Jeff's note: We did it again. I have a 2010/2011 payroll post below this one. Scroll down. We are just the worst.
-----
I'm going to stop thinking about Felix for a few seconds to take a look at the arbitration process MLB wide. The reason, of course, that we've seen a slew of signings lately is that today was the deadline for clubs and players submitting arbitration numbers. For those who aren't in the know, basically if a player has sufficient service time (generally more than three years but sometimes not), they can have their salary decided by an arbitrator rather than just be at the mercy of their team. Each side submits the number they feel is most fair, an arbiter hears arguments from both parties, and chooses which figure he likes best. Once it gets to this stage, it's one number or the other - there's no turning back.
Arbitration can be a pretty contentious process, and there's every motivation to come to a settlement before it gets to that point. Today marked the day when the sides officially exchange numbers, but the arbitration itself will not occur until later - there's still time to get to a decent compromise. Very few cases even go to arbitration, so we see a lot of short term (and in some particularly happy cases, long term) contracts signed in mid-late January.
Anyway, the accepted standard salary for a player who is arb-eligible is 40%/60%/80% of their market value for the first, second, and third years of arbitration respectively. Service time often matters more than actual performance. But we have a metric that takes both service time and performance into account - namely, career WAR. While it's not perfect for reflecting recent play, it's close enough for our purposes. With it, I thought it might be interesting to compare how player-submitted figures and team-submitted figures matched up with performance level (the dollar numbers themselves can be found here). The results are quite interesting:

Figure 1: Career WAR vs. Player-Submitted Arbitration Figure, 2010. Note the difference in scale with Figure 2.

Figure 2: Career WAR vs. Team-Submitted Arbitration Figure, 2010. Note the difference in scale with Figure 1.
We can actually see which sides are being more consistent by looking at the correlation between WAR and submitted salary numbers. In the player's case, we find that the R² is 0.74, a very good match. From the teams, it's 0.68, also a good figure, but still less consistent than the player numbers. I'd be interested to see how these vary year-by-year (or even team by team). Are teams always coming out with numbers more loosely correlated to actual performance than the players are, or does this number vary? It's a very slight difference anyway, so I'd be surprised if it held up, but it'd be interesting to investigate. For 2010, though, the players are closer to their actual worth than the teams.

Of course, I'd be remiss if I posted on LL and didn't mention the arbitration-eligible players we have unsigned. Brandon League is in his first year of eligibility, Casey Kotchman is in his second. They submitted $1.325M and $3.9M respectively, and the team has countered with $900K and $3.125M. Expect contracts to be signed somewhere in between, but that's not a guarantee. Either way, the two player-submitted numbers means we can get a fix on the minimum amount of money that the Mariners have left to play with... which is a post for a little later, perhaps (or earlier?).
0 recs | 101 comments
How the fuck do you guys write so fast
gregrabble - January 19, 2010
There are more than one of us
Also I don’t write so much as make pretty charts and fill in a post around them
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
I've noticed your use of backgrounds on your charts now.
Taking it to the next level USA Today style.
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
Which is a joke
Actually how do you easily sub in the pictures in the background. Photoshop or is it something even easier?
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
I play with paint.NET a lot
I just like making things pretty.
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
He's been doing it at least
since “Is This Sparta” with the 300 graphics. A nice touch for sure.
appleshampoo - January 19, 2010 via mobile
I know, but over the last week or so it just seems like articles are constantly flying at us
It’s crazy
gregrabble - January 19, 2010
If I write a post a day the site has 50% more posts than usual
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
I can't wait for us to be burned out before the season even starts
Jeff Sullivan - January 19, 2010
Will the communication on posting improve if Jeff is only 200 miles away?
msb - January 19, 2010
What do you think
Jeff Sullivan - January 19, 2010
Carrier pigeons.
msb - January 19, 2010
I always imagined them meeting like the Jedi Counsel only with 1000% more drinking
With hologram projecters displaying images of those who can’t attend in person.
