Headlines

Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

Arbitration Breakdown: Khris Davis

By | at

Over the last few days, I have been discussing some of the higher profile upcoming arbitration cases. I rely partly on my arbitration model, developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. 2019 arbitration projections are available right here.

Khris Davis enters his third year of arbitration under somewhat familiar conditions—with a .247 average (matching his exact batting average in each season from 2015 through 2017) and at least 40 home runs in his platform season. Coincidences aside, my model sees him getting his biggest raise ever, a $7.6MM bump, good for an $18.1MM salary projection. Last year, he got a $5.5MM raise from his initial $5MM salary in his first year of arbitration.

With career highs of 48 home runs and 123 runs batted in, it is pretty logical that Davis is projected to get his biggest raise yet. On top of that, the same type of performance in the third year of arbitration eligibility is typically associated with a larger raise than it would in the second year of eligibility.

Davis’ case obviously hinges on his power numbers, which is certainly a fortunate skill to possess when it comes to arbitration; power is the skill the arbitration system favors most heavily. Looking for appropriate comparables for Davis is going to require looking for other players who have had significant tallies of the right counting stats, so we should restrict our search to prominent sluggers.

Somewhat surprisingly, in the past decade, only one player has hit 40 home runs going into his third year of arbitration: Todd Frazier, two years ago. Frazier only hit .225 that year and fell just short of 100 RBIs with 98. Davis hit eight more home runs than Frazier did, too. Putting that together, we get an absolute floor of the $3.75MM raise from Frazier’s case.

Even if we soften the home run requirement to 35 and require 100 RBIs, we only get one player in the past five years: Charlie Blackmon, last year. He got a $6.7MM raise for hitting .331 with 37 home runs and 104 runs batted in. There was some debate last year about whether that was enough of a raise, with some rival agents taking shots through the media claiming he should have gotten more. If applied back to Blackmon’s case, the current iteration model does project his 2017 season to support a larger raise of $7.8 million. That also means that the model slightly prefers that season, with its lofty batting average but lesser power stats, to the one just turned in by Davis. All things considered, Blackmon seems like a pretty solid overall comparable, one that either side in the Davis case could argue off of.

It is difficult to come up with other comparables in recent years, but if Davis and the A’s go further back, they might want to look for someone who led the league in home runs like Davis did going into his third year of arbitration. That would be Matt Kemp, who got a $5.05 million raise for his .324/39/126 season in 2011. That is obviously very stale, but it makes it plausible that Davis could get a similar kind of raise with inflation, although his batting average was obviously worse.

With so few plausible comparables, it is difficult to know what Davis could command. In such situations, I would lean towards the model, especially without much evidence that the number was too high or too low. Regardless, in the current era with so many home runs being hit league wide, it will be interesting to see how this affects future cases for guys like Davis who hit so many home runs. Of course, we may not get to see a one-year settlement. The relationship seems to be working for both sides and all involved surely remain mindful of the open market’s devaluation of sluggers, so it would not be surprising to see a multi-year agreement of some kind.

Arbitration Breakdown: Mookie Betts

By | at

Over the last few days, I have been discussing some of the higher profile upcoming arbitration cases. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. 2019 projections are available right here.

After the first year of arbitration, it is typical for arbitration salaries to be rewarded as raises on top of previous year’s salaries, based on platform year performances. That sets Mookie Betts up for quite a hefty salary in 2019, since he nearly had a record high $10.5 million salary last year and had quite an accomplished 2018 campaign.

Mookie Betts won the MVP Award with a .346 average and 32 home runs. Batting out of the leadoff spot, he only had 80 RBI, but entering arbitration with the MVP Award, my model projects him to get an $8.2 million raise and earn $18.7 million. That would easily set a record for second time eligible salaries (Ryan Howard got $15 million way back in 2009), but would fall short of the record raise for second time eligible players. Bryce Harper set the latter mark in 2017 with $8.63 million riase. Harper’s case was atypical, though, because it came following a two-year deal. Other than that, Betts is projected for the largest raise ever—which does make sense following an MVP season.

