The Rays decided over the weekend to renew the contract of reigning American League Cy Young winner Blake Snell for just $573,700, highlighting the less-than-satisfying manner in which pre-arbitration players’ salaries are determined. As we noted in that post, other similarly accomplished players have been paid quite a bit more by their respective teams. The collectively bargained system leaves full discretion with clubs to set salaries for those players that are not yet eligible for arbitration, subject only to a floor (currently $555K). A few players have landed in the $1MM range, though that is the exception rather than the rule. Approaches vary widely from team to team. Whatever one thinks about the fairness of that minimum salary level, it’s rather a bizarre system.
Here are some other notable recent pre-arb salary outcomes:
- The Astros renewed star third bagger Alex Bregman for $640,500, per MLB.com’s Brian McTaggart. That’s a bargain rate for one of the game’s best young position players, who says he’s “disappointed” in how things turned out. Bregman explained: “I feel like good business would be wanting to make a player who performed at a high level on your team happy and want to feel like he wanted to be kept and feel like they wanted him to play here forever. I’m just disappointed it doesn’t seem like the same amount of want.” GM Jeff Luhnow defended the decision in part by pointing to the fact that it’s “one of the top ten” pre-arb salaries ever awarded. “I know it’s not satisfying because he’s a great player and no player is ever satisfied the year before they reach arbitration with the amount the club gives them,” said Luhnow. “That’s just the nature of our industry right now.”
- Over in Cardinals camp, there are a few other players who are surely less than thrilled with how things turned out. Righties Jack Flaherty and Jordan Hicks were each renewed, as Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports. The former was renewed at $562,100 — $10K less than the team offered him, reflecting a $10K reduction for his decision not to sign on the dotted line. Flaherty decline to criticize the team, saying that “their process is great and it makes sense,” but says “the system as a whole is not great.”
- Meanwhile, the Angels managed to reach agreement with AL Rookie of the Year recipient Shohei Ohtani, Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times tweets. Ohtani has over than a year less service time than Bregman but will out-earn him at $650K. The ROY hardware certainly didn’t hurt and Ohtani is unquestionably a unique case — and not just because of his two-way contributions. The Halos originally landed Ohtani — Japan’s biggest star and the most fascinating international player ever to cross the Pacific — for a bonus of just over $2.3MM since he chose to come over while still subject to collectively bargained international signing caps. Ohtani’s will be a pre-arb earner one more time in 2020 before qualifying for arbitration.
What did Ohtani sign for though?
$650,000…..it’s in the twitter link
Meant to include that! Edited.
These cheap owners are going to force the players to strike when all they had to do was pay a Cy Young winner $2M and refused to.
Do you really think that if the Rays would have given Snell $2 million or Bregman say $1 million, there would not be a strike? Neither would lower their Arb demands a dime to say say thanks for the nice raise last year or from their FA demands a few million because their team showed them a little love.
angels paid $1 mil after his ‘rookie’ season.
i meant trout’s.
Not that he did not deserve every penny he got but do you think what the Angels paid Trout prior to his extension saved them any money in that extension or will it help the retain his services for when this contract is up if another team is willing to offer more than the Angels?
unfortunately, he hasn’t revealed his plans to me. or to anyone else for that matter. so, i don’t know.
Neither do I but the point is you never hear a player ever talk about how nice it was for their team to pay them that extra couple,of million,in their pre arb years and they want to,repay the team now in the extension talks.
Sample size of zero
Well, if you don’t know anything, what was the point in the first place of bringing up the amount Trout was paid? It’s pretty irrelevant to any other situation. He’s Mike Trout.
Hey, I think we all agree that younger players are grossly underpaid, but that’s the CBA the MLBPA negotiated – you know the one that allows Machado, Stanton and Harper to get contracts worth $300MM, the one that allows Kershaw and Greinke to make over 30MM per season.
If the younger players don’t like it they should take it up with the union.
Yes, can’t have it both ways. I wouldn’t mind seeing younger players get paid more but in exchange another year or two of player control.
I agree in you can’t have it both ways. But my thinking is I would love to see younger players get paid more but in exchange not getting 200-300 million in FA.
Pay minor leaguers more, pay pre arb more. It doesn’t really make me angry that a guy might be making 30+ a year, but it much rather see guys max out at say 20 a year but minor leaguers make more and a guy fresh off of a Cy Young get a million or so (at least).
*I’d much rather see
Can you imagine if Snell blows out his arm this year and his career is over? That 0.5-$2M push could have saved his entire future, instead of sketchily just hoping he never gets hurt in time to set him and his family up for life.
I completely agree pd14!
Good point, however this is exactly the argument the front office makes when offering an ‘extension’ in exchange for buy outs (or club options) of 1-2 years of FA..
