Tigers are close to trading Edwin Jackson

[Mackus]

I think I'm pretty clear on the skillset of one Edwin Jackson. Unfortunately, you think anyone who disagrees with your conclusions has zero evaluative abilities of their own. I almost forgot how condescending you are, so thanks for the reminder. Somehow, I knew your razor thin skin would somehow get bruised in this discussion. Debates with you can only end in two ways. You being right or crying. Need a tissue?

But, he is right in this case.

The bottom line here, is its not all that likely that the Edwin Jackson is as good as the guy the Detroit Tigers are trading.

What that means, is the Tigers are trading a 26 y/o first time All-Star coming off a 200+ IP season with a 3.62 ERA. However, I don't really think its likely that Jackson lives up to that kind of performance. His previous numbers and even his peripherals from 2009 don't reflect that type of ability. I think he's incredibly likely to remain a valuable guy, just not as valuable as the guy the Tigers are hyping him up to be. Its not good business to be trading #1 starter talent for a guy who is likely to only be a #3 starter. That's the point Stotle and I are making. We're not saying Jackson isn't any good, just that he's not nearly as good as the package the Tigers are insisting on for him.

[RShack]

Why is everybody (except RZNJ) dismissing Jackson's steady and significant year-by-year progress?

[Mackus]

No, the point isn't about the package the Tigers are trying to get for him. The point is whether Jackson is as good as his 2009 season indicates. You don't believe he's likely to repeat it, despite the numbers showing his improvement in almost every statistical area for pitchers. I don't know what to tell you. I'm going by the numbers and from watching Jackson pitch. The guy is immensely talented and the numbers show a guy who is in the midst of reaching his potential, IMO. I believe the first four months of 2009 were not a mirage or luck but rather Edwin Jackson coming into his own. We obviously disagree on that.

But, the numbers don't show that. The ERA does. And you're right that he had a little bit better K/9 and BB/9 numbers. But the HR/9 was worse. The BABIP was low, pretty much in an unsustainable level. The LOB% was very high, again near an unsustainable level.

If you just don't believe in using peripheral data, just say that. Because unless you're completely ignoring that type of information, there is no reason to expect that Jackson's actual pitching level is that of a 3.50ish ERA pitcher. The ERA this year was terrific, but you've gotta look beyond just ERA for predictive methods. You seem to be willing to do that a little bit in looking at K/9, BB/9 and HR/9, but not to be willing to go further and look at other things that the pitcher can and can't control and seeing what would happen if those numbers are in line with what is expected.

[Sports Guy]

Sure seemed like you and SG were saying his season was a fluke. That's what I was responding to. Your posts continued to pretty much dismiss Jacksons's season pointing to his poor finish as proof that Jackson's final numbers weren't really indicitive of his real worth. I would consider Jackson's full season to be worthy of a #2 starter. I haven't considered what it would take to get Jackson and never even considered him a target. I'm surprised the Tigers would even deal him for most of the reasons I've already stated. He's still young and relatively inexpensive. I still find some humor in you calling 2.94 walks per 9 innings, SPOTTY CONTROL. I would be curious to know how many people out there agree with you on that one.

Did you think Guthrie was an AS his first 2 seasons here?

BTW, his walk rate was very good this past year...but it hadn't been before that...I think he needs to do that one more year to show he has totally improved his command.

What would you trade for him?

[Stotle]

Because people ignore things when it doesn't fit their argument. Just like Stotle first pointing to Jackon's walk rate as being 62nd in baseball as evidence of spotty control. When it was pointed out that 62nd was actually in the top half he went to a different set of statistics.

Flag on the play -- unsportsmanlike mischaracterization of facts. You stated a majority of ML pitchers would like to have Jackson's walk rate. I took the time to actualyl look up the facts, which indicate that his season totals were average for a starting pitcher (a fairly low standard when we are talking about trade targets, I would hope you agree). I gave a link to the gamelogs way back towards the beginning of the discussion as evidence of spotty control. You chose to ignore it until I took the time to type it out for you. You still haven't addressed it, other than to imply that another pitcher who periodically struggles with control would likely show similar patterns. Are you taking another shot at addressing his gamelogs, or are we just going to leave it hanging out there, uncomfortably alone in the "facts" column of our discussion?