In the last decade, only two players have entered their second year of arbitration coming off an MVP season—Josh Donaldson in 2016 and Josh Hamilton way back in 2011. Not only is Hamilton a stale comp at this point, but both received multi-year deals that might make them less likely to be used as comparables. While Donaldson’s $7.35 million raise would therefore not typically be a useful comparable, both he and the Blue Jays filed numbers in a tight band ($7.05 million and $7.5 million) that were also quite close to the actual result. Given that the comp is a few years out of date, it seems reasonable for Betts to argue that the Donaldson salary point represents a clear floor. Since Donaldson hit .297 with 41 HR and 123 RBI, his performance was more power-centric. But it certainly suggests roughly an $8 million raise for a reigning MVP is close to the right price.

Betts also won the batting title, which also calls back to Charlie Blackmon and Dee Gordon in recent years. The latter had only four home runs in 2015, so he is a weak comparable. Blackmon is a little stronger since his 2016 numbers — .324/29/82 — delivered some of the punch that Betts did at .346/32/80. That earned him a $3.8 million raise, which was actually well shy of what the model predicted. If there’s any added boost for the batting title, then, it’s tough to gauge.

Meanwhile, the Red Sox can certainly try to point to the Blackmon comp if they want to hold Betts’ salary down, but the Donaldson raise seems like a more compelling precedent since he won the MVP Award. And it probably does not hurt Betts’s negotiating position that he scored a major win over the Sox last year in a hearing. All things considered, I suspect Betts will get a record raise and earn quite close to his 2019 projection.

Arbitration Breakdown: Trevor Bauer

By | at

Over the last few days, I have been discussing some of the higher profile upcoming arbitration cases. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. 2019 arbitration projections are available right here.

Trevor Bauer enters his third year of arbitration following a career year, in which he had a 2.21 ERA and struck out 221 hitters in 175 1/3 innings. Although he only recorded 12 wins and started 27 games, Bauer is still projected for a sizable $5.075MM raise to propel him from $6.525MM in 2018 to $11.6MM in salary for the 2019 season.

Trevor Bauer

Bauer’s season is somewhat tricky in that his ERA is extremely low and quite rare for an arbitration-eligible pitcher in his service class. However, he also didn’t throw many innings compared to the few pitchers in this class who posted similarly low ERAs. Among pitchers in his service class over the past five years, Max Scherzer and Jeff Samardzija both had ERAs just below 3.00. However, with 214 1/3 and 219 2/3 innings, respectively, they had considerably larger workloads. Scherzer won 21 games en route to a Cy Young back in 2013, so that netted him a service-class record $8.8MM raise. Samardzija got a $4.46MM raise — lower than Bauer’s projected raise — but he also only won seven games back in 2014. As such, it makes sense that Bauer would be projected for a larger raise. Clayton Kershaw actually had an ERA of 1.83 going into his third year of arbitration, but he signed a multi-year deal and is probably not a relevant comp for that reason.

The most relevant may be Doug Fister in 2015, who had a 16-6 record (four more wins than Bauer at 12-6) and a 2.41 ERA (similar to Bauer’s 2.21). Importantly, Fister’s 164 innings from that season are only 11 1/3 fewer than Bauer threw in 2018. That was four years ago, and it was good for a $4.2MM raise. The big advantage that Bauer has over Fister is that he struck out more than twice as many hitters. Fister fanned a mere 98 batters, while Bauer recorded a third strike against a whopping 221 hitters. It seems like this should make Fister’s raise a floor, although the four fewer wins could prove important. Still, I think the $5.075MM raise my model projects for Bauer is a defensible one.

If we step away from ERA to find reasonable comparables other than Fister, we find a couple interesting starters who recently had 200-plus strikeouts in fewer than 200 innings. Tyson Ross got a $4.38MM raise in 2016 after a 10-12 season with a 3.26 ERA, in which he whiffed 212 men in 196 frames. Michael Pineda racked up 207 strikeouts in 175 2/3 innings the following season, though he only received a $3.1MM raise thanks to an ugly 6-12 record and decidedly sub-par 4.82 ERA. Ross is the more logical comp, but with Bauer producing an ERA a full run lower, he should land north of Ross’ raise.

