Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Monday, July 31, 2006

Mets - Acquire O-Per, R-Hern

New York Mets - Acquired P Oliver Perez and P Roberto Hernandez from the Pittsburgh Pirates for OF Xavier Nady.

Nady started off hot in April but his stats have generally dropped since then to a more pedestrian 264/326/487, enough to make him a legitimate major leaguer and a starter on a bad team (hey, maybe the Pirates!) and he’s unlikely to develop much at this point.  Nothing wrong with being an OK player - great players wouldn’t be great if there weren’t a ton more players of Nady’s level of quality.  Not everyone can be awesome like Scott Podsednik…

Two years ago, Rick Peterson bragged that he could fix Victor Zambrano’s delivery in 15 minutes.  However, a bunch of things stepped in the way, such as the new TV series Prison Break, some dry cleaning that had to be picked up, and a few really bad traffic jams in the Holland Tunnel and Peterson just ran short of free time.  However, this intrepid reporter has learned that not only does Peterson promise to make room in his schedule to turn Perez into the electric starter he was becoming a few years ago, but to actually devote 30, or even 45 minutes (!) if need be.

Roberto Hernandez is the emergency replacement for the suddenly injured Duaner Sanchez (that’s why public transportation is valuable - Sanchez would totally be OK if he hadn’t been a selfish cab-rider!).  Hernandez has continued to get batters out despite even worse peripherals than normal and a blecch defense behind in Pittsburgh.  The Mets may be going back to the well one-too-many times in picking up Hernandez again, but when you suddenly have to get a reliever on July 31st, your tactical options are a bit limited.

Dan Szymborski Posted: July 31, 2006 at 09:03 PM | 77 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. 1k5v3L Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:05 PM (#2120391)
So, Mike Cameron for Ollie and Koolie-Aidie. Good move, Omar.
   2. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:08 PM (#2120398)
Peterson took one look at Oliver and determined he was unsalvageable.
   3. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:10 PM (#2120402)
Levski, I remember you saying that Met fans were being unreasonable to expect much more than Nady considering Cameron's injury. Am I remembering wrong?
   4. 1k5v3L Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:12 PM (#2120404)
At least Omar got two more spicy Latinos for his mariachi band. Ollie gets the clay flute, Kool-Air the conch-shell horns.
   5. 1k5v3L Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:13 PM (#2120409)
I definitely said Mets fans were unreasonable. Given their GM, they were lucky to get a man with four healthy limbs for Cameron.
   6. greenback calls it soccer Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:21 PM (#2120420)
that’s why public transportation is valuable - Sanchez would totally be OK if he hadn’t been a selfish cab-rider!

Or if he had been driving an SUV.
   7. glendelicious Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:28 PM (#2120435)
Am I the only one excited about getting Perez? Maybe he never gets it back or maybe he becomes Santana.

And what makes him such a psycho?
   8. Rob Base Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:31 PM (#2120444)
Thanks for your usual racist contribution, levski. You're a real asset to the board.
   9. Darren Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:38 PM (#2120462)
Perez? I could fix him in 10 years!

Wow, that levski post goes beyond his usual inanity into hardcore offensiveness.
   10. HowardMegdal Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:40 PM (#2120467)
I think this is a not-disastrous move at worst that has the chance to be one of the best the Mets ever made. People don't have the type of season Perez had as a 22-year-old routinely. He K'd 239 people. For all the Zambrano-based bashing Peterson takes, he's been a terrific pitching coach, and I look forward to seeing him work with Oliver Perez. Worst comes to worst, you still have Milledge to plug in anyway. Nady has value, but the Mets are in a position to try and add even more value, and considering the weakness of the current organization (mid-career starting pitching), getting Perez turned around would be tantamount to landing a number one starter for Nady.
   11. Raskolnikov Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:42 PM (#2120469)
Am I the only one excited about getting Perez? Maybe he never gets it back or maybe he becomes Santana.

And what makes him such a psycho?


I am excited as well. That's why I wouldn't deal him for Linebrink. Hey, Perez sucks right now. But he's still young and has a world of talent. The Mets could use a longshot that pays off.
   12. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: July 31, 2006 at 10:43 PM (#2120476)
that’s why public transportation is valuable - Sanchez would totally be OK if he hadn’t been a selfish cab-rider!

Oh, so you're one of those public transportation snobs!
   13. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:15 PM (#2120524)
Oh, so you're one of those public transportation snobs!

And you're one of those Angelenos who spends forty minutes a day standing still on the highway!

Hasn't Perez suffered a drop-off in velocity? I thought he was rumored to be a PED-testing casualty.
   14. Bob Koo Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:20 PM (#2120533)
While I'm still not wild about the deal, I credit Omar for realizing that Nady is not a building block by any means. Too many GM's hold on and choose to build around 1B's/corner OF's that can hit, when they're really just average players at their positions.
   15. DCW3 Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:21 PM (#2120537)
How can you use that headline and not call Nady "X-Nad"?
   16. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:23 PM (#2120540)
Hasn't Perez suffered a drop-off in velocity?

Sort of. In 04, Perez's fastball would top at 98mph. Now, it tops at 94. I'm sure Rick can work with that. Plus, it doesn't hurt to have those two sliders.

