Carl Pavano

by **Timmyb** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 10:30 pm

I know the guy comes with a lot of baggage,but Carl Pavano might be of intrest to the tribe.He is a legit #3 who pitched well at the end of last year, and depending on what he is asking for as a free agent he just might be worth the risk for the Indians.What do you guys think?

by **carnegie44115** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 10:36 pm

Timmyb wrote:I know the guy comes with a lot of baggage,but Carl Pavano might be of intrest to the tribe.He is a legit #3 who pitched well at the end of last year, and depending on what he is asking for as a free agent he just might be worth the risk for the Indians.What do you guys think?

Only an Incentive-laden deal and only if we can't get a SP that had more starts last year than Pavano the last 4 years combined.

by **jellis** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:59 pm

Timmyb wrote:I know the guy comes with a lot of baggage,but Carl Pavano might be of intrest to the tribe.He is a legit #3 who pitched well at the end of last year, and depending on what he is asking for as a free agent he just might be worth the risk for the Indians.What do you guys think?

I dont think you can call him legit, hasnt pitched for mst of 3 years and only had 1 good year. most of his career he wasnt a even a decent pitcher. I am all for passing on pavano

by **TonyIBI** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:05 am

Like I said in the Benson thread and just about every other thread asking about these reclamation projects. No thanks. I'd rather go with one of our 5000 lefties we have battling for the last 1-2 spots in the bullpen than deal with these kind of guys. Go out and get a good, solid MOR starter via FA or trade, and if no one is available or you can't swing a deal, then just go with what you have in-house for the rotation and maybe use the money to get a good infield upgrade.

by **carnegie44115** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 4:07 am

Tony I know you want the Indians to get that #3 guy and I want them to get that guy too, I think it is attainable in a trade unless we get a bargain which is very possible these days and I totally agree with you on the reclamation projects and when I say incentive laden deals I guess I should say NRI since they are two different things. But I was thinking of a guy that hasn't been mentioned much, Odalis Perez, not exactly the greatest of them all and another lefty, but only made 850K last year and with some stats down, probably going to get a decent figure but im sure still under 5 million. I also think Brad Penny has to be an option, I don't think he exactly falls into the same pile as Pavano, Benson, and Pedro, because he did make 17 starts last year, is doing more to be in better shape this off-season, and it was just in 07 that he was no. 3 in the NL Cy Young. Also others in our reach for FA I think are Looper and Wolf, I am not convinced with Looper as a starter, got hit a lot and Wolf has always been a guy that has flown under the radar as a decent #3 guy, but I think he ends up going back out west.

As for as much as the Yanks screwed themselves when they signed Pavano to his deal, which I cherished every moment to see all that money go for nothing, but I think the Dodgers will get screwed even more by the Jason Schmidt deal.

by **TonyIBI** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:14 am

Penny is really the only one I would go after.

I know a guy like Benson, Pavano, etc may come cheap or as an NRI....but I am just not interested in bringing another retread like that in who will take a job away from one of the lefties who are more deserving of it and are arguably a better solution at the #4/#5 spot in the rotation anyway. All it does in bringing in one of those retreads is screw one of those young guys because you just know somehow, someway the Indians will find a way to have the retread make the opening day roster based on their past history. If we were lacking of bullpen or starting options, I would be completely on board with taking a shot on some of the retreads, but this is not the case. It's time to put some trust in the kids for those roles, be it 5th starter or your 6th/7th reliever.

by **Hermie13** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:59 am

Pavano would be a great guy to bring in on a deal similar to Milwood's (incentive laden). I'm not buying a rotation with Reyes, Laffey, and Sowers (or Huff and Lewis) as the 3-4-5 even with how much I like Reyes and Sowers. We need to get someone else even if it's a reclamation project.

Plus we all know Shapiro loves his pitching. Someone will be added...

by **Timmyb** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:22 am

I agree, the current staff makes me very nervous. Carl Pavano could be a dominating force in the #3 hole. He has a whole lot to prove and with an incentive deal he could be just what Millwood was to the Indians in 05.

by **indianinkslinger** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:33 am

Tony 1, Hermie and Timmy -1. Pavano as a realistic 3rd starter or comparison to Millwood just does not cut it. Give me the options we already have against this broken down, washed up pitcher. Let's have a real laugh and propose Dontrelle Willis.

by **Hermie13** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:03 pm

Pavano does compare somewhat to Milwood. Milwood as you recall was coming off an injury. Pavano's arm may actually be healthier than Milwood's was going into the season. Pavano isn't an ideal choice.....but could be cheap and prove to be a steal.

