Matt Wieters St. Louis Cardinals

Age: 34 (May 21, 1986) | 6' 5" | 235lbs. | Bats: Both C-18 PH-11
Tm Lg YEAR G AB R H BB SO 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BA OBP SLG BB% SO% BABIP G/L/F % $4x4 $5x5
BAL AAA 2009 39 141 25 43 20 30 9 2 5 30 0 0 .305 .387 .504 12 18 .352 n/a
BAL AL 2009 96 354 35 102 28 86 15 1 9 43 0 0 .288 .340 .412 7 22 .356 n/a 10 9
BAL AL 2010 130 446 37 111 47 94 22 1 11 55 0 1 .249 .319 .377 9 19 .287 n/a 9 8
BAL AL 2011 139 500 72 131 48 84 28 0 22 68 1 0 .262 .328 .450 9 15 .276 43/18/39 17 16
BAL AL 2012 144 526 67 131 60 112 27 1 23 83 3 0 .249 .329 .435 10 19 .274 44/20/35 17 15
BAL AL 2013 148 523 59 123 43 104 29 0 22 79 2 0 .235 .287 .417 7 18 .247 39/18/44 15 13
BAL AL 2014 26 104 13 32 6 19 5 0 5 18 0 1 .308 .339 .500 5 17 .329 28/30/43 6 6
BAL AA 2015 3 11 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 .182 .231 .182 8 0 .167 n/a
BAL AAA 2015 2 5 2 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 .600 .667 1.20 17 0 .500 n/a
BAL AL 2015 75 258 24 69 21 67 14 1 8 25 0 0 .267 .319 .422 7 24 .328 43/25/32 6 6
BAL AL 2016 124 423 48 103 32 85 17 1 17 66 1 0 .243 .302 .409 7 18 .265 36/24/40 11 11
WAS NL 2017 123 422 43 95 38 94 20 0 10 52 1 0 .225 .288 .344 8 20 .264 42/21/36 4 5
WAS A+ 2018 1 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 .250 .250 .250 0 25 .333 n/a
WAS AA 2018 2 6 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 .167 .286 .333 14 29 .250 n/a
WAS NL 2018 76 235 24 56 30 45 8 0 8 30 0 1 .238 .330 .374 11 17 .261 34/21/45 5 5
STL NL 2019 67 168 15 36 12 47 4 0 11 27 1 1 .214 .268 .435 7 26 .223 38/21/41 4 3
STL NL 2020 19 35 3 7 3 10 1 0 0 4 0 0 .200 .300 .229 7 26 .280 40/32/28 -1 -0
Career 12yrs 1167 3994 440 996 368 847 190 5 146 550 9 4 .249 .313 .409 8 19 .279 n/a
Welcome! You are invited to wander around and read all of the comments that have been posted here at Patton & Co., but as soon as you register you can see the bid limits that Alex, Peter and Mike propose for each player, and you can post your own comments. Registering is free, so please join us!

Six-year scan in Defensive Runs Saved:

2012: 13

2013: -10

2014: -4

2015: -7

2016: -3

2017: -3

Alex Patton Alex
Dec 6 '17

A dose of reality for those of us with our heads in the sand about Matt Wieters' actual value ... from a Chat with MLBTR ...

Brandon
3:16
If you were GM of the Nationals what would be your offseason plan?
Steve Adams
3:17
Build a time machine and undo that Wieters deal.

Failing that, build a time machine, go back to last week, and convince Welington Castillo to sign in DC.

Failing that, sign Alex Avila.

Basically they're shooting themselves in the foot if Wieters is the primary catcher in 2018.
Howard Lynch LynchMob
Dec 6 '17

The passed-ball strikeout, not the interference, is the issue.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/possible-blown-call-highlights-fifth-inning-meltdown-by-nationals-in-game-5-vs-cubs/

The rule itself could not be more clear. When the batter swings and misses with a man on base, then clobbers the catcher with his backswing, the strike counts but the action stops. Thinking is, the catcher's got the ball in his glove but may be in no condition to throw out a baserunner.

Wieters confused matters by failing to get the ball in his glove, so he loses some sympathy right there. Nevertheless, "the ball will be dead... and no runner shall advance on the play."

It's possible the ump didn't see Wieters get clobbered, and doesn't believe Wieters when he points to his head and says, "I was clobbered."

That's what replays are for. The replay clearly shows Wieters getting clobbered. Wieters' ill-advised and badly-executed throw to first, indeed, illustrates why the rule is a good rule.

But. But. There's a catch.

"Backswings are not reviewable."

And that's my question. Why not?

Alex Patton Alex
Oct 13 '17

Why was the interference play not reviewable?

Alex Patton Alex
Oct 13 '17

Tough two at-bat sequence for Weiters.

Passed Ball, Throwing Error on the first play
Catcher's interference on the next play

Two runs scored because of it and your team loses by 1 and goes home from the NLDS.

Kent Ostby Seadogs
Oct 13 '17

My understanding is that since MLB started collecting PitchFX data they've been sharing it in post-game reviews with umps, who see the strikes they called balls and the balls they called strikes. Since that started the strike zone has been called much more uniformly, with more high and low strikes called, and much less lattitude on the inside and outside parts of the plate.

This excellent Hardball Times story from 2014 gets into it.

Peter Kreutzer Rotoman
Mar 2 '17

Yeah, challenging balls and strikes . . . kill me now.

Mike Dean TMU2009
Mar 2 '17

They are trying to shorten the game.

Tom Zeke
Mar 2 '17

Why not let the umps call the game as usual, but each team can 'challenge' one ball/strike call per inning. It would have to be immediate, and probably it would have to come from the batter, not the bench. But I think that might work

Keith Prosseda andypro
Mar 2 '17