Edwin Jackson: Interested?

[BaltimoreTerp]

We should go 4/44 then, unless you want to see our 5.32 starters ERA again and another 95 losses..or we can sign him and get 200 innings of 4,2 ERA he's gonna give us with a 3.5 xFip cuz our D is god awful.

Unless he struggles.

Look, over the five years he has been a full-time starter, he has been exactly a league-average pitcher (100 ERA+). He gives up almost 1.5 baserunners per inning and his strikeout-to-walk ratio is less-than two. On the plus side, he is very durable: at least 31 starts in all five years and a third of an inning short last year of three consecutive 200-inning seasons. He's also 28, so he right at his prime, which also means he's unlikely to get better.

I really don't know what to make of this guy. He'd be a big help but he's also the kind of guy who could come in here and struggle. Then all of the people screaming at the front office for his arrival are screaming at the front office for his departure and the team is not likely to be in a better situation.

EDIT: Also, look at his comps. They aren't exactly inspiring.

[Sports Guy]

We should go 4/44 then, unless you want to see our 5.32 starters ERA again and another 95 losses..or we can sign him and get 200 innings of 4,2 ERA he's gonna give us with a 3.5 xFip cuz our D is god awful.

The idea that we should we give him a stupid contract just because he is better than what we have is moronic. I know people want to upgrade the rotation. We all do. But you shouldn't do it at the expense of common sense.

Jackson brings some good to the table. But its not all good and some of his issues will crop up when he is in the AL East and in OPACY.

On top of that, if the D is so awful, advocating a GB pitcher may not be the best thing.

I don't mind the guy and I think he is a worthwhile signing up to a certain point but he isn't THAT good where you just decide to starting handing him 10-12 million a year for 4+ years. Its just not a smart contract.

[Sports Guy]

Because we know giving him say 3/36 and spending that extra $2 million a year would just cripple this franchise. Or that extra year at 4/40-42 million....devastating.

I know you have to acquire players you have heard of because it makes you feel good.

But those aren't reasons to give out stupid contracts.

Of course its not crippling to the franchise to do that....but does that mean it is what you should do?

[El Gordo]

I know you have to acquire players you have heard of because it makes you feel good.

But those aren't reasons to give out stupid contracts.

Of course its not crippling to the franchise to do that....but does that mean it is what you should do?

Why is giving 12M per to a guy who has been worth 16.8M per the last 3 years, a stupid contract?

[GoldGlove21]

The idea that we should we give him a stupid contract just because he is better than what we have is moronic. I know people want to upgrade the rotation. We all do. But you shouldn't do it at the expense of common sense.

Jackson brings some good to the table. But its not all good and some of his issues will crop up when he is in the AL East and in OPACY.

On top of that, if the D is so awful, advocating a GB pitcher may not be the best thing.

I don't mind the guy and I think he is a worthwhile signing up to a certain point but he isn't THAT good where you just decide to starting handing him 10-12 million a year for 4+ years. Its just not a smart contract.

I am not sure that I disagree, but 3/$30M is not a bad contract considering the cost of pitching these days. This is one of the major problem with GM's making fans happy IMO and shows that winning and not premium players is what will bring fans back. We talk about guys like Fielder, Beltran, Jackson, Beuhrle, Cespedes, Darvish, Wilson and Pujols only to come up with the following criteria.

Fielder: I am willing to go up to 7-years at $23M, but that will not be enough for Fielder since we are the Orioles.

Beltran: 2/$26M is not that risky, but it is a lot of money. Not sure that I would have given Beltran that much.

Jackson: Not worth $10M-$13M over 3 or 4 years.

Beuhrle: The deal he got from the Marlins was too much for him.

Cespedes: High upside, but he will demand $50M-$60M and he is a major risk at that rate.

Darvish: Might be a #1 or #2, but $120M+ over 5 or 6 years is a lot to give up for a guy who has never pitched outside, more than one a week or in the AL.

Wilson: Turned down a higher offer from the Marlins to sign near his home in LA.

Pujols: Angels were crazy to give him that deal because it will be a crap contract by years 7-10.

So anyone that we sign that could upgrade our team will be taking our offer for one reason, we offer more than anyone else. If that happens that some of those numbers get inflated compared to the salary and the guy was a terrible signing. In reality he was a terrible signing because we were not going to compete with him on the team. So why inflate a players salary just to add him to a terrible product? There is the possibility for rewards, but there is a lot of risk for a team like the Orioles as well. I could make a case for signing any of those guys and I could make a case for passing on them considering the kind of money these guys are making and how much we have in terms of team salary.

The Orioles are going to have to give a little to get a little. Jackson is Jeremy Guthrie with more upside IMO. Jackson is decent and 3/$30M is just a decent deal for a quality #3 starter IMO. We need a lot of help and no player is going to give us a discount. If we get anyone that other teams are interested in it will be because we over paid IMO. Trade the premium guys for multiple quality prospects and try to time a rebuild a little better this time around.

