Author Topic: Carl Pavano  (Read 3825 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online blue911

  • Posts: 18604
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #25 on: December 22, 2008, 10:13:29 pm »
VORP - Garland +11.6
Cabrera  +8.5

Fairly minor difference, and to Blue's point, Cabrera is probably a heckuva lot cheaper.

 Cabrera started 14 games against the AL East (all teams had winning records) while Garland started 11 games against the AL West (all teams with losing records). Cabrera not only faced stiffer competition but pitched a majority of his games in parks that are considered "hitter friendly". Garland started a majority of his games in neutral or "pitcher friendly" parks. I think Cabrera would benefit more from a change than Garland but if he doesn't start striking out batters at a higher rate than last year it really won't matter.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33885
  • Hell yes!
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #26 on: December 22, 2008, 10:16:01 pm »
Cabrera's problem is control, not velocity or movement or quality of competition.  The plate and strike zone are pretty much the same size now, both leagues.

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23269
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #27 on: December 22, 2008, 10:24:42 pm »
Garland had his worst season since his rookie year. It's hard not to expect a 5.00+ ERA and a 1.50+ WHIP from Cabrera. Also, keep in mind that Cabrera is a TERRIBLE hitter. We won't let him go too deep into games unless he is absolutely dominant and we have a 3+ run lead.


Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #28 on: December 22, 2008, 10:26:20 pm »
Cabrera started 14 games against the AL East (all teams had winning records) while Garland started 11 games against the AL West (all teams with losing records). Cabrera not only faced stiffer competition but pitched a majority of his games in parks that are considered "hitter friendly". Garland started a majority of his games in neutral or "pitcher friendly" parks. I think Cabrera would benefit more from a change than Garland but if he doesn't start striking out batters at a higher rate than last year it really won't matter.

:clap:   great stats.

Online blue911

  • Posts: 18604
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #29 on: December 22, 2008, 10:27:40 pm »
Cabrera's problem is control, not velocity or movement or quality of competition.  The plate and strike zone are pretty much the same size now, both leagues.

Cabrera's main problem is between his ears. Look at his numbers with Hernandez as his catcher then compare them to what he did when Quiroz was behind the plate.

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23269
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #30 on: December 22, 2008, 10:35:14 pm »
Cabrera's main problem is between his ears. Look at his numbers with Hernandez as his catcher then compare them to what he did when Quiroz was behind the plate.

Besides knuckleballers, any pitcher (especially vets) who needs a specific catcher to pitch well should not be in the majors, IMO.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #31 on: December 22, 2008, 10:36:22 pm »
Besides knuckleballers, any pitcher who needs a specific catcher to pitch well should not be in the majors, IMO.

This

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22885
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #32 on: December 22, 2008, 10:39:17 pm »
Besides knuckleballers, any pitcher (especially vets) who needs a specific catcher to pitch well should not be in the majors, IMO.
You mean like Greg Maddux did?

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23269
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #33 on: December 22, 2008, 10:40:01 pm »
What's odd is that Cabrera wasn't even a good Minor League pitcher. I'm hoping he does well here, but it's pretty hard to believe he'll be much better than he has been his whole career.

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23269
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #34 on: December 22, 2008, 10:44:27 pm »
You mean like Greg Maddux did?

8 catchers caught him 45 or more times. He was pretty successful w/ all of them.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22885
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #35 on: December 22, 2008, 10:48:37 pm »
Certainly.  He had more than one but he always had his own catcher in his best years.  Don't know if he did that towards the end of it.

Online blue911

  • Posts: 18604
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #36 on: December 22, 2008, 10:51:39 pm »
What's odd is that Cabrera wasn't even a good Minor League pitcher. I'm hoping he does well here, but it's pretty hard to believe he'll be much better than he has been his whole career.

When I started looking at his stats it was because I thought the guy wasn't worth having on any staff. But I couldn't ignore the stats that don't agree with my opinion.There is enough there to justify a 1 year, $2.6M contract.

I like having the backup catcher be the personal catcher for one of the starters and Sundays. This allows the starting catcher to remain strong thoughout the season. It allows for a "head case" or a young pitcher to have a better relationship with his catcher than the starter has time to provide. It also allows the starting catcher to concentrate more on the other four starters.

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23269
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #37 on: December 22, 2008, 10:55:30 pm »
When I started looking at his stats it was because I thought the guy wasn't worth having on any staff. But I couldn't ignore the stats that don't agree with my opinion.There is enough there to justify a 1 year, $2.6M contract.

I like having the backup catcher be the personal catcher for one of the starters and Sundays. This allows the starting catcher to remain strong thoughout the season. It allows for a "head case" or a young pitcher to have a better relationship with his catcher than the starter has time to provide. It also allows the starting catcher to concentrate more on the other four starters.

I've never minded taking chances on guys. My only problem w/ this signing is we only really had room for one more starter. I guess I was hoping we'd get a #3 or higher instead of another #5.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #38 on: December 22, 2008, 10:58:32 pm »
I've never minded taking chances on guys. My only problem w/ this signing is we only really had room for one more starter. I guess I was hoping we'd get a #3 or higher instead of another #5.
Does the signing of Cabrera guarantee that we won't bring back Perez?

What do you think Olsen projects as a starter? #3?

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23269
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #39 on: December 22, 2008, 11:01:53 pm »
Does the signing of Cabrera guarantee that we won't bring back Perez?

I don't think Perez will be back unless he accepts a long relief/spot starter role. Someone will want/need him as a starter, though. Maybe the Royals.

What do you think Olsen projects as a starter? #3?

On our team? This year or down the road? This year I'd say he'll be our #2 or #3.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #40 on: December 22, 2008, 11:04:21 pm »
On our team? This year or down the road? This year I'd say he'll be our #2 or #3.
Yes, our team. We have Olsen for 3 more years I think (and possibly more if we sign him in the future to an extension). What do you think he projects as down the road?

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23269
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #41 on: December 22, 2008, 11:06:04 pm »
Yes, our team. We have Olsen for 3 more years I think (and possibly more if we sign him in the future to an extension). What do you think he projects as down the road?

#3 or #4. That's not bad considering that should mean we'll add some solid pitchers. I don't see him as a future #2 for any team, though (besides us this year :?).

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19056
Re: Carl Pavano
« Reply #42 on: December 23, 2008, 01:07:36 am »
Well I think the long-term goal has to be Strasburg / Zimmermann / Lannan / filler. As soon as 2010 that could be, I suppose, at which point Balester and Olsen/Martis/random free agent is not bad filler.