Blue Jays offer Burnett arbitration
-
-
- December
- 1
-
Toronto has offered arbitration to A.J.Burnett. The Blue Jays remains hopeful of signing Burnett and seems willing to devote their resources to that. They are not known to be involved with any other prominent FAs.
This entry was posted
on Monday, December 1st, 2008 at 7:26 pm by Peter Abraham.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
Chad Jennings
Sam Borden
Josh Thomson
I guess the Blue Jays don’t have the economic considerations to worry about that the Yankees do.
no, they want to keep burnett
Burnett not’s accepting. He wouldn’t have opted out in the first place.
He’s leaving and the Jays want the picks.
Abreu more than likely wouldn’t accept as he wanted to get a multi-year deal. Pudge as well was looking for more than being a backup and only for a year. Pettitte is another that the argument about wanting to have control over the negotiations doesn’t hold up.
If the Yankees want them or not, those players aren’t likely to accept. The Yankees will have less bargaining power with them as it won’t be costing other teams their picks if they sign them. What it means over all is that it will cost the Yankees more to keep these guys, and will make it more likely that other teams will be willing to bid on them, driving up the price IF the Yankees want to keep them.
They know AJ won’t accept. They know he will have other offers on the table. The Yankees aren’t sure that is the case with Pettitte and Bobby (despite what the Dodgers might say).
That said I am still shocked they didn’t offer anyone arbitration.
I would have offered Abreu arbitration to get the picks. If they are trying to keep Andy less than 16mil, declining arbitration for him makes sense.
Still no CC whispers?
Jennifer – I’m really curious as to the business reasons why they didn’t. I don’ think they is a unilateral decision by Cash, but rather he had a lot of input from Stick, Oppenheimer, Newman…and Joe G. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Hal had input. It is his money, afterall.
Clearly it was time for Bobby Abreu and his 16 milion to take a hike, even if the cost was 2 draft picks…..I have no issue with what transpired today…..Cashman is pushing a large broom…..Let’s see how things turn out, we all may be pleased in a few weeks…..
This whole draft pick compensation scheme is a crapshoot. Prospects can come from a variety of places, including the draft. It all comes down to scouting. What Cashman is saying is that, the risk of Pettitte & Abreu accepting arbitration, and getting raises from already over-valued contracts, is greater than them losing out on a few draft picks. Picks that they’ll have to give up to other teams when the Yankees make some free agent signings. It’s a wash.
oK, WHATEVER. They know Burnett is not re-signing.
As long as Burnett doesn’t sign with us, I’m ok.
PETE,
I believe the Jays were involved with Manny rumors. Is this incorrect?
–MP
“Cashman is pushing a large broom”
I think this is the bottom line.
I wasn’t expecting them to offer arbitration to either Pettite or Pudge.
Both would have accepted. If they had, much of the off season plans would have evaporated due to money tied up in their contracts.
Abreu was surprising. But I think that speaks volume for where they see the free agent market going once you get past the top 4-5 players.
Demand at established market prices may be very small and players may make surprising arbitration decisions.
I know many people feel that if they offered Pettite 12M and he wanted 16M what’s the big deal – they have the money – just offer him arbitration.
I think those days of spending marginal dollars like that are over, particularly with the economy.
Several people have mentioned the stock market. And that’s a big issue.
But what’s even more worrying is the direction of consumer spending we are seeing.
Consumer spending fell 1% in october. That was the biggest drop since the month after the 9/11 attacks.
Consumer spending has now fallen for 4 months in a row. The last time that happened was 1991.
In this environment all teams will have a great deal of trouble projecting revenues. A lot of baseball revenues are locked in due to TV – but revenues from ticket sales, merchandising, etc. are not.
I think the team made the decision to value flexibility over potential draft picks for Abreu.
The yanks wants to ensure that they have the opportunity to change the roster and values that opportunity more than they do the potential picks.
Remember – we have little idea what the market for guys outside of CC and Tex will look like. It very well might just collapse.
Part of the organization’s thinking is likely based on the idea that prices for players may fall dramatically over the winter.
Therefore locking in spending at current rates (which is what arbitration promotes) is not the wise decision.
Basically – we very well might see “deflation” of salaries for guys in the Abreu, Dunn, etc. category of player.
The entire country is going to see its standard of living decrease. It’s inevitable. There’s just no doubt about it.
Baseball – even the yankee’s are not immune from that.
