PDA

View Full Version : Edwin Jackson



edavis0308
12-16-2012, 03:57 PM
There aren't enough Edwin Jackson threads. Reports are that the Padres are in negotiations with him and a three year deal, per MLBTR. Doesn't sound like they are really close to a deal.. but if he gets those years for anything around the 13ish a year he's looking for..let the erupting from everyone commence.

crapforks
12-16-2012, 04:17 PM
I wouldn't fault the team for going 3 @16-17/yr.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 04:53 PM
Last 3 years, Edwin Jackson has been an average pitcher. 100 ERA+
I wouldn't give him anything more than 7 million a year. Looking at a 3 year deal? Highest I'd go is 3yrs /19 Million Total.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 04:56 PM
3/19? You're crazy. He said 16-17/year. You're underestimating the value of an "average pitcher".

minn55441
12-16-2012, 04:57 PM
I've never been that high on Jackson. His numbers don't jump off the page at you and the thing that really sticks out to me is that he has played for 6 teams in the last 5 seasons.

I still remember him as a Tiger and was really shocked when they traded him to the Diamondbacks. I remember wondering why they would trade a young starter with so much talent. He then threw the no hitter in Arizona and I thought again, they will hang onto this guy. There has to be a reason that teams move him after only one season. The talent is there. For me that explains why everyone keeps trading for him, but what is it that causes everyone to be in such a hurry to move him off their roster?

Will Gardy and Rick Anderson be the ones that finally create a home for the guy? I don't have the answer, I've never read anything that says they guy is a bad team mate. Perhaps someone else can shed a little light on his character.

Don't get me wrong. I understand why he has moved each step of the way, it just seems strange that teams wouldn't be more concerned with locking up the guy long term.

Twins best friend
12-16-2012, 05:09 PM
Edwin Jackson confuses me because I feel like I'm always hearing somebody talking about how electric his stuff is but it never seems to translate into the elite level of production that should go with that description. Seems like there's too much danger of overpaying in his case.

notoriousgod71
12-16-2012, 05:11 PM
Last 3 years, Edwin Jackson has been an average pitcher. 100 ERA+
I wouldn't give him anything more than 7 million a year. Looking at a 3 year deal? Highest I'd go is 3yrs /19 Million Total.

Good luck signing a quality pitcher with that offer, JR.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 05:14 PM
3/19? You're crazy. He said 16-17/year. You're underestimating the value of an "average pitcher".

I'll spend money on Marcum, not this guy. 16/17 million a year? Let's put an average starting pitcher in the top 10% of player salaries. Yeah, that's not crazy.

Brock Beauchamp
12-16-2012, 05:25 PM
Last 3 years, Edwin Jackson has been an average pitcher. 100 ERA+
I wouldn't give him anything more than 7 million a year. Looking at a 3 year deal? Highest I'd go is 3yrs /19 Million Total.

You're joking, right? The average team spends about $8-9m per win. Edwin Jackson is worth somewhere between 3-4 wins a season but you only want to give him $7m a year?

Good luck signing anyone with that attitude.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 05:33 PM
I'll spend money on Marcum, not this guy. 16/17 million a year? Let's put an average starting pitcher in the top 10% of player salaries. Yeah, that's not crazy.

I think 16-17 a year is really steep but its more realistic then your 6 and some change a year low ball.

snepp
12-16-2012, 05:37 PM
The average team spends about $8-9m per win.

Eh? Where did 8-9 come from?

Brock Beauchamp
12-16-2012, 06:12 PM
Eh? Where did 8-9 come from?

Read it awhile back... Was it a member of the Rays front office that said it? Can't remember.

And that should have read "per win above replacement", not "per win".

Top Gun
12-16-2012, 06:36 PM
Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com reports the Twins have signed Mike Pelfrey to a one-year, $4 million contract.


Related: Twins (http://www.rotoworld.com/teams/clubhouse/mlb/min/twins)

Source: Jon Heyman on Twitte (https://twitter.com/JonHeymanCBS/status/280464292292227074)

Twins Twerp
12-16-2012, 06:51 PM
Read it awhile back... Was it a member of the Rays front office that said it? Can't remember.

And that should have read "per win above replacement", not "per win".

I'm glad you changed that because I was ready to show you some math. A 100 would then have a payroll of 800-900 million dollars a year. Wins above replacement makes more sense.

snepp
12-16-2012, 06:54 PM
Read it awhile back... Was it a member of the Rays front office that said it? Can't remember.

And that should have read "per win above replacement", not "per win".

There was a Toronto guy that threw similar numbers out there, but they don't make any sense when used with the publicly available valuation metrics.