I'd take Penny though over him.....

by **TonyIBI** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:40 pm

To me, Penny is a good Millwood comp and someone you take a 1 year risk on. Everyone else? Feh.

by **cardiackidz** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:00 pm

i agree go with your kids. how many times through the lat 5 years have the tribe gotten burned by there retreads? penny is it and he reminds me alot of kevin millwood. if you cant get him i dont want any of that garbage thats left out there.

by **Hermie13** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:04 pm

cardiackidz wrote:i agree go with your kids. how many times through the lat 5 years have the tribe gotten burned by there retreads? penny is it and he reminds me alot of kevin millwood. if you cant get him i dont want any of that garbage thats left out there.

hmm.....once is all I can think of, Jason Johnson.

Other than that Milwood and Byrd have been solid.

by **toledobuck** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:44 pm

Penny or Garland seem like the only somewhat proven MOR starters that are FA's. They would be decent and better options thatn what Byrd was last year. Signing Garland makes the most sense for two years and ~ $9 million per. They will have to be creative on the trade front if a FA pitcher like those two cannot be had. I am just not a big fan of O. Perez. His numbers and peripherals are not very good. He is the youngest of the FA group and eats a lot of innings but he has not been the same effective pitcher of a couple years back since his innings workload has dramatically gone up.

by **Hermie13** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 4:00 pm

I'd love to land Garland for only $9M. But he'll get more like $12M and for 3-4 years. He's a proven inning eater and will get paid well.

I agree on Oliver Perez though. For the money and years he's asking for, just not worth it.

by **indianinkslinger** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:21 pm

Hermie13 wrote:Pavano does compare somewhat to Milwood. Milwood as you recall was coming off an injury. Pavano's arm may actually be healthier than Milwood's was going into the season. Pavano isn't an ideal choice.....but could be cheap and prove to be a steal.

I'd take Penny though over him.....

I agree on Penny but for the Pavano comparison to Millwood to work, Millwood would only have had on decent year in his career and been useless for 4 years. Thumbs way down for that argument.

by **Hermie13** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:39 am

Milwood only had two really good years before coming to Cleveland (only 2 years with an ERA under 4). Pavano had 1 full year of that and a couple partials. The comparison is pretty valid, especially when you consider Milwood's last year with an ERA under 4 came 3 years before he signed with Cleveland....

by **JP_Frost** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:24 am

The biggest difference between them is track record. Prior to Millwood coming to the Tribe he made atleast 33 starts in 4 of his last 6 years (averaging close 220 IP in those seasons). Pavano, prior to his deal with the Yankees, surpassed 30 starts and 200 IP just twice. On top of that, Millwood was clearly the better pitcher ... and still is.

The only comparison I can see is that both were signed after having an injury, but that's where it stops imo.

by **Hermie13** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:38 am

Well Milwood wasn't averaging anything close to 220 IP. only twice had more than that and had under 150 innings twice in that span.

Agree, not the greatest of comparisons.....but not as far off as people think. Milwood has only had one ok year since leaving Cleveland as well (granted going to Texas). Pavano isn't anything special, but neither was (or is) Milwood.......

Another difference is that Milwood finished his year prior to coming to Cleveland injured, whereas Pavano was pitching the end of the year (albeit rather poorly).

by **Timmyb** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:47 am

I never compared Pavano to Millwood! I just said that Pavano could be a great signing of a pitcher who has somthing to prove, just like Millwood was to the indians in 05. He has Talent. He has pitched in the playoffs. He did decent down the stretch last year after coming back from injury. And I have heard it a million times that it takes a pitcher about two years to get back to there old form after coming back from Tommy John surgery. I am well aware that the guy has been accused by his team as being indolent and not very commited. However, You put a pitcher in a less stressful enviroment like the "Jake" with somthing to prove it could turn out well like it did with Millwood.

by **JP_Frost** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:48 am

Hermie13 wrote:Well Milwood wasn't averaging anything close to 220 IP. only twice had more than that and had under 150 innings twice in that span.

Agree, not the greatest of comparisons.....but not as far off as people think. Milwood has only had one ok year since leaving Cleveland as well (granted going to Texas). Pavano isn't anything special, but neither was (or is) Milwood.......

Another difference is that Milwood finished his year prior to coming to Cleveland injured, whereas Pavano was pitching the end of the year (albeit rather poorly).

