<< Previous Article
Overthinking It: Sprin... (02/11)
|
<< Previous Column
Arbitration Showdown: ... (02/08)
|
Next Column >>
Arbitration Showdown: ... (02/12)
|
Next Article >>
Baseball Prospectus Ne... (02/11)
|
February 11, 2013
Arbitration Showdown
Mock Hearing: Martin Prado
by Sam Miller, Jason Wojciechowski 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 Six of this 10-part series, we'll tackle Arizona Diamondbacks infielder/outfielder Martin Prado, who sought $7.05 million and was offered $6.65 million by his new employer. Unbeknownst to our arbitrators, Prado and the Diamondbacks reached an agreement on a four-year, $40 million contract extension, 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
Overthinking It: Sprin... (02/11)
|
<< Previous Column
Arbitration Showdown: ... (02/08)
|
Next Column >>
Arbitration Showdown: ... (02/12)
|
Next Article >>
Baseball Prospectus Ne... (02/11)
|
Can players and/or clubs use a planned change of positions in their arbitration argument? What prevents a club from saying "Joe might be worth $5 million, but next year, he'll be in our bullpen so he should be paid less."