[GoldGlove21]

Why is giving 12M per to a guy who has been worth 16.8M per the last 3 years, a stupid contract?

1.) The Orioles are going to lose with or without him. Jackson by himself is not enough.

2.) Do you really want to put 12%-15% of the Orioles $85M payroll into a guy like Jackson?

3.) Is it smart to invest in Jackson on a 3-year deal when we are not likely to compete for a playoff spot in that time frame?

I can think of some pros too, but we can't just slot Jackson into the #2 or #3 spot and think that our rotation is stabilized IMO. I am not a fan of treading water and we have done that for too long. Go big or go home. Jones, Markakis, Reynolds, Johnson and Hardy are not getting any cheaper, nor are the many young players we have. The Orioles have flexibility in one way as guys like Roberts, Reynolds, Guthrie and Gregg come off of the books soon, but another way to look at it is that Markakis, Hardy, Johnson and Jones will cause the team to be tied into a high base payroll moving forward. We could move most of those guys as needed, but if we are going to do that than why not just deal them now, save the money and obtain numerous top prospects for them. It still feels like we are rebuilding except we are not rebuilding.

[JTrea81]

1.) The Orioles are going to lose with or without him. Jackson by himself is not enough.

2.) Do you really want to put 12%-15% of the Orioles $85M payroll into a guy like Jackson?

3.) Is it smart to invest in Jackson on a 3-year deal when we are not likely to compete for a playoff spot in that time frame?

I can think of some pros too, but we can't just slot Jackson into the #2 or #3 spot and think that our rotation is stabilized IMO. I am not a fan of treading water and we have done that for too long. Go big or go home. Jones, Markakis, Reynolds, Johnson and Hardy are not getting any cheaper, nor are the many young players we have. The Orioles have flexibility in one way as guys like Roberts, Reynolds, Guthrie and Gregg come off of the books soon, but another way to look at it is that Markakis, Hardy, Johnson and Jones will cause the team to be tied into a high base payroll moving forward. We could move most of those guys as needed, but if we are going to do that than why not just deal them now, save the money and obtain numerous top prospects for them. It still feels like we are rebuilding except we are not rebuilding.

Jackson and Fielder make the Orioles an 83 win team on paper without internal improvement factored in as this team is a 75 win team right now at the least IMO. It doesn't take much to get to 85 wins or better from there if some of our guys step up.

If we can be 85 or better, that's something to build on going into 2013.

Jackson stabilizes the rotation. He's not a TOR, but we don't need a TOR right now when multiple ones are about to hit the trade market at the deadline next season and in FA next offseason. What we need is a stable pitching staff, and that's what EJax can help with.

Make no mistake, Duquette is "building" not "rebuilding."

[El Gordo]

1.) The Orioles are going to lose with or without him. Jackson by himself is not enough.

2.) Do you really want to put 12%-15% of the Orioles $85M payroll into a guy like Jackson?

3.) Is it smart to invest in Jackson on a 3-year deal when we are not likely to compete for a playoff spot in that time frame?

I can think of some pros too, but we can't just slot Jackson into the #2 or #3 spot and think that our rotation is stabilized IMO. I am not a fan of treading water and we have done that for too long. Go big or go home. Jones, Markakis, Reynolds, Johnson and Hardy are not getting any cheaper, nor are the many young players we have. The Orioles have flexibility in one way as guys like Roberts, Reynolds, Guthrie and Gregg come off of the books soon, but another way to look at it is that Markakis, Hardy, Johnson and Jones will cause the team to be tied into a high base payroll moving forward. We could move most of those guys as needed, but if we are going to do that than why not just deal them now, save the money and obtain numerous top prospects for them. It still feels like we are rebuilding except we are not rebuilding.

Who is saying that. Jackson will secure the rotation for the next 3-4 years in terms of innings. as Guthrie has done. Guthrie is gone next year if not sooner. We have to keep improving the rotation, if not by internal improvements, then by trades and FA signings. How much cheaper would a guy like Chen be? We can't do it all in one year but we can keep building on it.

[33rdst]

1.) The Orioles are going to lose with or without him. Jackson by himself is not enough.

2.) Do you really want to put 12%-15% of the Orioles $85M payroll into a guy like Jackson?

3.) Is it smart to invest in Jackson on a 3-year deal when we are not likely to compete for a playoff spot in that time frame?

I can think of some pros too, but we can't just slot Jackson into the #2 or #3 spot and think that our rotation is stabilized IMO. I am not a fan of treading water and we have done that for too long. Go big or go home. Jones, Markakis, Reynolds, Johnson and Hardy are not getting any cheaper, nor are the many young players we have. The Orioles have flexibility in one way as guys like Roberts, Reynolds, Guthrie and Gregg come off of the books soon, but another way to look at it is that Markakis, Hardy, Johnson and Jones will cause the team to be tied into a high base payroll moving forward. We could move most of those guys as needed, but if we are going to do that than why not just deal them now, save the money and obtain numerous top prospects for them. It still feels like we are rebuilding except we are not rebuilding.

