View Full Version : What to do with Pavano?
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 11:32 AM
I've been hearing that Carl Pavano is the target of several clubs, the Mariners leading the charge in pursuing a possible deal with him. What does everyone think about the possibility of using Carl to land a young centerfielder, perhaps Jeremy Reed who in the games I saw the Yankees play against Seattle he got AMAZING jumps on the ball and was just flying all over the place. He's young (24) however he was a big part of the Freddy Garcia to the White Sox trade the year before and I dont know if Seattle would be willing to part with him. He also suffered from a wrist ligament injury last year that ended his season early.
However my question remains what is the consensus around here, trade Pavano or give him another year to prove himself. Personally I'd like to see him get another shot because him being traded would most likely mean we would have to eat part of his salary. So what does everyone think any realistic packages that you could see Carl going for or should we keep him? Just throwing this out there to get some more conversation going since this slow time is killing me. So let's discuss.
I Love Wang
11-07-05, 11:35 AM
I've been hearing that Carl Pavano is the target of several clubs, the Mariners leading the charge in pursuing a possible deal with him. What does everyone think about the possibility of using Carl to land a young centerfielder, perhaps Jeremy Reed who in the games I saw the Yankees play against Seattle he got AMAZING jumps on the ball and was just flying all over the place. He's young (24) however he was a big part of the Freddy Garcia to the White Sox trade the year before and I dont know if Seattle would be willing to part with him. He also suffered from a wrist ligament injury last year that ended his season early.
However my question remains what is the consensus around here, trade Pavano or give him another year to prove himself. Personally I'd like to see him get another shot because him being traded would most likely mean we would have to eat part of his salary. So what does everyone think any realistic packages that you could see Carl going for or should we keep him? Just throwing this out there to get some more conversation going since this slow time is killing me. So let's discuss.
If the Mariners would give us Reed for Pavano, and they would take most of the contract, there is not a measure of time to tell you how quickly I would do it.
YankeeStripes
11-07-05, 11:35 AM
trade him. I think if they can get any decent outfielder who can play CF, they should bite the bullet, pay part of his contract, and do it.
RhodyYanksFan
11-07-05, 11:36 AM
I can't believe teams are interested in him. If they are, I'm pretty sure they'll want the Yankees to pay a significant part of his salary. I don't see how they can trade him and make it really beneficial. Give him another year to see if he rebounds and then try to move him next year when he's either A) over-valued after a great year or B) really useless and we can get prospects to send him back to the NL.
If he's expected to be healthy, I say you keep him and pitch him. I understand he was a dissapointment last season, but the thought process that led the Yankees to acquire him should still be valid today. The Red Sox wanted him last season, and if you're right about Seattle - other clubs wouldn't mind adding him to their staff. He isn't old and he's got playoff experience. I would assume either/both RJ and Moose spend extended time on the DL next year. You have to assume that between RJ/Moose/Wright there will be a need for some reliable starters and Pavano - assuming he's healed up - could fit that role.
I've been hearing that Carl Pavano is the target of several clubs, the Mariners leading the charge in pursuing a possible deal with him. What does everyone think about the possibility of using Carl to land a young centerfielder, perhaps Jeremy Reed who in the games I saw the Yankees play against Seattle he got AMAZING jumps on the ball and was just flying all over the place. He's young (24) however he was a big part of the Freddy Garcia to the White Sox trade the year before and I dont know if Seattle would be willing to part with him. He also suffered from a wrist ligament injury last year that ended his season early.
However my question remains what is the consensus around here, trade Pavano or give him another year to prove himself. Personally I'd like to see him get another shot because him being traded would most likely mean we would have to eat part of his salary. So what does everyone think any realistic packages that you could see Carl going for or should we keep him? Just throwing this out there to get some more conversation going since this slow time is killing me. So let's discuss.
I am not a Pavano hater, I actually believe he could become a quality number 2 or 3 for this teambut if the Mariners put up Jeremy Reed without having the Yankees pay an exorbitant amount of Pavano's salary I think it is a move the organization would have to seriously consider. I personally would do it then replace Pavano with Burnett, someone who in my eyes is simply a number one waiting to develop with the stuff to back him up unlike Pavano whose K rates and over-reliance on his defense don't put him in the same position.
Having seen Carl Pavano pitch when fully healthy, I will tell you he is A LOT better than he was for the Yanks. And, if you look at his numbers for the Yankees before he started pitching with a sore shoulder the last 6 or 7 starts, he was decent. Not great, but decent. His velocity was down 3-5 mph, and he couldn't get his breaking pitches to break the way they had in the past- they were spinning.
Anyway.....if you could get Reed for Pavano, you do it. The kid is extremely talented, and WILL hit in the big leagues. The defense is already there. I doubt Seattle would even consider such a deal, but it would be a no-brainer.
That being said, I look forward to seeing Pavano next year- hopefully healthy.
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 11:46 AM
I'm of the mindset that unless a deal comes along like Reed for Pavano straight up then it is best to keep Pavano. I'd like to see the guy pitch when healthy.
Yankees1962
11-07-05, 11:50 AM
I am not a Pavano hater, I actually believe he could become a quality number 2 or 3 for this teambut if the Mariners put up Jeremy Reed without having the Yankees pay an exorbitant amount of Pavano's salary I think it is a move the organization would have to seriously consider. I personally would do it then replace Pavano with Burnett, someone who in my eyes is simply a number one waiting to develop with the stuff to back him up unlike Pavano whose K rates and over-reliance on his defense don't put him in the same position.
I wouldn't think Burnett would come here after the Yankees dumped his buddy after one season which is the same thing they did with Vazquez.
I Love Wang
11-07-05, 11:53 AM
I wouldn't think Burnett would come here after the Yankees dumped his buddy after one season which is the same thing they did with Vazquez.
