David price get 14 mil... impact on market?

[floplag]

The David price arbitration deal i think was very interesting

I get that its only a 1 year deal and not quite an apples to apples comparison, however, Price is an absolute proven commodity in this league, i would think that number could be more relevant to some of the recent discussion that what Feldman got or others.

I would think that number gives some leverage as to what guys like Garza and Tanaka might get as much as some of the silly FA deals that got signed would.

[eaterfan]

I think it has almost zero impact on the FA market. Garza isn't a FA and the market for his services was one team.

[bloodbrother]

No it won't have any impact on the current FA crop. We're talking 2 different beasts here between Arb and FA

[gotbeer]

How arbitration is treated is totally different than what people get in FA'cy.  There is no comparison.

 

The only comparisons made is between say a guy like Felix, and what he made in his second year of arbitration.  Lincecum would probably be another person he would be compared with, along with kershaw.

 

2 year of aribitration

Lincecum bought out for 2 years in year 1 of arb 2/$23 ($13-8 split in arb figures)

Felix bought out for 5 years in year 2 of arb 5/$78 ($11.5-7.2 split)

Kershaw bought out of 2 years in year 1 of arb 2/$19 ($10-$6.35 split)

[Docwaukee]

I agree that this is a little lower than I expected.  I would imagine that arb salaries will rise in similar proportion to the FA market and Price's salary does have impact on other arb eligible players, but I don't think his arb number has impact on the Free agent market.  A couple mil in salary should impact his trade value really as well. 

[Brent Maguire]

This shouldn't make a difference. 

 

If Price was a free agent, he would be making much much more. Arbitration is a totally different process than free agency. 

[floplag]

stating the obvious is obvious and i already alluded to that...   the point isnt an EXACT comparison, just that even in arb is Price got 14 paying 20+ for lesser guys is still a bad idea.

[eaterfan]

Mike Trout will get $1 million this year (or less). Paying $5 million for lesser guys is still a bad idea.

[Docwaukee]

stating the obvious is obvious and i already alluded to that...   the point isnt an EXACT comparison, just that even in arb is Price got 14 paying 20+ for lesser guys is still a bad idea.

but it's always going to be like that with the way the system is set up.  You are looking at two different economies and trying to correlate values.  What you get from a free agent will always be less.  It's like comparing arb players to those prior to hitting arb and saying it's silly to give Trumbo 4mil because Trout is so much better making 500k. 

[Stradling]

stating the obvious is obvious and i already alluded to that... the point isnt an EXACT comparison, just that even in arb is Price got 14 paying 20+ for lesser guys is still a bad idea.

The Angels should ask Pujols and Hamilton to take a pay cut to under $500k because paying them more than Trout is a bad idea.

[YouthofToday]

stating the obvious is obvious and i already alluded to that... the point isnt an EXACT comparison, just that even in arb is Price got 14 paying 20+ for lesser guys is still a bad idea.

Perhaps, yet if you want the player and the market dictates $20+, well...

[UCLAngel]

stating the obvious is obvious and i already alluded to that...   the point isnt an EXACT comparison, just that even in arb is Price got 14 paying 20+ for lesser guys is still a bad idea.

 

It's not that it isn't an EXACT comparison, it's that there is NO comparison.  It was one thing when you suggested that paying Tanaka more than Darvish was foolish (the situations were different, but your thought process was somewhat understandable), but extrapolating an arbitration salary to the free agent market is ridiculous.  I really think you should do a bit of research on the concept of markets. 

 

Let's just say this then: because Mike Trout is going to make around, say, $10 million through arbitration next year, signing anyone on the free agent for more than $10 million a year is a bad idea.  Of course, this is because Mike Trout is the best player in baseball and should be paid the most.  Do I have that right?