Now that the terrific Super Game is over and we have more than a month until March Madness arrives, we are left with the February interregnum. Sure, we can get excited about pro basketball and hockey, but they are just more of the same. We need a new national sport for February.
So gather 'round boys and girls. It may be snowy outside with wind chills in the single digits, but it is time to play America's new favorite winter pastime -- the baseball salary arbitration game.
The rules are easy, although the answers are not. You start by picking a player or his club. (They are listed in your sports pages.) Then you prepare your arguments as to why your player is (or is not) worth the millions he wants. Put together some snazzy multicolored exhibits for the arbitration panel that will decide your case. Then your client goes home a millionaire -- and that applies even if he loses!
Baseball salary arbitration is no Slumdog Millionaire contest -- my pick for the Oscar, by the way. These are bona fide athletes of the highest caliber, all with at least three years in the Majors, except for a few who slip in through the "Super-Two" exception which is way too difficult to explain in a single blog. Recently, the baseball clubs and the eligible players submitted their final offers and final demands for this coming baseball season. It looks like there will be some fun cases for the baseball neutrals to decide before Spring Training begins.
Let's take an example. I know we would all like to represent Ryan Howard, the Phillies slugging first baseman, who has asked for $18 million in arbitration, the third highest figure ever submitted after Roger Clemens' $22 million in 2005 and Derek Jeter's $18.5 million in 2001. The problem with choosing the Howard case is that it is difficult finding comparable players with only four years of Major League Service. He is a unique talent.
It would be most fun picking someone from your hometown club. How about John Maine from the Mets? Oops, he just settled with the club for the mid-point between his demand and the club's offer and will be earning a tidy $2.6 million for the 2009 season after earning $450,000 last season. Let's find another pitcher. How about Justin Verlander of the Tigers? He wants $4.15 million and Detroit has offered $3.2 million. Either way, he gets a nice raise from his $1.13 million salary for the 2008 season.
Let's look at his stats, because that is the way the game is played. Verlander won 11 games in 2008, but lost 17. Most people would stop there and wonder why the Tigers would even want him. He had an earned run average of 4.84, certainly not a stellar mark, although the ERA of American League pitchers is considerably higher than National League pitchers. He struck out 163 batters over 201 innings pitched or 7.2 per nine innings, a good solid performance. He walked only 87 batters, so his K/BB ratio was almost 2:1. On the other hand, Verlander was the American League Rookie of the Year in 2006. He pitched a no-hitter in 2007 and in that year went 18-6.
Now we need to select an arbitration panel. Under the current Basic Agreement between the club owners and the union, these cases are heard by three-person panels. We will have to pick three neutrals. Just check the www.naarb.org website for the membership of those neutrals who have been elected to the National Academy of Arbitrators. Most, if not all, of the salary arbitrators are members of the Academy. What we don't know is whether they have ever done salary arbitration. Each fall, the Commissioner's office and the Players Association jointly select the actual salary arbitrators, and they normally bring back veterans of the process.
During the "salary arbitration game," each side will have one hour to present its case, with half hour for rebuttal, just like in real life. It may be difficult to get Justin Verlander to come to your house, but the player always attends the hearing in his case. The heart of the matter is the list of comparable players -- in this case starting pitchers -- and what they are paid. Each side presents the arbitration panel with its list of "comparables" who generally have about the same amount of years of Major League service. After the one-hour presentations, first by the player's agent and then by the lawyer representing the club -- there is a break, followed by one-half hour of rebuttal by each side.
The arbitration panel then looks at the final offer and demand to find the "break point," the mid-point between the final positions. In Verlander's case that is $3.675 million. The panel's job is to decide, looking at the comparable players and what they are paid, whether Verlander is worth more or less than the break point. If he is worth more, even by one dollar, the panel should vote to give him what he demanded. If he is worth less, again even by one dollar, it should vote for the club's offer. Therefore, almost by definition every player who wins in salary arbitration is overpaid and every player who loses is underpaid.
How do you know who is comparable to Justin Verlander? First of all, he should be compared with starting pitchers, as opposed to other categories of hurler - long relief, set-up men, closers, and left-handed specialists. (Why are there no "right-handed specialists?) Both sides will point out his performance statistics that help its case and respond to opposing arguments. The arbitrators must rely on the representatives to point out any errors in their opponent's presentations.
I remember my first case in 1986 where I heard Ron Darling's request for a raise. The club pointed out that Darling allowed too many runners to get on first base. A runner on first with no men out is quite likely to score. The agent came back on rebuttal with a new statistic -- opponent's batting average with men on first base. Apparently, Darling would become a tiger on the mound after he allowed someone on base. In any case, Darling's agent proposed as comparables Darling's teammate Dwight Gooden and pitching stars Fernando Valenzuela and Orel Hershiser. Darling was good, very good, but his statistics did not put him in their league. He lost the case.
In real life, the arbitrators have 24 hours in which to reach a decision. They review the glossy briefs the agent and club submit. They argue among themselves. Finally, they vote and the next day the chairman of the panel calls the representatives of the owners and the union to announce the verdict. The chairman also fills in the pre-signed standard player contracts with the player's salary. (You may want to shorten the time your arbitrators have, or your home game may take longer than Monopoly.)
And that's the baseball salary arbitration game. Oh, the arbitrators have to be paid, but just a very modest amount as compared with the players' salaries. That seems fair considering the fact that no baseball salary arbitrator has ever struck out a batter in the bottom of the ninth inning with the bases loaded.