PDA

View Full Version : Tigers acquire Edwin Jackson...


getonbckthr
12-10-2008, 08:50 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8922020/Wednesday-MLB-winter-meetings-blog

Domeshot17
12-10-2008, 08:58 PM
Thank God, this means we can light his crappy self up and not worry about him pitching for us

chisoxmike
12-10-2008, 09:01 PM
Hopefully he doesn't learn how to pitch.

But right now, that's two guys in Jackson and Willis that can't find the strike zone.

DSpivack
12-10-2008, 09:02 PM
That's not such a bad deal for Detroit, especially if they can somehow send the other Detroit Matt Joyce (http://www.detroitlions.com/bio.cfm?player_id=5576)to Tampa.

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-10-2008, 09:03 PM
They're going to have the best High-A rotation in baseball.

Corlose 15
12-10-2008, 09:05 PM
It seems to me that historically the Sox have hit Jackson.

If so does that mean that the Sox now own 2/5 of Detroit's rotation?:cool:

cws05champ
12-10-2008, 09:06 PM
For Matt Joyce...and people here were suggesting Dye for Jackson awhile back?

oeo
12-10-2008, 09:08 PM
It seems to me that historically the Sox have hit Jackson.

If so does that mean that the Sox now own 2/5 of Detroit's rotation?:cool:

The Sox own Detroit, period.

I just don't know where the Tigers are headed. It doesn't appear that they've improved from any of these deals. Yeah, they've got some warm bodies in their holes, but nothing really to get excited about. I thought they should have been doing something similar to what we're doing, except much bigger. :dunno:

For Matt Joyce...and people here were suggesting Dye for Jackson awhile back?

People here were not suggesting anything; that was the rumor. Likely didn't go through because Kenny wanted more in return...much like the deal with the Reds.

Brian26
12-10-2008, 09:12 PM
Hopefully he doesn't learn how to pitch.

But right now, that's two guys in Jackson and Willis that can't find the strike zone.

The difference is that Willis is set to make $20 million over the next two years while Jackson is still making around the league minimum. Based on Jackson's upside, I think it's a pretty decent move by Detroit.

champagne030
12-10-2008, 09:27 PM
Thank God, this means we can light his crappy self up and not worry about him pitching for us

I wouldn't have wanted to trade Dye for Jackson, but I'd much rather have Jackson than Marquez as our #5 this year.

DaveFeelsRight
12-10-2008, 09:53 PM
I wouldn't have wanted to trade Dye for Jackson, but I'd much rather have Jackson than Marquez as our #5 this year.not to beat a dead horse or whatever and not to sound like a dick or anything but.....i dont get why everyone doesnt want him as our #5. im a firm believer on seeing is believing. would rather watch him pitch a few times first.

jabrch
12-10-2008, 09:58 PM
WOW...This is great news for us. If Detroit has Edwin Jackson as their #5 to open the season, it means their pitching has actually gotten worse from Opening Day in 2008. Carlos Silva can be had cheaply. They can bring back Rogers too.

How many awful pitchers do they want to start?

Subtraction by Addition...me likey.

oeo
12-10-2008, 09:59 PM
not to beat a dead horse or whatever and not to sound like a dick or anything but.....i dont get why everyone doesnt want him as our #5. im a firm believer on seeing is believing. would rather watch him pitch a few times first.

Marquez is just champagne030's newest whipping boy.

Tragg
12-10-2008, 10:08 PM
I've seen worse fifth starters. From what I can tell, they didn't give up much.

Domeshot17
12-10-2008, 10:08 PM
Well that and Marquez isn't that good. Richard isn't any good and hes slotted ahead of him. If Marquez is the 5 thats fine, but it means we need to get a guy who slots infront of atleast Burls and floyd. Getting a number 4 won't do us much, we need a 1 or 2, Danks 2 Burls 3 and Floyd 4, then we can watch Marquez "grow" and see if hes anything, but its not like this is some top flight top 100 prospect here.

oeo
12-10-2008, 10:11 PM
Well that and Marquez isn't that good. Richard isn't any good and hes slotted ahead of him. If Marquez is the 5 thats fine, but it means we need to get a guy who slots infront of atleast Burls and floyd. Getting a number 4 won't do us much, we need a 1 or 2, Danks 2 Burls 3 and Floyd 4, then we can watch Marquez "grow" and see if hes anything, but its not like this is some top flight top 100 prospect here.

Have you seen him pitch?

BadBobbyJenks
12-10-2008, 10:12 PM
Have you seen him pitch?

Have you?

champagne030
12-10-2008, 10:15 PM
not to beat a dead horse or whatever and not to sound like a dick or anything but.....i dont get why everyone doesnt want him as our #5. im a firm believer on seeing is believing. would rather watch him pitch a few times first.

