Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
wildcard

Is Mouncastle as good a hitter as Mancini was prior to his rookie year?

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't know, scores?  MiLB radio is a thing.

You have great hearing abilities.  <Sarcasm>

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Even Johnny Damon had some assists.  I ain't impressed on a throw from shallow LF.

There will always be assists.  I'm blanking on the LF, but I remember once late career Jim Thome against us blooped one into the LF corner when he couldn't really move at all, and still tried and succeeded at getting a double because the LF arm was so poor.  I remember noting it to a pal as the opposite of the Immovable Object v. Irresistible Force.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen worse arms in the outfield. Damon's was notoriously weak. Gardner's on the Yanks is very weak. I think Don Baylor was one of the weakest I ever saw. They always blamed on an old HS football shoulder injury.

If he has Nolan Reimold instincts without Nolan Reimold speed then you have someone probably worse than Mancini in the OF and no one really wants to see Mancini in the OF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Weams and I agree more often than you might think.

One thing we agree on is the sound.

You can't fake it.

Mediocre defense, great sound off the bat: two things Mancini possesses that Mountcastle also possesses, yet I see you denigrate Mancini on the regular. 

That's hypocritical, no? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, actually I don’t care anymore. If he hits well enough to compensate for his defense, wherever he plays, then OK. If he can’t make the transition, which has been the case for many a hitter before him, then not-OK.

I just hope they don’t keep him around for years like Mike Wright if he doesn’t produce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, interloper said:

Mediocre defense, great sound off the bat: two things Mancini possesses that Mountcastle also possesses, yet I see you denigrate Mancini on the regular. 

That's hypocritical, no? 

I don't think I've been unfair in my criticism.  He's a poor defensive player who bats right handed.  That limits his value.  I don't think he will bring back much in trade due to those factors.

If it comes to pass that Mountcastle isn't superior at the bat or in the field to Mancini I'll feel the same way about him.  I think Mountcastle has the potential be be superior defensively because of his past history.

Edit- Keep in mind I'm against gaming Mountcastle's service clock since I don't think he will be the caliber of player that warrants such action.  Obviously I'm not predicting stardom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Philip said:

Meh, actually I don’t care anymore. If he hits well enough to compensate for his defense, wherever he plays, then OK. If he can’t make the transition, which has been the case for many a hitter before him, then not-OK.

I just hope they don’t keep him around for years like Mike Wright if he doesn’t produce.

Pitchers who can throw hard get the most chances.    

I have essentially zero doubt that Mountcastle will be a much better major league player than Mike Wright.    I’d say his floor is about Renato Nunez, his ceiling is a bit north of Mancini.    
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think I've been unfair in my criticism.  He's a poor defensive player who bats right handed.  That limits his value.  I don't think he will bring back much in trade due to those factors.

If it comes to pass that Mountcastle isn't superior at the bat or in the field to Mancini I'll feel the same way about him.  I think Mountcastle has the potential be be superior defensively because of his past history.

Superior because of his past history? For being a SS in name only, and so sub par at 3B that a ML team in need of a 3B would not consider him a potential ML 3B.  There were reports that his brief audition at 1B didn't go so well either.  Are all of those things somehow a plus for him developing into a competent outfielder?  I'm not saying he can't,  just that I don't see his history as being a plus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RZNJ said:

Superior because of his past history? For being a SS in name only, and so sub par at 3B that a ML team in need of a 3B would not consider him a potential ML 3B.  There were reports that his brief audition at 1B didn't go so well either.  Are all of those things somehow a plus for him developing into a competent outfielder?  I'm not saying he can't,  just that I don't see his history as being a plus.

As opposed to being a first baseman in college yea. 

I rate crappy minor league shortstop over mediocre college first baseman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 

I think there’s two issues here: short term and long term.    I would not bet on Mountcastle having as good a rookie year as Mancini, when the latter put up a 120 OPS+.   That’s a very good rookie year, and was good for 3rd in the ROY voting.   It would be asking a lot for Mountcastle to match that, and I’ll guess he falls short of that, while still holding his own and putting up a 110+.    And, he’ll be two years younger than Mancini was when he does that.

Which brings us to the long term.    I think Mountcastle has the higher ceiling, though Mancini is doing a pretty good job of maxing out on his.    I think in the long run Mountcastle will be a somewhat better hitter, which is saying something, because Mancini’s pretty damned good.    The plate discipline is an issue but I think Mountcastle will adjust at least to a reasonable degree.    

By the way, for some league context, Mancini had a .351 wOBA and 124 wRC+ in AAA, while Mountcastle had .367 and 117.     The league average was .254/.319/.378 when Mancini played at Norfolk, .266/.342/.445 when Mountcastle played there last year.   So really, they performed quite similarly if you consider league context.   
 

You forgot to add one very important detail that some seem to forget, he was two years younger than Mancini at the same time in AAA. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 I’d say his floor is about Renato Nunez, his ceiling is a bit north of Mancini

If his floor is Nunez, then he shouldn’t own a glove. Put him at DH, and in 20 years he goes into the Hall next to Edgar.

If his Ceiling is a bit North of Mancini, you’ve got a few additional options on D, but don’t go crazy, and all will be well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Superior because of his past history? For being a SS in name only, and so sub par at 3B that a ML team in need of a 3B would not consider him a potential ML 3B.  There were reports that his brief audition at 1B didn't go so well either.  Are all of those things somehow a plus for him developing into a competent outfielder?  I'm not saying he can't,  just that I don't see his history as being a plus.

I mention things like this constantly, but constantly get slammed for doing so. I don’t care anymore. Bring him up when service time is no longer an issue, and let him play and he’ll make his way or not.

Meanwhile, about Stewart...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

You forgot to add one very important detail that some seem to forget, he was two years younger than Mancini at the same time in AAA. 

I didn’t say that because it was obvious.  I quoted interloper’s post about their comparative stats at age 22, and I mentioned that Mountcastle would be two years younger this year than Mancini was in his rookie year.    So, I think the age point was covered.    

That’s also why I focused on short term vs. long term.    Mountcastle’s age gives him more time to develop and reach his peak, which is why I like his ceiling better in the long term.    In the short term, though, I think you need to take into account that Mancini had a much smoother rookie transition than most players do.    I think most of us, even people who were high on Mancini, were pleasantly surprised by how easily he adjusted that year.    It’s possible that Mountcastle will too, but that’s asking a lot, even if you like Mountcastle better in the long run.   
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes.

The sound rarely lies.

He is unlike any young hitter that I have heard as an Oriole since Manny. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






×
×
  • Create New...