Is Wieters a disappointment?

[EagleOriole]

Sorry i don't give defensive catchers 10m a year.

Defensive catchers do not hit 22 homers a year, which is what Wieters has done the last two years (22, 23). He is not the offensive superstar we thought he would be be, he is still an above-average offensive catcher with great defensive skills.

I'll keep him, thanks.

[elextrano8]

Wieters has been a 3.5 WAR player or better and will continue to be for sometime. So his production on average is about 18 M per. I'd say that's worth more than 10M.

This.

It amuses me, too, that this thread appears as Matty appears to be heating up at the plate - he's hit .353 with a 143 OPS+ over the past seven days - and specifically, I think he's been doing far better of late as a LHB. The sample size is small, of course, but Matty is anything but a disappointment. Would I prefer Matt to have the same skill at the plate as Williams or Ruth or Mays? Of course. But he's an above average offensive player, and (I feel) an elite defensive player and he's 26 (though, for full disclosure, his b-day is soon so this is his age 27 season).

Defensive catchers do not hit 22 homers a year, which is what Wieters has done the last two years (22, 23). He is not the offensive superstar we thought he would be be, he is still an above-average offensive catcher with great defensive skills.

I'll keep him, thanks.

My only quibble with you is probably just semantics, but I'd argue rather that defensive catchers can hit 22 homers a year. I'd argue that being a defensive catcher does not preclude one from being an offensive catcher as well - and add that being above average offensively does not necessarily mean being a superstar. It's just generally, catchers are one or the other - Matt being a big exception in that sense.

[BohKnowsBmore]

This.

It amuses me, too, that this thread appears as Matty appears to be heating up at the plate - he's hit .353 with a 143 OPS+ over the past seven days - and specifically, I think he's been doing far better of late as a LHB. The sample size is small, of course, but Matty is anything but a disappointment. Would I prefer Matt to have the same skill at the plate as Williams or Ruth or Mays? Of course. But he's an above average offensive player, and (I feel) an elite defensive player and he's 26 (though, for full disclosure, his b-day is soon so this is his age 27 season).

My only quibble with you is probably just semantics, but I'd argue rather that defensive catchers can hit 22 homers a year. I'd argue that being a defensive catcher does not preclude one from being an offensive catcher as well - and add that being above average offensively does not necessarily mean being a superstar. It's just generally, catchers are one or the other - Matt being a big exceptional in that sense.

All true, but this ignores the connotation associated with the term "defensive catcher" in the initial comment.

[atomic]

Sorry i don't give defensive catchers 10m a year.

Well you won't have to. His offensive WAR was over 3 both of the past years.

[OriolesHash1]

He's the second best catcher in the baseball, why would he be a disappointment

[wildcard]

If he hits 23 HR and 83 RBI like last year, I will be happy. I think he can do that.

Great defensive, Great at calling game, Great at controlling the running game.

The whole pitching staff trusts him.

Sign him for 5 or 6 years.

[AlbionHero]

He's the second best catcher in the baseball, why would he be a disappointment

He was supposed to be a switch hitting Mike Piazza with a far better arm. He's a good player, yeah, but he's still a disappointment compared to his prospect status. He was supposed to be a major superstar offensively and defensively.

The batting average is the one thing I'm most disappointed in, personally. He had like a career .350 minor league batting average, yet that hasn't transitioned to the majors at all. I was thinking he'd be a minimum .300 guy.

[Can_of_corn]

He was supposed to be a switch hitting Mike Piazza with a far better arm. He's a good player, yeah, but he's still a disappointment compared to his prospect status. He was supposed to be a major superstar offensively and defensively.

Please show me a scouting report or prospect write up that had Wieters pegged as a defensive superstar.

[AlbionHero]

Please show me a scouting report or prospect write up that had Wieters pegged as a defensive superstar.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/prospects/y2009/profile.jsp?t=p_top&pid=446308

He's remarkably agile behind the plate -- especially considering his size -- with good hands and an above-average arm. He has performed well handling pitchers and calling games with a quiet leadership that is a big plus.

Defensive superstar might of been exaggerated, but he was projected as a very good defensive catcher too.

This is the key thing though:

An All-Star catcher who can lead a young staff, contend for MVP awards and be the best all-around catcher in the game.

He was expected to be a guy who would be competing for MVP awards. He isn't, so he's a disappointment.

[elextrano8]

All true, but this ignores the connotation associated with the term "defensive catcher" in the initial comment.

Yeah, I guess I wasn't totally clear - I know the connotations that the terms "defensive catcher" and "offensive catcher" generally carry. I imagine it as a venn diagram, with a small percentage of catchers falling into the space in which they could be described in either sense, so my (attempted) point was that, especially in Matt's case, the two terms are not mutually exclusive, no matter the traditional connotations.

[Can_of_corn]

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/prospects/y2009/profile.jsp?t=p_top&pid=446308

Defensive superstar might of been exaggerated, but he was projected as a very good defensive catcher too.

Good quote but yea, it doesn't say "Defensive Superstar". He has certainly exceeded defensive expectations.

[elextrano8]

He was expected to be a guy who would be competing for MVP awards. He isn't, so he's a disappointment.

Interesting you say that following Matt's fourth season at the major league level, where he placed 21st in AL MVP voting. I'm not going to argue that placing 21st in MVP voting once is in any way proof that Matt will be a perennial MVP candidate, but he was one of only twenty-four players to get votes for AL MVP.

[elextrano8]

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/prospects/y2009/profile.jsp?t=p_top&pid=446308

He was expected to be a guy who would be competing for MVP awards. He isn't, so he's a disappointment.

You also left out a key part of that analysis:

"Upside potential: An All-Star catcher who can lead a young staff, contend for MVP awards and be the best all-around catcher in the game."

Upside potential quite a bit different than an expectation.

[Ven6]

Since the word disappointment references the expectations that the fan base had before he was called up to the bigs, I'd say, yes, he's been a colossal disappointment.

But I still want him as my everyday catcher.

[Frobby]

I will say that overall I am mildly disappointed with Wieters, but only because expectations for his bat were so high. He's an above average offensive catcher, and a Gold Glove defender, and that has translated into two consecutive All-Star appearances so I don't think you can complain too much. There are about 27 teams in baseball that would love to have him.