It's always hard for us in New York when the Mets are on the West Coast because the games start at 10:00 PM.
Yesterday evening I was flipping between House (the latest season just isn't as good, is it?) and the Red Sox-Tigers game, wondering if my fanaticism and insomnia would win out over the knowledge that I had to wake up at 6:30 in the morning. Should I stay up and watch the Mets game?
I eventually decided, since I had a few other things to finish up anyway, to go to bed and watch it the next day. I fell asleep unaware of what was happening in Los Angeles.
I was on the subway coming home to catch the encore when I happened to espy the sports page of some good-for-nothing rag of a newspaper. It had the unbelievably witty headline "Same 'Ol' Story" with a picture of Oliver Perez crouching down with his hands on his head.
Needless to say, I was miffed that my hopes for a pleasant afternoon of watching the game had been Wainwrighted (I'll explain later).
But, because I am a diehard fan, I watched the game anyway. I didn't get home in time to see the first two runs, but I watched the rest of the game, waiting for the collapse I knew would come.
- B/R Ticket Guide
However, it didn't come. Perez never collapsed. It wasn't the same "Ol" story. He let up a few home runs, true, but he didn't look awful. It wasn't anything like his last start. In fact, I don't think he's pitched this well since April 19 in Philadelphia.
I know what you're thinking: he let up five runs! Here's what I've got to say: two, and walks.
What has Perez's problem been over his last few starts and over the course of his career? The answer is control. He walked three or more batters in every start this season, except in his latest start and his first appearance back on the April 2.
Imagine if he let up the three home runs, but with five walks. Then instead of two solo shots and a two-run-homer, you'd have a pair of two-run shots and a three-run-homer, or even a grand slam.
I'd rather have him throwing strikes than giving up free passes. He'd only given up one home run this season before yesterday, but he still managed to let up a heck of a lot of runs. Why? Because he walked batters, and I think yesterday's start was a step in the right direction.
Am I the only one who remembers game seven of the NLCS in 2006? (I know Mets fans don't really like to talk about it; in my personal vernacular, "Wainwright" is a verb that means "to crush, as in destroying hopes and dreams.")
Perez pitched six innings of one-run ball on three days rest. And what about last season? Sure, he had his bad starts, but he also posted a 3.56 ERA and struck out 174 batters in 177 innings.
So it isn't the same "Ol" story. Perez is moving in the right direction. Yesterday he gave up a lot of runs on a few mistakes, but that's better than a lot of runs on a lot of mistakes.
Ever analyzing arm aptitude,
-Louis
comments (2) write a comment »
write a new comment
8 months ago
I went to bed early that night, so I didn't get to see Perez after the 1st inning. However, what I've read about the game is similar to what you reported: that Perez had a decent outing. As far as moving in the right direction, I'd like to see Oliver in control and still striking out batters. Perez only struck out 3 batters against LA and just 5 combined in his two starts before that. On the season, he has 29 Ks to 23 BBs, which isn't a good ratio. However, if Perez can get his K to BB ratio above 2:1 like he did last year, he'll continue to be an effective pitcher for the Mets.
That said, I agree that the start in LA was a step in the right direction, just because he kept his walks down.
8 months ago
Clearly Perez wants to compete with Johan Santana in the statistcal department...for most home runs allowed!!!
Seriously, I hope it is a step in the right direction for Perez and maybe he (and John Maine) will learn from Johan that giving up a homer or two isn't the end of your night.
write a new comment