Which situation is better?? [Pavano or Zito? -mod] [Archive]

PDA

View Full Version : Which situation is better?? [Pavano or Zito? -mod]

azzurribaggio

04-29-08, 03:07 PM

Us having Pavano...or the Giants with Zito???

-tz

04-29-08, 03:08 PM

Definitely, a situation in which all threads have descriptive titles is better than one in which they do not. ;)

bigwampum

04-29-08, 03:09 PM

Pavano's only lost 6 games for us. Zito's already lost 19 for the G-men.

TheBamTino24

04-29-08, 03:09 PM

Pavano. He's off the books after 2008.

BrooklynBotz

04-29-08, 03:25 PM

I don't believe that I'm actually writing this but I'd rather have Pavano than Zito. Zito will go down in history as the worst free agent signing in history. At least until the next one.

Ynkcpt23

04-29-08, 03:35 PM

I don't believe that I'm actually writing this but I'd rather have Pavano than Zito. Zito will go down in history as the worst free agent signing in history. At least until the next one.

Strong statement there. The crux of the whole argument is the $$$. And that contract Zito signed was ridiculous. The Giants deserve this mess for giving a SP that much money and exploding the market.

Dave Visbeck

04-29-08, 03:38 PM

Us having Pavano...or the Giants with Zito???

Money money money ... for that I'd say, Pavano.

Do you think that Zito could be a new-made man once again, if he pitched for the Yanks?

NelsonMuntz

04-29-08, 03:40 PM

Strong statement there. The crux of the whole argument is the $$$. And that contract Zito signed was ridiculous. The Giants deserve this mess for giving a SP that much money and exploding the market.
Especially when anyone with even a cursory understanding of peripheral stats could have predicted that he wasn't worth that much money.

In Mo I Trust

04-29-08, 03:41 PM

The Zito contract is worse.

Ynkcpt23

04-29-08, 03:42 PM

Especially when anyone with even a cursory understanding of peripheral stats could have predicted that he wasn't worth that much money.

Couldn't agree more.

freebubba

04-29-08, 03:44 PM

Money money money ... for that I'd say, Pavano.

Do you think that Zito could be a new-made man once again, if he pitched for the Yanks?

If SF picked up $90m to $100m of his remaining contract, I'd be willing to find out.

Dave Visbeck

04-29-08, 03:44 PM

Is part of Zito's problem caused by his just not pitching in the AL?

hellonewman

04-29-08, 03:51 PM

Is part of Zito's problem caused by his just not pitching in the AL?That would be a new one.

flymick24

04-29-08, 03:52 PM

put 'em both down

Casey37

04-29-08, 04:00 PM

Is part of Zito's problem caused by his just not pitching in the AL?

If anything, it should be easier in the NL (no DH).

NewEraYanks2527

04-29-08, 04:01 PM

Is part of Zito's problem caused by his just not pitching in the AL? Or maybe it is more a product of not pitching in Oakland.

Tim Hudson two years before going to the Braves:
<TABLE class=stats width=700><TBODY><TR><TD>2003</TD><TD align=middle>27</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>OAK </TD><TD align=right>34</TD><TD align=right>34</TD><TD align=right>240.0</TD><TD align=right>197</TD><TD align=right>.261</TD><TD align=right>15</TD><TD align=right>.56</TD><TD align=right>61</TD><TD align=right>2.29</TD><TD align=right>162</TD><TD align=right>6.08</TD><TD align=right>2.66</TD><TD align=right>-</TD><TD align=right>.765</TD><TD align=right>2.70</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE class=stats width=700><TBODY><TR><TD>2004</TD><TD align=middle>28</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>OAK </TD><TD align=right>27</TD><TD align=right>27</TD><TD align=right>188.7</TD><TD align=right>194</TD><TD align=right>.302</TD><TD align=right>8</TD><TD align=right>.38</TD><TD align=right>44</TD><TD align=right>2.10</TD><TD align=right>103</TD><TD align=right>4.91</TD><TD align=right>2.34</TD><TD align=right>-</TD><TD align=right>.713</TD><TD align=right>3.53</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Tim Hudson with the Braves:

