Dempsey strongly implied last night that he hated Wieters' pitch-calling

[DJHJR86]

It wasn't only Demspey and Palmer, I've also heard Ross Grimsley made similar remarks about how well Castillo frames pitches and calls a game.  

[DrungoHazewood]

7 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

It wasn't only Demspey and Palmer, I've also heard Ross Grimsley made similar remarks about how well Castillo frames pitches and calls a game.  

That's high praise from a pitcher who was once caught by Ken Rudolph.

[bobmc]

1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

Of course last night, I will have to own up, to mainly watching the Capitals. I know blatant sin to admit, but I was split screen with the Caps in the big screen.

 

You had company in the dugout

 

[Frobby]

38 minutes ago, oriole said:

I am surprised to see how well Castillo can avoid a passed ball. Just from conventional stats it looks like Wieters was a magician at blocking balls and Castillo had some high PB numbers. After watching him keep Brittons erratic sinker in front of him last night I'm not leaning much on past performance anymore...he has looked great and seems to be a good hitter too.

Castillo has looked pretty sloppy at times on catching and blocking pitches.    He did do an excellent job on Britton last night, no question.    

[Tx Oriole]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

On the post-game show last night, Rick Dempsey was effusive in his praise of Welington Castillo's pitch calling, saying things like "finally we have a catcher who will call something other than a fastball with two strikes and a runner on base!"    He never mentioned Wieters by name, but he gave the distinct impression that he thought Wieters was a lousy pitch-caller and that Castillo is a big improvement.    I was kind of surprised how blunt he was.

I know there are some posters who were critical of Wieters' pitch-calling at times, but it was usually criticism of a specific sequence, rather than a general statement.    I think Dempsey is overstating things, as he always tends to do anyways, but I'm curious what others think.

One difference I have noticed is that Wieters always called a lot of fastballs in the first couple of innings, whereas Castillo seems more inclined to show all the pitches right away.   

Oh that's Dempsey being Dempsey. 

[oriole]

25 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Castillo has looked pretty sloppy at times on catching and blocking pitches.    He did do an excellent job on Britton last night, no question.    

There were a couple pitches that if Castillo missed them I would not have blamed him one bit. I may have lamented that Wieters would have gotten to it but Britton was all over the place last night. 

[Enjoy Terror]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

No one had ever accepted one before, and he was almost certainly leaving money on the table by accepting.  A year later after a meh season he got $21M over two years.  

Doesn't really matter what they thought he'd do; the context of our conversation was that DD quickly wanted to shut the door and be rid of Matt Wieters. They offered him a QO last season instead of letting him go to FA, or trading him mid 2015. Seems to me that there was no haste to be rid of him, and even just an offer of QO is evidence enough to me that they entertained the thought of keeping him around.

[SteveA]

2 hours ago, dan-O said:

I don't question that. My comment is in regards to his broadcasting skills and opinions about the team over the years. I like the guy enough, he just makes me roll my eyes. 

You mean like when he said that Arrieta was the best of the young pitchers that came up around this time, and most people laughed at him?

[El Gordo]

3 hours ago, Snutchy said:

Palmer has made it a point to mention that Castillo has them throwing everything out of the gate.

I like Matt, but Castillo is the superior catcher. 

Why is showing them everything up front such a good idea? If you can be effective early by locating the fast ball why not do that and show the other stuff the nex times through the lineup. If you don't establish FB command early you're not likely to do well.

[backwardsk]

5 minutes ago, El Gordo said:

Why is showing them everything up front such a good idea? If you can be effective early by locating the fast ball why not do that and show the other stuff the nex times through the lineup. If you don't establish FB command early you're not likely to do well.

Because if that becomes a tendancy, teams can sit on the fastball the first time through without respecting the secondaries.

[Rene88]

Dempsey was not a fan. He made that pretty clear if you ran into him...or so I heard.

Nats starting pitching minus Guthrie been ok so far though.

[Snutchy]

36 minutes ago, El Gordo said:

Why is showing them everything up front such a good idea? If you can be effective early by locating the fast ball why not do that and show the other stuff the nex times through the lineup. If you don't establish FB command early you're not likely to do well.

Because it has worked for Bundy and they haven't been able to sit on any one pitch. First time through they'll wait for the fastball and let the rest sail by. 

[El Gordo]

2 minutes ago, Snutchy said:

Because it has worked for Bundy and they haven't been able to sit on any one pitch. First time through they'll wait for the fastball and let the rest sail by. 

If it works for one pitcher does that mean ot works for all?

[Snutchy]

18 minutes ago, El Gordo said:

If it works for one pitcher does that mean ot works for all?

I guess we'll revisit this at the end of the season.

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, Snutchy said:

I guess we'll revisit this at the end of the season.

and 10K before the season ends, too!