Brewers in front with Nationals for Carl Pavano?

[endaround]

Pavano is a much better pitcher than Suppan ever was. Suppan was both aging and bad.

Just out of curiosity, how does Pavano's numbers over his career (save for last season) make you think he is "much better" than Suppan?

 

Suppan's WAR the 3 years before the Brewers signed him: 1.3, 1.5, 1.7

Pavano's WAR the last three season 0.1(injury), 3.7, 3.2

Suppan's Careern xFIP is 4.68, Pavano's is 4.11 I don't want to see Pavano on a 3 year contract but we need acknowledge that Suppan wasn't just old he was Chris Narveson.

 

[TheCrew]

2 year deal for $22 million or less with a mutual option on the 3rd year and I'd be extremely happy - I think some people need to let the Suppan thing go, Pavano is a much better pitcher than Suppan ever was.

 

Even if he regresses a bit, the move the NL should help his numbers.

[Beast Light]

2 year deal for $22 million or less with a mutual option on the 3rd year and I'd be extremely happy - I think some people need to let the Suppan thing go, Pavano is a much better pitcher than Suppan ever was.

 

Even if he regresses a bit, the move the NL should help his numbers.

I've never understood this argument. How exactly would this help him, or the Brewers, win more games?

 

Yes he will not be facing DH's but he also will not have one providing him with run support either.

 

 

[brains and braun]

The Crew is not talking about wins...he means how it would help with his other numbers, like ERA, WHIP, etc.

[And That]

Even if he regresses a bit, the move the NL should help his numbers.

I've never understood this argument. How exactly would this help him, or the Brewers, win more games?

 

Yes he will not be facing DH's but he also will not have one providing him with run support either.

Run support has little to no effect on pitching effectiveness. The lack of a DH in the NL makes the league more pitcher-friendly for all pitchers. In general, a pitcher will tend to have better results in the NL.

[madtowndrunkard]

2 year deal for $22 million or less with a mutual option on the 3rd year and I'd be extremely happy - I think some people need to let the Suppan thing go, Pavano is a much better pitcher than Suppan ever was.

 

Even if he regresses a bit, the move the NL should help his numbers.

I've never understood this argument. How exactly would this help him, or the Brewers, win more games?

 

Yes he will not be facing DH's but he also will not have one providing him with run support either.

 

given his age....you can fully expect him to regress. In Miller Park and with our defense I expect him to regress significantly to the point were he'd be our #5 starter. Maybe slightly better then Suppan but less durable. This would be a horrible signing. I could see signing a Pavano type late, right before spring training if it were clear we couldnt do better.

[TooLiveBrew]

Not sure if it was assumed or not, but according to Bruce Levine of ESPN Chicago, "A major league source told ESPNChicago.com that Milwaukee is talking to Carl Pavano about a three-year contract."

 

What a terrible freaking idea. Don't forget Pavano's a Type A free agent, so even though the Brewers' first rounder would be protected, they'd still forfeit the second-rounder.

[chadomac]

given his age....you can fully expect him to regress. In Miller Park and with our defense I expect him to regress significantly to the point were he'd be our #5 starter. Maybe slightly better then Suppan but less durable. This would be a horrible signing. I could see signing a Pavano type late, right before spring training if it were clear we couldnt do better.

I agree. This is an awful idea. I was so excited after hearing about Marcum, but this is going to negate that. Total waste of $10 mil a year. And that three year deal will feel like six. Ugh, I just pray the Twins or someone else is willing to outbid them. It's hard to believe Melvin has learned nothing from past free agent pitcher signings.

[TheCrew]

Don't like the 3 year contract at all - but the "he will regress because he is 35" argument is pretty weak if you ask me.

[brains and braun]

Yeah, I don't like it either, but more because of the third year, and loss of pick. Two years would be a reasonable gamble, as many others have already stated.

[brosto1]

I would have concerns over his health, although he was healthy the past two years. I would be fine with a two year offer with the third year vesting if he makes 24 or more starts each of the next two seasons. When he is healthy he is a decent pitcher. They can either pay Pavano or deal talent and still pay a guy like Garza a good amount of money. I would prefer Garza, but the ability to keep young cheap talent for a team like Milwaukee must be taken into account.

[Beast Light]

brains and braun]The Crew is not talking about wins...he means how it would help with his other numbers, like ERA, WHIP, etc.

I understand that. My point is that if you are adjusting or assuming and impact on ERA, WHIP, etc due to changing leagues, that really won't amount to any more wins. So to me, the team sees no real benefit in these numbers going down if it is soley due to the reasons discussed.

 

 

[trwi7]

I don't want Pavano on a one year deal. A three year deal and Melvin should be fired.

[TheCrew]

I understand that. My point is that if you are adjusting or assuming and impact on ERA, WHIP, etc due to changing leagues, that really won't amount to any more wins.