It’s amazing to me (with the real injury rates of pitchers and MLB players in general) that more young ‘stars’ do not focus on extensions (other than maybe when they are in the Wall year)… the $ is life changing even at extension type levels
Indeed. Leading into Mookie Betts’s third season (at which point he had the EXACT same service time as Bregman), Boston chose to give him a generous raise to $950K, just short of Mike Trout’s record (I think) $1M.
So far, the team has been “rewarded” by having attempts at a long-term contract rebuffed. Betts has indicated no issue with maxing out his earnings year-to-year through arbitration, before presumably earning a giant long-term contract once he hits free agency. To his credit, he has faith in his ability to stay healthy and produce, but it seems the gesture by Boston got the team diddly squat in terms of good will with the player. That isn’t a given, but so far nothing has been revealed.
I agree. He was upset with that raise too and refused to sign.
If the MLBPA was smart, then this is the one area they’d target most in the next CBA. Minimum guaranteed salaries for non-arb eligible players should be staggered. E.G. ~500K for players with 0 years of service, ~750K for players with 0.001-0.171 years of service. ~1M for players with 1.000-1.171 years of service, ~1.25M for players with 2.000-2.171 years of service.
This would boost salaries for nearly 2/3rds of all major league players on reserve rosters. In addition it would lead to increased arbitration values in the future.
For a vast majority of player, shorter term contracts (2 years) is the way to go. They should just shorten the pre-arbitration timetable to 2 years. Let these guys get paid for their performance now, as opposed to longevity late in their careers.
I don’t see MLB agreeing to allow players to enter arb at 2 years.
But that is indeed something else the MLBPA should fight for.
Yes, I think the old standard system is broken – players being underpaid in their prime and then they make up for it on the back end. Teams are now exploiting those prime/cheap years and wisely not paying for a player’s decline, but that really hurts the players, who need to pack 6 years of prime numbers into an actual long a decent-paying career. It’s tough, because the metrics show you shouldn’t be giving out the huge contracts to 30+ year-olds. But if you’re underpaying for the first six years of a player’s career then the player is getting the shaft.
I’d love to see players be arb-eligible after their first season and free agent-eligible after, say their 3rd season, but I doubt MLB will go for that. They pay the minor-leaguers so little now that’s an issue they’ll need to fix as well. Not looking good for labor peace.
Right: the problem isn’t that they get underpaid early, overpaid late. The problem is that the vast majority of them who get underpaid early never get overpaid later because their careers are ending after 3-6 seasons.
MLB and MLBPA need to find out how to pay these guys what they are worth early, mid, and late.
FA eligiblility that soon will seriously hurt the development system. Young players will no longer be a hot commodity because you control them for so few years. If you have to pay a first rounder let’s say 4 million bucks on average: you get no return on that for X amount of years while he’s in the minors and then you’re going to let him to go arb year 1 where you will only control him 3 years. The surplus value and risk/reward ratio on that is a whole lot lower. I think you’d start to see teams shy away from prospect development because it’d be cheaper on a risk basis to just go sign established players. I think 5 seasons of control would work if we can get these guys to arbitration sooner. The mere fact that they’re in arbitration sooner would get them paid.
You have to walk the tightrope to make it worth developing these guys and also get guys paid. I don’t think 3 years of control with an immediate arb go around gives the team enough incentive to develop a ton of guys.
I look at it this way: MLB teams/owners are only going to agree to pay out a certain amount of their revenue, and they pretty much know what the range of percentages is before they sit at the bargaining table. I would be willing to bet that they thought they’d be paying out a bit more of the overall revenue than they are now, and didn’t quite realize the full extent that their analytics savvy FO’s might have on valuations going forward.
However, the point is the owners have a range – they know what they are willing to pay out.
What the MLBPA does is decides, through collective bargaining, how that share of revenue allocated to players is going to be divvied up. They have negotiated deals in the past (not just the current one) that has basically hurt younger players to the benefit of older ones.
They’ve also negotiated deals that have scre**d a lot of people they don’t represent, like draftees, international FA’s and minor leaguers, with the design that monies that might have gone to those players would be spent on MLB players.
If the players, particularly the younger ones, want the union to negotiate a deal that divvies up their share differently, they the MLBPA and those young players are going to have to understand that the FA deals on the back end won’t be what they’re used to seeing..
If they want to get paid now they won’t get paid as much later.
Spot on
Imagine calling someone underpaid a guy making 600k who may not even have a HS education, as many ball players don’t. It’s mind boggling.
That’s not how it works. The notion that because we don’t make 600K a year and would be ecstatic to do so means everyone should, even when they are one of the best 800 people in the world at the job they do, is misleading. In the context of the value Bregman provided to his employer in 2018, he was woefully underpaid. Most of us who work for a living provide surplus value to our employers – that’s how all jobs work – but most of us don’t provide hundreds of times more surplus value to our employers, which Bregman does.
