How much better is Conor Jackson than Matt Murton?

[badnews]

I ask because on a number of larger message boards and blogs that are not team-specific, my finding has been that fans think Conor Jackson has "excellent" trade value and Matt Murton has "none or close to none."

 

Now, I'm not saying Murton is as good a hitter as Jackson, he isn't. But they seem somewhat closer than people think.

 

The only question I want people to answer is this: Why is Jackson a darling for most people, with "excellent" trade value while Murton is just dumped on? I don't think anyone would say Murton isn't half the ballplayer Jackson is, so why does Murton have less than half the trade value?

 

[i put this under Transactions because it's kind of an offshoot of my Wuertz trade value/perceived trade value topic, feel free to move it if you feel it doesn't fit.]

[BCVM22]

You could tie it to the fact that Jackson's name was bandied about in widespread rumors of trades with the White Sox back around the deadline, while Murton's name didn't really pop up in too many reports of that ilk.

 

You could also figure it's largely because fans of Jackson's team are, for the most part, morons.

[SAMMYWHO]

You could also chalk it up to the perceived power Jackson has. I'd think being platooned with Tony Clark should hurt your value but I guess Tony's a proven vet.

[Outshined_One]

During his time in the minors, Jackson was a highly-touted prospect. Most people thought that he and Carlos Quentin would end up becoming two of the brightest young stars in baseball. Both of them put up some impressive numbers down in the minor leagues.

 

Murton, on the other hand, didn't receive much recognition until the season after he was traded to the Cubs. Even then, he didn't receive nearly as much hype or recognition as Jackson.

 

I think these perceptions, in part, stem from that.

[Skyballer]

Murton's only 1 year older and they both put up and OPS of 809 in 06 and at a glance their numbers looked relatively similiar.

 

Of course I could be totally wrong because I'm only looking at a glance.

[LuvChicagoSports]

This is all fan perception and not what team scouting departments and front office members are saying. When it really comes down to it, what the fans think means nothing. I hate admitting this because I like to think my opinions and thoughts have some value, but honestly if it was all about fan perception, the Cubs could have traded Corey Patterson for just about anyone or anything when he was first coming up. They probably could have traded him for a lot, but you know GM's like Billy Beane would have been skeptical of players like that. Simply put, we don't know what scouts think about Murton and Jackson they could see them as virtually the same "players with some good potential, but haven't really displayed if they can do it consistently or not" or they might see them as on different levels. It's probably pretty safe to assume most teams wouldn't look at things the same as all other teams.

[Guest]

the Cubs do their best to destroy all value of their young players.

[minnesotacubsfan]

the Cubs do their best to destroy all value of their young players.

 

this is why

[badnews]

During his time in the minors, Jackson was a highly-touted prospect. Most people thought that he and Carlos Quentin would end up becoming two of the brightest young stars in baseball. Both of them put up some impressive numbers down in the minor leagues.

 

Murton, on the other hand, didn't receive much recognition until the season after he was traded to the Cubs. Even then, he didn't receive nearly as much hype or recognition as Jackson.

 

I think these perceptions, in part, stem from that.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, but looking at the parks where Jackson put up his best numbers it looks like it's not totally equal.

 

To the other guy, actually Murton is 7 months older than Jackson and was only drafted 13 spots below him.

[nilodnayr]

During his time in the minors, Jackson was a highly-touted prospect. Most people thought that he and Carlos Quentin would end up becoming two of the brightest young stars in baseball. Both of them put up some impressive numbers down in the minor leagues.

 

Murton, on the other hand, didn't receive much recognition until the season after he was traded to the Cubs. Even then, he didn't receive nearly as much hype or recognition as Jackson.

 

I think these perceptions, in part, stem from that.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, but looking at the parks where Jackson put up his best numbers it looks like it's not totally equal.

 

To the other guy, actually Murton is 7 months older than Jackson and was only drafted 13 spots below him.

 

How many top 100 prospect lists was Jackson on and how many were Murton on?

[badnews]

I'm not sure that proves anything. How many times did Jeremy Sowers rank better than Fausto Carmona in the prospect rankings?

[nilodnayr]

I'm not sure that proves anything. How many times did Jeremy Sowers rank better than Fausto Carmona in the prospect rankings?

 

Um, this was your question

 

The only question I want people to answer is this: Why is Jackson a darling for most people, with "excellent" trade value while Murton is just dumped on? I don't think anyone would say Murton isn't half the ballplayer Jackson is, so why does Murton have less than half the trade value?

 

So, yeah it kinda proves exactly what you are asking.