The Kansas City Royals have entered a challenging phase in their offseason, as two arbitration-eligible players, Vinnie Pasquantino and Kris Bubic, remain unsigned. This situation highlights a widening gap between roster management and relational trust within the organization. While the team efficiently settled contracts with six players prior to the January 8 deadline imposed by Major League Baseball (MLB), the unresolved cases of Pasquantino and Bubic raise questions about the Royals’ long-term strategy and internal culture.
On the day of the arbitration deadline, the Royals announced one-year contracts for Michael Massey, Kyle Isbel, Bailey Falter, Daniel Lynch IV, John Schreiber, and Nick Mears. According to Anne Rogers, a beat writer for MLB.com, Pasquantino and Bubic were the only players left without agreements, placing them on track for potential arbitration hearings unless late settlements occur. Historically, the Royals are known for not settling once figures are exchanged, suggesting that unresolved cases are often a deliberate choice rather than an oversight.
Insights into Vinnie Pasquantino’s Situation
For Vinnie Pasquantino, entering his first year of arbitration is typically a time when organizations seek to build long-term relationships with their players. Instead, his situation has stalled. In a recent appearance on the Foul Territory podcast, Pasquantino expressed that the Royals have not engaged in discussions about a contract extension in recent years. He emphasized that extension talks are contingent on performance, indicating his understanding of the business side of baseball.
The player’s comments were measured, yet they revealed an underlying concern. Pasquantino admitted he feels a “kinda funny spot” as he prepares his potential replacement, Jac Caglianone. This situation was further complicated when he briefly reposted a social media message from Milwaukee catcher William Contreras, which expressed frustration over arbitration negotiations. Although Pasquantino removed the post shortly after, the action highlighted the tension surrounding his contract status and the overall sentiment among players regarding arbitration.
Kris Bubic and the Implications of Team Control
The situation with Kris Bubic presents a different set of challenges. As he enters his final year of team control before free agency, the stakes are higher. This context shifts the arbitration discussion from long-term relationship building to asset management. According to MLB.com, teams are often more willing to endure the relational costs of arbitration when a player is nearing free agency, especially if they may be traded or allowed to leave.
This reality creates a decision-making dilemma for the Royals. Bubic’s potential role in the club’s competitive rotation will significantly influence the organization’s approach. If the team views him as a vital component worth preserving, they may seek to maintain trust. Conversely, if they perceive him as a short-term asset, they may be prepared to accept the friction that comes with arbitration.
As teams assess player projections, the Royals appear to be concerned about the long-term value of both Pasquantino and Bubic. Public projection systems, such as FanGraphs, ZiPS, and Steamer, indicate that while Pasquantino is projected to be a solid offensive first baseman, he may not reach elite status. Similarly, Bubic’s projected performance aligns with league-average starting pitchers, which complicates decisions regarding financial commitments.
This ongoing situation underscores a broader issue within the Royals’ front office. The approach of prioritizing procedural discipline and cost control has historical merit, especially during rebuilds. However, as the organization shifts toward sustained competitiveness, the need for proactive communication becomes increasingly important.
Arbitration serves as a testing ground for alignment within a team. Organizations that believe in their players typically act before deadlines force confrontational negotiations. With both Pasquantino and Bubic, the Royals face decisions that extend beyond mere salary figures. Pasquantino symbolizes the future identity of the franchise, while Bubic represents present utility and value.
Ultimately, the Royals do not face an arbitration problem; they face a clarity problem. The ongoing negotiations expose a club grappling with its identity and direction. How Kansas City resolves the cases of Pasquantino and Bubic may well define its future approach to player relations and organizational culture.