Jake Arrieta is another somewhat interesting and relevant comp. Two years ago, the right-hander struck out 190 batters in 197 1/3 innings, with more wins (18) than Bauer but an inferior ERA (3.10). Arrieta received a $4.94MM raise.

Between Fister, Ross, and Arrieta, we have three starters who received raises between $4.2MM and $4.94MM when they were in this service class. All three fall short of Bauer in one category or another. With natural salary inflation, I think the model is probably in the right neighborhood for Bauer for his 2019 salary forecast.

Arbitration Breakdown: Nolan Arenado

By | at

Over the last few days, I have been discussing some of the higher profile upcoming arbitration cases. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. 2019 projections are available right here.

Nolan Arenado already earned $17.75 million in 2018, and put together another storied season. He led the league with 38 home runs, and hit .297 while knocking in 110 runs. He won yet another Gold Glove, yet another Silver Slugger, made the All Star Game, and again finished in the Top 5 of MVP Voting. That makes for his sixth, fourth, fourth, and third consecutive season in each of those accomplishments.

Entering his fourth year of arbitration, it stands to reason that Arenado will earn more than any player ever has in arbitration. After all, Josh Donaldson currently holds that record at $23 million just last year. Since the arbitration system generally awards raises based on platform year performance (except for in the player’s first year of arbitration eligibility), Donaldson’s level of pay would only reflect a $5.25 million raise, which is frankly too small for Arenado.

Indeed, the model predicts a big move up to $26.1MM for Arenado, which would represent a raise of over $8MM from his 2018 salary. Notably, too, there is some uncertainty present, since he earned $17.75 million last year only as part of a two year deal. Players do sometimes get treated differently in the event of returning to arbitration following multi-year deals. In the industry, this is often termed a “re-slot.” Probably the most recent notable example of such was Bryce Harper. In 2017, he received an $8.625 million raise from $5 to $13.625 million after a two-year deal. In that case, Harper had won the MVP Award in the first year of the two covered by the earlier agreement, and may have been treated as someone who would be re-slotted. In this case, if we were to estimate what Arenado would have earned in arbitration in 2018 based on his 2017 performance, we might have guessed $20.7 million rather than $17.75 million.

So, if anything, we would probably expect Arenado to argue for more than $26.1 million based on a re-slotting. Already in uncharted waters in terms of salary, that may or may not be a hard sell. After all, at that point, we would be looking at a “Kimbrel Rule” situation. That “rule” is named after Craig Kimbrel, and basically describes the maximum amount that we should expect a player to break the record raise for his service class. This rule exists because Craig Kimbrel’s first year of arbitration eligibility was so unique that my model had him earning significantly more than any closer had ever earned. We therefore capped his projection. The Kimbrel rule as applied to Arenado would give him a $26.75 million maximum, not much different than his $26.1 million projection.

If we look for comparables, it’s hard to find any for Arenado regardless of the method used to evaluate him. Donaldson would actually be a floor in my estimation. He hit .270 with 33 HR and 78 RBI in 2017, but in just 496 PA. With Arenado stepping up to the plate a whopping 673 times, and hitting .297 with 38 HR and 110 RBI, he will surely not command a smaller raise than Donaldson’s $6 million.

One potential comparable for Arenado could be teammate Charlie Blackmon, who produced .331/37/104 the year before last, and got a $6.7 million raise. We might expect that to be a rather close match for Arenado, although Blackmon’s ultimate raise was called into question by other agents at the time. Still, if we think that Arenado would come in at about a $6.7 million raise, that would land him at a $24.45 million salary — less than his $26.1 million projection. On the other hand, if Arenado’s Gold Gloves or higher service time factor in, we may still be north of that and closer to his projection.

Arenado will be an interesting, record-breaking case this year. With several complicating factors impacting his case, there’s a fairly large spread of dollars theoretically open for discussion. Ultimately, I suspect that the model is pretty close, but I could see being off by a couple million in either direction.

Arbitration Breakdown: Jacob deGrom

By | at

Over the next couple weeks, I will be discussing some of the higher profile upcoming arbitration cases. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. 2019 projections are available right here.

