Edwin Jackson Signs w/ Cubs: 4 years/$52 M

[davell]

Price or Felix is the ace I'm figuring we'll target. We'll have enough in the system to get either one, when they become available. I'd LOVE to have one of them, to go with Shark, E-Jax, AND Garza obviously, not sure if the payroll can take it and improve the offense a ton as well though, hence why I'd move Garza.

[SouthSideRyan]

To me, Jackson likely comes in around half the price of Garza on an extension. I'd rather have Jackson and the package of prospects you can get for Garza(assuming he's healthy) and the extra flexibility to go get an actual ace as well.

 

You think Garza's going to get 100M?

[davell]

To me, Jackson likely comes in around half the price of Garza on an extension. I'd rather have Jackson and the package of prospects you can get for Garza(assuming he's healthy) and the extra flexibility to go get an actual ace as well.

 

You think Garza's going to get 100M?

If he's healthy this year, given the state of next years FA class, I think its at least a solid possibility.

[Guest]

Garza will likely get more than the front office would want to give him, but he's not getting 100 million dollars, come on.

[Guest]

He'd have to repeat his 2011 for there to even be a prayer of that happening.

[SouthSideRyan]

Price or Felix is the ace I'm figuring we'll target. We'll have enough in the system to get either one, when they become available. I'd LOVE to have one of them, to go with Shark, E-Jax, AND Garza obviously, not sure if the payroll can take it and improve the offense a ton as well though, hence why I'd move Garza.

 

Seems like we're putting all our eggs in one basket if we don't sign Jackson.

 

-Better hope nobody can upstage our offers on these 2.

-Better hope Seattle doesn't have an Orioles year in them leaving them to keep or extend Hernandez.

-Better hope the Rays don't decide to deal off one of their other lesser pitchers.

[davell]

True, but how else can we acquire a true ace? The good thing about this though, is we'll have a better feel for things at midseason. We'll know if the Mariners are contending or not and we'll know how Garza looks as well. If he looks great, I guess theres at least a chance we're in contention anyway. And we can decide to extend him at any point, if we've got confidence in him. As for Price, we'll have an idea, based on how our system is looking at that point, if we'll have the goods that Tampa may not be able to pass up.

[davell]

And yeah, Garza would need a 2011 type season to get 100(or close to it). But with Lincecum, Hughes, and Johnson being the 3 best SP on the FA market, other than Garza and pitching always at a premium, if he pitches well, I could see him getting a very large deal from someone.

[SouthSideRyan]

So say things work out for the best and we can trade half of our best prospects for Price:

 

Who is our #3 starter if we trade Garza and don't sign Jackson? Vizcaino? Wood? Loux?

[jersey cubs fan]

True, but how else can we acquire a true ace?

 

The only realistic way is by drafting one this year.

[neely crenshaw]

Jackson seems to be trending upwards. His recent stats are much better than his career averages, with his ERA hanging in the high 3's as opposed to a 4.40 career. They are saying his output does not match his stuff.

The difference between re-signing Garza vs signing Jackson is we already have Garza. He is one of our only chips to build with. We almost have to trade him at some point to get prospects, then maybe we re-sign him, or someone they want more- and we still have those prospects.

I am not sure about signing Jackson for too much or too long, but I'm not against it, I'll leave that choice to guys in charge. It doesn't seem that help is close from the minors. I am pretty sure we should deal Garza at some point.

 

I do have to ask if we do nothing else, how are we going to be in contention even if Garza looks great?

 

Dempster posted a 2.25 era with 1.038 whip and was still only 5-5 and the cubs were 27 games under .500 with pretty much the same offense.

Edited December 19, 2012 by neely crenshaw

[KingCubsFan]

Jackson seems to be trending upwards. His recent stats are much better than his career averages, with his ERA hanging in the high 3's as opposed to a 4.40 career. They are saying his output does not match his stuff.

The difference between re-signing Garza vs signing Jackson is we already have Garza. He is one of our only chips to build with. We almost have to trade him at some point to get prospects, then maybe we re-sign him, or someone they want more- and we still have those prospects.

I am not sure about signing Jackson for too much or too long, but I'm not against it, I'll leave that choice to guys in charge. It doesn't seem that help is close from the minors. I am pretty sure we should deal Garza at some point.

One of the interesting things about Jackson is that he's been on a lot of teams that have preached pitching to contact, as opposed to striking people out. The Rays, White Sox and Cardinals all take that approach, and I think that partly accounts for the low K/9 output. I wonder if going to a team like the Cubs, who historically have seemed to emphasize the strikeout more, would raise the K/9 and increase the rest of his numbers as well, given that his control is improving.

[Guest]

True, but how else can we acquire a true ace?

 

I vote for "not trade Samardzija".

[jersey cubs fan]

Jackson seems to be trending upwards. His recent stats are much better than his career averages, with his ERA hanging in the high 3's as opposed to a 4.40 career. They are saying his output does not match his stuff.

The difference between re-signing Garza vs signing Jackson is we already have Garza. He is one of our only chips to build with. We almost have to trade him at some point to get prospects, then maybe we re-sign him, or someone they want more- and we still have those prospects.

I am not sure about signing Jackson for too much or too long, but I'm not against it, I'll leave that choice to guys in charge. It doesn't seem that help is close from the minors. I am pretty sure we should deal Garza at some point.

One of the interesting things about Jackson is that he's been on a lot of teams that have preached pitching to contact, as opposed to striking people out. The Rays, White Sox and Cardinals all take that approach, and I think that partly accounts for the low K/9 output. I wonder if going to a team like the Cubs, who historically have seemed to emphasize the strikeout more, would raise the K/9 and increase the rest of his numbers as well, given that his control is improving.

