Edwin Jackson

[edavis0308]

I bet they sign for similar deals. One with injury risks, one without.

 

That being said, I'd be happy with either, I just think Jackson is the better pickup (assuming a reasonable and not ridiculous deal).

 

You're seriously undershooting the market.. though if 3/33 could get it done.. do it yesterday. I just think he signs for more unless its faster year all over again.

[Physics Guy]

I'll throw my 2 cents (or less). Marcum and Jackson are clearly the two best pitchers left in my opinion. It can be argued that either one is more valuable than the other, depending on what you value. Marcum has better rate stats, but he doesn't have a contract yet due to his injury issues last year. Jackson does not have the rate stats and doesn't have the AL resume that Marcum does, but he did pitch over 180 innings in each of the past 5 years. TR seems to be very leery of a big contract to a pitcher who may not be able to pitch out his contract. If I were to bet on which Ryan values more, I would guess that he prefers Jackson because of his durability. At this point I honestly don't see TR going after either.

 

From Bonnes' interview with TR:

 

JB: It sounds like you’re sitting back and seeing what in the market comes to you, as opposed to aggressively chasing a couple of targets.

 

TR: If I do that, we’ll probably be holding the bag. You know pitching is going to go off the board. We certainly have to be looking at it.

 

That makes it sound an awful lot like he just hasn't liked the numbers and years that have been thrown around thus far. If one of them gets stuck signing a contract like Jackson did last year, then I'd say we have a chance. I'm disappointed because I really thought after reading the interview that he would be willing to sign a #2/#3 pitcher at the going rate, but he's given no indication that he is willing to do that yet. I am resigned to the fact that we MIGHT get Saunders or Myers and that is it.

[snepp]

Well, you could afford to overpay a bit every now and then for a guy like Jackson if you weren't busy flushing that extra money down the toilet on a guy like Correia.

[Physics Guy]

Over paying for mediocrity is never a good idea. 3/33 is the right number for a guy like Jackson, 3/45 is not. I'd much rather they keep that 15 million free in 2014/2015 and just go into this season and commit to a rebuild. Keep that 15 mil to go after a front of the rotation guy in the future. Or just sign Marcum for less money anyways (who has a good shot to put up superior numbers)

 

Honest question for you: Do you see Ryan committing those savings to a "front of the rotation" guy?

 

Greinke and maybe Sanchez were the only guys of that type this year and he went nowhere near them. In theory it's a great idea, I just don't think Ryan will ever pony up $50+M for a FA. I REALLY hope I am wrong, but I just don't think it's in his genetics. The only big contracts the offer are to guys already in the system. Do you see any players on the team currently that is going to receive any contract approaching that?

[Physics Guy]

Do you see any players on the team currently that is going to receive any contract approaching that?

 

That last question was referring to anybody currently on the team receiving a contract approaching $50M in the next three years.

[jorgenswest]

You can't say this:

 

 

And then this:

 

 

 

And then claim that you're not saying that average pitchers are worth the MLB median wage.

 

And you're still using Jackson's career ERA in those quotes. His recent 4.10 ERA may not be much above his 4.4 career mark, but it is quite a bit better than the ~4.60 mark he was posting before he turned the corner at age 26. Using career stats of a guy in his late 20s is one of the worst forms of cherry picking. You're using rookie and early age seasons of a guy still in his prime. Just stop. You're weighting Jackson's age 20 season in 2004 the same as his age 28 season in 2012. If you're trying to use stats honestly to make a point, how do you justify that obvious miscalculation?

 

I don't see anyone here arguing that Jackson isn't a league average pitcher... But I do see a lot of people arguing that he's worth a hell of a lot more than $7m. And you don't need stats to see that. You merely need to look around and see guys like Dan Haren getting $13m in 2013.

 

Brock is correct about the price of purchasing WAR on the free agent market. He may have read it on this site in one of Parker's excellent articles.

 

Twins Daily - The rising cost of relief pitching

 

Look at fangraphs valuation of Jackson and you will see that 16-17 million are his peak two seasons. It isn't unreasonable to think that some team will make an offer in that neighborhood. If the team is willing to go mulitple years, they should be able to bring the per year cost down.

 

On the other hand, there must be some reason why he will making his ninth organizational move by age 30. That has to concern some teams and reduce the competition for his services.

[DaveW]

Honest question for you: Do you see Ryan committing those savings to a "front of the rotation" guy?

 

Greinke and maybe Sanchez were the only guys of that type this year and he went nowhere near them. In theory it's a great idea, I just don't think Ryan will ever pony up $50+M for a FA. I REALLY hope I am wrong, but I just don't think it's in his genetics. The only big contracts the offer are to guys already in the system. Do you see any players on the team currently that is going to receive any contract approaching that?

 

I could see him doing it in the future, it just has to be the right guy to go after. No way in hell were they going to get in the Greinke sweepstakes and compete with the insane contract the Dodgers gave him, I am bummed they weren't in the Sancez sweepstakes, but at the end of the day he isn't an "ace" or really even that close to one.

