01/22/2007 12:52 PM ET Mailbag: Salary arbitration 101 Astros beat reporter Alyson Footer answers fans' questions By Alyson Footer / MLB.com From http://tinyurl.com/338uoc =============== The baseball world lost a good friend on Saturday, when Vern Ruhle passed away after a nearly year-long battle with cancer. He impacted hundreds during his three decades as a player and coach, and his contributions to the Astros in both capacities have never been forgotten. I had the privilege of spending ample time with Ruhle from 1997-2000 when he was the Astros pitching coach, and I appreciated his candor, wit and willingness to share his vast pitching knowledge with anyone who asked. He was loved in Houston, and he'll be greatly missed. 在上星期六，棒球界失去了一名重要的夥伴， Vern Ruhle与 癌症病魔搏斗多年後，与世长辞。在他30年的球员与教练生 涯中，他影响无数人们，他过去在太空人队的贡献会被大家 缅怀。 我有幸在 1997-2000年与当时担任太空人投手教练的 Ruhle 共事一段期间，我很欣赏他向请教的後进分享自己渊广的投 球学问时，表现出来的坦率、风趣、与乐意。他被休士顿的 大家所热爱，会被永远缅念。 While I do understand the basic principles of salary arbitration, I do wonder how it's possible that someone such as Brad Lidge, who had such a bad year in 2006, can still get a raise? What happened to earning what you're worth? -- Joshua C., Brimfield, Ill. 问︰我虽然知道薪资仲裁的基本原则，但是我想知道像 Lidge 这样在2006年投得七零八落的球员也有可能加薪的可能？赚多 少不是要符合身价吗？ Judging from the e-mails I've received after Lidge's contract was announced, I sense there is some confusion regarding what arbitration is and how the process works. So, in the simplest terms possible, let's review the basics. 答︰在 Lidge合约对外公布後，根据我所收到的 e-mails判断， 我觉得对於何谓仲裁以及个中运作过程，大家有些许困惑。因此 ，我尽可能用简单的说法解释，接下来我们一起复习基本原则。 For the first three years of a player's Major League career, the club essentially dictates his salary. The player has little-to-no leverage, and if he chooses not to sign a contract, the club would just renew it and pay him what it wanted to anyway. The player has no choice but to accept whatever dollars the club gives him. 球员在大联盟的前三年，所属球团掌有他薪水的生杀大权。球员只有 微乎其微的影响力，如果球员选择不签约，球团可以改变合约并照 自己所开价码支付薪水。对此球员别无选择，除非答应球团的开价。 Years four through six are much more fruitful. These players, now arbitration-eligible, are paid based somewhat on past performances, but also on how they compare to other players with similar numbers and Major League service time. 然而从第四~第六年，就是成果大丰收的时刻。这些球员就会有薪资 仲裁资格，赚取的薪水不只以过去表现为导向，也以他们跟其他相似 成绩的球员与大联盟资历作比较。 They can also be compared to other players going as far back as three or four years, as well to their contemporaries. 他们也可以被拿来跟过去三四年同期的球员一同比较。 So, let's use Lidge as the example. Based on what he has done in his career, back to 2003, he's considered to be in the upper echelon of big-league closers. You can compare him to current elite closers, like the Angels' Frankie Rodriguez, who, like Lidge, is in his second year of arbitration. 所以我们现在拿 Lidge当例子谈。以他生涯表现为基础，回到 2003年，他被 认为是大联盟的顶级救援投手。你可以拿他跟现今杰出的王牌救援，像是天 使队的 Rodriguez来做比较，他跟 Lidge挺像的，都是仲裁的第二年。 Rodriguez recently signed a one-year deal worth $7 million. In 2006, he made slightly less than Lidge -- $3.7 million compared to Lidge's $3.9, which is pretty much in line with how they performed in '05. Last season, Rodriguez saved 47 games and had a 1.73 ERA. Lidge didn't have such a great year, and he's going to make less than Rodriguez -- $5.35 million. Had Lidge had a year like he did in '04 or '05, he would probably be making more than Rodriguez. But Rodriguez surpassed him in performance, and, as a result, his salary is higher by more than $1.5 million. Rodriguez最近签下一年＄7M的合约。