Skip to content

Rays, David Price avoid arbitration for $14 million

Jan 16, 2014, 11:47 AM EDT

Division Series - Tampa Bay Rays v Boston Red Sox - Game Two Getty Images

David Price and the Rays won’t be going through an arbitration hearing, as the two sides have agreed to a one-year, $14 million contract. For comparison, Tampa Bay’s entire payroll last season was $58 million.

Price will be arbitration eligible for the final time in 2015 before hitting the open market as a free agent, which is why he’s been the subject of trade speculation that will no doubt continue. I’d bet Price read a few articles about Clayton Kershaw yesterday.

He made $10 million last season, starting 27 games with a 3.33 ERA and 151/27 K/BB ratio in 187 innings as the follow-up to his Cy Young-winning 2012 campaign.

  1. uyf1950 - Jan 16, 2014 at 11:52 AM

    A little more then the projected model on MLBTR of $13.1MM but still a good deal for both parties.

    • proudlycanadian - Jan 16, 2014 at 11:57 AM

      The price was right.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 16, 2014 at 12:07 PM

        “Come on down”.

    • spudchukar - Jan 16, 2014 at 12:42 PM

      This should not be taken as an indication he won’t be traded. The number is very slightly above what many predicted. If the Dodgers or Mariners do not land Tanaka, he is still very much in play if either team will meet the Rays’ demands.

      I have been wondering if the Rays will be more apt to keep him if Tanaka doesn’t sign with the Yanks. A Tanakaless Yankees would be much more beatable, and may encourage the Rays to make 2014 their best shot at the AL pennant, not that they won’t still be favorites in the East.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 16, 2014 at 12:58 PM

        I don’t know if he will or won’t be traded this season. What I’m fairly confident in saying is that he has a good 2014 season he won’t be with the Rays for the 2015 season.

        I’m also fairly confident in saying since Price is already on record that he will NOT sign an extension with the Mariners if he is traded to them that makes the likelihood of him going to the Mariners for the kings ransom that the Rays are going to ask for him via a trade slim to none. And slim may have already left town.

      • raysfan1 - Jan 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

        He’s not getting traded this year unless somebody is desperate. The price for Price is higher than it was for Shields. The Rays are in position to win now and won’t scuttle that either. The new contract makes it neither more or less likely he gets traded, but he’s not likely to be moved until after this coming season when the cost likely comes down a bit. (All bets are off, however, if he wins another Cy this year.)

      • spudchukar - Jan 16, 2014 at 1:23 PM

        If the Mariners were to include a package of Walker, Franklin and Ackley, I bet Price would be moved.

      • spudchukar - Jan 16, 2014 at 1:20 PM

        Price has been known to make a couple of knee-jerk comments in his days. Plus, two years of a Cy Young caliber guy for $14-18mil plus a #1 pick isn’t all that bad. And who knows an up and coming team like the Mariners, and a couple of years in the Northwest might turn Price’s head around.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 16, 2014 at 1:37 PM

        @ spudchukar, I mean no disrespect but I’ve heard that up and coming comment on this blog about the Mariners for 2 or 3 years now. Not necessarily by you, but aside from the Cano signing I have yet to see any signs that would indicate they stand a snowballs chance in hell of overtaking the A’s and Rangers or even the Angels in the West standings. Now that day may one day come but it ain’t here yet.

      • raysfan1 - Jan 16, 2014 at 2:02 PM

        Spud,
        Everything I’ve heard indicates the Mariners won’t give up Walker. I kind of doubt they’d give up all 3 of the players you named either.

      • spudchukar - Jan 16, 2014 at 2:14 PM

        Not sure I agree. The management amended their stance on Walker some time ago. As I said Zunino might also be a trade piece, and the signing of both Quintero and Buck make me wonder about him.

      • spudchukar - Jan 16, 2014 at 2:12 PM

        I wouldn’t trade the Mariner 3B, SS, and 2B trio for any in Baseball. Plus, their starting staff is in the top 5 in the AL, without Tanaka. I know many will argue that they aren’t that good, but both Paxton and Walker are as good as many #3s and #4s.