While this is true, until they players are willing to give back for underperforming Bergman should keep his mouth shut and play. While I would have no issue with Houston giving him 1M this coming season, if he hits .275 they should be able to drop him down. Players don’t want to hear that though.
Nobody cares about batting avg! Especially not the GM of any baseball team.
David, what I believe I hear you saying is that Bregman should get more money because he’s underpaid.
By definition, that means older players who aren’t performing up to their contracts should have to give money back, no?
The union has always fought against performance-based contracts and would never agree to that – they want the contracts guaranteed.
I am sure that if the union and owners could ever agree on a percentage of revenue to be allocated to the players, the owners would be more than happy to have all compensation derived therefrom to be performance based, It would keep players motivated.
I’m sure fans would like it too.
Would players? Would Bryce Harper have enjoyed taking the massive pay cut he would have had from 2015 to 2016? How about Machado from 2016 to 2017? Would Albert Pujols enjoy being out of a job? He would be if he didn’t have a guaranteed contract.
I feel no sympathy for the younger players like Bregman. They vote for their union reps who negotiate things, They can change the system if they want to .
Actually, batting average DOES matter, though not as much as OBP. It’s harder to drive in runs with walks.
I was listening to MLB radio a couple weeks ago and one of the commentators suggested that they have arbitration every year or after 1 year. This would allow the players that perform to get paid. On the flip side, I think currently you can only make something like 20% less in arbitration than you did in the previous year (say someone had a down year) and he suggested that this number get increased substantially so if you underperform you could get a substantial salary decrease.
I thought this approach seemed reasonable as it would allow younger players to get paid more in line with what they’re worth based on their performance, but the flip side would have to be that the FA market would take a hit (like it is now).
I think the point is that there’s no negotiations for these pre-arb players. In FA, terms are agreed upon by both parties.
In my humble non expert personal opinion, I think Harper and Machado got too much, Trout should be given a blank check, and the next CBA should lower elite FA expected deals while rising pre-arb deals based on performance
Old system isnt broken, the owners FO’s now are ran like hedge funds. That means maximize value at all costs. While thats good on paper and for owners, its not good for players. There isnt an MLB without the best players. Union will have to hold strong and be willing to strike to get a fair deal.
Union has to end service time manipulation, younger players need to reach Arb and FA sooner. Player should absolutely not give up guaranteed contracts.
You might want to imagine a world in which “performance-based” contracts exist. Because a cheap team or owner would just tell the manager to sit a player. Those contracts don’t work in football, at all. (In football, they’re dangerous because they force players to play with serious injuries). Contracts are contracts; they shouldn’t be renegotiated on the fly. Owners take risks on contracts; so do the players. Managing risk is why you hire smart people to analyze data and negotiate contracts. I think every “bad contract” you can think of could have been highly predicted by anybody who seriously studies baseball.
I don’t think every bad deal could’ve been avoided. You’ve got guys now into advanced stats so much they got Tyler chatwood 38 million for doing little to nothing throughout his career. Unless you’re giving out one year deals there’s always going to be bad ones. Whether you’re a traditionalist or a new age baseball evaluator.
Well, Chatwood’s deal isn’t done; I don’t know what the Cubs were evaluating with him, but it sure doesn’t look good. But I’m thinking more about the Howard/Pujols/Crawford/Miggy sort of contracts. We’re not going to see too many of those going forward – huge deals for guys who are already 30 and limited defensively (or, in the case of Crawford, speed-first guys).
The MLBPA also needs to work on getting a guarantee on XX-B free agents signing minor league deals. E.G., A rule that states that any XX-B player who signs a minor league contract will receive a minimum of ~2M if his contract is purchased. Right now you have 30 some odd guys signing minor leauge deals who have 6+ years of mlb service that’ll only pay them .55M-2M if purchased. That’s ridiculous.
You want to talk about ridiculous? Getting 25+ million a year for playing baseball is crazy…do these guys save people lives? Short answer is, no they dont. Hearing you whine that the majority of the major league regulars are still making millions is not enough? Crazy, because without the sports these guys would be nothing but car washers or work at the market.
We live in a capitalist society, less than 300 guys in the world each year are able to compete at the top level. The owners of these clubs are getting tens of millions each year from just their tv rights (not to mention tickets, merchandise, and monopoly appreciation).
Yes, they should get paid. Furthermore, these players are basically indentured servants the first 12 years of their careers – if their careers even last that long. So, yes I think they should get paid more earlier, if that means less later I’m fine with that too.
Well said mrkinsm
And FYI, I’m not suggesting players get back some insane 80% of revenues or anything. 50% seems reasonable. That 50% simply needs to be structured differently.