在2006年它的薪资稍微少於 Lidge-- ＄3.7M比上 Lidge的＄3.9M，跟他们在05年的表现大有关联。去年 Rodriguez 获得47次救援成功，自责分率 1.73。而 Lidge表现没他优异，所以他所获 ＄5.35M的薪水当然比 Rodriguez少。 要是 Lidge表现像他04或05年一样，他的薪资可能会比 Rodriguez高。但是 因为 Rodriguez表现胜过他，所以他薪水当然高了 Lidge＄1.5M以上。 Lidge and Rodriguez are also compared to the Mariano Riveras and Eric Gagnes of the world. What were they making heading into their fifth season in the Majors? Taking into consideration the escalation of time, how would that translate in present economic terms? Lidge跟 Rodriguez也会被拿来跟当今世上无数个 Mariano Riveras与 Eric Gagnes作比较。他们进入大联盟第五年球季後，会获取取多少薪 资呢？考虑到薪资逐年升高，这该如何转换成合乎经济效应的价格呢？ So, in that respect, Lidge's raise of $1.375 million isn't as drastic as it would have been had he had a better year. If he had, then that's where it gets a little murky. Is he worth a half-million more than the next guy? More than that? Less than that? These are the issues that keep general managers and agents at odds for much of the offseason, and that's why it seems to take so long to get some of these guys signed. 因此 Lidge获加薪＄1.375M的幅度并非如同表现良好年份後，变化的大。 假使他当初投的好，那麽这其中就让人模糊了。他身价真的比表现次一 级的球员多＄0.5M吗？或是更多？或是更少？在球季结束後，在总管 与经纪人之间总是有薪资差额的问题，这也是为何会花这麽多时间与球 员签约。 I don't think the Astros will have to go to an arbitration hearing with any of the three remaining unsigned players: Morgan Ensberg, Adam Everett and Jason Lane. But Ensberg's case is interesting. Should he be paid for his All-Star performance in '05 or his .235 average in '06? Again, players from the past will be used to compare and contrast. Is there a player who had a similar dropoff in performance? Did he make a million more the next year? Half-million? 我想太空人不会跟剩下还未搞定合约的几名球员︰ Ensberg、Everett、 与Lane上仲裁听证会。不过 Ensberg的合约相当耐人寻味。应该支付他 05年明星级身手的薪水，还是看 06年 .235打击率的成绩？再者，过去 的球员常会被拿来比较与对照。有没有类似球员前一年陷入低潮的例 子？而隔年反而薪水多了＄1M以上？或是说多了＄0.5M？ And surely, there were players in the past who have had poor years but were generously compensated the following season. I guarantee that Lane's agent has a list of anyone who has fallen into that category, although I doubt it'll be enough to convince the Astros to pay him $1.375 million. 当然，也有球员过去表现不佳，但在下一年度反而获球团慷慨加薪的例子。 我保证 Lane的经纪人手中有一长串名单，属於这一类型，虽然我认为太空人 不会被说服付给他＄1.375M。 In Everett's case, arbitration is much more offensively based, so he may not have much leverage. He's going to be compared to shortstops who hit well and will therefore make significantly less than any of the elite shortstops before him i.e., Cal Ripken Jr., Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez. 在 Everett的案例中，仲裁基本上是以他的打击表现为基础，所以他不会有太 多影响力。因为他要跟那些打击优异的游击手做比较，在他之上有许多 打击比他强太多了的顶尖游击手。例如像 Cal Ripken Jr.、 Derek Jeter、 Alex Rodriguez。 If a contract cannot be agreed upon, the case goes to an arbitration panel, who will listen to both sides and have to pick one number or the other. There's no middle ground -- it's either the player's proposed figure or the club's. The panel will base its decision on which side of the midpoint is the right salary. So in Lane's case, the midpoint between his offer and the club's offer is $1.1375 million. If the panel decides that he's actually worth $1.1376 million, Lane will win his case. If the panel thinks he's worth no more than 1.1374 million, the club wins. 