Will Cubs Offer Wood & Howry Arbitration?

MLB clubs have until Monday (December 1st) to decide whether to offer salary arbitration to their Type "A" and Type"B" free-agents. 

If a club offers salary arbitration to a Type "A or Type "B" free-agent on 12/1, the player has until 12/7 to decide whether to accept the offer.

If the player accepts the offer of salary arbitration, the player is immediately and automatically returned to his club's 40-man roster and is considered a "signed player" for the following season, and the player and the club proceed onward to the arbtration process, just as would be the case for any player eligible for salary arbitration (the only differences being that a free-agent who is offered arbitration cannot be "non-tendered" on 12/12, and the club can offer a free-agent who accept salary arbitration any salary as long as it is at least the MLB minimum salary--that is, the club does NOT have to offer at least 80% of the player's previous year's salary).   

If the Type "A or Type"B " free-agent is offered salary arbitration on 12/1 and declines the offer, the player's old club can continue to negotiate with the player, and the club would receive two (if the player is a Type "A" FA) or one (if the player is a Type "B" FA) compensation draft pick(s) in next June's Rule 4 Draft (AKA "1st-Year Player Draft") if the player eventually signs with a new club.

If a Type "A" or Type"B" free-agent is not offered salary arbitration on December 1st (and if the FA has not signed with a new club prior to 12/1), the player's old club would receive no compensation draft picks in the 2009 Rule 4 Draft (although the club can continue to negotiate with the FA). 

The Cubs have two Type "A" free-agents who have not yet signed a contract for 2009: RHP Bob Howry and RHP Kerry Wood. (Ryan Dempster was also a Type "A" FA, but he re-signed with the Cubs earlier this month). In order to receive compensation draft picks in next June's Rule 4 Draft if Howry and/or Wood sign with a new club, the Cubs will have to offer the players salary arbitration on Monday. 

The problem with offering salary arbitration to a Type "A" or Type "B" FA is that the player might actually accept the offer, and it's possible that the club might not really want the player back, or at least would not want to take the risk that the player might win his case in arbitration and end up with a sizable 2009 salary that the club either doesn't want to pay or can't afford to pay. 

In the case of the Cubs, Kerry Wood apparently told GM Jim Hendry that he would prefer to remain with the Cubs, and that he would even be willing to accept a one-year deal for 2009, but Hendry supposedly told Woody that he should pursue a multi-year deal on the open market. Hendry then proceeded to acquire closer Kevin Gregg from the Florida Marlins, apparently seeing Gregg as a cheaper (but only slightly cheaper) version of Wood, although Gregg presumably could just as easily replace Howry as a "set-up man" if the Cubs were to bring Wood back.

Since the difference between what Wood would likely get in arbitration (probably about $9M) versus what Gregg will probably get (likely about $5-6M) is only about $3-4M, Hendry (apparently) must believe that the difference between the two salaries is critical as far as the Cubs being able to sign or acquire an established left-handed hitting middle-of-the-order type RF. So will Hendry risk offering Wood arbitration just to be sure of getting a couple of draft picks in next June's draft (players who will probably cost the Cubs upwards of $2M in signing bonuses), or will Hendry just let Wood sign elsewhere and get nothing back in return when he does? 

Or if he does offer arbitration to Wood, and if Wood accepts, will Hendry then be forced to non-tender or trade Michael Wuertz, Chad Gaudin, Neal Cotts, Ronny Cedeno, and Reed Johnson (all are arbitration-eligible) in order to find additional money (probably about $7.5M aggregate if all five are non-tendered) to pay Wood? Not too likely, but I guess it's possible. .

Bob Howry is even more-problematic, because if the Cubs offer Howry salary arbitration and he accepts, the Cubs could be stuck with a pitcher they don't want in 2009 (as an Article XX free-agent signed after the conclusion of the Free-Agency Filing Period, Howry would have automatic "no trade" rights through 6-15-2009), at least not at the salary Howry will likely get through arbitration (probably about $3.5M). So Iit's VERY unlikely that Hendry will offer Howry arbitration, even if it means not getting draft picks back as compensation if he signs elsewhere. There's just too much risk that Howry would accept the offer.

There is one way to get rid of a Type "A" or Type "B: free-agent who acceps salary arbitration, however. The club can proceed through the arbitration process and take their chances that the club wins its case and can get the player at a "reasonable" salary. But that can't be be certain, so if a player wins in arbitration and receives a salary for the following season that the club just doesn't want to pay, the club can release the player prior to Opening Day and pay the player only a percentage of his salary.

If the player is released at least 16 days prior to Opening Day, the club is responsible for only 1/6 of the player's salary, and then the player is free to sign with any club for any amount. If the player is released prior to Opening Day but not 16 days or more prior to the start of the regular season, the club is responsible for 1/4 of the player's salary, and the player is free to sign with any club for any amount.