Brock Beauchamp
12-16-2012, 07:28 PM
There was a Toronto guy that threw similar numbers out there, but they don't make any sense when used with the publicly available valuation metrics.

Don't they, though? I know the number was around $7m for awhile but after this offseason, it wouldn't surprise me at all if that number has risen a fair amount in recent weeks.

Anyway, I'm not arguing the accuracy of the numbers... Just using them to point out that Edwin Jackson is worth a hell of a lot more than $6m and change a year.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 08:06 PM
You're joking, right? The average team spends about $8-9m per win. Edwin Jackson is worth somewhere between 3-4 wins a season but you only want to give him $7m a year?

Good luck signing anyone with that attitude.

Since when is a pitcher with a 4.10 ERA worth 10+ million? True I did underball a little bit, but if you haven't realized, I don't want him. Jackson is a #4 on a good team. I wouldn't even call him a 3 as far as performance goes.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 08:14 PM
You're joking, right? The average team spends about $8-9m per win. Edwin Jackson is worth somewhere between 3-4 wins a season but you only want to give him $7m a year?

Good luck signing anyone with that attitude.

3-4 wins per season? Where do you see that? 2 per year for the last 3 seasons. Just makes no sense to spend that kind of money when the average pitcher can do it for much less. Scott Diamond provides what Jackson can do and at a much, much cheaper price.

diehardtwinsfan
12-16-2012, 08:15 PM
4.10 ERA is better than league average.. He's a number 3 on most teams and the best starter we have on this one...

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 08:18 PM
Since when is a pitcher with a 4.10 ERA worth 10+ million? True I did underball a little bit, but if you haven't realized, I don't want him. Jackson is a #4 on a good team. I wouldn't even call him a 3 as far as performance goes.

Uh.. a #4 on a good team? I think your perception is a bit skewed here.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 08:19 PM
Uh.. a #4 on a good team? I think your perception is a bit skewed here.

Doug Fister, the #3 on the Tigers, was much better. Ryan Vogelsong, the Giants #3, is much better. Fister and Vogelsong are both notably cheaper too. Jackson was the #5 on the Nationals. The Rangers also had 3 pitchers better than Jackson. That's the 4 top teams.

snepp
12-16-2012, 08:23 PM
Don't they, though? I know the number was around $7m for awhile but after this offseason, it wouldn't surprise me at all if that number has risen a fair amount in recent weeks.

Anyway, I'm not arguing the accuracy of the numbers... Just using them to point out that Edwin Jackson is worth a hell of a lot more than $6m and change a year.

I agree with your primary point, I was just quibbling over the dollars/per. At least as far as FG's is concerned, they've always shown free agent dollars-to-wins working out to that 4-5 million per win neighborhood.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 08:32 PM
Since when is a pitcher with a 4.10 ERA worth 10+ million? True I did underball a little bit, but if you haven't realized, I don't want him. Jackson is a #4 on a good team. I wouldn't even call him a 3 as far as performance goes.


Doug Fister, the #3 on the Tigers, was much better. Ryan Vogelsong, the Giants #3, is much better. Fister and Vogelsong are both notably cheaper too. Jackson was the #5 on the Nationals. The Rangers also had 3 pitchers better than Jackson. That's the 4 top teams.

Welcome to free agency. And all three would arguably be the best starter on our staff.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 08:44 PM
Let's start naming all the free agents (and former FAs) pitchers that have better career ERAs than Edwin Jackson, shall we? John Lannan, Mike Pelfrey, Jair Jurrjens, Scott Baker, Shaun Marcum, Zack Greinke, Brandon McCarthy, Joe Blanton, Erik Bedard, Jeremy Guthrie, Derek Lowe, Randy Wolf, Joe Saunders, Carlos Villanueva, Chris Young, Freddy Garcia, Kevin Millwood. There's a lot and while I wouldn't take all of these guys over Jackson, think of how much cheaper so many of these will end up being. Oh, and Liriano is tied with Edwin Jackson's career 4.40 ERA. Seriously, pretty much all pitchers besides Correia and some of the true scrubs are the only ones I could find with worse career ERA's than Edwin Jackson.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 08:46 PM
Welcome to free agency. And all three would arguably be the best starter on our staff.

And yet the Twins aren't required to participate in getting ripped off.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 09:00 PM
3/19? You're crazy. He said 16-17/year. You're underestimating the value of an "average pitcher".

I'm pretty sure the average pitcher salary isn't much more than 7 million a year.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 09:01 PM
I think you're discounting how much better Jackson has been the past few years. I don't know about you but I would pay the premium on him then the sale prices on Lowe, Wolf, Garcia, etc.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 09:02 PM
I'm pretty sure the average pitcher salary isn't much more than 7 million a year.
This isn't even worth debating if that is your approach to this subject.

