I'm going on the market this fall (Cognitive/Developmental), and am wondering what to do with one of my papers. It's on a topic that doesn't much interest me anymore but is tangentially related to my main research lines. I have a full manuscript that can be sent out, like, tomorrow. I've had people in my field read it, and the consensus is that it's interesting, publishable, but not groundbreaking. The methodology is sound, but the interpretation of the data is necessarily a bit speculative.
I don't have a ton of time to be working on this paper (I have other, more interesting/exciting papers at all stages of the pipeline), so my plan isn't to take the next few months to hone the paper and go back and forth with reviewers. My coauthors are dispersed around the country and my advisor is not a co-author on this publication, so whatever I do, it will be mostly just me doing it.
Normally, I would just let this paper die. The data and ideas are worth sharing, but are just not all that amazing. But, since I'm going on the market, I'm somewhat inclined to try to get it published somewhere with a quick turnaround and not-so-insane review process. PLoS or Frontiers or something. I'm not desperate for pubs, but not flush with them either (I have 6 plus 2 that will *hopefully* get in in the next few weeks).
What do people think? Better to get it out there (if it's decent — but not my best — work) in an open access online format, or would it be better to have my recent pubs be only work that I'm truly thrilled with?