Are there set statistical guidelines for arbitrators as far determining who are and aren't comparables? If an arbitrator personally sees a star relief pitcher as more comparable to a starter than star hitters are, can't he go ahead and compare to his heart's content?

I think that everything the Giants have done this off-season has to be looked at in light of the facts this article brings up. Sabean still deserves a lot of scrutiny for his look-back obsession, but he's also not going to be able to go get some of the guys he might have if he knew what the budget was.

I'm curious - can a player be traded after an arbitration decision, as normal, or are there restraints?

I think he should go for at least $15m. After all, Dontrelle Willis is making $12M this year.

What was Doc Gooden's contract situation?

The irony, of course, is that the Giants have been willing to spend massive sums of money on bad players...But they can't make an acceptable offer to Lincecum.

This is going to be interesting.

The Giants' horrible free agent debacles have been well documented, but I wonder if the Giants didn't feel some immediate ripple effects from the Barry Zito signing.

Three years ago Giants signed Barry for about twice as much as he likely was worth per season and for perhaps two to four years longer than one would LIKE to extend a pitcher.

Six months later, they apparently didn't try hard enough to lock up what I think they already believed to be their top prospect in at least 20 years. Certainly there is great risk in signing a young, unproven PITCHER to a long-term contract when he first comes up. But as they are now seeing, there can be great risk in NOT doing so, as well.

Might the Giants have been more aggressive in signing Lincecum long-term if they hadn't already taken on the risk of Zito's long-term pact (which wasn't off to a great start)?

A month later the Giants had the opportunity to draft Rick Porcello, considered by some to be the best high school pitching prospect since Josh Beckett, with the #22 overall pick -- which wouldn't even have been the Giants' first pick in the draft, since they took Madison Bumgarner with the 10th overall choice.

Could it be that the risk with Zito stood in the way of what now appears to have been a very fine gamble?

This is theoritical, but the Giants had the opportunity to resist one of the larger pitching contract mistakes in history, to lock up one of the best pitching prospects in history, and then to draft one of the best high school pitching prospects in history -- all in a little over half a year.

Don't know if the decisions were indeed related, but the Giants made the wrong choice at each juncture. And those poor decisions might wind up costing then far more than the $126 million they are paying Zito.

I don't know that a precedent has been set for resisting the Zito signing (except that the 29 other teams did so), but a year after the Giants DIDN'T lock Lincecum up long-term, the Rays did indeed lock up Evan Longoria when Evan was brought up. Evan was drafted seven picks ahead of Lincecum. And a year after the Giants decided NOT to pony up a big draft bonus for Rick Porcello, they did do so with Buster Posey.

So it appears the Giants are capable of learning -- they're merely a year or so late in doing so.

By the way, congratulations to Will for being the first media person I saw to predict the type of future for Tim Lincecum that he has thus far fulfilled. I'm pretty sure that Will wouldn't have signed Zito, that he would have had the guts to lock Lincecum up long term and that he would have had the guts to pay a high bonus for Porcello.

With that in mind, wouldn't the Giants have a chance to save tens of millions by making Will a consultant? :)

Silly to argue that 29 other teams 'resisted the Zito signing'. The Giants were in a bidding war for the free agent Zito with however many other teams, and they wound up with the best bid. Nothing more to it than that. It's unlikely they were that much higher than whatever the 2nd-highest bid was.

I wonder how obvious a move it is that Lincecum's agent isn't looking for a mutli-year deal during a down-market period, realizing that the best way to maximize young Timmy's revenue is to earn bigger and bigger arbitration awards as the market recovers, and then be positioned for the fatness of free agency.

(Moment of confusion: Lincecum isn't eligible for free agency until *after* 2013? I'm reading that after six years of service, one can declare....? And he started 24 games in 2007?)

Of course, he'll be in his 30-year-old season in 2014 (or 29 in 2013, see above confusion), the downside of starting a brilliant career out of a four-year college. So he better be hoping for a booming market, thin for pitching, and continued dominance with few signs of fading, or, a team as gullible as the Giants to hand him a seven year deal (e.g. the above-mentioned Zito-Syndrome).

who wins really depends on who submits what. but, what is the range that you would consider "unsurprising". $7-12.5M?

I wasn't arguing that the other 29 teams (aside from the Giants) resisted signing Barry Zito. I was stating a fact.

It has been reported that the Giants' offer to Barry Zito was the only one in nine figures. Don't know if that is factual.

Tim Lincecum isn't eligible for free agency prior to the end of the 2013 season because until then he won't have completed six FULL seasons.

You could be right about Tim's agent not wanting to negotiate a long-term contract in a down market, although at the end of the season it was stated that Tim's agent was open to such a suggestion. That seemed to change in late November, perhaps because Tim's winning his second Cy Young Award put him it even better position.

This whole situation has become amazing. Based on the "special situations" clause, it is conceivable Tim could ask for as much as $25 million. That would be two million more than C.C. Sabathia is making annually, but there is usually a discount for a longer contract.

I don't expect Tim to come in anywhere near that high, but then again, I don't expect the Giants to come in lower than $10 million. And unless Tim's number is through the roof, I expect some sort of a compromise to be reached.

Brian Sabean hates to go to arbitration, and he has already stated that there is virtually nothing bad he can bring up about Tim to argue the smount down.

My own over/under is $13 million, but the whole thing is a crap shoot (as Sabean loves to say about the playoffs). The only way I can see Tim making less than $10 million would be if he comes in with an over-the-top number and the Giants come in with $8 or $9 million. Even then I think Sabean would make every effort to avoid arbitration.