I wouldn't touch Burnett anyway. I'm wary of career underachievers who have a big contract year. They're lazy, and they don't perform when they have contract security.
mvavra1
11-07-05, 11:56 AM
Unless we get the defensive CF we're looking for and our defense finally tightens up, then Pavano will never do good here. He relies too much on batters putting the ball in play, then striking them out. He's a good pitcher but without a great defense he will lose games. I do think he could be good for us as long as we get that CF with an arm and ability to track down balls, and if Cano can improve his defense and we get a capable defensive 1B. Lots of ifs, I know, but if it happens Pavano could win 16 or 17 next year. He will stay healthy next year.
yanksconstantino24
11-07-05, 12:01 PM
I'm not willing to write Carl Pavano off after one bad year. It was his first season in New York, and I don't believe he was healthy all year. I think Pavano is going to have an excellent year in 2006.
nyyanksfan20
11-07-05, 12:05 PM
I would like to keep him much like I would have given Javy another chance. If a really good trade comes around I would be open to trading him but would prefer to keep him.
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 12:09 PM
I would like to keep him much like I would have given Javy another chance. If a really good trade comes around I would be open to trading him but would prefer to keep him. However in hindsight Vazquez went back to the N.L. and stunk it up I just hope Pavano does prove to be a good pitcher. Vazquez stinks.
I would absolutely trade pavano for jeremy reed and maybe one of their relievers. i love jeremy reed and really hated that we passed he and neal cotts when we had a chance to acquire them last year. jeremy reed would certainly answer our cf needs for years to come.
rivera,s cutter
11-07-05, 12:16 PM
If the Mariners would give us Reed for Pavano, and they would take most of the contract, there is not a measure of time to tell you how quickly I would do it.i agree
I wouldn't touch Burnett anyway. I'm wary of career underachievers who have a big contract year. They're lazy, and they don't perform when they have contract security.
I don't see any big contract year from Brunett. What did he win, 3 games after the all star break? And he has baggage, witness his outburst at the end of 2005, when he had to be sent home.
Forget him.
But if Seattle offers Reed for Carl, and we do not have to pay more then 1 or 2 million per year, then do it. No brainer.
Still Have Randy, Moose, Wang, Chacon, Wright and Small. No issue there, Carl can go if the deal is right.
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 12:19 PM
I would absolutely trade pavano for jeremy reed and maybe one of their relievers. i love jeremy reed and really hated that we passed he and neal cotts when we had a chance to acquire them last year. jeremy reed would certainly answer our cf needs for years to come.
When did we have the chance to get him? I missed it.
yanksphan
11-07-05, 12:20 PM
Selling Low is never good business.
HouseThatRingsBuild
11-07-05, 12:23 PM
If you can get him for Zito, I would dump him. I know that will never happen. They have no choice but to give him another chance.
If Reed was being offered I would do it but probably be a bit hesitant becuase I think Pavanowould turn it around in NY next year. I would definatley do it if Matsuzaka was posted though, so we could sign him to offset Pavano's departure. Reed is maybe the best defensive CF in the game, if we get him he would shore up our CF situation for a long time.
HouseThatRingsBuild
11-07-05, 12:25 PM
Selling Low is never good business.
Great advice. :P
yanksphan
11-07-05, 12:31 PM
Great advice. :P
;)
Seriously though - put it into perspective - why would any team trade away a stud CF making no money for a $10mil/year injury risk?
;)
Seriously though - put it into perspective - why would any team trade away a stud CF making no money for a $10mil/year injury risk?
Exactly what I have been thinking since this "dump Pavano" stuff has started being discussed. I can't see us do anything but get completely fleeced if we try to move him before the All-Star break.
Unless we are willing to eat a huge amount of money, I think we have ride it out with Pavano. And the amount we would have to eat will never be more than it is right now.
I'd be really hesitant to move him, unless it was in a deal for Vernon Wells. We are going to need the pitching next year, so why not hang on to him and see what he can do.
Box him up and mail him to abu daubi
nyg02005
11-07-05, 01:04 PM
When did we have the chance to get him? I missed it.
I believe reed was offered first to the yankees for contreras.
MattUNC2003
11-07-05, 01:08 PM
OK, I know that Jeremy Reed is an amazingly promising CF, etc. But can we get something else out of the deal if we're to assume the rest of CP's contract. I mean, that is a ton of dinero for just one player in return. Why doesn't Seattle throw in some higher end AAA arm for the BP?
If that were the case, I'd be willing to part with Pavano.
Mr. Mxylsplk
11-07-05, 01:14 PM
I can't believe teams are interested in him. If they are, I'm pretty sure they'll want the Yankees to pay a significant part of his salary. I don't see how they can trade him and make it really beneficial.
Agreed. That being said, if we got a decent offer that didn't require paying much of his contract, I'd be interested. I think the yanks overpaid him, and if they could somehow get out of that, I think it could be a smart move. But if we're going to be stuck paying him anyway, I'd just as soon pay him to pitch for us.
NelsonMuntz
11-07-05, 01:28 PM
I still think Pavano could be a decent #2/#3 starter for us once he's healthy, but I would consider moving him for a centerfielder if the right deal came along. For example, if the Nats (who need pitching desperately) were willing to trade Wilkerson for Pavano I would probably do it. And I would definitely do the Reed deal but I doubt that the Mariners would do it.
MTYankee23
11-07-05, 01:28 PM
I wouldn't touch Burnett anyway. I'm wary of career underachievers who have a big contract year. They're lazy, and they don't perform when they have contract security.
You mean like Pavano?
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 01:29 PM
I still think Pavano could be a decent #2/#3 starter for us once he's healthy, but I would consider moving him for a centerfielder if the right deal came along. For example, if the Nats (who need pitching desperately) were willing to trade Wilkerson for Pavano I would probably do it. And I would definitely do the Reed deal but I doubt that the Mariners would do it.
I dont think Wilkerson = Pavano. Sorry I just think Wilkerson could be had for much less than a starter.
One3kid
11-07-05, 01:30 PM
You mean like Pavano?
:clap: :clap: :clap:
MTYankee23
11-07-05, 01:34 PM
I dont think Wilkerson = Pavano. Sorry I just think Wilkerson could be had for much less than a starter.