ThePuck
12-16-2012, 09:03 PM
I'm pretty sure the average pitcher salary isn't much more than 7 million a year.


What's that number look like when you only look at players past their arbitration years?

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 09:07 PM
What's that number look like when you only look at players past their arbitration years?

Don't know, but there were young guys who were non-tendered arbitration that have better career ERA's and will sign at a fraction at Jackson's price. There are people that want to overpay Jackson by 5-10 million a year of what he's actually worth and it's ridiculous.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 09:08 PM
This isn't even worth debating if that is your approach to this subject.

Worth debating? I'm pretty sure I've made my point with stats, while you're just relying on smug ignorance, guesses, and personal opinion to make your point. Maybe you're right. It's not worth debating when I've been called crazy, insane, etc. when it comes to overpaying a player who probably would hurt us financially for 3 years. Jackson would be wasting cap space for the bright 2014 and 2015 teams.

Brock Beauchamp
12-16-2012, 09:13 PM
So now we're down to using ERA as the sole metric of worth with no distinguishing between leagues.

I'm just gonna walk away from this thread now. Its baseball IQ dropped below my minimum threshold.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 09:15 PM
So now we're down to using ERA as the sole metric of worth with no distinguishing between leagues.

I'm just gonna walk away from this thread now. Its baseball IQ dropped below my minimum threshold.

Yep.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 09:17 PM
So now we're down to using ERA as the sole metric of worth with no distinguishing between leagues.

I'm just gonna walk away from this thread now. Its baseball IQ dropped below my minimum threshold.

You use WAR as the sole metric, Brock. You must be so much better and advanced to use a stat that's nearly as flawed as the NBA's PER!! Why should I pay a pitcher 3X the salary when he can't even post a higher ERA than another guy. Jackson's NL ERA: 4.51 Jackson's AL ERA: 4:33
That's such a HUGE difference, huh!

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 09:23 PM
The problem I have with all of you is you're just disregarding what I'm saying and acting stuck up. You haven't said it, but you're just hinting at me with you're smartass comments when you have provided next to nothing in facts. All I've received is snooty opinions. Pretty pathetic, that this is what I get for a conversation. Especially from one of the moderators.

Brock Beauchamp
12-16-2012, 09:27 PM
It has nothing to do with his AL vs NL ERA. It has everything to do with using a career ERA of a guy who is 28 and has pitched much better in the past three seasons and your assumption that an average pitcher is paid the average MLB wage. One is intentionally ignoring recent performance to cherry-pick stats and the other is a logical fallacy based on bad math.

And I never used WAR to prove anything. I used it to point out the absurdity of claiming and "average" pitcher is worth $6m a year when WORSE and OLDER pitchers are earning DOUBLE that amount.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 09:28 PM
You're seriously killing the guy for the years when he was 23 pitching for the DEVIL rays? I've watched the guys on your "list" pitch. Jackson is the second best pitcher on that "list". You can have your bargain bin Wolf, Lowe, Garcia, Saunders, Guthrie, Blanton, et al. He hasturned a major corner since his AZ days, but if we can't "debate" stats, advanced stats, personal knowledge, researched knowledge, etc..then...well..

Hey Brock, wait up!! I'm coming!

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 09:41 PM
It has nothing to do with his AL vs NL ERA. It has everything to do with using a career ERA of a guy who is 28 and has pitched much better in the past three seasons and your assumption that an average pitcher is paid the average MLB wage. One is intentionally ignoring recent performance to cherry-pick stats and the other is a logical fallacy based on bad math.

And I never used WAR to prove anything. I used it to point out the absurdity of claiming and "average" pitcher is worth $6m a year when WORSE and OLDER pitchers are earning DOUBLE that amount.


You just pointed to the league difference when he has an opposite split of what's expected. I never said the average pitcher wage was the same as the average position player wage. You use WAR in nearly every thread when evaluating a player and even said he was worth 3-4 wins. ERA is not the end all stat and neither is WAR. Jackson has been around the league a while now and he's not getting any better. His last 3 years he's posted a 4.10 ERA which is better than 4.40, but for me the changes aren't huge. Jackson has generally had a very high WHIP in addition to ERA and his SO/BB ratio has been good the past three years, but career wise unimpressive. The 23 year old Devil Ray season is a complete outlier, but other than that his career numbers have bounced around in the same inconsistent trend.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 09:48 PM
It's fun to have different views.and have a legit debate over a real possibility as an.acquisition the twins COULD make.

