Add new comment

In a vaccuum I don't like passing on Morrow+Kelley for Jackson at all. Z, however, has shown a tendency for getting great value in trades, so I'm hoping that this another one of those cases. Maybe Z is going to find an even better return for Morrow.. but I can't say that I'm too confident this time.
The big issue is the years of control. Morrow has 4 and Jackson has 2. The real issue though is how you project Morrow's next 4 seasons vs Jackson's next 2. Not trading Morrow for Jackson would only make sense if you think Morrow is going to put up a full season somewhat comparable to Jackson's 2009 WITHIN 2 years. Otherwise, its a no-brainer.
That means Morrow is going to have to find his command (which the vast majority of young pitcher don't), hes going to have to stay healthy, and hes going to HAVE to do it within 2 years (by some degree) for it to make any sense to pass on Jackson. Morrow's 4 years combined are going to HAVE to surpass Jackson's next 2 in total value.
Of course the years aren't even a gaurantee. Morrow could tear his labrum in '10 or '11 or '12, then the question looks a lot different. Pitchers are not the best bet to stay healthy in general, and I see Morrow as a signficantly higher injury risk than even your average pitcher.
There is also the option of keeping Ed.Jackson for one year and trading him the following offseason for a larger return. IF Ed.Jackson repeats or does even better than his '09 then his value is only going to go up despite the loss of one club-controlled year. The only reason Ed.Jackson's stock is lower in the first place is because of his poor 2nd half results.