I do think the system needs to change but I wouldn’t compare it to being an indentured servant. They’re still being paid over half a mil to play a game. And how much was bregman paid just for being drafted? Made millions before he even played one professional inning.
How would you describe it? They aren’t allowed to sell their services to any of the other 29 clubs for up to 6 seasons in the minors and 6 more in the majors. Most of these guys are 28-32 before they are even allowed to do that. That is the definition. of the term.
And again, I’m not saying it’s a bad thing. Without that length of contract you’d see 6 clubs buying every good player and MLB would be ruined. I see value in the draft and development system.
mrkinsm, the players are the ones who decide how that 50% – or whatever percentage it is – is divided up. They could easily, in the past, have asked for younger players to get paid more – higher MLB minimums, shorter time to arb, etc.
But they didn’t do that. They chose to negotiate a deal that hurts younger players.
.
The MLBPA agreed to it – the owners did not impose it arbitrarily.
Where did I ever state that the Union wasn’t the ones who decided that? It’s how must unions work, they strive to better those who have put in the most time. Rightly or wrongly.
indentured servants? how disrespectful. these guys still earn more than 90% of the people you and i know. even a utility player is going to earn a minimum of $3 mil if he can hang on thru his years of control. even some of the guys will get six- figure bonuses when they sign. even if you aren’t set for life you’re still off to a good start if you handle your money the right way early in your career. they’re some guys that might never make it past AAA but between bonuses and salary might earn $500-$1 mil before they turn 25. don’t we all earn a salary early in our respective careers and despite how great we might be only see gradual increases in salary or a promotion every 3-5 years? i don’t begrudge the fact they make tons more than me but i don’t see it as a travesty.
in the case of Snell, his risk of injury is no more relevant that any of his contemporaries. there’s likely far more players his age that aren’t special so his scenario is different.
that being said, the Rays come off as petty and that will be interesting to watch if they had any desire to extend him.
i think the mlpa should seek some sort of standard bonuses for players under control that win mvp, cy young, roy, battling titles, homeruns, etc. a $2 mil bonus for mvp or cy young. maybe $500k for an all-star appearance, etc?
@mrkinsm, I definitely agree with your argument, but where are you getting that “less than 300 guys” are competing at the top level? The top level is MLB, no? If all 30 teams used the same 25 guys the entire year with no callups or demotions, that’s 750. And according to BR, there are more along the lines of 1,300 competing each year
Well, the union agreed to the “indentured servitude” that you’re complaining about, no?
Again, blame the union, not the owners. The owners are negotiating in their own interests, just as are the players.
The union decided it was OK that younger players should get so little. Snell should be griping about the union – not the owners.
~240 guys debut each year (that’s the less than 300 figure). 240 out of 130 million born each year.
How many players are making $25 million plus? Not very many. How many are being paid league minimum? Veterans minimum? Quite a few more. Also, how much do the owners make percentage wise compared to the players? Owners take a larger share.
Over 1,200 players on reserve lists come opening day, and more than 50% of them will make the pro-rated league minimum this year.
And how much is minimum? 1 million to play “baseball” its not about the game anymore its about dollars, its really gross
Communists unite!!! Every citizen of the state shall make a decent wage according to their value to society. This is why 3rd grade teachers shall now make $30 MILLION a year (taken out of your tax dollars, of course).
All major league baseball teams will be handed over to the State and we will now pay each MLB pitcher a flat salary of $90,000 a year (even though they deserve LESS for playing a game they love). All trillions of revenues will be divided up by leaders of the Politburo and the State (to pay the Universal Wage for all Americans so no one goes hungry… EVER!!!)
Man, if you think the players make too much money don’t even look at what the owners – most of whom inherited great sums of wealth – make.
Most inherited great wealth?
Arizona owner – started a software company and invested in a bank
Peter Angelos – lawyer and son of a bar owner
John Henry – son of soybean farmers and founder for Henry and Co
Ricketts- son of Ameritrade founder
Jerry Reinsdorf – son of a sewing machine salesman. He is a lawyer and CPA
Bob Castellini – looks like he was in the family business
Larry Dolan – lawyer and military vet.
Monfort Brothers – joined the family business
Jim Crane – borrowed $10,000 to start a logistics company
So the vast majority of these that I listed did not inherit wealth
Well said jj. Starbucks Dave typically doesn’t understand logic or common sense.
Ask Dave if he prefers Socailism?
9 out of 30 is a majority? That’s funny math.
(And one of those guys is indeed the son of a billionaire. So it’s 8 out of 30)
mrkinsm, if you put that 2MM rule in place, you’ll se a lot less of those 30 some odd guys get those contracts to begin with. Teams will just roll the dice with younger players.
Negative, these contracts are non-guaranteed during ST, the extra monies would not cost teams much at all. Fans expect to see the best players on the field.
