Thread: Twins are not the only team interested in Pavano

In addition to previous reports that the Twins had expressed interest in his return, Carl Pavano told Palm Beach Post's Joe Capozzi that he would love to pitch in Miami in 2013. It's possible that he has not been alerted to the recent roster-gutting or that his agent, Dave Pepe, is simply is trying to create a market for him.

Pavano, coming off bruised humerus bone in 2012 which decreased his velocity and his overall effectiveness, will be 37 years old in 2013. While he's thrown almost 200 in three consecutive seasons prior to 2012, it is uncertain if he will be able to recover and avoid the reality of time at his accelerated age. After all, his strikeout rate had dropped significantly since his return in 2009 as did his velocity.

But whatever. Twins need starting pitchers and if Pavano signs for peanuts, sure. What the hell, right?

Why on earth are the Twins interested?

Ya why? At best a short-term fix. We need some long-term help!

In general, the trend around here is cracking me up. Sign Liriano and re-sign Pavano. Also, bemoan the loss of Baker. It is as though people around here WANT to simply repeat 2012. Good god.

And then there is the fun addition of Chone Rivas, I mean Chone Figgins to the discussion.

You guys are supposedly only weeks away from your blueprints and this is what has become of that?

I wish Gleeman were around to consider Baker, Pavano, Liriano, and Figgins. That would be hilarious.

Ya why? At best a short-term fix. We need some long-term help!

I would go to a game to see Liriano K 15 or 20 batters but Pavano no way.

I swallowed hard when they signed him to a 2 year deal for 2011 & 2012 and was greatly relieved that there wasn't a 3rd year.

Now we're being asked to be sanguine about Pavano for another year (or God Forbid, 2)? Even at presumably significantly less money than his last contract, -- No, thanks.

Why not? He is old and bad and hurt. There are three reasons. I'd they sign him, they are less likely to sign someone else. There are four. Need more?

I think it comes down to whether you want 5 starters in the rotation or if you just want to sign a bunch of guys to create some competition for starting pitching spots. This isn't 3B, we need legitimate starters. Guys that we can count on to take the ball every 5th day. Pavano isn't one of those guys. I liked him while he was here, but we need better in 2013.

The question remains, will TR find better in 2013. If he signs Pavano, he is going down the wrong path.

I want long-term solutions, too. So here are your options...
1. Pay a lot of money for a top-notch free agent...
2. Make a trade that gives up some valuable players/prospects.

I can see the Twins doing both - ONCE. After that, they still have two spots to fill. When I (and I assume others) say I'm not opposed to Pavano, it doesn't mean as the premier signing of the offseason. It means this rotation is gutted right now that having a guy that throws 200 IP at a league average ERA at the back end of our rotation would be a significant upgrade.

Look at it this way: Diamond (even according to Ryan) is a #3. I'd be thrilled with Pavano being the #4.

I'll add one more thought that might draw a reaction, but I'll stand by...I'd much rather the Twins sign Pavano for that #4 spot next year than sign Baker for that spot if they couldn't get an option year. Not to mention, I think he'll be half the price.

Originally Posted by John Bonnes

I'll add one more thought that might draw a reaction, but I'll stand by...I'd much rather the Twins sign Pavano for that #4 spot next year than sign Baker for that spot if they couldn't get an option year. Not to mention, I think he'll be half the price.

Ooh, I don't know if I agree with that but I'm not in total disagreement, either. Here's how I view it.

1) If signing Baker doesn't prevent the team from picking up two more pitchers, one of them being a legitimate #2 in the rotation, they should have signed Baker without the option.

2) If signing Baker prevents the team from picking up two more pitchers, one of them being a legitimate #2, they were right on passing on Baker and Pavano is a fine third (but NOT second) acquisition for the rotation.

I have an idea! Let's just sign all the guys that were on last year's 96 loss team!

If Pavano pitched to a league average ERA, I would be shocked. His ERA will be in the 5 range. I would rather Hendricks pitch, all year, and see if he can grow.

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

If Pavano pitched to a league average ERA, I would be shocked. His ERA will be in the 5 range. I would rather Hendricks pitch, all year, and see if he can grow.

I don't foresee a 2013 season where pitchers are being held out of the rotation because it's too crowded.

Originally Posted by notoriousgod71

I have an idea! Let's just sign all the guys that were on last year's 96 loss team!

I know! Also, are people forgetting how bad he was when healthy last year? There is no "league average" ERA there and there sure as hell aren't going to be 200 innings!

Originally Posted by John Bonnes

I'll add one more thought that might draw a reaction, but I'll stand by...I'd much rather the Twins sign Pavano for that #4 spot next year than sign Baker for that spot if they couldn't get an option year. Not to mention, I think he'll be half the price.

Baker signed for $5.5M. If Pavano is willing to sign for half that- at $2.75M- I think he knows, Ryan knows and the fans know, that he has no shot whatsover at getting close to 200 Innings or a League Average ERA for Marquis-level money.

Originally Posted by John Bonnes

I want long-term solutions, too. So here are your options...
1. Pay a lot of money for a top-notch free agent...
2. Make a trade that gives up some valuable players/prospects.

I can see the Twins doing both - ONCE. After that, they still have two spots to fill. When I (and I assume others) say I'm not opposed to Pavano, it doesn't mean as the premier signing of the offseason. It means this rotation is gutted right now that having a guy that throws 200 IP at a league average ERA at the back end of our rotation would be a significant upgrade.

Look at it this way: Diamond (even according to Ryan) is a #3. I'd be thrilled with Pavano being the #4.

I agree with you in principle, I just think the idea of Pavano throwing 200 innings with a league-average ERA is far-fetched. You're living in a 2010 mindset. He's 37 and he's been in steady decline the past two years. Not to mention that his injury issues this past season were characteristic of his track record, not some flukish exception. Even on a smallish one-year deal, I'd go another direction.

The thing is: If we are going to be with Liriano, Pavano, etc. and not sign a real improvement, why not keep going with Deduno, DeVries, Hendriks, etc. and save the money? I don't see any real difference in performance. Maybe Frankie can pitch a couple of good games, (althoughat the end of the year I bet you he will end up with an ERA north of 5, lots of walks, etc) but clearly Pavano is at the end of the rope.

This stuff needs to stop. If we sign Pavano or Liriano every twins fan should take that as a slap in the face and give them no support this year.