Beast Light

Your original response and subsequent responses also talked about wins quite a bit - which are pretty meaningless when it comes to pitchers and had nothing to do with my original post. I was talking about wins in the context of the chance he gives his team to win. Not in the context of Braden Looper being showered with run support and winning 14 games. It basically comes down to "x - y = the teams chance to win". x = run support, y = the pitcher's runs given up. All I'm getting at is that his numbers can improve by him coming to the NL but since this natural improvement doesn't really add to his teams bottom line, how is it even applicable to his abilities regressing and how much he is worth contract wise? The logic would be similar to getting a raise at work to account for inflation and then going on a spending spree because you think you now have more money. Not to be an ass, but again - if he regresses slightly, playing in the NL should offset that and he should be able to put up similar numbers as to what he did last year (assuming he stays healthy of course). If he can put those numbers up or anything even remotely close, that is an absolute huge upgrade for the #4 spot in the rotation. Just because he is replacing a person who had no business pitching in a Major League rotation, it doesn't increase his value or what he should be offered in terms of a contract. The guy he is replacing and his fair market value are not connected. A #4 pitcher with an era in the high 3's/low 4's? Yes, please. I also never said the move to the NL is something that should factor into offering him a contract - was just pointing it out that the move to the NL should help his numbers slightly and should offset any regression due to age (unless he completely hits a wall of course) - It should give us an idea of what to expect from him in 2011, simple as that....... I think your reading far too much into it. What should factor into offering him a contract - and ultimately the only thing - is his performance over the last few seasons and nothing else. I have to completely disagree with this logic. Age, career performance, and injury history are risk factors that should absolutely be considered when offering him a contract. Its just the way the world works and the reason that a male insurance premiums change when they reach certain ages.

Just out of curiosity, when does assumed regression due to age become a valid argument in your opinion? 37? 39? 41?

I've got to agree with you. Aside from the contract aspect, I'm not sure if the Brewers farm system is in a position to be parting with 1st round picks. If Melvin signs Pavano to the 3 year $30MM contract that has been discussed, I will have lost all faith in him. If Mark A is behind it, I will have lost all faith in him too. Seriously, what is there to like about this guy? I couldn't think of a pitcher in baseball with more red flags. Only time will tell but from what I have been reading on websites, another team is going to have to swoop in soon to save us from making this deal.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

Pavano has missed some serious time due to injury over the years. Even if we throw the contract year coincidence aside, the fact that he made only 26 of what should have been 128 starts over a 4 years span with the Yankees needs to be taken into consideration. I'm not sure a team like the Brewers should be handing out a 3 year $30MM contract to any player over the age of 34 much less a guy who has been very average all the while missing significant time to injury over the course of his career. There is literally no upside to giving him such a contract. If the Brewers do end up making this deal, I will no longer hold any small market sympathy for them.

The only difference is that Carl Pavano would probably miss more games than the two Dave Bushes combined. I was never a big Dave Bush fan but all things considered, I'd take him over Pavano in a heartbeat.

I completely agree. If the Brewers sign Pavano, then Melvin clearly hasn't learned his lesson from the Suppan signing. There is no way that I am willing to believe that his best two seasons occurring in contract years is a mere coincidence. The Yankees signed Pavano to a 4 year contract and this is what they got out of it: 26 appearances, a 9-8 record, 5.00 ERA and a 1.46 WHIP. In my mind, there is not a better example of someone who performs abnormally well in contract years in all of baseball, although Kevin Millwood is pretty close. Top it all off with his age (35 to start the 2011 season) and there is no way a team like the Brewers should even be considering this guy. The fact that some people think this could be a good idea has me completely puzzled.

Pavano seemingly has every possible red flag that there is. Extensive injury history: Check Seems to perform abnormally well in contract years: Check Old and looking for last contract: Check Does a 37 year old Carl Pavano at $11MM sound good for the 2013 season? I sure don't think so. Hopefully the Brewers will pass.

Here's the problem for me. Weeks is far more valuable than Hart, so if anyone should be locked up to a deal, it should be Weeks over Hart. I would trade Hart this offseason as I'm not sure he can repeat his 2010.I agree with you 100%. I didn't want Hart to be extended and would have preferred that the money had gone to a guy like Weeks. If Hart can be moved, then I would be a lot more open to Weeks being resigned.

I don't really want to see Weeks resigned. I would prefer to see him traded so that we can clear room for Lawrie. I may be in the minority here but we've already locked guys like Hart, Braun and Gallardo up. If lower payroll teams want to be successful and sustain success, they need to keep the turnover of talent going. You need to have a cycle of identifying talent, getting 4-5 productive years out of it at the Major League level and then trading it for what you can get. Its OK to find a few cornerstones and lock them up like what they did with the aforementioned guys but you have to draw the line somewhere. Dropping a lot of money on a guy that has really only had one truly successful, injury free season just doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

I think we need to stop when we find ourselves saying things like "at this point he's only a 4-5 pitcher". This team needs to find a #2 that can push everyone back a spot in the rotation. Unless this happens, the pitching will not get better.