Ohtani has only pitched 6 games in his career and won’t do it at all this season. Can he really be called a two-way star? Basically he is a DH. A good DH, but still a DH.
Your “hot take” is just as bad as your research.
Ohtani started 10 games not 6.
He placed right around 10th in FIP for AL starters. He was inside the top 10 for AL batters using wRC+. Being Top 10 in the league is generally “Star” material. Being a Top 10 performer in both offense and pitching makes you a freak.
And oh yeah, he was a rookie that didn’t speak English (tough transition culturally). And he took more than few AB’s with a torn ligament in his elbow.
Disappointed that he got hurt. But that in no way dims his Star performance. The guy is an absolute freak of nature and deserving of all accolades being heaped upon him.
Show me another player to have as much success as Ohtani both ways in the regular season in the last 30 years. Pitching 60 high quality big league innings is real good. Direct that dislike of Ohtani somewhere else. What he did was special.
I never said I disliked Ohtani. I guess I can be misquoted too.
Last 30 years? How about ever? Like, seriously. People will bring up Babe Ruth, but he was a pitcher and then he was a hitter. He wasn’t really a two-way player at all – he batted a lot because he pitched a lot. Ruth had three great seasons as a pitcher (in the deadball era) in which he hit very well in very limited at-bats. By the time 1918 rolled around Ruth was done as a pitcher (he walked twice as many batters as he struck out in his final season as a pitcher) and the trade to the Yanks, along woith the introduction of the “lively” ball in1920, was when “Babe Ruth,” the hitter was really born. He almost never pitched after that, maybe a few games in mop-up duty.
Okay 10 not 6, I guess that makes him Nolan Ryan then.
And you think you don’t have a problem with Ohtani? You’re attempting to discredit what he did.
I’m not discrediting what he did. I am attempting to lower the hype level to where it should be. It was an impressive season, but if you look at his stats without the hype it was a very good rookie season as a DH and a couple of very good months as a pitcher. It was definitely not a Ruthian season. He is a very good player, but I think everyone needs to take it down a notch with him. As of right now he is closer to Rick Ankiel than Babe Ruth.
I didn’t write what you said I did.
But … yes, he’s a fantastic pitcher, not merely “a good DH.”
You said two-way contributions and you called him Japan’s biggest star. Sorry, I transposed them when typing. Although I have a feeling you don’t disagree with my mistake.
Bregman just can’t help but be a tool. He had such an easy question to answer and say you know my time is coming etc. instead he went the entitled route.
What did he think he was going to get?! He’s pre arb. I guess he thinks he’s entitled to it. He thinks he should get more than other players before him just because he thinks he’s important.
Newsflash to him, this isn’t LSU. His little SEC little league antics won’t work all the time. Can’t pout your way to get what you want in mlb. Can only stare into camera for so long. You have to perform every year if you want the big bucks mijo. If you keep performing and then get screwed like Kimbrel, then I’ll be your biggest advocate…..until then go to work and know your role.
Over 6.5 WAR got him 650K. The strike is coming. It’s not the Astros fault but the game won’t continue with this kind of imbalance. In no professional sport other than baseball are star players routinely underpaid by 10’s of millions of dollars.
now you know how all the other players for for decades feel when they are pre arb. Rules need to be changed, and it is wrong, but him thinking the rules will bend for him is almost comical.
He just got a taste of the business side of MLB. The side where the team can replace you or cut you any time they want.
But they won’t be replacing or cutting Bregman because they’ve got him over a barrel. I understand the frustration. Especially with the Astros .org who gave Correa a million bucks last year and Breg was every bit as productive. You’d probably feel slighted too.
If you’re citing WAR as a basis for compensation, then aren’t you saying you would like to see it performance based? You would have to do away with guaranteed contracts to do that, and the MLBPA would never agree to that.
Putting a player through arbitration earlier wouldn’t do away with guaranteed contracts. My reference to WAR was simply to show how comically underpaid he is.
And the Cubs just spent 25 million dollars for Yu Darvish to put up a -0.2 WAR. Maybe Snell should ask Darvish for some of that money.
Or Albert Pujols or Chris Davis.
How does it feel being a supposed “Baseball fan” but all you care about are billionaire owners money and you hate players? Bregman represents everything that is good about the game, you represent owners making money money.
Grow up, you either are pro-player or whats the point of you being here?
Clearly you aren’t pro-fans. Without fans there is no game. Grow up.
I don’t think we fans need to take a side since fans are always left on the sideline kicking rocks either way.
Fans want ownership to manage their money responsibly. Fans want workers to temper their expectations and be realistic in how much they can get in the dispute. And this is coming from a fan of labor law.
Entitled was my exact thought when reading his quote.
