Edwin Jackson, Nationals Reach Agreement

It’s one thing to say no to the Orioles, since Orioles, but the Pirates? Granted, for a while, the Pirates and the Orioles were basically the same thing, but in 2011 the Pirates showed promise. They showed that they might be on the right track. Jackson turned down three years with them for one year with the Nationals?

Well, yeah. I mean, the Pirates still have a long ways to go. The Nationals might be ready to contend now. And it’s not like Jackson assumes he’s going to suck or get hurt in 2012, so he can get right back into the market and find eight figures somewhere else. The Pirates have more going for them than they have in the past, but the Nationals have more. Lots more.

Jackson took a long time to sign, because Jackson’s market was slow to develop. At least, from the outside, it appeared as if Jackson’s market was slow to develop. We can never know for sure what things were really like. That Jackson signed for a year and about $10 million when he entered the offseason looking for something much longer and bigger suggests as much.

Or something along those lines. Basically, I saw a lot of people trying to explain Jackson’s market by pointing to his trade history. Jackson’s been a pretty good pitcher. He’s been traded unusually often. Therefore, Jackson has some problem that must be known within baseball circles.

From the estimable Joe Lemire’s look at the Edwin Jackson deal, this little tidbit:

Let’s remember to keep an eye on Jackson’s splits this season, but I will note in passing that Jackson’s splits were perfectly normal in 2010; also, doesn’t Scott Boras pay people good money to notice stuff like this?

We turn to Nationals blog Federal Baseball. There’s a lot in there, but here’s one excerpt:

Everybody knows that Jackson’s a power pitcher. Fewer people know that Jackson’s been a steady pitcher. Pitchers are kind of unpredictable so you can’t just assume that Jackson will stay healthy going forward, but the history is suggestive. Jackson’s a good candidate to fill a hole the Nationals wanted to fill.

So, what now? What does this mean? Why do this? At FanGraphs, Carson Cistulli tackles the subject and raises concerns:

But he might overstate his position, because, ultimately, Jackson’s an upgrade, and the Nationals are in the market for upgrades. Upgrades allow the Nationals to move closer to contention. The Nationals are better with Jackson than without him, and Jackson isn’t costing them too much, so this is a neat move that improves the team’s chances of seeing the playoffs.

The Nationals finished 2011 just one win short of a .500 season: 80-81.

That was their best finish since 2005 -- their first year in Washington, actually -- when they went 81-81.

So the Nationals probably aren’t going to mess around with Wang as a $4 million spot starter, nor are they going to turn Lannan into a LOOGY (a role that wouldn’t even suit him well). They have a glut of pitchers. Considering that their Opening Day starter from last year just signed a minor-league deal with a bad team, it’s a problem that they’re ecstatic to have.

They have apparently succeeded. Amanda Comak:

Jon Heyman:

Jon Heyman:

There’s no word yet on the terms. Jackson’s deal is pending a physical. But it looks like Jackson is headed for the nation’s capital, since Heyman usually isn’t wrong about these things. Especially when these things involve Scott Boras clients.

Rule 1a of the offseason: There’s always a mystery team. And in case you haven’t noticed, the mystery team is often the team that gets their man. The two top free agents of the offseason were nabbed by the mystery team, for example. And the mystery team is at it again, this time in Washington D.C.:

Rosenthal later clarified the story, suggesting that it’s Jackson that the Nationals are targeting. The Nationals just won their arbitration case over Lannan, and he’ll make $5 million next year. The lefty had a 3.70 ERA last year (104 ERA+), and he’s been a fairly consistent innings muncher since becoming a full-time rotation member in 2008.

The Red Sox are reported to have offered Jackson a one-year contract worth $5 million - $6 million. Jackson is worth more than a one-year contract worth $5 million - $6 million. Jackson is represented by Scott Boras, so you can figure that Jackson is well aware that he’s worth more than a one-year contract worth $5 million - $6 million.

A couple things, though. For one, it was Edes who, last Friday, reported that Roy Oswalt was going to St. Louis. Oswalt hasn’t gone to St. Louis, as far as anybody knows, so you have to wonder. Not that I think Gordon Edes is just making things up, but I do wonder about his individual sources.

I’m not sure how relevant his No. 1 caliber stuff is, without No. 1 caliber performance. Except there’s always a pitching coach who thinks he can fix a guy. Except he usually can’t.

Jackson did take a step forward in 2009, but even since then his strikeout-to-walk ratio is just 2.33, which would be real good for an extreme ground-ball pitcher but Jackson still gives up roughly one home run every nine innings. He’s a good pitcher and pitchers are weird so maybe he’ll be great someday. But probably not.

About those multi-year contract offers, though - Jackson might not take one of them. From Dan Connolly:

The term that’s been thrown around is “pillow contract.” Jackson could sign a one-year contract for a soft landing before trying the market again next fall. Maybe next fall, there’s more interest. Maybe next fall, there’s more money.

Sources: E. Jackson has multiple three-year offers. Also could take one-year deal, go back on market next off-season.

Hamels, Greinke likely at top of 2012-13 FA class if #SFGiants extend Cain. Jackson, 28, could further enhance value with strong year.Thus, Rosenthal appears to agree with Baseball Nation’s Marc Normandin, who suggested just yesterday that Jackson might be better off taking a one-year deal:

There is security in a four-year deal, as Jackson would be paid regardless of whether he ever pitched well again (or at all). But pitching for the Cardinals or Red Sox for a year represents Jackson’s chance to pitch in an environment that would likely host competitive baseball -- a successful full season in conditions Jackson hasn’t tasted outside of his short stay in St. Louis might make for a more lucrative 2012-2013 off-season.

The counterpoint to this is basically that if Jackson couldn’t land a multi-year deal (the Orioles notwithstanding) this winter, why would he be able to next season, when the pitching market is that much stronger? There are two thoughts with this line of thinking that can be questioned. First, if there are tons of pitchers available on the free agent market, that means there are a whole lot of vacancies that need to be filled as well. It might not be a 1:1 ratio, but unless Jackson completely falters, he’ll have more places he could pitch in 2013 than in 2012. The second notion is that there are tons of pitchers available in the first place: almost half of next year’s assumed available crop has an option on 2013, and with a few exceptions, they are club-friendly ones:

The better pitcher for next year? Flip a coin. The better pitcher for 2014? Almost certainly Jackson, so if the Red Sox are thinking this is an opportunity to buy low on him, it makes sense.

Here’s the ostensible rotation for the 2012 Yankees:

I just gave you reasons to be suspicious of four of those pitchers. The Yankees’ payroll will likely be over $200 million this year, and yet 80% of their rotation is made up with if-then scenarios. It worked last year. It could work again this year.

Perhaps that will change soon. Jon Heyman reports that Yankees owner Hal Steinbrenner met with Jackson’s agent Scott Boras in Phoenix, where owners are having meetings this week:

As always, we await further developments.