Brewers in front with Nationals for Carl Pavano?

[NievesNoNO]

endaround[/b]]Suppan was consistently a below average pitcher before coming to Milwaukee whose ERA looked OK due to a really good St Louis defense. His FIP the 3 years with the Cardinals were 4.77, 4.53, 4.70. He actually pitched well (for him) his first year in Milwaukee (FIP of 4.42) Pavano's FIP the last two seasons were 4.00 and 4.02.

I'll be the first to tell you I don't have a great understanding of some of the more advanced pitching metrics out there. I know that Suppan had an ERA+ of more than 105 for 7 out of the 8 years before joining the Brewers (baseball-referece.com). To me that's consistently at least slightly above average. I stand by that I believe the comparison is fair, although it's not fair to assume that everyone's career will progress the same way. I don't hate Pavano, but for the money he will get I'd rather put some money towards a couple 1 year reclamation projects (as Pavano was a few year ago), rather than sink any of our resources into a commitment to him. Like I said before, I could live with 2 years because he's better than our current options at 4-5. I'd just like to see some other options explored first and if another team wants to jump the gun on him then so be it.

[TooLiveBrew]

I know that Suppan had an ERA+ of more than 105 for 7 out of the 8 years before joining the Brewers (baseball-referece.com). To me that's consistently at least slightly above average.

 

Any ERA stat is inherently a team stat, not individual

[RockCoCougars]

I'm with those that say Suppan was below average before he joined the Brewers. The only reason that his ERA was slightly above league average was due to the fact that for whatever reason, he pitched lights out against the Brewers. Dude was a Brewer killer pure and simple....before, while and after he was on the team - a curse on the franchise, so to speak.

[dlk9s]

b) NievesNoNO - your screen name might become epic this season if Wil Nieves makes the team and he's behind the dish for a no-hitter.

Doesn't even need to be a no-hitter. I bet a lot of people will be screaming Nieves NO! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When they see his name in the lineup.

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/2849/3346f60.gif

[Beast Light]

Beast...

 

If Pitcher X had a 4.50 ERA in the American League. Pitcher Y had a 4.50 ERA in the National League. Which player would you pay more for?

That is not what the point is about as I have acknowledged the difference between the leagues many times. Obviously you pay more for the guy with the ERA coming from the AL. This is about paying him based on his AL statistics and using his switch to the NL as a risk mitigating factor should his pitching abilities regress.

 

If you decide to pay him the premium based on his performance in the AL and his abilities regress, you are still not getting what you paid for even though the benefit of pitching the NL may mask or hide the regression in his statistics. That's all I'm getting at.

 

Let me walk through this logic on final time:

 

On a scale of 1-10, lets just say Pavano is a 7. As a pitcher rated as a 7, his ERA equates to 4.50 in the AL. The Brewers sign him and pay him the going rate for pitchers rated as a 7. In his first year with the Brewers, his talent regresses and he now rates out as a 6. However, since his new rating of 6 equates to a 4.50 ERA in the NL, his statistics will remain the same. The Brewers paid him as 7, but he is now a 6. Even though his numbers look the same, did the Brewers get what they paid for?

[Ennder]

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."

If you go by ERA he's had 5 good years. If you go by WAR he's had 6 or 7 good yeras. If you go by FIP he's had probably 7 good years and his only bad years were for the Yankees. Again Pavano isn't a great pitcher and I am not really excited about signing him but we have to at least be honest about how good he is. He is not Suppan 2.0.

 

[kramnoj]

I guess it depends on what one expects out of a pitcher to say he had a good season. Pavano has only started 30 games in a season 4 times. Suppan has done that 11 times (or 10 if you want to ignore 2009). They definitely are not comparable pitchers.

 

I guess it depends on each team which would be better to have: a pitcher who is more likely to show up for the vast majority of his starts but not be great, or a pitcher who is more likley to dominate, but much less likely to actually pitch.

[Beast Light]

If you go by ERA he's had 5 good years. If you go by WAR he's had 6 or 7 good yeras. If you go by FIP he's had probably 7 good years and his only bad years were for the Yankees. Again Pavano isn't a great pitcher and I am not really excited about signing him but we have to at least be honest about how good he is. He is not Suppan 2.0.

Just out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a good ERA for a starting pitcher?

[BrewCrewForever]

I guess I can't say Pavano would be Suppan 2.0, he is a better pitcher than Jeff ever was. But I just find it very hard to sign a 35 year old guy to a 3 year deal. If they can somehow get it done for 2 years I would be all about it. But some other team will give Carl 3 years, I'm pretty sure.

[PeaveyFury]

Seems like everybody is only talking about a 2-year deal with him at this point. If all else is equal on that front, I'd think he'd almost certainly stay with Minnesota over moving to Washington or Milwaukee. I don't see any of those three teams suddenly adding a year to their offer.

[dadofandrew]

As Peavey points out, no one is going over 2 (DC might only be 1). I wonder if a 3rd year option, with a $2M buyout, might be enough to put enough guaranteed money on the table. The Twins might just match it, but it might be the only hope, as it appears no one is going 3.

[Ennder]

If you go by ERA he's had 5 good years. If you go by WAR he's had 6 or 7 good yeras. If you go by FIP he's had probably 7 good years and his only bad years were for the Yankees. Again Pavano isn't a great pitcher and I am not really excited about signing him but we have to at least be honest about how good he is. He is not Suppan 2.0.

Just out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a good ERA for a starting pitcher?

In this case I just looked at years with an ERA+ of 100 or better. Usually average starter ERA is significantly higher than league average ERA so if you can do a 100 ERA+ you generally had a pretty good year.

 

[MNBrew]

Pavano has only started 30 games in a season 4 times.

Right, but 2 of those 4 are the past 2 seasons. He's returned to good health and all in all had a very solid season for MN last year. The 7 CG stand out to me as well, pitching outdoors in weather similar to Milwaukee's.

 

I'd still prefer Garza, but Pavano still only costs money rather than prospects.

[Hate those Rodents]

Maybe the question becomes, how much money are Jeffress, Rodgers, and Cain worth to us. If the answer is 20 million, we probably should look into Pavano. If the answer is closer to ten million, then maybe we should be willing to ship them for Garza.

[dhoffman19]

If you go by ERA he's had 5 good years. If you go by WAR he's had 6 or 7 good yeras. If you go by FIP he's had probably 7 good years and his only bad years were for the Yankees. Again Pavano isn't a great pitcher and I am not really excited about signing him but we have to at least be honest about how good he is. He is not Suppan 2.0.

Just out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a good ERA for a starting pitcher?

In this case I just looked at years with an ERA+ of 100 or better. Usually average starter ERA is significantly higher than league average ERA so if you can do a 100 ERA+ you generally had a pretty good year.

 

Ok, let's go with ERA+, but let's also not count the years where barely pitched. If you look at years where he's actually pitched at least 100 innings, he has exactly 2 years out of 8 with an ERA+ over 100. In the vast majority of his years, he's been below average.

 

He didn't just have bad years in NY. He had bad years for the Expos, Florida and Cleveland.

 

I'll give you that he's probably more talented than Suppan, and has a higher ceiling. But he only seems to reach that ceiling in contract years.

[kramnoj]

Right, but 2 of those 4 are the past 2 seasons.

 

Yes, but each of those years he was playing on a one year contract. I find it beyond a reasonable coincidence that he managed to stay healthy when he had an incentive to do so, and managed to not put together a seasons worth of starts over 4 years in his last big guaranteed contract.

[brosto1]

He had incentive to stay healthy every season. His stint with the Yankees cost him many millions of dollars since that contract expired.

[dlk9s]

Yes, but each of those years he was playing on a one year contract. I find it beyond a reasonable coincidence that he managed to stay healthy when he had an incentive to do so, and managed to not put together a seasons worth of starts over 4 years in his last big guaranteed contract.