Wins are the least important stat when it comes to a pitcher - see Loopers 14 wins 2 seasons ago.

 

Whether he is in the AL or NL, a pitcher can't control run support - but when in the NL, he'll face a weaker lineup than in the AL and pitchers, in theory, will put up slightly better numbers when in the NL.

[Beast Light]

Even if he regresses a bit, the move the NL should help his numbers.

I've never understood this argument. How exactly would this help him, or the Brewers, win more games?

 

Yes he will not be facing DH's but he also will not have one providing him with run support either.

Run support has little to no effect on pitching effectiveness. The lack of a DH in the NL makes the league more pitcher-friendly for all pitchers. In general, a pitcher will tend to have better results in the NL.

This is exactly my point. I don't think that the assumption that the NL will help his numbers can be used to justify a contract offer nor can it be used to minimize the risk of regression. Why use something that naturally occurs to justify pay/contracts?

 

[Beast Light]

I understand that. My point is that if you are adjusting or assuming and impact on ERA, WHIP, etc due to changing leagues, that really won't amount to any more wins.

Wins are the least important stat when it comes to a pitcher - see Loopers 14 wins 2 seasons ago.

 

Whether he is in the AL or NL, a pitcher can't control run support - but when in the NL, he'll face a weaker lineup than in the AL and pitchers, in theory, will put up slightly better numbers when in the NL.

I think you are either missing my point or I am doing a poor job explaining it. All things save for the DH held constant, if a pitcher moves from the AL to the NL, his numbers should improve. The improvement in his numbers will not, however, improve his overall chances of winning games.

 

Therefore, you can't really use the assumption that a pitchers numbers will improve by moving to the NL to justify a contract or imply that there is a built in "fluff factor" to absorb a regression in ability due to age. The reason is because the team sees no real benefit from this. In theory, the pitcher will have better numbers but for the same reasons, will get less run support. In other words it washes out.

 

[brains and braun]

All that we're saying is that some of our guys would likely have significantly worse numbers had they faced the Yankees, BoSox, etc more times, essentially comparing apples to oranges, in terms of pitchers.

[TheCrew]

Never said it would improve his chances to win games - I said it should allow him to put up similar numbers and if the Brewers #4 pitcher can put up similar numbers to what Pavano did last season, it would be a huge improvement and would lead to more wins.

[brewerfan82]

I've never understood this argument. How exactly would this help him, or the Brewers, win more games?

 

Yes he will not be facing DH's but he also will not have one providing him with run support either.

Run support has little to no effect on pitching effectiveness. The lack of a DH in the NL makes the league more pitcher-friendly for all pitchers. In general, a pitcher will tend to have better results in the NL.

This is exactly my point. I don't think that the assumption that the NL will help his numbers can be used to justify a contract offer nor can it be used to minimize the risk of regression. Why use something that naturally occurs to justify pay/contracts?

 

 

 

It's a matter of perception. Since the Brewers are in the NL, we're used to seeing NL pitcher numbers. So when we see AL player John Smith is a 4.50 ERA pitcher in the AL, we adjust his numbers to what they might be in the NL to reflect that he isn't the equivalent of a 4.50 ERA pitcher in th AL... So while, assuming the same offensive talent on AL team A and NL team B, the adjustment won't result in more success for pitcher John Smith, the adjustment shows that a player with John Smith's numbers in the AL will result in more success for NL team B than a player with the same numbers that played in the NL.

[dhoffman19]

Carl Pavano has had two good years out of 12. Paying him big money is a huge mistake. I hope they don't overpay just to do "something."

[Beast Light]

Never said it would improve his chances to win games - I said it should allow him to put up similar numbers and if the Brewers #4 pitcher can put up similar numbers to what Pavano did last season, it would be a huge improvement and would lead to more wins.

Not to start an argument, but my original response was made to the comment "Even if he regresses a bit, the move the NL should help his numbers".

 

If he regresses, he regresses. Playing in the NL will not allow him to overcome his regression and make him equally productive in terms of giving his team the same chance to win as when he played in the AL. Therefore, we can't use him switching to the NL as a risk mitigating factor as it pertains to a potential contract.

[tyguy20204]

I don't want Pavano on a one year deal. A three year deal and Melvin should be fired.

Now this is extreme. What would you possibly have against Pavano getting a one year deal?

[trwi7]

Now this is extreme. What would you possibly have against Pavano getting a one year deal?

The farm system is mediocre at best, so giving up a high pick for a 34 year old pitcher doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

 

 

[amt2138]

Per Phil Rogers twitter, we won't go over 2 years and pavano camp looking for three

 

http://twitter.com/ChiTri...status/12728443598807040

[wibadgers23]

Per Phil Rogers twitter, we won't go over 2 years and pavano camp looking for three

Good. Now let's focus on trading for Garza instead.