Jump to content

Austin Jackson


hogan873
 Share

Recommended Posts

He's way better in CF defensively than Eaton. If he hits about .250 and drives in 50 runs and plays a standout center field AND we win the division, I'd say he could sign a two-year deal for 10 million total. In order words his current contract with a second season. Nobody's gonna sign Austin Jackson to a big-buck contract. It's nice to have a good glove in center, but he's not going to get a great offer from any team.

Five-to seven million a year is about the highest I'd go for 1-3 years. If Sox don't make the playoffs, move on. But the new CF must have a good glove.

Edited by greg775
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ May 9, 2016 -> 06:16 PM)
Might as well let play May in center and bat 9th. I'm sure he could put up Jackson offensive numbers for league minimum with better d.

 

BS...I'd rather have Austin Jackson playing CF than Avila catching. And it's not even close....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ May 9, 2016 -> 08:23 PM)
Huh? I don't want Avila catching really. Those 2 positions aren't dependant on each other lol

 

If you're slotting a "non-hitter" in the lineup given tne current roster...Id much rather it be Jackson than Avila is the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There would be some problems with re-signing Jackson. The first is that he's likely to hit FA this winter and, since this is the last big contract he's going to get, he's going to want maximum value. The upcoming FA period is also going to be a player's market, so Jackson will be able to command more than he's worth (I'd guess in the 4/$30M-4/$40M range). On top of that, he's hit well below his career .730 OPS for the past couple of years and he turns 30 next season. Given that his decline in offense might be permanent, his value would be mostly his defense, which will begin to erode in the next few years. He'll probably have to move to LF in the third or fourth year of his contract.

 

Given all of that, I'd take a pass on signing Ajax to a multi-year deal. I'd rather roll the dice with May or somebody else who is cheaper, can play plus-defense in CF, and can put up an upper-.600 OPS.

 

On the other hand, if Ajax's bat remains cold this season and he waits until the winter of 2017 to test the market, I'd be cool with re-signing him to another one-year deal. But I really think that he hits free agency this winter.

Edited by Black_Jack29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 9, 2016 -> 12:25 PM)
The fact is, Jackson has been pretty terrible offensively for almost two full seasons

 

The average CF in the American League last year put up a .683 OPS.

 

Austin Jackson put up a .696 OPS.

 

People still have a bizarrely, insanely inaccurate view of what is league average and what is terrible in the present, non-steroid era.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ May 9, 2016 -> 09:01 PM)
There would be some problems with re-signing Jackson. The first is that he's likely to hit FA this winter and, since this is the last big contract he's going to get, he's going to want maximum value. The upcoming FA period is also going to be a player's market, so Jackson will be able to command more than he's worth (I'd guess in the 4/$30M-4/$40M range).

 

Why in the universe is anyone offering him a 4 year deal? He had to sign a 1 year $5 million deal this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Vance Law @ May 10, 2016 -> 07:38 AM)
Why in the universe is anyone offering him a 4 year deal? He had to sign a 1 year $5 million deal this year.

Exactly. He's past the big contract stage. If he somehow has an amazing year offensively, he might get Kendrys Morales money but I even doubt that.

Two year deal max, like one of those old deals Francoer used to get. Two years 14 million is MAX and he won't get that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Vance Law @ May 10, 2016 -> 12:34 AM)
The average CF in the American League last year put up a .683 OPS.

 

Austin Jackson put up a .696 OPS.

 

People still have a bizarrely, insanely inaccurate view of what is league average and what is terrible in the present, non-steroid era.

 

 

If you strip away Jackson's April in 2014 with the Tigers, I'm sure you will find he's at or below .683 (over the last two years)....that's why I said the better part of two seasons.

 

He did have a brief recovery for one month, July 2014, then it was all downhill from the time he was traded to the M's.

 

1.5-1.7 WAR might be acceptable for some teams, but it's borderline. Most of Jackson's defensive stats have been fairly mixed, although the "eye test" would seemingly tell you that he's been better than average this year.

 

And part of it's comparing Jackson to the player he USED to be from 2010-2014. He was a very good player, and he's still young, but these seasons have been pretty terrible comparably to the past standard he set.

 

Otherwise, he would have gotten more or better offers for Scott Boras than he ended up with...

 

 

 

Remember, I spent most of the offseason arguing we should sign both Jackson and Ian Desmond...so I'm quite familiar with his history and the fact that signing "terrible" players usually isn't a good idea.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Vance Law @ May 10, 2016 -> 12:38 AM)
Why in the universe is anyone offering him a 4 year deal? He had to sign a 1 year $5 million deal this year.

 

The upcoming FA market is going to be thin. That's why Fowler took a one-year deal over a three-year deal, Cespedes has an out clause in his current deal, and Rasmus accepted the qualifying offer. All of those guys are going to cash in, and I guarantee you that Jackson will get a multi-year deal as well.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 10, 2016 -> 08:38 AM)
If you strip away Jackson's April in 2014 with the Tigers, I'm sure you will find he's at or below .683 (over the last two years)....that's why I said the better part of two seasons.

 

He did have a brief recovery for one month, July 2014, then it was all downhill from the time he was traded to the M's.

 

1.5-1.7 WAR might be acceptable for some teams, but it's borderline. Most of Jackson's defensive stats have been fairly mixed, although the "eye test" would seemingly tell you that he's been better than average this year.

 

And part of it's comparing Jackson to the player he USED to be from 2010-2014. He was a very good player, and he's still young, but these seasons have been pretty terrible comparably to the past standard he set.

 

Otherwise, he would have gotten more or better offers for Scott Boras than he ended up with...

 

 

 

Remember, I spent most of the offseason arguing we should sign both Jackson and Ian Desmond...so I'm quite familiar with his history and the fact that signing "terrible" players usually isn't a good idea.

 

Well it isnt June yet, so we can still sign Desmond

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ May 10, 2016 -> 01:10 PM)
Well it isnt June yet, so we can still sign Desmond

 

 

It was the correct thought process, at least.

 

Signing Jackson has obviously worked out well, Desmond will be fine and Fowler was the other one it was speculated could go over into the season, and he's been one of the top 5-10 players in MLB so far this season.

 

Obviously THAT won't last, but once those players come off the board, you move to the next best alternatives.

 

 

The reason I wanted Desmond was not being 100% sold on Tim Anderson. The Rangers have Odor, Andrus, Profar, Alberto, etc. They are a manufacturing line for Latin American middle infielders. Whether we could have given Desmond an attractive enough deal for two years, we'll never know, probably.

 

As it is, SS is the weakest area on our team and I would argue worth a late first round draft pick, but whatever. It became obvious at a certain point that Hahn wasn't going to go there with either Fowler or Desmond. He stuck to his cards, rightly or wrongly, it remains to be seen how it all works out. Even if the pick turns out to be a bust, many will still argue it was the right thing to do regardless.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...