Author Topic: Carl Pavano (Read 3853 times)

Eddie the Expos fan · « **on:** December 21, 2008, 07:03:18 pm »

Do you think the Nats have any interest in Pavano?

ronnynat · « **Reply #1 on:** December 21, 2008, 07:08:13 pm »

Doubtful. I think they're done picking up starters. I'm not too happy about that.

PatsNats28 · « **Reply #2 on:** December 21, 2008, 07:08:43 pm »

Obed_Marsh · « **Reply #3 on:** December 21, 2008, 07:12:13 pm »

His 45.2 innings pitched in the last two years is certainly impressive.

Too lazy to find the puking smiley others use.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3784

PANatsFan · « **Reply #4 on:** December 21, 2008, 07:27:29 pm »

He's too busy crashing cars with supermodels in them and running away.

Dave B · « **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2008, 07:29:17 pm »

Is Carl Pavano interested in Carl Pavano? I say that because there was an article a while ago that indicated he just didnt care about crap.

Natskins · « **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2008, 08:05:41 pm »

Quote from: thom202 on December 21, 2008, 07:12:13 pm

His 45.2 innings pitched in the last two years is certainly impressive.

Too lazy to find the puking smiley others use.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3784

Yeah, between the 9 total starts over the last two years combined and the 5.77 ERA in 2008, what's not to like?

natsdad · « **Reply #7 on:** December 21, 2008, 09:03:40 pm »

Are you crazy. JimBo talks to everyone. He keeps all options open until they are closed. That is he strength as a GM.

Obed_Marsh · « **Reply #8 on:** December 22, 2008, 04:34:17 am »

Quote from: Natskins on December 21, 2008, 08:05:41 pm

Yeah, between the 9 total starts over the last two years combined and the 5.77 ERA in 2008, what's not to like?

Another bona fide beast with killer kicks. (Not pictured). How does Jimbo unearth such untapped talent?

LARRYbroadway · « **Reply #9 on:** December 22, 2008, 11:01:46 am »

Carl Pavano is a good pitcher that just hasn't been healthy. It's a gamble I'd be willing to consider because I've seen him pitch for the Expos back in the day. The guy is good WHEN HEALTHY. I wouldn't give him much money just because of his past injuries. But if he'd be willing to take say 1 million, I'd sign him. The potential reward is just amazing. Having said all of this, I'm sure somebody is going to give him a little more than that, so I wouldn't expect the Nats to jump on the Pavano band wagon. On top of that, a 1 yr deal might be motivation for him to pitch well.

DPMOmaha · « **Reply #10 on:** December 22, 2008, 11:10:24 am »

I think our record is broken. It sure sounds like it. I think our whole team is very good "when healthy". Give me a bunch of hard-nosed, tough guys who don't back down from anyone and play 150 games a year. This "when healthy" mantra is getting tiresome. I understand injuries are part of the game but we can't continue to have all our impact makers iffy "when healthy" guys. That's no way to build a team. They could be nice complimentary pieces if you're close and may push you over the top, but they shouldn't be the foundation.

Nat of the Living Dead · « **Reply #11 on:** December 22, 2008, 11:12:54 am »

Quote from: LARRYbroadway on December 22, 2008, 11:01:46 am

Carl Pavano is a good pitcher that just hasn't been healthy. It's a gamble I'd be willing to consider because I've seen him pitch for the Expos back in the day. The guy is good WHEN HEALTHY. I wouldn't give him much money just because of his past injuries. But if he'd be willing to take say 1 million, I'd sign him. The potential reward is just amazing. Having said all of this, I'm sure somebody is going to give him a little more than that, so I wouldn't expect the Nats to jump on the Pavano band wagon. On top of that, a 1 yr deal might be motivation for him to pitch well.

God damn it, people. We already have Shawn Hill. Can we just let these types of players go elsewhere and concentrate on getting real MLB pitchers?

