How do you view Wieters now?

[wildcard]

Well, I am shocked by this one!

What it means is that you are dead wrong on your assertion about him needing more rest.

We have different views on this subject. I think that is allowed on the OH.

[Sports Guy]

We have different views on this subject. I think that is allowed on the OH.

That's fine....The problem is, you have showed no evidence on your side that supports you.

You have brought up Mauer's games played in the past but you also conveniently leave of the time he has missed due to injuries.

What evidence do you have that catchers should and do get handled this way?

And you say you don't know what the comment means about him being good later in the season...umm, it means he didn't shown signs of wearing down. Why wouldn't he be very good early but poor late if the rest thing was such an issue?

[wildcard]

That's fine....The problem is, you have showed no evidence on your side that supports you.

You have brought up Mauer's games played in the past but you also conveniently leave of the time he has missed due to injuries.

What evidence do you have that catchers should and do get handled this way?

And you say you don't know what the comment means about him being good later in the season...umm, it means he didn't shown signs of wearing down. Why wouldn't he be very good early but poor late if the rest thing was such an issue?

I could said the same about you position. You have no evidence that more rest will not help Wieters. Where is your evidence?

Wearing down can happen any time during the year from over use. It does have to be at the end of the season. Cooler weather could easily have help Wieters feel stronger.

[Sports Guy]

I could said the same about you position. You have no evidence that more rest will not help Wieters. Where is your evidence?

The top catchers in the sport, if they stay healthy, do not sit and/or DH for 42-50 games a year. It just doesn't happen. Why would you think Wieters will be treated any different than everyone else?

And why should he be treated any different?

And what evidence is there that more play has worn him down thus far?

This is a guy that is supposed to be our franchise guy...He is supposed to be a superstar, HOF caliber catcher. He has already shown that he is at a GG level defensively and despite all of this, you want him to sit more? It just makes no sense.

A workload behind the plate of 125-135 games should and will happen..assuming he is healthy.

And then he should maybe DH another 5-10 games.

[wildcard]

Steve Melewski:

also think Wieters showed the possible impact of the heavy amount of games played load early in 2010 and not late, as you might expect.

Wieters played in 47 of 51 O's games in April and May, or 92 percent. He played in 44 of 58 in August and September, or 76 percent.

On May 22, Wieters was batting .262. But he was also playing just about every day. By June 19, his average was down to .222.

Also, he went a career-high 30 games without a homer from May 6 to June 13.

There could be many reasons for that, but I think we have to consider that he was just playing too often at a position that is both mentally and physically demanding and draining.

Some fans will say, "He's only 24, how did he tire by Memorial Day?" Maybe some of that falls on Wieters to handle the strain better. But he's a big guy with a lot of pressure on him and all catchers need regular rest, even in the season's opening months.

Later in the year, Wieters got some rest, but not by just being rested. He was on the disabled list from July 10-25. Perhaps somewhat freshened up by that DL stint, he hit .282 in September.

Moving into the 2011 season, I just feel Buck Showalter has to consider more rest earlier in the year for Wieters. Maybe even more games as a designated hitter. Did you know Wieters had just seven at bats as a DH in 2010?

http://www.masnsports.com/steve_melewski/2011/01/can-matt-get-his-bat-going-in-2011.html

[wildcard]

The top catchers in the sport, if they stay healthy, do not sit and/or DH for 42-50 games a year. It just doesn't happen. Why would you think Wieters will be treated any different than everyone else?

And why should he be treated any different?

And what evidence is there that more play has worn him down thus far?

This is a guy that is supposed to be our franchise guy...He is supposed to be a superstar, HOF caliber catcher. He has already shown that he is at a GG level defensively and despite all of this, you want him to sit more? It just makes no sense.

A workload behind the plate of 125-135 games should and will happen..assuming he is healthy.

And then he should maybe DH another 5-10 games.

125 games catching would be fine. That is 37 games not catching or about 30% of the year. Its important that he gets the rest when he needs it. Buck should be good at getting him rest if MacPhail adds a backup catcher that is not such a big drop off in talent.

[Bosibus]

What kind of line would you be happy with this year from MW?

[Moose Milligan]

I think he'll be average. As SG pointed out, his best month came in his rookie year. He wasn't able to build on that at all last year. I know I'll get flak for thinking he doesn't pan out the way we hope/wanted him to, but I really don't care.

I hope I'm wrong.

[ShaneDawg85]

Steve Melewski:

http://www.masnsports.com/steve_melewski/2011/01/can-matt-get-his-bat-going-in-2011.html

Seems like pure speculation from Melewski. Just the same as saying pressing and not having anyone around him in the lineup caused his poor offensive output. There are a lot of factors that likely went into his disappointing season offensively, but playing too much, in my view, isn't one of them.

[wildcard]

Seems like pure speculation from Melewski. Just the same as saying pressing and not having anyone around him in the lineup caused his poor offensive output. There are a lot of factors that likely went into his disappointing season offensively, but playing too much, in my view, isn't one of them.

I agree it could be many things. They addressed the lineup. Might as well address the rest and give him the best chance he can get to improve.

[Bosibus]

I think he'll be average. As SG pointed out, his best month came in his rookie year. He wasn't able to build on that at all last year. I know I'll get flak for thinking he doesn't pan out the way we hope/wanted him to, but I really don't care.

I hope I'm wrong.

Yes, because sophmore slumps never happen.

[Sports Guy]

After Buck took over, Wieters didn't play in 17% of the games. He would sit every 4-5 days. Over the course of a full season, 17% of the games has him missing about 27 games, which puts him at 135 games.

And do you know how many games Wieters DH'ed last year, either under your boy Buck, DT or Samuel? ZERO!

Now, do I expect that this year? Not neccassarily but I wouldn't expect a lot of games where he will be DH'ed.

Last year, he appeared in 130 games but he pinched hit 6 times...So, in a season where he spent some time on the DL, he still started 124 games behind the plate.

Now, I do think DT did a poor job of resting him early...I see from mid april to mid May, he appeared in like every game and it looks like only one of those was pinch hitting(but I didn't get real in depth in his game logs).

That is too much. He needed to be rested in that stretch more than he did.

I think you can expect to see him miss about every 5th game, which sounds about right to me.

[Sports Guy]

Yes, because sophmore slumps never happen.

Shouldn't soph slump be preceeded by a good freshman year?

So far, all he has done is slump.

I don't see how anyone can view Wieters as anything but a major disappointment thus far, at least compared to what we thought, hoped and needed him to be.

If all he ends up being is a 2-3 WAR catcher, he will be valuable but not nearly the player we needed him to be.

[Sports Guy]

BTW, some of the blame here goes on the Orioles and how awful they are at developing power prospects.

I am not sure if this will be true or not but I am hoping Crow being gone will help Wieters.

[Moose Milligan]

Yes, because sophmore slumps never happen.

Well considering his rookie year wasn't that much above average and it took a furious finish to get to that "slightly above average" level, I don't think his 2010 was the product of a sophomore slump.

Sophomore slumps do happen...but they're more noticeable when you can actually slump down from something that was pretty great to begin with. Wieters wasn't.