Carl Pavano Signs With Twins - 2 years $16.5 Million

[yount19.u]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=6038883

 

I didn't see this anywhere else, and I'm surprised I didn't. With the Brewers going for it this year, I think going $8.5-9 million a year for two years would have been worth it to make Wolf the 5th starter. That would have given them one of the deepest rotations in the majors. Maybe Pavano gave the Twins a discount.

[chadomac]

I'm glad we didn't get him. I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I actually think Wolf will outperform Pavano this coming season.

[jjkoestler]

I'm glad we didn't get him. I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I actually think Wolf will outperform Pavano this coming season.

 

 

I agree. I don't think Pavano will be much better than Narvy. I'd rather spend the $8.5m on SS, CF, bench, or bullpen.

[Ennder]

There are much better places to spend that kind of money than a marginal upgrade for depth reasons. Like getting a real SS or CF.

[crewcrazy]

Pavano also would have cost the Brewers a 2nd round pick to sign, as he was a Type A free agent. Considering the depth of this year's draft and the Brewers' need to rebuild the farm system, I would have been more upset about that aspect of a Pavano signing than I would have been about the money.

 

Minnesota's still a decent fit for him, though, and I don't think he ever seriously wanted to go anywhere else.

[Hofbraunhaus]

I really thought at the beginning of the offseason that Pavano would be the "big" signing the Brewers would make to improve their rotation. Seeing this signing makes me that much more excited about the moves we made and this season.

[JohnBriggs12]

Pavano left money on the table by waiting so long. Once the Brewers dealt for Greinke, his bargaining position weakened.

 

Remember though had the Brewers signed Pavano instead of dealing for Greinke, they still would have Cain, Escobar, Jeffress, and Odorizzi. If Pavano outpitches Greinke this year, there's going to be some questions.

[kramnoj]

If Pavano outpitches Greinke this year, there's going to be some questions.

 

That has happened twice. Last year, and in 2004, when Greinke was 20 and only pitched in 145 innings.

[endaround]

He didn't outpitch him last year. Greinke's WAR was 5.2, Pavano's 3.2. Pavano, at least this year, is better than Narveson, but likely at the 1-1.5 win level and next year it would decline further. Given that getting a decent shortstop can make that difference up at 1/4 the cost Pavano isn't really worth given the 2nd year on the contract and the draft pick.

[RockCoCougars]

I'm sure he got about half of what he expected and this is probably about what he's worth, or slightly more. Based on his past history after signing multiple year deals, I wouldn't recommend drafting him in fantasy baseball, but the Twins held their ground and hedged their bet somewhat with a two year deal. The fact that there was little to no interest for this guy is no surprised based on his history.

[kramnoj]

He didn't outpitch him last year. Greinke's WAR was 5.2, Pavano's 3.2.

 

There are different values for different needs. If we only want to look at numbers based on theories, you can choose to use that set of numbers. If we look at numbers based on production, and thus the value that the team derived from the performance, Pavano was better than Greinke last year.

 

The numbers you use are better for predictive purposes, and leads to a smaller chance of there being questions regarding Greinke.

[Ennder]

He didn't outpitch him last year. Greinke's WAR was 5.2, Pavano's 3.2.

 

There are different values for different needs. If we only want to look at numbers based on theories, you can choose to use that set of numbers. If we look at numbers based on production, and thus the value that the team derived from the performance, Pavano was better than Greinke last year.

 

The numbers you use are better for predictive purposes, and leads to a smaller chance of there being questions regarding Greinke.

ERA is at best a team stat at worst a useless stat, it most certainly is not a meaningful production stat. You have no idea how a pitcher pitched by looking at their ERA, it is like judging a QB by his team wins. A good example of this is comparing Annibal Sanchez to Ryan Dempster. They were the two players with the best and worst luck when it came to bullpens driving in their inherited runners. There is a 10 ER difference just from how the bullpen pitched, nothing else included at all like defense etc. If Ryan Dempster had the same luck as Sanchez with bullpens his ERA would drop 0.43 for the year. The bullpen alone can make up almost half a run in ERA. Defense can easily make up another 0.25 to 0.50. Park and league can easily make up another 0.5 or more. ERA is not a stat to be judging pitchers by.

[logan82]

ERA can easily swing 0.25 on just one bad outing. A thin bullpen and being left in for a couple extra innings when you obviously should be pulled will do that. Happened to Wolf a couple times last year and Parra once or twice the year before.

[kramnoj]

I'm curious, Ennder, do you look at a batter BABIP and use that to say whether he had a good year, versus his ISO, or whatever stat you choose to use? If a batter has a .260 BABIP and another batter has a .350 BABIP, do you say the first batter is better? The batter can't control where the defenders are in the field, but it will affect his production.

[Ennder]

I'm curious, Ennder, do you look at a batter BABIP and use that to say whether he had a good year, versus his ISO, or whatever stat you choose to use? If a batter has a .260 BABIP and another batter has a .350 BABIP, do you say the first batter is better? The batter can't control where the defenders are in the field, but it will affect his production.

Nope, but I don't judge a hitter by his AVG either, it isn't a major part of what makes an offensive player productive. ERA in no way is comparable to a stat like OPS though, if that is what you are getting at. ERA is probably about as meaningful as AVG so that is a pretty good comparison though. There really isn't a good go to stat for judging pitching, some sort of composite ERA type stat is probably the best you are going to get.

[kramnoj]

But a low BABIP is going to have an effect on a players OPS. So a hitter will not be as productive, based on things he can't control.

 

I don't just use ERA, in case anyone is wondering. I think ERA+ is useful, but I certainly understand there are more descriptive and more predictive stats out there.

[Ennder]

Stats can't tell the whole story, it is just how things are. BABIP is luck based but it is impossible to account for how much of it is luck and how much is something else. Getting behind in the count lowers your BABIP as a hitter, hitting weak groundballs and popups lower it, being slow lowers it. You can somewhat normalize it to what they have done the past 3 years but even that is somewhat flawed. OPS gives you a decent picture of how good a guy was offensively, it isn't perfect by any means. ERA doesn't even reach the decent picture because so much of what happens is out of a pitchers control.