Comments on: Offering Polanco arbitration isn't a risk worth taking

By: Garland Lamos

Garland Lamos — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:08:22 +0000

I saw this really great post today, found it on yahoo. i think i may return soon.

By: hk

hk — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 08:47:02 +0000

I’d also be concerned about Lyon accepting. Following last season where he made $4.25M and posted a nice ERA (2.86 vs. 4.20 for his career) and knowing that ERA is a key stat in the arbitration process, the Tigers could end up paying $5M plus for a set-up reliever with a career 4.20 ERA who’s .229 BABIP last year is probably not sustainable.
I think that this offseason, we are going to see the agents turn the tables on the owners – having learned from the Juan Cruz situation last year – and accept arbitration for a lot of players who might take pay cuts or not get raises in free agency. Brandon Lyon is one of those examples. This guy looks to be worth $5M to $6M for 2 years in free agency, but maybe $5M plus for 1 year in arbitration.

By: hk

hk — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 08:40:55 +0000

The point of offering him arbitration is to get draft choices for him when he signs elsewhere. If they offer, they better be pretty sure that he won’t accept. Even in the back-up plan that notsodumbbrowski describes, Polanco accepting would cost the team approximately $1M (1/6 of the $6M that he’d likely receive in arb) and they’d lose him to free agency without getting the draft choices.

By: notsodumbbrowski

notsodumbbrowski — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:57:03 +0000

Salaries granted through the arbitration process are non-guaranteed though, so the Tigers may offer it to him to provide some insurance in case Sizemore’s return from his broken ankle doesn’t go as planned. If he’s ready though they can release Polanco during spring training and only owe him a prorated portion of his salary.