New York Yankees Hot Stove: 7 Reasons For My New Edwin Jackson Attitude New York Yankees Hot Stove: 7 Reasons For My New Edwin Jackson Attitude New York Yankees Hot Stove: 7 Reasons For My New Edwin Jackson Attitude

New York Yankees Hot Stove: 7 Reasons For My New Edwin Jackson Attitude

Edwin Jackson

Edwin Jackson was a Tiger in 2009. Image via Wikipedia

Last February, knowing the New York Yankees had lost Cliff Lee and that the Chicago White Sox were a team with a surplus of starters the talk of a trade between the two was a hot topic.

The name Edwin Jackson started popping-up and I was adamantly against the idea, as stated in my Four Reasons Not To Trade For Edwin Jackson.

Now a season later, and GM Brian Cashman has reportedly been in contact with Jackson’s agent within the last week according to George King at the NY post.

With the bleak state of the free agent pitching market, I took a few days to reassess Jackson and the Yankees again; and good thing I did because my sentiments have changed.

Why the sudden new attitude about the Yankees acquiring Jackson?

  1. Jackson is a 28-year old innings eaters, who throws a lot of strikes and has lowered his walk numbers to a more respectable number over the last two seasons. Since 2007, his first full season as a starter he has never made less than 31 starts.
  2. Jackson is a solid fourth starter who could solidify the backend of the rotation and eat innings, which helps relieve the bullpen. Remember the Yankees did not know how good Ivan Nova or Freddy Garcia would be a season ago and Jackson would fit behind them nicely. Pending if Garcia is back in 2012, but my guess is he will.
  3. Last season, Jackson pitched under intense pressure in St. Louis and that makes him better equipped to handle New York.
  4. Pitching coach Larry Rothschild verified his reputation in 2011 and I have complete confidence that he will make Jackson better.
  5. Jackson will come a lot cheaper than CJ Wilson or Mark Buehrle both in years and in dollars, so the Yankees should offer more money to keep it a three-year deal. His agent is Scott Boras, so nothing is set in stone.
  6. Jackson had a nice 2011 season, splitting his time between the White Sox and the WS Champion Cardinals, who traded for him, mid-season. Combined, Jackson went 12-9 in 31 starts, posting a 3.79 ERA, issuing 62 walks, 148 strikeouts and gave up just 16 home-runs. He pitched his third straight season of 200 innings, which included one shutout and one complete game.
  7. Finally, Jackson has never had stability playing for six clubs in nine seasons. For a guy whose worn five different uniforms since 2009, having a secure home for a few years gives him and a team something he has never had…time.

Overall, Jackson’s upside is greater now and the Yankees could be getting a big bang for their buck. He has the stuff with a plus fastball that sits around 95 mpg, a killer slider and an 86+ change-up that just need some more grooming and a full season in one uniform could be just what the doctor ordered.

The “backseat approach” the Yankees claim to be taking this winter won’t work to ink Jackson because along with a scarce market, he is the best affordable option out there.

In my opinion, Jackson is worth taking a chance on now.  Of course pending that the years stay at three, with a fourth year vesting option maximum. If those terms are possible, I hope the Yankees seriously consider signing him.



  1. Tanned Tom says:

    How about 5 reasons not to sign Edwin Jackson:
    1) his agent is Scott Boras, so he will not come at fair market value. After the Oliver Perez and Barry Zito contracts, just imagine what he'll be asking for this guy. I'm guessing he'll want 6 years and $75 mil, which is absurd.
    2) he's a .500 pitcher with a 4.46 ERA who has thrown over 200 innings in a year exactly twice, this seems strictly back of the rotation material to me.
    3) a good pitcher throws 200 innings AND has an ERA below 4.00, Jackson's done that one time. Buehrle done it 8 times, see a difference here?
    4) Nobody wants to keep the dude around. Now it's possible that one team can make a mistake about a player, but 7? Something is wrong here.
    5) Since there is no way he'll sign a short term deal for realistic money (say 3 years at $25 mil, and that's above his worth) you're taking up a roster spot that could go to a younger, cheaper player with a much higher celing.