Question:
If a team offers arb to a player and the player declines arb but then later signs with this same team for a multi-year contract, then does the team still get the draft picks?
well said, CB
This shopping season has seen a big increase over last year. Tell me again about consumer spending.
AROD fan
December 1st, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Question:
If a team offers arb to a player and the player declines arb but then later signs with this same team for a multi-year contract, then does the team still get the draft picks?
———————————————————–
Sure, the Yankees will get the Yankees draft picks, but will get penalized and won’t get the supplimental picks.
AROD fan,
Nope…because from what team would they “steal” the picks from?
The thing is, MLB is a private company as well as a subsidized monopoly. They are not suddenly shocked because there is a bust that is following a boom. Consumption is not just an economic stat. People have to consume something as they watch their 401ks implode, etc. And that something is the great American pastime of baseball.
At the same time, they have to plan for either deflation or hyper-inflation, so it’s best they wait until the last minute when they know which they are dealing with. AND, any excuse to lower payroll or to “collude” is a good one.
“This shopping season has seen a big increase over last year. Tell me again about consumer spending.”
Not at all. First of all the holiday shopping season started on friday. Second of all sales weren’t at the levels people hoped for. Third there’s huge concerns about falling profit margins due to retailers cutting prices to get people into the stores.
That’s why the market fell 700 points today. That didn’t just happen for no reason.
And on top of that – it’s just a fact that consumer spending has decreased for 4 months in a row which is a very rare occurrence in the US economy since WWII. The last time it happened was 27 years ago. And the economy is much worse off now than in was during the recession of 1991 – much worse off.
People spend on baseball out of their disposable income. Disposable income is the first thing people stop spending on.
CB,
Consumer spending surely is a factor. It would be interesting to see how many long time season ticket holders that got screwed out of their seats to make way for luxury boxes retained their licences. I’m sure there are unsold luxury suites. Part of the Yankee’s problems stem from their greed. I wonder if there is any regret about building the new ballpark.
Funny that picture doe’nt look like cashman,looks more like Ted Knight from the mary tyler moore show.Lowe will go to the Sux,Peavy to the Cubs and CC to the Angels.Yanks will get Zippo!!!!!
But the Yankees/MLB economy is more complicated than just disposable income volatility. No one on this blog would consider blogging their disposable income, but this blog and all the others are a part of the overall Yankees economic picture. No one would consider yes part of their disposable income. Or going to Yankees.com from their blackberry. Plus, there are many smart people out there who gamble with their disposable income, but there are many many more who gamble with they don’t have. Gambling is and has been for some time the only profitable business in this country (whether it’s hedge funds or actual casino’s). There is no gambling without sports.
“Part of the Yankee’s problems stem from their greed. I wonder if there is any regret about building the new ballpark.”
I’m sure there is tremendous concern.
The yankees borrowed money to finance the stadium and did so based on estimates for projected revenues.
If those revenues suddenly plummet – then they could in theory have trouble servicing the debt they took on.
Now, thanks to the tax payers, much of the debt they took on was very favorable to them.
But it’s an issue. The entire economy is not only contracting – it’s deflating. In deflation the prices for goods and services decrease due to lowered demand.
Many people posting here are assuming that demand for baseball related good and services will remain constant and won’t be affected by the larger downturn.
That’s very unlikely.
The teams you’ll really see this potentially affect are the ones that have borrowed a lot of money and don’t have fixed sources of revenue.
Teams that are most dependent on ticket sales for revenue must be very worried.
“No one would consider yes part of their disposable income. ”
Sure it is. It’s paid for through cable tv fees. I’d bet plenty of people who are worried about losing their homes will cut the cord on cable TV.
The yankees are lucky however that their revenues are not as dependent on sources of revenue that are liable to fluctuate.
That said – there are still at least 6-7 unsold luxury boxes. If you would have told the yankees a year and a half ago that 6-7 boxes would remain unsold they would have thought you were crazy.
Each box costs $600 – 700K. So that’s around $4-5M of lost revenue right now.
Or the difference between Pettite’s $16M demand and the yankees reported $12M offer.
Consumption for the Yankees/MLB will definitely change, but we are not suddenly looking at a leveling of society or communism.
There are tons of people who are going to now change their mind and instead of buyign their grandmother the picasso original for xmas buy her the Yankees tiffany lamp.
Consuming the Yankees is a reduction in disposable income for some people. Yankees tickets are still cheaper than the Opera, or dinner at Union Square Cafe, etc.
Furthermore, the Yankees socialized their risks for a reason.