        The outfield contribution is a question. Defensively, they are very good. And if Saunders and Ackley don’t produce guys like Almonte, Choi, and Romero may be “Sleepers in Seattle”.

        I’m not as sold on their pen as they seem to be, but they have Smoak, and Franklin as trade bait, and perhaps even Zunino. The signing of both Quintero and Buck makes me wonder about him being included in a deal.

        In fact, I hope they let Montero go and don’t go after Cruz. The addition of Hart, Cano, and Morrison and inserting Walker and Paxton into the rotation should make them a .500 club.

        Additional moves could make them another 5-7 games better, and then they are in contention in a division that will be beating each other up.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 16, 2014 at 4:35 PM

        @ spudchukar my friend you honestly believe “Additional moves could make them another 5-7 games better, and then they are in contention in a division that will be beating each other up.” ?

        They finished 25 games behind the A’s and 20 games behind the Rangers last season. But all accounts the Rangers have gotten better and the A’s certainly have not regressed to a team only winning 80 games +/- from 96 wins in 2013. Even the Angels should be better this year getting some of their players healthy from last year like, Albert and some others.

      • spudchukar - Jan 16, 2014 at 4:38 PM

        In a word, Yes. In two, Yes definitely.

      • sportsfan18 - Jan 16, 2014 at 7:22 PM

        A trade for Price has been made more complicated when he said he wouldn’t sign or resign with the M’s.

        A team won’t want to give up a bunch of top flight prospects if they don’t think he’ll resign with them.

        Of course getting him this off season means the team would have him for two years.

        IF he is NOT traded this year, a team would only have him for one season guaranteed and would then be reluctant to give up many of their best young players for him for only one year.

        Now Price may say he won’t resign with team X, Y or Z or maybe it’s only team X.

        If a team thinks they may get him to sign with them then they will be willing to offer the Rays more in return when trading for him.

        But this isn’t any different than any other high profile player that gets traded a yr or two before being eligible for free agency.

        Teams simply need to do their homework.

        Price wouldn’t commit this off season to guaranteeing a team he resign with them in two years as he would want them to continue building a winner. If he WAS traded this off season to a team he’d like to resign with but they began floundering and appeared lost, there isn’t anything to make him sign an extension with them.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 16, 2014 at 10:23 PM

        @ spudchukar, I beg to differ with your comment “…But this isn’t any different than any other high profile player that gets traded a yr or two before being eligible for free agency….”

        It’s my experience that teams that are willing to trade a boatload of talent for a player that they can control for only a year or so (two) are generally teams that are already competitive and lack that one player to take them to or over the top. The Mariners are not that team, they are not just one player away from getting over the top, even with Price.

        Considering Price’s stated view that he will not sign an extension with the Mariners whether their is a chance that it’s just talk or not the Mariners would in my opinion be foolish to trade a boatload of top prospects for a player that as it stands now is not interesting in re-signing with them should he be traded.

      • spudchukar - Jan 17, 2014 at 1:21 AM

        UYF, my friend, this is the second time today, and third time in 2 days that you have attributed a comment to me that I haven’t made. Please try and read more carefully.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 17, 2014 at 6:46 AM

        @ spudchukar, my apologies I stand corrected.

      • spudchukar - Jan 17, 2014 at 10:53 AM

        No problem.

  2. raysfan1 - Jan 16, 2014 at 12:30 PM

    I’ll worry about next winter when it comes. Meantime, I hope he stays healthy, and has another Cy Young type of season.

    • dylanthom2013 - Jan 16, 2014 at 5:56 PM

      I know people think next winter his trade value will have dropped a ton because he’ll only have one season left – that instead of Will Myers TB’ll end up being offered Brett. Well, look at what TEX was willing to give up last season for only 1/2 season of an inferior pitcher in Matt Garza: C. J. Edwards, Mike Olt, Neil Ramirez, and Justin Grimm. Edwards is a stud starting pitching prospect who throws gas and has 2 plus secondary pitches, and not to mention has a great backstory:

      http://www.milb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20131023&content_id=63154266&vkey=news_milb&fext=.jsp&sid=milb,

      while Olt is a decent 3B prospect with power whose career has been temporarily derailed due to vision problems, and Ramirez and Grimm could end up decent backend starters or at least bullpen guys. Ranger fans couldn’t believe we gave up all this – esp. Edwards – for a few outings from Garza.

