PDA

View Full Version : Reds exchange arbitration numbers with EE and Weathers



Tom Servo
01-20-2009, 05:55 PM
From Fay:


The Reds exchanged arbitration figures with reliever David Weathers and third baseman Edwin Encarnacion.



The Reds offered Encarnacion $2.55 million. He countered at $3.7 million. He made $450,000 last year. The Reds offered Weathers $3 million. He countered at $4.6 million. He made $3.3 million last year.



Players don't lose in arbitration even if the hearing doesn't go their way.

jesusfan
01-20-2009, 05:58 PM
Weathers 4.6 million?? LOL

hebroncougar
01-20-2009, 06:28 PM
Weathers 4.6 million?? LOL

For a guy that's been 130+ to league ERA the last 3 seasons, and made $3.3 million last year? With the Reds offer at 3, I don't see how Weathers loses. They're asking him to take a pay cut?

redsmetz
01-20-2009, 06:37 PM
For a guy that's been 130+ to league ERA the last 3 seasons, and made $3.3 million last year? With the Reds offer at 3, I don't see how Weathers loses. They're asking him to take a pay cut?

My guess is that both will be settled before arbitration. I think EE comes in around $3M - Weathers number will be a slight raise over last year, somewhat closer to his number (maybe $3.75M).

dougdirt
01-20-2009, 07:29 PM
For a guy that's been 130+ to league ERA the last 3 seasons, and made $3.3 million last year? With the Reds offer at 3, I don't see how Weathers loses. They're asking him to take a pay cut?

My thoughts exactly.

SMcGavin
01-20-2009, 08:35 PM
Wow, the Reds are going to have a really expensive bullpen.

AmarilloRed
01-20-2009, 08:37 PM
I think more players should have accepted the arbitration offers they were given by their teams. David Weathers was one of the smart ones.

blumj
01-20-2009, 09:00 PM
Wow, the Reds are going to have a really expensive bullpen.
It sure seems to me like a bit too much of their payroll is tied up in their bullpen.

Highlifeman21
01-20-2009, 09:13 PM
Wow, the Reds are going to have a really expensive bullpen.

Really expensive and most likely really crappy.

SMcGavin
01-21-2009, 12:49 AM
Really expensive and most likely really crappy.

I don't know about really crappy. I think it'll be OK, just not as good as you'd hope for the dollars being spent.

Odd fact I found looking up contracts of our bullpenners: Did you know Mike Lincoln has a clause in his contract giving him bonuses based on numbers of starts made? His salary is bumped $50,000 for hitting each milestone of 12, 15, 18, 21, 23, 25, and 27 games started. Weird.

Screwball
01-21-2009, 03:06 AM
Odd fact I found looking up contracts of our bullpenners: Did you know Mike Lincoln has a clause in his contract giving him bonuses based on numbers of starts made? His salary is bumped $50,000 for hitting each milestone of 12, 15, 18, 21, 23, 25, and 27 games started. Weird.

I hear he also gets a bump every time a unicorn eats leprachauns while picking 9 leaf clovers. :D

But I agree, the Reds' bullpen will not be crappy. Not sure what basis there was to suggest that in the first place, but there are some electric arms in there along with others that have solid track records. They may not repeat their performance from '08 (3rd best BP ERA in the league), but I seriously doubt the bullpen will be a liability.

WebScorpion
01-21-2009, 11:56 AM
The Reds offered Encarnacion $2.55 million. He countered at $3.7 million.

$3.7 million for EE?? that's over $150,000 per error!! http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-merv/kane.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

TRF
01-21-2009, 12:36 PM
$3.7 million for EE?? that's over $150,000 per error!! http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-merv/kane.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

How much is it per HR he hit's?

REDREAD
01-21-2009, 02:45 PM
I think more players should have accepted the arbitration offers they were given by their teams. David Weathers was one of the smart ones.

Yes, Weathers was smart.

I was afraid of this when Weathers was offered arb. Weathers will probably make double what he would on the free market. He'll get paid for 2 years and only have to work 1.