That being said...he has pitched better as his career has progressed, he's a solid yet not reliant strikeout pitcher, and he's still relatively young and has been durable. May I ask what you don't like about him? Is the disagreement here price tag alone? I would take him and something like 3/36 in a heartbeat. Anything under that I don't think is realistic, while I think you have a little room to overpay before the overpay gets uncomfortable.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 09:51 PM
It's fun to have different views.and have a legit debate over a real possibility as an.acquisition the twins COULD make.

That being said...he has pitched better as his career has progressed, he's a solid yet not reliant strikeout pitcher, and he's still relatively young and has been durable. May I ask what you don't like about him? Is the disagreement here price tag alone? I would take him and something like 3/36 in a heartbeat. Anything under that I don't think is realistic, while I think you have a little room to overpay before the overpay gets uncomfortable.

It's definitely the price tag that bothers me. I don't see him as an elite pitcher that's worthy of what he'll be paid. The length of contract bothers me too. He's a 4 ERA guy and allows a lot batters to get on base. I just think there are/were other options that were slightly worse, but dramatically cheaper.

snepp
12-16-2012, 09:55 PM
No one called him an elite pitcher, and he isn't going to get paid like one. I think you're underselling what average to slightly above average starters are worth and what they make.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 09:57 PM
I'm in the camp that if he puts up a 4 ERA with decent strikeouts for a full season, he's by far our best pitcher. Then he's a legit veteran opening day starter as opposed to livan, ponson, pavano, etc.

Brock Beauchamp
12-16-2012, 09:58 PM
You can't say this:

I'm pretty sure the average pitcher salary isn't much more than 7 million a year.

And then this:


Last 3 years, Edwin Jackson has been an average pitcher. 100 ERA+
I wouldn't give him anything more than 7 million a year. Looking at a 3 year deal? Highest I'd go is 3yrs /19 Million Total.

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.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 10:30 PM
No one called him an elite pitcher, and he isn't going to get paid like one. I think you're underselling what average to slightly above average starters are worth and what they make.

There are people that want to give him 16-17 million a season. That sounds like elite money to me.

Brock Beauchamp
12-16-2012, 10:41 PM
There are people that want to give him 16-17 million a season. That sounds like elite money to me.

Who want to do this? I haven't seen them. $16-17m is Anibal Sanchez money.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 10:42 PM
There are people that want to give him 16-17 million a season. That sounds like elite money to me.

Person. Not people. Let's not get carried away. You realize if we take his 12M salary last year.. the 16-17 is closer than your 6-7 a year you want to give him right? You should compare Correia stats compared to Jackson.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 10:44 PM
Who want to do this? I haven't seen them. $16-17m is Anibal Sanchez money.
second post of the thread. It was a comment saying "i wouldn't be pissed if they paid this a year for three years". I believe.

snepp
12-16-2012, 10:44 PM
There are people that want to give him 16-17 million a season. That sounds like elite money to me.

One person is "people?"

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 10:48 PM
second post of the thread. It was a comment saying "i wouldn't be pissed if they paid this a year for three years". I believe.

Yes, but then another went on to justify that insane amount. Maybe just saying it was better than 7. I think 7 is closer to 10-12 than 16 is though.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 10:50 PM
Should have posted separately
It seems like too many people group Jackson together with Marcum, when Marcum is miles beyond Jackson. I really only used career ERA to show names, as in "Would you give this player that contract at any point in their career?" and I'll say the thinking was flawed on that. Some players consistently average the stats between mediocre Jackson and decent Jackson, so they aren't worth as much. I'll submit that Jackson is 10-12million range and that I've changed my mind some. The shock of 16-17 a year really did make me think people were overrating him (and that still is) so I wanted to go the other way and I went too far. That's not to say I'd ever sign Jackson for 3 years and that money since he's still extremely unpredictable. The Twins don't need him past 2014, because I think there will be much better options in the farm and free agency.

Riverbrian
12-16-2012, 10:52 PM
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.

darin617
12-16-2012, 10:57 PM
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.

And Brett Myers.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 10:58 PM
And then claim that you're not saying that average pitchers are worth the MLB median wage.


I thought I said average pitchers are worth the average MLB pitcher's salary? Possibly a typo, but I'm pretty sure I never said that.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 10:58 PM
I'm in the camp that if you can get Jackson at 3/45.. you take it. You're getting a durable pitcher with strikeouts in his prime years. 3/48 I wouldn't kill the team for. We have money and we need a top of the rotation starter. I'm not giving that money to Marcum. He's got elbow issues. You get a deal on him for cheaper, its a whole different story.

