<< Previous Article
Pebble Hunting: What i... (02/15)
|
<< Previous Column
Arbitration Showdown: ... (02/15)
|
No Next Column
|
Next Article >>
Baseball Prospectus Ne... (02/15)
|
February 15, 2013
Arbitration Showdown
Mock Hearing: Sergio Romo
by Nick J. Faleris, Bradford Doolittle and Ben Lindbergh
It's salary arbitration season in Major League Baseball, and here at Baseball Prospectus we're holding mock hearings, arguing for or against the actual team/player filing figures before a three-person panel of certified arbitrators. We've selected 10 of this winter's most intriguing, highest-dollar cases to cover in depth over the first two weeks of February (regardless of whether the players' real-life cases remain unsettled). After each side's opening argument and rebuttal/summation below, we'll give you a chance to vote on what you think the result should be before seeing the panel's decision. For more on the arbitration process, read the series intro by Atlanta Braves Assistant GM John Coppolella, listen to his appearance on Episode 35 of Up and In, or check out the BP Basics introduction to arbitration.
In Part 10 of this 10-part series, we'll tackle San Francisco Giants reliever Sergio Romo, who sought $4.5 million and was offered $2.675 million. Unbeknownst to our arbitrators, Romo and the Giants reached an agreement on a two-year, $9 million contract, avoiding arbitration.
|
Mock Hearing Schedule
- Chase Headley [2/4]
- Jason Hammel [2/5]
- Shin-Soo Choo [2/6]
- Max Scherzer [2/7]
- Jim Johnson [2/8]
- Martin Prado [2/11]
- Homer Bailey [2/12]
- Jordan Zimmermann [2/13]
- Dexter Fowler [2/15]
- Sergio Romo [2/15]
|
Table of Contents
|
The Criteria
<< Previous Article
Pebble Hunting: What i... (02/15)
|
<< Previous Column
Arbitration Showdown: ... (02/15)
|
No Next Column
|
Next Article >>
Baseball Prospectus Ne... (02/15)
|
Preaching to the choir but the entire Romo as closer strikes me the wrong way. Would you rather have Romo pitch in the 7th in a close game with runners on base and a couple of tough right handed hitters due up, or pitching in the 9th with nobody on base and the bottom of the order coming up?
I hear this a lot, and it would be true if set-up men were used much more flexibly than closers. In other words, if teams used their closers to start the ninth with three-run leads, but their set-up men whenever they were most needed to put out fires before the ninth, then the set-up man might be the potentially more valuable pitchers.
I'm not convinced that this is the way most bullpens work, though--in a lot of cases, I think set-up men are used a lot like closers, but in earlier innings. They're just the seventh- or eighth-inning guys, instead of the ninth-inning guys. If you look at a list of relievers sorted by the highest average leverage when entering games, it's mostly closers.