Note to Boras---Wieters rated the 9th worst "framing"-

[CA-ORIOLE]

Perhaps it was just the "power of suggestion" but watching the O's and Rays last night I made a point to pay extra close attention to the framing skills of Ryan Hannigan (one of the best at this skill, according to metrics) and our own Matt Wieters (one of the not so best, to put it politely).

Just by the naked eye, obviously, I really did notice a big difference between the way both receive the ball and the difference stayed true, IMO, even after Price and Tillman left the game. Hannigan did seem to help Price, and others, out a bit, or perhaps he didn't hurt them (that could be a better way to put it?). Wieters on the other hand, does seem to be a bit lazy (for lack of a better word) in the way he receives the ball. With Wieters there seems to be a bit of recoil, and his glove isn't as steady. Whereas Hannigan, very similarly to Jose Molina who I had started a thread on a year or so ago on this same topic, is very adept at being in the best possible spot to receive the pitch - with body and glove, and he holds onto the ball and his glove rarely moves when the ball hits it.

Don't get me wrong, I think overall Wieters is an outstanding catcher and he is top notch in many other catching duties. But, this is one area where, IMO, he could make a great deal of improvement.

Careful Lester, you're on dangerous ground here. It's always seemed fairly clear to me. Not to pile on, but I was watching closely also and it appeared Wieter's had some issues gloving a few balls in the dirt (supposedly his forte) yesterday as well.

[BohKnowsBmore]

Careful Lester, you're on dangerous ground here. It's always seemed fairly clear to me. Not to pile on, but I was watching closely also and it appeared Wieter's had some issues gloving a few balls in the dirt (supposedly his forte) yesterday as well.

I think wieters critics claim they get bashed around here for bringing up criticisms more than it actually happens. Many posters disagree, but rarely have I see anyone be filleted for daring to criticize wiet. I only notice bashing or ridicule directed toward the position that he's easily replaceable or that we could get a AAA catcher to provide the same level of performance.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CA-ORIOLE]

I think wieters critics claim they get bashed around here for bringing up criticisms more than it actually happens. Many posters disagree, but rarely have I see anyone be filleted for daring to criticize wiet. I only notice bashing or ridicule directed toward the position that he's easily replaceable or that we could get a AAA catcher to provide the same level of performance.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When Frobby gets snarky, you know you've crossed the danger line.

I only notice bashing or ridicule directed toward the position that he's easily replaceable or that we could get a AAA catcher to provide the same level of performance.

No one has said this (i.e a random AAA guy can just replace him), and if anybody actually did it was likely no one that actually matters. More likely this is something that you've made up. "Easily replaceable" is another matter and open to a more nuanced discussion. i'd say this is something you've also exaggerated.

[terps19]

I posted this the other day in a game thread

Matt Wieters Framing:

2-1 count 2 outs top of 2nd inning. Matusz throws a curve ball and the ball starts in the middle of the plate and breaks inside. Matt took his glove from the middle of the plate and drug his glove across the plate so that his palm is facing towards 3rd base. The proper mechanics is to catch the ball on the outside half (the 3rd base half of the ball) of the ball and turn your knuckles into the ball or back towards the middle of the plate. NOT drag your hand further away from the plate.

And now that I notice this, it seems like I have seen him do this many times before. I wonder if anyone has talked to him about it?

[CA-ORIOLE]

I posted this the other day in a game thread

Matt Wieters Framing:

2-1 count 2 outs top of 2nd inning. Matusz throws a curve ball and the ball starts in the middle of the plate and breaks inside. Matt took his glove from the middle of the plate and drug his glove across the plate so that his palm is facing towards 3rd base. The proper mechanics is to catch the ball on the outside half (the 3rd base half of the ball) of the ball and turn your knuckles into the ball or back towards the middle of the plate. NOT drag your hand further away from the plate.

And now that I notice this, it seems like I have seen him do this many times before. I wonder if anyone has talked to him about it?

Since Buck thinks he's God, probably not.

[terps19]

I hated how he tried to back hand that ball last night from cruz and try a swipe tag, he missed the ball hit off his wrist and bounced away, run scored, runners moved up. get in front of the ball.

[Lester Freamon]

Careful Lester, you're on dangerous ground here. It's always seemed fairly clear to me. Not to pile on, but I was watching closely also and it appeared Wieter's had some issues gloving a few balls in the dirt (supposedly his forte) yesterday as well.

I think wieters critics claim they get bashed around here for bringing up criticisms more than it actually happens. Many posters disagree, but rarely have I see anyone be filleted for daring to criticize wiet. I only notice bashing or ridicule directed toward the position that he's easily replaceable or that we could get a AAA catcher to provide the same level of performance.

For the record I think Wieters is the "cat's pajamas". Seriously. However, last night's game seemed like a perfect opportunity to put my eyes, as untrained as they are, on the framing question as Wieters was "going up against" someone who rates out as one of the best at this skill.