While that may be, at some point you have to realize that baseball players are people, just like us. Would you find yourself working harder if you knew there was a potential for a large pay increase or bonus? Of course you would, its human nature. Ask Yankee fans what they think of this guy. Aside from what his statistics have shown over the past two years, the sniff test say that he has miraculously turned in the best two seasons of his career in contract years. Add in the fact his is a 35 year old pitcher carrying a serious injury history and I would be very, very cautious with this guy. I just put together some quick stats on him: Here are his numbers without his contract years in FLA and MIN: YEAR TEAM G GS IP H R ER HR BB SO W L WHIP ERA 1998 Mon 24 23 134.7 130 70 63 18 43 83 6 9 1.28 4.21 1999 Mon 19 18 104.0 117 66 65 8 35 70 6 8 1.46 5.63 2000 Mon 15 15 97.0 89 40 33 8 34 64 8 4 1.27 3.06 2001 Mon 8 8 42.7 59 33 30 7 16 36 1 6 1.76 6.33 2002 Mon 15 14 74.3 98 55 52 14 31 51 3 8 1.74 6.30 2002 Fla 22 8 61.7 76 33 26 5 14 41 3 2 1.46 3.80 2003 Fla 33 32 201.0 204 99 96 19 49 133 12 13 1.26 4.30 2005 NYY 17 17 100.0 129 66 53 17 18 56 4 6 1.47 4.77 2007 NYY 2 2 11.3 12 7 6 1 2 4 1 0 1.24 4.77 2008 NYY 7 7 34.3 41 23 22 5 10 15 4 2 1.49 5.77 2009 Cle 21 21 125.7 150 80 75 19 23 88 9 8 1.38 5.37 2009 Min 12 12 73.7 85 39 38 7 16 59 5 4 1.37 4.64 Total 195 177 1060.3 1190 611 559 128 291 700 62 70 1.40 4.74Here are his contract years in FLA and MIN: YEAR TEAM G GS IP H R ER HR BB SO W L WHIP ERA 2004 Fla 31 31 222.3 212 80 74 16 49 139 18 8 1.17 3.00 2010 Min 32 32 221.0 227 95 92 24 37 117 17 11 1.19 3.75 Total 63 63 443.3 439 175 166 40 86 256 35 19 1.18 3.37 Edit: This is cool, I never knew you could just paste excel tables in here!

I think signing Pavano is a terrible idea in fact I think it is by far the worst potential signing that I could imagine. Is it just a coincidence that his best two seasons have both come in contract years? Since he is 35 years old and was pretty much injury riddled from 2005-08 (4 seasons), I don't want the Brewers to be the team to find out. He if can be signed for next to nothing, thats one thing. If not, he's simply not the guy that we want to be pinning our hopes of a pitching turnaround on. If Melvin spends significant money on Pavano, I will have lost all faith with him.

I don't like it all. I would be in favor of increasing the divisional series to 7 games but that is where I would draw the line. In my opinion, baseball has achieved the perfect balance between regular and postseason play with their current format. Adding another team and a 3 game series while other teams sits idle just doesn't seem like a good idea. Also, unlike in other sports (ahem! Basketball), making the playoffs in baseball is special and something to really be proud of. All this being said, I can't imagine how boring things were when there were two divisions in each league and the playoffs contained only and ALCS and an NLCS.

If we didn't plan on re-signing Capuano if he performed the way he did after coming back from his injury, then why did we keep him around in 2010 in the first place? Does this team really think they have enough starting caliber pitching to let a guy like Capuano walk? I just don't get it.

There is, completely a reason to justify it. Supply and Demand. There is a much larger crop of guys who can play 1B than 3B at the MLB level and the majority of them will outhit McGehee. If he can't play 3B, then he's just not nearly as valuable a commodity. I agree in a sense when making deals and signing FA's. However you do what you have to do to get the best guys in your organization in the lineup.

Hart to 1st is a no-brainer. It was his position before the team drafted Fielder. He makes a great target at 6'6" and to be honest, at 29 years old, not really sure it is wise to have a guy his size running around in the OF. He is no spring chicken anymore. As for RF, go with Gamel. If he doesn't cut it, there are always decent corner OF that can be had at a relatively low cost in FA. Braun and Cain would be locks in the OF and the only unsettled position would be RF and in my opinion, Gamel would be able to handle it. Once this is done, the organization needs to shift its attention to finding a long-term solution at 3B. McGehee's successor needs to be identified or acquired. If Lawrie is ready in the next year or two, Weeks could help to net that individual. Also, I have read a lot of posts where people ar concerned about player "x" being able to provide adequate production for "x" position. In my mind, that is not something that you should really worry about. What a team needs to do is acquire as much talent as possible and do everything realistically possible to get them in the lineup. If you have a strong lineup 1-8, who really cares if your 1B is good for only 18-22 HRs? I don't. Its all about total production.

For what its worth, WSSP reported that Pat Listach said his interview went "tremendously" well.

Capuano did about as good as he could have done this year considering his circumstances. If you are not going to bring him back after what he did in 2010, then why do you bring him back for 2010 in the first place?

This may be a little far fetched but what if there was a way that you could turn his "little" crime into a much more serious one? Or at least monitor him until he does it himself. Does he still have the ability to send text messages? If so, can you still read them? For some reason, your issue makes me think of this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR5iwELasvI Anyways, glad to hear you are OK and I hope the police get this clown.

If any team offered anything for Bush at the deadline, this only makes the Brewers front office look incompetent. IF this is true.