The most interesting arbitration case of 2019 is probably Jacob deGrom. The arbitration system is an antiquated method of player compensation. While teams on the free agent market bid based on innovative stats, other numbers that reflect more accurate player valuations, and detailed scouting assessments, the arbitration system still uses stats like wins, saves, and RBI that teams have since discarded in their player evaluation. The stats remain important because a couple hundred players become eligible for arbitration every year, and everyone knows what criteria the system uses.

But arbitration also rewards hardware. An MVP or Cy Young Award can weigh heavily on the ultimate salary a player will take home, and until recently those awards were often based on antiquated statistics like wins. The press was a few steps behind front offices in innovation—after all, that’s probably how it should be.

All these differing forces crash into each other in 2019, as deGrom enters his third year of arbitration eligibility with a mere 10-9 record, but a Cy Young Award. And it was not just a squeaker he won without real competition —he got all but one first place vote in a year where Max Scherzer won 18 games, had a 2.53 ERA, and struck out 300 hitters. Aaron Nola won 17 games this year with a 2.37 ERA too. There were clearly other contenders, but deGrom won thanks to a more knowledgeable press base that eschewed wins and focused on his sensational overall performance.

Arbitration still uses wins, however. And that could easily downgrade deGrom. In fact, my model—which is backward looking by design, asking what raises players have gotten historically with similar statistics—sees deGrom earning a mere $5.5 million raise, which would bring him up to a $12.9 million salary. Back in 2014, Scherzer himself won a Cy Young with a 21-3 record and a 2.90 ERA, striking out 240 in 214.1 innings. That got him an $8.8 million raise, a record for third time eligible starting pitchers which still stands today. The eleven fewer wins are the main reason the model is more skeptical of deGrom. After all, the strikeouts and innings are similar and deGrom’s ERA was a full point lower.

The model could easily miss here. If a panel decides to ignore wins like the Cy Young voters did, it could easily give deGrom a $9 or $10 million raise (and somewhere around a $17 million salary), possibly setting off a new wave of arbitration cases that could simultaneously give arbitration-eligible pitchers salaries more in line with their relative value, all while forcing the unfortunate arbitration salary modelers of this world to retool their models!

Of course, maybe the model is just right. Maybe the Mets will be able to persuade a panel — or, more likely, persuade CAA Sports (the agency that only recently employed new Mets GM Brodie Van Wagenen) that a panel would be persuaded — that wins will be valued as they have in the past, substantially harming deGrom’s argument. In that case, we would need to look for pitchers with very low win totals and very low ERAs. Only a few names surface.

By far the most interesting is Jeff Samardzija. In 2015, Samardzija went 7-13 with a 2.99 ERA in 219.2 innings, and earned a $4.34 million raise. That seems like an absolute floor for deGrom, who clearly bested Samardzija on every major statistic—even wins. Plus, that was four years ago and is probably a little stale.

There are not even that many very low ERA seasons to look at. Cole Hamels got a $5.5 million raise seven years ago with a 14-9 record and a 2.79 ERA. The model is essentially predicting that deGrom gets Hamels’ raise despite the staleness of that case, and despite the fact that deGrom topped Hamels in every category but wins.

Perhaps another interesting comparable could be David Price, who went 15-12 with a 3.26 ERA in 2015. The most notable aspect of his case though, is the fact that his tally of 271 strikeouts is quite similar to deGrom’s 269. Probably the most compelling aspect of Price’s case, however, was his accumulation of 248.1 innings. That tops deGrom by over thirty frames. Price’s $5.75 million raise could be argued as a ceiling on that front as well. There is a key difference cutting in the other direction, of course, in the form of the extra 1.5 earned runs Price allowed per nine innings.

Whatever deGrom gets, he is sure to set an interesting precedent going forward. Will arbitration panels stop paying as much attention to wins? How will they consider extremely low ERAs? How will Cy Young Awards come into play? The most interesting case of 2019 probably has some light to shine on these questions.

Arbitration Breakdown: Josh Donaldson

By | at

Recently, I have been discussing some of the higher-profile upcoming arbitration cases as part of MLBTR’s Arbitration Breakdown series. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. Full arbitration projections for 2018 are also available.