However, the only way a club can safely release a player under these circumstances (that is, without risking the loss of a grievance, where the club ends up having to pay the player his entire season's salary) is if the player has a bad Spring Training and (after a "fair trial") is clearly outperformed (statistically) by another player (or several other players, in the case of a pitcher) and his slot on the 25-man Opening Day roster is taken by the player or players who outperformed him.

So if the Cubs do offer Howry salary arbitration on Monday and he accepts, the Cubs would have to hope that Howry has a clearly statistically-horrible Spring Training (because arbitrators ONLY look at statistics) where he is clearly outpitched by at least seven other relief pitchers, and where all seven make the Cubs Opening Day roster.  

The most-recent example of a free-agent being offered salary arbitration by his old club and then accepting, and then getting released prior to Opening Day, was ex-Cubs 2B Todd Walker.

Walker was a Type "A" FA post-2006, and Padres GM Kevin Towers offered Walk salary arbitration, just so the Padres could get two 2007 Rule Draft picks after Walker signed elsewhere (or at least so it would appear). But then Walker accepted the arbitration offer, won his arbitration case (being awarded a $3.95M salary for 2007 after the Padres offered $2.75M).

However, the Padres released Walker prior to Opening Day, such that they had to pay him $971K to go away. So ihe gamble cost them about $1M, and they didn't get any draft picks, either. 

But it didn't end there. Walker filed a grievance, charging that the Padres released him just to save $3M. If Walker had won the grievance, he would have received his entire $3.95M salary AND he would have been a totally unrestricted free-agent, too. But the Padres were able to show that Walker was (statistically) outplayed in Spring Training by another second-baseman (Marcus Giles) and by another back-up INF-LHPH (Geoff Blum), and so Walker lost his grievance and the Padres did not have to pay him his entire 2007 salary. The only problem is, MLB clubs never can be sure what an arbitration panel is going to do, And then what if Walker had had a really outstanding 2007 Spring Training? Kevin Towers just lucked-out.  

So if a GM offers salary arbitration to a Type "A or Type "B" free-agent on 12/1 just to get a compensation draft pick or two, he better know that he won't t get any draft picks if the player accepts the salary arbitration offer, and it could cost the club millions of dollars in additional unplanned payroll.  .

Of course, Wood saying he would accept a one-year deal to return to the Cubs in 2009 could just be a ploy concocted by Wood and his agent. If he had said "I absolutely, positively have to get a three year deal or I'm not coming back," Hendry could have probably offered salary arbitration to Wood and not thought twice about doing so. But by planting the seed that he might accept a one-year deal (which actually sounded plausible, because he's done it before), Wood has put Hendry in a tough spot as far offering salary arbitration, especially if Hendry has some financial restrictions on his 2009 payroll that make bringing Wood back at $9-10M somewhat difficult. .  

My guess is that Jim Hendry will not take any chances and will not offer salary arbitration to either Kerry Wood or Bob Howry on Monday, and so the Cubs will not receive any compensation draft picks in next June's Rule 4 Draft if (as expected) Wood and Howry sign elsewhere.  

That is... unless some secret "agreement" has been worked out between Hendry and Wood and/or Howry, where one or both will be offered arbitration, but have agreed in advance (for some inexplicable reason) to decline the offer (which would be stupid for the player, because doing so would diminish the player's value on the open market since any club that signs the player would know that it would have give up a 1st or 2nd round draft pick).

Comments

Nice breakdown (as usual), Phil.

I understand your point about the possible salary restrictions per Wood, but it'd be a shame to not even offer him arbitration. Wood's the embodiment of the player I want the Cubs to have, ESPECIALLY on a one-year gig.

In poker parlance, the Cubs have a lot of face cards in the bullpen but bringing back Woody would give them a straight.

Howry Haiku:
Can you count all the
balls flying over ivy?
Do you have whiplash?

Offer it to them both. Some team will sign multiple type A's and not be too worried about their draft picks.

If a player accepts arbitration, can they be traded?

I'm hoping they offer arbitration to both, personally.

Even if Wood accepts (which I'd be thrilled about) it shouldn't really hurt the cubs. I'd love to have him and Marmol back again in the 8-9, which'd continue to keep Marmol's arbitration value down. I wonder if, perhaps, the Cubs want Marmol to close, which isn't really possible if Wood is still around. With Wood, we have three closers, which, I'd imagine would be some valuable trade commodities.

I'll bet Howry bounces back next year. I wouldn't mind taking a risk on arbitration with him either...in hopes that he rejects. I wouldn't be devastated if he were given another shot at the 7th. If he sucks in ST, then they can do that contract% thing. Probably stupid, but yeah.

They get the same 5/10 rights as all MLB'rs so Wood would have a defacto NTC and Howry would not.

