Category: Tigers
Posted by Tom Gage (The Detroit News) on Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:34 PMVerlander Update
A date has been set for Justin Verlander's arbitration hearing, but other than it occurring between Feb. 1 and Feb. 20, nobody is at liberty to say when it will be.
There's a reason for the secrecy, though. Arbitrations are heard by three-person panels that aren't supposed to know ahead of time which case they will decide. If the date is made public, the panel would know.
The fact a date has been set doesn't mean it will get that far. Remember, the Tigers haven't had an arbitration case go a hearing since Dave Dombrowski has been at the Tigers' helm.
Having a case get this far is unusual, though - not unheard of, but unusual.
Verlander is seeking $4.15 million, the Tigers have countered with an offere of $3.2 million. Tigers' VP in charge of such things, John Westhoff, said on Friday that talks have continued and that he's "cautiously otimistic" that a hearing will be avoided.
"We're working hard to get it done and so is the other side," Westhoff said.
Nothing is done yet, though, and a hearing date looms. It be surprising if it's in the second half of the 20-day window, so there's time yet for a settlement.
I think there will be one, because Westhoff has always found a way - but this time, I'm not certain he will. I don't think he is, either.
Comments
| Jump to bottom |
Tom Gage
Thanks for the update, Mr. Gage. They normally set the hearings for pitchers earlier on the schedule because they're scheduled to report to camp sooner. I'd be very surprised if they didn't get a deal worked out. If they do go to arbitration, both sides have to prepare briefs, and a club has the not so comfortable task of putting in writing why their player isn't worth so much money. All the clubs and agents have the spreadsheets with comps, and all the charts, so they know the parameters. I figure they'll settle this for 3.7 to 3.75 million. Only 8 cases in all of MLB went to a hearing last year.
I'd be modestly surprised if Verlander did a long term deal, though. Both sides have legitimate reasons to keep this to a one year deal. This year figures to be more because of the sheer number of unsigned players at this late stage. Seldom does a case go to arbitration and then the player winds up staying with the same club into his free agency years.
Padres GM Paul DePodesta blogs on arbitration:
Arbitration is never a pleasant (or terribly productive) exercise for the parties involved, which is probably why fewer than 10% of the potential cases ever see the hearing room. The system is pretty straight forward:
1. The Player and the Club submit filing numbers, which are then exchanged a few weeks in advance of a hearing.
2. The player and the Club may continue to negotiate (in fact, they can strike a deal all the way up to and even AFTER the hearing if it's before the decision).
3. If no agreement is reached, the parties will go into a hearing in front of a panel of three arbitrators.
4. Both sides present their case to the panel and follow up with a round of rebuttals and a round of surrebuttals.
5. The panel deliberates for up to 24 hours before rendering a decision.
6. The panel has two choices - the Player's number or the Club's numbers - there is no middle ground.
Among other things, these hearings can: cost time, cost money, create animosity, and take both the Player and the Club away from Spring Training. The system is far from perfect, but for all of the aforementioned reasons the current structure does a reasonable job as a deterrent.
| Jump to top |