Josh Donaldson enters his third year of arbitration with an already extraordinarily high $17MM salary. This would already be the highest ever one-year deal signed in arbitration (with the exception of Bryce Harper’s 2018 salary, inked back in May) and Donaldson will certainly command a raise above that. The highest one-year deal ever signed went to Prince Fielder in 2011 at $15.5MM. However, Buster Posey and Ryan Howard earned $20MM during years generally covered by arbitration as part of multi-year deals inked earlier in their careers.

Josh Donaldson | Jordan Johnson-USA TODAY Sports

Generally, players who are beyond their first year of arbitration are effectively given raises, rather than absolute salaries, and my research has determined that these raises are almost exclusively based on their platform season. That is how my model is set up. In other words, Donaldson is projected to earn $20.7MM because the model projects a $3.7MM raise for a player with his 2017 performance.

However, Donaldson received a two-year deal covering 2016-17, making his case somewhat tricky. We sometimes see players in such circumstances being paid as a “re-slot” case, which means they are slotted back into the arbitration system based on career performance. So it is possible that Donaldson’s performance prior to 2017 will be considered. However, that would probably push his salary even further above the current record and seems unlikely.

Like many others in the league this season, Donaldson could see his case impacted by the record level of home runs that were hit in Major League Baseball in 2017. Big league hitters combined for a total of 6,105 total home runs — a whopping 26 percent increase over the average from the past five seasons. When I look at players with similar home run totals in that span, it isn’t clear if an arbitration panel (or teams and agents that are negotiating in the shadow of what an arbitration panel would say) would treat home runs from Donaldson as similar to other players with the same number as home runs, or as someone with maybe 26 percent fewer home runs.

In recent years, data has shown that run environment is not a big consideration in arbitration, and as such, my model does not adjust for league run environment in this way. Hitters in high-scoring years benefit from being compared to hitters in low-scoring years, and pitchers in low-scoring years benefit from being compared to pitchers in high-scoring years.

Donaldson hit 33 home runs but did so only in 496 plate appearances, and that total was only accompanied 78 RBIs. If we re-adjust his home run baseline to the average of the last five years, that would put us at 26.  If we allow for the possibility that a potential panel might consider his home run total to be inflated, we might want to look for other players who hit 25 home runs. But playing time is a huge factor in arbitration, so we would want to look for players who did not play full seasons.

If we even limit to players with 25 home runs and under 600 PAs, we only get five players in the last five seasons. These are actually the same five players who hit 25 home runs but had fewer than 90 RBIs as well. They are Lucas Duda (who got a $2.5MM raise two years ago), Luis Valbuena (who got a $1.9MM raise two years ago), Brandon Moss (who got a $2.4MM raise three years ago), Chris Davis (who got a $1.65MM raise three years ago), and Jarrod Saltalamacchia (who got a $2MM raise five years ago).

All five of these players had batting averages between .196 and .244, so Donaldson at .270 is far above them. They also all hit between 25 and 27 home runs, which means Donaldson’s mark total of 33 will probably place him above that group as well. Valbuena and Saltamacchia are poor comparables because their averages were in the .220s and both had fewer than 60 RBIs. Davis, who hit .196, is probably also low. So we would rather compare Donaldson to Duda (.244/27/73) or Moss (.234/25/81). But it is clear that these are both probably floors, since Donaldson bests them on all major fronts considered in arbitration. That leads me to believe that Donaldson should definitely get a raise above $2.5MM.

If we relax the home run assumption and look for players who had fewer than 600 PAs, we find a couple other recent players who got raises around $2.9MM. Justin Smoak hit .226/18/59 in 328 PAs in 2016, and Steve Pearce hit .293/21/49 in 383 PAs in 2015. Both seem like floors as well. So we have to assume Donaldson probably pulls in above $3MM.

If we relax the playing time assumption, we could arrive at Todd Frazier in 2017. He hit .225/40/98 in 666 PAs, so while his batting average was low, the more-important home run and plate appearance totals put him as a clear favorite. He received a $3.75MM raise last year, so that seems like a plausible ceiling for Donaldson.

