Skip to content

Giants avoid arbitration with MVP Buster Posey

Jan 18, 2013, 2:30 PM EDT

Buster Posey Getty Images

What does a 25-year-old reigning MVP get in his first year of arbitration eligibility?

Apparently $8 million, which is what Buster Posey and the Giants settled on for a one-year contract to avoid arbitration.

As a “Super Two” player Posey has four years of arbitration eligibility rather than the usual three, so he remains under the Giants’ control through 2016.

The one-year deal is mostly just a formality to avoid a hearing, but Andrew Baggarly of CSNBayArea.com writes that the two sides will probably talk about a multi-year deal at some point before spring training begins.

  1. The Dangerous Mabry - Jan 18, 2013 at 2:39 PM

    Well, he’s no Hunter Pence, that’s for sure.

  2. zzalapski - Jan 18, 2013 at 2:46 PM

    Whatever Posey gets, how much should Wieters get in relation to that, and how much will Boras ask for?

    Serious question here. Obviously, Wieters isn’t as good or accomplished as Posey at this point.

  3. hansob - Jan 18, 2013 at 4:29 PM

    $8M instead of $500K? This is why GM’s mess with service time. $7.5M is a lot to pay for calling up a player a few weeks sooner than they might have.

    • phillyphever - Jan 18, 2013 at 4:55 PM

      Sure, but he was one of the main reasons why they have two titles in the last 3 years. Personally, I hate holding someone back just to delay arbitration for a year. I mean, isn’t winning more important than your bank account?

  4. mrrooch - Jan 18, 2013 at 5:04 PM

    As Buster goes the Giants go. Guy is worth 100+ mil. He’ll eventually get that.

  5. pandorasdadca - Jan 18, 2013 at 5:23 PM

    This guy is the heart and soul of a team that won 2 World Series titles in 3 years. Pay that man his money!

  6. yankeepunk3000 - Jan 18, 2013 at 5:36 PM

    I don’t care what they get paid really…its all about the years…once they get the big contract they stop trying so hard. 8 million is fine right now especially when he just has a few years under his belt…yes great offensive player but a very poor catcher…they should just move him to first base by now.and move belt to right or left field

    • sailcat54 - Jan 20, 2013 at 1:38 PM

      A poor catcher? You don’t watch much baseball, do you? Or are your posts driven by wishful thinking?

  7. smcgaels1997 - Jan 19, 2013 at 2:13 AM

    Poor catcher?? Average defensively but a great game caller and a nightmare to run on.

  8. sfgiantsfanforlife - Jan 19, 2013 at 8:10 AM

    Poor catcher? obviously you do not watch him play to often. I believe he is far from poor catcher.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Red Sox shopping Lester and Lackey
Top 10 MLB Player Searches