James Loney Avoids the Most Depressing Arbitration Case in History
January 17, 2012 at 11:10 am | Posted in James Loney | 34 Comments
Earlier today on Twitter, I joked that if the Dodgers and Clayton Kershaw couldn’t come to some sort of an agreement before reaching the arbitration table, I’d love to have the chance to sit in on that hearing. What could the Dodgers possibly say to argue Kershaw’s case? “Uh, if he was so good, how come Juan Uribe was so bad?” What I didn’t say at the time was that the inverse of that situation – James Loney‘s arbitration hearing – would have been equally as hilarious, just in a completely different way. Can you imagine Loney’s representatives trying to come up with ways to bolster his case, particularly since his usual crutch of “RBI guy” didn’t even really happen in 2011?
Unfortunately for purveyors of high comedy, we won’t get a chance to envision that, since Loney has avoided arbitration by agreeing to a one-year deal worth $6.375m. If that sounds like a lot for a player of Loney’s talents, well, just remember that the arbitration process isn’t exactly the free market. And if he’s anything like the Loney we saw over the last two months of 2011, he’ll actually be underpaid. (When he’s not that Loney, of course, feel free to commence moaning.)
Updating the numbers from earlier today, the Dodgers now have about $79m committed to 16 players under contract for 2012, plus the approximately $5m or so that will be spent on minimum salary pre-arbitration types like Dee Gordon, Kenley Jansen, and A.J. Ellis. The only outstanding arbitration case, Kershaw, still looms…
34 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
How Many McCourt Sins?
MSTI on the web
MSTI Library
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Are there still Dodgers fans who would want Ethier and Loney after the season? I still have hope both become more like Kemp to help the Dodgers offense become much more potent this upcoming season, and lead LA back to October baseball. Go Blue!
Comment by dodgerccp— January 17, 2012 #
Compared to what?? Don’t forget, we’re dealing with Nedward J Colletti here. Imagine who he’d hire in their absence?! Considering that, my answer is absofreakingLUTELY.
Comment by Native Angeleno— January 17, 2012 #
I am sure Jim Loney will earn every nickel of his bloated salary. I am just worried about his Mr Hyde persona that makes him about as productive as Uribe.
Comment by Grabarkewitz— January 17, 2012 #
I hope Loney is underpaid. :)
Comment by Bob Springer— January 17, 2012 #
Not to say I’m defending Ned, but what else is out there for the Dodgers for sign at that price?
It’s easy to say a deal is bad in a vacuum, but if you look at the market, is there a more reasonably priced first baseman available (other than Prince Fielder)?
Comment by Brian Stuart— January 17, 2012 #
Yeah, I’m not complaining. I might have tendered him too. The only other alternative that interests me is Carlos Pena, but he’s likely to get $2-3m more.
Comment by Mike— January 17, 2012 #
Kotchman? But he isn’t exactly a decent consolation prize for not signing Fielder.
Comment by Grabarkewitz— January 17, 2012 #
How about Gerald Sands?
Comment by Doppel— January 18, 2012 #
Much I as like Sands, I think asking him to be an everyday 1B is a lot at this point.
Comment by Mike— January 18, 2012 #
Backloaded Prince Fielder…….
Comment by DodgersKings323— January 19, 2012 #
Loney is not worth a penny more than $6 million.
Comment by Ken— January 17, 2012 #
Apparently Ned believed he was worth 35,750,000 pennies more than $6 million.
Comment by Paul— January 17, 2012 #
Good lord, does anyone else think it’s ridiculous that Tim Lincecum filed for 21.5 million? Or that the Dodgers filed for only 6.5 million for Kershaw? I would imagine I’m not the only one who thinks that Kershaw might be able to get the 10 million he is asking for through arbitration.
Comment by Joseph— January 17, 2012 #
Nah, it’s all a game. Both sides file for more (or less) than they really want so they can settle in the middle.
Comment by Mike— January 17, 2012 #
Yeah, but $6.5 million would seem to be insulting. A $4 million split seems to be a wide gulf and while I doubt that Kershaw will hold any grudges, it does paint Frank and Ned as bigger cheapskates than had been assumed. So be it, one more reason not to shed any tears when those two are gone.