All of the players listed here were actually reaching arbitration for only their third year of eligibility and Donaldson is actually entering his fourth year of eligibility (his first year was 2015, before his two-year pact for 2016-17). If we want to strictly adhere to finding a fourth time eligible, we could see Eric Hosmer last year at .266/25/104 in 667 PAs. He got a $4MM raise and could potentially be a good comparable as well.

I think the model is pretty close to accurate for Donaldson in this case. I could see an argument for a raise in the low 3’s rather than the high 3’s, putting him between $20MM and $20.5MM instead of $20.7MM, but I do not think he will go lower than that.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Arbitration Breakdown: George Springer

By | at

Recently, I have been discussing some of the higher-profile upcoming arbitration cases as part of MLBTR’s Arbitration Breakdown series. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. Full arbitration projections for 2018 are also available.

George Springer enters his second year of arbitration eligibility (as a Super Two player) having compiled a solid .283 average to go along with 34 home runs and 85 runs batted in in 2017. As a result, he is projected for a $5MM raise to take him up to an $8.9MM salary in 2018.

George Springer | Richard Mackson-USA TODAY Sports

One thing complicating Springer’s case is something that could affect a great number of cases this year—the high home run level throughout the league. This past season set a league record with 6,105 total home runs, which represented a 26 percent increase over the league average from the previous five seasons. As such, when examining players with similar totals over that five-year span, there’s no way of knowing whether an arbitration panel (or teams and agents that are negotiating in the shadow of what an arbitration panel would say) would treat home runs from Springer the same as they would in an environment when home runs were less prolific.

My model does not adjust for league run environment in this way; rather, the data has shown that run environment has not historically been a significant component in the arbitration process. Hitters in high-scoring years benefit from being compared to hitters in lower-scoring years, and pitchers in low-scoring years benefit from being compared to pitchers in high-scoring years. Springer could potentially be treated by a panel (or negotiated with in the shadow of what such a panel would say) as someone who hit closer to 26 home runs than someone with 34. But even still, his list of comparables shows solid earning potential.

There have only been a couple players entering their second year of eligibility with averages north of .275 and at least 25 home runs in the past five years, and both are from last year. Manny Machado got a $6.5MM raise after hitting .294 with 37 homers and 96 RBIs. Charlie Blackmon got a $3.8MM raise after hitting .324 with 29 home runs and knocking in 82 runs.

Machado is a more obvious ceiling because his numbers are not inflated by Coors Field, and he hit substantially more home runs than Blackmon in 2016. Blackmon might serve as a floor in Springer’s case due to the fact that he hit fewer balls into the seats, despite playing in Coors. However, his high batting average could make him more favorable at the same time. In the end, I think Springer might be closer to Blackmon than he is to Machado.

Few other players really show up as decent comparables, especially when limiting the field to those who did not sign multi-year deals. Looking to a statistical comparable that did sign a multi-year deal, J.D. Martinez signed a two-year contract covering 2016-17 which included a $3MM raise in the first year of the pact. It also was preceded by an exchange of figures in which Martinez asked for a $4.25MM raise, while the Tigers countered with an offer of a $2.25MM raise. Considering Martinez’s .282, 38 homers and 102 RBIs in the platform season for that two-year deal, this could suggest a lower number for Springer.

I am guessing Springer ends up closer to a $4MM raise than $5MM based on the cases of Blackmon and Martinez. But with little comparability and the uncertainty of how a panel will consider the relevance of Coors Field or Martinez’s multi-year deal, Springer may be able to land closer to that $5MM raise. This would still be south of Machado’s $6.5MM raise but would safely beat the other two players.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Arbitration Breakdown: Kris Bryant

By | at

Recently, I have been discussing some of the higher-profile upcoming arbitration cases as part of MLBTR’s Arbitration Breakdown series. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. Full arbitration projections for 2018 are also available.

Star Cubs third baseman Kris Bryant enters arbitration for the first time with a compelling case to compete with historical records. The current record for first time eligible players still goes all the way back to Ryan Howard in 2008, who earned $10MM after a 47 home run season that brought his career total to 129 home runs. While that price point is now ten years old, it is still an unbroken record. Buster Posey got close with $8MM, but that is already five years old.