Really, if the Reds only submit 3 million, Weathers should take them to arb. He will most likely win. Weathers has some nice stats, including saves. My guess is that he will get his 4.6 million pretty easily. Why settle for 3.5 million or so if you are Weathers? Go for the gusto.

Anyhow, I see Weathers getting payback for some of those years he worked relatively cheap and produced.

Mario-Rijo
01-21-2009, 04:17 PM
According to Cots these are the figures for payroll starting the year before Castellini took over (rounded to the nearest hundred thousand).

2005: 61.9 Million
(Castellini and company takes over 11/05)
2006: 60.9 Million
2007: 68.9 Million
2008: 74.1 Million

So let's see if we can get an idea of where we are now to see what at most we can expect to happen moving forward.

2009 Payroll obligations for former players:
Stanton - 500K
Ross - 375 K
Castro - 100 K

Total 975 K

Payments from other clubs:
2 Million from O's for Hernandez

Pen:
Cordero - 12 Million
Weathers - 3 to 4.6 Million
Rhodes 2 Million
Lincoln 1.5 Million
Burton 400K
Bray 400K
Masset 400K

Total 19.7 - 21.3 Million

Rotation:
Harang - 11 Million
Arroyo - 9.5 Million
Volquez - 400K
Cueto - 400K
Owings - 400K

Total 21.7 Million

Starting 8:
Hernandez - 8 Million
Votto - 400K
Phillips - 5 Million
Gonzo - 5.375 Million
EE - 2.55 to 3.7 Million
Gomes - 800K
Taveras - 2.25 to 2.5 Million
Bruce - 400K

Total 25.025 - 26.175

Bench:
Hanigan - 400K
Dickerson - 400K
Keppinger - 400K
Rosales - 400K
Hairston - 2 Million

Total 3.6 Million

Other:
Alonso 400K

Grand total

69.15 - 72.15

Guesstimated salary with final arb. #'s
71 Million

Guesstimated cap
80 Million

Total available no more than 9 million but probably less than that due to the economy. Also have to take into account guys who will be up and down and prorate that time at the major league from 400K per.

Summary:
Based on everything mentioned and the timing of the Gomes signing I'm guessing we are done. Unless we eventually come to the conclusion Gonzo can't go and we have that money insured we are just about tapped out. We might be able to squeak out a Nady trade (reportedly avoided arb. for 6.65 million) but unless the Yankees take on a little of that I doubt it. So my guess is what you see is what you get.

Anyone disagree or see anything I am missing?

VR
01-21-2009, 04:47 PM
I wouldn't give up on Abreu just yet. Getting him at a 1 yr deal for 8-10M is not out of the question.

backbencher
01-21-2009, 07:21 PM
Good breakdown, M-R. I would think that the Latin bonuses should be factored in as extraordinary (i.e., not part of the standard development budget) and therefore either be added to the current layouts or subtracted from the expected payroll. If we're lucky, the FO used the extra budgets for Griffey, Dunn for that purpose in '08 rather than using '09.

On Weathers, I assume that the Reds' plan is to cut/threaten to cut him if he wins. The team doesn't have much leverage otherwise.

Ltlabner
01-22-2009, 07:39 AM
Based on everything mentioned and the timing of the Gomes signing I'm guessing we are done.

Oh, I'm guessing based on everything mentioned this offseason we are done alright.

redsmetz
01-22-2009, 08:01 AM
I can't say for certain whether we're done. I'm guessing that like any GM, Jocketty's keeping his ears open to what might evolve in the next month. Clearly anything on the ML roster will require a move to open a slot. I wouldn't be surprised to see some move or another, particularly as Spring Training approaches and players want to get into camp.

REDREAD
01-23-2009, 12:13 PM
On Weathers, I assume that the Reds' plan is to cut/threaten to cut him if he wins. The team doesn't have much leverage otherwise.

The Reds would be foolish to do that. Word would get out, and then the Reds would have even more trouble attracting players to come here.

Not to mention, there's probably a clause in the collective bargaining agreement that says arbitration must be offered in good faith. Threatening Weathers to settle before the hearing probably isn't legal.

