Skip to main content

Pirates’ rising arbitration bill is about to test whether ownership was ever serious about winning

It's time to pay up.
ByEmma Lingan
Pittsburgh Pirates v Houston Astros
Pittsburgh Pirates v Houston Astros | Tim Warner/GettyImages

For years, the Pittsburgh Pirates have sold their fans on the idea that financial flexibility would eventually translate into meaningful investment once their young core was ready to compete. Well, that young core is starting to get more expensive, and ownership is about to face a revealing test of just how committed it actually is to winning.

According to MLB Trade Rumors' projections, the Pirates have 10 arbitration-eligible players heading into 2027, with estimated salaries totaling $28.7 million.

That's a significant financial commitment by Pittsburgh's historically modest payroll standards. But here's the thing: It shouldn't be considered an obstacle to building a contender. It should be viewed as the natural cost of developing one.

The most expensive name on the list is Paul Skenes, whose projected $7.2 million salary would put him within striking distance of the record for a first-year arbitration-eligible pitcher. Even after a less dominant 2026 campaign, Skenes remains one of baseball's most valuable young arms. And at $7.2 million, he's still an absolute bargain compared to what a pitcher of his caliber would command on the open market.

Oneil Cruz is projected to earn $6.3 million, nearly doubling his $3.3 million salary from 2026. Nick Gonzales ($3.1 million), Spencer Horwitz ($2.5 million) and Jared Jones ($2.1 million) are also in line for raises.

Of course, not every arbitration decision is quite so straightforward. Endy Rodríguez is projected to earn $1.2 million despite another injury-shortened season that ended with hip surgery. Henry Davis, meanwhile, is projected for $1.4 million after another disappointing offensive campaign, although his defensive contributions behind the plate remain valuable.

The emergence of Rafael Flores Jr. gives Pittsburgh additional flexibility at catcher, but neither Rodríguez nor Davis represents a particularly burdensome financial commitment. Likewise, Horwitz's projected $2.5 million salary introduces an interesting decision following his inconsistent, injury-affected season.

There's a reasonable argument that all 10 arbitration-eligible players should receive contracts before the November tender deadline. In fact, that might be the most likely outcome.

But tendering all 10 players isn't evidence of an aggressive offseason. It's simply maintaining the roster Pittsburgh already has.

Pirates can't use arbitration raises as another excuse to avoid spending

The Pirates finished 2026 with an 82-80 record, securing their first winning season since 2018 but falling short of the postseason yet again. Their young pitching foundation offers legitimate reasons for optimism, but the offense's second-half collapse exposed glaring weaknesses that won't disappear simply because the organization retains its existing talent.

With Brandon Lowe, Marcell Ozuna and Gregory Soto among the players coming off the books, Pittsburgh should have opportunities to redirect money toward addressing those weaknesses. Whether that means replacing Lowe's production, adding another reliable starting pitcher or reinforcing the bullpen, the Pirates have needs that extend well beyond arbitration.

Those needs aren't going to become less pressing as Skenes, Cruz, Jones and the rest of the young core continue moving closer to free agency. For a franchise that has spent the better part of a decade rebuilding, the prospect of paying its own young players more money should be a sign of progress, not an excuse to stop improving.

Bob Nutting and the Pirates have repeatedly insisted that their goal is to build a sustainable winner. Now that the players they've developed are beginning to command higher salaries, we'll find out whether that commitment extends beyond having one of baseball's cheapest young cores.

Because if a projected $28.7 million arbitration bill is enough to discourage Pittsburgh from making meaningful additions, then ownership was never particularly serious about taking the next step in the first place.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Loading recommendations... Please wait while we load personalized content recommendations