Those two players share something in common with Bryant and no one else: they had received both a Rookie of the Year Award and a Most Valuable Player Award prior to entering arbitration. The only other such player would have been Mike Trout, but he signed a multi-year deal the year before reaching arbitration eligibility. Awards can be a huge part of arbitration hearings, especially for first-time eligible players like this, which immediately explains why Bryant is projected to earn $8.9MM, nearly halfway between Posey and Howard. Joey Votto also had an MVP Award (but no ROY) in 2011 when he received an $8MM salary, but he ended up agreeing to a multi-year deal and did not exchange figures before that, so he is not very useful for our purposes.

When it comes to actual numbers rather than hardware, Bryant has a good case as well. He hit .295/29/73 in his platform year and has amassed .288/94/274 for his career. Howard hit .268/47/136 in his platform, with .291/129/353 in his career. So he would be appear to represent a ceiling if the deal was more recent. That said, Bryant might argue that his case is old enough that it should not act as a ceiling on his earnings.

Posey hit .336/24/103 in his platform year and had .314/46/191 for his career line entering arbitration. The batting average (and the fact that he is a catcher) makes Posey look more favorable, but the fact that Bryant has twice the career home runs might make his case more impressive in a process that leans heavily on home runs. Votto’s numbers are actually somewhat closer though, with a .324/37/113 platfrom and .314/90/298 career. Of course, his multi-year deal limits his usefulness as a comparable.

Nolan Arenado and Manny Machado could serve as floors. Neither had the hardware, and both had relatively similar numbers except for far fewer career home runs when they entered the arb process. Machado had a .286/35/86 platform and a .281/68/215 career, while Arenado had a .287/42/130 platform and a .281/70/243 career. So I would guess that their identical $5MM salaries two years ago are a solid floor for Bryant.

I suspect Posey might actually be the best comparable, despite the fact that he plays a premium defensive position. Adding in salary inflation, his $8MM salary in 2013 puts Bryant around $9.5MM. I suspect he will not break Howard’s record, so this seems pretty believable. The Cubs could easily try to argue for a lower number like Arenado or Machado, but probably will have trouble making that case. However, the team could still try to push Bryant south of Posey’s $8MM. There is a large range of plausible outcomes for a case like this; it would represent a fascinating hearing if it went to a panel.

Arbitration Breakdown: Jacob deGrom

By | at

Recently, I have been discussing some of the higher-profile upcoming arbitration cases as part of MLBTR’s Arbitration Breakdown series. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. Full arbitration projections for 2018 are also available.

Jacob deGrom enters his second year of arbitration eligibility poised to earn a solid bump up from his $4.05MM salary from 2017. He went 15-10 with a 3.53 ERA in 201.1 innings and struck out 239 batters, so my model places him at $9.2MM, good for a $5.1MM raise. This is probably too high based on comparables, as I discuss below, but it should easily be enough to earn him a large raise.

Players who are past their first year of arbitration eligibility general get raises based on their platform year performance only. So we just need to look for pitchers with roughly 15 wins and a ton of strikeouts, along with respectable ERAs. One such player who got a very large raise is David Price—he got a $5.76MM raise back in 2013 after going 20-5 with a 2.56 ERA and 205 punch outs. That is probably somewhat stale by now, although it certainly looks like a ceiling given the much stronger performance in terms of wins and ERA. A more recent ceiling might be Jake Arrieta’s $7.07MM raise two years ago after going 22-6 with a 1.77 ERA. Like Price, he won a Cy Young, and clearly has better numbers. I think both Price and Arrieta cap how high deGrom’s raise can get.

More within striking distance is Stephen Strasburg three years ago. He went 14-11 versus deGrom’s 15-10. And his 3.14 ERA is better than deGrom’s 3.53, but when you consider run environment it’s nearly a dead ringer. A panel might not consider run environment, but either way both have ERAs in the 3’s. Strasburg’s 242 strikeouts are of course very similar to deGrom’s 239. Strasburg took home a $3.43MM raise. Add in some salary inflation, and you might get closer to $4MM for deGrom.