Obed_Marsh · « **Reply #12 on:** December 22, 2008, 11:29:54 am »

Don't worry NoTLD. I doubt there is enough in the fan club piggy bank for LARRYbroadway to go and sign Pavano.

Nat of the Living Dead · « **Reply #13 on:** December 22, 2008, 11:37:20 am »

Quote from: thom202 on December 22, 2008, 11:29:54 am

Don't worry NoTLD. I doubt there is enough in the fan club piggy bank for LARRYbroadway to go and sign Pavano.

Ugh, it's just getting ridiculous. We have gotten no where with garbage players like Shawn Hill and his ilk, yet, we have people wanting to continue the same, tired, worthless cycle.

I'm telling you, it will drive a man to drink and do heavy drugs.

UMDNats · « **Reply #14 on:** December 22, 2008, 01:13:15 pm »

this guy is worse than patterson and hill combined

spidernat · « **Reply #15 on:** December 22, 2008, 01:27:07 pm »

He should be Pattersoned before we even sign him.

ronnynat · « **Reply #16 on:** December 22, 2008, 06:59:39 pm »

Quote from: natsdad on December 21, 2008, 09:03:40 pm

Are you crazy. JimBo talks to everyone. He keeps all options open until they are closed. That is he strength as a GM.

Hopefully he's got Jon Garland on speed dial then. We could use him.

blue911 · « **Reply #17 on:** December 22, 2008, 07:16:00 pm »

Quote from: ronnynat on December 22, 2008, 06:59:39 pm

Hopefully he's got Jon Garland on speed dial then. We could use him.

Why do you believe Garland is any better than Cabrera?

ronnynat · « **Reply #18 on:** December 22, 2008, 07:23:03 pm »

Quote from: blue911 on December 22, 2008, 07:16:00 pm

Why do you believe Garland is any better than Cabrera?

Because he pitches to contact. We have the the perfect ballpark for him. Plus, watching both over the last couple of years, he's just the better pitcher of the two.

blue911 · « **Reply #19 on:** December 22, 2008, 08:05:16 pm »

Quote from: ronnynat on December 22, 2008, 07:23:03 pm

Because he pitches to contact. We have the the perfect ballpark for him. Plus, watching both over the last couple of years, he's just the better pitcher of the two.

Are you aware that his "contact" doesn't reduce the number of pitches thrown per batter?

ronnynat · « **Reply #20 on:** December 22, 2008, 08:14:55 pm »

Quote from: blue911 on December 22, 2008, 08:05:16 pm

Are you aware that his "contact" doesn't reduce the number of pitches thrown per batter?

It does reduce walks, though. The most Garland walked last season was 4. He can go deep into games on a regular basis, too.

Do you really think Cabrera is as good as Garland?

PC · « **Reply #21 on:** December 22, 2008, 08:15:14 pm »

Quote

Carl Pavano is a good pitcher that just hasn't been healthy.

...which means he'd fit in perfectly here. We can always use a new "when healthy".

HalfSmokes · « **Reply #22 on:** December 22, 2008, 09:02:40 pm »

Quote from: PC on December 22, 2008, 08:15:14 pm

...which means he'd fit in perfectly here. We can always use a new "when healthy".

We traded Dukes and NJ?

blue911 · « **Reply #23 on:** December 22, 2008, 09:13:12 pm »

Quote from: ronnynat on December 22, 2008, 08:14:55 pm

It does reduce walks, though. The most Garland walked last season was 4. He can go deep into games on a regular basis, too.

Do you really think Cabrera is as good as Garland?

Garland started 32 games and pitched into the 7th inning 16 times. Cabrera started 30 games and pitched into the 7th 14 times. Walking fewer people is great but Garland's OPS was .819, Cabrera's .826. It would say that Garland pitched in a ballpark that was more pitcher friendly than OPACY. But do I think Cabrera is better than Garland, No. But I don't think Garland is worth what it would take to sign him. (remember he made $12M in '08).

tomterp · « **Reply #24 on:** December 22, 2008, 09:53:24 pm »

VORP - Garland +11.6
Cabrera +8.5

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