First Page


Last Page


Document Type



This paper argues that Major League Baseball should amend its Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) to remove the outright ban on certain types of statistical evidence to help prove a player’s value. First, the paper briefly describes the history of the compensation system in the MLB and its evolution. Then, it details how final offer arbitration became the default mechanism for resolving compensation disputes between teams and players. The paper subsequently focuses on the Collective Bargaining Agreement’s carve-out of statistical evidence and notes the similarities and differences between Major League Baseball’s evidentiary standards governing salary arbitration hearings and the Federal Rules of Evidence (“FED. R. EVID.”). Finally, the paper argues why this rule should be changed in light of the fact that Statcast data meet the federal standard for admissibility per the Federal Rules of Evidence, which will result in financial gain for players going through the salary arbitration process.