IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v67y2000i1p87-104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Theoretical and Empirical Comparison of Free Agent and Arbitration‐Eligible Salaries Negotiated in Major League Baseball

Author

Listed:
  • Phillip A. Miller

Abstract

This paper presents a theoretical and empirical comparison of determination of negotiated salaries in baseball's free agent market to that in its final‐offer arbitration (FOA) system. The theoretical bargaining model of each system is based on Nash (1950). It is argued that Farber's (1980) model of FOA is not fully applicable in explaining baseball's FOA process. The free agent market and the arbitration system each determine negotiated salaries that are dependent on the different disagreement outcomes of the negotiators in the respective systems. It is thus concluded theoretically that the two systems will determine salaries differently. The theoretical analysis also suggests that there may be selection bias present when one empirically analyzes only negotiated settlements. Using a straightforward regression model that controls for productivity, playing experience, and the potential selection bias, the empirical analysis substantiates the theory's results. A method is then developed to estimate the effect that free agent salaries have on salaries for arbitration‐eligible players. It is found that there is a significant positive relationship between them, but the systems do not determine equal salaries for comparable players.

Suggested Citation

  • Phillip A. Miller, 2000. "A Theoretical and Empirical Comparison of Free Agent and Arbitration‐Eligible Salaries Negotiated in Major League Baseball," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 67(1), pages 87-104, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:67:y:2000:i:1:p:87-104
    DOI: 10.1002/j.2325-8012.2000.tb00322.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2325-8012.2000.tb00322.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/j.2325-8012.2000.tb00322.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gibbons, Robert, 1988. "Learning in Equilibrium Models of Arbitration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 896-912, December.
    2. Paul L. Burgess & Daniel R. Marburger, 1993. "Do Negotiated and Arbitrated Salaries Differ under Final-Offer Arbitration?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 46(3), pages 548-559, April.
    3. Myerson, Roger B, 1984. "Two-Person Bargaining Problems with Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 461-487, March.
    4. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    5. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    6. Vincent P. Crawford, 1982. "Compulsory Arbitration, Arbitral Risk and Negotiated Settlements: A Case Study in Bargaining under Imperfect Information," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 49(1), pages 69-82.
    7. David J. Faurot & Stephen McAllister, 1992. "Salary Arbitration and Pre-Arbitration Negotiation in Major League Baseball," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 45(4), pages 697-710, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. J. Richard Hill & Nicholas A. Jolly, 2014. "Negotiated Settlement Under Mlb Final-Offer Salary Arbitration System," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 32(2), pages 533-543, April.
    2. Roberto Pedace & Curtis M. Hall, 2012. "Home Safe: No-Trade Clauses and Player Salaries in Major League Baseball," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 627-644, July.
    3. Turner, Chad & Hakes, Jahn Karl, 2007. "The Collective Bargaining Effects of NBA Player Productivity Dynamics," MPRA Paper 5058, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Phillip A. Miller, 2000. "An Analysis of Final Offers Chosen in Baseball's Arbitration System," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 1(1), pages 39-55, February.
    2. Eran Hanany & D. Marc Kilgour & Yigal Gerchak, 2007. "Final-Offer Arbitration and Risk Aversion in Bargaining," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(11), pages 1785-1792, November.
    3. Daniel R. Marburger & Paul L. Burgess, 2004. "Can Prior Offers and Arbitration Outcomes Be Used to Predict the Winners of Subsequent Final‐Offer Arbitration Cases?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(1), pages 93-102, July.
    4. John Fizel & Anthony C. Krautmann & Lawrence Hadley, 2002. "Equity and arbitration in major league baseball," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(7), pages 427-435.
    5. Marselli, Riccardo & McCannon, Bryan C. & Vannini, Marco, 2015. "Bargaining in the shadow of arbitration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 356-368.
    6. Chen, Natalie & Conconi, Paola & Perroni, Carlo, 2007. "Women’s Earning Power and the “Double Burden” of Market and Household Work," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 800, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    7. de Clippel, Geoffroy & Pérez-Castrillo, David & Wettstein, David, 2012. "Egalitarian equivalence under asymmetric information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 413-423.
    8. Eric van Damme & Xu Lang, 2022. "Two-Person Bargaining when the Disagreement Point is Private Information," Papers 2211.06830, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    9. Nathalie Chappe, 2001. "L'analyse économique d'un mode de résolution des litiges : l'arbitrage," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 15(4), pages 187-208.
    10. Geoffroy de Clippel, 2009. "Axiomatic Bargaining on Economic Enviornments with Lott," Working Papers 2009-5, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    11. John W. Budd & Aaron Sojourner & Jaewoo Jung, 2017. "Are Voluntary Agreements Better? Evidence from Baseball Arbitration," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 70(4), pages 865-893, August.
    12. Robert J. Weber, 1985. "Negotiation and Arbitration: A Game-Theoretic Perspective," Discussion Papers 666, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    13. Alan Speight & Dennis Thomas, 1997. "Arbitrator Decision‐Making in the Transfer Market: an Empirical Analysis," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 44(2), pages 198-215, May.
    14. Françoise Forges & Roberto Serrano, 2013. "Cooperative Games With Incomplete Information: Some Open Problems," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 1-17.
    15. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
    16. Kjell Hausken, 1997. "Game-theoretic and Behavioral Negotiation Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(6), pages 511-528, December.
    17. Andrés Salamanca, 2020. "A generalization of the Harsanyi NTU value to games with incomplete information," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(1), pages 195-225, March.
    18. Jyotishka Ray & Syam Menon & Vijay Mookerjee, 2020. "Bargaining over Data: When Does Making the Buyer More Informed Help?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 1-15, March.
    19. Roger B. Myerson, 1984. "An Introduction to Game Theory," Discussion Papers 623, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    20. Edward J. Anderson & Andrew B. Philpott, 2019. "Forward Commodity Trading with Private Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 58-71, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:67:y:2000:i:1:p:87-104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.