FYI, Omar just said that Sanchez might not be out for the year. They'll evaluate him next week. If Met doctors determine he needs surgery, he'll miss the season. If he doesn't, he could be back in September.

And just to finish, I'm going to go on a limb and say Ollie will be back to being a good starter. Not the 200 K machine he was two years ago, mind you, but at least a pretty sucessful third starter.
   17. zonk Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:29 PM (#2120559)
I agree with what several have said -- Oliver Perez isn't a bad acquisition, especially when you can slot him into the 7th or 8th SP role for the year, and see if he gets it figured out.

I wouldn't be at all shocked to see Perez turn it around. There have been games - admittedly, back in 2005 and against the Cubs -- where I thought his stuff was as electric as anything I've seen this side of Juan Cruz ;-)
   18. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:36 PM (#2120567)
Omar just reiterated that the Mets don't know if Sanchez is out for the year. He said right now he thinks the chances he has surgery are 50/50.
   19. Sam M. Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:54 PM (#2120593)
So, Mike Cameron for Ollie and Koolie-Aidie. Good move, Omar.

Oh, Levski? Now that Milledge has survived as a Met past the deadline, and will almost certainly be with them for the rest of the season at least (with Nady gone), Omar has gone a long, long way towards forcing you to keep your word and never say another unkind word. You might want to get started on that.

Omar just reiterated that the Mets don't know if Sanchez is out for the year. He said right now he thinks the chances he has surgery are 50/50.

Not being a doctor or anything, I'm probably talking nonsense here, but I would humbly suggest waiting until the absolute last possible moment to operate. Give the rest option as long as you can. Why not? If it doesn't work, you can always operate in October and let him heal in the off-season.

If he does come back, acquiring Kool-Aid™ was really a good idea. In his absence, the temptation to overwork Heilman and Bradford (and even Wagner to some extent) would be pretty strong. With Kool-Aid™, there's someone to take those innings and keep folks fresh until Sanchez comes back (if he does).

I'm going to go on a limb and say Ollie will be back to being a good starter. Not the 200 K machine he was two years ago, mind you, but at least a pretty sucessful third starter.

If you think of Perez as a prospect -- he's still so young, after all -- where would he rank in the Mets' system? I'd say behind only Pelfrey and Humber, on a par with Maine (but not as major league ready), and ahead of Bannister, Guerra, Niese, and Soler. I'd trade Nady for a pitching prospect like that and Kool-Aid™.
   20. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: July 31, 2006 at 11:57 PM (#2120597)
This is just Omar trading away a veteran to give a stud prospect a chance. Maybe Byrnes should ask for help in that regard.
   21. HowardMegdal Posted: August 01, 2006 at 12:05 AM (#2120613)
He arguably has more major league upside than Maine. But the Mets have young starter prospects at or near-ready in Bannister, Maine, Pelfrey, Humber, Perez. That's a nice crop.
   22. 1k5v3L Posted: August 01, 2006 at 12:22 AM (#2120636)
Gotta admit, good job by Omar. Getting someone to fill Duaner's spot in the pen, even picking up a guy who's young enough and upsidish enough to be interesting in Ollie (and who still has an option this year so the Mets can have him take lessons from Jose Lima in AAA), AND at the same time opening up a spot for Milledge, for both this year and beyond. I'm very impressed with Omar, very impressed. The Mets needed to NOT do anything stupid this summer to have a nice outlook for 06, and the next couple of years at least, and Omar didn't do anything stupid. Kudos to him.
   23. Rob Base Posted: August 01, 2006 at 12:25 AM (#2120641)
This is just Omar trading away a veteran to give a stud prospect a chance. Maybe Byrnes should ask for help in that regard.

pwn3d
   24. 1k5v3L Posted: August 01, 2006 at 12:30 AM (#2120653)
The Pirates actually wanted someone worse than Shawn Green for Kool-Aid, unfortunately...
   25. Sam M. Posted: August 01, 2006 at 12:52 AM (#2120722)
The Pirates actually wanted someone worse than Shawn Green for Kool-Aid, unfortunately...

In defense of Byrnes, what they really wanted was someone a lot cheaper than Shawn Green for Kool-Aid. I chuckle at the prospect of Littlefield asking ownership for permission to take on Green's contract.
   26. 1k5v3L Posted: August 01, 2006 at 12:58 AM (#2120737)
Shawn Green can be had for just enough quarters to do a load of laundry, and no one wants him. So sad. Green is another remanant of Moorad's idiotic attempts to be a big dog on the block (after Russ Ortiz, Troy Glaus, and the RJ to NY trade). Thank god he realized he sucked at being a mover and a shaker and hired Josh Byrnes to be the GM...
   27. Raskolnikov Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:05 AM (#2120755)
The sad thing is the we have a better version of Nady slumbering in AAA. Hey, Victor, if you ever decide to make something of this chance, you could be a contributor to a championship team.

Not being a doctor or anything, I'm probably talking nonsense here, but I would humbly suggest waiting until the absolute last possible moment to operate. Give the rest option as long as you can. Why not? If it doesn't work, you can always operate in October and let him heal in the off-season.