如果合约不获双方协议，那麽案子就要送到仲裁陪审团，陪审团会听取双方 的说法，并且选择其中一方。不可以站在中间的立场上。不是选择球员开出 的价码，就是球团开出的。陪审团会以其中一方作为合理薪水根据。 因此拿 Lane来说，跟球团双方提出的报价，平均起来为＄1.1375M。如果陪审 团觉得他的确值$1.1376M，那麽 Lane就获得胜诉。如果陪审团认为他身价不到 ＄1.1374M，就由球团获得胜诉。 No one wants to go as far as a hearing. It's uncomfortable. Essentially, a team is saying, "We need you, we're counting on you, but you're not worth what you're asking for and here's why." It's not fun for anyone, and that's partly why the Astros have managed to avoid arbitration hearings for 10 years. 没人愿意让事情拖到听证会上见。那种感觉很不自在。基本上，会听到球队说， 〝我们需要你的才能，我们也依赖你的球技，但你根本不值你开出的价码，这 就是为什麽。〞 对任何人来说，这并不有趣，这也是太空人队已有十年避免上仲裁法庭的 部分原因。 I agree with what you said in your last mailbag about how if the Astros have any chance whatsoever to get Roger Clemens, they need to jump on the idea ASAP and push as hard as they can. Besides Clemens, are the Astros looking at any other starting or relief pitcher to help their rotation and bullpen? -- Jason H., Houston 问︰我认同你上周 mailbag所说，如果有机会，太空人 务必要签下 Clemens，他们得尽快进行该计画并加把劲 实行。除了极力签下 Clemens外，太空人队还有要找其 他的先发或後援投手来补强战力吗？ The Astros are up to their limit of 40 on the 40-man roster, so it's unlikely that they'll be adding any free agents at this point. They signed Brian Moehler to a Minor League deal and could be looking at other pitchers of the same ilk -- veterans who have had success in the past but have dealt with injury or surgery issues and are looking to make a comeback. 答︰目前太空人的40人名单已经饱和，所以他们不可能再 签下任何自由球员。太空人跟 Brian Moehler签的是小联 盟合约，接下来签下其他的投手也会依此模式--球团着眼 於过去成绩亮眼，但是有伤痛困扰，或动过手术，准备东 山再起的老将。 At this point, the club can't afford to remove any of the players currently on the 40-man roster, so acquiring a Major League-ready player through free agency probably isn't going to happen right now. Trades are still a possibility, however. 现在球团无法移除40人名单中的任何一员，所以不能和自 由球员签下大联盟约。不过做球员交易是可行的方法。 Every national article I read on the Clemens saga mentions his lack of run support in Houston. But surely with Houston's free-agent signings -- Carlos Lee and Mark Loretta -- Clemens must realize the Astros will score more runs in 2007. Why do the national media writers always conveniently forget this fact? -- Brian T., Rochester, Minn. 问︰从我阅读的关於 Clemens传奇故事的文章中，每篇都 谈到他在休士顿投球，都缺乏队友的火力支援。可是这些 作者无疑都忘了今年休士顿签下了两名自由球员-- Lee 跟 Loretta-- Clemens应该清楚2007年太空人会打下更多分数 。为什麽国内的媒体记者却一直忽略这个事实呢？ I don't think they've forgotten about Houston's offseason moves, but you can't ignore the fact that the Astros seem to completely forget how to score runs whenever Clemens is on the mound. In my opinion, it wasn't just a weird coincidence. I think that after a few games of giving Clemens no run support, it affected the lineup from a mental standpoint. I don't know if they froze or tried to hard, but the lack of offensive production had to be something more than just a bizarre phenomenon. 答︰我想他们并没有忽略休士顿今年球季之後的补强动作， 但你实在无法忘记 Clemens先发时，太空人好像不知该如何 得分的窘境。我认为那并非难以解释的巧合。 我想在几场没给 Clemens火力支援的的比赛後，给了打线 心理上的影响。我不知道他们到底是整个给冻结了还是有 尽力，不过缺乏火力攻击可是比异常情况还来的严重。 That said, I would not expect the same to happen in 2007. The offense is just better, and players like Lee and Loretta, as you pointed out, weren't here for the past Clemens' droughts. 不过我可不希望窘况在2007年又重蹈覆辙。