Isn't Wilkerson cheap, young, and productive? And isn't Pavano only sort of 1 of those?
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 01:36 PM
Isn't Wilkerson cheap, young, and productive? And isn't Pavano only sort of 1 of those?
He's also a starting pitcher which that in itself drives his value up. Honestly do you think Wilkerson for Pavano is a good trade from the Yankees standpoint? Pavano can fetch more than just Wilkerson maybe a reliever too but seriously Pavano is worth more than Wilkerson. Wilkerson is a solid ballplayer but he does strike out over 100 times a year, hes not flawless and not worth what could be a viable #2 or #3 starting pitcher.
MTYankee23
11-07-05, 01:40 PM
He's also a starting pitcher which that in itself drives his value up. Honestly do you think Wilkerson for Pavano is a good trade from the Yankees standpoint? Pavano can fetch more than just Wilkerson maybe a reliever too but seriously Pavano is worth more than Wilkerson. Wilkerson is a solid ballplayer but he does strike out over 100 times a year, hes not flawless and not worth what could be a viable #2 or #3 starting pitcher.
A good cheap productive CF who had one off season for an overpaid 4-5 starter who had one on season. We would be thankful not to have to throw something else in.
Its all about filling needs. We NEED a good CF. We have mediocre starting pitching. I'm willing to give up one to get the other. So should you. Outside of 2004, when he didn't strike out that many batters to begin with, has Carl Pavano performed like a top 3 in the rotation starting pitcher? Most of his success can be directly attributed to the Marlins defense. At this point in the game, who would you rather have filling the 4 slot behind Unit, Moose, and Wang. Chacon or Pavano?
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 01:51 PM
A good cheap productive CF who had one off season for an overpaid 4-5 starter who had one on season. We would be thankful not to have to throw something else in.
Its all about filling needs. We NEED a good CF. We have mediocre starting pitching. I'm willing to give up one to get the other. So should you. Outside of 2004, when he didn't strike out that many batters to begin with, has Carl Pavano performed like a top 3 in the rotation starting pitcher? Most of his success can be directly attributed to the Marlins defense. At this point in the game, who would you rather have filling the 4 slot behind Unit, Moose, and Wang. Chacon or Pavano?
I am fully aware we need to fill needs but if you can get Wilkerson without giving up starting pitching than you do that. He should not come at such a cost, unless of course you are saying the Nats will not have the Yanks pick up any of Pavano's salary. Wilkerson is 28 and entering his prime. Believe me I would love to have him on the Yankees however I just think he can be acquired without giving up a starting pitcher which alot of teams seem to still be high on. I just think the only way a Wilkerson Pavano trade could happen would be if the Yanks paid for alot of Pavano's salary and I really do not want to see that happening.
MTYankee23
11-07-05, 01:55 PM
I am fully aware we need to fill needs but if you can get Wilkerson without giving up starting pitching than you do that. He should not come at such a cost, unless of course you are saying the Nats will not have the Yanks pick up any of Pavano's salary. Wilkerson is 28 and entering his prime. Believe me I would love to have him on the Yankees however I just think he can be acquired without giving up a starting pitcher which alot of teams seem to still be high on. I just think the only way a Wilkerson Pavano trade could happen would be if the Yanks paid for alot of Pavano's salary and I really do not want to see that happening.
We're going to have to give up something to get something. Obviously Pavano's appeal is going to be directly correlated to how much of his salary we pick up. And since we'd be hard driven to just give up on him, and get basically nothing in return (paying no salary). I'd rather see us pay the difference between Pavano and a potential impact CF. Which would mean we wouldn't have the hole in CF anymore, and our payroll wouldn't have gone up. From there we can concentrate on our other 2 biggest weaknesses (bench and bullpen).
At this point in the game, who would you rather have filling the 4 slot behind Unit, Moose, and Wang. Chacon or Pavano?
Considering the health concerns of the first three, I'd rather have both Chacon and Pavano.
People forget that Pavano was once a highly rated prospect who was the key piece in the trade for Pedro. Success was always predicted for him. To say his 2004 season was only due to the Marlins defense is silly. He is not Aaron Small.
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 01:58 PM
We're going to have to give up something to get something. Obviously Pavano's appeal is going to be directly correlated to how much of his salary we pick up. And since we'd be hard driven to just give up on him, and get basically nothing in return (paying no salary). I'd rather see us pay the difference between Pavano and a potential impact CF. Which would mean we wouldn't have the hole in CF anymore, and our payroll wouldn't have gone up. From there we can concentrate on our other 2 biggest weaknesses (bench and bullpen).
How much do you think it is fair for the Yanks to pay, obviously teams will want them to pay something so what do you think would be fair. Personally if they are going to eat alot of the salary which it might look like they would do I'd rather see them do it for Reed but how much do you think would be fair for the Yanks to ship Carl off. I say 1-2 million.
aeromac76
11-07-05, 02:05 PM
Wow color me in the minority here but I would not deal Pavano for Reed.
I think Pavano, with a new set of coaches and a year in NY under his belt and being healthy will rebound.
Reed is a guy who has almost CF speed, and that is his scouting report, not mine, and a guy who hit all of .254 last year. I have not seen much of him but I don't see him as being an impact player. I don't know if Reed is projected to be a future star or not, but from what I saw of him and what his so far stats (I know, brief stats) say, I dunno that he is worth a potential rotation stalwart. I'd rather see what we have with Carl next year and go in another direction..
Heck, Bubba Crosby could probably hit .254 for us every day and play a good CF..
I think we can do better..
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 02:10 PM
I wouldn't touch Burnett anyway. I'm wary of career underachievers who have a big contract year. They're lazy, and they don't perform when they have contract security.
Ken Rosenthal had this to say....
Some team will overpay for free agent A.J. Burnett, but here's something to consider: Burnett, 28, is 49-50 lifetime with a 3.73 ERA. At the same age, Yankees lefthander Randy Johnson was 56-61 with a 4.09 ERA. Burnett comes with injury and makeup questions, but his potential remains intriguing....
