Find MASN on your cable or satellite provider.

I like how you lined up their stats on subsequent lines, showing how ridiculous it is that "Goose Creek" Wieters got snubbed. Coincidence, I think not.

And they say that there's no NY bias in these things.

Happy Turkey Day, Roch!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours. - Roch

Wieters was shut out simply because he has an exclusive deal with Upper Deck. Topps cannot issue any cards of Wieters while this exclusive deal is in place. They always issue their all rookie team cards (the ones with the little gold trophy on them) in the following year's set (these will be in the 2010 set). Since Topps now has an exclusive deal with MLB, I was hoping that the deal with UD would be null and void, but I suppose that's not the case.

Happy Thanksgiving Roch / all

Wieters absolutely should have been selected as the top rookie catcher. He obviously has a higher ceiling than Santos & his card will be much more coveted down the road.

One concern, why couldn’t the O’s recognize Santos’ talent before they let him fly? He would be the perfect backup for Wiets. Another duh move by the O's.

Roch,
In theory, I tend to agree with you. Weiters was robbed. But maybe we are looking at it from the "Hype" standpoint. Weiters was touted and hyped to be the next Johnny Bench from the start.

I think the review panel looked at it from actual stats perspective.

Dont know, but would have rather seen Weiters on the list.

Yes, dumb that Wieters was not included. Congrats to Santos, I suppose. The Mets can keep him, though--I’ll take Wieters any day. If just the other day on this blog is any indication, more people are likely to mention Matt Wieters in the same sentence with reigning AL MVP Joe Mauer than they will Omir Santos.

Of course, this is the kind of thing that gets our feathers ruffled, screaming bias against Baltimore. Let’s just think back to the Adam Jones Gold Glove Award--where some people here were still dissatisfied anyway even though any bias went out the window--and think that it’s not all bad.

Looks like Wieters signed an exclusive deal w/ Razor and will not have a Topps card this year.
http://bdj610bbcblog.blogspot.com/2008/10/does-razor-entertainment-really-think.html

"Razor has signed Matt Wieters to a contract that extends from now until 365 days after he makes the 25-man roster of an MLB team. This is an EXCLUSIVE for images and autographs of Matt.

That's really odd considering I believe he was one of the players on the foil packaging of their own baseball cards this year (among a few other established superstars). I saw that at Walmart last week. You would think they'd go with the best statistical rookie catcher and the one who generates the most hype. No brainer, right? Guess not. Oh well, thanks for digging up that statistical comparison, Roch.

Roch,
I read the article by Steve. Great interview from his standpoint. Unfortunately there is a lot of fluff from MacPhail with little substance.
I dont understand why they are putting so much hype on Snyder. He has not shown the ability to hit with above average power to date. Usually this is a prerequisite for corner infielders. Why not go after a proven power player at 1st while committing to a long term deal? I dont see Snyder tearing major league pitching up?

Positively sinful of them. I actually believe there was an 11th commandment stating "Thou shalt not exclude Matt Wieters from the Topps All-Rookie team." Here's hoping Topps is now subjected to wandering the desert for forty years as pennance for this crime.

Thanks for the blog Roch! Happy Thanksgiving!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Marty. Have a safe holiday. - Roch

Good catch, William R. After actually looking it up, those packs of cards I saw were upper deck, series 1 and series 2 Combo Packs.

Roch,

Have you seen the 2011 Free Agents list on MLBTradeRumors.com?

There is a TON of premium pitching potentially on the market next year.

I read somewhere that the O's current payroll commitment for 2010 is about $30 million.

Wouldn't it make sense to really hold off on making any kind of a splash this off season so we can save for next?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree in a sense, but they still have to show signs of progress next season. They need to do more than just filter in more young talent and lose 98 games. That's why I'd like to see them make a trade for a big bat without surrendering the top young pitchers in the system, however they can do it. (perhaps with a chloroform rag). - Roch

I think it has more to do with a sense of "fairness". No team had more than one player and Nolan was probably the better choice from the O's. Additionally, Topps would likely pull their toe nails out before snubbing both NY teams.

JamesG

I hope this news doesnt bring out any postings from Mets fans in Towson.