OnBaseMachine
01-28-2009, 03:49 PM
Things I'm told
Reds reach deal with Weathers
1-year, plus a team option for 2010
2009 is 3.5 million
Plus: $100,000 for 50gf; $150,000 for 55gf; $200,000 for 60gf; $250,000 for 65gf.
Plus: $25,000 for All Star; $50,000 for LCS/MVP; $100,000 for WS/MVP; $100,000 for Rolaids ($75,000-2nd; $50,000-3rd).
2010 is a club option for 3.7 million or a 400,000 buyout

http://www.thelotd.com/lance/

redsmetz
01-28-2009, 03:55 PM
Things I'm told
Reds reach deal with Weathers
1-year, plus a team option for 2010
2009 is 3.5 million
Plus: $100,000 for 50gf; $150,000 for 55gf; $200,000 for 60gf; $250,000 for 65gf.
Plus: $25,000 for All Star; $50,000 for LCS/MVP; $100,000 for WS/MVP; $100,000 for Rolaids ($75,000-2nd; $50,000-3rd).
2010 is a club option for 3.7 million or a 400,000 buyout

http://www.thelotd.com/lance/

If that's the deal, it's not a bad one. Bumps up the one year deal a bit higher than I thought they'd settle for with the $400K buyout. It does give them the option to bring him back at a fixed amount that's not too unreasonable. They may just re-up him to cause a frenzy on RZ.

HeatherC1212
01-28-2009, 03:57 PM
Things I'm told
Reds reach deal with Weathers
1-year, plus a team option for 2010
2009 is 3.5 million
Plus: $100,000 for 50gf; $150,000 for 55gf; $200,000 for 60gf; $250,000 for 65gf.
Plus: $25,000 for All Star; $50,000 for LCS/MVP; $100,000 for WS/MVP; $100,000 for Rolaids ($75,000-2nd; $50,000-3rd).
2010 is a club option for 3.7 million or a 400,000 buyout

http://www.thelotd.com/lance/

How do the fans take part in the Rolaids part of that deal?! I think we'll all need them this year, LOL :p:

TOBTTReds
01-28-2009, 04:10 PM
I would give him $250 mil if he wins the World Series MVP

REDREAD
01-28-2009, 04:49 PM
So, with the 400k buyout, Weathers is basically getting 3.9 million this year, plus incentives.

TOBTTReds
01-28-2009, 05:12 PM
So, with the 400k buyout, Weathers is basically getting 3.9 million this year, plus incentives.

That's how the Reds look at it. Or 3.9 mil with 400k deferred.

Mario-Rijo
01-28-2009, 05:17 PM
That's how the Reds look at it. Or 3.9 mil with 400k deferred.

Exactly, great job Walt. I actually had Weathers down for roughly 4.1 in my final estimate IIRC. So in essence we saved about 500K more than I expected, in the short term anyway.

PuffyPig
01-28-2009, 05:26 PM
The Reds would be foolish to do that. Word would get out, and then the Reds would have even more trouble attracting players to come here.

Not to mention, there's probably a clause in the collective bargaining agreement that says arbitration must be offered in good faith. Threatening Weathers to settle before the hearing probably isn't legal.


I think that if the Reds told Weathers that they might release him (owing, I think, 1/6th of his contract) if he won could not be construed as bad faith. That's part of the rules of arbitration i.e. the ability to release players. It's not a threat, it's a position.

If releasing players was "bad faith", it wouldn't be allowed.

Mario-Rijo
01-28-2009, 06:04 PM
I think that if the Reds told Weathers that they might release him (owing, I think, 1/6th of his contract) if he won could not be construed as bad faith. That's part of the rules of arbitration i.e. the ability to release players. It's not a threat, it's a position.

If releasing players was "bad faith", it wouldn't be allowed.

Now that's interesting, didn't realize they could pass that off as a position.

PuffyPig
01-28-2009, 06:22 PM
Now that's interesting, didn't realize they could pass that off as a position.

Any player who has a "non-guranteed" contract (arbitration or not) can get released before the season starts and get paid only (I think 1/6th) of his contract.

Since arbitration contracts were not negotiated in the Union Contract to be guaranteed, the same rules applies.

