White Sox Acquire Edwin Jackson

[greg775]

Pena definitely has stunk. It would have been interesting to see him get the start tonight, however.

[fathom]

Now go get Fat Elvis (and $) and call it a deadline.

 

Sounds like Yankees are going to get either Dunn or Berkman. And as for Jackson, what scares me is that he had a dead arm to start the year, and now he has another dead arm.

[dyuen]

Kalapse,

 

When 90% of the posters are condescending towards me, I cant help myself.

 

If people want to imply that I dont understand f***ing salary, the most simple thing in baseball, then Im going to give it back in spades.

 

If people want to believe that Hudson is better than Jackson, thats one thing.

 

But to suggest that some how the Sox dont understand the potential consequences of adding more pitching salary to a team in need of hitting, is just mind boggling.

 

At least give the Sox management some credit, that maybe they know a little bit what they are doing. Thats all I ask from posters, juts give them a shred of credit.

 

You dont have to agree, but KW has been responsible for more success than any other GM in my life. He at least deserves some deference in his decision making.

I dont think we are saying that the sox dont understand the consequences. I think we are saying that we dont agree with the need for a mediocre starter over an impact hitter.

 

Absolutely KW deserves some credit and I am glad we have him because he has balls and will take risks. That doesn't mean we can't debate his decisions and disagree with them.

 

Anyways, I don't think Jackson makes us any better team than Hudson does.

[iamshack]

Really? I feel like the Sox take on this much salary all the time in trades. They did it twice last year, Peavy and Rios make a hell of a lot more than this guy.

The Sox take on salary. What the Sox don't do is eat salary when they trade their own players. Last year with Contreras and Thome was the first time I can remember it...

[greg775]

Let's go get Berkman. Now!! (Assuming we have no interest in Derrick Lee, whom I covet).

[Soxbadger]

Jackson's salary made him cheaper on the trade market, just like Peavy (and Rios although he was a waiver).

 

So when they traded for Jackson, they were getting him cheap in terms of prospects because of the fact that his play did not match his salary.

 

The Sox want to make noise this year. They are not a team where people show up to games when they are middling.

 

No one showed up the first half of the season, it was sad. The Sox need to make the playoffs so that they can continue to draw fans.

 

If the Sox had 8mil to spend and Hudson and this is all they can get, it should say how much Hudson was worth.

 

(Edit)

 

The White Sox almost always get some sort of cash back in a trade for a salary this high.

 

There are some outliers, but the Sox have generally paid more in spects to get more money back.

 

 

Edited July 30, 2010 by Soxbadger

[clyons]

You really think that a struggling, terrible second half pitcher, is worth the $8.5 million upgrade while losing your youngest, cheapest, most impactful pitcher?

 

I'm not sure what this means, but I think I disagree.

[kjshoe04]

Pena definitely has stunk. It would have been interesting to see him get the start tonight, however.

He''s been about the same as Jenks. Who you have said multiple times has had a good season.

[bigruss]

I think Jackson is a better pitcher right now than Hudson and believe he has more potential than Hudson. The 8.5 million isn't for me to worry about.

I dont think that at all. He's has one good month this season, and that was in June, besides that hes been absolutely terrible.

[greg775]

No comment on Jenks. My stance on him is pretty well known, basically regarding his saves.

[bigruss]

I'm not sure what this means, but I think I disagree.

He is the best prospect that we had to call up and start for us this year.

[BearSox]

I never once said that, so I'm not sure who you are referring to. But there is a massive disconnect between people on here's value of Hudson, and every major league teams value of Hudson.

You pretty much said it when you said:

 

"this guy was so highly regarded and sought after then why didn't the Nationals jump at a chance to trade Dunn for him?"

 

And yeah, Hudson probably is overvalued on this board. But it still doesn't make the trade make anymore sense. Hudson is a young, cheap pitcher with potential to be at least a 4 or 5 in the big leagues. Jackson is an older, a LOT more expensive pitcher who does have some potential but has shown to be nothing but a 4 or 5 starter after more than a couple years of pitching in the big leagues already.

 

I'd have no problem if we traded Harrell and Holmberg for Jackson... but it was dumb to trade our most valuable young pitching prospect for him.

[greg775]

I'd have no problem if we traded Harrell and Holmberg for Jackson... but it was dumb to trade our most valuable young pitching prospect for him.

 

Exactly!!! You just said it all.

Jackson was a salary dump and we got fleeced for the salary dump. God I hate we can't WIN trades any more, significantly win them.

[Jerksticks]

I LOVE THIS TRADE

 

I LOVE THIS TRADE

[WHarris1]

You pretty much said it when you said:

 

"this guy was so highly regarded and sought after then why didn't the Nationals jump at a chance to trade Dunn for him?"

 

And yeah, Hudson probably is overvalued on this board. But it still doesn't make the trade make anymore sense. Hudson is a young, cheap pitcher with potential to be at least a 4 or 5 in the big leagues. Jackson is an older, a LOT more expensive pitcher who does have some potential but has shown to be nothing but a 4 or 5 starter after more than a couple years of pitching in the big leagues already.