This might be a good approach if our GM had a 5 year contract and our manager had more than two years left on his.I think the O's are going to try to win now within the financial parameters the owner has set. So signing Jackson wouldn't be a bad move in that context. There is noting to preclude the O's from trading him in a year or two. That 's assuming of course that we don't give him a no trade clause.

[NickM21]

I'm tired of hearing we shouldn't sign someone because it "won't be enough". We'll no ****! We aren't going to jump into the playoffs adding one player, even Pujols (in the AL East anyway). It's about making the team better. Should we just never sign anyone because we need several upgrades for it to "be enough"?

If we can get Jackson to a reasonable contract, do it. Same goes with Fielder.

[Roll Tide]

I know you have to acquire players you have heard of because it makes you feel good.

But those aren't reasons to give out stupid contracts.

Of course its not crippling to the franchise to do that....but does that mean it is what you should do?

See this is the problem...One guy alone will never be the difference between winning and losing. The Orioles will need to upgrade their talent over several years to close the gap. Not signing Fielder or Jackson because a couple of early seasons that won't be used during contending seasons put the Orioles in a constant holding period. The Orioles have to spend to get better and they have the resources if thy want to do it. They are not going o blow it up so they really need to take this approach.

1.) The Orioles are going to lose with or without him. Jackson by himself is not enough.

2.) Do you really want to put 12%-15% of the Orioles $85M payroll into a guy like Jackson?

3.) Is it smart to invest in Jackson on a 3-year deal when we are not likely to compete for a playoff spot in that time frame?

I can think of some pros too, but we can't just slot Jackson into the #2 or #3 spot and think that our rotation is stabilized IMO. I am not a fan of treading water and we have done that for too long. Go big or go home. Jones, Markakis, Reynolds, Johnson and Hardy are not getting any cheaper, nor are the many young players we have. The Orioles have flexibility in one way as guys like Roberts, Reynolds, Guthrie and Gregg come off of the books soon, but another way to look at it is that Markakis, Hardy, Johnson and Jones will cause the team to be tied into a high base payroll moving forward. We could move most of those guys as needed, but if we are going to do that than why not just deal them now, save the money and obtain numerous top prospects for them. It still feels like we are rebuilding except we are not rebuilding.

[section18]

Please expain why Jackson is on the market? Who else needs pitching? Boston, NYY, Texas, Miami, and a lot of other teams. Why hasn't he signed yet?

Did everyone see one of the national reports that said Boston and the Yankees were trying to get Gio Gonzalez late before the deal with the Nationals was finalized? They are looking? What's wrong with Jackson? Why haven't they signed him? Too much money and too many years for 10-14 wins per season.

I'm surprised with the number of knowledgeable supporters he has on here. I'm not saying he is not a good pitcher. He's just not worth the money it will probably take to sign him. I would rather sign Kuroda on a one year deal with an option for $11 million per year. Apparently he is willing to leave the west coast. Boston and the NYY are both negotiating with him.

[El Gordo]

Please expain why Jackson is on the market? Who else needs pitching? Boston, NYY, Texas, Miami, and a lot of other teams. Why hasn't he signed yet?

Did everyone see one of the national reports that said Boston and the Yankees were trying to get Gio Gonzalez late before the deal with the Nationals was finalized? They are looking? What's wrong with Jackson? Why haven't they signed him? Too much money and too many years for 10-14 wins per season.

I'm surprised with the number of knowledgeable supporters he has on here. I'm not saying he is not a good pitcher. He's just not worth the money it will probably take to sign him. I would rather sign Kuroda on a one year deal with an option for $11 million per year. Apparently he is willing to leave the west coast. Boston and the NYY are both negotiating with him.

Probably because Buehrle, Wilson, Darvish Cahill, Gio, and Latos were percieved to be better for the price, Of the pitching left I would rank them, Oswalt, Jackson, Kuroda, Chen, Iwakuma, Jurrjens, Rodrigez, Floyd, Guthrie, Saunders, and Maholm.

[weams]

Probably because Buehrle, Wilson, Darvish Cahill, Gio, and Latos were percieved to be better for the price, Of the pitching left I would rank them, Oswalt, Jackson, Kuroda, Chen, Iwakuma, Jurrjens, Rodrigez, Floyd, Guthrie, Saunders, and Maholm.

You realize we are going to get Maholm, don't you?

[Capn Vivi]

I'm not sure the FO believes that improving our bench depth is going to take us from 69 wins to .500. I wouldn't mind a Jackson signing if it meant we were going to sign Fielder also or maybe Trade Guthrie/Jones. Something besides treading water!

I wouldn't want to guarantee Jackson more than $30-35m anyway, but his signing would be much more palatable if we knew which direction the FO wants to take this team.