The key are the ligaments. If there are any tears, then eventually you'll have to go in there. But yeah, in general, the rule of thumb in surgery is to not cut unless you have to. I think they're going to reexamine in a couple of weeks to see how much damage was done.
For example, ACL repairs for lay people are completely different from athletes. You're supposed to wait 1-2 months before operating, not the immediate repair done for athletes.

I'm as hopeful of Perez as anyone here, but I don't think he's anywhere near ready right now. Let's check back in a month.

All in all, a very nice trade from Omar.
   28. Rob Base Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:06 AM (#2120757)
Come on, the idea should be to open up Green's spot in the outfield. Somebody would take him if AZ picked up his salary. Byrnes just can't get enough of that veteran leadership. Byrnes wouldn't be a Jew, would he?
   29. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:06 AM (#2120761)
If you think of Perez as a prospect -- he's still so young, after all -- where would he rank in the Mets' system? I'd say behind only Pelfrey and Humber, on a par with Maine (but not as major league ready), and ahead of Bannister, Guerra, Niese, and Soler. I'd trade Nady for a pitching prospect like that and Kool-Aid™.

The thing about Perez is that despite his young age, he already has a season in which his park adjusted ERA was the 9th best in baseball, and in which he led the league in strikeouts per nine innings. Needless to say, no Met prospect currently in the farm has accomplished anything as remarkable as that. Not Pelfrey. Not Humber. Not Guerra. Not Niese. Heck, the closest thing to Perez's season is the Future dominating low A ball at 17, but that's still not quite the same. Needless to say, these last two seasons and the drop in velocity have cut down in some of that potential, but its still very high. I mean, come on, we are talking about a 24 year old left-hander who can hit 94 and who has two plus sliders. I love Humber as much as the next guy, but I don't see any area in which he has any advantage over Perez. Health? Nope. Stuff? No. Performance? Nope. Guerra and Niese are too far away, and neither of them is really dominating to say they are any better. Maine? No freaking way. So if I'm doing the ranking, it'd look like this:

1. Milledge - Has all going for him. Age, performance, tools.
2. Pelfrey - Stuff is there, performance has been up and down. Injury free. Tremendous upside.
3. The Future - As good as advertised. And I'm referring to the Carlos Beltran comparisons.
4. Ollie - Electric stuff. Top 10 in baseball. Two down years after historic season. Change of scenery will help.
5. Humber - Coming strong from TJ
6. Guerra - Above average performance as a 17 year old in H-town. Control has improved drmatically since the start of the season.
7. Gomez - Performance finally catching up to hype? Plate discipline needs to improve.
8. Carp - Most underrated prospect in the system. Power will come. Defense a bit shaky, but that's about it.
9. Niese - Definitely intriguing. Not a big difference between him and Guerra.
10. Flores - Power hitting catcher who likes to get HBPs. From what I hear, he's good behind the dish. Biggest flaw is the lack of plate discipline.
   30. 1k5v3L Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:11 AM (#2120773)
Base, we should get married. Your anti-Semitism will complete me.
   31. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:15 AM (#2120780)
Damn, and I forgot about Bannister. Does he even crack the top 10? How about Maine? Do you still see him as a prospect? I guess that they could slide in between Humber and Guerra, if "closeness to the big leagues" is something you laccount for when evaluating prospects. If it isn't, I'm not sure they make it. Maine would probably, but that's mostly because of what he's shown lately. Minaya called him "the next John Patterson." I kid you not. I love Omar.
   32. Rob Base Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:16 AM (#2120783)
It's ok, iksvel, I celebrate Hannukah.

Speaking of Omar and the job he's doing, we interrupt this program to report that Carlos Beltran and his 1.013 OPS are on pace for 50 HR and 149 RBI.
   33. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:18 AM (#2120789)
Damn, speaking of the devil...Bannister's line today: 7 IP, 4 H, 0 R, 0 BB, 8 K. I guess he had a chip on his shoulder after #31.
   34. Raskolnikov Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:19 AM (#2120793)
More reinforcements are on the way.

Bannister tonight in high A - 7IP, 4H, 0R, 0BB, 8K - sweet!



For further interest,
Carp (Mr. Remote Chance) - 2-4, 1 2B.
Flores - 2-4
The Future - 2-3, 1 2B, 1 BB, 1 SB (7th) - back up to .335. He's mastered this level, time to promote him. Better prospect than Tabata IMO.
   35. Sam M. Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:23 AM (#2120803)
I love Humber as much as the next guy, but I don't see any area in which he has any advantage over Perez. Health? Nope. Stuff? No. Performance? Nope.

Humber's advantage is obvious to me, OFF: he's never proven to be a flop. Don't underestimate that; Perez now has to overcome failure, two years running. Having to recover his confidence, and his "electric stuff," is going to be a tough road. I think you have to hold that seriously against him, and say that his odds of getting back to where he was are pretty long. You said it yourself; you think he might get back to be a # 3 starter. I think Humber's ceiling is higher than that, myself, and I think his chances of reaching that ceiling are better than Perez's chances of reaching his.