Edit. A pitcher with an ERA around 4.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
12-16-2012, 11:03 PM
I'm in the camp that if you can get Jackson at 3/45.. you take it. You're getting a durable pitcher with strikeouts in his prime years. 3/48 I wouldn't kill the team for. We have money and we need a top of the rotation starter. I'm not giving that money to Marcum. He's got elbow issues. You get a deal on him for cheaper, its a whole different story.

Sarcasm or serious?

SpiritofVodkaDave
12-16-2012, 11:04 PM
I don't understand all the Edwin Jackson love, the dude just has never been that great. He isn't terrible, but is basically a back end rotation type guy (albeit much better then what we currently have) I would give him 3/30 but not a whole lot more (maybe 3/33 if I was pressed)

FWIW: He posted pretty close to Carl Pavano (when healthy) numbers in his ERA/ xFIP/ IP/ WAR etc (especially when you factor in his AL vs NL numbers)

I wouldn't give someone like that 15 mil a year.

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 11:06 PM
That depends. In reality or your Bizzaro world? You realize how much money an oft injured Dan Haren got this year....right???

You need to get over the fact that this guy isn't a scrub. Guys that throw decent ERAs with strikeouts and durability cost money.. you can't get them at the Kevin Correia special discount price...right?

Riverbrian
12-16-2012, 11:14 PM
I don't understand all the Edwin Jackson love, the dude just has never been that great. He isn't terrible, but is basically a back end rotation type guy (albeit much better then what we currently have) I would give him 3/30 but not a whole lot more (maybe 3/33 if I was pressed)

FWIW: He posted pretty close to Carl Pavano (when healthy) numbers in his ERA/ xFIP/ IP/ WAR etc (especially when you factor in his AL vs NL numbers)

I wouldn't give someone like that 15 mil a year.

I agree... But I think he's getting better. I remember watching him pitch for Tampa and thinking this guy is just a thrower hoping to get lucky. I saw him again with Chicago and he was much better... Ive watched him a few times since then and hes been good each time and His recent numbers do suggest that he has figured some stuff out.

SpiritofVodkaDave
12-16-2012, 11:19 PM
That depends. In reality or your Bizzaro world? You realize how much money an oft injured Dan Haren got this year....right???

You need to get over the fact that this guy isn't a scrub. Guys that throw decent ERAs with strikeouts and durability cost money.. you can't get them at the Kevin Correia special discount price...right?

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)

SpiritofVodkaDave
12-16-2012, 11:21 PM
I agree... But I think he's getting better. I remember watching him pitch for Tampa and thinking this guy is just a thrower hoping to get lucky. I saw him again with Chicago and he was much better... Ive watched him a few times since then and hes been good each time and His recent numbers do suggest that he has figured some stuff out.

Yeah, I mean I just see him as a pretty inconsistent pitcher, maybe I am wrong. I don't think he is bad, I just don't think he is worth over paying for (where as I think a guy like Sanchez or Haren would have been worth over paying for)

edavis0308
12-16-2012, 11:24 PM
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
12-16-2012, 11:26 PM
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
12-16-2012, 11:29 PM
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
12-16-2012, 11:32 PM
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
12-16-2012, 11:36 PM
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
12-16-2012, 11:48 PM
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 (http://twinsdaily.com/1142-rising-cost-relief-pitching.html)

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.

SpiritofVodkaDave
12-17-2012, 12:20 AM
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
12-17-2012, 12:55 AM
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
12-17-2012, 01:01 AM
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
12-17-2012, 01:09 AM
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
12-17-2012, 06:24 AM
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
12-17-2012, 11:15 AM
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
12-20-2012, 10:19 AM
Per ESPN:

"The Chicago Cubs (http://espn.go.com/mlb/team/_/name/chc/chicago-cubs) are moving closer to completion on a four-year, $52 million deal with Edwin Jackson (http://espn.go.com/mlb/player/_/id/5842/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
12-20-2012, 10:30 AM
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
12-20-2012, 11:24 AM
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
12-20-2012, 11:35 AM
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
12-20-2012, 11:43 AM
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
12-20-2012, 03:07 PM
The dream is over. Signed with the Cubs for 4/52 per MLBTR.

mike wants wins
12-20-2012, 03:33 PM
How does signing Jackson not help 2014?

SpiritofVodkaDave
12-20-2012, 03:46 PM
Def need to sign Marcum now, should be able to get him on a solid contract for us as well.

Shane Wahl
12-20-2012, 03:58 PM
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
12-20-2012, 04:03 PM
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.

ashburyjohn
12-20-2012, 04:59 PM
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.