Allowing the teams to take advantage of it (and you see lots of players relaesed just before the season starts) is well within the rules and would not be considered a "loophole" that someone was taking advantage of.

A player who's negotiating an arbitration contract needs to consider this possibility in his negotiations. Weathers likely accepted less money becuase now he has a guaranteed contract. He din't need to be reminded that he might get released in spring training if he had a bad spring. It's a well know fact.

UKFlounder
01-28-2009, 06:41 PM
I thought that releasing a player because he won in arbitration was not something teams could do. Didn't the players union file a grievence when Marge threatened to do that once?

I guess I'm wrong, but I thought a contract awarded in arbitration was guaranteed, so that the team could not release the player just for retaliation.

Edit: I googled it and I was completely wrong on that. I guess you learn something every day.

Sorry

klw
01-28-2009, 07:17 PM
I would give him $250 mil if he wins the World Series MVP

Does this offer still stand if he gets traded to the Cubs at the trading deadline and he gets the MVP by getting the win in 3 of the 4 Cubs series wins? ;)

redsmetz
01-28-2009, 07:35 PM
Does this offer still stand if he gets traded to the Cubs at the trading deadline and he gets the MVP by getting the win in 3 of the 4 Cubs series wins? ;)

I see your wink, but he would receive the bonus in such a scenariio, as unlikely as that might be.

camisadelgolf
01-28-2009, 07:49 PM
Any player who has a "non-guranteed" contract (arbitration or not) can get released before the season starts and get paid only (I think 1/6th) of his contract.

If a player is cut before the 16th day before the season begins, he is entitled to only 30 daysí termination pay. If he is cut during spring training but after the 16th day before the season begins, he is entitled to 45 daysí termination pay.

klw
01-28-2009, 08:05 PM
I see your wink, but he would receive the bonus in such a scenariio, as unlikely as that might be.

I realize that if it was in the contract it would remain, however as written TOBTTReds was indicating that he/she would be paying the bonus directly or the lawyer in me was being too literal.

PuffyPig
01-29-2009, 11:23 AM
I thought that releasing a player because he won in arbitration was not something teams could do. Didn't the players union file a grievence when Marge threatened to do that once?

I guess I'm wrong, but I thought a contract awarded in arbitration was guaranteed, so that the team could not release the player just for retaliation.

Edit: I googled it and I was completely wrong on that. I guess you learn something every day.

Sorry

You were assuming that a team would cut a player just because he won arbitration. They may cut him even if the team won. There's no way of knowing the motivation, nor any reason to care. Contracts are either guaranteed or not. If not, players can be cut (as you have stated) if the team chooses. Their reasons for doing so are irrelevant.

REDREAD
01-29-2009, 11:26 AM
I think that if the Reds told Weathers that they might release him (owing, I think, 1/6th of his contract) if he won could not be construed as bad faith. That's part of the rules of arbitration i.e. the ability to release players. It's not a threat, it's a position.

If releasing players was "bad faith", it wouldn't be allowed.

Whatever you want to say, but if the club offers arb and then threatens to release the guy if he wins, word will get out about what a cheap place Cincy is.

Plus, it doesn't make much sense. 1/6 of Weathers contract if he won is about
3/4 of a million. Would you rather pay Weather 750k not to pitch, or 4.6 million to actually pitch? The incremental difference is about 3.9 million, which is what the Reds were apparently willing to pay him. In other words, the 750k is a sunk cost the Reds have to eat by offering him arb.

I still think it was a huge mistake to offer Weathers arb. We could've signed him or someone like him for much less in the market. Never worth offering arb to someone like Weathers, who will probably accept, simply because he's not a hot commodity. That's why the Snakes were smart not to offer Dunn arb.

Anyway, my point is that threatening a player after he has accepted arb is just not good business. Long term, it will do more damage than the couple hundred grand that is saved by the threat (if any money is saved).

People wonder why Dunn didn't want to come back here. They wonder why other FAs will only come here only if they are overpaid. Well, part of it is the Mickey Mouse way that this franchise was run while Dunn was here. I don't want to make that reputation worse.