Can’t blame a guy for complaining about a system that pays him $650k for being one of the most dangerous hitters in the game… while he sees others making millions for just breathing and putting up less numbers. “The system” needs to change with the times.
No one ever believes they are earning what they’re worth. However, there is always “common ground.” In this case, Bregman for 650k is an absolute bargain for the Astros… now put yourself in Bregman’s shoes. You will say to yourself: “WTF.”
he should complain to the union – they negotiated the deal.
if i was lunhow, i’d ask for me 100$K back. Bregman should be thankful he got that, instead of 550k. I bet lunhow wishes he wouldn’t have even given him that now.
30th pick in the upcoming NBA draft will get $1.35M in year one…that is some want to. Tough break little guy.
no wonder baseball is losing young talent to basketball and football.
The 30th pick in the MLB drafts slot value is higher than that.
He’s talking about salary not signing bonus, the 30th pick in the mlb draft gets paid peanuts in the minors.
I understand. Guys drafted in that range in the NBA typically don’t have long careers either and only receive 2 years guaranteed money. Followed by 3 years of team options at an attractive rate if they’re productive. There’s just better examples of showing disparity in pay scales I believe.
@vizionaire, baseball players get paid more than football players, generally
Correa got 1m last year and it seems he wanted more. I’m sure Bergman saw that and thought he would get a nice bump too and it didn’t come. This is why teams don’t do those goodwill gestures, because it will become expected.
I do agree that this system in which players in their prime are not being compensated at market value is being exploited, and I want to see players earn money on the front end of their playing days instead of the end. Regardless, this clearly shows no clear advantage of paying more than the required prearb minimum.
Guys Kurt Angle is retiring at Wrestlemania. Also these player aren’t wrong either, owners just want to be a bunch of cheapos.
He crawled back to the WWE after TNA’s collapse?
Yep, after he was inducted into the hall of fame in 2017.
It doesn’t make sense to me to not give these guys nominal increases. I want happy players. The Cards usually do the right thing. Trading Piscotti, giving Jose Martinez a new contract when they didn’t have to,so he can help his family in Venazuela. So I don’t get not raising Flaherty’s and Hicks to a mil a piece. Obviously they deserve it, have earned it, and for one more million they would be happy and satisfied. Happy employees make for a more productive work force.
Young pre arb players who are really good are always unhappy with what they are paid, and it is certainly an incredible value for the club. But the blame is on the Players Association. They over represent the established player at the expense of the minor leaguers and pre arbs. Even the arbitration years to some extent are underpaid. We, as fans want to see our older stars, who we have watched for 8, 10, or 15 years. As drawing cards, some of these older players have value well beyond their WAR. Expect the owners to do what is in their best interest. They have a lot invested, and expect to make a large return. They will always find the soft spot in any collective bargaining agreement. In this case they have decided that it is more profitable to employ younger players than middle of the road veterans. And then this whole system where tanking is the beginning phase of a rebuild, causes there to be so few teams actually competing in a given year that guys like Moustakas and Kimbrel are getting pretty well shafted. Another problem is the amount of money paid for amateur signings. The clubs are so profitable that they can hand out these incredible bonuses. How much of that money goes to players who never perform at the major league level? Wasted money that could be used to pay pre arb players. Continue to further limit the amount paid for signing bonuses. We may occasionally lose a top player to another sport, but very seldom
spitball, who are you to arbitrarily limit the amount of money that a international FA kid makes, or a kids drafted out of HS? Who gave you the right to “negotiate” or decide that on their behalf?
Let them go. The system is broken and it needs a redesign, not just a few band aids. Unfortunately it is going to take a strike to bring this about. It is the responsibility of both the Players Union and MLB to redesign this whole mess. I do think they need to represent all players, not just the older stars. Get more money for the minor leaguers. Get more money for the pre arbs. If they do that, then the owners will have a reason to pay the better veterans more.
To me fans, agents, and the union should be more outraged by this than player x not being able to get $30 million for 10yrs. The young players r just as important as the vet players, and nearly always have a higher long range ceiling. And maybe if mlb teams took care of prospects and young players better, maybe kyler mureay wouldnt have shafted oak and left them scratching their heads looking for loopholes and exceptions to try to persuade him not to jump to nfl??? And theres no guarantee itd work this way but just maybe if u raise the floor the ceiling goes up in relation??? Just my opinion though. But i cansympathize with a minor leaguer having to sell cars in the offseason, its a little harder to sympathize that x player cant afford another ferrari or $20 million house
Easy fix for Kyler Murray situations….once you sign with a MLB team, no longer allowed to pursue other sports. Done.