<TABLE class=stats width=700><TBODY><TR><TD>2005</TD><TD align=middle>29</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>ATL </TD><TD align=right>29</TD><TD align=right>29</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>192.0</TD><TD align=right>194</TD><TD align=right>75</TD><TD align=right>20</TD><TD align=right>65</TD><TD align=right>115</TD><TD align=right>-</TD><TD align=right>14</TD><TD align=right>9</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>3.52</TD><TD align=right>1.349</TD></TR><TR><TD>2006</TD><TD align=middle>30</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>ATL </TD><TD align=right>35</TD><TD align=right>35</TD><TD align=right>1</TD><TD align=right>218.3</TD><TD align=right>235</TD><TD align=right>118</TD><TD align=right>25</TD><TD align=right>79</TD><TD align=right>141</TD><TD align=right>1.98</TD><TD align=right>13</TD><TD align=right>12</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>4.86</TD><TD align=right>1.438</TD></TR><TR><TD>2007</TD><TD align=middle>31</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>ATL </TD><TD align=right>34</TD><TD align=right>34</TD><TD align=right>1</TD><TD align=right>224.3</TD><TD align=right>221</TD><TD align=right>83</TD><TD align=right>10</TD><TD align=right>53</TD><TD align=right>132</TD><TD align=right>2.61</TD><TD align=right>16</TD><TD align=right>10</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>3.33</TD><TD align=right>1.221</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Mark Mulder 2 years before going to St. Louis
<TABLE class=stats width=700><TBODY><TR><TD>2003</TD><TD align=middle>25</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>OAK </TD><TD align=right>26</TD><TD align=right>26</TD><TD align=right>186.7</TD><TD align=right>180</TD><TD align=right>.293</TD><TD align=right>15</TD><TD align=right>.72</TD><TD align=right>40</TD><TD align=right>1.93</TD><TD align=right>128</TD><TD align=right>6.17</TD><TD align=right>3.20</TD><TD align=right>-</TD><TD align=right>.756</TD><TD align=right>3.13</TD></TR><TR><TD>2004</TD><TD align=middle>26</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>OAK </TD><TD align=right>33</TD><TD align=right>33</TD><TD align=right>225.7</TD><TD align=right>223</TD><TD align=right>.285</TD><TD align=right>25</TD><TD align=right>1.00</TD><TD align=right>83</TD><TD align=right>3.31</TD><TD align=right>140</TD><TD align=right>5.58</TD><TD align=right>1.69</TD><TD align=right>-</TD><TD align=right>.694</TD><TD align=right>4.43</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Mark Mulder with the Cardinals
<TABLE class=stats width=700><TBODY><TR><TD>2005</TD><TD align=middle>27</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>STL </TD><TD align=right>32</TD><TD align=right>32</TD><TD align=right>2</TD><TD align=right>205.0</TD><TD align=right>212</TD><TD align=right>83</TD><TD align=right>19</TD><TD align=right>70</TD><TD align=right>111</TD><TD align=right>-</TD><TD align=right>16</TD><TD align=right>8</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>3.64</TD><TD align=right>1.376</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE class=stats width=700><TBODY><TR><TD>2006</TD><TD align=middle>28</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>STL </TD><TD align=right>17</TD><TD align=right>17</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>93.3</TD><TD align=right>124</TD><TD align=right>74</TD><TD align=right>19</TD><TD align=right>35</TD><TD align=right>50</TD><TD align=right>2.27</TD><TD align=right>6</TD><TD align=right>7</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>7.14</TD><TD align=right>1.704</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE class=stats width=700><TBODY><TR><TD>2007</TD><TD align=middle>29</TD><TD align=middle>MAJ</TD><TD>STL </TD><TD align=right>3</TD><TD align=right>3</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>11.0</TD><TD align=right>22</TD><TD align=right>15</TD><TD align=right>4</TD><TD align=right>7</TD><TD align=right>3</TD><TD align=right>1.23</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>3</TD><TD align=right>0</TD><TD align=right>12.27</TD><TD align=right>2.636</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Now Mulder has been hurt and Hudson has by no means been a bad pitcher for the Braves since joining them. However you would have thought Hudson's numbers would be a bit better going to the NL, at least I did. So I ask what is it that goes on in Oakland that makes these pitchers better. The ample foul territory coule be a factor. I just really don't know what Billy Beane does over there.