I meant 220 IP in the 4 years where he made atleast 33 starts.

by **Hermie13** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:59 am

JP_Frost wrote:I meant 220 IP in the 4 years where he made atleast 33 starts.

ah, gotcha.

by **indianinkslinger** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 4:22 pm

Hermie my lad, you are picking flyshit out of pepper in an attempt to make a case that doesn't cut it. A for effort, F for results.

by **Hermie13** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 4:35 pm

indianinkslinger wrote:Hermie my lad, you are picking flyshit out of pepper in an attempt to make a case that doesn't cut it. A for effort, F for results.

Care to explain? Like I said, people are right about Pavano and Milwood being different, Pavano is healthier at this point than Milwood was when we signed him.....

by **npc29** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:22 pm

Consigliere wrote:To me, Penny is a good Millwood comp and someone you take a 1 year risk on. Everyone else? Feh.

I agree with that in regards to Penny and maybe Garcia.. If anyone else wants to come on a Minor League deal though.. I'm not sure I'd be against it.. But the point you raised about the Indians finding a way to get them on the roster scares me. Wedge likes him some veterans.. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind if the Indians would just know when to cut a veteran.

by **JP_Frost** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:48 pm

I think Penny is out of our reach. I wouldn't be shocked to see some team offer him a 2-year 25MM deal.

by **MadThinker88** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:23 pm

JP_Frost wrote:I think Penny is out of our reach. I wouldn't be shocked to see some team offer him a 2-year 25MM deal.

With this economy, and his health issues as recently as the 2008 season, I would be shocked at deal like that.

I get a feeling that a number of pitchers are waiting for deals that are 3 to 5 years in length and at $12M to $15M per year and as those deals fail to appear come early January pitchers will start lowering their demands.

The Tribe and other 'smaller' markets are waiting in the weeds and will pounce on some reasonable deals at that point.

by **indianinkslinger** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:21 pm

Hermie13 wrote:
indianinkslinger wrote:Hermie my lad, you are picking flyshit out of pepper in an attempt to make a case that doesn't cut it. A for effort, F for results.

Care to explain? Like I said, people are right about Pavano and Milwood being different, Pavano is healthier at this point than Milwood was when we signed him.....

Millwood had more wins, strikeouts, IPs and every other measure I can think of in 2004 than Pavano has had total in the last four years. If Pavano has an ERA of near 6 when he is healthy, I shudder to think what incredible value he adds to our rotation. In an era of bad FA signings, he stands out. He parlayed one dumb luck season into $40M. And you want this guy as our #3? At any price? What possible difference does his health make? And who in fuck says he is healthy? His agent? Hey, I gotta bridge to sell you! Clean local one owner. Do they still have turnip trucks in Cleveland? :s_sarcastic

by **Hermie13** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:45 am

First off, i NEVER said I wanted Pavano as our number 3 starter, and definately not 'at any price'.

The fact that he came back and pitced without missing starts shows he's healthy. Was throwing with good velocity as well.

Pavano did put up ERAs in the 4's with NY a few times (total was 5.00). At $4-7M (incentive laden) he wouldn't be a bad 1yr pick up. Not saying it means anything, but you're wrong. Pavano had more innings in his 4 years in NY than Milowood did in 2004. Their ERA were similar (4.85 vs 5.00). Had the same number of wins (9 only). Pavano also had a lower WHIP for what it's worth (not much I realize).

Not saying Pavano will solve all our pitching problems, but on a 1year deal, he'd be worth the risk if the price is right, just like Milwood was. THAT is all I've said.

by **Hermie13** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:49 am

MadThinker88 wrote:With this economy, and his health issues as recently as the 2008 season, I would be shocked at deal like that.

I get a feeling that a number of pitchers are waiting for deals that are 3 to 5 years in length and at $12M to $15M per year and as those deals fail to appear come early January pitchers will start lowering their demands.

The Tribe and other 'smaller' markets are waiting in the weeds and will pounce on some reasonable deals at that point.

I agree, don't see any way Penny gets that much. Was only suppose to get $9M in 2009 with his option yet the Dodgers (who are in a bit of a bind for pitching) bought it out for $2M. He'll likely sign a 1yr deal and try and prove that he's back healthy and worthy of a 3-4 year deal (like Milwood and to a lesser extent Lohse this past year). He won't be expecting anything over the $9M option he was suppose to get and likely would take $7M.

by **jellis** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:11 pm

I agree I see penny getting a deal very similar to woods, 2 years with a third year vested at about 7-9 mil a year but as more FA sign the market gets worse for teams liek the Indians they need to sign some one sooner than later

by **Hermie13** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:28 pm

eh, I don't think waiting hurts the Tribe. As the higher-end pitchers start signing (and likely for less than they want), it'll make lesser tier pitchers cheaper.