打线有变强了， 像你所说的 Lee跟 Loretta都不是 Clemens过去出赛，未给 他火力支援的人。 Even if Clemens is bothered by the lack of run support, he'll have the first part of the season to keep his eye on how the team is doing without having to make a commitment. Of course, that's what he did in 2006, and with the Astros off to their best start ever in April, he probably thought the team was headed for great things. Little did anyone know they'd play sub-.500 ball for the next 4 1/2 months. 虽然 Clemens为缺乏队友火力支援而苦，然而不需先签下合约， 他还是可以先观察球队在上半季的表现。当然那是他在2006年 的决定，太空人在四月份球季之初表现异常的好，他可能以为 这支球队会有所作为。很少人知道在接下来四个半月他们的胜 率都在 .500以下。 I feel that the signing of Richard Hidalgo to a Minor League contract could work out to be a great deal for the Astros. Do you think he could return to form and make this team? -- J.D., Nixa, Mo. 问︰我认为对太空人来说，和 Hidalgo签下小联盟约，会物超 所值。你认为他可以回到过往的身手并回到太空人队吗？ I'd say he has a moderate-to-good chance to make the team. I doubt he'll overtake Luke Scott and win the right-field job outright, but if Hildago has a decent enough showing during Spring Training, he could make the team as the fifth outfielder. 答︰我会认为他有持续上升的可能成为队上一员。我认为他不能 马上击败 Scott并赢得右外野手的位置，不过如果 Hildago在春 训期间有不错表现，他会成为队中第五号外野手。 That said, I'll reserve my judgement until I see Hidalgo face, and do well against, Major League pitching. And by Major League pitching, I mean the pitchers who are starting Spring Training games in the last two weeks of March, when the Minor Leaguers have been shipped back. The latter half of Spring Training is crucial when evaluating players. It's when the pitchers who had no chance to make the team have been sent down, and the legitimate Major League pitchers are getting their arm strength back and are stretched out a bit, allowing them to log four or five innings per start. 不过我要先保留我的看法，一直到我见到 Hidalgo面对大联盟等级 投手打的不错後，我指的是在小联盟球员都已被送回所属球队，在 三月份最後两周春训的球员。 在春训末期评估一个球员具决定性。没机会的投手都已经被送回小 联盟了，有实力的大联盟投手这时正持续强化与伸展他们的手臂， 以期在每次先发中负担四或五局。 I know that Lane was in Venezuela, but he seems to have dropped out of sight. What happened to him, if anything? -- Ted S., Dripping Springs, Texas 问︰我知道 Lane目前在委内瑞拉打冬季联盟，不过他好像销声匿迹 了。他最近过的如何？有任何消息吗？ Lane played in Venezuela for the length that he had planned. He wanted to go there for just a few weeks and get some extra at-bats. Lane did so and now he's home. He's been working out in the Astros' clubhouse the entire offseason, with the exception of the few weeks he was playing in winter ball. 答︰ Lane照自己预定计画在委内瑞拉的冬季联盟打球。他要在那边 待个几周，获得一些上场机会。 Lane已达成计画目前也回家了。整 个球季结束後，他一直在太空人的会所练习，除了他到冬季联盟打球 那几周。 I've seen this discussed on several blogs and maybe you can answer. Why hasn't Chris Sampson been given a real shot yet? Manager Phil Garner seems to have little faith in him, but why? His numbers in the Minors have been good, and he pitched very well in his limited time. I think one day he could be a good No. 3 starter, yet Garner seems willing to try everybody but him. Why? -- Melissa L., Houston 问︰我从几个部落格看到这个讨论，或许你可以回答我这个疑虑。为 什麽到现在 Sampson没有获得真正的机会呢？总教练 Garner似乎不 太信任他，这是为什麽？他在小联盟所表现的数据相当好，而他在有 限的时机中也投的可圈可点。 我认为有朝一日他会是个合适的第三号先发，那为什麽 Garner可以给 人人机会，就是没给他？ Sampson absolutely will have every opportunity to make the rotation. I've received a lot of inquiries as to why Sampson isn't getting much of an endorsement from management, but I think that's somewhat of a misconception. There are two players who could not have done more in terms of making an indelible impression on management in 2006 -- Scott and Sampson. Both are going to have their chances in '07. 