iWant27

04-29-08, 04:08 PM

Pavano because for $40 Million , Yankees didnt get anything , i mean nothing .

For Zito , he still has lots of time left to be atleast 10-14 game winner in a year . He also has a good history for making his scheduled starts . And moreover if nothing else he could be useful in bullpen .
Out of $126 Mil for Zito , Giants will get something .
But for Pavano , Yankees got zip .

Yankee Tripper

04-29-08, 04:10 PM

Well a $40M mistake is roughly 3 times better than a $126M mistake and a 4 year mistkae is rougly 2 times better than a 7 year mistake so anyway you slice it Pavano is better. Plus it's not like Pavano is taking the ball every 5th team and not giving his team a chance to win.

I feel bad for Barry Zito, he is a really hard worker and basically a good guy, not a jerk like Pavano. But man he's really at the point where he's almost stealing money from the Giants.

Mr. Mxylsplk

04-29-08, 04:11 PM

Out of $126 Mil for Zito , Giants will get something .
But for Pavano , Yankees got zip .
While that's true, I highly highly doubt they'll get $86 million worth of something. Of the two, I'd rather have the shorter, cheaper contract, even if it came with less performance.

R.V.47

04-29-08, 04:13 PM

Zito has just pitched terribly for the Giants. Id like to believe that if Pavano actually pitched a full season he would put up better numbers than Zito would at this point. Also the fact that his contract although expensive is chump change compared to what Zito is getting and hasnt really hamstrung the yankees from making any other moves.

sahara

04-29-08, 04:14 PM

If Pavano were to pitch as badly as Zito has and may continue to at his cost, I'd rather just have the smaller sunk cost and no player.

So basically, we're the winners in comparing these situations... if there can be such a thing in either case. :o

Dave Visbeck

04-29-08, 04:39 PM

If anything, it should be easier in the NL (no DH).

I know ... but it hasn't been. You mean like the ERA difference for, say, a Randy Johnson or a Roger Clemens when pitching against AL vs NL teams -- which is about a 1 run lower ERA when pitching against the NL teams. :dunno:

Guess what for Zito vs. AL teams ... and for fun, throwing away games against a certain AL team. ;)

Throw out any games pitched regular season vs the NL. Throw out any regular season games pitched against the Yankees. What's left in his pitching against AL teams?

91 Wins and 49 Losses (.650 winning pct) and a 3.51 ERA

These totals do include the disasters he had against the AL in 2007 (0-3, 10.80 ERA)

dabomb2045

04-29-08, 04:44 PM

teknetic

04-29-08, 04:45 PM

Giants will get something .
But for Pavano , Yankees got zip .

So you'd rather pay more for losses than pay less for nothing?

NYYDragoon

04-29-08, 04:51 PM

iamdoingthat

04-29-08, 07:04 PM

It's not my money, so I'd rather have the guy who's healthy, gives a crap, and is good for the clubhouse.

just-blaze

04-30-08, 09:43 PM

CallOfTheCrow

04-30-08, 09:55 PM

It's not my money, so I'd rather have the guy who's healthy, gives a crap, and is good for the clubhouse.

So you'd rather pay 19/M a year to someone because he's a nice guy?