Don’t like it, don’t sign the contract
If i remember correctly that was stipulation of him signing, waa that he could play college football, but he did so well he won heisman
It’s understandably frustrating for Bregman after coming off a great season. Ofcourse, there’s always another profession. I’m sure he could command a hefty salary in his field of study at school if he decided to walk away from the game he loves. Or is it the money? With that quote I can’t decide.
How about this; MLB players offer a fair base salary with a percentage of merch sales. If your jersey is sold, you get a cut. Other team merch can be divided amongst the players and coaches, with the longest tenured player or coach receiving a higher percentage. Merch sales would A) help the player make more money at year’s end, and B) give players more incentive to remain with a team. Mind you, this could be one awful idea.
I understand why Snell & Bregman are upset about the pre-arb salries, but just like the service time move, it isn’t the team’s fault. It is the CBA. Who wouldn’t want to get players like Snell & Bregman under contract for the salaries they are getting? It gives teams more finacial flexibility. It isn’t that teams don’t like a particular player. It is because it makes too much sense business wise to not renew the contracts If the players want to change the system, they have to do it in the next CBA, That is where they can change the system. Unless the system changes, teams will continue to renew pre-arb players at the same rate they are now
Millennials who don’t have an understanding of how the system has greatly evolved over the years to be more and more advantageous to the players.
If the younger players don’t like it, maybe they should go to a performance based salary system? If a veteran player plays below average he donates his income into a fund that is distributed to the younger players that produce. I’m sure that will go over well.
A pay-per-play system was kicked around during the last MLB work stoppage. But while some thought it was a “fair” idea, it was a bit ahead of its time. The debate, as I recall, came down to “Do you want to pay players to WIN? Or pay them for how many bunts, homers, and rbi they had in the previous season?
if they go to that , then they have to fix catcher war calcs. baseball prospectus is the only one that does it correctly. FG’s war calcs for catchers is garbage and only shows you how good a hitter the catcerh is. Needs to include defense and framing blocking etc like baseball prospectus.
What impact would changing arbitration to restricted free agency make? With draft-pick compensation (directly from the signing team, not from some compensation pool) to teams who don’t match?
Can’t see owners accepting that kind of change but it might get more money in players’ hands while their performance actually earns it. Still favors the rich …but, if you make the compensation a first round pick, teams might actually make fair offers, knowing that part of the cost is the loss of that top pick
I feel bad for Bregman.. apparently he has not only spent his entire $5.9mm signing bonus, but he also has completely forgot the Astros even gave it to him in the first place.
Way to keep it classy, Jack Flaherty.
Acting on behalf of Bregman for this one post…
“that was then, this is now.”
Ha.. I hear ya, but that money paid then was for now! That’s the whole point of giving big signing bonuses – give give up a bunch of money for the very small probability that a player becomes as productive as Bregman and then the team gets a great value.
I really thought that Bregman could have made his point without bashing his team. This isn’t an Astros issue, it is the whole system. I agree that the system needs a lot of work.
Had Bregman not been restricted to signing with the only team who drafted him, he would have made much more. That’s the point. I’m not sure why the average baseball fan is naive of that fact.
I’m not sure how you interpreted Bregman’s comments as calling out the system. He bashed his team.
Flaherty called out the system instead of his team.. which I applauded him for doing in a classy way. I also agree that significant changes need to be made.
Wow, because someone points out Bregman got $5.9mm as a signing bonus, all of the average baseball fans are naive that he could only sign with the team that drafted him?
Lucy, you got some splainin’ to do. Please explain the connection between CK’s comment about Bregman’s signing bomus and the average fan being naive.
I don’t see it, so please help me.
It really is difficult to argue with “a fan” about players’ and owners’ disputes. They are always blowing hot air at you.
I was at a ballgame a few years ago and the fan sitting in front of me turned around and complained about the price of a ballgame beer. I agreed the cost of a ballgame beer is outrageous so I don’t drink at ballgames. He was visibly drunk and his team was losing.
Bonus pool. Decide on a revenue split between owners and players, like 50/50. When the players’ share is below 50%, a bonus pool is created to get their share up to 50%. That bonus pool can be divided among the players however MLBPA decides, such as percent of salary or better yet on a per capita basis based on days on the MLB roster. Especially the latter option would give a nice boost to younger and lower paid players. However, these players wouldn’t get anything if all the higher-ups drive the player total over 50%.
What’s with all this crap about players being upset about their pre-arbitration rates of pay? That’s the current system, you whiny babies. They get to instantly be 1 percenters (anything over $430k/year) for 3 years before becoming SUPER rich. Cry us a river.
Every single system will be technically imperfect. It’s “COLLECTIVE” bargaining. Everyone sacrifices something for the good of the whole. Perhaps they can negotiate something more beneficial next time… which will just end up negatively affecting others in its own way.
Everyone is dissatisfied these days in MLB. It’s getting old. NO ONE earns enough, NO ONE spends enough, EVERYONE is out to get everyone else. Grow the hell up!
