saves and a whopping 116 more strikeouts than his own teammate, Corey Knebel, had when reaching arbitration as a Super Two player last season. Knebel landed a $3.65MM salary, which Hader should handily top. Beyond that, Hader’s subsequent raises in 2021, 2022 and 2023 will be built off a higher base because of his early entry into the arbitration process.
Once the exact cutoff is determined, we’ll add projections for Hader, Riddle and any other newly minted arbitration-eligible players to our just-released annual list of arbitration projections.
Disaster for a small market team like the Brewers. Second most important player on that team. By his 4th year of arb he’ll break records for relievers, if he stays healthy.
A’s praying wrt Chapman, too. By 3rd arb he’ll be unpayable by them.
oh no, teams having to adequately compensate their players for their good production? what a shame.
Bingo. I understand fan griping when a big-contract player doesn’t live up to it. But Hader surely delivers tons of excess value…and even with arbitration isn’t going to be paid nearly commensurate with that.
It is economics. The lower have the league in income can not pay all of their players the going rate or else they will have a higher payroll than income. Not a big deal for the top half of the league because they all have large local TV deals that can absorb increased payrolls.. The lower half has to pick and choose who they can pay and who they need to trade off to be able to still cover payroll. It is not about Hader’s individual contract it is about the team payroll and how they can have the best team with the amount of payroll available to them.
they can pay their players. they make plenty of money, but need to spend less to profit as much, but they will profit either way. i certainly understand its a buissness and that the owners are by no means required to make money simply because i say so. the point is though, you have to pay money to win. sometimes you pay less, or pay later, but these players deserve their money, no matter how much money the owner of the team that holds their rights wants to spend s year.
^— this
Never said the players don’t deserve the money. The only question is who will pay them. If they want the most money, the will not end up playing for the bottom half of the league. If they enjoy living in a certain city that is in the bottom half and are willing to work with that team the will still make a good income just not as much. Teams in the lower half will make trades to the upper half if they have a large number of players in arbitration years. Players will get their arbitration money no matter what if they are productive.
im not charging that you believe the players dont deserve money. you understand the situation well, just have a different viewpoint on it. ive never been a fan of the arb system, but at the same time, guys like Chapman or Hader have been paid much less than their performance would merit the past few years, and eventually the bill has to come due. it sucks, but you have to pay to play.
The brewers made $66M in 2018, the second most “per fan” in the MLB. I think they can afford to pay Hader a few more million.
Except the Brewers don’t operate in the black year-to-year. They operated at a loss this season (highest payroll in team history) with the idea that the overall valuation of the franchise continues to rise.
The Brewers don’t operate in the black because they’ve traditionally put a product on the field nobody wants to pay to see. Play better, get more fans in the seats, make more money.
Kansas City is the best possible example of an owner who understands the business. KC has an incredibly small market for baseball and they had a very tight budget. As their rebuild started to bear fruit, KC expanded the payroll and fans flooded the gates dramatically increasing revenue.
2010 = $72M (67-95) Att 1.6M
2011 = $36M (71-91) Att 1.7M
2012 = $60M (72-90) Att 1.7M
2013 = $81M (86-76)Att 1.8M
2014 = $92M (89-73) Att 2.0M Lost World Series.
2015 = $114M (95-67) Att 2.7M Won World Series.
2016 = $113M (81-81) Att 2.6M
2017 = $127M (80-82) Att 2.2M
2018 = $130M (58-104) Att 1.7M
2019 = $68M (59-103) Att 1.5M
stevetheump.com/Payrolls.htm
Spend more, get a better product, put more fans in the seats, make more money. Spend money to make money.
Brewers brought in 7.8 million more fans during that time period than the Royals…
You don’t know what you are talking about.
Maybe you should do some research before making such a claim..The Brewers have been in the top 10 in attendance the last several years and have a very loyal fan base.
I don’t think he understands that the Brewers are actually a better run version than the Royals over the last 10-15 years.. Sure, KC has the World Series victory and appearances, but the Brewers have been more consistent attendance and victory wise.
It appears I used too many words for a few of you. Let me fix that for you.
“Spend Money to Make Money”
The Royals have averaged 700,000+ less fans per year than the Brewers over the last ten years. Your point makes no sense.
A lot of those fans dress in Cubbie Blue 9 times a year
Martas. The Brewers always have one of the top attendances in baseball. Your remark is stupid. They made $65 million in 2018. They have been at or near 3 million a year. You really should know what you are talking about. Miller Park is always full
No doubt some of those fans are Cubs fans, what is your point? The Brewers still draw very well.