 

Maybe the best way to obtain an ace is to draft and trade for high upside pitching prospects. I do know that the Twins should have quite a bit of money to spend next off-season at the very least, and with guys like May/Myer/Hicks/Arcia/Benson?/etc all knocking on the door then, maybe that is the time to truly "go for it"

 

I still think they can hopefully sign Marcum at this point, and bring in another "wing and a prayer guy" like Webb and see if they can somehow get lucky for 2013. Worst case scenario is they end up trading away Morneau and maybe Willingham at the deadline and bring in hopefully some more prospects.

[glunn]

If this rebuild happens like we expect it to... We will be very young in 2014 and 2015. With a young roster almost certain to come... There will be a lot of salaries in the minimum range along with Joe Mauer.

 

In consideration of where the salary appears to be heading... And the money we already have off the books... I see no problem in offering a ridiculous contract for Marcum or Jackson. I don't care what they pay... Just land a pitcher that can contribute in 2013 and 2015.

 

We could do this in my opinion and still have money available for an additional free agent or two down the road if the team looks like a Free agent could bring a championship.

 

Just one... That's all I ask... Marcum or Jackson is what's left.

 

You make a lot of sense my friend!

[Chip Chipperson]

I am as sick as everyone else of the Twins not spending money, however, I can't help but think that Edwin Jackson is overrated.

 

To put it into perspective:

Cole De Vries (in the AL)

5-5, 4.11 ERA, 1.21 WHIP, 6.0 K/9, 1.8 BB/9, 9.0 H/9, approx 5 innings pitched per start.

 

Edwin Jackson (in the NL)

10-11, 4.03 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 8.0 K/9, 2/8 BB/9, 8.2 H/9, approx 6 innings pitched per start

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have Jackson than De Vries, but Jackson is not that good. He is nowhere near 16 million per good. He makes the ball miss the bit a bit more than De Vries (not much career 6.9 K/9), he allows about as many baserunners (most years he allowed significantly more) and he walks slightly more hitters than De Vries did last year.

 

 

So maybe I'm missing something in the advanced statistics world (could very well be the case), but isn't Edwin Jackson simply a guy who was marginally better than De Vries last season?

[edavis0308]

I am as sick as everyone else of the Twins not spending money, however, I can't help but think that Edwin Jackson is overrated.

 

To put it into perspective:

Cole De Vries (in the AL)

5-5, 4.11 ERA, 1.21 WHIP, 6.0 K/9, 1.8 BB/9, 9.0 H/9, approx 5 innings pitched per start.

 

Edwin Jackson (in the NL)

10-11, 4.03 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 8.0 K/9, 2/8 BB/9, 8.2 H/9, approx 6 innings pitched per start

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have Jackson than De Vries, but Jackson is not that good. He is nowhere near 16 million per good. He makes the ball miss the bit a bit more than De Vries (not much career 6.9 K/9), he allows about as many baserunners (most years he allowed significantly more) and he walks slightly more hitters than De Vries did last year.

 

 

So maybe I'm missing something in the advanced statistics world (could very well be the case), but isn't Edwin Jackson simply a guy who was marginally better than De Vries last season?

Are you including time with the Dodgers...

 

Edit. Ok 2012, sorry jumped the gun.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I am as sick as everyone else of the Twins not spending money, however, I can't help but think that Edwin Jackson is overrated.

 

To put it into perspective:

Cole De Vries (in the AL)

5-5, 4.11 ERA, 1.21 WHIP, 6.0 K/9, 1.8 BB/9, 9.0 H/9, approx 5 innings pitched per start.

 

Edwin Jackson (in the NL)

10-11, 4.03 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 8.0 K/9, 2/8 BB/9, 8.2 H/9, approx 6 innings pitched per start

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have Jackson than De Vries, but Jackson is not that good. He is nowhere near 16 million per good. He makes the ball miss the bit a bit more than De Vries (not much career 6.9 K/9), he allows about as many baserunners (most years he allowed significantly more) and he walks slightly more hitters than De Vries did last year.

 

 

So maybe I'm missing something in the advanced statistics world (could very well be the case), but isn't Edwin Jackson simply a guy who was marginally better than De Vries last season?

 

Well...

 

1. If we could count on De Vries to post those numbers again, he'd be pencilled into the rotation right now.

 

2. Jackson isn't a great pitcher. In my opinion, he's not a $16m pitcher. But he is a durable, league average pitcher in his prime. A guy that can be counted on (as much as any pitcher, anyway) to pitch 3-4 years and crank out 200 IP a year with a 100-ish ERA+.

 

And that has value. At least $11-12m a year for 3-4 years. I wouldn't pay $16m for that (maybe if it was a two year deal, which he won't take) but I'd jump at the opportunity to sign him for 3/$36m.

[Chip Chipperson]

Well...