I’m not a financial wizard, but it seems to me that maybe baseball contracts should come with less guaranteed money and more incentives. If you want more money, we’ll write it in that you get it. Even for the minimum guys. They can still earn the minimum but have the right to negotiate for incentives.
But see, that isn’t really what they want. They don’t want the later FA deals to be shrunk to get more money to guys that are earning it. They want more money now and later. But that can’t happen. So the MLBPA has to make a decision. Do they want to keep their younger players happy or let the younger players pay for the Bryce Harpers and Manny Machados of the league. Because you can’t have it both ways. The last time they ignored the younger players to secure more money for older players. And that backfired. Maybe instead of taking out their rage at the owners they can place it where it belongs, at the feet of the organization that doesn’t value them as members until they need a boost.
Why can’t that happen? If the players share of revenues is in fact shrinking, then they have every right to demand more. The union should be fighting for all members.
Teams randomly giving extra money to certain players for NO REASON other than the pride and whininess of the players just creates instability, which is bad for ALL business. There needs to be predictability.
All of these players are also alluding to the idea that if they were randomly given extra money, then they will reward the team somehow down the line. Does anyone actually believe that?
So if Snell and Bregman want to be paid “more commensurate to performance,” then how about stratifying pay based upon numbers like OPS+, RC+, SIERA, etc? Do away with contracts altogether. Perhaps Alex Bregman makes $25M in 2019 due to his 2018 performance… but Alber Pujols makes $100k.
This is what they seem to want, right? HAHA… WRONG. They want it both ways. They want to be paid based upon performance AND paid when they stink. These players should be put in their place for these types of comments rather than given a legitimate platform to “advocate.”
Spot on, econ101. Nice handle, by the way.
I’m sure they’d all be for that. Pujols would only make 100K now but he would have made 60M 20 years ago.
We should just pay all single-A and under players $100k; AA players $200k; AAA players $300k; raise MLB first-year pay to $1M, second year to $2M, third year to $3M, and then let them be free agents for their 4th years. Once a player has played 3 seasons, they should automatically receive a guaranteed $3M/year regardless of ability for at least 5 more years, regardless of whether or not they play/a team wants them. Then the MLBPA can set the prices for their players and force teams to pay it. If no team wants to pay the $100M/year they decide Trout deserves, then all teams chip in an equal portion of the $100M to pay him NOT to play. At this point, teams like Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Miami, Baltimore, Minnesota, Oakland, etc., can just fold. No point in having cheap teams around when everyone gets paid “what they DESERVE.”
In the next collective bargaining agreement what is the union willing to give up in negotiations to increase arbitration pay?
You will find that like in every cba negotiated by any union some segment of the membership will not be happy with the result. Performance based pay is the fairest way to go. Some players get that guaranteed money and then proceed to come to camp overweight and out of shape, but lose no salary. Especially for the Latin American ones, many come from dirt poor backgrounds and the 500k league minimum is more money than they or their family could make in a lifetime. So if they go on strike everyone loses, the poorest most of all.
There’s certainly enough evidence from this board that fans care about the economics of the game, and that’s healthy. One of my favorite sports quotes of all time from Bill Veck:” Baseball is too much of a sport to ever be a business, and too much of a business to ever be a sport”. The responses on this board prove the point.
Obviously the system is broken, and needs a rework. And that may entail some ‘radical” proposals, along with some slight alterations. Player compensation is obviously flawed, some players being even grossly over or under paid. So is Revenue Sharing; some owners have just pocketed money that was SUPPOSED to be used for competitive balance.
It’s not an easy landscape. The numbers from Forbes (e.g.) are all lovely to examine, but for the most part they’re complete fiction. Everybody lies about revenue; everybody lies about expenses. It’s not unlike determining compensation based on things like WAR and SIERRA and fictions like those; they’re VAUGUE approximations, nothing more; more fiction than fact. You’d never win a court battle using WAR as a defense of anything in the real world.
But clearly work has to be done. I’d love see the elimination of arbitration, service time become a function of signing date rather than “promotion”, earlier Free Agency, and both a salary floor and salary cap. None are “perfect” solutions; merely improvements on current realities. But they would be improvements.
How about a bonus system to reward pre-arbitration players? Also, .make the bonuses not count as salary. Maybe a $25,000 bonus for every WAR above 1. Also, a more generous bonus for every award received that year, including Gold Gloves. You would only be rewarding the players as well as giving the incentives as well. The cost to each team would be minimal every year and there would be no long range money concerns when it comes to arbitration or free agency.
I’m sure they get bonuses for awards like ROY, CY, GG, and MVP. Good idea though. Establish a baseline of $750K per season for big-league pre-arb contracts, with performance bonuses added on later.