Wieters is pretty bad offensively

[Prayin4Reign]

Hmmm...next month when Wieters has gone on a tear, we'll be seeing, Extend Wieters Now! threads. It's kind of like clockwork...

[Flacco Machado]

Hmmm...next month when Wieters has gone on a tear, we'll be seeing, Extend Wieters Now! threads. It's kind of like clockwork...

To every season, turn, turn...

[zweem]

How will it play when we have to deal with Boras when it is time for him to re-up?--------"For every season, turn, turn..."--------TURN HIM OVER NOW ----sell high.

[SteveO]

Is he as good offensively as he was advertised? Certainly not. Hopefully over the next few years he becomes less streaky and develops into a guy who hits .275-.285 with 20-25 HR's. Combine that with his defense and that is a player who solves catcher for a while to come. Why mess with it? Even if he only gets marginally better offensively, as a complete package he is still in the upper tier of MLB catchers and its not like there are any sure thing prospects at the position in the system .

[UpstateNYfan]

Wieters has certainly been disappointing. I am beginning to think that this is pretty much what we'll see, occasional bursts and a number 6 or 7 hitter. This begs the question, what is Presley up to? For years here, Crowley took a beating for the lack of productivity from the offense. I am amazed at this teams spiral downward offensively. You would always here about Crowley working hard with the players, you rarely hear much about Presley. Just sayin.

[DrungoHazewood]

Wieters has certainly been disappointing. I am beginning to think that this is pretty much what we'll see, occasional bursts and a number 6 or 7 hitter. This begs the question, what is Presley up to? For years here, Crowley took a beating for the lack of productivity from the offense. I am amazed at this teams spiral downward offensively. You would always here about Crowley working hard with the players, you rarely hear much about Presley. Just sayin.

If you took a fan's survey of coaching performance 75% of everyone would be below average.

[Todd-O]

I wonder if the O's would have the guys to part ways with MW? Might get them the mother load

[Going Underground]

The problem is the O's have a third and fifth place hitter who don't belong in those spots. The O's need some hitters who can drive in runs at a consistent rate. Palmer said something on the telecast that the O's hitters swing at alot of bad pitches and put themselves in bad counts. The long good at bats seem to be long and far between. Davis and Wieters timing look so bad right now. I think Davis wants to always get that third K when Wieters has two.

[PaulFolk]

Thome hardy and wieters all hitting in the top 5 in the order is so bad it's mind blowing. Maybe as bad as we've ever had.

I'm guessing you haven't been an Orioles fan for very long if you think this is the worst top of the lineup we've ever had. Not even close. I can certainly think of far worse from the last 10-15 years alone. How would you like a 1 through 5 lineup of...

Matos, Bigbie, Conine, Richard, Ripken (from 2001, Cal's last year)

Hairston, C.Singleton, Segui, Conine, Batista (2002)

Hairston, Matthews, Segui, Conine, Gibbons (2003)

The offense this year is frustrating, but the Orioles have certainly had worse. Thome and Wieters, BTW, have a .772 OPS and .742 OPS respectively, so it's not as if they're embarrassing themselves.

[Tony-OH]

Wieters since May 5th:

Date 	Tm 	G 	GS 	Rslt 	PA 	AB 	R 	H 	2B 	3B 	HR 	RBI 	BB 	IBB 	SO 	HBP 	SH 	SF 	ROE 	GDP 	SB 	CS 	BA 	OBP 	SLG 	OPS 	BAbip 	aLI 	WPA 	RE245/5-7/24 BAL 	64 	63 	31-33 	263 	235 	24 	53 	13 	0 	5 	28 	25 	1 	48 	2 	0 	1 	2 	12 	1 	0 	.226 	.304 	.345 	.649 	.262 	.96 	-0.230 	-3.90

He probably should not be batting 5th but really, who else should bat above him? Betemit should already be batting 2nd against righties, but Buck keeps running out Hardy but he would be better at 5th than Wieters against righties.