Comment by grabarkewitz— January 17, 2012 #
6.5 is not insulting. It’s his first arb year and I’m pretty sure that would be record money for any player in their first arb year. Kershaw’s 10 was using Lincecum as a standard, but that was already in his second or third arb year.
Comment by Ben— January 18, 2012 #
The whole arbitration process seems kind of silly to me. If you were a player, why not ask for 100 kajillion million dollars and a trip to Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory? And wouldn’t it make sense for ownership to offer the league minimum to everyone? Isn’t it all kind of pointless since the arbitrator is deciding anyway?
Then again, there’s quite a bit I don’t understand about the process, so I’m content to assume I’m missing the bigger picture.
Comment by Paul— January 17, 2012 #
The arbitrator picks one or the other. If the team were to offer, say Kersh, the league minimum, they most definitely would give Kersh what his agents were asking. Unless it was a kajillion + the Wonka trip.
Comment by @BrocNessMonster— January 17, 2012 #
Interesting. So how exactly do they end up “meeting in the middle” ?
Comment by Paul— January 18, 2012 #
Broc is correct that the arbitrator can only pick one figure or the other, not any sort of compromise in between. What I meant was that the two figures generally serve to let player and team find a common ground prior to the hearing. An overwhelming number of cases are settled without going to the arbitrator. The Dodgers haven’t had one go that far since 2007; I think I read the Padres have had just one since 1999.
As far as why a team couldn’t offer the minimum, not only would they lose, but the rules state they can’t offer more than a 20% pay cut.
Comment by Mike— January 18, 2012 #
Thanks for clearing that up. Whenever I search around the web for explanations I find either incomplete summaries or extensive legal documents. Always fun to learn.
Comment by Paul— January 18, 2012 #
$6.5 mil is an insult. On principle the arbitrator should thumb his nose at Ned and give Kershaw the $10 mil. $8 mil WAS a good number but not NOW. Go to war, do not be a meek Christian. Think of how many children you can save from hunger with $10 mil. I am not being sarcastic. Would you rather spend the money on poor children, a $30,000 per month hotel room, or another pool for Jamie? Dodger ownership and management sucks, good riddance. Also, I would award $10 mil even though I am an anti-union person.
Comment by Ken— January 18, 2012 #
I find it hard to get on board the “insult” train when it’s 10 times what he made last season, and falls within the collectively-bargained arbitration process.
Comment by Mike— January 18, 2012 #
Lol @ anti-union. Unless you’re pro-regulation, then the scummy things that the McCourts would have to be seen as acceptable within the free market, so your point that you don’t want Jamie to have another pool is lost on me.
Comment by Bip— January 18, 2012 #
I think most projections I saw had Kersh around a league record $7MM, I actually think Kersh’s people aimed a little too high here.
Did I just agree with the Dodgers front office? Every blind squirrel finds an acorn sooner or later, I suppose.
Comment by @BrocNessMonster— January 17, 2012 #
Is Josh Fields a non-roster invite?
Go Blue!
Comment by dodgerccp— January 17, 2012 #
yep!
Comment by Mike— January 18, 2012 #
Great, here is to him to break the door down to become the athletic 3B the Dodgers need after Uribe gets his chance again, and likely again next yr.
A season plus in NM could be the opportunity he needs to replace Uribe. Go Blue!
Comment by dodgerccp— January 18, 2012 #
The caveat being so long as Mr Ned isn’t around to trade him and fill the roster with more aged roadkill.
Comment by Native Angeleno— January 18, 2012 #
As much as it would pain me if you did, Mike, have you considered blacking out your site in protest of SOPA and PIPA? http://sopastrike.com/
Comment by Bip— January 18, 2012 #
I have not. I support the cause, of course.
Comment by Mike— January 18, 2012 #
Doubt it’s big enough….
Comment by DodgersKings323— January 19, 2012 #
Better Cruz: Victor or Nelson?
Comment by Bob— January 18, 2012 #
Victor, only because he was on my fantasy team.
Comment by john m— January 18, 2012 #