Thus, I rank Humber as the better prospect. To me, Perez has to be seen as a major project, not as a likely success. Humber is a likely success.
   36. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:35 AM (#2120825)
You said it yourself; you think he might get back to be a # 3 starter. I think Humber's ceiling is higher than that, myself, and I think his chances of reaching that ceiling are better than Perez's chances of reaching his.

But read what I wrote again. I said Perez would become at least a pretty successful third starter. His ceiling is Johan Santana. Needless to say, things look grim right now. We wouldn't have gotten him for Nady if that weren't the case, but I have supreme confidence in Ollie's stuff, and the Mets' ability as an organization to get the best out of their players. One of Perez's biggest problems with the Pirates, IIRC, was the lack of communication between him or managment. I'm pretty confident that the Mets, who are the IMHO the team that's best equipped to understand and communicate with Hispanic ballplayers, will do a better job.
   37. Sam M. Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:13 AM (#2120980)
We wouldn't have gotten him for Nady if that weren't the case, but I have supreme confidence in Ollie's stuff, and the Mets' ability as an organization to get the best out of their players.

Then why did you seem so pumped when it looked like he was going to be flipped for Linebrink??? If you're that confident of what the Mets are ultimately going to get out of Perez, sending him to the Padres for Linebrink would have been folly.

Look at it this way: if a rumor had gone around three days ago that the Mets had proposed trading Humber for Perez, I would have laughed. There's no way I think Perez is nearly as valuable an asset as Humber, because of the substantially greater likelihood Humber (even though he's in A ball) reaches success in the majors than Perez does (even though Perez has been there before). Sad as that is to say . . . .

But that start from Bannister is certainly good news. Excellent, in fact.
   38. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:19 AM (#2120993)
if a rumor had gone around three days ago that the Mets had proposed trading Humber for Perez, I would have laughed. There's no way I think Perez is nearly as valuable an asset as Humber, because of the substantially greater likelihood Humber (even though he's in A ball) reaches success in the majors than Perez does (even though Perez has been there before)

I don't think that the expected performance between the two is really that great. What makes Humber a more valuable commodity is that he's six years away from free agency, whereas Perez is already into his arbitration years and is three years from free agency.

I
   39. AJMcCringleberry Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:25 AM (#2121008)
I was just looking at Maine's minor league stats and they look pretty good (someone who knows more about the league and park conditions can correct me if I'm wrong), I'm thinking he could be a weak #2/strong #3 guy.
   40. Bob Koo Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:38 AM (#2121026)
From this Newsday story, it appears that the Mets were oh so close to Oswalt or Schmidt:

The Mets believed they had deals in place for either Oswalt or Schmidt late Sunday, but both collapsed in the span of hours, a person familiar with the situation said yesterday.

The trade for Oswalt was a planned three-way deal with the Orioles that would have sent Lastings Milledge to Baltimore, Miguel Tejada to Houston and Oswalt to New York -- but the Astros got cold feet.

As for Schmidt, the Mets did not have to include either Milledge or Aaron Heilman in a package of lesser prospects -- "It was much less," the person said -- but the Giants also backed out, deciding to hold on to their ace for a postseason push.
   41. Bob Koo Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:42 AM (#2121029)
Oh, and Hernandez has given up 10 unearned runs for a total of 24. So his "RA" is at 5.02. Blech.
   42. Banta Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:45 AM (#2121034)
As for Schmidt, the Mets did not have to include either Milledge or Aaron Heilman in a package of lesser prospects -- "It was much less," the person said -- but the Giants also backed out, deciding to hold on to their ace for a postseason push.

Damn. I would have liked Oswalt more, but this would have been really awesome.
   43. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:52 AM (#2121040)
I'm OK with the trade, given the Sanchez situation. I'd love to hear some of the other "offers" the Mets must have gotten to give them relief help after Sanchez got hurt.
   44. AJMcCringleberry Posted: August 01, 2006 at 03:53 AM (#2121042)
the Astros got cold feet.

the Giants also backed out


Damn these teams for not following through.
   45. Sam M. Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:04 AM (#2121054)
Hernandez has given up 10 unearned runs for a total of 24. So his "RA" is at 5.02. Blech.

What's amazing about that stat is that the Pirates as a team have only given up 54. Of those 10 unearned runs, ALL of them came in just three outings. In order:

The first was on April 14th, in which he went 1.2 innings, giving up 1 hit and 1 walk. I looked at the scoring summary -- that 3-run 9th wouldn't happen to any team but the Pirates, believe me. A passed ball on a strike out, and a throwing error by Randa, is how the Cubs can score three runs on a single and a walk.

The second debacle was a 15-7 loss to the Royals (yes, the Royals) on June 22nd, in which Kool-Aid™ gave up 4 UER in 1.2 IP, this time giving up TWO hits and a walk along the way. At least this time, one of the hits was an XBH (a triple by Brown). Nevertheless, the inning included TWO Pirate errors (J. Wilson and Castillo), so I think we can fairly say this was not a blow-up in which he got pounded and one little error made the runs luckily unearned.

Finally, on July 16th, he really was bad. There, he gave up four runs, one earned, in a third of an inning against Washington. He gave up two hits (both doubles) and two walks along the way -- so that was ugly. Worst of all, it was his own error that made the three runs unearned!

