Jump to content

Orioles avoided arbitration with... (leave some very big differences as well)

Greg

By Greg
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

tntoriole Hangout Grand Counsel

tntoriole

Posted
Posted
He said in December that he is honoring his contract. Does he need to say that more often?

He hasn't stated that he isn't interested in the position because he probably is. It's not really in his hands. What do you want him to say that wouldn't be a lie?

I agree with this. Dan has said that he will honor his contract. This is primarily up to Toronto (who will likely stroke out when they finally see what Potter demands to let him go). It will be interesting to see if there are any leaks from either side about prospects or player names in the coming week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 200
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Mayor McCheese All-Star

Mayor McCheese

Posted
Posted
He said in December that he is honoring his contract. Does he need to say that more often?

He hasn't stated that he isn't interested in the position because he probably is. It's not really in his hands. What do you want him to say that wouldn't be a lie?

Yes but he was responding to Angelos remarks about his contract, he also added the following:

“We’ll that’s good to hear,” Duquette said. “And I do have a contract, and I’ve always honored my contract, so I appreciate the interest, and I don’t have anything else to add. … The good thing is that baseball is interesting and there’s always a lot of opportunities, and if you do a good job, the opportunities will follow you.”

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bal-orioles-executive-vice-president-dan-duquette-a-candidate-to-become-blue-jays-team-presidentceo-repo-20141207-story.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
Yeah, it is very strange indeed. I don't know how you can look at his stats and think he had a significantly better season this season than he did in 2013. The only difference is win-loss record and that's because he went from a 63 win team in 2013 (averaging 1/3rd of the Orioles record and 2/3rds of the Astros record) to a 96 win team in 2014. He shouldn't get much more than the typical 33 percent bump as is standard under the 40/60/80 arbitration precedent. $7.5 million is slightly more than a 40 percent bump which is completely reasonable. This will go to court and Bud Norris will lose. Seems like a major mistake by his agents.

Thanks for clarifying this. I wondered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
Because arbitration is either/or. No meeting in the middle. So if the player asks way too much, or the team offers way too little, one side can get screwed.
The technical procedure is simple. The player and club supply the arbitrator with a Uniform Player Contract (in duplicate) that has been properly completed except for the salary figure. Each side gets one hour to present its case. There is a short recess and then each side gets 30 minutes to rebut the other side's case and 30 minutes to present their summation. By tradition, the order of presentations is Player-Club-Player-Club-Player-Club, which gives the club the last word in each phase. Occasionally the player's representative will successfully move to have the order reversed. Some agents feel that even if this motion is unsuccessful it may stand as a helpful symbol to the arbitrators that the club has a unfair advantage in the hearing.

Within 24 hours of the end of the hearing the panel chief informs the Players Association and the Labor Relations Department of MLB of the final decision, providing additional time for a settlement. The panel does not submit an opinion explaining their decision; it does not explain why they chose one salary figure over the other. The panel chair is also directed not to inform either party of the actual vote of panel members (3-0, 2-1, who voted for whom?). That information is communicated to the Players Association and the Labor Relations Department on March 15th following the hearings and is used by the two sides to help them craft arbitrator slates for the next year. Baseball arbitration is considered a pretty good gig for professional arbitrators. Some observers cynically note that to keep the job you can't side consistently with one side or the other, lest the other group nix you from the job in future seasons.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15864

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
I honesty don't recall. I thought it was in the CBA but it isn't. The idea wasn't to call into question those newer stats but to keep the hearing clear of ambiguous data as each side only as a limited time to give their presentation and rebuttal.
What criteria are admissible? What is inadmissible?

The Collective Bargaining specifically outlines what can and what cannot be brought up by either side's representatives. If evidence is brought up that is not specifically listed in the CBA it is not to be considered by the arbitrators.

The following evidence is admissable:

The quality of the player's contribution to his club during the past season (including but not limited to his overall performance, special qualities of leadership and public appeal).

The length and consistency of his career contribution.

The record of the player's past compensation.

Comparative baseball salaries (the arbitration panel is provided with a table of confidential baseball salaries for all players broken down by years of service).

The existence of any physical or mental defects on the part of the player.

The recent performance of the club, including but not limited to his league standing and attendance.

-

The following evidence is inadmissible:

The financial position of the player and the club (though player representatives often try to get this information in the back door by presenting attendance information that implies the health of a club's revenue streams).

Press comments, testimonials or similar material bearing on the performance of either the player or the club, except for recognized annual player awards for playing excellence.

Offers made by either the player or the club prior to arbitration.

Cost to the parties of their representatives.

Salaries in other sports or occupations.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15864

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazysilver03 Hangout Grand Counsel

Crazysilver03

Posted
Posted
Yes it is. I can kind of understand giving Chris Davis what they gave him. But not Matusz.

I would hope this would ensure he is nontendered next offseason but with the bullpen losing so many pieces I wouldn't be surprised if he managed to stay yet again. I don't understand how he has made it this long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazysilver03 Hangout Grand Counsel

Crazysilver03

Posted
Posted
Yeah, it is very strange indeed. I don't know how you can look at his stats and think he had a significantly better season this season than he did in 2013. The only difference is win-loss record and that's because he went from a 63 win team in 2013 (averaging 1/3rd of the Orioles record and 2/3rds of the Astros record) to a 96 win team in 2014. He shouldn't get much more than the typical 33 percent bump as is standard under the 40/60/80 arbitration precedent. $7.5 million is slightly more than a 40 percent bump which is completely reasonable. This will go to court and Bud Norris will lose. Seems like a major mistake by his agents.

I wonder if Norris ends up getting traded now. His number is completely outrageous and even the middle ground doesn't jive with reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...