Soriambi

05-01-08, 10:17 AM

Pavano....we only had to suffer thru 4 years at $10M per. At least he stays away and doesnt hurt us on the field.

The Giants have to suffer thru 7 years of Zito while paying him $19M per. Its not as if he's gonna get any better.....its only gonna get worse.

I could see him getting better, only because he's so terrible right now. He's only 30, so it's not like it's age that's making him fall apart. I think most everyone knew it was a horrible signing when they made it, and so far we've been proven right, but I can't see him being this bad all the time. I think he'll probably have at least a few average-ish years by the end of his deal.

I agree on Pavano, though. I'd much rather have Pavano and be done with it after this year than have to deal with Zito for five more years at that price.

cyhughes22

05-01-08, 10:40 AM

Is part of Zito's problem caused by his just not pitching in the AL?

It's because his fastball is down to 84 on a good day and his curve doesn't fool anyone anymore.

Retire21

05-01-08, 10:40 AM

This thread should be titled "Which situation is worse?" I would say Zito is the worse situation because the Giants are on the hook longer and for more money- plus, they expected an ace.

Pavano is about to become Free Willy, we never expected him to be an ace, and we paid him a lot less.

Jersey Yankee

05-02-08, 04:49 AM

I don't believe that I'm actually writing this but I'd rather have Pavano than Zito. Zito will go down in history as the worst free agent signing in history. At least until the next one.
I'd rather have Pavano, since he's less expensive per season and for only 4 years.

Zito is a waste of time and a roster spot.

I'd say that Mike Hampton's contract would give Zito's a run for the money for the worst. At least in the case of Hampton, we already know he's not going to be pitching anytime soon. With Zito, he could still bounce back and become very good next year. However, I won't hold my breath.

YankeePride1967

05-02-08, 07:58 AM

Even looking at both deals at the start of the contract Pavano's is less damaging. 4/40 vs. 7/126?

Constantino24

05-02-08, 02:35 PM

I would rather have Zito because:

1. He still has the "ability" to pitch
2. You can actually have the satisfaction of yelling at him from the stands (unlike Pavano who we can only trash on the message boards)
3. That's about it

Both are pretty terrible choices.

apalradio

05-03-08, 10:32 AM

Money commitments aside, Pavano was worse, simply because he was so utterly and hopelessly useless through his entire 4 year contract. Zito, at least, still has a chance to redeem himself. In his prime, he was a better pitcher than Pavano anyway. What the heck happened to him?

ChinMusic

05-04-08, 12:26 AM

It's because his fastball is down to 84 on a good day and his curve doesn't fool anyone anymore.

It fooled the most important person ... Sabean.

BillBuckner

05-05-08, 11:27 AM

Pavano definitely. Less money, less years, and he does us a favor by keeping off the field.

cyhughes22

05-05-08, 07:41 PM

It fooled the most important person ... Sabean.

You've got me there. :lol:

ArodMVP217

05-05-08, 07:51 PM

Pavano's only lost 6 games for us. Zito's already lost 19 for the G-men.

plz don't call them teh gmen, lol

Ynkcpt23

05-05-08, 08:29 PM

plz don't call them teh gmen, lol

Second that. The G-men are World Champs from NY.

teknetic

05-05-08, 08:37 PM

It fooled the most important person ... Sabean.

I'm not sure if fooling Sabean counts..

primetime714

05-06-08, 10:46 AM

The Zito signing is much worse unless he really reinvents himself with pinpoint control (ala Moose this year). However Zito always struggled with walks throughout his career, so with extremely limited stuff and questionnable control he could be a real disaster of a pitcher the rest of his career.

Its sad too because the Giants also overpayed for him offering too many years and too much money.

I feel bad for him and really bad for the Giants, but I hope he continues to struggle this year and Johan also has an off year, so that there will be less precadent for Sabathia to demand 6+ years in FA and maybe we'll be able to get him on a 5 year deal.