I hope you have a great holiday, and I appreciate all your humor and updates.

I am excited @ all the Hot Stove news that will begin to come out especially after the Winter meetings in early December. Bring on Bedard, Beltre, Garland or Harden. As AM said,

Numerically, I think we'll be more active dollar-wise than we were last year. We're organized, we have our targets that we're going to go after, and we'll see how it goes and how the market unfolds.

GO O's!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving. - Roch

In Steve's recent blog he quotes "MacPhail insists any media or fan skeptics that question whether the club is willing to offer a big contract under the right circumstances, are off base."

I want to believe him, But if we were so legit in trying to obtain a power hitting 1st baseman last year to a long term contract, what has changed to this year? Are needs are the same with this position. Snyder's numbers last year in the minors were not that impressive to curtail this pursuit?

I am usually the utlimate optimistic type fan. But I do question the Front Office intentions with making this team competitive. A professional franchise builds from within the minors/draft while supplimenting talent thru trades and free agency. To date, I have not seen the willingness of this ownership or GM to secure top quality players to suppliment what is in the minors.
I think they want to be somewhat competitive by filling positions thru the draft and minor league process. But when it comes to filling the vacancies our system has not produced, they have not shown a willingness to spend the money.

This off season is huge in terms of fan committment to this organization. If they fail to show this willingness to spend the money for a few final pieces, we are in for many many more .500 or below seasons.

Just wanted to get this off my chest.
Thanks and Happy Thanksgiving to Everyone!

Ridiculous.

Roch,

Do you think that Wieters is getting snubbed with all these awards(ROY and this topps thing) because of his late entrance into the league this year? Did this other guy play all year and only get 90 some at bats? I am just wondering what people are thinking when he recieves no vote at all for ROY and then Is overlooked on things like this. You da man Roch. Keep blogging it up. I usually read from my iPhone right when I get up in the morning, but I think I will save your thanksgiving posts for all the ackward moments at my girlfriends parents thanksgiving party. Haha
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ha! Good luck with that, John. As for Wieters, I really don't think that's a factor. Could be the desire to get a NY player in there. Some people think it's because Wieters has a deal with Razor. I'm sure it was a hotly debated topic at Topps. - Roch

Rochster,

Hope you and your family have a great Thanksgiving and thanks for all your efforts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Rob. Same to you. And thanks for being such a loyal supporter of this blog. - Roch

Let Santos have his recog. That'll likely be the last of it. Wieters will get plenty of props in the years to come. IS there anyhting to the card company contract business as the reason for the snub???

There is not a single free agent first baseman I would feel confident about giving a long-term deal to. If anything, I would give 2 or 3 years to Adrian Beltre or Mark Derosa - but not a 1B. Delgado's coming off an injury, Adam LaRoche is an average player at best, Nick Johnson is injury prone, Russell Branyan is unproven... with Abreu off the market there's no DH candidates for a long-term deal either (Thome, Matsui, Vlad - they're all old and can't play the field, even as a spot starter).

I think that's why MacPhail is talking up Snyder. He's not stand there and say "our 1B options next year suck - prepare for another 90 loss season". Also, it's not just Snyder. Josh Bell could move to 1B if we acquire a 3B through other means, as could Brandon Waring, and while I'm not holding my breath, Bill Rowell is still young...

This is one of the cases where hypotheticals can be useful. Say Santos was still with the O's and in 2009 had performed to the same level as he did with the Mets. Say Wieters was with the Mets and in 2009 had performed to the same level as he did with the O's. Who would Topps have chosen? Exactly. They wanted to choose a NY player and found one with a reasonable year, ignoring the fact that any objective comparison would deem Wieters best rookie at the catcher position. That being said, it is a profit company making decisions about their products to maximize profit, so I guess we can't expect much more. Many much more important decisions are made with the same undisclosed priorities, ones that are expected to be consistent and just, so I suppose we shouldn't get too indignant about this one which, though blatantly self-serving, at least won't result in any death or destruction (other, than, perhaps, the ripping up of a few baseball cards!)

Yep, this is definately due to Topps not being allowed to use Wieters' rights due to his exclusive deal with Razor/Upper Deck IMO.