Buck is just too rigid with his lineup and doesn't adjust for matchups like he should in my opinion.

BTW, these are Hardy's numbers since May 17th:

Date 	Tm 	G 	GS 	Rslt 	PA 	AB 	R 	H 	2B 	3B 	HR 	RBI 	BB 	IBB 	SO 	HBP 	SH 	SF 	ROE 	GDP 	SB 	CS 	BA 	OBP 	SLG 	OPS 	BAbip 	aLI 	WPA 	RE245/17-7/24BAL 	56 	56 	27-29 	251 	239 	21 	46 	6 	2 	5 	19 	11 	3 	42 	0 	1 	0 	2 	7 	0 	0 	.192 	.228 	.297 	.525 	.214 	.95 	-1.345 	-19.00

That's a lot of outs in the top 5 of the order.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I'm guessing you haven't been an Orioles fan for very long if you think this is the worst top of the lineup we've ever had. Not even close. I can certainly think of far worse from the last 10-15 years alone. How would you like a 1 through 5 lineup of...

Matos, Bigbie, Conine, Richard, Ripken (from 2001, Cal's last year)

Hairston, C.Singleton, Segui, Conine, Batista (2002)

Hairston, Matthews, Segui, Conine, Gibbons (2003)

The offense this year is frustrating, but the Orioles have certainly had worse. Thome and Wieters, BTW, have a .772 OPS and .742 OPS respectively, so it's not as if they're embarrassing themselves.

What's funny is, there are a handful of guys listed there that the early 2000s OH would have DESPISED trying to trade for proven talent.

Get over the romanticizing of prospects, they ain't THAT valuable.

[vab]

What's funny is, there are a handful of guys listed there that the early 2000s OH would have DESPISED trying to trade for proven talent.

Get over the romanticizing of prospects, they ain't THAT valuable.

Amen to that.

[DrungoHazewood]

Get over the romanticizing of prospects, they ain't THAT valuable.

I think you need to be careful and not invoke the false equivalency of prospects. The O's top prospects today certainly aren't the same as the O's top prospects from 2002 or 2005. We were rightfully justified in our outrage over trading our #1 prospect (Denny Bautista) for Jason Grimsley, but Bautista might not be in the organizational top five today.

While it's silly to get up in arms about trading a Tyler Henson, you'd better be getting a legitimately huge haul if you're talking Bundy, Machado, Schoop, and a pretty decent return in immediate help for an Avery or comparable. Bundy and Machado are near untouchable, and they should be.

[sakata_catching]

If you took a fan's survey of coaching performance 75% of everyone would be below average.

That's a pretty conservative number, IMO.

I'd love to see one fan post on any message board for any team ever that reads "_____________ Is A Genius At Bullpen Management." Just one.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I think you need to be careful and not invoke the false equivalency of prospects. The O's top prospects today certainly aren't the same as the O's top prospects from 2002 or 2005. We were rightfully justified in our outrage over trading our #1 prospect (Denny Bautista) for Jason Grimsley, but Bautista might not be in the organizational top five today.

While it's silly to get up in arms about trading a Tyler Henson, you'd better be getting a legitimately huge haul if you're talking Bundy, Machado, Schoop, and a pretty decent return in immediate help for an Avery or comparable. Bundy and Machado are near untouchable, and they should be.

Eh, regardless of the year, the basic premise is the same. People are so freaking gun-shy about trading anything in the farm system even though most of these guys won't ever amount to anything.

Am I endorsing just dumping Machado or Bundy? No. Partially because I feel like these are extra-special once-in-a-generation types. However, we're currently being burned by our catcher who was rated just as high (if not higher) and couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat.

I actually read on either here or another board a poster who wouldn't trade Schoop straight up for Hunter Pence. I mean, come on. It's ridiculous how over-sensitive we get towards trading our own farm-hands. I think deep down it's because fans want to be able to sound smart when one of them eventually hits. "Hey! See! I TOLD you not to trade player X!"