How did Gagne lose his arbitration case

[Mathew]

5,000,000 instead of the 8 mil he was asking. Nice to know what a good closer is worth.......Billy Botch :headshake

[BrandoFan]

5,000,000 instead of the 8 mil he was asking.  Nice to know what a good closer is worth.......Billy Botch    :headshake

That's why we didn't re-sign Flash.

 

He is making almost 4 Mill a year, can't hold a candle to Gagne, is much older and injury prone.

 

one of the few things KW did right this off season.

[Chisoxfn]

The only thing I can think of is since they either pick 8 mill or 5 mill was that the arbitrator thought it would be fairer for him to make 5 then it would be to make 8, which would be a ton for a closer.

 

I think if he asked for 7 mill or 6.5 mill, he would of won the case.

[BrandoFan]

The only thing I can think of is since they either pick 8 mill or 5 mill was that the arbitrator thought it would be fairer for him to make 5 then it would be to make 8, which would be a ton for a closer. 

 

I think if he asked for 7 mill or 6.5 mill, he would of won the case.

I always talk about "interistic value" this and "% of the payroll" that....

 

Eric Gagne IMO is the ONLY closer in baseball who deserves a 7-8+ Mill salary.

 

They were wrong.

[Soxbadger]

If anyone has the arbitration rules I would like to take a look at them, usually arbitraters have discretion as to what they award but the baseball agreement may be different.

 

Regardless the arbitrators made a mistake, if it was purely a choice of 8 or 5 mil, there is no argument it is fairer to give him 5mil then 8mil.

 

Mariano Rivera, 10.5mil:

 

2003 64 0 70.2 61 15 3 10 63 8.02 5 2 0 40 6 .235 1.00 1.66

 

John Smoltz, 10.6 mil:

 

2003 62 0 64.1 48 9 2 8 73 10.21 0 2 0 45 4 .204 0.87 1.12

 

Billy Wagner. 8 mil:

 

2003 78 0 86.0 52 18 8 23 105 10.99 1 4 0 44 3 .169 0.87 1.78

 

Troy Percival, 7.8mil:

 

2003 52 0 49.1 33 22 7 23 48 8.76 0 5 0 33 4 .184 1.14 3.47

 

Eric Gagne, 5mil:

 

2003 77 0 82.1 37 12 2 20 137 14.98 2 3 0 55 0 .133 0.69 1.20

 

So arguably the best player on the list is also the lowest paid.

 

This is a mistake, 8mil was a very fair asking price considering he is statistcally much better than Percival and Wagner who make the same price.

 

Not to mention he won the Cy Young, meaning the best Pitcher.

 

So he should be compared to the highest paid pitchers, which is much higher than 8mil.

 

LA might of won the battle, but lost the war on this one.

 

Being paid only $5mil is not going to make Gagne happy.

 

SB

[Chisoxfn]

Ya Badger, in baseball there is no middle ground. They either side with the team or the player, they can't disagree with both and for example give Gagne 6 million.

 

I'm assuming its something thats written into the CBA.

[Soxbadger]

Interesting, the only argument I could see prevailing was that the Dodgers argued the market is different than when the other contracts were signed, and that going off of what Foulke and Guardado made he did not deserve 8mil.

 

Although that seems odd seeing as Gagne is much better than both of those, and if he was a free agent I think he easily would of gotten 8mil a year, if not more.

 

SB

[BrandoFan]

What did expect?

 

Despite being consulted by STATs, Inc, Bill James, etc.....

 

the panel uses such near-meaningless benchmarks as W-L, HR, etc/

 

They are behind times.

 

How can they give Millwood 11 Mill and only 5 to Gagne?

 

Makes no sense.

 

Also makes me question qhat Mark Buerhle would have gotten in his first try,

[WillieHarris2]

gagne should have won this case. hes easily worth 8 million dollars after becoming the first reliever in a long time to win a cy young.

[Harry Chappas]

My only thought would be that he has only done it for one year and his career as a whole is just picking up. You can't compare him to a Smoltz or a Rivera based on teh years they have been doing it.

[SoxFan562004]

I think an easy way to help fix the arbitration process is allow the arbitor to award a median price, because I think now one side wins. If the arbitor was allowed to award a salary between the numbers the sides present it would make for a fairer system and cause less angst between players and management...

 

Also, look to see what % raise this was for Gagne... Courts and arbitors often look at the percentages involved in situations rather than straight up numbers (ie if he was asking for a 600%, the arbitor might of felt that was excessive) This is why punitive damages are often lowered by appeals courts, if it is too high of a percentage over actual damages then the court will often reject it.

[WillieHarris2]

My only thought would be that he has only done it for one year and his career as a whole is just picking up.  You can't compare him to a Smoltz or a Rivera based on teh years they have been doing it.

smoltz hasnt been doing it as long as rivera has been.

[Soxbadger]

Soxfan,

 

You are right about the Supreme Court saying that excessive percentage of punitive damages may be grounds for reduction of the damages, but this does not apply to arbitration cases which are outside of the court system.