This is incredible -- I can't believe you're continuing to try and argue this. You have yet to address any of my points or Makus's points. Mackus has been kind enough to politely show why your views are "likely" (I admit I can't see the future -- maybe Jackson bucks the odds and pitches above his peripherals and inconsistencies) misguided.

[Stotle]

Why is everybody (except RZNJ) dismissing Jackson's steady and significant year-by-year progress?

I think I addressed this earlier, though it has been lost in all the

Over the past few seasons, Jackson has resurrected his career after disappointing initially. He's moved from a reliever/fringe starter to a solid Major League starter. That is certainly significant. It is my opinion (and I believe Mackus's opinion) that this is about where he tops out, based upon statistics, stuff and inconsistencies in his performance. Every player (with very, very few exceptions) that is Major Leaguer had to show improvement through their careers. Every Major Leaguer has a ceiling that their skill set will not permit them to break.

Jackson's ceiling is, and has been, that of a front-end starter. But he has never found the consistency, command or control to reach that ceiling. While his surface stats looked fringe-elite in 2009, a closer look at how the season unfolded, as well as his inconsistencies from start-to-start, seems to indicate that he still hasn't figured everything out. It isn't a disregarding of his areas of improvement, but rather a nod towards some troubling aspects of his skill set that look like they could cause him to underperform his cost on the trade market.

That's the bottom line for me. Combine that with the fact that BAL has plenty of mid-rotation candidates, under control for cheaper and longer, and you get my initial statement that I wouldn't give up anything significant for Jackson in a trade.

[Mackus]

You're killing me here. You make it sound like there is minimal improvement in the walks and strikeouts and then go on to say " but his HR/9 was worse.

There was actually significant improvement in walks and strikeouts. So much that his SO/BB ratio went from the 1.4's to 2.3. That's significant. The home run rate on the other hand, increased so little that I'd gather it's almost statistically not even worth mentioning. It went up something like .04 per 9 IP.

You're right the HR/9 hasn't changed. I was looking at the stats on Fangraphs and instead of looking at the difference between the '08 and '09 numbers I looked at the difference between the '09 numbers and '10 projections. My mistake. 1.1 HR/9 is still a high number, especially in that park.

The improvements in the BB/9 and K/9 are nice to see, and that's why he's now a guy I think can be a solid starter in the American League. However, the overall numbers, especially some of the predictive ones, continue to point to him being only a #3 type starter, not the #1/2 you are saying he could be. You've yet to address when I pointed out that both his BABIP and LOB% are at unsustainable levels, if those come back to what the league norm would be (although his BABIP will likely stay a bit better than league average, since he's a flyball pitcher, although still it should regress towards the median a bit) that alone would set his projected numbers back.

There certainly is a chance he continues to be someone who pitches better than their peripherals. There is really no way to tell who is going to be able to do that and who isn't. But the odds aren't great. Jackson has some good stuff, and he used to be a top prospect before he flopped and subsequently rebuilt his career, so maybe he is one of those guys. But I don't think its the most likely outcome. I think its far more likely that he settles in as a reliable #3 type starter, averaging 200-210 innings a year with ERAs in the 4.25-4.50 range most years. If he has another fortunate year with the BABIP and LOB% and other things like that, then he can have great seasons like 2009. If he has an unlucky year, then you could see him over a 5.00 ERA just as easily.

There really isn't very much that suggests he's going to be a guy who continues to pitch to a 3.50-3.75 ERA most seasons, and that's the type of value Detroit is trying to get in return for him. If you wanna make the case that he might continue improving, that's fine, but he's improving from a baseline of a 4.25-4.50 ERA-guy right now. To improve by half a run or more from that level would be a major improvement, not just continuing along a standard career path. I'm not sure he's got another breakout like that in him.

[Hank Scorpio]

So, the gist is this:

He's not worth what Detroit will get for him.