As for Pavano, if he nets us Reed, we MUST dump him
MTYankee23
11-07-05, 02:13 PM
How much do you think it is fair for the Yanks to pay, obviously teams will want them to pay something so what do you think would be fair. Personally if they are going to eat alot of the salary which it might look like they would do I'd rather see them do it for Reed but how much do you think would be fair for the Yanks to ship Carl off. I say 1-2 million.
It depends on how much they're getting in return obviously. If its a Brad Wilkerson or Jeremy Reed, I think 4-5 million is reasonable. Even at 7-8 million, the other team is overpaying for Carl Pavano. Look, we can all say what kind of a prospect he was, or how well we think he'll do. But he still has 3 years at 30+ left on his contract. He's had one above average year in his career. His K/9 is below average (perhaps the best predictor for future success in pitchers, right next to durability, which he lacks as well). He had one good regular season and one good postseason. Yes, given the lack of health of Moose, Wang, and Unit I would like to have him and Chacon at the back end of our rotation, But we have other holes to fill, and if trading a pitcher who has basically been league average, but makes well above league average will fill those holes, you have to do it.
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 02:14 PM
Wow color me in the minority here but I would not deal Pavano for Reed.
I think Pavano, with a new set of coaches and a year in NY under his belt and being healthy will rebound.
Reed is a guy who has almost CF speed, and that is his scouting report, not mine, and a guy who hit all of .254 last year. I have not seen much of him but I don't see him as being an impact player. I don't know if Reed is projected to be a future star or not, but from what I saw of him and what his so far stats (I know, brief stats) say, I dunno that he is worth a potential rotation stalwart. I'd rather see what we have with Carl next year and go in another direction..
Heck, Bubba Crosby could probably hit .254 for us every day and play a good CF..
I think we can do better..
Well maybe you are right, of course I would have to argue that the numbers do not speak for Reed alone. I've seen him play, I've seen him get a great jump on the ball and make tremendous diving catches. He played the last part of the year in 2005 with a ligament injury that came about towards the end of the season, I dont really think stats are a good represnation of how the 24 year old center fielder could mature and the type of player he already is.
MTYankee23
11-07-05, 02:31 PM
Considering the health concerns of the first three, I'd rather have both Chacon and Pavano.
People forget that Pavano was once a highly rated prospect who was the key piece in the trade for Pedro. Success was always predicted for him. To say his 2004 season was only due to the Marlins defense is silly. He is not Aaron Small.
Of course ideally we'd keep all 3, that may not be a luxury we can afford ourselves if an alternative solution in CF doesn't present itself.
Hensley Meulens and Ruben Rivera were also highly rated prospects. So was Eric Milton. Just because success was predicted for someone doesn't mean it will be so. If you're into the sabermetrical part of the game, 2004 was in fact due to a large part the marlins defense. Pavano doesn't strike out a lot of batters, he didn't in 2004, his GB/FB rate isn't great either. Those 2 areas are generally the best predictor of future success, along with durability. If he hasn't proven to be above average in any of those categories, its risky to believe that he'll all of a sudden just get it. I'd be more inclined to think that if he followed up his big contract season with another good season that he'll continue to progress, but the parts of last season that he was healthy for, he was below average.
When did we have the chance to get him? I missed it.
last year for contreras.
ChrisV82
11-07-05, 02:34 PM
I would honestly like to see Pavano pitch for us healthy. Now if you told me he was going to have injury problems every year a la Nick Johnson, I could see a trade being beneficial. As it is, I'm tired of always cycling pitchers in and out.
I say hold on to him. We're not gonna get a fair deal anyways.
I Love Wang
11-07-05, 02:49 PM
Ken Rosenthal had this to say....
Some team will overpay for free agent A.J. Burnett, but here's something to consider: Burnett, 28, is 49-50 lifetime with a 3.73 ERA. At the same age, Yankees lefthander Randy Johnson was 56-61 with a 4.09 ERA. Burnett comes with injury and makeup questions, but his potential remains intriguing....
I can't think of a much worse reason to sign a guy to a hefty long-term deal. Because Randy Johnson was mediocre at 28. Furthermore, Johnson's stuff was always evidence in his K rates. His problems was similar to Nolan Ryan's. He walked WAY too many people. Burnett's problem is he just isn't that great. I suspect he's too lazy to be a good player consistently.
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 02:51 PM
I can't think of a much worse reason to sign a guy to a hefty long-term deal. Because Randy Johnson was mediocre at 28. Furthermore, Johnson's stuff was always evidence in his K rates. His problems was similar to Nolan Ryan's. He walked WAY too many people. Burnett's problem is he just isn't that great. I suspect he's too lazy to be a good player consistently.
I wasn't using The Unit's career path as a reason to sign AJ, I was just trying to show you that maybe AJ's best days are ahead of him if he is put in the right situation
I Love Wang
11-07-05, 02:54 PM
I wasn't using The Unit's career path as a reason to sign AJ, I was just trying to show you that maybe AJ's best days are ahead of him if he is put in the right situation
I see no similarities in the performances of Burnett to date and Johnson through age 28, so I have no idea why we should view Johnson's stats as indicative of something we might expect Burnett to do.
AMYanks
11-07-05, 03:19 PM
If Seattle took on most of Pavano's contract, then I'd do Pavano for Reed. If they didn't offer to take on a lot of the money, then I might have to pass.
27IsNext
11-07-05, 03:26 PM
Unless we could get a good deal for him, and not have to eat a large bulk of his contract, forget it. We need him to start until we have options like Steven White to replace him.
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 03:31 PM
I think the three teams how would most likely trade for Pavano would be the Marlins, Mariners, and the Tigers.
The Tigers and Mariners were very interested in him last offseason, and the Marlins obviously were the team that he built his value with. The Tigers have money to spend this offseason, and maybe we can sucker them into a nice trade for prospects(maybe Curtis Granderson who is excellent in the field i believe).