What about Gregg? I wouldn't think of trading Wood.

Gregg doesn't have a contract, he'll probably settle on a one-year deal and be a FA after 2009. Even if Hendry gives him a contract it won't have a NTC in it. His coming to the Cubs is similar to Lee's after 2003.

I thought he was arb-eligible.

He is, but Hendry doesn't go to arbitration with players.

"With Wood, we have three closers, which, I'd imagine would be some valuable trade commodities."

I recall a team managed by Sweet Lou that had three closers...they did okay...

I'm guessing Marmol will be traded. His slingshot delivery is scary for injuries, but right now holds a ton of promise as trade bait (Lefty bat). Woody is signed, Howry goodbye.

marmol's set to close as of now...even with gregg on board.

then again 2 years ago dumpster was set to start, but that didn't happen.

Just heard Hendry on WMVP this AM with Bruce Levine.

Jimbo came on the show - no slam dunk with Marmol as closer. He is not "set to close", but it is Lou's decision. They (Marmol/Gregg) may share duties. One may close more in the beginning of the year than the other.

- It did not appear that Hendry was giving any cards away re signing Woody. Reiterated that he wanted to give Wood a shot at a "nice 2 or 3-year deal".

- Thinks the world of K. Towers. They are still discussing things.

- The Cubs braintrust has had "every possible combination of LH hitting FA's and and SH's on a big board for the last two months..." they are going to do something it appears.

_ B. Levine's money is on them "rolling the dice" (exact quote) on Milton Bradley. To put Ibanez in the OF with Soriano and Johnson/Pie/Dome, would just make it a shittier OF defensively. Just doesn't think they'll do it.

- Cubs are truly the "leading" trading partner in the Peavy sweepstakes. JH is awaiting the owner to be named in order to get a go-ahead (or decline, if its the Canning group) on taking on $60MM contract of the former cy Young winner.

- Levine's "two cents" is that IF the Brew can't sign Sheets or CC, or another big time pitcher, he thinks that the Reds - with a healthy Harang, could be the Cubs top competition in 2009. They have perhaps the best LH hitting "in baseball."

- He also believes he has heard that ticket prices may go UP for Terrace and Club Boxes (hear THAT Cubster), but the rest of the park will remain the same.

From the Windy City, I'm "The E-Man"

Thanks dude. I'm desperate for anything.

"he thinks that the Reds - with a healthy Harang, could be the Cubs top competition in 2009. They have perhaps the best LH hitting "in baseball."

votto and bruce?

Submitted by The Joe on Fri, 11/28/2008 - 1:37pm.

If a player accepts arbitration, can they be traded?

==========================

T JOE: If an Article XX free-agent is offered salary arbitration and accepts, he has automatic "no trade" rights through June 15th because he would be signed after the end of the Free-Agency Filing Period.

So Howry would have "no trade" rights through 6-15-2009, and as Real Neal mentioned, Kerry Wood is a 10/5 player (at least ten years of MLB service time, and with at least the last five years with the same club), so he would have automatic "no trade" rights past 6/15 if the Cubs offer him salary arbitration and he accepts.

An Article XX FA can waive his "no trade" rights prior to 6/15, but if he does, he can only be traded for cash or player contracts with a max aggregate value of $50,000. 

Thanks. Mainly, I was wondering if Gregg (who I think is arb-eligible) can be traded afterwards...and Howry, for that matter.

Submitted by The Joe on Sat, 11/29/2008 - 1:44pm.

I thought he was arb-eligible

=============================

T JOE: Kevin Gregg is arbitration-eligible, and if he signs a one-year deal for 2009 (which is likely), he can be a free-agent after next season.

Submitted by The Joe on Sat, 11/29/2008 - 3:25pm.

Thanks. Mainly, I was wondering if Gregg (who I think is arb-eligible) can be traded afterwards...and Howry, for that matter

==========================

T JOE: Players who are eligible for arbitration can be traded, so Kevin Gregg can be traded.

If he is offered salary arbitration and accepts, Bob Howry (as an Article XX FA who is signed after the conclusion of the Free-Agency Filing Period) would get automatic "no trade" rights through 6-15-2009. 

And a club cannot offer salary arbitration to a free-agent and then release the player prior to Spring Training. The player must receive a so-called "fair trial" in Spring Training before he can be released (as happened with Todd Walker in 2007).

Gotcha. Thanks, Phil.

Recent comments

Subscribe to Recent comments
The first 600 characters of the last 16 comments, click "View" to see rest of comment.
  • crunch - you do know that, taking defense out of the equation, Trout has led the AL in wRC+ each of those years, right?

    And, if you want to complain about position adjustment (which would be serious #crunchsplaining), he's been in the top 3 in the AL in WC (not park/league/position adjusted). And the only players ahead of him (if there were any players ahead of him) in any of those years have been DHs or 1B that play lousy defense.