10-4.

[Stotle]

Still seems like you are going out of your way to look for the negative. So a pitcher improves in hits per innings pitched, walks per innings pitched, and strikeouts per innings pitched. Let's gloss over all that and the fact that he just turned 26 and zero in on the fact that in some games he walked no batters and in a couple of games he walked 5 batters. You really think this points more to his skillset and than those other stats?

You may think being 26 means his best days are stil ahead of him. I could name many pitchers (including his teammate, Dontrelle Willis) who show that this is not the case.

As I stated in the very post you quoted (speaking of glossing over) Jackson has indeed made significant progress. He's gone from busted prospect/reliever/fringe starter to a legit ML starter. Looking at all of those stats you're pointing to, combining that with watching him pitch, and noting the inconsistencies that plagued him to a greater degree earlier in his career still hanging around, I tend to think he's closer to a 3/4 starter that for various reasons produced like a #2 this year.

Very little about the total picture indicates a #2 skillset, to me. Be specific. Why do you think he's a #2, and why is it unimportant that he's 1) inconsistent, and 2) solid but unspectacular (statistically) almost across the board? As SG or Mackus pointed out, the Tigers are shopping a 26-year old coming off a statistical on-the-surface-#2 season. I assume, if you're right and my thoughts are as out there as you think they are, he'll fetch a mighty impressive pacakge, no? And I'm sure in quick order.

[Sports Guy]

I am still waiting for an answer from RZ as to what he would trade for Jackson.

Then we get a better idea of how good RZ really thinks he is.

I said I would move Erbe and JJ....probably would include a Steve Johnson type guy if needs be as well.

[Stotle]

So, the gist is this:

He's not worth what Detroit will ask, and potentially get, for him.

10-4.

Noting the above change, I think you nailed it, Hank. In my amateur opinion, of course.

[Sports Guy]

I certainly would do either of those trades. I think he's worth more than that. I never said it was my intention of trading for Jackson or that I thought we should go after him. I'm not sure it would makes sense for what we'd have to give up. I think the correct value for someone like Jackson would be Tillman and maybe another starter a tier down. Erbe and JJ for Jackson would be a no brainer. Tigers would never do it. Talk about overvalued. That's just what Jim Johnson is around here.

I never said Detroit would do the deal...I am just saying that is what I would give....I am not overvaluing him like you.

Are you going to continue to side step the question or are you going to answer what type of package you would be willing to move for him?

And I was saying that Jackson this year was essentially what Guthrie was his first years here.

[RShack]

However, the overall numbers, especially some of the predictive ones, continue to point to him being only a #3 type starter, not the #1/2 you are saying he could be.

How good are those predictive numbers at actually predicting how individual P's perform?

Not pitchers-as-a-group, but predicting how Person-X will perform? How exact and reliable are the predictions you're referring to?

[Sports Guy]

Statistically they were both solid starters. The difference is that Jackson has the superior talent to Guthrie. His secondary stuff is worlds better than Guthrie's. I just don't know if you are implying that Jackson will suffer the same fate as Guthrie did last year. If you are, then I strongly disagree. I said what I thought the correct value was for Jackson. The problem is that he's a FA in two years and it makes no sense for us to trade someone like Tillman for him. He makes sense for a team on the cusp. If I have to propose a package to get your panties out of the bunch they seem to be in, I would offer Erbe, Hernandez and Pie. I won't give up one of Matusz, Tillman, Arrieta, or Britton for a two year rental.

No, not at all..Sorry if I wasn't clear.

I am really kind of referring to what i was saying before about not paying too much for Jackson based off of his ERA this year...that's the comparison I was drawing to Guthrie.

I don't think jackson is as good as his ERA...But I do think he could be a solid #3 guy...i think many of the points both you and Rshack are making are correct but I wouldn't go crazy for him either...If Detroit trades him, I would think they get a package more indicitative of a 3.60 ERA pitcher and Jackson isn't that IMO.

[andrewrickli]

He reminds me of what DCab was supposed to turn out to be!