 

1. If we could count on De Vries to post those numbers again, he'd be pencilled into the rotation right now.

 

2. Jackson isn't a great pitcher. In my opinion, he's not a $16m pitcher. But he is a durable, league average pitcher in his prime. A guy that can be counted on (as much as any pitcher, anyway) to pitch 3-4 years and crank out 200 IP a year with a 100-ish ERA+.

 

And that has value. At least $11-12m a year for 3-4 years. I wouldn't pay $16m for that (maybe if it was a two year deal, which he won't take) but I'd jump at the opportunity to sign him for 3/$36m.

 

I understand and I would prefer Edwin Jackson to Cole DeVries. I guess my point was simply that if I could magically gurantee that Cole DeVries will pitch EXACTLY like he pitched last season, but for that magical gurantee you'd have to pay him $32 million dollars over the next two seasons, people would immedietly turn that deal down.

[Physics Guy]

Per ESPN:

 

"The Chicago Cubs are moving closer to completion on a four-year, $52 million deal with Edwin Jackson, sources told ESPN The Magazine's Buster Olney on Thursday."

 

Being as this offer is pretty close to most of the speculation thus far, I find it hard to believe that Ryan came anywhere near this offer. He either doesn't understand the "going-rate" for starting pitchers (I doubt it) or he is so risk-averse to big contracts for pitchers (more likely). I don't see him coming anywhere near Willingham's total contract for any pitcher this year. I don't see how that gets us a "pretty darn-good" pitcher. I have been happy with most of his moves this year, but I am disappointed with his "quantity over quality" approach to filling out the rotation.

[Shane Wahl]

If it really is a 4 year/$52 million deal that is not that high of a contract to pay out to somebody who is going to be solid and could be good for the length of the contract. The Twins are paying Blackburn, Correia, and Pelfrey $14 million right now.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The Twins are paying Blackburn, Correia, and Pelfrey $14 million right now.

 

This. The Twins can find #5 starters, often from within the organization (PJ Walters, Deduno, Hendriks, etc) and for the same amount of per-year money they've spent on huge question marks (though I like the Pelfrey signing), they could have Jackson.

[Shane Wahl]

Yeah, going into the offseason I was saying that I would rather have 2 good middle rotation guys for combined less money than Greinke alone, mainly because of the innings of quality pitching, but also because one of them might provide near or the same value as Greinke depending on performance. But there isn't a slippery slope, Terry Ryan! That doesn't mean three bottom of the rotation guys instead of two middle rotation guys, then 4 marginal starters instead of three 4-5th starters, etc.!

 

As much as I think Anthony Swarzak is a lunatic and also not a very good pitcher, Ryan Pressly can serve as the long reliever and Swarzak the 5th starter. No need to chase after Myers and Garcia. Good god.

[LimestoneBaggy]

If it really is a 4 year/$52 million deal that is not that high of a contract to pay out to somebody who is going to be solid and could be good for the length of the contract. The Twins are paying Blackburn, Correia, and Pelfrey $14 million right now.

 

Somehow I like a 4/52 contract, but there is no way I would have signed him to a 3/51. I'm still trying to figure out why.

 

I still think TR has decided this team will be rebuilt for 2014-2015, and he's not spending any real money until he sees the internal talent level pre-2014 (K. Corr still didn't happen....if I keep pretending, it's real, right?).

[edavis0308]

The dream is over. Signed with the Cubs for 4/52 per MLBTR.

[Mike Sixel]

How does signing Jackson not help 2014?

[DaveW]

Def need to sign Marcum now, should be able to get him on a solid contract for us as well.

[Shane Wahl]

Def need to sign Marcum now, should be able to get him on a solid contract for us as well.

 

Yes. Jackson at 13 per year means that Marcum is probably in the 10-12 range and cannot reasonably ask for more than 3 years.

[Riverbrian]

What are the latest rumors on Marcum... He must be out with the Cubs now... The Royals have taken a different path with Shields, Davis and Santana. The Brewers are being Coy about it.

 

The only teams I ever heard rumored besides those I listed are the Twins and Padres.

 

I think Terry has to do it... 36 Million for 3 years... Sign me up to sign him up... I'd make the big hard to turn down offer now before the big boys get desperate and the Rangers, Yankees, Red Sox... Come knocking.

[ashbury]

This. The Twins can find #5 starters, often from within the organization (PJ Walters, Deduno, Hendriks, etc) and for the same amount of per-year money they've spent on huge question marks (though I like the Pelfrey signing), they could have Jackson.

 

You can't undo the Blackburn contract (and he wasn't signed to be a #5 at the time), and you like the Pelfrey signing for the amount they agreed on. That doesn't leave much for Jackson or Marcum or whoever else. So you're basically saying you want the Twins to spend more. Which, they have room to do. Blackburn and Pelfrey are red herrings in this - the question is whether Kevin-money should have been applied toward Edwin-money.