But in general, I'd say the first seven unearned runs don't reflect bad pitching that should make us think he's pitched all that much "worse" than his ERA suggests. Those are unearned in the classic sense: the team's defense screwed up good pitching.
   46. cynic Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:06 AM (#2121058)
I have supreme confidence in Ollie's stuff, and the Mets' ability as an organization to get the best out of their players.


Wow. I don't think you'd have to go very far back to reach a point in time when such a statement would be completely laughable.
   47. cynic Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:12 AM (#2121063)
RE: 40, just because it's fun to speculate, what "package of lesser prospects" do you think would have landed Jason Schmidt? I know he's 33 and a rental, but I can't think of too many non-Twins teams that he wouldn't be the #2 or better starter in a playoff rotation.

I'm shocked Sabean didn't ask for Milledge. You'd think the Giants of all teams would like to get a little bit younger in the outfield (I'm really straining to avoid make a joke at the hometown team's expense -- it's just too easy).
   48. Sam M. Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:20 AM (#2121071)
I'm shocked Sabean didn't ask for Milledge. You'd think the Giants of all teams would like to get a little bit younger in the outfield (I'm really straining to avoid make a joke at the hometown team's expense -- it's just too easy).

You have to think like Sabean. He would almost rather trade Schmidt away, just so he can resign him in the offseason so he can get rid of the draft pick he doesn't want anyway! I'm serious. He does it every year -- signs a FA he knows a team isn't going to offer arb to, but before they don't, just so he can lose the pick. And he knew that in this market, rentals don't bring great prospects; they bring packages of so-so stuff, like Melvin got for Lee. He knows his team isn't going to win anything, which is why he considered dumping Schmidt, but darn the luck, they're just a bit too close to completely give up, so he kept Schmidt and decided to sign another FA to execute the draft pick sacrifice instead.
   49. Passed Ball Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:35 AM (#2121087)
I'm pretty tired of the name abbreviations. It is okay with good players, like A-Rod.
But R-Hern? Enough!

I'm out.

P-Bal
   50. Raskolnikov Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:39 AM (#2121090)
You have to think like Sabean.

That's the key. In any negotiation, you have to understand the person on the other side. Sabean doesn't want young players. We should have started our offer with Franco, Trachsel, and Offerman. That would have grabbed Sabean's attention.
   51. Raskolnikov Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:41 AM (#2121094)
But in general, I'd say the first seven unearned runs don't reflect bad pitching that should make us think he's pitched all that much "worse" than his ERA suggests. Those are unearned in the classic sense: the team's defense screwed up good pitching.


Your analysis doesn't apply here. Have a little more of the Kool-Aid.
   52. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: August 01, 2006 at 04:45 AM (#2121097)
We should have started our offer with Franco, Trachsel, and Offerman. That would have grabbed Sabean's attention.

Hell, resign John Franco and throw him into the deal.
   53. ChadBradfordWannabe Posted: August 01, 2006 at 05:05 AM (#2121107)
Of course I have done a rough, quick comparison of Oliver Perez this year vs a few years back. The difference in his mechanics then vs now are VERY fixable, IMO. I would love to take a flyer on someone like Ollie P...
   54. J. Cross Posted: August 01, 2006 at 05:07 AM (#2121110)
I don't think that the expected performance between the two is really that great. What makes Humber a more valuable commodity is that he's six years away from free agency, whereas Perez is already into his arbitration years and is three years from free agency.

Right, not only is Humber under control for 6 year AFTER he reaches the majors (probably another 8 years total) while Perez is only under control for only 2 more years, Humber is also much cheaper during his years as a prospect. While Perez acts as a prospect he'll be making $2M a year to play in the minors. So, even if Perez is as likely to enjoy major league success as Humber the cost/benefit ratio between the two is radically different.

The Mets have two months to look at Perez beforing deciding whether to offer him arbitration. I'm assumming that they intend to offer him arbitration as otherwise they wouldn't have traded for him. The Mets must think that Perez has a solid chance of being good again because they'll be paying a solid chunk of change for what might be one major league year of Perez before free agency.

I think the big think to take from the deal is that Minaya wisely made room for Milledge instead of trading him. I would have rather he dealt Nady for someone like Linebrink or Lidge instead of the Kool-Aid/Perez package but perhaps a deal like that wasn't available.

I hope Sanchez can come back. If he can come back by mid-Sept that should be enough time for him to be primed for the playoffs. These other guys should be able to hold the fort in the mean time.
   55. Sam M. Posted: August 01, 2006 at 01:10 PM (#2121246)
Of course I have done a rough, quick comparison of Oliver Perez this year vs a few years back. The difference in his mechanics then vs now are VERY fixable, IMO. I would love to take a flyer on someone like Ollie P...

That is the best, and most encouraging, thing I've read since the trade. Great to see!

If I were a Pirate fan, it would unquestionably be the most depressing.
   56. Left Hand of Go(d)rzelanny Posted: August 06, 2006 at 12:55 AM (#2128806)
That is the best, and most encouraging, thing I've read since the trade. Great to see!

