Span's extension and arbitration.

by timprov on Mar 16, 2010 3:59 AM EDT

Lots of talk about the Span extension around. Jesse compared the contract to estimated values of WAR and came to the conclusion that it's a good deal. John Bonnes compared the contract to other centerfielders' and came to the opposite conclusion. I want to do something different: compare it to the arbitration floor as represented by some of the Twins' least valuable players. I suppose this might apply to the Blackburn contract as well.

Span's contract will pay him a little extra the next couple years, then, barring something weird with service time, $3M in his Arb 1 year, $4.75M in his Arb 2 year, and $6.5M in his Arb 3 year. What are other guys getting?

Delmon Young, everybody's favorite whipping boy, the sixth-worst hitter in baseball by WAR at -1.3, hit 284/308/425 while playing atrocious defense, and the Twins bought out his Arb 1 year for $2.6M.

JJ Hardy was surprisingly useful last year at 1.4 WAR due to good fielding at shortstop, but hit just 229/302/357 in the National League and managed to get himself dumped back to AAA, had the eighth-worst OPS of anyone with 450+ PAs, and the Twins bought out what's essentially Arb 2b for $5.1M.

Heck, go back to Luis Rivas, whose first arbitration year was way back in 2004. He was never even as good as Young, and that was six years ago, and he still made $1.5M.

What this adds up to is the not-so-startling revelation that arbitration is really expensive, even for players who aren't very good. So ideas of saving a bunch of money on Span by going year-to-year are overblown at best. It might make sense to do that if the Twins would be willing to non-tender him if he turned into a pumpkin, but I think we've learned by now that they wouldn't. Meanwhile there's a fair amount of upside to the deal if he does improve.

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

It's not often I disagree with John Bonnes.

But I think his analysis of the situation is wayyyy off-base.

by Jesse on Mar 16, 2010 6:19 AM EDT reply actions

Me too

I think he’s using an old model. If you plan to get rid of a guy eventually, you treat him as Twins Geek suggests: Pay him close to the minimum and use arbitration as leverage to reduce your salary risk until he’s a free agent. If you sign a guy to a multi-year deal, you do so to buy out a year of arbitration to reduce your exposure to that risk. But you don’t buy out his years when he’s a serf. That’s the old model.

The hidden risk of the old model is generating bad will with a player by playing the hard ball negotiator. If a player thinks a team is not bargaining in good faith or treating him fairly, he’s liable to walk no matter how much money you offer at the end of his arbitration years. We saw with Santana how you can lose a valuable asset by underestimating a player’s sensitivity to these issues. In that case, he thought the Twins were trying to lengthen his arbitration years and reduce his leverage in arbitration by first sending him to Rochester and then singing Kenny Rogers. He was vocal at the time of those transactions. And he had a long memory when it came to a long-term deal. In the end, there was no way he would sign with the Twins.

The marketplace is not the only standard by which to judge a player’s value. The player’s own sense of fairness also plays a part. These guys are not automata. They’re human beings who are sometimes sensitive to the mere appearance of tight-fisted dealing. Using arbitration as leverage, as Twins Geek suggests, is the height of folly. You invariably generate more bad will with a player in arbitration hearings than you gain in short-term dollars.

The new model is to identify strategic assets that you want to lock up and to go out of your way to sign them to long-term deals. In doing so, you’re creating the good will to put yourself in a position to retain him for his entire career. That is what the Twins are doing with Span. Based on how he’s played the last three years combined with the kind of man he is, I have to say it’s a good move.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Mar 16, 2010 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions

Better model

It sets a good example for the young players also. Do your job well and we’ll treat you to a nice contract. Do your job well and we’ll try to mess with you in arbitration isn’t very motivating.

It is telling the Span got the 5 year deal, not Delmon.

by DJL44 on Mar 16, 2010 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions

Kenny Rogers

I’m guessing it was probably just a typo or not, but when I read “by first sending him to Rochester and then singing Kenny Rogers”, I laughed just thinking of the staff singing Kenny Rogers songs to him and him thinking I’ve gotta get out of here.

by Pedro Munoz is fast on Mar 17, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions

I could just hear Gardy

“You got know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em, know when to walk away, know when to run…”

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Mar 17, 2010 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Seems like his kind of song.

by Jesse on Mar 17, 2010 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Service Time

Span isn’t going to be a Super Two, but he won’t miss it by a ton – will the fact that he’ll have some of the highest service time of any first-year arbitration-eligible player factor into his projected arbitration value as well?

I get John’s objections (like Jesse, it’s not often that I disagree with him), but I’m not nearly as dubious of this deal as he is, either. One limitation of his analysis is that it assumes that salaries will stay constant for the next five years – the Twins essentially signed Span at a small discount and without inflation factored in. I doubt we’ll see 90s-style salary inflation again this decade, but I also doubt it will remain static.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Mar 16, 2010 9:40 AM EDT reply actions

Agree......

Players can remember service time and arbitration. As long as they peform, they can succeed in getting $$$ in arbitration fights.

But come the signing of a long-term contrat before the free agent year, or even after…well, don’t look for Francisco Liriano to play “hometown discount” when his day with the Twins truly arrives.

If you feel a player will produce adequately, a long-term contract can be fine, fine, fine…especially with the option year. But if you look at Span’s option year in 2010 $$$, would you pay that to him as a single year free agent today, elt a,one x-amount of years from now.

Unless if you really become a stud, I almost see arbitration being the golden years for many a player.

Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!

by rosterman on Mar 17, 2010 4:18 PM EDT reply actions

In a word...

YES.

Yes, I’d sign Span to a $9M 1-year deal right now if he was a FA. Absolutely. He’s worth at least that on the market IMO with what I expect to be very good defense in CF this year (2009 UZR be damned) and well above average offense. I think he’ll be a top 10 defensive CF at the least, I really do, and I think he’ll also be something like a top 5 offensive CF, along with being an ideal fit in the leadoff spot for this club and a great guy in the community. And I actually think he’ll improve over the next few years, making it more of a bargain.

And I haven’t exactly always been a big fan of Denard. Hell, I’ll admit it; I really thought they should have dealt him last offseason with the thought that “his value is highest of the OF’s relative to what it will be in the next few years.”

by DJSkillz on Mar 17, 2010 11:04 PM EDT up reply actions