A Market Correction for Arbitration-Eligible Sluggers
In Major League Baseball, the market tends to correct itself as clubs gain greater knowledge of players and their value. If aging players are less successful, the market for that group might slow a bit. Bullpen arms become more or less desirable depending on their scarcity. Increased revenues tend to move everyone up the pay scale. It is important to understand how and when to make adjustments in value as run-scoring environments, finances, and aging patterns change.
That is all well and good for those who run organizations and those who follow the game closely, but the arbitration process is much less nuanced. The non-tendering of contracts to Pedro Alvarez and Chris Carter, along with the trade of Mark Trumbo, are all the result of a failure to adjust — within the arbitration process, specifically — as the market slowly corrects for the overpayment of defensively- (and sometimes offensively-) limited home run hitters whose overall effectiveness has dimmed.
The arbitration process tends to favor the traditional stats that place like FanGraphs have tried to de-emphasize. Closers get big paydays in arbitratio, regardless of overall performance. As a result, the St. Louis Cardinals opted to let Steve Cishek go instead of moving to arbitration where he would receive a salary of around $7 million. Home runs and RBI tend to get paid as well, causing an overpayment for those players who rack up those numbers, but have big deficiencies in other areas.
Consider the following players who MLB Trade Rumors predicted would get salaries in excess of $5 million in arbitration. The second column represents their predicted salary, the third column represents their predicted WAR by Steamer, and the third column represents the cost per WAR in millions of dollars.

| Projected Salary ($M) | Projected WAR | $/WAR (M) | |
| Luis Valbuena | 5.8 | 1.9 | 3.1 |
| Chris Carter | 5.6 | 0.1 | 56.0 |
| Josh Reddick | 7.0 | 2.8 | 2.5 |
| Ben Revere | 6.7 | 0.8 | 8.4 |
| Josh Donaldson | 12.0 | 5.9 | 2.0 |
| Brandon Moss | 7.9 | 1.0 | 7.9 |
| Justin Turner | 5.3 | 2.7 | 2.0 |
| Brandon Belt | 6.2 | 3.0 | 2.1 |
| Mark Trumbo | 9.1 | 1.3 | 7.0 |
| Dee Gordon | 5.9 | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Lucas Duda | 6.8 | 1.9 | 3.6 |
| Wilson Ramos | 5.3 | 1.7 | 3.1 |
| Manny Machado | 5.9 | 5.8 | 1.0 |
| Pedro Alvarez | 8.1 | 0.8 | 10.1 |
| Neil Walker | 10.7 | 2.6 | 4.1 |
| Mitch Moreland | 5.6 | 0.9 | 6.2 |
| Nolan Arenado | 6.6 | 3.9 | 1.7 |
| Mike Moustakas | 5.7 | 3.0 | 1.9 |
| Lorenzo Cain | 6.1 | 3.7 | 1.6 |
| J.D. Martinez | 7.8 | 2.5 | 3.1 |
| Trevor Plouffe | 7.7 | 1.7 | 4.5 |
| AVERAGE | $7.0 M | 2.4 | $2.9 M |
The average at the bottom showing cost per WAR is the average of the totals. Chris Carter’s monster number does not have an undue influence. The chart above has a lot of good players. Manny Machado and Nolan Arenado are two of the best young players in the game. It is possible you have heard the $8 million per win as the going rate to buy wins in free agency. Here the number is less than half that, around $3 million, as arbitration salaries are purposefully suppressed by the system to which the players and owners have agreed in the collective bargaining process.
Let’s isolate those players above who are defensively limited by the position they play. I included first basemen and designated hitters, although Brandon Belt could arguably be left out as he can play some outfield.

| Projected Salary ($M) | Projected WAR | $/WAR (M) | |
| Chris Carter | 5.6 | 0.1 | 56.0 |
| Brandon Moss | 7.9 | 1.0 | 7.9 |
| Brandon Belt | 6.2 | 3.0 | 2.1 |
| Mark Trumbo | 9.1 | 1.3 | 7.0 |
| Lucas Duda | 6.8 | 1.9 | 3.6 |
| Mitch Moreland | 5.6 | 0.9 | 6.2 |
| Pedro Alvarez | 8.1 | 0.8 | 10.1 |
| AVERAGE | $7.0 M | 1.3 | $5.4 M |
Pedro Alvarez once played a poor third base, but was moved to first base last season, and could not do well enough there that he might only be a fit in the American League as a designated hitter. Chris Carter has limited time in the outfield, but played just six games there in 2014 and none in this past season. Lucas Duda was dreadful in the outfield, but has become a more valuable player since moving to first base. Mark Trumbo still played some outfield last season with the Mariners on a team with Nelson Cruz and Logan Morrison, but those experiments are likely (hopefully) over as Trumbo heads to Baltimore. Moss can play some outfield as well, but is generally defensively limited.
When you take away the seven players in this second table from the first table above, you are left with 14 position players. Every single one of them was tendered a contract for next season, while two players were non-tendered (Alvarez, Carter) and one was given away in trade (Trumbo). Brandon Belt was a no-brainer to keep and Lucas Duda was likely an easy decision as well, but for five of the seven players above, the team would have to pay, or is paying, essentially free agent prices for these sluggers, some of whom have not slugged as well lately.
Here is what the stat lines looked like in 2013:

| Name | PA | HR | BB% | K% | wRC+ | WAR |
| Pedro Alvarez | 614 | 36 | 7.8 % | 30.3 % | 112 | 3.0 |
| Mark Trumbo | 678 | 34 | 8.0 % | 27.1 % | 107 | 2.3 |
| Brandon Moss | 505 | 30 | 9.9 % | 27.7 % | 137 | 2.1 |
| Mitch Moreland | 518 | 23 | 8.7 % | 22.6 % | 95 | 0.6 |
| Chris Carter | 585 | 29 | 12.0 % | 36.2 % | 112 | 0.5 |
Here is what they looked like in 2014:

| Name | PA | HR | BB% | K% | wRC+ | WAR |
| Brandon Moss | 580 | 25 | 11.6 % | 26.4 % | 121 | 2.5 |
| Chris Carter | 572 | 37 | 9.8 % | 31.8 % | 122 | 1.8 |
| Pedro Alvarez | 445 | 18 | 10.1 % | 25.4 % | 103 | 0.0 |
| Mitch Moreland | 184 | 2 | 6.5 % | 23.4 % | 76 | -0.6 |
| Mark Trumbo | 362 | 14 | 7.7 % | 24.6 % | 91 | -1.2 |
And finally, their stats this past season:

| Name | PA | HR | BB% | wRC+ | WAR |
| Mitch Moreland | 515 | 23 | 6.2 % | 115 | 2.1 |
| Mark Trumbo | 545 | 22 | 6.6 % | 108 | 1.1 |
| Brandon Moss | 526 | 19 | 9.3 % | 94 | 0.6 |
| Chris Carter | 460 | 24 | 12.4 % | 101 | 0.3 |
| Pedro Alvarez | 491 | 27 | 9.8 % | 114 | 0.2 |
It might be a bit unfair to include Moreland in the non-tender category as he is more in the “think about it for a bit, but then tender him” camp. The home runs were there for all the players at some point, which also means their salaries in arbitration continued to rise even as the overall production has not. Eno Sarris wrote recently about the possibility that we are undervaluing slugging first basemen and designated hitters as maybe they take too much of a hit for positional difference. Looking at the stats in the chart above, as well as the projections for these players, even adding a bit extra for the big positional loss is not going to do a whole lot to help these players overall. This is not just a WAR-related issue, either.
Organizations have decided these types of players are receiving too much money and backing that up with their actions. Alvarez and Carter were non-tendered; Mark Trumbo was essentially given away; the Rangers might be trying to trade Moreland; and the Cardinals have possibly kept Moss as insurance for if they fail to bring in anyone via free agency (making him potentially expendable, as well). The arbitration process is designed to suppress salaries ahead of free agency, and for the most part it does a very good job at accomplishing that task. For defensively limited home run hitters, the scales tip the other way, and at least this season, the market has made a correction.
Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.
It’s worth mentioning that Justin Smoak goes against this trend as he avoided arbitration by signing a one year $3.9M deal that was almost double the amount predicted.
To what degree does MLBTR’s model take a player’s entire salary history into account like the arbitrators presumably can rather than just the immediate past season’s salary?
In a chat the other day, Tim acknowledged that a player like Smoak who was previously non-tendered and then signed back for a lower dollar amount kind of breaks their modeling equations.
That’s because they didn’t take into consideration his career stats. If a player’s previous salary was not derived from the arbitration process, you can’t simply give him a raise and call it a day like they did with Smoak.
Counterpoint: The Cards, normally considered a team that’s near the forefront of advanced thinking like this, just last year traded a very good pitching prospect for Moss.
Maybe the prospect wasn’t actually that good, at least in the Cardinals’ eyes?
Is it worth also noting service time on the table as that is another big factor…
Break that first table into three pieces by service time and the average $/win is:
Least service time, $2.1M
Medium service time, $3.3M
Most service time, $4.3M
Pedro Alvarez is in the third bucket so, his $10.1M/win is a bit overstated without accounting for service time and Chris Carter is in the first, so $56M/win is being generous with an adjustment…
Nothing to see here. While it is true that there are players that are getting overpaid through arbitration teams have the opportunity to non-tender them and possibly even resign them. Dozens of players are arb eligible every year, while a few players like the ones mentioned break the model it is not a totally bad system. Besides, the player’s union would never agree to change using baseball card stats for advanced metrics from one year to the next. There isn’t really a “fixing” to be done, if you want the player you pay him, if not, either trade him or non-tender him. The market corrects itself
How rigid are the arbitration rules? I’ve heard that agents have extensive presentations and so do teams, highlighting anything they want to. It’s just that the decision-makers think old-school, not that some part of the CBA requires them to.
Very rigid. It’s all outlined in Article VI, Part E, Section 10 of the CBA.
It outlines the process, but I don’t see anything limiting it to “baseball card stats”.
Here’s that section from the CBA:
“The criteria will be 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 (see paragraph (11) below for confidential salary data), 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 standing and attendance as an indication of public acceptance (subject to the exclusion stated in subparagraph (b)(i) below). Any evidence may be submitted which is relevant to the above criteria, and the arbitration panel shall assign such weight to the evidence as shall appear appropriate under the circumstances.”
So, per the CBA, a team or a player could prepare arb presentations that focus on advanced stats and ignore batting average and RBI’s. Each side has an hour to present to the arb panel and then 30 minutes for summation and rebuttal, and they have to provide written materials to the other side prior to the hearing.
Ah gotcha. There are two main reasons why they use only basic traditional stats:
(1) The object of the arbitration process is to reward tangible results so all predictive stats and regression indicators like BABIP, FIP, etc. aren’t all that relevant. In fact, from what I’ve been told by one of the authors of the CBA, such stats are not even allowed.
(2) The arbitrators are labor lawyers, many of which are not huge baseball fans and if they are, are unlikely to understand it. Nor is it wise to spend precious time during your argument to teach advanced metrics. That would be futile.
Now you might ask why would both sides prefer arbitrators who don’t know advanced metrics, but it’s actually quite simple. Both parties prefer 100% neutrality rather than a more “accurate” system. Not to mention that, even if you include advanced metrics, the results are going to largely be the same.
The only real issue is closers vs. non-closers since reliever salaries are nearly wholly dependent on saves, but that’s not going to change until managers adopt leverage-based relief roles instead of inning-based.
I agree with you, but if you think about it, would it not be in the best interests of the players union? Players are players. All this would do is shift money from 1 dimensional sluggers to players with more value based on on-base skills, defense, and base running. As it stands, the 1-dimensional sluggers are just getting non-tendered and then getting paid less, while the balanced players are still just getting screwed out of money. If the process changed, at least the players with more subtle skill sets get paid more, while the sluggers get what they’ve been getting after they’re non-tendered. It means more money for the players overall. But I agree with you that this probably won’t happen.
Still, the arbitrators SHOULD love this. It would make their jobs easier. All they have to do is look at some agreed upon WAR number, service time, and bam, you get paid X amount. It’s probably a simpler formula than what they’re doing now.
some agreed upon war number is harder than you think. There are still a few different ones floating around out there, and all of them still have some flaws to them.
A lot of the issue are in this type of player too. Is there an over correction for positions like 1b and DH (hitting dips when a player Dh, so should a player get dinged twice when they DH) the models that use defensive scores vs. other players also reward good LF more than average Ss. a MLB average SS is still an amazing fielding, but the best LF is still only a Lf (the issues with Gordon having a huge War last year)
Changing the system really is impractical. While the stats used are fairly archaic, the process works as advertised. Currently, the arbitrators are non-baseball people who specialize in labor law. If you were to expand the valuation methods past the basic traditional stats, you’d have to find new arbitrators and with that comes the bias the arbitration seeks to prevent.
Not to mention that the goal of arbitration to reward the player for his actual results and the traditional stats are more than adequate enough to give accurate descriptions of what happened during the past season.
“utterly useless” then I could not agree more.
There might be something here, but in free agency many sluggers get a lot more than most people on FG think they are worth (to a greater extent than other players). This could be something, or it could be nothing.
A Mitch Moreland Chris Carter firstbase platoon would probably be a cheap but effective option for an NL team like the Marlins. Moreland had very good defensive numbers last year at firstbase. He is also an above average hitter against righthanders. Chris Carter has historically destroyed lefthanded pitching. So, Moreland plays firstbase against RHP in NL parks and firstbase all the time in AL parks. Carter plays firstbase against lefthanders vs the NL and DHs in AL parks. If Morleand continues his decent firstbase play, The Marlins would have a defensive hole at first only against lefthanded pitching in NL parks and there are very few good lefthanded starting pitchers in the NL east right now.
Isn’t Justin Bour still under contract in Miami? I’m not sure how good he is defensively but he hit well vs rhp in 2015.
A couple years ago Eno Sarris gave a great breakdown of how the arbitration process works. Especially in regards to baseball stats v. advanced metrics. Here is a link to the podcast. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fangraphs-audio-eno-sarris-on-the-curiosities-of-arbitration/.