Cardinals waited and were able to land Lohse for under $5M last year....they waited til the middle of March even. Was demanding a 4yr/$40M deal then......I expect Penny's (and other pitchers) demands to drop as well.....

by **indianinkslinger** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 7:01 pm

Hermie13 wrote:First off, i NEVER said I wanted Pavano as our number 3 starter, and definately not 'at any price'.

The fact that he came back and pitced without missing starts shows he's healthy. Was throwing with good velocity as well.

Pavano did put up ERAs in the 4's with NY a few times (total was 5.00). At $4-7M (incentive laden) he wouldn't be a bad 1yr pick up. Not saying it means anything, but you're wrong. Pavano had more innings in his 4 years in NY than Milowood did in 2004. Their ERA were similar (4.85 vs 5.00). Had the same number of wins (9 only). Pavano also had a lower WHIP for what it's worth (not much I realize).

Not saying Pavano will solve all our pitching problems, but on a 1year deal, he'd be worth the risk if the price is right, just like Milwood was. THAT is all I've said.

I did not say you did but if he isn't a 3, then what does he add? I give up!!!!

by **carnegie44115** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 10:09 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:
JP_Frost wrote:I think Penny is out of our reach. I wouldn't be shocked to see some team offer him a 2-year 25MM deal.

With this economy, and his health issues as recently as the 2008 season, I would be shocked at deal like that.

I get a feeling that a number of pitchers are waiting for deals that are 3 to 5 years in length and at $12M to $15M per year and as those deals fail to appear come early January pitchers will start lowering their demands.

The Tribe and other 'smaller' markets are waiting in the weeds and will pounce on some reasonable deals at that point.

Yea in total agreement with MadThinker here, it is going to be a waiting game and I have the feeling were going to keep throwing names out here and drive ourselves insane. :s_wacko

by **Hermie13** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:34 am

indianinkslinger wrote: I did not say you did but if he isn't a 3, then what does he add? I give up!!!!

ha, you said (and I quote): "And you want this guy as our #3?"

He adds some depth and a guy that could be a steal (much like Milwood was). Someone is likely to get hurt (if not 2 guys) in the rotation. We do have 'some' depth.....but adding another guy is a good idea.

Obviously if you can get someone better I'm all for it......but options will be limited for us.....

by **indianinkslinger** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:57 am

Hermie13 wrote:
indianinkslinger wrote: I did not say you did but if he isn't a 3, then what does he add? I give up!!!!

ha, you said (and I quote): "And you want this guy as our #3?"

He adds some depth and a guy that could be a steal (much like Milwood was). Someone is likely to get hurt (if not 2 guys) in the rotation. We do have 'some' depth.....but adding another guy is a good idea.

Obviously if you can get someone better I'm all for it......but options will be limited for us.....

I said that because I couldn't believe you would propose to pay good money to use him as a 4 or 5 since we already have 6 of those in house which are less costly. What was I thinking?

by **Hermie13** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:02 am

ha, I was just answering your question (you asked if I wanted this guy as a 3....I don't). But as a 4-5 he'd be a decent option. Sadly, $4-7M isn't much for a starter, even one such as Pavano.

Huff hasn't thrown a ML pitch and even with how good he looks in AAA and the praise he's gotten....can't really be counted on. Lewis had an amazing September.....but can he reproduce? possibly....but not holding my breath. Sowers has proven he can pitch at the ML level.....but not that well. I think he'll suprise this year....but no sure thing. Laffey had some arm tiredness at the end of the year and also struggled in the middle when the league caught up to him....I think he'll be ok this year, but again adding someone else that's had some great success at the ML level for fairly cheap is something the Tribe should (and likely will) look in to.....

There's a few guys I'd look at before Pavano (Looper and Penny, for example)......but keeping the options open is never a dumb thing....

by **indianinkslinger** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:31 am

Thank heaven you don't run the Indians. Worst reasoning I have read on this site. :s_omg

by **Hermie13** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:58 am

indianinkslinger wrote:Thank heaven you don't run the Indians. Worst reasoning I have read on this site.

ha, how so? Tribe has done it in the past (signed injured or less than stellar vets). I don't see it changing this year at all.

Who is online