All I'm saying is that I think Matt could make improvements in this area, and I think I could also see a very practical use in regards to more than a few strike calls that Price got (which I'm pretty sure were strikes) versus some ball calls Tillman got that could have been called strikes if Wieters received them a little more cleanly.

Again, take with a grain of salt because I do have a great deal of respect for the people who scout professionally.

[BohKnowsBmore]

For the record I think Wieters is the "cat's pajamas". Seriously. However, last night's game seemed like a perfect opportunity to put my eyes, as untrained as they are, on the framing question as Wieters was "going up against" someone who rates out as one of the best at this skill.

All I'm saying is that I think Matt could make improvements in this area, and I think I could also see a very practical use in regards to more than a few strike calls that Price got (which I'm pretty sure were strikes) versus some ball calls Tillman got that could have been called strikes if Wieters received them a little more cleanly.

Again, take with a grain of salt because I do have a great deal of respect for the people who scout professionally.

I have no problem with you taking a look at it and providing your analysis, whether that puts Matt in a positive or negative light regarding pitch framing. I actually appreciate it and think it adds a great deal of value to the conversation at hand, so kudos to you. All I took exception with is the idea (not from you) that any critical commentary on wieters' shame is dangerous ground around these parts.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BohKnowsBmore]

When Frobby gets snarky, you know you've crossed the danger line.

No one has said this (i.e a random AAA guy can just replace him), and if anybody actually did it was likely no one that actually matters. More likely this is something that you've made up. "Easily replaceable" is another matter and open to a more nuanced discussion. i'd say this is something you've also exaggerated.

I never said its a prevailing thought or something that's been said more than one or two times. I was providing the EXTREMELY limited times I believe posters have been blasted for wieters criticism.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Frobby]

When Frobby gets snarky, you know you've crossed the danger line.

With whom did I get snarky? Where? I'm not denying it, I just want to know what you're referencing.

[CA-ORIOLE]

With whom did I get snarky? Where? I'm not denying it, I just want to know what you're referencing.

Yeah, I thought it was this one, but I guess it was the Wieters discussion in the backup catcher thread, post #134. You responded to RZ, but I'm fairly sure it was directed at me. I even commended you on it.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/139603-Orioles-Searching-Outside-Organization-for-Backup-C-(per-Roch)/page9

[LookinUp]

How do we know that Molina doesn't wear awesome cologne? Maybe the umps just like him better. Ever consider that? I didn't think so.

In all seriousness, my thoughts are as follows.

1. This is a good discussion.

2. Good examples highlighting the types of behavior apparent in pitch framing are helpful, so we can observe.

3. I still question (because I don't understand) the importance of 1 ball or 1 strike, weighting based on situation, and the ultimate conversion to runs prevented. That part seems very hard because it's dependent on many factors which may vary by team/opponent.

[Frobby]

Yeah, I thought it was this one, but I guess it was the Wieters discussion in the backup catcher thread, post #134. You responded to RZ, but I'm fairly sure it was directed at me. I even commended you on it.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/139603-Orioles-Searching-Outside-Organization-for-Backup-C-(per-Roch)/page9

OK. Fair 'nuff.

[CA-ORIOLE]

How do we know that Molina doesn't wear awesome cologne? Maybe the umps just like him better. Ever consider that? I didn't think so.

In all seriousness, my thoughts are as follows.

1. This is a good discussion.

2. Good examples highlighting the types of behavior apparent in pitch framing are helpful, so we can observe.

3. I still question (because I don't understand) the importance of 1 ball or 1 strike, weighting based on situation, and the ultimate conversion to runs prevented. That part seems very hard because it's dependent on many factors which may vary by team/opponent.

Yeah, i think the accounting and possible double counting could be problematic. That said, I think we can all relate that a ball called a strike or visa a versa can be big impact at any point in a game. then figure teams throw approximately 20,000 pitches over the course of a season and there is potentially a lot of opportunity to gain an advantage with something like this. 50/140 does seem high end, but figure that's 50 above average. What about the guys that are below average compared to above average guys.

Also, without looking at this recently, I seem to recall Molina did kind of stand out on his own as compared to even the other top tier catchers.

[DrungoHazewood]

Yeah, i think the accounting and possible double counting could be problematic. That said, I think we can all relate that a ball called a strike or visa a versa can be big impact at any point in a game. then figure teams throw approximately 20,000 pitches over the course of a season and there is potentially a lot of opportunity to gain an advantage with something like this. 50/140 does seem high end, but figure that's 50 above average. What about the guys that are below average compared to above average guys.

Also, without looking at this recently, I seem to recall Molina did kind of stand out on his own as compared to even the other top tier catchers.

I just have a lot of problems accepting that Molina's framing is about as valuable as Miguel Cabrera's bat. If that is true then why does no one act like it is? Molina has never played more than 102 games in a season. He's never been paid much over $2M in a season. This would be one of the great inefficiencies/efficiencies of modern times. A strong MVP candidate that you can get for near waiver wire prices and then never gets 400 PAs.