Mike, why does it have to be either/or? I'm certain the 86 rated guy wasn't getting released had I not traded for him.

Not sure if your tanking comment was directed at me or tisi. But I'm as anti-tanking as anyone on this site.

Mike, why does it have to be either/or? I'm certain the 86 rated guy wasn't getting released had I not traded for him.

Not sure if your tanking comment was directed at me or tisi. But I'm as anti-tanking as anyone on this site.

I'm not sure why I'm continuing with this because I don't think all that many arb-el All-Stars are getting dealt but I will.

First let's examine the player.
Arb-el:  4-6 year player
All-Star:  Very good player
So, we have a very good player on the good side of 30.  Unless, of course, you're going to argue that this All-Star caliber player was kept in the minor until he was 25-26.

Now let's look at the team will to give up a very good, relatively young player.
1.  The team has a younger/cheaper player capable of replacing him.   Since the team isn't willing to use him, or the younger/cheaper player, at another position, I would think that team is pretty good.  After all, they're trading an All-Star.  They can't have All-Stars everywhere but, if they do, they're good.  Why would I want to help them get younger/cheaper/both?
2.  The team is 'rebuilding".    Why wouldn't the "rebuilding" team want an All-Star on the good side of 30 for 2-3 seasons in order to be respectable?  Because they don't care about being respectable.   Why would I want to help a tanker?

 

The other thing to consider here is that the overall rating determines contract demands, meaning that a "fringe all-star" (if there is such a thing) can be demanding way more than I might be willing to pay.  He also may hold more value to another team, based on that team's specific needs than mine.  I can think of several different directions you may want to go good arb-level players.

Mike are you saying you'll never trade a prospect for an all-star player? It seems the arbitration aspect is secondary in your argument.

I'm saying if you're looking to move an arb-el player that you might let him go.   I'll take that chance rather than help you replenish your system.

It may cost me a few million, I may not get him but there's one thing I know won't happen.  You won't get rid of an older, more expensive player and get a young player from me.    As I said, part of me winning is you losing.   If the player is under contract, you have him and you will use him.  If he's not and you're shopping him, you're looking at other options.   

I think what Mike's getting at is that there are very, very, very few scenarios that are entirely on the up-and-up where one would want to actively rid themselves of a all-star.

And then, in addition to that, there are very, very, very few scenarios where he would be willing to trade equal, but younger/cheaper, talent to someone who is shopping said all-star.

I tend to agree.

Plus, the whole idea that giving a team willing to move an all-star talent more salary flexibility isn't helping your own cause. Teams don't win/lose in a vacuum.

Finally.

Yes, if you're willing to move an arb-el All-Star, I think there's an underlying, probably unsavory, reason for it.    I want to know that reason and, assuming I'm right, I'm not helping you get younger/cheaper.  

Wow, this is a great debate all of a sudden. Thanks for all these responses.

My team's situation is that we have a couple of arb-elgible guys that are not all-stars and not needed in the majors anymore. Plus, we wanted to cut some salary where possible. I just wanted to make sure if they're released, I'm not on the hook for any future dollar figure.

Also, I agree with MikeT23...I'll trade any of my all-star vets to a powerhouse team, but never a top-flight projected prospect.  I would want to push the powerhouses to the salary cap brink, so the international prospect pool is more wide open for the developing teams.

I agree with that as well, I remember the Mets in HJ -- Mike knows this as well. Winning 110 games season after season, I hated when teams traded young studs to him. He was already the best team and he always had young talent in his ml system. Argg.