Skip to content

The Yankees will only give Edwin Jackson or Hiroki Kuroda a one-year deal

Jan 12, 2012, 1:30 PM EDT

Edwin Jackson Getty Images

This morning we heard that the Yankees were talking to Scott Boras about Edwin JacksonJoel Sherman of the New York Post says, however, that the Yankees are only interested in a one-year deal for Edwin Jackson. Same for Hiroki Kuroda too.

That’s certainly not what Jackson is interested in, but at times Kuroda has seemed receptive. Either way, it sounds like the Yankees are willing to see who’s left standing and try to get a bargain.


  1. uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:41 PM

    Great, great, great decision by the Yankees Ownership and Management.

    • bigharold - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:45 PM

      Yeah, it’s about time that the Yankees employed a little common sense but it makes me wonder. These are the same guys after all that gave Soriano his ridiculous contract to fill a need that didn’t exist.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:50 PM

        Actually it was Levine that pushed for and negotiated the Soriano signing/deal. He’s probably not allowed out by himself now after that debacle.

      • bozosforall - Jan 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM

        Seven rings since free agency began for the Yankees. Fans of any other team can dog the Yankees all they want to but the results speak for themselves. Besides, the Yankees have always had the money and only a greedy owner would hoard the money instead of spending it to improve the team for the fan base. King George always understood this and the Yankee fans have always appreciated it. Other fans only wish that they had an owner who was so committed to fielding a winner every single year. Haters can suck it.

    • poorwalt - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:46 PM

      I agree, there is no such thing as a bad 1-year contract.

      • deathmonkey41 - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:53 PM

        Even with Milton Bradley?

      • bigharold - Jan 12, 2012 at 3:00 PM

        Bradley is the exception that proves the rule.

  2. bigharold - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:42 PM

    Geez, the economy must be worst than I thought. My Yankees are playing hard ball in contract negotiations.

    • uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:45 PM

      Boras doesn’t seem to be having the type of off season he’s accustomed to. And that’s a good thing.

      • proudlycanadian - Jan 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM

        I do not feel sorry for Boras.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 2:03 PM

        proudlycanadian – it would appear you are not the only one that has NO sympathy for Boras.

      • stex52 - Jan 12, 2012 at 2:09 PM

        A note on a previous thread suggested that maybe the whole course of negotiations with non-superstar players is changing and Boras hasn’t got it yet. A reasonable possibility.

        He also seemed to drop the ball with the ARod/Yankees deal. Maybe the GM’s are pretty much wise to his techniques and ready to go around them. Boras has always counted on outwaiting the other guy (and outright lies). Now they seem to be lining up alternatives rather than waiting for him.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 2:26 PM

        stex52 – It will be very interesting to see what kind of deal Fielder comes away with now. My guess is Fielder maxes out at 6 years/$114 to $120MM total. Afar cry from the 10 years $200MM plus Boras was pushing for.

      • bigharold - Jan 12, 2012 at 3:46 PM

        “Afar cry from the 10 years $200MM plus Boras was pushing for.”

        Yeah but that would seem to have more to do with the free spenders not having the need. Perhaps had the RS or Yankees needed a bat and a 1B things would be far different. Also, Fielder for all his talent, which I grant is considerable, he is too big which is a key component of this equation. Think about it; he’s 5 inches shorter than his Dad and is listed as about 40 lbs heavier. That has to be in the forefront of any GM’s think when offering him a long term contract.

        Also, why Boras is the subject of so much disdain is puzzling. He is doing exactly what he is asked of by his clients request of him. He is no more the problem than the idiotic GMs that give out ridiculous contracts. It’s not like he’s going to the local grade school and chiseling 5th graders out of their lunch money. Clearly, he’s exceptionally good at what he does. Even, if he doesn’t get what he thinks Fielder is worth this year, that has more to do with free spending teams not having the need, Pujols being on the market the same year and Fielder should have dropped 30-40 lbs over the last few off season to alleviate that concern.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 4:49 PM

        bigharold – I don’t disagree with with the fact that the Red Sox and Yankees were not in the market for a 1st baseman.

