Showing posts with label baseball arbitration consultant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label baseball arbitration consultant. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

The Best Defense for Arbitration

One of our recent posts detailed vital differences between baseball arbitration and free agency. Here’s another major one: an opposing party isn’t trying to discredit exhibits in your free agency packet. That is true in an arbitration hearing.

The Sports Resource strives to make agents arbitration briefs “rebuttal proof” by going on the offensive. One way to do this is make key points at least three different ways. This strengthens your arguments and defends them against the close scrutiny that always follows your presentation.

Even a powerful arbitration exhibit can get refuted when the club has its rebuttal time. Dismissing a point supported by multiple exhibits is much more difficult.

If one theme focuses on a position player’s clutch performance, we first demonstrate with core numbers. For example, we could show a strong slash line (batting average/on-base percentage/slugging percentage) late in close ballgames. Another exhibit could detail all the player’s clutch achievements in the platform season: extra inning hits, game-winning RBI, etc.

Advanced metrics like win probability added – a great tool for this purpose – can drive home the point even further. Finally, we may include pertinent quotes from baseball insiders like teammates, coaches, or even front office members. This not only supports the numbers, but makes them come alive.

It’s never easy. The player may not have excelled in all these statistical categories, or he may have shined in some during the platform year but not his career timeframe. We find the right balance, avoiding anything that appears contrived, and build support for the main themes of the case.

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Starting at the Top

The term “leadoff man” usually applies to the number one hitter in the lineup. However, all batters lead off innings. In fact, traditional leadoff men bat first in fewer than 20 percent of their team’s total innings.

When the leadoff batter for an inning reaches first base, his team’s run expectancy becomes .86 runs. If he makes an out, it drops to just .26. That’s a huge swing and teams face this situation nine times each game, 162 games per season.

While number one hitters get the most opportunities in this role, everybody in the lineup receives numerous chances over the course of the season. For example, Michael Bourn led off more innings (282) than any Braves batter by far. But that was just 19.6 percent of the team’s total innings. There were 327 Major League players who led off at least 50 innings in 2012. Most position players – including those currently arbitration eligible impacted their teams in these situations.

So who stood out when leading off innings last season? None of the top five players in on-base percentage resemble prototypical leadoff men, but all shined in this role: Joey Votto (.457 OBP), Travis Hafner (.456), Miguel Cabrera (.456), David Ortiz (.441), and Joe Mauer (.439).

This data also enables us to measure how number one hitters perform in these situations, when getting on base is much more valuable than with one or two outs. The arbitration-eligible Austin Jackson had a .409 on-base percentage when leading off an inning versus .355 in all other plate appearances. So when he could make the greatest impact by reaching base, Jackson excelled.

We can dig deeper in this analysis as well. Reaching second base to start innings carries major value – a 1.07 run expectancy. A slugger topped this group as well. Giancarlo Stanton got to second base (or further) 28 times in 121 inning leadoff plate appearances. His 23.1 percentage blew away everybody with at least 50 plate appearances in these spots. Oakland’s Brandon Moss topped all arbitration-eligible players. He made it to second in 16.4 percent of his leadoff plate appearances, seventh best overall in MLB.

This analysis results from one small shift in thinking. In arbitration and free agency, such approaches can really pay off.

Friday, January 4, 2013

Arbitration and Free Agency: A Key Distinction


Baseball arbitration and free agency differ tremendously in one respect: free agency is about what a player will achieve while arbitration focuses on what he has done.

Future projections – based on past performance – play a role in free agency. But projections aren’t included in the arbitration criteria. This distinction makes certain types of information and analysis, which clubs may not want to see in a free agent package, extremely important to an agent’s arbitration brief.

For example, skills like bunting and advancing runners with outs won’t fetch top dollar on the free agent market. But arbitration is a whole different ballgame. Exhibits detailing how a player excelled at “little things” – that resulted in wins – help make your brief a winner. Demonstrate how he performed better than comparable arbitration eligibles in these areas, and it strengthens your case even further.

Gregor Blanco didn’t post big numbers in core statistical categories, but he delivered in many other ways that impacted the Giants outstanding season.

1) Blanco did not hit into a double play in 453 plate appearances. This had only been done seven times since 1950.

2) He advanced a runner from second base with nobody out in seven of eight plate appearances in this situation.

3) He drove in a runner from third base with less than two outs 10 times in 18 opportunities. Six of these RBI came in the seventh inning or later, seven contributed to wins and three made up the margin of victory in one-run games.

4) Blanco topped 25 steals and had 5 triples in fewer than 400 at-bats. Only one other Giants player had done that since 1912.

5) He executed five successful sacrifice bunts. The Giants went 4-1 in these games.

All those feats are impressive enough, but they also contributed to a World Championship team. Looking back, for arbitration, that bottom line is all that matters.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Four Ways to Build Value for Arbitration

The arbitration season is a crazy time of year for baseball agents and The Sports Resource. So before it gets into full swing, here are strategies for making your briefs a winner.

Building a brief starts with telling a compelling story in the player profile section. That makes matching the player against key comparables easier and more convincing.

The approaches below work for both the player profile and comparables sections, and will make powerful points that complement a brief's core elements. 

History, All-time Greats, and Rarities. While their achievements may not find their way onto SportsCenter, players record historic achievements throughout the regular season. For example, Antonio Bastardo’s 14.0 strikeouts per nine innings rate this season has been matched by just two lefthanders in Major League history: Billy Wagner and Aroldis Chapman. We’re not saying Bastardo is as good as Wagner (obviously), but linking his name to an all-time great is huge. And such feats carry value even when they don’t involve common statistics. 

Marginal Value adds Major Value. Players on teams that narrowly reach the postseason – such as the Orioles and Cardinals this year – help their teams generate $25-to-$50 million of additional revenue. That’s according to research by Vince Gennaro, a consultant for Major League teams and author of the book “Diamond Dollars”. Reaching the playoffs also impacts club revenues for up to five seasons. Demonstrate how your player made that two or three-game difference for his club (and his key comparables didn’t), and you score a huge plus. 

Ballpark Figures. Park factors can be a tremendous weapon in arbitration. Hitters in Safeco Field, or any of the five California stadiums, are ideal for park adjustments. The same goes for pitchers in Coors Field, U.S. Cellular Field and Fenway Park. Our last newsletter addressed this topic for free agency. The concept works differently in arbitration – because the criteria does not allow for projections – but it’s a great tactic for evaluating past performance. 

Advanced Metrics. Clubs have used win expectancies and leverage index against relievers in recent hearings. So why not do the same? Even if they don’t help your case, it pays to prepare information for rebuttal. WAR is a powerful tool as well, but works better at some positions than others. Although their explanations consume some presentation time, advanced metrics complement core numbers extremely well.