Jump to content

Britton praises Welington Castillo


wildcard

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, dan-O said:

He looks roughly equal to Wieters on paper, but I don't believe that is how it will bear out this season. 

I like Wieters better than some posters.    I don't have an opinion on Castillo yet.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I think it helped Castillo catching for the Dominican team and basically being in "playoff" mode.  Even though he's been an "NL" guy I still though he navigated the lineup pretty good with Gausman.  

I actually didn't mind him getting doubled up off that Rickard fly ball.  Bautista made a play that nobody thought he could make.  Given the situation it was well worth the gamble to take off and try to score there and win the game.  I don't mind the aggressiveness.  

If you don't go there, you are the goat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

As I sated in the other thread it isn't at all surprising to have a pitcher, when prompted, to say good things about his catcher.

1.  He recognized the problem

2.  He knew the pitcher well enough to know what adjustment needed to be made.

3. He didn't worry about going up to last year's CY Young Winner* in a tied game and telling him what he thought.

There is a lot more there then just fixing the problem.  It shows a lot about him and what he can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChuckS said:

Given the whole package that Castillo appears to possess why on earth did the DBacks non-tender him?

It's not like catchers who can hit and play at least adequate defense grow on trees. 

Teams make bad personnel decisions at times. Look how we got Hardy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



  • Posts

    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
    • What if they don’t want to be extended?
    • I don't want the O's to lose much, but I do want there to be a massive streaming deal with Amazon or some other company the O's are left out of.  This blackout nonsense is bullsh!t. 🤬
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...