        But it’s not like the Red Sox and Yankees just happened to not be in the market for a 1st baseman. Gonzalez was under contract to the Sox and Tex was under contract to the Yankees and Howard was under contract to the Phillies. Yet he still insisted Fielder was worth and going to get 10 Years and in excess of $200MM. He greatly miscalculated the market and overplayed his hand to this point. Not only with Fielder but with Madson and also apparently with Jackson.

      • dan1111 - Jan 13, 2012 at 6:17 AM

        Everyone is quick to write off Boras’s negotiations for Fielder as a failure. Wait until he gets his contract before you make that conclusion! Waiting is often part of the negotiation process, especially with Boras. Yet, everyone concludes, “Fielder can’t find a job, ha ha!”

        Also, the fact that Boras asked for a ridiculous amount to start off, but won’t get that, is not a failure on his part. Any good negotiator starts off by asking for more than he thinks he will get. Boras is notorious for high asking prices, as well as producing literature claiming that Barry Zito or whoever is the next Sandy Koufax. None of this should be taken at face value.

        Finally, it is hard to say that “Boras failed” in any given situation, because we don’t really know if anyone would have been willing to pay more, and we don’t know what conditions the players place on him. The only time we can definitely say he failed is when the player ends up unhappy, as with A-Rod leaving him to negotiate with the Yankees himself.

        Scott Boras is very useful for the fans. Besides the endless entertainment, we can call him greedy, thus shifting the blame away from the beloved players. And we can call him a manipulator, shifting the blame away from dumb management that signs bad contracts.

      • uyf1950 - Jan 13, 2012 at 8:46 AM

        dan1111 – If we all waited until after the fact to comment on any topic. There would be no reason for sites like this one to exist.

        BTW, I think it’s also safe to assume Ryan Madson believes Boras failed in his duty. And regardless of anything else it’s probably also a safe bet that that neither Fielder or Jackson will get numbers that are that close to what Boras has told them they are worth.

        Also, I’ll have a hard time believing that even if Fielder get 6 years/$120MM (while that’s an incredible sum to 99.9999999% of Americans) that he won’t be disappointed when he looks at what Pujols, Tex, Gonzalez and even Howard got.

  3. kinggw - Jan 12, 2012 at 2:34 PM

    In other words Yankee management has instituted the AJ Burnett rule.

  4. Francisco (FC) - Jan 12, 2012 at 2:44 PM

    Funny that the Yanks aren’t talking to Oswalt. Roy is said to be accepting one year deals now. That back must be a huge red flag – nae – drape!

  5. mox19380 - Jan 12, 2012 at 2:49 PM

    I think decision has more to do with the players they’re going after (Jackson and Kuroda) only deserving 1-year deals than the Yankees being economical… Although the new Steinbrenner is none to be more patient and less brash than his Pops…. This also makes me think that they are going to make a hard run for Cole Hamels or Matt Cain.

    Seems like Hamels will be more likely since it sounds like the Giants are going to lock Cain up for several years.

    • uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 3:04 PM

      I’m not sure that them locking up Cain is a certainty. Because whatever they offer Cain will no doubt have a huge impact on Lincecum. They were said to be offering Lincecum a 4 year deal and he wanted 8 years. Cain isn’t going to settle for 4 years. So if they offer him 6 years you have to know that Lincecum is going to expect and get more.

      Something just tells me both Hamels and Cain will hit FA. Now ultimately their current teams may wind up signing them then but I’m not sure it’s guaranteed by any means. Both should be able to get 6 year deals because of their age and pitching histories and both probably well north of $100MM. At least that’s my opinion.

      • mox19380 - Jan 12, 2012 at 3:23 PM

        you’re 100% right even if they get signed it could be for sign and trade purposes (hopefully as a Phillies fan that would be ruben Amaro’s angle) … So either guy being signed beyond 2012 probably won’t change the fact that the Yanks are going to put the full court press on them

      • bozosforall - Jan 13, 2012 at 11:27 AM

        The Yankees want pitchers on one-year deals because contracts any longer will only impede the ultimate ascension to the bigs of Betances and Banuelos. Imagine a 2013 or 2014 rotation of CC, Nova, Betances, Banuelos and either Hughes or even AJ. Having AJ as the 5th starter will be a luxury, even if he is nothing more than a .500 pitcher. Cashman will show where his true genius lies once his patience with the farm hands pays off.

