Is Wieters a disappointment?

[Hallas]

^ Molina?

1: I'm not sure if I buy the pitch framing stuff.

2: He's on the wrong side of 30.

Right now he's probably better, but Wieters has at least 6-8 years left in him. Molina has maybe 2-4.

[Jon]

It's perfectly reasonable to feel disappointed that Matt has not and probably will not ever become the offensive threat he was billed to be. But to be disappointed in Wieters overall, seems misguided.

His defensive prowess, his decent bat and the match up problems he creates thanks to switch hitting make him a a top two or three catcher in the game. Think of how rare it is to have a true "shutdown" catcher in baseball. The way he holds down opposing teams running games alone makes him such a valuable commodity. Watching the O's run wild against the Angels last week had me saying out loud, "thank god we have Matt!"

My concerns with Matt lay down the road as he ages and in how well he ages. If this is his ceiling offensively, he becomes a real hard decision for the GM/ownership to make when free agency rolls around, as his value is almost entirely tied to his catching abilities and his price tag will certainly be very high.

But luckily, Matt and free agency don't cross paths for awhile yet. Until then, I'm going to enjoy and appreciate Matt and his talents for as long as I can.

[BaltimoreO's]

If you had your pick of all MLB catchers, who would you choose? #1 would mostly likely be Posey. #2? I'd be surprised if most people especially ML GM's, didn't say Wieters. Disappointment?

I think some of them would take Salvador Perez,Mauer,A.J Ellis,Rosario,Santana.

[Can_of_corn]

1: I'm not sure if I buy the pitch framing stuff.

2: He's on the wrong side of 30.

Right now he's probably better, but Wieters has at least 6-8 years left in him. Molina has maybe 2-4.

Wrong Molina

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/molinya01.shtml

[El Gordo]

I think some of them would take Salvador Perez' date='Mauer,A.J Ellis,Rosario,Santana.[/quote']Then they'd be stupid. Non of them are as good with the glove as Wieters.

[Can_of_corn]

Then they'd be stupid. Non of them are as good with the glove as Wieters.

Molina is probably better.

[El Gordo]

Molina is probably better.

Marginally, for now, but considering cost and years of control it would be stupid to take him over Wieters, and Matt hasn't reached his ceiling yet. Most likely Molina has.

[weams]

I think some of them would take Salvador Perez' date='Mauer,A.J Ellis,Rosario,Santana.[/quote']

None of them would. None of them. Zip. Zero.

[Flash- bd]

None of them would. None of them. Zip. Zero.

I think you may mean this facetiously, so if so sorry for jumping on it, but:

not really true, there's good cases to be made for Santana and Perez. Santana (4.1) had more WAR last season than Wieters (3.6) (and is killing it this year with a .464 wOBA), and Perez is younger with the chances to be nearly as good defensively while perhaps better offensively.

[BohKnowsBmore]

I think you may mean this facetiously, so if so sorry for jumping on it, but:

not really true, there's good cases to be made for Santana and Perez. Santana (4.1) had more WAR last season than Wieters (3.6) (and is killing it this year with a .464 wOBA), and Perez is younger with the chances to be nearly as good defensively while perhaps better offensively.

But if a gm is doing this thought exercise, why would they assume such improvement in offense and defense for Perez while predicting that Matt has reached his ceiling?

[Flash- bd]

But if a gm is doing this thought exercise, why would they assume such improvement in offense and defense for Perez while predicting that Matt has reached his ceiling?

Because he accumulated 3.0 WAR in 76 Gs in his longest sample size, because he has all the tools, because he's 4 years younger than Matt Wieters and OPS+ through his first 553 ML ABs is .784 (compared to Wieters who had an OPS+ of 96 through his first 354 ABs and a 90 in his next 446), because in 76 games last year he's put up a better OPS+ than Wieters has in his career.

I'm not saying he's better right now (though it's possible he is, he certainly was the better player last year, albeit the limited SS), but I think any GM would imprudent to turn down a deal of Wieters for Perez straight up.

[Frobby]

Is it inconsistent to say that I'm thrilled to have Matt Wieters yet mildly disappointed with how he's done overall compared to my expectations? I don't think so.

Meanwhile, Wieters has been on a little mini-tear the last five games or so. Let's hope he stays hot for a while.

[AlbionHero]

Then they'd be stupid. Non of them are as good with the glove as Wieters.

Maybe not as good with a glove, but overall I'd rather have Santana or Mauer, for sure. They are legit offensive threats and will win you more games with that offense than Wieters will with his defense.

1. Posey

2. Molina

3. Santana

4. Mauer

5. Wieters

[Loophole]

Then they'd be stupid. Non of them are as good with the glove as Wieters.

Posts like this are why this thread shouldn't be stuck at 1 star... we've apparently taught ourselves to overrate catcher defense THIS much to cope with Matt's disappointing bat. If a time traveler went to the OH in 2009 (for some reason) and told everyone that in the future, we'd value Matt more for his defense than his offense, there'd be a whole lot of disappointment going on.

[AlbionHero]

Posts like this are why this thread shouldn't be stuck at 1 star... we've apparently taught ourselves to overrate catcher defense THIS much to cope with Matt's disappointing bat. If a time traveler went to the OH in 2009 (for some reason) and told everyone that in the future, we'd value Matt more for his defense than his offense, there'd be a whole lot of disappointment going on.

Wieters averages about 10 defensive runs saved a season. While thats good and all, really good offensive catchers can contribute more than 10 extra runs a season than Wieters. Defense is nice, but its not the end all like some people think it is.