 

We would have ot know the actual language of the arbitration agreement to know the criteria for coming to a certain result.

 

I mean the criteria could range from: Combined statistics to one year performance, and so on.

 

Until we know what the arbitrators are deciding on, its really only speculation as to why they ruled in a fashion that they did.

 

Just as an outside observer looking at the facts that I have, my judgement suggests that 8mil, while a significant increase in pay, was only such because last year he was so under paid.

 

He recieved $550k to be the best pitcher in the NL.

 

The year before he was paid less and had comparable statistics.

 

For 2 years he was severely under paid, and the arbitrators reasoned that he should continue to be comparably underpaid.

 

If you were even to compare this to Gore v BMW, which is the Supreme Court Case where they looked at punitive damages as Gore recieved millions in punitive when actual damages were only $3000, it is distinguishable because the Supreme Court never even touched on the issue if the damages were deserved.

 

As in this case, Gagens pay is deserved. He is not asking for a ridiculous raise for what he has done, he was just so severely underpaid that any raise will be some what ridiculous percentage wise.

 

I mean a raise from $550k to $5mil is 900%, what is the difference if it is a raise of 1400%?

 

It just seems unless that no matter what argument they use it can not satisfy how they can argue the best NL closer, let alone best NL pitcher does not derserve to be paid as much as Closers who he has been better than or just as good as the last 2 years.

 

SB

[BrandoFan]

It's not an exact science.

 

Like I said....arbitors are behind the times.

 

S-metrics is something they have not completely adopted yet. Veyr conservative, convention-respecting folks these people are.

 

On one hand it would be stupid not to consider the entire career at some point. Was Brady Anderson deservant of a huge raise based on 1996 season?

 

Then again, it would be quite STUPID to look at Gagne's first year as a starter and count it as much as his 2002-2003. He is simply a different pitcher.

 

I mean....Guilermo Mota will be making BIG money if he repeats 2003 performance. BUT, if you were to go by his CAREER #s (whether it be OPS-against or win-losses, whatever) he is a BELOW average reliever.

 

Based on his career, Gagne might not deserve 5 Mill. Based on last year, he should make AT LEAST 7-8 Mill.

[Soxbadger]

Brando,

 

Do you have any knowledge of arbitration cases or have any copies of rulings, etc that would give us insight into the exact reasoning they use?

 

I would be really curious to read about Baseball arbitration and what factors they take into consideration.

 

I just have never seen nor heard of anything other than the proceedings happened and this is who won or lost, havent really read any reasonings.

 

SB

[fullcollapse]

this is the best article i could find on how arbitration is decided

 

http://www.baseballprimer.com/articles/eug...3-12-14_0.shtml

 

For either group of players proceeding to arbitration hearings, there is a three team panel that determines the salary that will be awarded to the player. That panel must consider 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 existence of any physical or mental defects on the part of the player, and the recent performance record of the club including but not limited to its league standings and attendance as an indication of public acceptance. Arbitrators may not consider the financial position of the player and the club, press comments, testimonials, or similar material bearing on the player or the club, except for recognized annual awards, offers made by either the player or club prior to arbitration, the cost to the parties of their representatives, and salaries in other sports or occupations. Further, the neither party may present evidence related to the luxury tax.

 

based on that it seems he should have won.

[Soxbadger]

Thanks good article and I agree those criteria suggest Gange should win but this is even more puzzeling:

 

Since the goal of arbitration is to correct the market effects of monopsony on player salaries by adjusting player salaries during their reserve years to that of negotiated settlements, the ultimate positive result would be that all salaries would be negotiated, rather than determined at hearing.

 

Correct market effects of monpsony on players salaries by adjusting during their reserve years.

 

Gagne's salary this year is deservedly 8mil, had he been in the open market he would of recieved 8mil or more, at 5mil he would of been a steal.

 

This is not a market correction, this goes against what the point of arbitration seems to be.

 

SB

[BrandoFan]

For either group of players proceeding to arbitration hearings, there is a three team panel that determines the salary that will be awarded to the player. That panel must consider 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 existence of any physical or mental defects on the part of the player, and the recent performance record of the club including but not limited to its league standings and attendance as an indication of public acceptance

 

Good job. This pretty much what I was expecting, save for their actual STATISTICAL criteria, which I guess they do not disclose.

 

Players are always advised to get tougher skin because during the hearing, they are liable to hear some REAL TWISTED s*** about themselves. Think divorce/custody courts, but with less histrionics.

 

24yo Mark Burhle was 1-st year eligible. The club lost consistently during his SP tenure. Attendance- low. Ledership- little if any. Was only making 450K in 2003. Market was sorta depressed this off-season.

 

How in the world did he not go through arbitration and instead got 18 Mill? :headshake

[BrandoFan]

This is not a market correction, this goes against what the point of arbitration seems to be.

 

They HAD to weigh in his ENTIRE career.

 

Mota will have the same problem, then. Stud pitcher in 2003, but very mediocre career-wise. And he doesn't have Cy Young to wave in front of their faces, either.

