In a Sunday article in a major New York newspaper, it was reported that Oliver Perez refuses to go to the minor leagues and has that right to do so because that's the way his contract is written. His own teammates (not named of course) are demanding that the team jettison the wayward lefty despite his contract. When you have players who don't want another player on their team anymore, there is a big, big problem. But the Mets deserve this mess because they created it in the first place.
On February 2, 2009, the Mets signed Oliver Perez as a free agent for roughly $12 million a year. This was after a season where he finished with a league average 100 ERA+ ONLY because he pitched in the National League and only because he mixed in a few brilliant games in between a bunch of rotten ones. Not only did a lowly blogger like this one insist at the time that the signing was unbelievably stupid but a whole bunch of noted and big time writers like Mr. Neyer and many others said the same thing.
Perez had just completed two season where he made just about all of his starts, had a very good K/9 performance and won 25 out of 42 decisions. But despite the fact that he posted a 121 and 100 ERA+ in those two seasons, there were danger signs written everywhere you looked. He averaged a meager 5.88 innings per outing over those two years because of the many times he had to come out early due to pitch counts or poor performances. He led the league in walks in 2008. He had stretches were he was just abysmal only to save his job by pitching the occasional gem. Plus, many accounts hinted that he was not one to be coached.
But the Mets were desperate for pitching and they knew the guy so they signed him. And man has it ever blown up in their faces. He's averaged eight walks per nine innings since the contract. He's averaged a 1.95 WHIP after the contract. He averaged 4.7 innings per start in his 14 starts last season. He had some early stinkers in the rotation this year, so they pulled him and put him the bullpen where he has been just as bad. The above linked article quotes his manager as stating that he doesn't know of a situation in a game where he would be willing to use Perez and then added maybe an extra inning game. A player (again not named) when told of his manager's comments laughed and said something to the effect of, "yeah when it's a 20 inning game and we have nobody else." That's bad.
So what should the Mets do? They guy is only 29 years old so he may still have a future, but it's clear that it shouldn't be with the Mets. The Cubs hit the jackpot with Carlos Silva who had a similar situation in Seattle. Maybe they could turn him around too. Who knows. But it is crystal clear that he needs to be cut from the roster. If his own teammates are turning on him, then he becomes not only a liability in the game when he plays but in the clubhouse. The Mets have to either trade him right now or cut him loose. There isn't a question about the money. They are going to eat that either way it goes. That horse is out of the barn (Egads! a cliche!)
The above linked article basically states that Perez has the Mets by the...umm...male reproductive system because he won't go to the minors. He is painted as a bad guy because of that. He may be a bad guy, but this blogger just doesn't know. But Perez has this leverage because the Mets GAVE it to him. The Fan once had a boss who put a letter of resignation in front of the Fan and told the Fan to sign it. The Fan refused. If the guy wanted the Fan gone, the Fan wasn't going to make it easy for him. Why should Perez? Apparently he likes it in the big leagues despite not competing there very well. So sue him.
The Mets have to make a move. It's going to be painful. But that's life.
Showing posts with label Oliver Perez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oliver Perez. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
A Post on Coaches
Was reading the latest post from the great Joe Posnanski about cycles and the Great Pos mentioned Rich Gedman, the former Boston Red Sox catcher. The great thing about reading great writers is that they promote thought and the first thought concerning Gedman was that he was once a great catcher who seemed to go down the tubes due to bad coaching. Coaching in the major leagues is hardly ever mentioned. We all hear about the manager but seldom about coaches. Some seem to be brilliant and other just seem to cause more harm than good. Let's see where this post goes from here.
Let's go back to Rich Gedman. Gedman was a Worcester, Massachusetts native that became a free agent amateur, something you don't see very often. He made his debut with the Red Sox at the age of 21 in 1980. He came in second in Rookie of the Year voting in 1981 as he batted .288. He regressed a bit in 1982 but came back strong in 1983, batting .294. He was a platoon catcher those first three years but in 1984, he became the full time catcher and though his average went down a bit, he hit 24 homers and posted a respectable .818 OPS. He was even better the following year (1985) when he made the All Star team and posted his career best .846 OPS to go along with a .295 Batting average. Then the Red Sox hired Walter Hriniak as its batting coach.