You may want to see him pitch before passing your opinion, but I saw him pitch recently and was not impressed. His change has nice downward movement, but he telegraphs it from a mile away. And his fastball was 89-90.

Edit: I want to make clear I'm not being a smartass about giving your opinion before seeing him pitch.....I'm just saying you have full right to reserve opinion until you see him pitch. My point was that I saw him pitch in the AFL and my opinion is based on that impression.

oeo
12-10-2008, 10:16 PM
Have you?

No. I'm not throwing out statements saying he's this or that, though.

champagne030
12-10-2008, 10:18 PM
Marquez is just champagne030's newest whipping boy.

He hasn't passed Owens yet, but if he's #5 and Owens isn't starting in CF you might be right.

turners56
12-10-2008, 10:21 PM
For Matt Joyce...and people here were suggesting Dye for Jackson awhile back?

Matt Joyce is no JD, but he's got some good potential.

BadBobbyJenks
12-10-2008, 10:25 PM
No. I'm not throwing out statements saying he's this or that, though.

That wasn't meant to be an attack just I find it silly (as you do to it seems), how everyone seems to have an opinion on this kid.

btrain929
12-10-2008, 10:35 PM
I've never seen Marquez pitch, but when a guy is only 24, throws a sinker, and has a plus changeup, I tend to like him more than guys like Lance ****ing Broadway. But I do agree we need someone else for the rotation because we CANNOT have both Richard and Marquez in the rotation at the same time. I think the only things that can get in his way to prevent him from being serviceable is injuries, something he's had a problem with in the past.

jabrch
12-10-2008, 11:19 PM
But I do agree we need someone else for the rotation because we CANNOT have both Richard and Marquez in the rotation at the same time.

Why?

Who the hell knows how good or bad either will be next year?

Britt Burns
12-10-2008, 11:43 PM
Tigers acquire Edwin Jackson...what an euphenism. Sort of like 'Illinois Guv to acquire new residence.'

Domeshot17
12-10-2008, 11:49 PM
Why?

Who the hell knows how good or bad either will be next year?

come on, by this logic we should go with a 5 man of Richard Marquez Broadway Poreda and Egbert because maybe they all become awesome.

You use past performance and scouting reports to give you the best ideas. Marquez is very fringe by all accounts. We will see him working with Coop in spring training, but I don't get why people get flamed for not liking what they know about him, then others can make comparisons of him to Pedro Martinez. It is assanine to say the least.

Richard, I guess some people just have total blind faith in the Sox and kenny and coop. Enough that we forgot how freaking terrible he was in the rotation for us, posting an ERA over 6, because he had 4 dominating innings of mop up playoff relief vs a dominantly left handed lineup that he matched up VERY well against. He is a GREAT situational loogy and long reliever, why not let him flourish there instead of ruin him in the rotation.

ChiSoxFan81
12-11-2008, 01:38 PM
Nice. Not only does this mean there is no chance we get him, but we now get to light him up a few times a year.

doublem23
12-11-2008, 01:41 PM
Why?

Who the hell knows how good or bad either will be next year?

I do.

At least 1 of them will be bad next year.

SoxSpeed22
12-11-2008, 01:46 PM
Good deal for Tampa. With Price coming in, they could unload Jackson and keep acquiring assets to remain competitive.

thedudeabides
12-11-2008, 02:01 PM
I don't see this as bad a deal for the Tigers, as some do here. Joyce has never been a highly touted prospect, but can hit lefties. He probably projects more as a platoon type player.

Jackson has some flaws for sure, but he has a big arm and big potential. He may yet be able to turn it around, and aquiring more arms for a marginal cost is never a bad idea.

MHOUSE
12-12-2008, 11:14 AM
they've got some warm bodies in their holes, but nothing really to get excited about.

Oh man, it's hard to lay off this hanging curveball....

guillen4life13
12-12-2008, 01:47 PM
You may want to see him pitch before passing your opinion, but I saw him pitch recently and was not impressed. His change has nice downward movement, but he telegraphs it from a mile away. And his fastball was 89-90.

Edit: I want to make clear I'm not being a smartass about giving your opinion before seeing him pitch.....I'm just saying you have full right to reserve opinion until you see him pitch. My point was that I saw him pitch in the AFL and my opinion is based on that impression.

I haven't seen him pitch, but it seems that if he is tipping his pitches or not doing a good job of disguising them in his windup/delivery, these are things that can be easily fixed with help from a good pitching coach.

From the scouting report, Marquez seems like he was made to pitch at the Cell. Sinkerballer. He needs to get more groundouts but I think this really is a situation where the oft-used phrase "Coop'll fix 'em" actually means something.

Like every other Sox pitcher, he will add a cutter.

But as I said, I've never seen him pitch.

jabrch
12-12-2008, 01:50 PM
I do.

At least 1 of them will be bad next year.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/Quartz_crystal.jpg/597px-Quartz_crystal.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Quartz_crystal.jpg)