Orioles Officially sign Catcher Welington Castillo

[theobird]

6 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

So would I but you can't argue with what they are paying Castillo.

I agree, MW is the better player. So we take a little step back at the catcher position, but you really can't argue the deal they got Castillo for. Castillo is basically betting that he can spring board this into a bigger, better deal on the open market after this season. And playing in the AL east with half of his games at OPACY...Hopefully he will.

[scOtt]

If Nick Markakis can be replaced, so can Matt Wieters. It’s about letting go. And this is what figures to happen with Castillo agreeing to terms.

 

 

[scOtt]

 

[wildcard]

The O's are betting that John Russell can make Castillo into a better defensive catcher than he has been.   They would not have paid 13m for him if they didn't believe that could happen.   Its an interesting bet and a risky one considering Castillo will be 30 soon.

Many are comparing Castillo to Wieters and are happy with the direction.  However, there were many other directions.

As it stands right now what Corn has pointed out on Fangraphs is significant.  Joseph will play more innings behind the play next year than Castillo if Castillo does not improve his defense.  Buck will not be able to watch the pass balls and wild pitches that should have been blocked. Russell can call the pitches from the dugout for Castillo but he can't play defense for him.  That is up to Castillo to improve.

Buck has always been a defense first guy at high skill positions like catcher and SS.  This will be an interesting test. How the pitchers do with Castillo probably tells the tale.  We know the pitchers liked Wieters and have a high opinion of Joseph catching skills.

[weams]

19 minutes ago, wildcard said:

The O's are betting that John Russell can make Castillo into a better defensive catcher than he has been.   They would not have paid 13m for him if they didn't believe that could happen.   Its an interesting bet and a risky one considering Castillo will be 30 soon.

Many are comparing Castillo to Wieters and are happy with the direction.  However, there were many other directions.

As it stands right now what Corn has pointed out on Fangraphs is significant.  Joseph will play more innings behind the play next year than Castillo if Castillo does not improve his defense.  Buck will not be able to watch the pass balls and wild pitches that should have been blocked. Russell can call the pitches from the dugout for Castillo but he can't play defense for him.  That is up to Castillo to improve.

Buck has always been a defense first guy at high skill positions like catcher and SS.  This will be an interesting test. How the pitchers do with Castillo probably tells the tale.  We know the pitchers liked Wieters and have a high opinion of Joseph catching skills.

He's been as good as Wieters. Or the metrics are funny. 

[wildcard]

9 minutes ago, weams said:

He's been as good as Wieters. Or the metrics are funny. 

He has been bad enough to be non tendered by the D'Backs.  And that was not because of his offense.

I am not saying that its not a decent gamble that Russell can make him better.  But it is a gamble.

[weams]

5 minutes ago, wildcard said:

He has been bad enough to be non tendered by the D'Backs.  And that was not because of his offense.

And yet they were negotiating an extension with him three months ago. He is not much worse than Wieters post TJ. 

[wildcard]

7 minutes ago, weams said:

And yet they were negotiating an extension with him three months ago. He is not much worse than Wieters post TJ. 

 

7 minutes ago, weams said:

And yet they were negotiating an extension with him three months ago. He is not much worse than Wieters post TJ. 

But there is a world of difference.  Wieters had the confidence of the pitching staff.  They trusted him.  Castillo starts from ground zero and with a bad rep on defense and handling a staff.  I really think Russell is huge in this equation.

[Larry18]

I'm going to cheerlead for Castillo because I want this to work. 

[weams]

Just now, Larry18 said:

I'm going to cheerlead for Castillo because I want this to work. 

Why not I cheered for Wieters. I wanted him to be Johnny Bench.

[Larry18]

15 minutes ago, weams said:

Why not I cheered for Wieters. I wanted him to be Johnny Bench.

[Larry18]

The new software doesn't like my kindle's browser. 

I'm not the type to carry on about a move I'm not promoting.

[weams]

 

[Frobby]

11 hours ago, cimota said:

I thought the Orioles didn't opt-outs.  I guess Dan finally sees the benefit of them.

I'm still waiting to see if the player option has any conditions, such as a minimum number of PA.   But in any event, there's a huge difference between a one-year player option at a modest price and a huge multi-year deal where the player can opt out halfway through.    The O's aren't taking a huge risk here -- they're paying Castillo less for 2017-18 (if he exercised the option) than they paid Wieters in 2016 alone.   

That said, I'm not in favor of a blanket rule against player options.   It depends on the facts and circumstances.    In a backloaded deal, an opt out before the backloaded part should be OK much of the time.   

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Frobby said:

I'm still waiting to see if the player option has any conditions, such as a minimum number of PA.   But in any event, there's a huge difference between a one-year player option at a modest price and a huge multi-year deal where the player can opt out halfway through.    The O's aren't taking a huge risk here -- they're paying Castillo less for 2017-18 (if he exercised the option) than they paid Wieters in 2016 alone.   

That said, I'm not in favor of a blanket rule against player options.   It depends on the facts and circumstances.    In a backloaded deal, and opt out before the backloaded part should be OK much of the time.   

Some of us just find it amusing that a year after taking a rather public stand against opt-outs they gave a guy an opt-out.  The fact that they are phrasing it in such a way as to obfuscate that fact that it is indeed an opt-out just makes it more amusing.