I’ve heard of arbitration and the settled amounts plenty of times before, but never seen a breakdown of generally how the process goes. Very informative and cleanly explained video!
Great outline and shows why even the rich owners can’t just willingly agree over such a small discrepancy because like you said that number increases each year which I didn’t realize about that % increase
Every year in the NHL about 10-15 players will have their contract negotiations go before an arbitrator. 95% of the time it will be the player opting for this as the incentives of the system lean in the players favour. Very rarely will a team opt for it as they usually find in the players favour and every arbitrator awarded contract is two years and will walk a player to UFA(unrestricted free agent) status. In these cases even an arbitration win is still a loss as a player is no longer tethered to the organization Nearly every case will never see an arbitrator with teams and players coming to agreements prior to their hearing as teams know they usually find in the players favour don’t want an RFA(restricted free agent) to be walked to UFA status and ending a teams control over a player with no guarantee that the player in question will even negotiate a new deal before becoming a free agent
As a relatively new baseball fan I have to say you’ve done a great job explaining the arbitration and I’ve been going thru some of your other work and I’m very happy to have stumbled across your page!
Some teams are better at file and trial than others. Some intentionally drag their players through the mud, such as the Yankees, while others treat each and every player the exact same.
7:44 I'm curious if there are any patterns in whether the team or player wins in arbitration, e.g. player status (bone-fide star vs. productive complementary piece vs. bench player), how big the spread of the figures were, etc. Do big ticket stars usually win more in arb? Well-done video either way - definitely clarified what I thought was a confusing system. Great work!
Amazing content and presentation. I laughed a few times however, when you said: it only $700,000…..It’s only $850,000 a year, they can afford that. It’s funny how we all think it’s okay.
the deals atlanta are doing aren’t that super friendly. they convince their players to take more money early in their careers by delaying their free agency by 2-3 years, and also taking less money than in their FA years. a ‘team friendly’ deal was pete alonso making 1.5M in his first 3 years, plus only 7.5M last year. in addition, an extension has to be a 2-way streets. many players, esp if they have boras as an agent, are willing to make league min and then go to arbitration year-by-year and undermarket in hopes of splashing big in free agency. case in point : cole made about 35M in career earnings from 2011 to 2019. now he surpasses that in 1 year (36M).
Even accounting for free agency discounts, Ozzie Albies is by far the friendliest team contract in the league. He could've asked for $20 million more the day he signed that contract and the Braves would've still rushed for him to sign. I also think you're underestimating how much they're delaying those players free agency. Except for Strider, it's not 2-3 years. Albies, Acuna, Murphy, and Harris were 4 years and Riley was 8 years.
@@BaseballsNotDead ahh thanks for explaining that part to me 👌🏼 didn’t think these players delayed FA by that much. still … these players took guaranteed money early rather than try to milk every penny out of free agency possible, which could easily backfire. yelich is thankful he signed an extension. bellinger is punching a wall wishing boras would have let him sign an extension.
Interesting idea, how often does each level of Arb go to Trial? I'd assume Arb 1 since it's the first tier and the level where the snowball can grow the largest, but I'd be interested to see the numbers.
I think going to trail helps players with later contracts as the trail cost the team a miniscule amount of money but having to deal with that incentives the team to give the player a nicer long term contract to avoid the hassle if trails
Nice explanation about today’s economics. I’m old enough to remember when Koufax and Drysdale threaten to sit out for $100,000. Which would’ve translated to just under $1 million in today’s money. My how times have changed… Thanks to Curt flood. And I’m definitely OK with most of it. Except I paid over $40 for a hotdog and a beer.
Just the other day I tweeted about how I thought Sotos deal was low not knowing how arbitration works, I thought I was gonna be one of the tweets I had to pause the video
I’m a new baseball fan and come from basketball I’m sick of basketball players and side more with owners now But MY GOD … baseball fans are owner first 🤣😭😭
naw, he still needs to keep this arb system in tact so that salaries don't get out of hand all over the game. Free Agents require extra money to bring them in, arb players do not...unless you lose the case. It's not being cheap, it's the process and no matter how much money an owner has, they will always try to save some here. (you hit my point as i was typing when you said 'determining the year to year base amounts. not fighting for 850k, but 5.1 million' perfect info. You hit it right on the head!!).
It's why the Jays won't budge with Bo. They stand to save upwards of 10 million dollars if the win this case and every dollar saved is a dollar used VS the cap.
The thing you're not mentioning about the Braves is that the vast majority of those extensions bought out pre-arbitration years. Riley is the exception, not the rule. and of course, this whole arbitration situation is ridiculously unfair.
Does anyone think the MLB is fair to new players in the league? You have to play for six years before you get what you're worth but at the same time, MLB has some of the richest contracts in all of sports.
When I read Moneyball, I think there was a point that Billy Beane compared rookie contracts to slave labor. Low value rookie contracts aren't really unique to baseball though.
The reason they do this is to prevent salaries from steadily rising. It will get out of hand very soon, anyway, and there will be no more superteams. All teams will be equal since nobody can afford more than one all star since literally everyone gets a 15 year 350 million dollar deal.
Baseball players and sports networks who report on them are obsessed with OPS this year like never before. I don't even know what it is, but it was never 'thing' until recently. Player averages are the lowest they've ever been, yet nobody seems to care about batting avgs anymore. Gotta get that OPS up as if if really means anything. There are players with 30+ HR and 80 RBI with a .216 BA!! It's crazy. Batters are standing around these days taking call 3rd strikes with runners in scoring position as if taking a walk is more important than getting a hit and driving in runs. I'd be hammering players too if I were an owner.
It's because the game has evolved. People care about OPS because it's a better measure of good batting. If players are doing something like what you're complaining about consistently it's that the team agrees with and you just don't understand.
@@mnm1273 Nope! OPS means nothing to me. It's just made up to deflect from a possible lousy batting average. Walks and HBP are on the pitcher, not the hitter. Why should an OPS rise if a batter gets 3 walks and a HBP during a game? That doesn't elevate their value as a hitter. It might help during contract talks, but it's still meaningless. Batting avg is what counts! Slugging percentage is valuable because it is derived from a actual hit, otherwise, no.
@@tommybotts If a batter consistently gets more walks than other it's because they've got a better mastery of when to swing. It's an undisputable skill. And HBP are often intentional and a reaction to the batter's strength and when unintentional are made more likely by forcing riskier pitches and more pitches. Any "luck" factor will balance out over enough games. OPS measures how good you are at batting in a useful way.
@@mnm1273 I understand your point, however, walks are on the pitcher, not because the batter possesses a keen eye. If batters were that precise at the plate, why do they consistently take a call strike fastball right down the middle? If they're not looking for that pitch, then for what are they looking? It's quite maddening to watch batters let the 'perfect' pitch go by. A batter who walks a lot but has a low batting avg could possibly have a higher OPS than someone with a higher batting avg who doesn't walk as much. Who do you want at the plate in a clutch situation - high batting avg or low avg with better OPS? I'm going with higher avg.
@@tommybotts Batters have gotten better at knowing when to swing and when not to. It's a game of psychology and probability. A few decades ago players swung more than they should have, with the expected value of not swinging being higher. Now they don't. This means they get more walks. It's a choice by the batter to play smarter. Getting on base matters more. The teams know it and the players know it. The fact you don't is why you're only watching.
I understand being disgruntled about not getting paid what you think you're worth, but I have no sympathy for when millionaire sports figures cry about it. Some of them come from nothing.