Franchise values are going to rise regardless of the product on the field. The Marlins were terrible and saddled with debt and still saw a significant rise in value prior to a sale.
In the current economic environment team values are going to rise until they don’t. The profits on operations is a pittance compared to the money owners stand to make when selling the team.
“Spend money to make money.”
Agreed, so long as you acknowledge that it often doesn’t work…
A’s can just trade him to the Jays. We’d be happy to run that play again.
So does that mean if a player spent 186 days on the roster this year, theyd accrue more than one year of service time? Or would it max out at 172 days?
Any service time of at least 172 days equals one year.
Six years of team control may not legally be codified collusion but it’s horrible for the players. And a tragedy for players who aren’t “superstars.”
Well, maybe the MLBPA should start caring about its future members and stop giving the current members perks at their expense. This is on the PA and the PA alone.
That was the intention of the
owners–to sew division in the ranks. It’s worked so far.
Wrong. The PA agreed to it. Its not a conspiracy by the owners.
Yeah, it’s not like there was a trophy awarded to the team that kept player salaries down or anything!
I don’t think anyone said conspiracy (I think you mean collusion), but collusion and agreement are not mutually exclusive. The no-collusion clause is in the CBA, and if there’s collusion during the agreement, it’s voids they agreement. Saying “you agreed to it” doesn’t defeat collusion even if they did agree.
Teams tend to put players who aren’t superstars on the roster regardless of service time if they deserve it.
Crying a river over here for these poor, mistreated ballplayers.
Except that young players are drastically mistreated. Ripped off. The ones you shouldn’t cry about are the ones who make tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Especially all those failing to earn their pay. But the young ones should get your sympathy. Many of them are being robbed.
im for players making more money, but i also wouldn’t be happy as a fan if all the players i liked on my team were gone so quickly like that. id rather them revamp the arb system to better reward pre-arb players, and perhaps add some sort of offer sheet system like the NHL does.
Is it safe to assume this number has dropped in some way because of the increase in service time manipulation over the last few years?
That’s a very good question.
do have to wonder if that has played a role
since its always the same percentage it would have to be. that beings said, it wss not intentional if that’s what point you are trying to make.
The reverse actually. When a team intentionally keeps a top prospect down after he appears to be ready, they are trying to avoid him becoming a Super Two guy. What causes the Super Two date to move forward like it is, is more young players being brought up sooner.
That being said, the ideal sort of young player to be brought up early is a guy who’s pretty good but not likely to be a star. Non-closer relievers, back-end starters who get MiLB guys out but don’t have blazing fastballs, productive hitters who don’t have loud tools.
And that’s what’s happening. Teams are bringing up more young (cheap) guys because it’s a better financial decision than giving a contract to a fading mediocre veteran.
The Kris Bryants of the world are always going to be held back to avoid Super Two status.
No it isn’t the reverse. The cutoff is getting lower because teams continue to wait longer to try to avoid super 2 but by doing so they might not be anymore since so many teams do it. Your last sentence with Kris Bryant is also the total opposite, Bryant is the definition of a super two player, he was held back so the Cubs could keep him another year but he is so good that they couldn’t wait to call him up so he is Super 2.
Owners make HUGE money just with the appreciation of the team. Look at the KC Royals for example. Owners need to spend more, open the books, they are making huge income every year. Fans buy into it and it won’t change. It’s a business NOT a sport (for the owners).
Appreciation means the value of the team increases. That does not make any money for the owner unless the owner sells the team. It does help in negotiating things for the team but no direct income. Value in the team does not pay bills.
KC is the complete opposite of the point you should want to make. they arent spending now because no matter how much they spend they can not reasonably contend. they spent on some buy-low guys like Owings to see if they would pan out. one also forgets the same ownership group – changed just this offseason – won them a world championship a few years back. they are the worst example of how you need to spend big to win – they’ve did just that withought.
KC is the perfect example of how a small market franchise should be run based on the last few years. They rebuilt, opened a window, spent a lot of money to add pieces and went to the World Series 2x, winning one of them.
I think KC hung on 1 year too long before tearing it down again, but who can blame them?
MLBTR articles really help me understand how many people just don’t understand simple economics and/or business matters.
I know all the things in the world, but I don’t want to talk about it. Instead, I’ll talk about how little other people know. It makes me feel better about myself.
That statement shows your ignorance and not just about baseball
Hader will make more than $5M IMO, that arb estimate is too low.
probably not much more….1st year arb MVP is only worth about 10 mil…. Hader wont be the MVP or Cy Young winner…
That means Jarlin Garcia, Miami Marlins relief pitcher, with 2.114 years of MLB service time will miss arbitration by one day.
The vagaries of cutoffs.