Hriniak was a disciple of the great Charlie Lau, who is often credited with making George Brett the kind of hitter he became with the Kansas City Royals. Lau's theories had to do with staying back in the stance with all the weight on the back foot and exploding into the pitch. It is certainly hard to know if Lau made Brett or if Brett made Brett, but Lau was the hitting guru of the period and as baseball is trendy by rule (look how many pitchers now throw the splitter), teams were scouring the land for Lau disciples. Walter Hriniak was one of those and the Red Sox turned to him.
Ted Williams hated what Hriniak taught. Williams felt that Hriniak's teaching robbed players of their power especially by taking the upper hand off the bat at the end of the swing and trying to hit everything up the middle. In fairness, Wade Boggs and Dwight Evans, two pretty darned good hitters gave Hriniak credit for their success and participated in Hriniak's book on the the subject. Gedman did too, which is amazing as Hriniak probably ruined his career.
The Fan watched all the Red Sox games back then. It was the early days of cable and we in New Hampshire got to see all of the Red Sox games on Channel 38 (pre-NESN days). Gedman always seemed to be an aggressive hitter with a fluid and easy swing. But in 1986, things changed. And the Fan noticed. Gedman's swings began to look like practice swings where he was thinking more about the mechanics of the thing instead of letting it happen. His average fell to .258 and his OPS dropped .107 points.
It got worse from there as Gedman never hit again above .212! And he was done as an effective major league player. The Fan has always thought to this day that Hriniak ruined Rich Gedman.
Jeff Pearlman wrote a book about the 1986 Mets called, "The Bad Guys Won." The book also has a ridiculously long subtitle that won't be repeated here. The book was hugely entertaining. For us to stay on point for this post, one of the assertions Pearlman made in the book was that Mel Stottlemyer, one of the most revered men in baseball, tinkered with Doc Gooden and lessened his effectiveness. According to Pearlman, despite the amazing season Gooden had in 1985, Stottlemyer, his pitching coach didn't like his release point and his arm angle and worked on them.
Pearlman's report is backed up by circumstantial evidence. Gooden gained more than a run a game on his ERA and was not as dominant a strikeout pitcher and never was again. But can Gooden's loss of "stuff" be blamed on Stottlemyer or on drugs or simply on the fact that Gooden was required to throw so many pitches so early in his career? Who knows.
A recent blog post (might have been Buster Olney) was discussing the problems Oliver Perez was having with the Mets. One of the suggestions the post mentioned as a possibility was the Mets bringing back deposed pitching coach, Rick Peterson, because he was regarded as the reason why Perez had so much success in 2007. The suggestion was that Perez flourished under Peterson and maybe Peterson could get Perez back to that place.
Many of the Dodgers young hitters credit Don Mattingly for their development. Most point to the development of Kemp and Ethier and point to Donny Baseball.
The Fan thinks that coaches are a lot like managers. They get more credit than they probably deserve and more blame than they deserve. There are good ones and there are bad ones. Most are probably paid pretty well and have a pretty good life. But they are one of the overlooked aspects of the game. They work with infielders, outfielders, hitters, pitchers. They throw batting practice or spend countless hours hitting fungos to guys on the field. But they are hardly talked about.
Here are a couple of suggestions to fix that. How about a player-based vote on the game's best coaches? The players (and managers) could vote and select the Coach of the Year. How about if those same players and managers voted for coaches for the All Star game instead of having a bunch of managers filling out the All Star coaching staff?
It just seems right that more "ink" be given this bunch of the major leagues' silent staff. Some of us Fans would like to know more about who is good and who is not.