The Giants are indeed in a tricky spot. With the signing of Aubrey Huff, they have now committed $69 million of a previously stated $88-$90 million budget. It would appear that budget has risen to the $95-$100 million level.

Not only do the Giants have Lincecum's arbitration salary to worry about, but they are in the same position with Brian Wilson, Jonathan Sanchez and Brandon Medders.

If Lincecum and the other trio came in at $13, $5, $2 and $1 million, that would make the Giants' commitment $90 million. And with 12 roster spots remaining, the Giants would need to add another $5 million to their payroll even at the minimum for those players.

Meanwhile, Sabean is saying the Giants still have budget flexiblity to sign a reliever and a catcher, although apparently not a fifth starter. Sounds to me as if the Giants need to get prepared to pay as much as $100 million overall.

They might mitigate that circumstance by signing some of the arbitration-eligibles to long-term, back-loaded contracts. But on a contract-average basis, that would make their 2010 salary cost even higher.

It would be fun to know how much the Giants have budgeted for 2010 with regard to the four arbs. If the Lincecum situation spins out of control, it might not be enough.

Is there an article on the formula they use to determine the top 17% of players?

I think the real reason why Lincecum and his agent are no longer interested in a long term deal is that the players union has been on them to get a massive arbitration award, pushing up the market for everyone else.

I think the players' union may indeed be putting on the pressure, but I think players should ultimately be able to do what they want to do.

I don't expect this to happen, but an example in another sport would be Sidney Crosby, considered by many to the the 2nd best player in hockey. He took less than market value in order to help the Pittsburgh Penguins be able to build a Stanley Cup winner -- which they did in 2009.

Joe Thornton of the Sharks is another player who took below market value to stay with his teams in hopes of building a top team. I suspect there are players in other sports who have made similar sacrifices.

IMO the player himself is ultimately responsible for the contract he accepts. No doubt the union can have impact, and the agent certainly does. But ultimately the decision is made by the player. He is the one who signs the pact.

One possible resulting impact: Assuming teams have a budgeted amount to spend, if Lincecum drives arbitration awards higher, presumably the contracts of free agents will shrink.

I suspect the players' union would like to use a high arbitration award to drive the salary market up, but at some point there is only so much money available from the 30 teams.

What is crazy to me is that the owners ultimately determine how much they will pay the players. They aren't allowed to collude, but if I were MLB, I would gather the owners and point out that while teams aren't allowed to collude, each owner does have the ability to control the salaries he pays.

I'm sure they must have had discussions to that effect already, but it would seeem that the owners just can't manage to control their greed.

Realistically, where else are players going to play? They can make decent money in Japan, but how many players want to make the sacrifice of playing in a different country which speaks a different language?

MLB has a monopoly which is sanctioned by the legal system based on a general agreement with the players' association that allows a team to control a drafted player for as long as 12 years.

Personally, I'm all for abolishing the draft and letting players negotiate whatever contract the market will bear. But ultimately the owners themselves, individually -- not collectively -- can determine player salaries.

And to an extent, the fans collectively can determine ticket prices. If MLB builds it and the fans don't come, prices will go down.

I guess when all is said and done, it comes down to how the battle of various forms of greed turns out.

Here's a random question. With all the secrecy surrounding the arbitration offers, has there ever been a case where the team submitted a higher amount than the player?

Great article, Jeff! Thank you!

According to Cot's, the fifth-highest paid pitcher in the league this year is, coincidentally, Barry Zito, earning $18,000,000. It seems like a no-brainer for Rick Thurman to name that salary and still come off as a conservative number to the arbitration panel. Lincecum has arguably/demonstrably performed as "the top" pitcher, at least in his league. And, with more certainty, he's worth as much as his teammate.

From your Cot's Contracts website:
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2000/05/most-lucrative-contracts.html

You can't name Barry Zito's as the end all be all. For a Zito there is a Cliff Lee.

Hey, I know what Sabean can throw at Timmeh! Base stealers were successful 20 out of 25 times against him in 2009.

In answer to a couple of points, after signing Aubrey Huff, I don't think the Giants are interested in re-signing Ryan Garko. It didn't appear they were interested in doing so even before they signed Huff.

As for what the Giants have offered or not offered Tim Lincecum, I don't think we know, do we?

It will be intriguing to see what number the Giants' camp comes up with. I would think the Giants would come in at $10 million. I can't see Tim coming in at less than the $12-$15 million range. And he could conceivably come in as high as $25 million.

My guess would be $10 million (Giants) and $16.5 million (Lincecum). But I think I can predict the Giants' offer a lot easier than Tim's.

And unless Tim comes in shooting for the moon, I don't expect it to go to a hearing.

Lincecum's 20 steals against in 25 attempts isn't very good at all -- but it actually represents an improvement over his first two seasons.

Tim has been working on varying his deliveries to the plate, throwing more to first base and trying to vary his looks at a runner on second. He has improved, but he still has a long way to go in this area.

This is one of the few areas in which Tim has a weakness.

Just for fun, in Lincecum's five starts at AAA Fresno, he yielded only one hit with runners on base and NONE with RISP. The only run he allowed scored on a sacrifice fly.

Lincecum had right at twice as many strikeouts as runners allowed. He made only something like 13 starts in the minors, but I believe he had the highest minor league strikeout rate in at least a decade.