Strasburg is actually the largest raise in the last five years excluding the two Cy Young Award winners (Arrieta and Price), so that might be the best comparable. Tyson Ross had a 13-14 record the same year as Strasburg and just 195 strikeouts, but had a 2.81 ERA. He got a $3.27MM raise. But that is likely to fall below where deGrom gets, and could be viewed as something of a floor. ERA is generally not as important in arbitration as you might expect.

Garrett Richards is the only other comparable that makes sense to me. His $3.23MM raise two years ago off a 15-12/3.65 performance came with only 176 strikeouts, though. So he also likely helps to establish a floor for deGrom.

Overall, I think there is a good case case for deGrom to get a raise closer to $4MM than the $5.1MM projection. Look for a salary around $8MM when push comes to shove.

Arbitration Breakdown: Charlie Blackmon

By | at

Recently, I have been discussing some of the higher-profile upcoming arbitration cases as part of MLBTR’s Arbitration Breakdown series. I rely partly on my arbitration model developed exclusively for MLB Trade Rumors, but will also break out some interesting comparables and determine where the model might be wrong. Full arbitration projections for 2018 are also available.

Charlie Blackmon put up some gaudy numbers in 2017, hitting .331 to go along with 37 home runs and 104 RBIs. As a result, my model projected him for a very high raise. However, the model also utilizes something called the Kimbrel Rule– which states that no player gets projected for an increase more than $1MM higher than the record raise for his service class. This limits Blackmon to a $6.1MM raise, which lands him at a $13.4MM projection for the 2018 season. Truth be told, though, the model actually spit out a $16.8MM salary estimate!

Charlie Blackmon | Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports

There are two different run environment factors to consider for Blackmon that could be inflating the way his number would be viewed by an arbitration panel. Blackmon plays his home games at Coors Field, a notorious home run park. FanGraphs gives Rockies’ players a 116 park factor, suggesting Blackmon’s 37 home runs might be the equivalent of 32 home runs in a more neutral setting.

Further inflating Blackmon’s home run total is something that will affect a great number of cases this year—the dramatically increased level of home runs throughout the league. This past season set a league record with 6,105 total home runs—this was 26 percent higher than the average from the last five years. So when I look at players with similar totals over the last five years, it is unclear whether an arbitration panel (or teams and agents that are negotiating in the shadow of what an arbitration panel would say) would treat home runs from Blackmon as similar to other players with the same number of home runs, or as someone with maybe 26 percent fewer home runs.

My model does not adjust for league or park home run environment in this way; in general the data has shown that run environment is not a big consideration in arbitration. Hitters in high-scoring years benefit from being compared to hitters in lower-scoring years. Pitchers in low-scoring years benefit from being compared to pitchers in high-scoring years.

If you knock down Blackmon’s home run total by league and park effects, he lands somewhere around the equivalent of 25 home runs in a neutral park in a prior season. But of course, that may not be what the panel considers. Most likely, they will just compare him (favorably) to the current record-holder in this service class, which is Chase Headley from 2013. Headley hit .286 with 31 homers, 115 RBIs and 17 stolen bases in the platform season for his final trip through the arbitration process.

Blackmon outperformed Headley in both homers and average, and he also stole 14 bags, further helping his case. It seems likely to Blackmon will be seen as favorable to Headley — especially considering the fact that Headley’s case is already five years old — so I think earning a raise north of $6MM seems likely.

If we’re looking for other recent players with a lot of home runs who reached arbitration, Todd Frazier’s name emerges. He hit 40 home runs in his platform season, but at .225, his average was more than a hundred points below Blackmon’s. Frazier got a $3.75MM raise, which Blackmon should easily crush.

Eric Hosmer is another potential comparable, but he’s also clearly a player with an inferior case to that of Blackmon. In 2016, Hosmer’s platform before his final trip through arbitration, he hit .266 with 25 homers and 104 RBIs. Blackmon has him handled in every category, so Hosmer’s $4MM raise is another example of a potential floor for Blackmon’s raise.

I think it’s clear that Blackmon is going to set a new record. The “Kimbrel Rule” has worked very well since its inception, and I think it will apply well here. Look for Blackmon to land somewhere between $13-14MM, with some chance of going slightly above that if and when he settles on a one-year deal for the 2018 season.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com

hide arrowsFOX Sports Engage Network scroll to top