Mookie4ever wrote:Once a 200K pitcher always a 200K pitcher?
Ask Zito and Loaiza.
There is some risk with Ollie. He had no control and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn last year. He had a 5.49 ERA and a 1.632 WHIP in 2003. He could lose it again because he was never known for his control.
That being said, I'm a big Ollie fan and think that he will be a good one to keep.
Last year? He had a 4/1 K/BB ratio and 3.5 BB per 9 innings. That's pretty damn good control for a 22 year old. And I'm not sure where his reputation for no control comes from, because it sure isn't in any of his minor league numbers. I watch him a lot, since the Pirates are close by, and he'll sometimes lose his release point, but that almost never happens any more and when it does he usually gets it back within an inning or so.
At age 22 Sheets had a 2/1 K/BB ratio and 3 BB per 9 innings.
Both guys showed similar tendencies in the minors, with Sheets having a little better control, but not a substantial advantage.
I think people are letting Sheets greater tenure in the major leagues outweigh the fact that Perez's youth should be counted in his favor. He pitched as well at age 22 as Sheets did at age 25.
I like them both and believe they can be consistant at or around 200 Ks, Ollie more so. Both make good keepers.
I'm a big Ollie fan. I love watching him pitch. I would describe him as "wildly effective". In other words he throws a fireball in the high 90s headed for the strikezone only to tail a foot out of the strikezone. Batters swing hopelessly at a pitch, having no idea where it will end up. He is the definition of "nasty" in my eyes.
He still had a winning record (12-10) on a bad team.
My only concern with him is that he's 6-3, 160. Thats pretty slim and lanky, skinnier than Oswalt. Maybe as he gets older he will add some weight. If not he may see some injuries.
Sheets on the other hand is a horse at 6-1, 220. At first I thought the fact that he threw over 200 innings for 3 years in a row at such a young age would come back to bite him on the ass. However, I think he has the right body structure to handle it.
I haven't seen Ben pitch too often, so I can't really comment on what his pitching syle is and what makes it effective. I can only speculate based on his games being consistant last season.
Fireball Express wrote:I like them both and believe they can be consistant at or around 200 Ks, Ollie more so. Both make good keepers.
I'm a big Ollie fan. I love watching him pitch. I would describe him as "wildly effective". In other words he throws a fireball in the high 90s headed for the strikezone only to tail a foot out of the strikezone. Batters swing hopelessly at a pitch, having no idea where it will end up. He is the definition of "nasty" in my eyes. He still had a winning record (12-10) on a bad team. My only concern with him is that he's 6-3, 160. Thats pretty slim and lanky, skinnier than Oswalt. Maybe as he gets older he will add some weight. If not he may see some injuries.
Sheets on the other hand is a horse at 6-1, 220. At first I thought the fact that he threw over 200 innings for 3 years in a row at such a young age would come back to bite him on the ass. However, I think he has the right body structure to handle it. I haven't seen Ben pitch too often, so I can't really comment on what his pitching syle is and what makes it effective. I can only speculate based on his games being consistant last season.
160? Maybe three years ago he was 160. He's listed at 190 on every site I can find.
I wonder if there's any truth to the idea that slimmer pitchers are more injury prone.
I think you're right. That was probably an old weight (source:CBS). He still looks kinda lanky. Still this all bodes well for Ollie and reinforces my belief that he'll be a stud over at least the next few years.
Mookie4ever wrote:Once a 200K pitcher always a 200K pitcher?
Ask Zito and Loaiza.
There is some risk with Ollie. He had no control and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn last year. He had a 5.49 ERA and a 1.632 WHIP in 2003. He could lose it again because he was never known for his control.
That being said, I'm a big Ollie fan and think that he will be a good one to keep.
Last year? He had a 4/1 K/BB ratio and 3.5 BB per 9 innings. That's pretty damn good control for a 22 year old. And I'm not sure where his reputation for no control comes from, because it sure isn't in any of his minor league numbers.
Are you sure about that? Granted, as a young man, he has not had a lot of minor league experience but his control has been all over the place.
This is his BB/9
2001 A 7.64
2002 A 6.66
2002 AA 4.30
2002 MLB 7.10
2003 AAA 8.31
2003 SD 8.94
2003 Pit 10.17
and his WHIP has bounced everywhere from 1.17 to 1.65.
He has not been the epitome of control. His stuff has never been questioned just his control. He could regress, but I would bet that he doesn't.
I don't know who has the right source. But, in the numbers I'm looking at, two of his highest ones are rookie ball and the year he jumped from A to the majors. Other than that I see a guy he his pretty consistently in the 3.5 to 4.5 walks per 9. Those are still a little high, though not nearly as high as the numbers you gave.
Still, with a 1.63 WHIP in 2003 you can't exactly say that he was a control pitcher.
But, WHIP isn't so much about control as it is about hits. Look at his annual H/9
2004: 145 in 196 IP
2003: 129 in 126 IP
2002: 118 in 161 IP
2001: 129 in 154 IP
The one that looks odd there is 2003, so I'm inclined to think defense or luck explained the jump. And most of that WHIP jump is explained by hits. His BB/9 rose 0.6 but his H/9 rose 2.4.
All in all, I think it's 2003 that looks to be the odd year. Other than that, Ollie's has very good control for a young pitcher. I think Ollie's looking a lot like a shorter version of RJ early in his career--a little high on the walks, but pretty unhittable. Of course, Ollie's doing it in the majors while Randy was still in the minors at this age.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by GotowarMissAgnes » Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:39 pm 