So just to clarify, you think that Pavano was like, "Screw it, I'm gonna mess up my elbow and have Tommy John surgery because I'm not in a contract year." Is this correct? You believe that when he was in the middle of a contract, he just let himself get hurt, damaging his chances at another big contract?

[kramnoj]

TJ surgery doesn't limit someone to 26 starts in 4 years. Or do you have evidence to believe that it does?

 

I think there is sufficient reason to question how much Pavano dedicated himself to be healthy and prepared when he signed his biggest contract.

 

Ben Sheets started 34 games 3 years in a row. He then has a tough 3 year stretch where he started 63 games over 3 years and he was called Brittle Ben. Pavano barely pitched in those 4 years what Sheets was able to do in 2007.

[Ennder]

In 2005 he had shoulder problems, in 2006 he had back problems. 2007 and 2008 were due to the TJ surgery. You would probably need some proof that it was a conditioning problem though given just how often pitchers get hurt.

[endaround]

TJ surgery doesn't limit someone to 26 starts in 4 years. Or do you have evidence to believe that it does?

 

I think there is sufficient reason to question how much Pavano dedicated himself to be healthy and prepared when he signed his biggest contract.

 

Ben Sheets started 34 games 3 years in a row. He then has a tough 3 year stretch where he started 63 games over 3 years and he was called Brittle Ben. Pavano barely pitched in those 4 years what Sheets was able to do in 2007.

And that has much more to do with Milwaukee fans and press having no clue than the fact the Sheets was that injured or missed that much time.

[dlk9s]

TJ surgery doesn't limit someone to 26 starts in 4 years. Or do you have evidence to believe that it does?

 

I think there is sufficient reason to question how much Pavano dedicated himself to be healthy and prepared when he signed his biggest contract.

 

Ben Sheets started 34 games 3 years in a row. He then has a tough 3 year stretch where he started 63 games over 3 years and he was called Brittle Ben. Pavano barely pitched in those 4 years what Sheets was able to do in 2007.

I gave TJ surgery as one example of an injury that caused him to lose time. I didn't say it was the reason for all of his missed starts in NY.

 

If you want to question Pavano's dedication because you think he could have come back from injury faster than he actually did, fine. I could buy that, although it would be pure conjecture on your part. At the same time, I have a feeling that any potential lack of dedication in NY would have been because he didn't feel comfortable playing there. But that's all besides the point. I think the theory that he actually willingly kept himself out of shape so as to get hurt because he was no longer in a contract year is silly. As someone said earlier, he could have earned a lot more money after his stint with the Yankees had he stayed healthy.

[RockCoCougars]

I'm so hoping the Twins come up with a decent offer to make this a non issue. The time has come and gone on Pavano. I would have been interested 12 years ago when he was young, or 2 years ago when he was dirt cheap, but I have no interest in him now. Though, quite frankly, he was never as good as he was cracked up to be when he was young and healthy. Now he's old and is going to be expensive. Hopefully Melvin has learned his lesson about signing old question-mark guys coming off their career seasons to multi year deals. If not, he will probably be looking for work at next year's winter meetings.

[kramnoj]

In 2005 he had shoulder problems, in 2006 he had back problems. 2007 and 2008 were due to the TJ surgery. You would probably need some proof that it was a conditioning problem though given just how often pitchers get hurt.

 

My opinion isn't based totally on that 4 year stretch. The fact that he didn't start that many games at the beginning of his career, and finally got healthy the two years before he became a FA is suspicious to me. Sure, pitchers get hurt, but how many good starters pitched as rarely as he has throughout his career? I just find it hard to believe that a pitcher has started 30 games 4 times in his 12 year career, 3 of those times he was playing for a contract, and it is a complete coincidence.

[dadofandrew]

Pavano on a 2y deal would be a near perfect fit without weakening the system or lineup (or even depth).