      Teams that believe they’re close will give up a decent amount for only 1 year of Price. It won’t be what they’d give up for 2 years, but it could still be pretty good – say one or two high-ceiling prospects plus 2 low-ceiling but still potentially useful guys.

      • raysfan1 - Jan 16, 2014 at 6:23 PM

        Nobody’s going to get him cheap ever however next year they might get him at about the same price as the Royals paid to get Shields… Unless of course he wins another Cy Young.

      • dylanthom2013 - Jan 16, 2014 at 8:04 PM

        Don’t think they’ll get as much for 1 year of Price next offseason as they did for 2 years of Shields, but they could still ask for and get a decent package including 1 or 2 high-ceiling prospects. It won’t include an absolute superstud prospect like ROY Myers that they got for Shields but it should still be pretty good.

  3. bendover09 - Jan 16, 2014 at 5:39 PM

    Going by post season records David is 1-4 with era over 5.00. He also has two no decisions and the only game he won he had a 4.48 era. Not saying he is bad but when the time comes to shine he is no where to be found

    • raysfan1 - Jan 16, 2014 at 6:27 PM

      Small sample fallacy.

      • bendover09 - Jan 17, 2014 at 1:32 AM

        You’re saying I am lying, correct? Look for yourself butthurt rays fan. Those no decisions he threw, also games lost.

        Funny how you call someone lair when the blatant truth is in your face.

      • raysfan1 - Jan 17, 2014 at 9:38 AM

        “You’re saying I am lying, correct?”
        No, incorrect.

        The small sample fallacy is not a lie; it is a failure of logic. He had only pitched a few postseason games, not enough to judge him as someone who doesn’t play well in big situations. With the number of games you use to make that determination, it’s about like calling someone a journeyman after a bad April. Not to mention, he has to pitch a lot of big games for his team to even qualify for the playoffs.

        Your stats are accurate, but you draw conclusions from them that cannot yet be conclusively drawn.

  4. bendover09 - Jan 17, 2014 at 1:36 AM

    4 years (5 series) ERA 5.06

  5. bendover09 - Jan 17, 2014 at 10:48 AM

    4 years and 6 games is not a enough? You might want to look up the word fallcy bc it does my liar. Good day, butthurt.

    • raysfan1 - Jan 17, 2014 at 2:16 PM

      It’s 6 games, the fact that it’s spread over four years is irrelevant. So, yes, I’d still say that is too small a sample size to make a definitive judgment. If you disagree, that’s your prerogative.

      From Urban Dictionary–“ButtHurt
      An inappropriately strong negative emotional response from a perceived personal insult. Characterized by strong feelings of shame. Frequently associated with a cessation of communication and overt hostility towards the ‘aggressor.'” This definition pretty clearly applies a lot more to you than to me.

      I acknowledge they Rays’ lack of success overall in the playoffs thus far. It does not hurt my feelings; I’m happy they make the playoffs at all, especially in considering how bad they used to be. So I’m not in the slightest “butthurt” about either the team’s performance or any individual player’s.

      You, on the other hand, immediately took my comment as in insult and started attempting to insult me–I’m sure you simply felt you were responding in kind. I did not mean to insult you. I only meant to point out that I disagree with your premise because I would not judge a player based upon 6-7 games.

      Oh, and I’ve added a link to a discussion about the small sample fallacy so you can see I didn’t just make it up.

      http://m.voices.yahoo.com/critical-thinking-fallacies-small-6199998.html

      Again, if you feel 6-7 games is enough to decide someone is a journeyman pitcher, then we will just have to remain in disagreement.

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Pitching vs. history in NL wild card game
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Jeter (2985)
  2. R. Martin (2323)
  3. A. Rodriguez (2050)
  4. D. Gordon (1978)
  5. J. Hamilton (1955)
  1. J. Altuve (1949)
  2. C. Kershaw (1888)
  3. E. Volquez (1758)
  4. M. Shoemaker (1749)
  5. Y. Cespedes (1664)