If I were a Pirate fan, it would unquestionably be the most depressing.


Unfortunately for Mets fans, it's also the most inaccurate.

Oliver is an enigma, always has been. He's never had consistent mechanics, even in 2004 when he was dominant. Granted, the Pirates have tried to alter his mechanics in the past, and it has hurt Oliver, but this year, he was given permission to just pitch however he felt comfortable. The reason he's struggling is because he's lost 4-5 mph off his fastball and a lot of the bite off his slider. It's very doubtful to me (and I've seen every single start by Oliver since 2003) that his problems are mainly mechanical in nature. I don't like to throw out PED accusations but there is a lot of evidence that points to this being a possible, even likely, cause for his regression. I'm not convinced it is, but I believe it's a more significant possibility than a simple mechanical adjustment. Finally, somebody mentioned that Oliver and the Pirates had breakdowns in communication and that the Mets would be better able to communicate with Latin ballplayers. That strikes me as pretty ridiculous. The vast majority of the communication problems were directly Oliver's fault. One particular example is when he refused to do offseason conditioning exercises that the Pirates gave to him. He showed up to camp out of shape and didn't explain why he didn't do the exercises. What are the Mets going to do that the Pirates couldn't? Is Omar going to hold Oliver's hand and babysit him? Come on.
   57. 1k5v3L Posted: August 06, 2006 at 01:18 AM (#2128814)
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/stats/player.php?id=424144

I think Rick Peterson might need more than 10 minutes to fix Ollie. And he's out of options next year, so Rick really should do a better job than the Victor Zambrano fixer-upper.
   58. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: August 06, 2006 at 02:21 AM (#2128840)
The reason he's struggling is because he's lost 4-5 mph off his fastball and a lot of the bite off his slider.

He doesn't need to regain all that velocity to be a number 3 or 4 type starter. Lots of pitchers have had successful careers with less "stuff" than Perez. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Perez never makes a start for the Mets. The fact that he's out of options is going to make it difficult for the Mets to keep him.
   59. Kyle S Posted: August 06, 2006 at 03:21 AM (#2128867)
I've been gone for a week on vacation, but where are all the Pirates fans complaining about this trade? Is the franchise in such a sorry state that Xavier Nady is worth giving up ANYTHING for?
   60. 1k5v3L Posted: August 06, 2006 at 03:54 AM (#2128875)
If Perez is really fried, then the Buccos traded 2 months of Kool-Aid for several years of Nady. It's not a bad trade. And god knows Perez needed a change of scenery. Maybe a change of careers too...

A long time ago, the Pods traded Bay to Pitt because they had decided Nady was the player they wanted to keep as the franchise guy. Now both of them are Pirates. It's a strange world--but Perez is the one sent out...
   61. J. Cross Posted: August 06, 2006 at 04:21 AM (#2128880)
Nady will b eligible for arbitration after the year. Nady, like Perez, is a guy who's not necessarily a steal at his next arbitration salary. I guess he's probably worth his year one arb salary just to have him on the bench and he'd still have some (small) trade value at that salary but I doubt he's worth his year 2 arb salary.

I'm not a big fan of Roberto Hernandez either so for me the quality of this trade hinges on what Milledge can do over the next two months. I happen to believe that he's ready to be better than Nady right now and that keeping him in the minors longer would have only stunted his development (and without even extended the time it takes him to reach arbitration). Realistically, they weren't going to play Milledge with Nady around, they weren't going to get something great for Nady, and needed another arm in the pen.

Perez can (and he most likely will) never contribute and Kool-Aid can be no help and this trade still works if Milledge is better than Nady.
   62. Sam M. Posted: August 06, 2006 at 04:42 AM (#2128885)
Perez can (and he most likely will) never contribute and Kool-Aid can be no help and this trade still works if Milledge is better than Nady.

That ignores the growing concerns about Floyd's Achilles problem. It only works if Milledge is better than Nady and Floyd can stay in the line-up and be productive. Which is questionable right now.

So I think you have to bring back the pitchers into the equation to say the trade works. I think if Kool-Aid™ provides league-average relief, that would be enough to say the trade "works" -- even if Floyd is in and out of the line-up. They need his innings after the Sanchez injury, even if they are only OK. They just can't be BAD.

As for Perez, Russlan is absolutely right: he doesn't have to get back every inch of his velocity to become a valuable starter again. It is obvious to me that Perez was never going to recover his value with the Pirates; # 56 notwithstanding, it's not just Oliver Perez who regressed under that organization's terrible work. It's happening to Zach Duke. It happened to Aramis Ramirez. Kip Wells. Blame Perez if you like; I see a pattern of young players showing great promise, then getting worse. So in one sense, Perez as a Pirate probably had no more (maybe less) value than Xavier Nady. Perez in an organization that knows what it's doing? I'd give up Xavier Nady without hesitating for the chance to recover Perez's value, even knowing it may not happen. Perez is the only guy in that deal anybody might care about in 10 years.
   63. Raskolnikov Posted: August 06, 2006 at 04:57 AM (#2128889)
That ignores the growing concerns about Floyd's Achilles problem. It only works if Milledge is better than Nady and Floyd can stay in the line-up and be productive. Which is questionable right now.