Obviously if we can get Pierre or Reed from the other two teams it would be solid
I think the three teams how would most likely trade for Pavano would be the Marlins, Mariners, and the Tigers.
The Tigers and Mariners were very interested in him last offseason, and the Marlins obviously were the team that he built his value with. The Tigers have money to spend this offseason, and maybe we can sucker them into a nice trade for prospects(maybe Curtis Granderson who is excellent in the field i believe).
Obviously if we can get Pierre or Reed from the other two teams it would be solid
No Pierre. We are going to need the pitching. Keep him.
whalers
11-07-05, 03:38 PM
I'd like to see Pavano for a full season before the Yankees ship him off.
I think we should keep him. His value is extremely low now. With all the pitching problems we had last year, you can never have enough arms.
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 03:44 PM
Why does it seem like all the NY papers have the same opinion about Pavano - that he showed no heart last year? I dont agree with this, when you're hurt you're hurt bottom line
I just want to trade him because I think he has some value and unless an injury occurs we won't even need him
Why does it seem like all the NY papers have the same opinion about Pavano - that he showed no heart last year? I dont agree with this, when you're hurt you're hurt bottom line
I just want to trade him because I think he has some value and unless an injury occurs we won't even need him
But that's the problem. Almost EVERY pitcher on the staff has had injury problems: Moose, RJ, Chacon, Wang, Wright. The only one that hasn't is Small. We cannot afford to give up pitching.
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 03:52 PM
But that's the problem. Almost EVERY pitcher on the staff has had injury problems: Moose, RJ, Chacon, Wang, Wright. The only one that hasn't is Small. We cannot afford to give up pitching.
But it's tough to keep high priced pitchers on your roster just because you are banking on another high priced pitcher getting injured
Enter_Sandman_42
11-07-05, 03:56 PM
it really depends what we can get for him, I'm not gonna just give up on him for the sake of getting rid of him.
I Love Wang
11-07-05, 03:56 PM
But it's tough to keep high priced pitchers on your roster just because you are banking on another high priced pitcher getting injured
It would have been nice if the FO had thought about this before bringing in Pavano, Wright, and Johnson in the same offseason.
YankeePride1967
11-07-05, 03:57 PM
I would NOT trade Pavano to unload him as I would like to see how he does with another shot. But if we can fix another problem (CF) via trade then fine.
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 03:58 PM
It would have been nice if the FO had thought about this before bringing in Pavano, Wright, and Johnson in the same offseason.
Yeah especially if you and I could have come up with this info, I dont see how the scouting team overlooked this
Captain Yankee
11-07-05, 04:16 PM
Pavano's career trend is being injured. The year before his walk year was one of the few seasons that Pavano wasn't hurt. Could we package Pavano in a deal to Seattle for Ichiro? Hopefully we could do something that doesn't include dealing Cano. Than we could go after a guy like Kevin Millwood who would come much cheaper than Pavano. We really overpaid for Pavano and I suspect he is an injury waiting to happen.
Boogiedown Bomber
11-07-05, 04:27 PM
If the Yankees can use Pavano as trade bait for younger, less injured players, i.e. a CF, then by all means I'm for it. I just hope there's a sucker, I mean a team, willing to take him off our hands!
But it's tough to keep high priced pitchers on your roster just because you are banking on another high priced pitcher getting injured
No, we keep him because we're paying him a ................load of money. If healthy, he is our #3 pitcher and we don't need another young CF when we have plenty in the farms who will be ready in a year or two.
RhodeyYankee2638
11-07-05, 05:00 PM
Pavano's career trend is being injured. The year before his walk year was one of the few seasons that Pavano wasn't hurt. Could we package Pavano in a deal to Seattle for Ichiro? Hopefully we could do something that doesn't include dealing Cano. Than we could go after a guy like Kevin Millwood who would come much cheaper than Pavano. We really overpaid for Pavano and I suspect he is an injury waiting to happen.
Good calls, I feel exactly the same way. Millwood is better and would be cheaper than Pavano, and Pavano is still dealable (even if we gotta through in some cash)
RobbiMan
11-07-05, 05:08 PM
Good calls, I feel exactly the same way. Millwood is better and would be cheaper than Pavano, and Pavano is still dealable (even if we gotta through in some cash)
Millwood is a Boras client and after posting that low ERA last year, he's likely going to be asking for lots of money.
That's funny, I thought I heard someone seriously consider starting the Kevin Millwood every five days (well, in thoery) next year.
Millwood is not only older, and just as mediocre, but will command almost the same salary as Pavano, and cost a draft pick to boot.
Crusadecat
11-07-05, 05:17 PM
Right now i'd have to say I'd like to keep Pavano and see what he can do healthy.
Crusadecat
11-07-05, 05:25 PM
IF the M's want to go Wright for Reed then i'd do that in second.
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 05:29 PM
IF the M's want to go Wright for Reed then i'd do that in second. Why would anyone want Wright? I still dont know why the Yankees wanted him.
CuzzinDave
11-07-05, 05:37 PM
Unless the Yanks are paying for most of it, no one wants Pavano and no one will give up anything of big value for him. Teams are laughing over the screwing we got over him and Wright.
The Mariner's will probably retain Jamie Moyer and feature a rotation next season that includes Moyer, King Felix, Pineiro and probably Gil Meche. They will also make a play for a FA pitcher like AJ Burnett, Matt Morris or Kevin Millwood. If they fail to acquire one of them then they may consider a move for Pavano.
Don't expect to get Jeremy Reed in return, because of his injury and the $30 million on his contract, we would be lucky to get Ryan Franklin and Scott Spiezio.
#7forever
11-07-05, 05:57 PM
I'd like to hold on to Pavano for another year.
Perhaps a year with Gator can help adjust better to NY, and give him a fresh perspective on pitching.
If he continues to pitch well on the road, he will be more valuable duing the season than now.