I also knew of the deal with Razor, but Upper Deck has released some products this year with Wieters in them, names UD Icons, UD SP Authentic, UD SPX, etc. I'm not 100% sure how the exclusive deal works, but I'm hoping that by the time Topps Series II comes out in June/July, Wieters will be included.

Regardless of the teams involved all you really need to see is:
"He's been in pro ball for nine seasons"

Certainly doesn't qualify as a tops rookie. Even if he signed when he was 18, he'd be 27. Floundering around for 9 yrs in the minors is rarely a good sign.

Just gotta get the words "New" and "York" in there somehow, huh Roch? I won't bring this up this at the dinner table tomorrow, but I gotta say, The School of Roch is definitely something I am thankful for. I log on every day this time of year with hopes of big news related to the O's free agent signings. Thanks for the hard work. Happy Turkey Day to you and yours.

Chris V.

P.S.
Would love an early Christmas present from the F.O! Go O's !
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh come on, you HAVE to say it at the dinner table tomorrow! Seriously, thanks so much, and have a happy and safe holiday. - Roch

Ok, I take back my pedantic rant about consistency and justness if in fact Topps couldn't have chosen Wieters even if they had wanted to, not wouldn't choose him because he doesn't play for a team based in the city where their headquarters is located... But even then, couldn't they have selected a rookie catcher named Matt Swieters who plays for the Baltimore Smorioles, with identical stats and instead of a picture an outline of a guy on the card? That's not too much to ask. Wow, November really is the most tedious month.

Happy Thanksgiving, SoR!

Roch - Have a great Thanksgiving. Headed to the eastern shore? I'll be right down here on the Broadneck peninsula frying up a few Turkeys!

You have the email address so if you're in/or passing thru the old stomping grounds of AA County the drinks on me!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Dave. I'll actually be in Ocean Pines on Friday. That was the first day that the entire family could gather. Be careful frying those turkeys. - Roch

So that's what the Mayor Dixon jury has been doing all this time: Voting on the Tops All-Rookie Team. The vote for best rookie catcher must have bumped up against a smoke break.

Hey just wait for the extended set..I'm pretty happy with my 1982 Topps rookie/traded set.

How did Matt Wieters not make the list all of his stats are better? Happy Thanksgiving Roch and keep up the great work with your blog.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Andrew. - Roch

Topps is going to look pretty stupid when Wieters puts up .330 35hr's and 115 ribbies next year.

Happy Thanksgiving. I have a huge turkey and will be eating leftovers for a week. Everyone have a great holiday, even Brummie.

Absurd, a joke almost on the Santos over Wieters thing.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone, especially you Roch for all you do here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Brian. You too. Hope you get some quality time with your little girl. - Roch

"One concern, why couldn’t the O’s recognize Santos’ talent before they let him fly?"

Because the MLE for his 2008 season at Norfolk looked like this: 241/288/277
http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/index.html
(Sorry, I can't reference his page directly. They're all CGI generated.)

Happy Thanksgiving, all!

Chris said:

I want to believe him, But if we were so legit in trying to obtain a power hitting 1st baseman last year to a long term contract, what has changed to this year?

**************************************************************************

What has changed is what's available on the market. You can't offer $140 million to an elite first baseman who doesn't exist. Well, you could, but you'd look absolutely silly doing it. And now that Andy has built the base for a respectable minor league system, it would be foolish to scrap that for a two year rental of an A-Gone or a Fielder. If we keep on the same track, we could very well be serious contenders for those two when they hit FA after the 2011 season.

Roch,

Thanks for all your hard work and for being there day in, day out. Without you, I'd end up actually doing work at work and I don't think I could handle that.

Not that it means a lot, but that is absurd. Wieters clearly had a better season.

Happy Thanksgiving Roch,

Thanks for keeping the blog going during the holidays.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My pleasure, Jedd. Happy Thanksgiving. - Roch

DEAR GOD! What's wrong with those guys!

Happy Thanksgiving All! And lets be thankful we have a stud like Weiters instead of a scrub like Santos.