    But sure - Trout sucks (or at least isn't as good as WAR says). Because it factors in defense and position.

    big_lowitzki 41 min 59 sec ago view
  • early tim tebow stuff rolling in...

    ran a 6.7 60yd (above average)...shagging flies in RF and showed off a rather impressive arm a few times, but average-at best on most of his throws...hit a few over the fence (both fields), fouled or weak contact a few...he's got a touch of power

    it'll be interesting to see who bites on this project, if anyone. he probably projected himself out of RF and into LF/1st because of his arm, but unless he can make that power work on a steady basis it'll be hard for him to play himself up anyone's system.

    crunch 1 hour 27 min ago view
  • LHP Clayton Richard (released by the Cubs earlier this month) is pitching very well as a starting pitcher for the San Diego Padres and could be a good candidate to get traded to a contender looking for a veteran SP before tomorrow night's post-season roster eligibility deadline.

    Because they released him, the Cubs are paying most of Richard's 2016 salary (the Cubs are on the hooks for $2M, minus the pro-rated portion of the MLB minimum salary that is paid by the Padres).

    Arizona Phil 3 hours 14 min ago view
  • it is honestly awesome (for real) that anyone would even have a strong opinion on AZL playoffs. i guess if you invest enough time watching it, you want to see a fair/just playoff structure.

    plus, the kids deserve it.

    crunch 3 hours 14 min ago view
  • The AZL team with the best record over the course of the full 2016 AZL season and the only AZL team to play .600 ball (the AZL Dodgers) did not qualify for the AZL playoffs, and the AZL East Division team with the best record over the course of the full season (the AZL Athletics) did not qualify for the AZL playoffs, either. 

    That's because of the ridiculous "split season" schedule most of the minor leagues now play, a stupid system that rewards mediocrity at the expense of the worthy. 

    Arizona Phil 3 hours 21 min ago view
  • Despite good movement on his fastball, I think location kept him from getting Ks. Left some pitches up and away that got hammered up and away. Then of course Travis Wood gave up the 2-run double in the 7th, but both runs counted against Arrieta.

    Charlie 3 hours 58 min ago view
  • "i'm gonna make you my main squeeze one day, bro. save the date."

    This level of discourse is #charming.

    #baseballtalk

    Tito 3 hours 58 min ago view
  • I would be having this discussion with anyone who (a) blathered on ad nauseum about the topic. (See, "Olt, Mike, not given an opportunity") or (b) responded directly to what I posted (which you did).

    Have a nice day.

    #baseballtalk

    Tito 4 hours 1 min ago view
  • what would you do without me? aside from having your posting content here cut by 75%+?

    i'm gonna make you my main squeeze one day, bro. save the date.

    crunch 4 hours 4 min ago view
  • In this instance, yes, I care more about the result of this big thing that isn't really a big thing.

    #crunchsplaining

    #willlistentojeffsullivanmorethanyou

    #blessyourheart

    #hitler

    #tcrmartyr

    #billyhamiltonwar

    #baseballtalk

    Tito 4 hours 5 min ago view
  • Two things:

    Fangraphs WAR #s include baserunning and Hamilton is elite at that. He leads in SBs with the 54 and and has an 87% rate which is really good. I'm sure once he gets on base he's able to take the extra base quite often too. Both those things will up his overall WAR value.

    The differences between BR and FG WAR is pretty well documented online and thus If there are discrepancies it's fairly easy to figure out why. It's fairly well accepted that BR WAR is fine as a snapshot but FG is better at predicting future value.

    johann 4 hours 9 min ago view
  • i have no doubt at all you quit reading at that point. you're very enamored with outcomes without caring what it takes to get there.

    the fact it's exploitable, especially without someone to cover the running game for him, as well it's evolution in how people are testing possible exploits is interesting to some people...to me...i'm some people...hurrah.

    some people want to check the boxscore to see who won, some want to know how it went down.

    crunch 4 hours 21 min ago view
  • I read it as him saying it's not really that much of a concern and that the one time it really cost Lester, vs. K.C., was an anomaly.

    #baseballtalk

    Tito 4 hours 27 min ago view
  • if jeff says it, it's cool...when i say it, it's straight from the mouth of hitler.

    aside from the lack of jeff touching on the insane leads runners take and lester's inability to throw if he's fielding, this is a lot of what i've said about the issue.

    exploitable, needs his own personal catcher to control his shortcomings, relies on his ability to get outs along with his personal catcher keeping runners in check before things become further exploited...

    crunch 4 hours 29 min ago view
  • That would be Rice Krispy Treat

    The E-Man 5 hours 47 min ago view
  • "Crunch's cousin"

    Butterfinger or Baby Ruth?

    VirginiaPhil 6 hours 1 min ago view