I Love Wang
11-07-05, 06:15 PM
Dumping Pavano and replacing him with Millwood seems counterproductive. Look at Millwood's career. Lots of promise, but constantly underachieving, then has a great year in a contract year. I remember this song from last year.
Yanks21
11-07-05, 06:34 PM
Why would the Mariners trade Jeremy Reed? He has established himself as their CF, and he's cheap...
I could see the Tigers moving Granderson in some deal, because they have Nook Logan. Although, Logan could easily be the one moved...
JeffWeaverFan
11-07-05, 06:44 PM
If the Mariners would give us Reed for Pavano, and they would take most of the contract, there is not a measure of time to tell you how quickly I would do it.
Even if the Yankees had to take a lot of Pavano's contract, I would trade him in a second to get Reed back. I know Reed didn't have a good offernsive year, but you gotta believe that will improve given his impressive minor league numbers and he's also one of the best defensive CFers in the game.
yankees76
11-07-05, 07:21 PM
It's really hard to judge what we have/don't have with Pavano until we see him pitch regularly. Assuming he was pitching injured for at least some of the (short) time we saw him pitch in 2005 ... whatever the injury was ... we still haven't seen him pitch yet. So, it's hard to evaluate trade proposals, not knowing what our side of the trade is worth. I remember how excited I was just to get Jeff Weaver off the books for the "chance" to get a few good starts or a half a season of what Kevin Brown used to be. Well, I'm still waiting for that one to pan out. If nothing else, Weaver has at least been an inning-eater.
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 07:29 PM
It's really hard to judge what we have/don't have with Pavano until we see him pitch regularly. Assuming he was pitching injured for at least some of the (short) time we saw him pitch in 2005 ... whatever the injury was ... we still haven't seen him pitch yet. So, it's hard to evaluate trade proposals, not knowing what our side of the trade is worth. I remember how excited I was just to get Jeff Weaver off the books for the "chance" to get a few good starts or a half a season of what Kevin Brown used to be. Well, I'm still waiting for that one to pan out. If nothing else, Weaver has at least been an inning-eater.
I remember one night he pitched a complete game shutout vs. the Mariners and I was thinking wow, this is it....haven't seen anything remotely close since but hes certainly capable (not that the Mariners are the 27 Yankees but it's still not easy to shutout ANY team in the MLB)
buntsalot2
11-07-05, 07:43 PM
The early concessus seems that "nobody is untradable". Heck if we got say an offer of Pujols for Jeter are we going to say noabsophukinglutly no? Carl may have just had a "bad injury year" and that was that. I recall him saying that "at least I'm not giving up homers"... well, one week later he was doing just that and couldn't get back on track ever again.
Basically, I'd say yes for the Reed deal but no to most others unless it was a huge upgrade to the OF or BP... :D
Heck if we got say an offer of Pujols for Jeter are we going to say noabsophukinglutly no?
Yeah, even though St. Louis would get shafted beyond all measure
SINCE77 2
11-07-05, 08:12 PM
Pavano+ midlevel prospect or two for Ichiro.
JapanJobbers
11-07-05, 08:38 PM
Pavano+ midlevel prospect or two for Ichiro.
I'm sure Seattle would jump at that.
ring403
11-07-05, 08:45 PM
Moving him for the sake of moving him would be foolish. He should be traded only if the Yanks can find a deal that makes the team better.
SINCE77 2
11-07-05, 08:48 PM
I'm sure Seattle would jump at that.
They are close enough in remaining salary to make the deal realistic. Less cash the Yankees have to payout, the better. I can't see them taking on 30 mill in salary and giving up Reed in the process who makes no money. Trading Ichiro for Pavano allows them enough payroll flexibility and the ability to fill any other holes they may have. Unlike Detroit who would probably trade Granderson for Pavano without much cash from the Yankees, Seattle is not desperate for fans.
Don Mack
11-07-05, 09:14 PM
I'm of the opinion that we should hold onto Pavano. He did have an excellent year in 2004 for the Marlins in addition to his WS performance against us in 2003. I'd like to see what he can do as a healthy pitcher.
I also think our pitching will improve with Ron Guidry and Joe Kerrigan in to replace Mel and Neil Allen. Our middle relief couldn't get any worse than last season. I think Contreras is a good example of how the Yankees messed hiim up. They tried to change his arm angle and he wasn't successful at all. With Chicago, they let him pitch the way he did with the Cuban National team and look at the results.
It is not worth trading Pavano for a CF, especially when we'll be paying a good part of his salary. He deserves another shot.
YankeePride1967
11-07-05, 09:19 PM
They are close enough in remaining salary to make the deal realistic. Less cash the Yankees have to payout, the better. I can't see them taking on 30 mill in salary and giving up Reed in the process who makes no money. Trading Ichiro for Pavano allows them enough payroll flexibility and the ability to fill any other holes they may have. Unlike Detroit who would probably trade Granderson for Pavano without much cash from the Yankees, Seattle is not desperate for fans.
Before even getting into the amount of money that Ichiro brings to Seattle from Japan, why would they trade Ichiro for our question mark and a mid-level prospect? You can start the Yankees offer with two of Cano/Wang/Duncan and go from there for Seattle to even take the call.
yanksphan
11-07-05, 09:36 PM
Before even getting into the amount of money that Ichiro brings to Seattle from Japan, why would they trade Ichiro for our question mark and a mid-level prospect? You can start the Yankees offer with two of Cano/Wang/Duncan and go from there for Seattle to even take the call.
It's funny how many posters are so quick to deal Pavano off, yet not understanding that the reason they want to deal him is the same reason other teams don't want him.
YankeePride1967
11-07-05, 10:04 PM
It's funny how many posters are so quick to deal Pavano off, yet not understanding that the reason they want to deal him is the same reason other teams don't want him.
I call it the "we'll give you are castaways for your crown jewels" syndrome.
just-blaze
11-07-05, 10:20 PM
It's funny how many posters are so quick to deal Pavano off, yet not understanding that the reason they want to deal him is the same reason other teams don't want him.
