but this team wants the message to sink in that you accept our terms or you get cut.
I don't really see any evidence of that (yet). I see evidence that the Lerners are pretty hardnosed on spending and contractual negotiations, so they tend to roll the dice on arbitration more often than many teams. But this process is fairly straightforward. And there are specific formulas used to value a player. A team isn't going to cave on that simply because they want to avoid arbitration. The only financial motivation for the team to find a middle ground is if they believe they are risk of losing big based on the numbers.
That said, financial considerations are certainly factored in, but it is about the bottom line, not a matter of refusing to accept what is offered. Hill was a completely different situation than Morse. Hill was dead weight, and when he won arbitration, he was overpaid dead weight. So cutting him was an option. The team may find that Morse is overpaid at $5M, but you don't cut a player like Morse outright like you cut Hill. Trading to trim payroll may be explored if that is a concern, but I still wouldn't see that about trying to enforce some code of contact, just looking at the budget. So, we'll wait and see. I actually think they are likely to find a middle ground with Morse, unless Morse is happy to roll the dice on 5M content to lose. The arbitors could go either way there.
