The Marginal Improvements of Oliver Perez

There's been a ton of literature on the enigma that is Oliver Perez. Mechanical analysis, injury speculation, etc...but I haven't seen this, yet. So here it is:

2004:
12-10, 2.98 era, 30 GS, 196 IP, 145 H, 81 BBs, 239 Ks, 1.15 WHIP, 10.97 K/9, 64.4% of pitchs were strikes

2005:
7-5, 5.85 era, 20 GS, 103 IP, 102 H, 70 BBs, 97 Ks, 1.67 WHIP, 8.48 K/9, 60.2% of pitchs were strikes

2006:
Pitt: 2-10, 6.63 era, 15 GS, 76 IP, 51 BBs, 61 Ks, 1.83 WHIP, 7.22 K/9, 62.02% of pitches were strikes

NYM: 1-3, 6.38 era, 7 GS, 36.2 IP, 17 BBs, 41 Ks, 1.58 WHIP, 10.06 K/9, 62.10% of pitches were strikes

------------------

On the surface, it doesn't look like much. Duh, Tejesh, more strikes = better pitcher. They teach that in little league.

Well, yes. But the quality of those strikes matters. And when you're throwing 4.2% less strikes then before, it can indicate a mechanical flaw. Or an injury. Or something else. But here's the thing, with the Mets, while there wasn't a dramatic return to the 64.4% strike rate of 2004, the quality of the strikes Ollie threw were better. He was spotting his 94-96 mph fastball on the corners. And like the ERA, BBs, Ks, WHIP, there was some improvement in his strike rate.

The two biggest improvements, though, came in his K/9 ratio, and velocity. Both are inter-related. In Pittsburgh, Ollie lost 10 mph on his fastball. He got most of that back with the Mets. Thusly, his K's went up, walks went down.

Expect good things from Perez this year. Nothing like a 2.98 era (well, we can dream, right?). If he puts up a line like 18-8, 3.89 era, that's a great start towards regaining his dominant 2004 form. Plus, it's not projection with Perez, he did it. He put up a 2.98 era in his career, you can't take that away. He may not ever do that again, but the talent is still there. It's just a matter of finding it.