Do Arbitration Numbers Seem Off?

[Neags23]

So I started a thread earlier this week about how long people set FA restrictions for. I decided to give 10 years a try and give players arbitration for the last 9 years of that.

I was going for kind of a tiered, gain salary with seniority kind of thing, with the better players earning more.

I had superstar players set on $9 million, stars $7 million, good players at $6 million, above average $5 mil, avg $3 mil, below avg $2 mil, fair $1 mil, and poor at $.5 mil.

I figured that this way, the stars of the league in their 6th and 7th years (or thereabouts) would get arbitration awards around $9 million.

Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be working out at all. The highest arbitration salary I've seen in the league for the 10 years I've been doing this is $7.6 million. This year, the highest VORP player (and also MVP) was awarded $5.4 million. The best pitcher in the league with a VORP of 93 (!) was only awarded $3.9 million.

To make it even stranger, then the highest paid player in the league signed a $15 million/year contract. So he went from making $5.1 million for arbitration, then in his 11th year of service, signed a 3 year $45 million deal.

This just seems really, really off based on the salary structure I imposed in the league setup. Does arbitration not get based on the league setup? Where are those arbitration #'s coming from?

So if I wanted to double the arbitration salaries, I'd end up letting FA salaries be absurdly high.

I just wanted to get a few other thoughts about this before I log it as an official bug.

[conception]

It may be because players in arbitration still do not earn near the money that free agents will earn. That's the way it is in real life.

I would be interested in hearing how 9 years of arbitration affected competitive balance, however. I've considered experimenting with arbitration years myself but I was afraid of shifting the competitive balance in ways I didn't intend.

[SDtwin]

I wonder if the game calculates arbitration based on the salary levels you specify or the amount of money teams have. If teams are willing to give out larger contracts in free agency because they have the cash, then that might be one reason or the big differences in arbitration and free agency contracts.

I think the other reason is that arbitration seems to be based more on rating than stats sometimes. I've never really looked at it, but sometimes it seems that way to me.

[Neags23]

Originally Posted by conception

It may be because players in arbitration still do not earn near the money that free agents will earn. That's the way it is in real life.

Well, that's not exactly true. K-Rod got $10 million in arbitration recently, as did Ryan Howard. Carlos Zambrano was offered over $11 million in '07.

You may argue these are far below what these guys would've made via FA, but I doubt it's half as much.

[gpm22]

You might get $9-10 M in arbitration if you had your Superstars at $15M. I don't believe that your numbers are odd.

[Carplos]

Gotta agree that those seem like fair arbitration numbers given your salary settings.

[Neags23]

Originally Posted by gpm22

You might get $9-10 M in arbitration if you had your Superstars at $15M. I don't believe that your numbers are odd.

Originally Posted by Carplos

Gotta agree that those seem like fair arbitration numbers given your salary settings.

Really? Maybe I'm nuts, but with $9 million for a superstar, I think a pitcher with 93 VORP should make more than $3.9 million.

If they seem okay, I guess I'll just try upping the salary settings.

[Carplos]

Really? Maybe I'm nuts, but with $9 million for a superstar, I think a pitcher with 93 VORP should make more than $3.9 million.

I understand what you're saying, but one thing to keep in mind: Arbitration in OOTP isn't "owner vs player" so it's unlikely you'll see the outliers ala K-Rod or Howard.

If one of the above posters is correct and arbitration relies on rating, perhaps that is something that can be changed.

If they seem okay, I guess I'll just try upping the salary settings.

Your arbitration vs free agency/extensions will still be skewed.

[Neags23]

Originally Posted by Carplos

Your arbitration vs free agency/extensions will still be skewed.

Exactly the problem.

So I either just have to put up with (seemingly) low arbitration salaries or inflated FA/extension salaries.

[Carplos]

The goal of arbitration isn't to give player free market contracts, it's to give them "fair" salaries.

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that arbitration is designed to give the same type of contracts free agents get.

[Carplos]

The only thing I can suggest as a work around would be to set your salary settings hire near arbitration then revert them afterwards. Bit of work, but if you want arbitration to be used as giving market-level contracts, it's all you can do.

[Neags23]

Originally Posted by Carplos

The goal of arbitration isn't to give player free market contracts, it's to give them "fair" salaries.

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that arbitration is designed to give the same type of contracts free agents get.

I'm not of the idea that they get the same as free agents get. Free agent salaries will naturally go higher, as they are awarded under an auction/bidding type scheme.

As you said, the goal of arbitration is to give them 'fair' salaries. Thus, if the average superstar in the league should make ~$9 million according to the league setup, the best pitcher in the league (which should make him a superstar) should be making well over $3.9 million in arbitration.

I would expect the arbitration salaries of superstars to be about $8 million - $10 million, then the FA salaries of the same superstars to be anywhere from $9 million to $14 million, depending on age and available cash in the league.

The fact that it goes from $3.9 million in arbitration to $14 million via FA just doesn't seem right.

[lahoward]

Originally Posted by SDtwin

I think the other reason is that arbitration seems to be based more on rating than stats sometimes. I've never really looked at it, but sometimes it seems that way to me.

Yeah i think the ootp engine determines a players worth by calculating 30% to ratings, 50% to current year stats, 15% to previous years stats & 5% to two years ago stats. Thats the default anyway (or used to be) so a rookie may take a hit if he has no prior years stats to figure into the equation.

[Carplos]

The fact that it goes from $3.9 million in arbitration to $14 million via FA just doesn't seem right.

How much do you think Ryan Howard would get in the free market if he was an FA after this year? He may not quite get a $10.1 raise, but he'd go from $10m to $18-20m per year.

Again, I think the $3.9m number has more to do with the fact that arbitration seems to be based primarily on ratings rather than performance. Does the player have "best pitcher in the league" ratings or is he "overperforming"? Also, is it his first year in arbitration?

If so, that likely plays a role as well, since he would still be 9 years away from FA in your league.