2K24: Pittsburgh Pirates

[Hornsby]

Agree 100% on this. I haven't paid to go to a Pirate game in over 10 years. I don't own or purchase any Pirate merchandise either.

Baseball is a business for the owners so why would they give out more money than they have to? Oh yeah because the players are so loyal to the teams and their fan base. Goes both ways. They all want to ensure maximum earnings.

No, because it's a good business practice to try to have loyal employees that might just think about staying around when the time comes for them to be free of their contract. And to show the fans that they really care about putting the BEST product on the field, not the cheapest.

[Hammer]

I thought Huntingtons response was spot on and can understand why the Pirates didnt give Cole an increase

"Gerrit strikes a note that most people can empathize with," Huntington said. "I'm sure there are many people in this world who don't feel they are adequately compensated for what they do. The challenge we have is there is a collectively bargained system in place and it's been in place for years."

Sure it may play a factor in whether Cole stays or goes when eligible but who knows if the Pirates will want him that far into the future and who is to say Cole would give the Pirates a discount to stay in Pittsburgh. I am not saying the Pirates couldnt have bought some good will here but I dont think its a big deal that they chose not to.

[Erik]

Boras clients ALWAYS play the market when they hit free agency and usually don't like to take deals that buy out FA years. This may have played out differently if his agent were someone else.

[Mithrandir]

No, because it's a good business practice to try to have loyal employees that might just think about staying around when the time comes for them to be free of their contract. And to show the fans that they really care about putting the BEST product on the field, not the cheapest.

So when Cole's contract is up and the Pirates offer a certain price and another team offers way more than the Pirates can offer, Cole is going to stay a Pirate? I think not.

[madducks]

So when Cole's contract is up and the Pirates offer a certain price and another team offers way more than the Pirates can offer, Cole is going to stay a Pirate? I think not.

That's almost what McCutchen did. He didn't test the waters, but he surely could have gotten more elsewhere if he would have. I don't see Cole having the same kind of loyalty.

The bottom line is that even something like a $40,000 raise, which is a drop in the bucket for a team making millions in profits, would have kept their top pitcher happy and sent a positive message to the other players and the fans. The Pirates apparently didn't think it was worth a few thousand dollars to promote their team in a positive way.

GM Neil Huntington said something about the Pirates having a salary structure for players who are in their pre-arbitration years that is strictly followed by the Pirates when determining contract amounts for those players. I would have said to him "Since contract amounts for young players are predetermined to control cost instead of being based on performance does that mean that their promotion date from the minor leagues is also pre-determined to control cost instead of being based on their performance?"

[Hammer]

GM Neil Huntington said something about the Pirates having a salary structure for players who are in their pre-arbitration years that is strictly followed by the Pirates when determining contract amounts for those players. I would have said to him "Since contract amounts for young players are predetermined to control cost instead of being based on performance does that mean that their promotion date from the minor leagues is also pre-determined to control cost instead of being based on their performance?"

We all know the answer is yes whether he says so or not and thats smart business in 95% of the cases. Blame the Players' union for allowing Super 2 dates to effectively keep players off the big club because of an extra year of control. Its a horrendous rule but thats not on management.

[madducks]

We all know the answer is yes whether he says so or not and thats smart business in 95% of the cases. Blame the Players' union for allowing Super 2 dates to effectively keep players off the big club because of an extra year of control. Its a horrendous rule but thats not on management.

It just seems like Pirates GM Neil Huntington came very close to admitting what everyone already knows.

[Hornsby]

So when Cole's contract is up and the Pirates offer a certain price and another team offers way more than the Pirates can offer, Cole is going to stay a Pirate? I think not.

What madducks said X2...for a pittance, the Pirates could have, and should have, set the tone with their best pitcher. Not to mention showing fans that they're realistic about fielding the best team possible, at all possible times.