 

I'd have no problem if we traded Harrell and Holmberg for Jackson... but it was dumb to trade our most valuable young pitching prospect for him.

Regarding the bolded part, I already said I agree with most on the trade and Hudson vs. Jackson, but the value of Hudson on this board and what he could have fetched around the league had gotten out of hand.

 

And the part you quoted is far from me saying "well we got nothing good for him so he must suck", what i'm saying is the way he is talked about around here you would think the Nationals would easily give up half a season of Dunn for him.

[greg775]

How can anybody argue with bearSox's post. That to me was the concise post of the decade.

[BearSox]

Regarding the bolded part, I already said I agree with most on the trade and Hudson vs. Jackson, but the value of Hudson on this board and what he could have fetched around the league had gotten out of hand.

 

And the part you quoted is far from me saying "well we got nothing good for him so he must suck", what i'm saying is the way he is talked about around here you would think the Nationals would easily give up half a season of Dunn for him.

Okay, fair enough.

[bigruss]

Jackson's salary made him cheaper on the trade market, just like Peavy (and Rios although he was a waiver).

 

So when they traded for Jackson, they were getting him cheap in terms of prospects because of the fact that his play did not match his salary.

 

The Sox want to make noise this year. They are not a team where people show up to games when they are middling.

 

No one showed up the first half of the season, it was sad. The Sox need to make the playoffs so that they can continue to draw fans.

 

If the Sox had 8mil to spend and Hudson and this is all they can get, it should say how much Hudson was worth.

 

(Edit)

 

The White Sox almost always get some sort of cash back in a trade for a salary this high.

 

There are some outliers, but the Sox have generally paid more in spects to get more money back.

So what happens when the Sox cant afford to keep some combination of AJ, Paulie, Putz, Jenks, etc because they are paying a mediocre-bad starter in EJax? Then all of a sudden they have holes they cant fill, and were back to middling.

[kjshoe04]

I dont think that at all. He's has one good month this season, and that was in June, besides that hes been absolutely terrible.

Hey its all opinion either way. There hasn't been enough of a Hudson sample to compare yet. It just annoys me how people look at his salary for next year and declare this Kenny's worst trade ever and all that. Maybe he puts it together for half a season here and we trade him for a cheaper, better option than Hudson in the offseason. Things can change fast.

[Soxbadger]

Not only that, but most believed that the Nats preferred Jackson and his salary to Hudson.

 

What does that say about Hudson? Why do multiple teams prefer overpaid Action Jackson to him?

 

There must be a reason and its not just that every GM is stupid.

[ScottyDo]

I'm sure it's been brought up (I don't have time to read ~65 pages of stuff), but Jax was good (great, even) as recently as last year. There are a billion reasons a young pitcher can regress that don't include him being bad. I'm amazed that people view his CEILING as a 4th or 5th starter when he has pitched like a #2 not long ago.

 

Jax is exactly the type of pitcher I want to see working with Coop: loads of talent which has not been harnessed reliably, but which has shown extended periods of effectiveness. All he really has to do is figure out what made him great last year, get it back, and keep it consistent. And consistency is one of the things I feel like Coop excels at finding.

 

I don't know what type of rock the rest of you were smoking but I was certainly underwhelmed by the little I saw out of Hudson. Stuff-wise, what separated him from Rowland-Smith? They're both kind of flat and lacking a measure of control. The comparison is not wonderful, but based on how the two pitchers LOOKED, I'd say it's not terribly far off, stuff-wise. And sample size, sure...but I really didn't see anything more than a future #4.

 

Money-wise, that's another story. It's a gamble, to be sure, but if Coop does, in fact, do his thing, then we've got a stud at $8.5M and nobody's complaining.

 

I don't love it, but I would never use the word "abominable" to describe this trade. Holy eff, people.

[WHarris1]

Okay, fair enough.

Trust me I'm not oozing my pants over this trade, but at the same time I'm not incredibly devastated over the loss of Daniel Hudson as many others seem to be. He became highly overvalued around these parts.

[bigruss]

Not only that, but most believed that the Nats preferred Jackson and his salary to Hudson.

 

What does that say about Hudson? Why do multiple teams prefer overpaid Action Jackson to him?

 

There must be a reason and its not just that every GM is stupid.

At this point, I would have zero confidence in claims by the Dbacks and Nats in terms of their quality of scouting.

[nitetrain8601]

I haven't read everything and probably won't because I don't have that type of time. In the end though, I'm very happy if we keep Jackson. As a 4th or 5th starter, he can definitely get us to the playoffs. In the playoffs, he can be an electric arm out of the pen. I think if he can get with a good pitching coach, he's a better player for it.

 

I won't be too upset if he isn't flipped for Dunn or anyone else.

[ScottyDo]

So what happens when the Sox cant afford to keep some combination of AJ, Paulie, Putz, Jenks, etc because they are paying a mediocre-bad starter in EJax? Then all of a sudden they have holes they cant fill, and were back to middling.

Somehow, I feel like the next 2 months are not going to change EJax's trade value all that much, and he can be traded again in the offseason if we need to. There were other teams interested in him, not just us.