 

Another first-timer Santana got awarded 1.6 Million-- if not based on his whole career oeurve, then on what? 2002-2003? No way, he would have gotten at least 3-4 Mill if that were the case.

[Ishmookie]

a closer really isnt worth that much in reality its someone who comes on in the ninth with no one on base to get three outs. you can easily train a pitcher to become a closer.

[baggio202]

gagne was robbed!!

 

i think they are all overpaid but if anyone deserves the benefit of the doubt is gange...what he is doing is amazing...did anyone ever imagine a guy dominating like he does???....he's the closest thing to a real life sid fynch

[Gene Honda Civic]

24yo Mark Burhle was 1-st year eligible. The club lost consistently during his SP tenure.  Attendance- low.  Ledership-  little if any. Was only making 450K in 2003.  Market was sorta depressed this off-season.

 

How in the world did he not go through arbitration and instead got 18 Mill? :headshake

MB had turned down an even larger contract the year before.

 

Using your own words to illustrate why they paid MB the way they did:

Players are always advised to get tougher skin because during the hearing, they are liable to hear some REAL TWISTED s*** about themselves. Think divorce/custody courts, but with less histrionics. 

 

The Sox didn't want to damage a player who has already expressed interest in another team(Cardinals). They likely weighed the financial implications of paying him Maybe 500K more than he would have recieved at arbitration this year, versus locking him into a contract where he avoids arbitration altogether. Thus, MB doesn't have to hear bis name dragged through the mud, and will be much more likely to resign with the club at the termination of the contract.

 

MB's contract structure:

Buehrle will receive $3.5 million in 2004, $5.75 million in 2005 and $7.75 million in 2006. The club holds an option at $9.5 million for 2007 with a $1 million buyout.

 

3.5 Mil this season, based on the criteria you were just given, what do you feel MB would have earned by going to arbitration? My thought is that it would be very comparable to the salary he is already recieving, and quite possibly could be more. He did win 19 games in '02, had the best WHIP in the AL in '01, has pitched in 220+ innings in each of the last three years. He made 445K last year, a gagne-like %900 increase would put him at 4MIL next year.

[Soxbadger]

Brando,

 

You keep repeating the same part of the test it breaks down to multiple factors:

 

That panel must consider 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 existence of any physical or mental defects on the part of the player, and the recent performance record of the club including but not limited to its league standings and attendance as an indication of public acceptance.

 

1) Contribution to club during past season (including overall performance, special qualities of leadership, and public appeal:

 

2) The length and consistency of his career contribution.

 

3) Comparative baseball salaries

 

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

 

5) The recent performance record of the club including but not limited to its league standings and attendance as an indication of public acceptance.

 

Now you keep repeating number 2 one of the factors but lets break it down, I will use a scale of 1-5 representing whether Gagne was high or low in that area.

 

1) Contribution to club: 5, Cy Young, most recognizable player, is his teams most valuable player.

 

2) Length and Consistency: 3, Although I could lean to a 4 because 2 years of dominance at a position has to be considered consistent this day and age, but I will give him a 3 because I want to low ball it. Although his first 2 seasons were unproductive, once he went to a new position he was outstanding. Beltre has done less and been more inconsistent and was given $5mil by the Dodgers.

 

3) Comparitive Baseball Salaries: 5, As shown before Gange would not even be the highest paid closer. He would be in the same area as Wagner and Percival and I doubt many would argue that they would rather have Percival over Gagne.

 

4) Existence of Defect: 5, Gagne has no injuries and is a converted starter. No signs of being over used, seems like he is in excellent condition and is still young.

 

5) Performance of Club and Attendance: 5, LA is one of the highest attendance and over the last 42 years has averaged 2.7mil (Crazy but I found it on their MLB site). It is not like they are a small market team.

 

So out of a total of 25 points, Gagne earned 23.

 

All Gagne would need to do is earn 13 points, or be atleast a 3 in every category, which means average in all 5 categories and the arbitration should favor him.

 

Since the mediator had no discretion, they had to either chose Gagne or the Dodgers, I find it impossible that they thought Gagne was worth less than an average player at arbitration.

 

The only problem with this is that lower players would never win arbitration cases because they would always rate below a 3, but they could easily impose a standard number that has to be met for a certain salary to be given out. Such as to get a 8mil salary you need to be atleast a 20, and so on and so forth.

 

I just think the consistency argument is weak at best because 2 years of dominance, is pretty damn consistent. In fact as a closer he has never been inconsistent.

 

SB

[witesoxfan]

a closer really isnt worth that much in reality its someone who comes on in the ninth with no one on base to get three outs. you can easily train a pitcher to become a closer.

I would guess the average closer would blow 6-7 saves a year. Gagne hasn't blown a save for well over a year(going back to 2002), that is, unless you count the All-Star game.

 

In some cases, you are right. However, there are some exceptions to the rule...Mariano Rivera, Eric Gagne, Billy Wagner...those types are worth the money now a days to just come in and close.

[WillieHarris2]

ya thats why it just boggles my mind why houston traded billy wagner