Club wins Burnes' arbitration case (source)

[Brewcrew82]

2 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

I mean they have to make a persuasive argument, at the hearing, to the panel in support of their offer of less money. How you do that without being critical of the player "bad mouthing" is beyond me. If a team cannot talk about their players critically, then there is no point to going to a hearing in the first place. 

To say that Burnes was at the "forefront" of why we missed the playoffs last season is not presenting a persuasive argument, it's a gross distortion of the truth and an insult to his actual contributions to the team's success.

[monty57]

Years ago, Doug Melvin said that he always tried to get contracts signed without going to arbitration, because in arbitration the team is forced to point out why a player doesn't deserve the money they're asking for. This can obviously cause bad feelings for the player, and it's really the opposite of how teams want to treat their players, but it's how the system is set up.

Everyone who goes to arbitration is going to have this happen to them. Some will take it harder than others. 

[monty57]

1 minute ago, Brewcrew82 said:

To say that Burnes was at the "forefront" of why we missed the playoffs last season is not presenting a persuasive argument, it's a gross distortion of the truth and an insult to his actual contributions to the team's success.

What was actually said in the hearing will never be publicly known. At the end of the day, the independent arbiter decided in favor of the Brewers, so whatever they said was a more persuasive argument than what Burnes' lawyers argued.

[MVP2110]

3 minutes ago, monty57 said:

Years ago, Doug Melvin said that he always tried to get contracts signed without going to arbitration, because in arbitration the team is forced to point out why a player doesn't deserve the money they're asking for. This can obviously cause bad feelings for the player, and it's really the opposite of how teams want to treat their players, but it's how the system is set up.

Everyone who goes to arbitration is going to have this happen to them. Some will take it harder than others. 

Yep and I think it's something the Brewers continue to try and do. They got something like 10 out of 11 signed before exchanging numbers? That's pretty good but obviously the one is a big one and has stirred up a ton of controversy 

[Playing Catch]

I mentioned this possibility in the other thread, but it's possible Burnes wasn't willing to sign for his arby number, either. That way, the union can badmouth the system/MLB/owners and drum up sympathy for the players. All he said was that the Brewers offer was poor.

[MrTPlush]

Boo Hoo, cry me a river.

I don't really care if his feelings are hurt. He wasn't ever signing an extension here, it doesn't matter.

Lets all feel bad for a guy about to make $10mil because he couldn't stand hearing he choked down the stretch, was simply average, and not worth the bigger arbitration raise he wanted. A real competitor, leader, and best player on a team would agree with how much he blew our chances and wasn't as good as he is/can be. 

Must have hung around Hader too much. 

[Brewcrew82]

2 minutes ago, monty57 said:

What was actually said in the hearing will never be publicly known. At the end of the day, the independent arbiter decided in favor of the Brewers, so whatever they said was a more persuasive argument than what Burnes' lawyers argued.

Just because the "independent" arbiter decided in favor of the Brewers doesn't justify it being said or make it correct. The Brewers won because the system is set up heavily in favor of the owners. It's as simple as that. 

[Brewcrew82]

5 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

Boo Hoo, cry me a river.

I don't really care if his feelings are hurt. He wasn't ever signing an extension here, it doesn't matter.

Lets all feel bad for a guy about to make $10mil because he couldn't stand hearing he choked down the stretch, was simply average, and not worth the bigger arbitration raise he wanted. A real competitor, leader, and best player on a team would agree with how much he blew our chances and wasn't as good as he is/can be. 

Must have hung around Hader too much. 

Did you miss when Corbin kept us in the playoff race in the first place, while the rest of our pitching staff was riddled with injury and we were trotting out the likes of Chi Chi and Costanza?

I also remember him rising to the occasion and outdueling Sandy Alcantara over 8 innings while the rest of the team choked away that series when one additional win would've put us into the playoffs. 

[monty57]

As was noted early in the thread, one of the biggest problems with the arbitration process is that teams need to "dress down" their own players. 

It's basically a trial, with attorneys on each side presenting their case to an arbiter, who makes a binding decision. Burnes' side is going to be positive about everything he's done, while unfortunately the team has to be negative. It's been that way through the history of arbitration. 