Its also funny how people think Pavano has no value. I dont want to trade him unless we get value.
I would be hesitant to trade for Reed because he really hasnt done much if anything. He might pan out he might not. Just like Pavano. Injuries hampered both. Only time will tell if they will realize that potential.
Teams are interested in Pavano, just not his contract. And if the right deal came along that would improve the team, you can do what we did with the Vazquez deal and send 2-3 million to Seattle per year.
I dont think the Yankees should do this though, b/c free agents are going to weary of coming here after Weaver, Vazquez, and maybe Pavano being shipped off after one bad year. And that is a sad state of affairs.
Personally, I would prefer to see Pavano in pinstripes next year. I think at the very least he will have a productive year.
surge511
11-07-05, 10:30 PM
I bet Pavano is here for next year. The FO put too much energy and money into getting him here. I know they did the same with Vazquez, but they traded him for the best pitcher in baseball. Pavano would not command nearly that much, and I don't think the Yankees would find reasonable value for him.
NewEraYanks2527
11-07-05, 10:38 PM
I bet Pavano is here for next year. The FO put too much energy and money into getting him here. I know they did the same with Vazquez, but they traded him for the best pitcher in baseball. Pavano would not command nearly that much, and I don't think the Yankees would find reasonable value for him.
Personally I am hoping to at least give Carl another shot, no matter how frustrated I am with him. I think a pair of new pitching coaches will be good for him and that perhaps now that he has something to prove he can shine. I would not trade him unless the right deal came along and of course that goes for just about anybody on this team. He has value and we may have a "surplus" of starting pitching but you have to remember that you can never have enough starting pitching. My guess is that someone, if not multiple members of the rotation in 2006 will go on the DL. Let the pitchers fight it out and earn their spot. I think Pavano can be good for us of course he could just be anothe Vazquez who sucks for us and then goes and sucks somewhere else.
BombersBlvd
11-07-05, 10:40 PM
Pavano.. Pavano... sounds so familiar...
THEBOSS84
11-07-05, 10:48 PM
I dont see how anyone can have any faith in Pavano..I feel like we have all been down this road so many times already and we already know the results...Vazquez, Contreras, Weaver..etc. ....When does the madness end?!?
Matsui55
11-07-05, 10:54 PM
The M's were talking Pinero and/or Meche for Pavano at the deadline.
I'd take one for Pavano- saves $$, leaves you with the same number of arms, and Meche/Pinero are infinitely more tradeable at the 2006 deadline than Pavano will be.
And the M's definitely have the $$$. They pull in a ton of money here and in Japan- thanks to Ichiro
NYYRocket
11-08-05, 08:46 AM
Pavano's woes could of been him pitching threw injury, we should give him a healthy year before we push him under the train
JeffWeaverFan
11-08-05, 08:52 AM
Pavano's woes could of been him pitching threw injury, we should give him a healthy year before we push him under the train
There were questions about how seriously injured he actually was. What really has to be done with Pavano is to have a sit down with him and ask him if he wants to be here next year. If the rumors that he doesn't are true, we have to get rid of him. Eat some of the salary and get a prospect in return. If he tells us he really wants to be here, then keep him and we've got our rotation set for next year:
RJ, Moose, Wang, Chacon, Pavano. Wright and Small in the bullpen and both can spot start when the guarenteed injury bug hits that starting rotation.
JeffWeaverFan
11-08-05, 08:53 AM
I dont see how anyone can have any faith in Pavano..I feel like we have all been down this road so many times already and we already know the results...Vazquez, Contreras, Weaver..etc. ....When does the madness end?!?
Well, now that Mel is gone it could end quite soon.
silverdsl
11-08-05, 09:12 AM
I dont see how anyone can have any faith in Pavano..I feel like we have all been down this road so many times already and we already know the results...Vazquez, Contreras, Weaver..etc. ....When does the madness end?!?Pavano's only been in pinstripes for one season and he was injured for half of it. I have the patience to see what he might be able to do in his second season with the Yankees with a new pitching coach.
-Deborah
bostonyankeefan
11-08-05, 09:17 AM
Pavano's only been in pinstripes for one season and he was injured for half of it. I have the patience to see what he might be able to do in his second season with the Yankees with a new pitching coach.
-Deborah
I agree 100%. If we are going to build a good young team, we need to give guys like Pavano a chance. One season during which he was injured is not enough. The pressure to win every year makes it difficult to be patient, but we really need to be in Pavano's case. He could be a very solid pitcher for us for a long time.
THEBOSS84
11-08-05, 09:17 AM
Pavano's only been in pinstripes for one season and he was injured for half of it. I have the patience to see what he might be able to do in his second season with the Yankees with a new pitching coach.
-Deborah
I understand why you might still believe in him based on the fact that he was not healthy last season, but all you gotta do is look at his track record. He conveniently had his ONLY above average season in the majors in his walk year. He has practically been hurt every other season in his career...of course hindsight is always 20/20 but that was a signing that the Yankees WISH they can take back (there are plenty others of course)
SoCal Pinstriper
11-08-05, 09:36 AM
As sombody who hasn't exactly been one of Carl's biggest fans around here (understatement), I think that we need to treat the prospect of trading him just like any other player on the roster. In other words, I don't think that we need to go out of our way to "dump" him.
If a situation arises where we can legitimately improve the Yankees by trading Carl, then we should do it (just as we would with Sheff, Posada, or anybody else).
Unless there is more to the injury (or lack thereof) story than we know at this time, I'm fine with going to ST with Carl in the rotation. If 2005 reinforced anything, it is the old axiom that you can never have enough pitching.
If a great deal comes up, the Yankees shouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger. Otherwise, lets see what Pavano brings to the party this spring. His value may be greater at the deadline.
THEBOSS84
11-08-05, 09:40 AM
As sombody who hasn't exactly been one of Carl's biggest fans around here (understatement), I think that we need to treat the prospect of trading him just like any other player on the roster. In other words, I don't think that we need to go out of our way to "dump" him.