 

Historically meaning the Hendry/Rothschild era? Or are you saying the current regime in charging of preaching the Cubs way has historically emphasized the strikeout more than pitching to contact? I get the impression this regime is more let quality defenders do the work than the last Cubs regime was.

[neely crenshaw]

True, but how else can we acquire a true ace?

 

I vote for "not trade Samardzija".

That would seem to go against what they have done so far. Certainly he is one of our only valuable pieces but he's not a free agent until 2016 and relatively cheap, and definitely on an upswing in performance. He and Rizzo might be the only ones still here in 2016

[KingCubsFan]

Jackson seems to be trending upwards. His recent stats are much better than his career averages, with his ERA hanging in the high 3's as opposed to a 4.40 career. They are saying his output does not match his stuff.

The difference between re-signing Garza vs signing Jackson is we already have Garza. He is one of our only chips to build with. We almost have to trade him at some point to get prospects, then maybe we re-sign him, or someone they want more- and we still have those prospects.

I am not sure about signing Jackson for too much or too long, but I'm not against it, I'll leave that choice to guys in charge. It doesn't seem that help is close from the minors. I am pretty sure we should deal Garza at some point.

One of the interesting things about Jackson is that he's been on a lot of teams that have preached pitching to contact, as opposed to striking people out. The Rays, White Sox and Cardinals all take that approach, and I think that partly accounts for the low K/9 output. I wonder if going to a team like the Cubs, who historically have seemed to emphasize the strikeout more, would raise the K/9 and increase the rest of his numbers as well, given that his control is improving.

 

Historically meaning the Hendry/Rothschild era? Or are you saying the current regime in charging of preaching the Cubs way has historically emphasized the strikeout more than pitching to contact? I get the impression this regime is more let quality defenders do the work than the last Cubs regime was.

I'm not really sure where Bosio stands, because he didn't have much to work with last year, but I agree that Theo & co. definitely favor pitching to contact moreso than Hendry/Rothschild ever did. At the same time, I don't think the preference is as extreme as Don Cooper, Dave Duncan, or the Rays. I guess my point is that Jackson set a career high last year in K/9, and I would expect his future numbers would be closer to that rate as opposed to his cummulative career rate given the teams he's played for.

[jersey cubs fan]

True, but how else can we acquire a true ace?

 

I vote for "not trade Samardzija".

That would seem to go against what they have done so far. Certainly he is one of our only valuable pieces but he's not a free agent until 2016 and relatively cheap, and definitely on an upswing in performance. He and Rizzo might be the only ones still here in 2016

 

Castro is the most likely to still be here, given the likelihood of being among the very best at his position and being signed longterm. Rizzo is less likely to be among the best 1B in the league and Samardzija's status as a pitcher automatically leads to some doubts and his history just adds to the doubt.

[Guest]

True, but how else can we acquire a true ace?

 

I vote for "not trade Samardzija".

That would seem to go against what they have done so far. Certainly he is one of our only valuable pieces but he's not a free agent until 2016 and relatively cheap, and definitely on an upswing in performance. He and Rizzo might be the only ones still here in 2016

 

I think you misread what he wrote.

 

He says not trade Samardzija, because, as it looks to me, he is saying Samardzija is/will be a true ace.

[davell]

So say things work out for the best and we can trade half of our best prospects for Price:

 

Who is our #3 starter if we trade Garza and don't sign Jackson? Vizcaino? Wood? Loux?

My idea is based on getting Edwin. If we miss on him, I'm probably against dealing Garza.

[davell]

And it'd take a ridiculous offer to make me trade Shark. I do think he's got more upside still. Take away the experimental month and allow him to pitch in September, we may have had a 5 WAR SP.

[KingCubsFan]

So say things work out for the best and we can trade half of our best prospects for Price:

 

Who is our #3 starter if we trade Garza and don't sign Jackson? Vizcaino? Wood? Loux?

My idea is based on getting Edwin. If we miss on him, I'm probably against dealing Garza.

He's had two straight years of elbow issues. I'm not sure if the front office is going to want to give 5-6 years to a guy with a questionable health record. Given some of the returns for pitchers, my guess is they'd rather trade him.

[davell]

To me, its the biggest mistake by the FO, so far, in not dealing him already. But, if he pitches well, its possible to get a solid return at the deadline or at least the comp pick, if he walks. If we miss on Edwin though and Garza stays healthy, if he'd take 5/75 without a NTC, its not a bad thing for us.......

[neely crenshaw]

The FO seems to be much more attached to Rizzo and much more willing to deal Castro. That's the only reason I put it that way. I think shark is here until he is in his free agent season, Then his pitching will dictate his future.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If Garza is healthy and has a 2011ish season (obviously a huge if), I think $100 million is very much in his ballpark. He'd be a slightly better, slightly less reliable Anibal Sanchez at that point, but he'd be in a market with even less starting pitching and more money.

[neely crenshaw]

To me, its the biggest mistake by the FO, so far, in not dealing him already. But, if he pitches well, its possible to get a solid return at the deadline or at least the comp pick, if he walks. If we miss on Edwin though and Garza stays healthy, if he'd take 5/75 without a NTC, its not a bad thing for us.......

other than missing a chance at prospects. The problem the front office had is at the best time to deal him(at the deadline with a year of control), he got hurt. They could have moved him earlier in the year but I'm sure they were trying to get the most for him and hoping someone with need would ante up for him. Currently I think they have to wait to show he is healthy in order to get value from him. I'm sure people have checked but I don't think they'll offer enough with question marks on his health. Bottom line if healthy he is our one and only real tradable commodity.