The Brewers aren't doing anything different than every team has to do in this process. Unfortunately, it's probably the first time in Burnes' life that he's had someone in a position of authority really tear into his negatives. That's not how you generally treat an athlete, as coaches, trainers, parents, scouts, agents, etc. usually want to focus on the positives.

It probably really sucks for him, and he probably really feels like the team isn't on his side. He certainly wouldn't be the first player to go through this process to feel that way.

[MrTPlush]

2 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Just because the "independent" arbiter decided in favor of the Brewers doesn't justify it being said or make it correct. The Brewers won because the system is set up heavily in favor of the owners. It's as simple as that. 

According to MLBTR:

2021 - 4 players won / 5 teams won

2020 - 5 players won / 7 teams won

2019 - 6 players won / 4 teams won

It appears you are wrong.

[wiguy94]

 

6 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

I also remember him rising to the occasion and outdueling Sandy Alcantara over 8 innings while the rest of the team choked away that series when one additional win would've put us into the playoffs. 

If only that was the norm from him in the second half last year. We would have made the playoffs! A 3.97 ERA over an 85 inning sample is tough to swallow from your ace down the stretch. 

[Brewcrew82]

Just now, wiguy94 said:

 

If only that was the norm from him in the second half last year. We would have made the playoffs! A 3.97 ERA over an 85 inning sample is tough to swallow from your ace down the stretch. 

And if only he hadn't pitched like a top 10 pitcher in the NL for the season as a whole. We could've finished below .500 and avoided this discussion entirely ...But yes, he's at the "forefront" of why we missed the playoffs. 

[monty57]

12 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Just because the "independent" arbiter decided in favor of the Brewers doesn't justify it being said or make it correct. The Brewers won because the system is set up heavily in favor of the owners. It's as simple as that. 

Not sure what the all-time numbers are, but after 2021, MLBtraderumors did an article which stated that of the previous 99 cases, the owners won 51 and the players won 48. That's not "a system set up heavily in favor of the owners."

It's a legal proceeding, and no one (outside of the attorneys who make a lot of money off of it) likes going through a legal proceeding. Expecting a player to come out of an arbitration hearing feeling happy is like expecting someone to get through a divorce and saying "boy was that fun." 

[wibadgers23]

I understand what people are saying about the arbitration hearing and all of the ugliness that comes with it, but this should never have gone to a hearing in the first place.  The Brewers had every opportunity to meet Burnes' asking price which was extremely reasonable.

[Brewcrew82]

13 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

According to MLBTR:

2021 - 4 players won / 5 teams won

2020 - 5 players won / 7 teams won

2019 - 6 players won / 4 teams won

It appears you are wrong.

I stand corrected. Though, the system is still ridiculous and favors the owners overall because it allows them to pay far less than what these players are actually worth. 

Regardless, the bit about Corbin being at the "forefront" of why we missed the playoffs is a total distortion of the truth and shouldn't have been said, if it indeed was said.

[MVP2110]

6 minutes ago, wibadgers23 said:

I understand what people are saying about the arbitration hearing and all of the ugliness that comes with it, but this should never have gone to a hearing in the first place.  The Brewers had every opportunity to meet Burnes' asking price which was extremely reasonable.

What makes it a reasonable request? I think we'd all agree that on the open market Burnes would get over 30 mil easy so should he have requested that much? The precedent was set in January with Shane Bieber in a case very similar to that of Burnes, so the Brewers offer seems quite "reasonable"

[monty57]

8 minutes ago, wibadgers23 said:

I understand what people are saying about the arbitration hearing and all of the ugliness that comes with it, but this should never have gone to a hearing in the first place.  The Brewers had every opportunity to meet Burnes' asking price which was extremely reasonable.

But they won, which would seem to show that they were more reasonable than Burnes, right?

As was stated earlier, I think the Brewers (and probably most teams) want to sign players prior to arby, as they probably hate "dressing down" the players almost as much as the players hate getting "dressed down."

[Thurston Fluff]

7 minutes ago, wibadgers23 said:

I understand what people are saying about the arbitration hearing and all of the ugliness that comes with it, but this should never have gone to a hearing in the first place.  The Brewers had every opportunity to meet Burnes' asking price which was extremely reasonable.