If Wieters has an exclusive deal with a different company, then Topps didn't snub him. It's interesting they wouldn't at least mention that, though, considering the baseball-wide hype surrounding Wieters. I remember when Barry Bonds had some kind of a deal that prevented him from appearing in video games. Some people thought the game makes snubbed Bonds because he was a jackass, but it was just something in a contract.

Anyway, happy Thanksgiving, Roch. And happy Thanksgiving to my fellow blog-mates. Even you, Brummie. :P

Matt Wieters eats little pieces of Topps for breakfast.

Matt Wieters isn't the Topp rookie catcher because he's the entire 51st Topps All-Rookie team.

Roch,
If it is true about the upper deck deal, then that explains why is was excluded. 2010 Wieters will show everyone what he really can do.
I have my hickory smoker going, with a Turkey, Brisket, and Pork Shoulder on. Hickory smoked Turkey is great.
Roch,
Hope you and your family have a great Thanksgiving. Don't eat too much!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Man, that sounds great. Thanks Rich. - Roch

Also be careful of flying turkeys...thank you Les Nessman.

A great Thanksgiving to teach and all my classmates.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks. And that's a great reference. - Roch

I wouldn't put too much stock into Topps' list. They've shown a pretty poor track record. It's not as if their staff makes these calls based on real scouting. I think they basically make the call based on final stats. I remember one year in the late 90s the Orioles representative was "Nerio Rodriguez." I thought, "wHo?!?" He wasn't even in the Orioles Top 10 prospects. Unfortunately for many Topps All-Rookies, that spotlight they find themselves in is usually rigged to a dimmer switch.

As a Met fan, I'm embarrassed. Santos is garbage. 2009 will be his career year.

Oh, just for giggles:

Weiters' entire edge on offense is due to the smoke and mirrors of a huge BABIP difference. Wieters pulled off a .356, while Santos was a much more reasonable .280. Give Santos Wieters' mark, and he has 18 more hits over the BIP plate appearances. He hits .323, has a .353 OBP, and if we convert those 18 hits to his normal rate of doubles and homers, 3 of them are doubles and 2 are homers (rounding as close as possible), giving him a .487 SLG. How does .323/.353/.487 strike you? That'd have been good for 26th in OPS in the NL.

Santos has better defensive numbers, with the huge boulder of salt to be taken for small sample sizes in rookie catcher defensive numbers.

Wieters - 738 innings in the field, 489 PO, 35 Assists, 12 DP (big edge here), 5 errors, 3 PB, 0 WP, .991 FP, 6.39 RF/9 to lg 7.48, 65 SB allowed, 21 CS, 24% throw-out rate.
Santos - 680 innings in the field, 502 PO, 26 Assists, 4 DP, 3 errors, 3 PB, 0 WP, .994 FP, 6.98 RF/9 to lg 7.77, 35 SB allowed, 15 CS, 30% throw-out rate.

We can ignore RF, of course. But basically there are two differences here, the 8 DP edge for Wieters vs. the 30 extra SB allowed - the 6 caught. So 8 DPs vs. 24 net steal margin.

Those 65 SB Wieters allowed? He did it in 738 innings in the field. The IP total is good for 22nd in the majors, the SB (unadjusted) are the 11th most allowed. If you adjust Wieters PT up to 11th, you add 200 more innings and he has the same number as Mauer. He now gives up 83 SB, good for 4th, but 100 IP in the field behind #3, 150 behind #2, and the same amount as #1, Varitek. Put him tied for 6th in innings with Laird, he's up to 3rd, just behind AJ. 5th in innings, and he's all alone in 2nd.

So Wieters this year allowed runners to steal at a clip only matched, being generous now, by late-career AJ Pierzynski and the corpse of Jason Varitek.

You cannot complain about a guy with a crazy high BABIP, still not even a 100 OPS+, and by all evidence a generally middling defensive year with awful, awful, putrid SB allowed numbers not being named to any team.