I like Nady, but this is not a crisis. Chavez is more than adequate. And we can pick up random OFers from the waiver wire and be fine with spotting Mr. Random a couple of starts a week.

But man, Floyd sure is brittle.

So I think you have to bring back the pitchers into the equation to say the trade works. I think if Kool-Aid™ provides league-average relief, that would be enough to say the trade "works" -- even if Floyd is in and out of the line-up. They need his innings after the Sanchez injury, even if they are only OK. They just can't be BAD.

Which is alright, because Kool-Aid does give you that secure feeling. But I maintain that Bell could do everything right now that Kool-Aid brings, and probably better, except erase that perception many fans have of him.

As for Perez, Russlan is absolutely right: he doesn't have to get back every inch of his velocity to become a valuable starter again.

This is the absolute key to the deal. Perez is a project, but you don't find lefties who can K > 1/IP at the local store. He has serious control issues and maybe it'll always limit his effectiveness, but this is a gamble the Mets have to take. It's why Montreal, then Seattle was so patient with RJohnson all those years. Same reason why teams will give power arms chance after chance - they're rare finds. I see Perez as the key to the deal.
   64. J. Cross Posted: August 06, 2006 at 05:28 AM (#2128895)
That ignores the growing concerns about Floyd's Achilles problem. It only works if Milledge is better than Nady and Floyd can stay in the line-up and be productive.

Jose Cruz Jr. can now be signed for the rest of the year for a mere $100K. They just need to make a phone call.

They need his innings after the Sanchez injury, even if they are only OK.

I think that Heath Bell, given one innings stints, would (perhaps, just) manage okay.

As for Perez, Russlan is absolutely right: he doesn't have to get back every inch of his velocity to become a valuable starter again.

Agreed. Based on film I saw from this year, his current velocity is still quite good for a lefty (although it may be inconsistent). If he can be half the pitcher he was I'd be thrilled.

Perez is the only guy in that deal anybody might care about in 10 years.

Again, agreed. (excepting friends and family of Nady and Kool-Aid, of course)
   65. ChadBradfordWannabe Posted: August 06, 2006 at 06:27 AM (#2128908)
I agree with a lot that is being said. When I compared his mechanics to a few yeara ago, they are not as different as some others I have compared (Prior, Mulder). I'm pretty sure it's not only a mechanics issue, but he has lost 4-5 mph and for him that seems to be a big deal.
A little something that I've been noticing.....
There is a particular type of power lefty. Watch guys like Liriano, Randy Johnson, Oliver Perez, Johan Santana to a certain degree. Watch how the catcher will basically camp out on the inside corner to righties, and then pitch selection boils down to two options: 1) over the bat-- with a fastball up and in or 2) under the bat-- with a slider/curve type pitch. Santana of course does it with a change middle away, but most of Santana's fastballs (I'd say over 75%) are inside to righties.
Since these guys are trying to "beat the hitter" to the inside part, velocity seems to be a really important component of their success/failure.

Perez needs his fastball if he intends to be the same type of pitcher he used to be. Mechanics changes would be a good place to start.
   66. J. Cross Posted: August 06, 2006 at 06:34 AM (#2128910)
Chad, did it looked to you like the timing between his hip rotation and release had changed? To my untrained eye it looked like he was getting less oomph from his hip rotation although I only saw a dozen pitches from his good year and a handful of pitches from a recent start.
   67. Bmore Boy (Thailand edition) Posted: August 06, 2006 at 06:36 AM (#2128911)
Nady bringing back Lidge? I have to laugh...
   68. ChadBradfordWannabe Posted: August 06, 2006 at 01:55 PM (#2128971)
J. Cross---
I was planning to wait to open the mechanics review forum that the BBTF administrators have talked about doing with Marcus Giles 2 and myself to analyze Perez. Here's a sneak peek as to what I see so far.

Perez '04 vs Perez '06

Both of these are the same number of frames before release (13 IIRC), so it gives you an idea as to where they are at the same time in their deliveries. And both are fastballs that result in strikeouts. One is at 98 and one at 93. '04 is on the left.

The two quick things I notices where these:

Notice how '04's arm just goes farther towards 3rd base. When both of them eventually land, this will result in '04's arm being farther back and more hyperflexed than '06's arm. More distance covered in the same amount of time=better capacity for velocity.

The lines on the legs. '04 seems to sit and almost extend his lead leg. '06 seems to sit a bit more and carry his body with his lead leg bent. Ordinarily, I'd like the '06 way. However, what works for some doesn't work for Ollie, apparently.

This could lead to what you say is the timing of the hip rotation difference you talk about. I didn't see it myself. However, what I believe is the difference is the potential energy/momentum '04 carries to home versus what the '06 version does.
   69. Left Hand of Go(d)rzelanny Posted: August 06, 2006 at 09:46 PM (#2129352)
He doesn't need to regain all that velocity to be a number 3 or 4 type starter. Lots of pitchers have had successful careers with less "stuff" than Perez. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Perez never makes a start for the Mets. The fact that he's out of options is going to make it difficult for the Mets to keep him.


