Oliver Perez Sticks With Mets

by Charlie on Feb 2, 2009 4:32 PM EST Comment 17 comments

They'll pay him $36 million over the next three years. Next year is still only Perez' age-27 season, believe it or not, and he's already struck out over 1000 batters in the majors. He still has tremendous upside and I think that's worth paying $36 million for, but with his body type, performance record and mechanical problems, he's more likely to break down completely over the course of the deal than emerge as an ace.

(Speaking of Perez's body type, I noted with amusement that Perez is listed at 6'3", 217. I've been wrong before, but I can't believe he weighs more than 190.)

0 recs | Comment 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Win Values

FanGraphs has Perez’s value pegged at $8.8 million in 2007 and $5.8 million in 2008. The projection systems they list seem to believe he’ll be significantly worse than those two seasons, not better, too.

Good deal for a team like New York that can afford the risk, I guess, but any fan who wonders why the Pirates didn’t give him $12 million per year needs to be slapped.

Believer in a Pirate Revolution.

by coryh64 on Feb 2, 2009 8:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Our old friend Kent Tekulve

is listed as 6’ 4", 180 at Baseball-Reference.com and managed to pitch 1,436 innings all in relief. He had 7 seasons with more than 100 IPs including 3 with over 125.

I know it is not exactly fair to compare a reliever with a starter but his durability was quite impressive despite the heavy work load. Perhaps he had better mechanics than Perez though.

by WestCoastBuc on Feb 2, 2009 8:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Je threw sidearm and underhand

Which I believe is a more natural and less stressful way to throw. Part of Ollie’s struggles, as I recall, were that he seemed to have no consistent release point, that he was throwing from all over the place (can somebody back me up here?). That can’t have been good.

by bucdaddy on Feb 2, 2009 11:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Kinda hard to duplicate Teke’s motion. Even harder to duplicate his physique.

by WTM on Feb 2, 2009 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No Repeatability

I doubt Perez ever throws the same way twice in a row – he seems to have no repeatability of motion. Doubt he will ever develop anything like consistency. He will be the same as ever – horrible one day, brilliant the next. On his good days he is well worth the money, but he will drive his employer and the fans crazy.

by Some Fat Guy in LA on Feb 3, 2009 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I notice that

Perez had an ERA+ of 100 last season. Is a team better off with an average pitcher who is sometimes great and sometimes awful or one who is pretty much average most starts?

by WestCoastBuc on Feb 3, 2009 3:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Depends on circumstances/expectations.

Let’s make two hypothetical pitchers: One is a guy who allows 2 runs in 50% of his starts and allows 4 in the other 50, while the other is a guy who allows 3 every game. A really bad team (averaging 2 runs a game) will probably prefer the first guy, since he gives them a fighting chance to win in 50 of his starts. A really good team (averaging 4 or 5 runs a game) will probably prefer the second guy, since he minimizes their chance of blowing any particular game.

There are lots of factors like these. A team with great middle relievers might prefer more variance, since they’re better able to deal with 3-inning 5-run starts, while a team with shaky middle guys and a top closer might go the other way, since the wild guy is sometimes going to torch their weak middle men and sometimes going to minimize the high-leverage opportunities for their bullpen hammer. Etc.

Now, that’s just game-to-game inconsistency. As far as year-to-year inconsistency, Bill James did a study about ten years ago, which claimed that a winning team will be better off with a guy who has boom-and-bust seasons than one with a steady performance. It’s kind of old, so I don’t know how high the quality of his sim was, but it’s in one of the chapters on Pappas and Drysdale in his HOF book.

by Vlad on Feb 3, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Glad he is a Met-Not a Buc

I am glad we did not sign him. He is a head case. Ollie’s problems are all between his ears.

by zogger on Feb 3, 2009 7:07 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

that was just cocky and arrogant

i would kill to still have ollie

BRING BACK TIKE REDMAN

by omar moreno on Feb 3, 2009 8:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not Really

If you look at Quality Starts for 2008:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/pitching?sort=QSPct&split=0&league=mlb&season=2008&seasonType=2&type=pitch2&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&hand=a&pos=all&minip=160

Oliver Perez: 17
Paul Maholm: 19
Zack Duke: 14

Perez is not in the top 40 in MLB.

For a young team like the Bucs, I don’t see Perez as a fit. Even if he would sign with us and we would pay him the $s; why would we want someone who has a 50% chance of not giving us a good start? I know we need good starters, but Perez is not what we want right now.

by zogger on Feb 3, 2009 12:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

One advantage of a guy like Ollie for us:

With his high K rate, he reduces the number of balls in play that our crappy defense would have to field.

by Vlad on Feb 3, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Perez Signing

They overpaid yeah, but he is a solid pitcher that can single handedly win you ten games a year. He can dominate any given day. This signing also makes it even more unlikely that they will sign Pedro.

BRING BACK TIKE REDMAN

by omar moreno on Feb 3, 2009 8:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, but...

…Ollie can also go out and walk 5+ in a game, which he did 8 times last year, or give up 5+ ER in a game, which he also did 8 times in 2008.

Perez has legitimate talent, but he’s far too inconsistent to be giving him $12MM a year. The Mets have no idea if Good Oliver or Bad Oliver will show up to pitch on any given day.

by Bishop1973 on Feb 3, 2009 9:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sure they know

they know exactly which Ollie will show up. if the opponent is below .500 he’ll probably walk 10. if the opponent is above .500 he’ll strike out 10. he totally pitches to the level of the opponent.

unfortunately, i see a lot of Met games here in western NY. he got screwed out of a couple of wins last year by attrocious defense by Reyes and Wright.

that said, he reminds me of a really big kid. short attention span, jumps over the baselines, swings so hard he falls down — he’s a total nutcase. lots of fun to watch though.

by Blyleven Curve Ball on Feb 3, 2009 12:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

totally agree

I was bummed a few years ago when Littlebrain sent Ollie down to triple-A, then trade him for nothing. I knew he wasn’t wound too tight, but to be a pitcher you need to be that way. Good luck Mr. Prez.

by Ketcham Bruce on Feb 4, 2009 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

you are right

I might give him 200. Look at LaRoche: he’s listed same height 200 pounds. Compare a couple photos, they look about the same.

My favorite is Lebron James. Every time I see him on TV he has apparently gained 10 pounds. I think the last game on TNT they (the announcers—he’s still listed at 250) were claiming he is 280. Is he going to start getting taller too?

Jason
The Hanging Curve

by poorboywilly on Feb 3, 2009 1:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs