Translation:She buys pans and saucepans for the new home.
Because there is not really a hard line between "pan" and "saucepan"; one is a category, and one is a type. A saucepan kind-of-is and kind-of-isn't a type of pan; it's arguably a subset of pans, but it's arguably not. It's like saying "we sell trucks and pickup trucks" or "she buys tomatoes and cherry tomatoes" It's not necessarily wrong, just awkward.
When answering this question recently, I translated "cratițe" as "pots" (which I think should be accepted, by the way, but it is not) because "pans and saucepans" just sounds weird, and I think that a lot of English speakers would avoid saying it ("pots and pans" as a set phrase is much more likely to be used).
Agree with all the above, it wiuld be good to know what distinguishes tigăi and cratițe fir a Romanian? In England I would say pan is simply a short form of saucepan, what you cook in it (sauce or not) is not a consideration anymore. Our use of pots is, I think, wider, and the set phrase 'pots and pans' wider still, meaning all the cooking vessels.
In general, tigaie is a low rim pan, (like a frying pan) while "cratita" has more depth. It is used for all kind of cooking, from frying stuff to slow cook, so it could easily fit it in an oven. It is not "oala"; that would be more like a pot, deep enough to make soup, or other big quantity of food . So, if you think like a Romanian, you might perceive a difference between pan and saucepan, but this distinction is not made in English. Usually, idioms are not translated word by word, since they wouldn't always make sense in another language; the authors need to look for the correspondent idiom that, in this case, is "pots and pans".