If a situation arises where we can legitimately improve the Yankees by trading Carl, then we should do it (just as we would with Sheff, Posada, or anybody else).
Unless there is more to the injury (or lack thereof) story than we know at this time, I'm fine with going to ST with Carl in the rotation. If 2005 reinforced anything, it is the old axiom that you can never have enough pitching.
If a great deal comes up, the Yankees shouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger. Otherwise, lets see what Pavano brings to the party this spring. His value may be greater at the deadline.
I agree with all your points except your last one....If his value is greater at the trade deadline, I don't know why we would want to deal him (obviously assuming his value becomes greater by showing he can pitch)
SoCal Pinstriper
11-08-05, 09:50 AM
I agree with all your points except your last one....If his value is greater at the trade deadline, I don't know why we would want to deal him (obviously assuming his value becomes greater by showing he can pitch)Actually, although there is no way to quantify this, I think that a players value is usually higher at the deadline as contenders look to make a pennant push in an environment that offers trades (no FA) as the only means to improve a team.
And yes, I'm assuming that Pavanno pitches about as well as he did last season. Any team trading for him now is assuming that he is able to pitch at least that well.
THEBOSS84
11-08-05, 09:53 AM
Actually, although there is no way to quantify this, I think that a players value is usually higher at the deadline as contenders look to make a pennant push in an environment that offers trades (no FA) as the only means to improve a team.
And yes, I'm assuming that Pavanno pitches about as well as he did last season. Any team trading for him now is assuming that he is able to pitch at least that well.
Why would the Yankees be looking to help out another contender at the trade dealine, even if would mean dumping a salary they dont want (even if the contending team would be in the nl, it still may have bite-you-in-the-ass ramifications)..
SoCal Pinstriper
11-08-05, 10:45 AM
Why would the Yankees be looking to help out another contender at the trade dealine, even if would mean dumping a salary they dont want (even if the contending team would be in the nl, it still may have bite-you-in-the-ass ramifications)..We wouldn't. I'd hope that the only reason we would do somthing at the deadline is that we would be helping ourselves with what we were able to get in return.
cuban_yanksfan
11-08-05, 12:48 PM
I understand why you might still believe in him based on the fact that he was not healthy last season, but all you gotta do is look at his track record. He conveniently had his ONLY above average season in the majors in his walk year. He has practically been hurt every other season in his career...of course hindsight is always 20/20 but that was a signing that the Yankees WISH they can take back (there are plenty others of course)
I've watched all of Carl's starts when he was with the Marlins and he's been getting progressivly better. Of all the marlin's pitchers over the past three years, he's remained the healthiest (exception: D-Train).
He's capable of throwing a CG any time he stepped on the mound. He usually durable, I think this past year was an isolated injury. He can bounce back and be productive in a staff that has much more injury-prone players (RJ, Wright, Wang, Moose..... shall I go on?)
NelsonMuntz
11-08-05, 01:47 PM
Pavano was 2 - 2 with a 3.10 ERA in April last year, so he certainly got off to a decent start. I still think he'll be a quality #2/#3 starter for us if he comes back healthy.
surge511
11-08-05, 01:49 PM
Pavano was 2 - 2 with a 3.10 ERA in April last year, so he certainly got off to a decent start. I still think he'll be a quality #2/#3 starter for us if he comes back healthy.
I agree, if he can be healthy, he can actually pitch to the money he is making. The Yanks would probably get screwed in any deal for him. Hold onto him, at least for 1 more year - I think he has a lot more to show than what we saw last year.
yankees76
11-08-05, 02:07 PM
Interest in Pavano being reported locally in Seattle.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/baseball/247502_mari08.html
surge511
11-08-05, 02:24 PM
As sombody who hasn't exactly been one of Carl's biggest fans around here (understatement), I think that we need to treat the prospect of trading him just like any other player on the roster. In other words, I don't think that we need to go out of our way to "dump" him.
If a situation arises where we can legitimately improve the Yankees by trading Carl, then we should do it (just as we would with Sheff, Posada, or anybody else).
Unless there is more to the injury (or lack thereof) story than we know at this time, I'm fine with going to ST with Carl in the rotation. If 2005 reinforced anything, it is the old axiom that you can never have enough pitching.
If a great deal comes up, the Yankees shouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger. Otherwise, lets see what Pavano brings to the party this spring. His value may be greater at the deadline.
This is a perfect post. Treat him just like every other player on the team. Right now, he is our #5 starter for 2006 - which is pretty good, considering we signed him to be our #2/3 guy. However, if we can significantly improve by trading him, don't hesitate to do so.
27IsNext
11-08-05, 02:39 PM
The only way I'd consider trading Pavano is if Matsuzaka gets posted, and we sign him.
I think he'll be better next season thus increasing his trade value if the right trade comes along
why not pitch him every 5th day
why not pitch him every 5th day
You know, I like that.
yanksphan
11-08-05, 04:40 PM
why not pitch him every 5th day
Radical man, radical.
32elston
11-09-05, 12:44 AM
We could get Urbina right now for a carton of cigs and some soap-on-a-rope.
K-Rod, Donnelly or E. Santana and Shields for Pavano. And I'll take it. Otherwise, no he's barely played this year.
JapanJobbers
11-09-05, 06:22 AM
K-Rod, Donnelly or E. Santana and Shields for Pavano. And I'll take it. Otherwise, no he's barely played this year.
Is that all you want?
George Steinbrenner
11-09-05, 03:41 PM
hang on to him. Hes not going anywhere unless we pick up alot of his money. He was injured last year and didnt tell anybody. Anybody who watched his games could see he was usually pitching well into the 5 or 6th inning, and then started missing his spots. He could have been faking an injury, but I dont buy that. I think his arm needed rest and hopefully Guidry will be able to do better than the ATROCIOUS job Mel Stottlemyer. Say his name: Stottlemyer. Its funny now that hes gone. I almost miss all the complaining about him. :D
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
0