JAH - January 20, 2010
Graham = Yoda
Jeff = Mace
Matthew = ??
appleshampoo - January 20, 2010
Old Ben Kenobi
Dewey N - January 20, 2010
You mean old Obi-wan Kenobi?
appleshampoo - January 20, 2010
You don't think they're the same person do you?
Poochie - January 20, 2010
So Graham is 3' tall wrinkled green fella with pointy ears?
ToddK - January 20, 2010
No, but he can make things levitate with his mind.
Sec 108 - January 20, 2010
rowr?
pdb - January 20, 2010
And then there are few folks such as I ...
… who have privileges to post if we were so inclined. But Jeff, Graham, and Matthew are simply so awesome that I hang my head and limit myself to the occasional FanPost when I feel as though I have something that might be worth hearing.
Jeff, et. al., deserve all of the accolades we can give them. I’m pretty sure that most of you have no idea what is involved with creating and running a blog that is persistently well-written, analytical, cogent, fun, and exhilarating despite attaining mass popularity.
There’s an oft-stated truism that the quality of comments and discussion on a blog is inversely related to the popularity of the blog. LL and USSM are doing their best to show that there might possibly be a smattering of exceptions to that axiom.
Steve Nelson - January 19, 2010
Not to detract from your point because it's spot on but,
Wheelhouse for life.
marinerdan - January 20, 2010
Efil4Esuohleehw?
pdb - January 20, 2010
Well, LL is, in a small way, the sucessor to Wheelhouse ...
… A few days after I retired my cleats, I received an invitation from Tyler Blezinski at Athletics Nation to fold Wheelhouse into the then-forming SportsNation blogroll. I declined, but I told Tyler that there was this other guy named Jeff who was a more awesome blogger than I and that he should approach Jeff about joining up..
Steve Nelson - January 20, 2010
If you had said yes I would probably be a college graduate right now.
Robert - January 20, 2010
It's kind of like the Seahawks who hire a pretty coach
and then hire a GM around him.
Coug1990 - January 19, 2010
This is a bad joke
Jeff Sullivan - January 19, 2010
Yeah suck on that Sullivan
OlSalty - January 19, 2010
What the hell.
I had the comment thread to “Felix Contract Details…” open for a few minutes, and as I went to return to the LL’s main page, I absentmindedly made a joke about “I wonder what new post will be on the front page now.”
Sure enough. Thanks, Graham!
katal - January 19, 2010
If I remember correctly, Bavasi never took a single player to arbitration, which is probably a pretty good policy for morale.
Do we know much about how Jack and his team work in this arena? No Mariner went to a hearing last year, did he?
Teej - January 19, 2010
(I know a one-year sample doesn't mean much, but Jack strikes me as the kind of guy who wouldn't want to go into a room and tell a panel why his player isn't as good as he thinks.)
Teej - January 19, 2010
OTOH, in Tampa
I heard that Tampa has a policy that once figures are exchanged, they never negotiate and just go through with the arbitration process. I hear it works for them, but that does fly in the face of conventional wisdom.
Paul AB - January 20, 2010
Seems like a non-terrible idea
maybe it encourages players to settle with the team faster so the team never has to send out a potentially insulting contract figure to the player
seattlebruin - January 20, 2010
They've had to go to arby three times and have won every time
but the process is unpleasant and it’s hard to say how players react to that kind of treatment. I wouldn’t draw any conclusions about on field performance, but certainly it seems that resigning those players at any point would be a long shot.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 20, 2010
It looks like the teams pay pretty fairly except for a few players who get offered way too much
maybe I’m misreading the plot but there are two really big outliers in the bottom right corner.
I think fair might not be the correct term. I think consistent might be a better word since R^2 doesn’t tell if they are erratic in any one direction.
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
True.
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
I changed the post
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
In your spreadsheet can you compare what they produced last year in WAR
vs what they expect to earn this year using the 20%/40%/60% split? I know its more complicated so it might not be worth the number crunching. Then you could at least compare the offers vs. an “unbias” benchmark to see if either the players or teams are way off.