Wieters will, of course, almost certainly be better than Santos in the end. All previous evidence points that way. But he did not have the rookie year expected of him, and if he doesn't improve quickly behind the dish, he's going to lose the biggest thing his prospect star has going for it: his position.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You didn't see any improvement in Wieters behind the plate as the season progressed? Gotta say, it was pretty obvious. And look at the way he hit over the last month or so. Anybody who thought he would come up and hit .400 while playing the most demanding position and learning all these new pitchers was being unrealistic, to say the least. - Roch

Roch (I used to work, long ago, with a guy whose given name was Toke...he used to joke his brother was named Roach) -

I'm not an Orioles fan, so I can't say that I did notice the improvement behind the dish. If it was there, that's good. It needs to be, judging from these end-of-year numbers. I don't have the interest required to drag through Retrosheet, which is the only way I know of to get fielding splits, so I'll have to trust that it's real and not a mirage.

As for "the way he hit over the last month or so", that's exactly what I'm talking about. Sure, he hit .333 and posted a 138 sOPS+ (OPS+ for the split) in September/October. Look at his BABIP: .413! In fact, the only two months where he was a legitimate ML hitter, he posted a .380 and a .413. In the other months, where he posted BABIP numbers in line with the league norm, those are the months he's hitting .250 with little power. That's not good. His season is dragged upwards by those two months, but those two months are basically the same crappy months as the others, just with (presumably, how it tends to work) more than his share of dinks falling in. It looks like he cranked a couple of extra homers over his previous rate, and otherwise, spot on for the dinks.

Agreed that too many people had too many expectations for him, but the question/theory you posed was regarding his being left off the list as some kind of preposterous and damaging to the award (the Topps award, so who cares?) I'm just saying, Santos had every bit the year that Wieters did if all you do is take away the BABIP luck. And Wieters had an awful, terrible, no-good year throwing out runners.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm saying he did a much better job throwing out runners as the season progressed. Everyone who followed the team knows this. There was a drastic improvement. You have to watch the player, if the BAPIP isn't blocking your view. - Roch

I've been on the road for the past couple days and am now just catching up with email and blogs.
Great post, Roch. Have a good Thanksgiving, and thanks for giving us this blog.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy Thanksgiving. And thanks for reminding us of Chico Salmon, a wonderful name from the past. - Roch

Roch, I predict this is the last time Omir Santos is picked over Matt Wieters. Everyone knows that Wieters is the better player. No offense to Omir, but it's a Matt Wieters Fact (as in "Matt Wieters Isn't Allowed In The Homerun Derby Because He'd Never Get To 10 Outs" and "Matt Wieters Is So Good That Jim Palmer Stopped Talking About Himself." http://www.mattwietersfacts.com/ ).

Seriously, everyone knows that Matt is better. Does anyone seriously doubt that? If so, consider this, if the Mets were offered Wieters straight up for Santos, they'd make the trade in a heartbeat, which is about how long it would take Oriole fans to run Andy MacPhail out of town on a rail!

Again, I'm not an Orioles fan. I'm a Rangers fan, and I live in Austin. Insinuating that I don't follow the team doesn't insult me, it's true. I watched probably as many Orioles games as you saw Rangers games in the previous few years before this one. But as for your claim of drastic improvement, you finally piqued my interest enough. Here are the SB/CS numbers from every game where Wieters started at catcher. Games he started at DH or didn't start at all not included, this was enough slogging through Retrosheet game logs as is:

First game is 5/29, so May/June - 18 SB / 2 CS / 11% CS - 23 games
July - 11 SB / 6 CS / 35% CS - 15 games
August - 15 SB / 7 CS 31.8% CS - 22 games
September/October - 17 SB / 6 CS / 26% CS - 21 games

So yes, he did improve on an atrocious June. However, I would very much like for you to explain to me how three consecutive months of significantly dropping CS% and higher SB totals (nearly approaching that awful June in the end) that can't be explained by games caught is "drastic improvement" that everyone knows.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't trying to "insult" you. And I couldn't be more bored with this topic. Do you blame the catcher every time a runner steals a base? Ever consider that the pitcher might be responsible? Again, if you were able to watch him consistently, you'd see that his throws were mostly on the money, even if the runner was safe. His throws earlier were slicing like a bad tee shot. Trembley pointed out numerous times that Wieters had made tremendous strides defensively and often credited roving catching instructor Don Werner. I really don't feel the need to defend my stance on this subject any longer. He showed a lot of improvement, no matter what stats you dig up. Have a good day. - Roch