Actually, I think he does. The pitchers you refer to who have lesser "stuff" than Perez who have successful careers typically knew how to pitch. Ollie always got by on pure stuff. He threw lots of pitches and fell behind in lots of counts, but he could always count on the ability to reach back and put a 98 mph fastball on the inside part of the plate to recover. Now when that same fastball is coming it at 92 or 93, it's far less formidable. Ollie isn't going to succeed, at least not within his current mentality, with the stuff he has right now. So if you expect him to be a successful pitcher, one of two things must happen:

1. He better regain that 98 mph fastball and biting slider
2. He better deconstruct and then reconstruct his entire pitching mentality

Unless a miracle occurs, #1 is not likely. #2 is possible but it would take multiple years and Ollie is out of options.
   70. Sam M. Posted: August 06, 2006 at 10:04 PM (#2129362)
Ollie isn't going to succeed, at least not within his current mentality, with the stuff he has right now.

We shall see. You think it was Perez's attitude (and I don't doubt it was that in part). I think it was the Pirates being an absolutely God-awful organization at working with young players, and continuing to develop their talents once they reach the majors. Maybe he didn't listen to them because they screwed up Kip Wells. Maybe because they don't know WTF they're talking about, and every player in the organization knows it and has no respect for them. Maybe because he's a stubborn jerk. Maybe some of all the above. Maybe he didn't do well in a losing atmosphere. Whatever. The depressing pattern of regression by some fine young players tells me that it's very, very unlikely the blame is all on Perez for whatever problems went on there. The Mets may have no success at all, and he may still flop, but I have zero doubt that they will create a better atmosphere, more conducive to his success. When the Pirates actually develop, and maintain, a great young pitcher, then maybe I'll believe all the blame could be on Oliver Perez.
   71. J. Cross Posted: August 06, 2006 at 10:53 PM (#2129396)
Chad, thanks, I'm really looking forward to the mechanics forum.

It's a funny thing how fickle velocity is and who has it and who doesn't. How Mariano Rivera wasn't much of a prospect and then all of a sudden started throwing about 10 mph faster. How a young Wagner who first threw with his right arm and only after breaking it, started throwing with his left is able to throw as hard as anyone in the game. How Matt Harrington apparently lost 15 mph on his fastball. Are there other seemingly fundamental abilities like this that can come and go so easily?
   72. J. Cross Posted: August 06, 2006 at 10:55 PM (#2129399)
Good news, Sam.

Mets signed third baseman David Wright to a six-year, $55 million contract.

That's 1 reserve year, 3 arb years and 2 FA years.

There a team option for a 7th year at $16M.
   73. Left Hand of Go(d)rzelanny Posted: August 06, 2006 at 11:39 PM (#2129441)
We shall see. You think it was Perez's attitude (and I don't doubt it was that in part). I think it was the Pirates being an absolutely God-awful organization at working with young players, and continuing to develop their talents once they reach the majors. Maybe he didn't listen to them because they screwed up Kip Wells. Maybe because they don't know WTF they're talking about, and every player in the organization knows it and has no respect for them. Maybe because he's a stubborn jerk. Maybe some of all the above. Maybe he didn't do well in a losing atmosphere. Whatever. The depressing pattern of regression by some fine young players tells me that it's very, very unlikely the blame is all on Perez for whatever problems went on there. The Mets may have no success at all, and he may still flop, but I have zero doubt that they will create a better atmosphere, more conducive to his success. When the Pirates actually develop, and maintain, a great young pitcher, then maybe I'll believe all the blame could be on Oliver Perez.


I don't think - I know it was Perez's attitude. Yes, the Pirates are a godawful organization at developing young talent. One of the best (or worst, from my perspective) examples is when Bobby Bradley had a pitch count of over 100 pitches, left the mound during a rain delay, then was sent back out to pitch. I believe it was quite chilly as well. That aside, the Pirates really cannot be blamed in this specific example. Perez refused to do offseason conditioning exercises. That's on him. Perez insisted on pitching in Mexico and in the WBC, despite the Pirates asking him not to. That's on him. Perez didn't take being in the majors seriously. That's on him. He punched a cart and broke his hand after leaving a game. That's on him. It's all on him.

Kip Wells is an awful example as well. How did the Pirates screw him up, exactly? He refuses to throw strikes, it's as simple as that. I don't think I've ever seen a pitcher nibble quite as much as Kip Wells.
   74. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: August 06, 2006 at 11:53 PM (#2129455)
Mets signed third baseman David Wright to a six-year, $55 million contract.

Source?
   75. CONservative governMENt Posted: August 08, 2006 at 03:26 PM (#2131290)
Triple-A Norfolk's Oliver Perez was lit up for seven runs in 2 2/3 innings Friday in his first start since Monday's trade.
   76. Guapo Posted: October 19, 2006 at 06:26 PM (#2217986)
Wow, not one person correctly predicted that Perez was acquired so he could start Game 7 of the NLCS.
   77. Freeballin' (Tales of Met Power) Posted: May 25, 2010 at 01:57 AM (#3541889)
Oy.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
HowardMegdal
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.8376 seconds
49 querie(s) executed