    • LLP says:

      Okay Tanned Tom here are my counters to your list:
      1) Zito was a better pitcher, who won a CY Young. And Perez awful signing was to the Mets, enough said.
      2 & 3) Jackson throws for strikes, he has a ridiculously good slider and has a 95+ fastball. He will come way cheaper than Buehrle, and I would want Wilson first anyway. Jackson is a better fir for the AL East in my opinion.
      4) Remember that Rothschild is a pitching genius and can work with Jackson to groom hom into a solid #3.
      I do agree with your point about the multiple teams Jackson has played for… has been a lot but as Anthony pointed out, there has never been any issues because that would be broadcasted everywhere.

      • Tanned Tom says:

        Youn make some good points, but I'm not persuaded. I agree that's the market value for a #3 starter is roughly $15 mi., but a guy who is 60-60 for his career with a 4.46 ERA is NOT a #3 starter, that's a #5 starter. Heck he only had the 4th best ERA among starters for St. Louis. If this guy is a #3, why don't the Cards re-sign him. Granted he's been pretty good the last year and a half, but would you be happy with 193 innings with a 4.40 ERA for $15 mil? Because that's what he's averaged over the last 5 years. This is not terrible, but probably pretty close to what Hughes will do, and not very much better than what Burnett will do (Rothschild hasn't worked any magic there). Any team that signs him will be overpaying on the hopes of better future performance than his recent past would indicate, and that's just crazy. Better to sign a player who's level of performance is established, that's the whole point of signing a free agent, acquiring a known commodity at a realistic price. He is intriguing I agree, but if I can't have a smart pitcher with great stuff, then I'll take the smart pitcher over the live arm.

        • LLP says:

          Well Tom, Hughes showed up out of shape last Spring Training and Burnett needs a shrink to travel with the team. Overall, Rothschild has improved the pitching staff. He helped Nova a lot, and he did get Burnett to show up when the Yankees needed him most; and the rest of team did nothing.
          I see your point about Jackson being a risk, but if the Yankees can keep the deal at 3 years with a 4th year vesting option that will be less years than Buehrle will want.
          I still think Wilson is the way to go…..but the Yankees are not going to over-pay him too much but I think they might have to rethink that.

          • Tanned Tom says:

            :) Burn-it needs a priest-exorcist-travelling witch doctor. Paging Dr. I. C. Spots!!

            If Burnett can traded (please!) then Jackson won't make my blood pressure rise. If they can trade Soriano too,
            then I'll go for Jackson and Wilson and say goodbye to Freddy.

            • LLP says:

              Soriano has a no-trade clause that he will not budge for….and the Yankees would get stuck paying all the money anyway. Wilson wants $120 million or 6-years….enough said.

  2. Yanks fan says:

    To be honest he threw 199.2 this year and was deprived of 2 starts because of the six man rotation in chicago and then losing a start when he was traded. In all actuality he would have easily been over the 200 innings mark this year.

    Furthermore, there are no hints of clubhouse problems with mr. jackson. If he had them the seven teams you qouted would not have drafted/traded for him…no?

    Jackson is not a 1 or a 2. He is a solid three or four based on stats and innings. No way his deal is anywhere close to 3 yrs 25 mil. Im guessing he signs somewhere around four to five years and $50 – $60 million. Thats the market for a solid mid rotation guy nowadays. It may seem a little high but thats the current market.

    • LLP says:

      Thanks Anthony…and I agree with you that he is a third or fourth inning guy and I did round up the 199.2 to 200 because of the reasons you gave but didn't want to ramble even more. I think Jackson could get five or six years but my guess is that if the Yankees gave him $30 million for three and a fourth year vesting option might be enough to lure him to the Bronx. I have never heard of any issues with Jackson either, but I think having a place to call home gives him security and with Rothschild's help it could be a great signing for New York.