答︰ Sampson绝对有机会成为先发轮值的一员。我也收到很多询问 Sampson为何没获得管理阶层垂青的质疑，可是我认为这些都有点 误会了。有两个球员在2006年表现优异让球队管理阶层惊为天人， 分别为 Scott和 Sampson。他俩在 07年会拥有机会上场。 But when it comes to pitching, it would be shortsighted for the Astros to hand Sampson a starting role based on a short stint on the Major League level last season. He made two starts and was phenomenally great in one of them, shutting out the Cubs over seven innings. His only other start arrived toward the end of '06 in Philadelphia, and he was again very good in an abbreviated 3 2/3 innings. 不过提到投手方面，上一季让 Sampson在大联盟层级短暂扮演先发， 对太空人来说，观察到的还太少。他先发两次，而且其中最亮眼的 一次是他对小熊投七局无失分。他另一次的先发是06年季末对上费 费城人，在极短的3 2/3投球局数中，表现再度让人满意。 Sampson was great in all but one of his eight relief appearances, too. But the team isn't going to look at his 32 innings of work and say, "OK, you earned it, you're our No. 3 or 4 starter." He's an option. But good teams need other options in case those options don't work out. If Sampson shows this spring that he can handle a starting job, he'll get his chance. If the club thinks he'd be better as a long reliever or spot starter, that's what he'll be. Sampson先发表现极佳，而八次上场後援也不赖。但是球队不能只看他 32局﹙按︰可是，我很无聊，查了官网，是34局，反正也没差多少。﹚ 的出赛就说︰ 〝好，你的表现足以成为先发轮值的一员。你就担任第三或四号先发。〞 让他担任先发是个不错的选择。不过一支好球队需要有其他备案以防当初 的作法不如预期。如果 Sampson今年春训展现自己能担纲先发的能耐，他 绝对可以获得该有的机会。假使球团认为他当长中继或者偶尔顶替先发， 较恰当，那这就是他未来一年的定位。 Is our pitching rotation finalized? It seems to be two arms shy, with one maybe being Fernando Nieve. Is the front office sweating? -- Scott L., League City, Texas 问︰我们未来的先发投手轮值就照这样安排了吗？只有两名堪用的投手， 战力应该不足，也许顶多再加一个 Nieve。太空人官方现在是不是为了这 个焦躁不安？ Sweating? Probably not. Mildly perspiring? Well, maybe. I would feel much better if the Astros had one more veteran arm in the rotation to slide into the No. 3 or 4 role. But their roster is at 40, which is the limit, and to add someone would mean someone else would have to come off the roster. They don't have anyone that they can afford to eliminate at this point. 答︰焦躁不安？或许没有。是稍为担忧吗？嗯，也许。如果太空人先发轮值中 有个老将担任第三或四号先发投手的话，我心里应该会好过些。但是他们的 球员名单已经达到40人，已经是上限了，要再加某些人进来代表有些人必须 被移出於名单之外。他们不想把堪用的球员排除於名单外。 I'm not thrilled with the makeup of the rotation, but you never know who's going to emerge and really break through. Matt Albers, Nieve, Sampson and Rodriguez have terrific opportunities in front of them. Moehler is also a candidate to slide into a starting role. It's up to them to take it and run with it. Some pitchers "on the bubble" in the past have had the same chances and made the most of it. Pete Munro and Brandon Backe come to mind. Others such as Tim Redding and Brandon Duckworth fit that category. 对於先发投手的组成我一点不感到兴奋，但你实在不知道谁到时会出头并崭露 头角。在 Albers、Nieve、Sampson和 Rodriguez眼前有非同小可的机会等待 着他们。 Moehler也是担任先发投手的考量人选。机会由他们自个儿获得并掌 握。一些过去像气泡般，梦想会幻灭的球员也有机会去卡位。我现在想到的就 是 Pete Munro、 Brandon Backe。其他像 Tim Redding、Brandon Duckworth 也适用。 Alyson Footer is a reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs. ==================== 弄得有点乱，如果有哪里翻错的，我再修， 谢谢 -- ~ 你对世界如何发问，世界就如何回答你 ~ --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 218.172.209.76 谢谢你的告知^_^ 错误已修正 ※ 编辑: mysunny 来自: 218.172.217.93 (01/24 14:05)