Boras is not saying that more than tripling his salary is justified. That's not the nature of arbitration. The "worth" of the player is calculated using precedent and performance and other factors believed to be pertinent to the arbitration board decision. With millions at stake, I am sure they use sophisticated models to predict likelihood of outcomes. The game is to pick the number that will be closer to the player's worth or value or whatever name you want to call the arbitration panels judgment. If Boras believes that $32 is justified, then he is not doing his job. He should give a higher number because the game is who has the most reasonable offer on the table, or in this case it seems the least unreasonable offer on the table.