Poll: Should Edwin Jackson Get A Qualifying Offer?

It wasn’t long ago that Edwin Jackson was one of the top free agent starting pitchers available. Before long he’ll re-appear on the free agent market, and when he does the Nationals will have to decide whether it’s worth extending him a qualifying offer.

Doing so would allow Washington to obtain draft pick compensation for the right-hander should he sign elsewhere. But it’d also create the possibility of Jackson accepting a one-year contract in the $13MM range.

In some instances the risk (the possibility of a $13MM commitment) isn’t worth the reward (potential draft pick compensation). But in Jackson’s case, a one-year $13MM contract would seem to be a team-friendly deal. 

Jackson has a 3.89 ERA with 8.1 K/9, 2.7 BB/9 and a 47.3 % ground ball rate in 173 2/3 innings so far in 2012. Like most Nationals starters, he throws hard (average fastball velocity of 93.5 mph) and generates swings and misses (12.2% swinging strike rate). And though he’s in the midst of his tenth MLB season, he’s still in his prime at 29 years old. Even if the Nationals preferred other candidates for their rotation, Jackson could generate trade interest at that salary.

Last offseason, under baseball’s previous collective bargaining agreement, the Cardinals offered Jackson arbitration, setting themselves up for draft pick compensation in 2012. If the Nationals make Jackson a qualifying offer, no other team will be able to sign him unless they surrender a 2013 draft pick. But there’s not an abundance of quality free agent starting pitching and many of the top pitchers (Zack Greinke excluded) will be linked to draft picks. Jackson, who’s now represented by the Legacy Agency, figures to draw interest either way. What should the Nationals do?


Leave a Reply

17 Comments on "Poll: Should Edwin Jackson Get A Qualifying Offer?"


Rynocerous
2 years 11 months ago

I’ll admit I don’t know much about Rizzo’s strategies, and if I recall EJax is a Boras client…but why wouldn’t they want to go with a multi-year deal with the way he has pitched for them? 2/25 with a mutual option for a third seems like a good deal for both sides.

melonis_rex
2 years 11 months ago

Someone will offer him more on the open market.

They should absolutely offer him a multi year deal, but when he rejects that (because he should absolutely test the market first), they should offer him a quailfying offer as well, so if someone else inks him to a multi year deal, they get a draft pick.

johnsilver
2 years 11 months ago

He also stands a better chance of signing a LT deal without Boras and probably would have last year had he dumped boras then.

I still see Sanchez probably getting a tiny bit more money, but both should be able to get 3-4Y deals in the 12-14mAAV range.

Bob Bunker
2 years 11 months ago

If he is offered a qualifying offer then teams will turn to Anibel Sanchez because they have very similiar stats and age.

NWDC
2 years 11 months ago

This is a no-brainer. Short-term deals at high annual rates should be more used by teams — much less risk. As a Nats fan, I’d rather Edwin at $13m/1 yr than 3 yr/$30m. $13m/yr is high for his performance but not for a 1 year deal. There should always be a large premium paid for that.

Kristopher Neild
2 years 11 months ago

It’s worth the risk b/c E-Jax is turning it down either way…he did his one year stint..now he’s getting that multi-year cash

dc21892
2 years 11 months ago

Yes, if the market gives him that. Players can seek 10 year deals if they wanted, but if every team says “no” then you’re not getting one. I don’t see why teams won’t offer multiple years but it all depends on the market. Being a Boras client doesn’t help.

Kevin Swords
2 years 11 months ago

He is no longer represented by The Boras Corp (Legacy Sports now).

Last off-season he had to settle for a one year deal because he did not find the multi-year deal he was looking for. Chances are that he will decline the qualifying offer in search of another multi-year deal. This year’s free agent class is fairly thin on pitching, so I’d imagine he will be able to find a deal to his liking. If not a one year deal in the $13MM-$14MM (qualifying offer amount) won’t be so bad (for him or the Nationals–with the Nationals paying a higher AAV but not having the risk associated with a multi-year contract).

Kristopher Neild
2 years 11 months ago

Plus, teams, if they already haven’t, are going to start to value durability, which this beast clearly has. You especially need to value it if you are the type of team that adopts the “shut your best pitchers down for the stretch run/playoff” philosophy.

FacelessGeneralManager
2 years 11 months ago

Nice bash against the Nats. Its almost like you think they shut Stras down for no reason other than they felt like it.

Lunchbox45
2 years 11 months ago

The top 10 draft picks are still protected right?

wade3061
2 years 11 months ago

The ‘No’ was on top this poll for me. Isn’t the ‘Yes’ usually on top? So rigged :)

Klaus D.
2 years 11 months ago

He had a solid year, but I’d personally consider it lightning in a bottle. People always said he had great potential but needed to harness it. He did this year, but I’d expect regression to the mean to occur sooner or later. He’s a career .500 pitcher with an ERA around 4.40. There’s a reason he’s been on 7 teams in 10 years. Nats can fill his production with one of their many talented young arms at a much cheaper rate and/or if they feel more secure, find another veteran pitcher off the scrap heap. Cut your ties and move on unless maybe he pitches like an absolute beast in the post season, in which case I’d make him the one year offer.

WrigleyTerror37
2 years 11 months ago

The Cubs should really look into signing him long term, he can help un in 2015, and he has play off experience. not to mention the cubs need a quality starter in the rotation. i could see the cubs signing him and McCarthy this off season

dylanp5030
2 years 11 months ago

You are assuming the Cubs are a playoff team in 2015. Are the Reds and Cardinals also moving the AL West with Astros?

Josh Jackson
2 years 11 months ago

That Nats clearly thought Jackson was worth one year/$11 million going into this season and they have demonstrated themselves willing to spend money to acquire draft talent. With those two facts in mind, it only makes sense they’d risk giving him a $2 million raise for a shot at a sandwich pick if he leaves.

notsureifsrs
2 years 11 months ago

another obvious yes