Let's go back to Rich Gedman. Gedman was a Worcester, Massachusetts native that became a free agent amateur, something you don't see very often. He made his debut with the Red Sox at the age of 21 in 1980. He came in second in Rookie of the Year voting in 1981 as he batted .288. He regressed a bit in 1982 but came back strong in 1983, batting .294. He was a platoon catcher those first three years but in 1984, he became the full time catcher and though his average went down a bit, he hit 24 homers and posted a respectable .818 OPS. He was even better the following year (1985) when he made the All Star team and posted his career best .846 OPS to go along with a .295 Batting average. Then the Red Sox hired Walter Hriniak as its batting coach.
Hriniak was a disciple of the great Charlie Lau, who is often credited with making George Brett the kind of hitter he became with the Kansas City Royals. Lau's theories had to do with staying back in the stance with all the weight on the back foot and exploding into the pitch. It is certainly hard to know if Lau made Brett or if Brett made Brett, but Lau was the hitting guru of the period and as baseball is trendy by rule (look how many pitchers now throw the splitter), teams were scouring the land for Lau disciples. Walter Hriniak was one of those and the Red Sox turned to him.
Ted Williams hated what Hriniak taught. Williams felt that Hriniak's teaching robbed players of their power especially by taking the upper hand off the bat at the end of the swing and trying to hit everything up the middle. In fairness, Wade Boggs and Dwight Evans, two pretty darned good hitters gave Hriniak credit for their success and participated in Hriniak's book on the the subject. Gedman did too, which is amazing as Hriniak probably ruined his career.
The Fan watched all the Red Sox games back then. It was the early days of cable and we in New Hampshire got to see all of the Red Sox games on Channel 38 (pre-NESN days). Gedman always seemed to be an aggressive hitter with a fluid and easy swing. But in 1986, things changed. And the Fan noticed. Gedman's swings began to look like practice swings where he was thinking more about the mechanics of the thing instead of letting it happen. His average fell to .258 and his OPS dropped .107 points.
It got worse from there as Gedman never hit again above .212! And he was done as an effective major league player. The Fan has always thought to this day that Hriniak ruined Rich Gedman.
Jeff Pearlman wrote a book about the 1986 Mets called, "The Bad Guys Won." The book also has a ridiculously long subtitle that won't be repeated here. The book was hugely entertaining. For us to stay on point for this post, one of the assertions Pearlman made in the book was that Mel Stottlemyer, one of the most revered men in baseball, tinkered with Doc Gooden and lessened his effectiveness. According to Pearlman, despite the amazing season Gooden had in 1985, Stottlemyer, his pitching coach didn't like his release point and his arm angle and worked on them.
Pearlman's report is backed up by circumstantial evidence. Gooden gained more than a run a game on his ERA and was not as dominant a strikeout pitcher and never was again. But can Gooden's loss of "stuff" be blamed on Stottlemyer or on drugs or simply on the fact that Gooden was required to throw so many pitches so early in his career? Who knows.
A recent blog post (might have been Buster Olney) was discussing the problems Oliver Perez was having with the Mets. One of the suggestions the post mentioned as a possibility was the Mets bringing back deposed pitching coach, Rick Peterson, because he was regarded as the reason why Perez had so much success in 2007. The suggestion was that Perez flourished under Peterson and maybe Peterson could get Perez back to that place.
Many of the Dodgers young hitters credit Don Mattingly for their development. Most point to the development of Kemp and Ethier and point to Donny Baseball.
The Fan thinks that coaches are a lot like managers. They get more credit than they probably deserve and more blame than they deserve. There are good ones and there are bad ones. Most are probably paid pretty well and have a pretty good life. But they are one of the overlooked aspects of the game. They work with infielders, outfielders, hitters, pitchers. They throw batting practice or spend countless hours hitting fungos to guys on the field. But they are hardly talked about.
Here are a couple of suggestions to fix that. How about a player-based vote on the game's best coaches? The players (and managers) could vote and select the Coach of the Year. How about if those same players and managers voted for coaches for the All Star game instead of having a bunch of managers filling out the All Star coaching staff?
It just seems right that more "ink" be given this bunch of the major leagues' silent staff. Some of us Fans would like to know more about who is good and who is not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)