  6. APBA Guy - Jan 12, 2012 at 3:47 PM

    The Giants situation with respect to Cain is tied up in two things: Zito and the A’s. Paradoxically, if the Giants refuse to allow the A’s negotiation to reach a conclusion (by stonewalling the compensation issue) and the A’s leave town, the Giants can jack their prices and actually afford Cain and Lincecum at market prices. Everyone’s happy in this scenario except A’s fans. And the Giants really don’t care about them.

    Now because of the Zito contract and the mere existence of the A’s, plus the Giants stadium debt, they can’t do these mega deals for more than 2 players. As long as Zito is slotting into one mega deal, that leaves out one of Cain or Lincecum. Zito comes off the books after 2013. But Cain goes FA in 2013. Plus Timmy is Arb eligible again this year.

    So in the Giants perfect world they string Cain and Timmy along until the great year of 2014 when Zito comes off the books and hopefully the A’s have been driven from town.

    But 2013 could be dicey for the Giants. If Timmy has another great year in 2012 his Arb award could hit $ 20M, and with Cain as an FA there would be no money to compete with his market on the East Coast. And if the dratted A’s are still breathing the Giants won’t have the monopoly they desperately crave and will thus be unable to skyrocket tickets and TV revenue.

    This is possibly MLB’s window to advance some settlement money to the Giants in exchange for acquiescence to an A’s move to SJ. Otherwise, Cain leaves town unless he takes an unbelievably backloaded deal.

    Meanwhile, the Giants still can’t afford any complementary offense until the stadium is paid for. They’re kind of like Arsenal in the EPL. You see the player moves they need to make, you look at their finances and go, “they can afford player x and player y” until you see that final line item for stadium debt. Then it all makes for a boring, thudding reality check on your dreams.

    • uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 5:11 PM

      ” If Timmy has another great year in 2012 his Arb award could hit $ 20M”.

      Lincecum is estimated by MLB TradeRumors this year for an arbitration award in excess of $19MM. I’d say even if Lincecum has a mediocre 2012 he will get more then $21MM after next season via arbitration. If he has a Cy Young type year in 2012 he could be looking at an award next year of $25MM maybe more

  7. nlucas550 - Jan 12, 2012 at 5:57 PM

    How long will the Rams wait for Fisher? Plus much more on the new!
    The Best Site Ever

  8. randygnyc - Jan 12, 2012 at 6:36 PM

    Yankees are “saving” this rotation spot for either Betances or banuelos. A 1 year signing gives them the flexibility they need.

  9. uyf1950 - Jan 12, 2012 at 7:12 PM

    Found this on ESPN New York a little while ago. I think it dispels any thought of a clandestine meeting between Boras and the Yankees ownership to usurp Brian Cahsman’s authority.

    Boras meeting “just a courtesy”
    By Wallace Matthews

    So says a source with knowledge of the meeting between Scott Boras, Hal Steinbrenner and Randy Levine on the subject of Edwin Jackson, the free-agent righthander who is said to be seeking a five-year deal in the neighborhood of $75 million. According to the source, the meeting lasted 25 minutes in between sessions of the owner’s meetings in Paradise Valley, Arizona, and had the blessing of GM Brian Cashman, who remained on the job in New York. According to the source, the Yankees still consider Jackson’s asking price too high.

    “Boras asked for a courtesy meeting and he got it,” the source said, adding that the Yankees “are no closer to signing Jackson today than before.”

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Stanton (2830)
  2. Y. Puig (2654)
  3. C. Correa (2640)
  4. B. Crawford (2638)
  5. G. Springer (2622)
  1. H. Ramirez (2557)
  2. H. Pence (2444)
  3. M. Teixeira (2374)
  4. J. Hamilton (2318)
  5. J. Baez (2297)