Happy Labor Day! Regularly Scheduled Articles Will Resume on Tuesday, September 2.
February 26, 2007
The Ledger Domain
The 2007 Salary Arbitration Results
Salary arbitration has been in place since 1974, the year after the 1973 Collective Bargaining Agreement was brokered. The number of cases filed in any one winter over that time as been as few as none (in '76 and '77 there was no arbitration, as the introduction of free agency eliminated the process those years) and as many as 157, in 1991.
It was the foresight of Marvin Miller, just after Curt Flood lost his challenge of MLB's antitrust exemption in the Supreme Court, that set the stage for the creation of salary arbitration. Miller understood that trying to achieve free agency for players immediately after the Flood ruling was not going to be fruitful, so salary arbitration was offered as an alternative. With the exception of Gussie Busch and Charlie Finley, the owners accepted the process as part of the new deal. Miller saw this as one of the greatest achievements of his early career as executive director of the MLBPA. He correctly anticipated that even though some players would lose their arbitration cases, they would still see a boost to their salaries as compared to not having the process.
Thirty-four years of salary arbitration later, the system is still going strong. With another year's results out of the way, it's time to take a look at the winners and the losers. Who got the whammy two years in a row, and why is Chase Utley is doing heel-clicks down in Florida?
Breaking Down 2007's Arbitration Class
A total of 106 players filed for arbitration (the largest class since 1993, when 119 players filed) with 50 of those players coming to contract agreements before salary figures were exchanged on January 16th. That left 56 players (23 from the American League and 33 National Leaguers) exchanging figures with 23 clubs. With six players willing to go to the mat, the Twins had the most players in salary arbitration after figures were exchanged, followed by the Pirates, Nationals and Brewers with five players each.
Of those 56 players that exchanged figures, all but seven cases were settled in advance of hearings. The following is a breakdown of the seven survivors:
Date Player, Team Asked Offered Winner 2/10 Josh Paul, Devil Rays $940,000 $625,000 Club 2/10 Joe Beimel, Dodgers $1,250,000 $912,500 Club 2/13 John Patterson, Nationals $1,850,000 $850,000 Club 2/13 Kevin Gregg, Marlins $700,000 $575,000 Club 2/17 Miguel Cabrera, Marlins $7,400,000 $6,700,000 Player 2/21 Chad Cordero, Nationals $4,150,000 $3,650,000 Player 2/21 Todd Walker, Padres $3,950,000 $2,750,000 PlayerLooking into the numbers for salary arbitration shows the following:
Of the 49 who settled before hearings, but after figures were exchanged:
So, what's the overall consensus following the 2007 salary arbitration process? Well, for the most part, that salary arbitration works. As outlined, of the 106 players that filed for arbitration, all but seven came to terms before going to hearings. Of those seven, owners won 4-3. Historically, owners lead the players 273-203 since the process was put in place. If they can put together one more good year, they should be able to hang on after that for 300 wins.
As Miller anticipated, the players wind up with salary increases, even though the majority of them that reach contracts before hearings sign below the midpoint of the two figures that are exchanged. Case in point, the Cubs and Zambrano. With the gap between asking and offering salary amounts so wide, there was extra incentive for both parties to get a deal done rather than risk losing in arbitration.