My guess is that the RP make too much as well as bench players. Any SP or position players who are getting playing time are way undervalued by either side.
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
I don't have service time numbers easily available or I would have
I had to manually enter in team/player figures as it was
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
Cool, yeah thats a pain
Somebody should get fangraphs or baseball ref to make that a stat so that we can know how many years a player has plus then we can easily record it in our super nerdy baseball spreadsheets. Its a pain searching around for it.
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
It's worth pointing out that the two players you noticed in your original comment are closers
Papelbon and Street
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
Who is the player with the lifetime WAR of ~22?
I feel like this won’t surprise me but I’m sure you’ve got the number right there.
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
Felix
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
Hah, cool. That was kinda my guess.
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
It would be interesting to see a multi-year study on which positions are over/undervalued
and compare that to the FA pool just to see if there is some sort of bias depending on position. You shouldn’t have different $/WAR based on position but I’m sure this happens (especially for RP).
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
(study on arbitration player salaries) and compare to FA salaries
Is what I meant to say.
Edgar for Pres - January 19, 2010
That fits into the whole
“Closers don’t get a high enough WAR” / “Closers are overpaid for the WAR they generate” argument that erupted at Fangraphs the last couple of days.
wandergeist - January 20, 2010
And in the story everyone's watching,
The Giants’ $8 million offer to Lincecum seems low. I think he gets his $13 million if it goes to an arbitrator. Or they’ll settle around $11 million and he’ll still break Howard’s record.
Teej - January 19, 2010
Oops I did it again
.Taylor - January 19, 2010
Isn't it likely that players and they agents are using similar advance stats to
justify the value.? Hence, the closeness to their actual value.
coasty141 - January 19, 2010
I'm not figuring out what question of mine this comment was answering
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
I can tell you as an absolute fact
Arbitrators care about the stupidest stats in the world, and agents know it, so this stuff doesn’t come into play.
Jeff Sullivan - January 19, 2010
Brian Hunter got a raise!
Poochie - January 19, 2010
I guess thats what I was trying to get at
It would seem as though the players/agents are using advance stats to determine their value. So the stats have to be holding up somewhat in the hearings, no?
coasty141 - January 19, 2010
Not necessarily advanced stats, though
They know arbitrators care way too much about things like Saves, fielding percentage, ERA, etc. etc.. so they use those statistics in making their case for a certain salary even though they may not be indicative of how talented the player is at all.
OlSalty - January 19, 2010
Imagines Tony Blengino explaining WAR before a panel.
Janic - January 19, 2010
I'm pretty sure the accepted standard is 40/60/80 for arb players
the 20% only really gets applied for Super 2s
Matthew - January 19, 2010
Whoopsadoodle
Graham MacAree - January 19, 2010
Stop thinking about Felix?
Just like humor after 9/11, it’s too soon.
seattlecougar - January 19, 2010
What's not funny about 9/11?
CapSea - January 20, 2010
Obligatory
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2009/5/6/860216/the-5-6-ot-a-new-hope#15395048
Faux - January 20, 2010
This is the very definition of what IS funny about 9/11
seattlebruin - January 20, 2010
Great job again
I may be drunk but damn this site is the best.. I toast to many more years of Felix and LL
Paseman - January 20, 2010 via mobile
Did anyone else notice the equations in the background?
Janic - January 20, 2010
I think its actually contruction plans for something
Edgar for Pres - January 20, 2010
One rec to whoever can figure out what being built
Hint: the date is on there somewhere
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
Is it a Seattle based LEED project?
coasty141 - January 20, 2010
I'm going to go with the Panama Canal
coasty141 - January 20, 2010
Doh! I didn't see this guess.
The 1903 number seems like it could be a year.
PDXTai - January 20, 2010
GRAHAM REC??
seattlebruin - January 20, 2010
Boat?