Hate to disagree with Pete, but the "collectively bargained contract" is nothing more than a floor, the very least that they can pay. They can pay anything that they want over and above that figure, but are just too cheap to do so, and it'll bite them in the ass in the long run.

[Mithrandir]

What madducks said X2...for a pittance, the Pirates could have, and should have, set the tone with their best pitcher. Not to mention showing fans that they're realistic about fielding the best team possible, at all possible times.

Hate to disagree with Pete, but the "collectively bargained contract" is nothing more than a floor, the very least that they can pay. They can pay anything that they want over and above that figure, but are just too cheap to do so, and it'll bite them in the ass in the long run.

While what you say is true, I guess I believe that no matter how nice the Pirates play now, Cole will go to the highest bidder when the times comes. And he would be stupid to do otherwise. How many players take a lesser deal money-wise to stay with a certain team?

Do other teams do what the Pirates did with Cole? Or is it just them being cheap?

[madducks]

While what you say is true, I guess I believe that no matter how nice the Pirates play now, Cole will go to the highest bidder when the times comes. And he would be stupid to do otherwise. How many players take a lesser deal money-wise to stay with a certain team?

Do other teams do what the Pirates did with Cole? Or is it just them being cheap?

It's not about preventing Cole from leaving in the future. That's probably inevitable. It's about creating a good atmosphere and avoiding distractions right now.

I doubt that any team tries harder to be cheap than the Pirates ownership even if the other team's payroll is lower.

[Mithrandir]

It's not about preventing Cole from leaving in the future. That's probably inevitable. It's about creating a good atmosphere and avoiding distractions right now.

I doubt that any team tries harder to be cheap than the Pirates ownership even if the other team's payroll is lower.

I cannot stand Nutting. And if other teams don't really do what the Pirates just did with Cole, I can see the frustration. If every other team does it, then so what.

[Kevin Seitzer]

I cannot stand Nutting. And if other teams don't really do what the Pirates just did with Cole, I can see the frustration. If every other team does it, then so what.

I will admit that I have not taken the time to understand the finer points of the dispute, but the way I understood it is that Cole earned $531k as a base salary in 2015 and received a $10k bonus for an All-Star selection. And the Pirates offered him $538k as a base salary in 2016, with (I would assume) a potential to earn a $10k bonus for an All-Star selection.

This is a pretty standard kind of thing around the industry, in terms of how pre-arb players are paid. Each team has a formula. If Cole is earning $531k as a second-year and $538k as a third-year by their formula, then the Pirates are not in the cheaper half among the 30 clubs.

As to how the discussion/negotiation went, I won't comment on that piece.

[Moonlight J]

Can a team even cut someone's base salary in the pre-arb phase these days?

[joncarlos]

I think (hope?) that Cole just didn't express his frustrations well. The Pirates told him that the 7k raise they gave him was the standard they do for every player. Sure, one of the 20 best pitchers in baseball probably deserves more, but if that really is their hard and fast rule, he should understand it.

But the Pirates have NOT followed that rule consistently. Hell, they gave Cole a 19k raise last year. If he's frustrated at them telling him they can't give him more because of a policy they don't follow, then I can understand why he's mad.

[Kevin Seitzer]

I think (hope?) that Cole just didn't express his frustrations well. The Pirates told him that the 7k raise they gave him was the standard they do for every player. Sure, one of the 20 best pitchers in baseball probably deserves more, but if that really is their hard and fast rule, he should understand it.

But the Pirates have NOT followed that rule consistently. Hell, they gave Cole a 19k raise last year. If he's frustrated at them telling him they can't give him more because of a policy they don't follow, then I can understand why he's mad.

The policies that teams have are not about the maximum size of the raise they can give, per se. They have a standard formula that's based on service time and innings pitched and things like that. It's about holding every pre-arb player's salary close to the minimum while giving modest raises to players with more seniority. It's all well within the CBA, and yes to Jason's question, they can cut a pre-arb player back to the minimum salary if they want.

Whether those are good policies for teams or not is another question.