It's been noted here several time over it isn't just about this one player. If they accepted Burnes demand every player in the future would use those numbers are parameters for their negotiation. While $750,000 doesn't sound like much now it means the next Burnes type player the Brewers have will get an extra $750,000 and trickle down to every other arbitration eligible player going forward. It would end up costing the Brewers, not to mention every other team, tens of millions down the road.

[jerichoholicninja]

I doubt Burnes impact on the playoff race was brought up as it would have added nothing to the Brewer's case. The arbitrator is supposed to look at Burnes stats and service time and compare it to similar players and what their salary is.

[Fear The Chorizo]

This is all so dumb - and it makes Burnes and his representation look bad for running to a microphone to parrot this crap.  The only reason this went to arbitration at all was the fact both sides know there's no way a longterm extension in Milwaukee is happening, and they've know that for multiple seasons.  Once that fact is out in the open between the two parties, what's the point of the Brewers to fork over more than what the arbitration process determines, and for that matter what's the point of Burnes accepting less than what he wants before the hearing happens?  Corbin needs to put on some big boy pants and realize this is all part of the business side of a process that will ultimately make him generationally wealthy in a couple offseasons, and frankly already has even though he hasn't yet reached free agency.

 

[wibadgers23]

11 minutes ago, monty57 said:

But they won, which would seem to show that they were more reasonable than Burnes, right?

I really don't care what some stupid judge decides.  Burnes could have gotten 3X the amount on the open market so yes, I would say his requested amount was more than reasonable.

[Thurston Fluff]

2 hours ago, monty57 said:

That and it still uses "antiquated" methods of determining value. For instance, wins and saves are very important in arbitration. They could keep the system while updating the valuation matrices, but that would probably have to be done through the CBA, and it's probably not high on either side's list.

I was talking more about the system itself as opposed to the method of determining worth within the system. What should determine value is certainly a debate worth having. Since you brought it up, is using more modern methods of determining value going to mess with the accuracy of those methods? For instance, if using WHIP, strikeouts and FIP is used to determine arby numbers then it would stand to reason pitchers would pitch to get those numbers. Does that actually lead to a more productive player if the goal was the stat vs the end result?

This is anecdotal evidence but Zack Greinke said as much a few years back. He thought, reasonably IMHO, that pitching to get those stats would lead to better production. His numbers went up but his results as it pertained to actually winning games went down. Changing the goal to get strikeouts instead of a save wouldn't necessarily lead to contributing to more wins.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Just now, wibadgers23 said:

I really don't care what some stupid judge decides.  Burnes could have gotten 3X the amount on the open market so yes, I would say his requested amount was more than reasonable.

No he couldn't, because he's not a free agent - the system is structured in a way that underpays most guys in their prime production years as they work through salary arbitration, then it often pays them guaranteed money far beyond what they're worth on the field later in their career.  Without a different system, there's no point to grouse about playing by the rules within it.

[adambr2]

16 minutes ago, jerichoholicninja said:

I doubt Burnes impact on the playoff race was brought up as it would have added nothing to the Brewer's case. The arbitrator is supposed to look at Burnes stats and service time and compare it to similar players and what their salary is.

That begs the question, why is a verbal "dressing down" even a necessary part of the arbitration process?

Surely the arbitrators have access to all the data and comparable they need to render a decision and don't need to have it presented to them in an argumentative format. 

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, Brewcrew82 said:

To say that Burnes was at the "forefront" of why we missed the playoffs last season is not presenting a persuasive argument, it's a gross distortion of the truth and an insult to his actual contributions to the team's success.

You may find watching civil jury trial sometime informative, they work the same way arbitration hearings do. In civil jury trials there are even instructions given to the jury before they decide specifically pointing out what the lawyers said are not  facts they're giving argument. 

The attorneys representing the Brewers are tasked with putting together an argument that persuades the panel to decide in their favor. In fact, its pretty common for witnesses to be upset when they hear how the lawyers distort and recalibrate what they know to be as facts. 

Don't forget that Burnes' appearance at his own hearing is also a tactic, hoping the Brewers lose their nerve and cave with the looming prospect of having to dump on their own Cy Young award winner with him sitting in the room.