Edgar for Pres - January 20, 2010
The Rainier brewery?
What’s a Graham rec worth these days?
d0nkey - January 20, 2010
The Panama canal?
PDXTai - January 20, 2010
Williamsburg bridge
waldo rojas - January 20, 2010
The Butterworth Building
wazzu93 - January 20, 2010
Smith Tower
Sec 108 - January 20, 2010
Wright Brothers Flyer?
rickpo - January 20, 2010
Winner!
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
Since I live in Dayton, Ohio, I had an unfair advantage on this question
rickpo - January 20, 2010
Strong work rickpo
coasty141 - January 20, 2010
Oh my God, I'm so so so so so sorry
so sorry
seattlebruin - January 20, 2010
I feel so awful for you
seattlebruin - January 20, 2010
Yeah, it's my cross to bear.
Fortunately, I’m in Seattle for a couple weeks.
rickpo - January 20, 2010
Wright Brothers' Flying Machine
coasty141 - January 20, 2010
Wright Brothers Flyer!
Robert - January 20, 2010
Hindenburg
Aaron Campeau - January 20, 2010
Whoa, the scale threw me off for awhile there.
I now see that the player figures go to $15m and the team ones go to $10m. I was trying to figure out how/why some of the player figures were lower than the corresponding team figure, but now I see that isn’t the case. Anyway, thanks for these graphs, Graham. It is interesting how well correlated these plots are. Plotting it on top of a hand-written spreadsheet is also a nice touch.
FlaskInSafeco - January 20, 2010
Yeah, I should have had them both on the same scale
But then the team one looked all scrunched up
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
Superimposed, maybe?
That way the scrunching would more highlight the difference in player/FO numbers?
Faux - January 20, 2010
Tried, looked stupid
Too many data on one graph.
The average team submitted number is 75% of the average player submitted number, for those who would like more of a sense of scale.
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
You might try just adding the other regression line to one of the graphs.
One line should be easy to pick out and would compare the slopes of the two lines.
PDXTai - January 20, 2010
Graham, what are the slopes of the two best fit lines? In other words, what is the increased salary per each additional career WAR?
Squooshed - January 20, 2010
I'll let you know when I'm at my home computer in a couple of hours
Also, please use the subject line when commenting on LL. Doing so helps the moderators out a lot. Thanks!
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
Whoops, forgot. Promise I'll get to it soon
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
Player: 671K/WAR
Team: 507K/WAR
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
It looks like the intercept goes through 0,$0
If so, wouldn’t it make sense to make it go through 0,$400K or whatever the league minimum is?
Matthew - January 20, 2010
Yes, but all I know how to do is to tell Excel that the line doesn't -have- to go through 0,0.
It decided to anyway
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
You can use the solver feature to make best fits for arbitrary functions
Just make two cells your “slope” and “intercept” if you want to use the function
$ = slope*WAR+intercept
to generate a column of expectation $‘s based on a player’s WAR total and the two constants designated by the “slope” and “intercept”.
Then either make a column that is “=abs($(real)-$(expectation))” to generate the absolute error between the real data and your function’s expectations (You can use RMS instead of absolute error if you want). Sum up that column of absolute error. Then use solver to minimize the absolute error by changing the slope and/or intercept.
You could set the intercept to $400k and just minimize the error with respect to the slope. Excel isn’t the most efficient way to do stuff but hey it gets the job done. This is a great way to fit any arbitrary function to data. Make sense?
Edgar for Pres - January 20, 2010
I could do that, but Excel is telling me that the best fit line for the data does not go through $400K, 0
I find this interesting
Graham MacAree - January 20, 2010
So maybe there shouldn't be a minimum salary in the MLB
Replacement players would play for free if you let them. This might be true. I would but I’m probably far below replacement.
Edgar for Pres - January 20, 2010
Also, I just tend to find using solver to fit functions to be really convienent
Spreading the Excel gospel.
Edgar for Pres - January 20, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.