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

[toonsterwu]

theo>dayton

 

BUT kc royals prospects > chi cubs prospects

 

Not after this current trade. With Myers gone, the Cubs have the better system. Now, if you are including the young major leaguers, that's a slightly different equation.

[toonsterwu]

10:03pm: Bowden reports (on Twitter) that the Cubs are now the front-runner for Jackson. He says a four-year deal worth approximately $52MM is in the ballpark.

 

I'm decidedly not excited about 4/52, but .... it's not that bad. Just wonder if, in their minds as of right now (acknowledging that a lot of things can change), this is a swap (signing Jackson and then dealing Garza) or if it's to give them three solid arms in their prime to build around.

[Cubswin11]

10:03pm: Bowden reports (on Twitter) that the Cubs are now the front-runner for Jackson. He says a four-year deal worth approximately $52MM is in the ballpark.

 

I'm decidedly not excited about 4/52, but .... it's not that bad. Just wonder if, in their minds as of right now (acknowledging that a lot of things can change), this is a swap (signing Jackson and then dealing Garza) or if it's to give them three solid arms in their prime to build around.

Pretty much a market value contract. He's averaged about 3.5 fWAR a year the last 4 years and 1 WAR = about $4-4.5mm. If not a bit below.

Edited December 20, 2012 by Cubswin11

[SABR Gamer]

10:03pm: Bowden reports (on Twitter) that the Cubs are now the front-runner for Jackson. He says a four-year deal worth approximately $52MM is in the ballpark.

 

I'm decidedly not excited about 4/52, but .... it's not that bad. Just wonder if, in their minds as of right now (acknowledging that a lot of things can change), this is a swap (signing Jackson and then dealing Garza) or if it's to give them three solid arms in their prime to build around.

Pretty much a market value contract. He's averaged about 3.5 fWAR a year the last 4 years and 1 WAR = about $4-4.5mm.

 

Market value is definitely not 1 WAR = $4-4.5 million anymore.

[Clem Fandango]

If you listen to Fangaphs it is. According to Fangraphs, Edwin Jackson's "Dollars" divided by fWAR

 

2009 - $16.3/3.6 = $4.52 million per win

2010 - $15.9/3.9 = $3.97 million per win

2011 - $17.4/3.9 = $4.46 million per win

2012 - $11.9/2.7 = $4.40 million per win

[SABR Gamer]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/a-retrospective-look-at-the-price-of-a-win-part-two/

 

Even in 2011 the actual value (not the estimate) was at 5 and a half. Prices have seemed to go up this offseason so I can't imagine it's any lower now.

 

ETA: I know it's ridiculous but it actually shows that in 2011, for the price range Jackson is in, $/WAR was actually valued at 11.4 million per win above replacement level.

[Clem Fandango]

Okay, but $52 million over 4 years falls in line with his previous 4 years $/WAR numbers. It's not an overpay, nor is it an underpay, it's right around what Jackson has been worth. And if the market is indeed above $5 million per win, then we'd be paying less than that in that situation, would we not?

[sneakypower]

Mark Shapiro thinks he's worth much, much more!

http://www.obstructedview.net/aside/mark-shapiro-one-win-in-free-agency-is-9-million.html

[Rob]

It's not a great value, but it's not an overpay either. It's a market value deal that fills a hole in the rotation with a solid performer. I've got no gripes.

[Clem Fandango]

Mark Shapiro thinks he's worth much, much more!

http://www.obstructedview.net/aside/mark-shapiro-one-win-in-free-agency-is-9-million.html

 

Well then in that case Jackson is a mf'n bargain

[weis21]

10:03pm: Bowden reports (on Twitter) that the Cubs are now the front-runner for Jackson. He says a four-year deal worth approximately $52MM is in the ballpark.

 

I'm decidedly not excited about 4/52, but .... it's not that bad. Just wonder if, in their minds as of right now (acknowledging that a lot of things can change), this is a swap (signing Jackson and then dealing Garza) or if it's to give them three solid arms in their prime to build around.

 

Either way, I'm getting excited. Not getting my hopes up yet, but cautiously optimistic with the reports out there. I predicted (shot in the dark) from the rumors swirling out there that the Cubs may sign both Jackson and CV.

 

Part of me would LOVE extending Garza (if healthy, of course) and having 3 really, really good starting pitchers going forward. But I'm also very intrigued to see if Shark could net 3 critical pieces that may be more important to fielding a contender sooner.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[mookie]

I just got all moist.

[BCVM22]

Put whatever stock in this you so choose.

 

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r71/bcvm22/sigzeon/secretgarza.png

[Guest]

it would be impressive if he was wrong for a third straight time

[toonsterwu]

Don't get me wrong, I get the value discussion as it pertains to the numbers. I don't have a big problem with the AAV ... just not a huge fan of 4 years for Edwin Jackson.

 

All that said, considering his strong 3 year run and the consistent control improvement since Don Cooper got ahold of him with the White Sox in 2010, maybe I should be a bit more excited.

[Guest]

it would be impressive if he was wrong for a third straight time

 

At least they're former teammates this time.

[Fro]

Garza will just say he was talking about Brett Jackson changing his number if he ends up being wrong again.

[mul21]

Don't get me wrong, I get the value discussion as it pertains to the numbers. I don't have a big problem with the AAV ... just not a huge fan of 4 years for Edwin Jackson.

 

All that said, considering his strong 3 year run and the consistent control improvement since Don Cooper got ahold of him with the White Sox in 2010, maybe I should be a bit more excited.

 

I'm not bothered by it (the 4 years) because it's not outlandish by any means and we're talking about a guy who has a pretty good history of being healthy and going out there every 5th day.

[fiver]

I'll get excited when the deal is finalized.

[Guest]

Buster OlneyVerified

‏@Buster_ESPN

The Cubs have made strong progress on a four-year, $52 million deal with Edwin Jackson.

 

Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN

Cubs' rotation could be Jeff Samardzija, Matt Garza, Edwin Jackson, Scott Baker and Scott Feldman. Which is better than in 2012.

 

Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN

With Edwin Jackson just about off the board, the most prominent starting pitcher still unsigned --easily the most prominent - is Kyle Lohse.

[Guest]

Excellent. That wouldn't be a bad contract at all.

[Guest]

Would've been so awesome to get both Jackson and Sanchez.

 

Samardz, Garza, Sanchez, Jackson, Feldman/Baker

 

 

Whatever order... drool.

[Guest]

David Kaplan ‏@thekapman

Trying to get deal done w/Edwin Jackson as they try to show improvement in '13. That helps entice FA next yr when they will look to spend.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm going to be naive and believe this is really about to get done.

 

It's no "sign Pujols and a SP and win right away," but "hoover up all the average starting pitching and just overload the roster with it" has some sort of weird, undefined quality of ambition that's more in line with what I expected from this front office.

[Guest]

If Kaplan is right and they plan to spend bigger next offseason, is there anyone even out there? From what I remember, the 2013 class looks pretty weak, but maybe there are some gems at the top.