Can Mullins have a bad spring .....

[Ruzious]

I don't think the O's have any alternatives on their roster at CF.  Rickard is not good enough to even be a placeholder at CF; RF maybe but not CF.  Mullins had a few bad plays as a rookie, but he obviously covers a lot more ground in CF than Rickard does.    

[glenn__davis]

22 minutes ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I think Mullins would have to have a really bad spring to not make the team. 

Right.  He'd have to be atrocious for me to not start him at CF for the first few months.  Like Chris Davis bad.

A lot of us have been following Mullins in the minors from the start, and he's a very streaky hitter, for better or worse.  The kind of guy who will look very pedestrian for a while, then raise his OPS by 100 points in 3 weeks.  I'm still bullish on him.

[BohKnowsBmore]

4 hours ago, Natty said:

Right now we have several outfielders who are hitting way better than Mullins. But its early, maybe he will start hitting.

With the highest number of plate appearances by any individual being 20...

[Legend_Of_Joey]

Double and a steal of 3rd for "Speedy Gone Mullins" in the 1st inning.

[Frobby]

Mullins apparently made a spectacular leaping catch at the fence tonight.    That’s the kind of defense I think he’s capable of.   I think he’ll be exciting to watch out there.   

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Mullins apparently made a spectacular leaping catch at the fence tonight.    That’s the kind of defense I think he’s capable of.   I think he’ll be exciting to watch out there.   

And with this pitching staff Mullins will have plenty of opportunities to make spectacular leaping catches.

[BohKnowsBmore]

53 PA in, his offense actually hasn't been that bad by the looks of it.

11.3% BB rate along with an 11.3% K rate
4/4 on SB attempts
.256 ISO
BA isn't pretty (.170), but that's with a horrendous BABIP (.132); for comparison he was something like .290-.300 in the minors

 

[wildcard]

Looks like the answer to the title question is "yes".   He could have bad spring and still the O's starting centerfielder.   

Service time for Austin Hays took priority over performance in ST.

[atomic]

34 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Looks like the answer to the title question is "yes".   He could have bad spring and still the O's starting centerfielder.   

Service time for Austin Hays took priority over performance in ST.

Looks like performance in spring training meant nothing to any player.  

[bobmc]

46 minutes ago, atomic said:

Looks like performance in spring training meant nothing to any player.  

Well other than affirming that we have some nuggets in Hays and Diaz and to some extent in Santander.  I would say that is "something".

[waroriole]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

Looks like the answer to the title question is "yes".   He could have bad spring and still the O's starting centerfielder.   

Service time for Austin Hays took priority over performance in ST.

It’s almost like performance in ST is never used to make absolute determinations. As is pointed out to you every spring. 

[spiritof66]

53 minutes ago, atomic said:

Looks like performance in spring training meant nothing to any player.  

I would like to think that however many ABs are left on the "So long, Chris Davis" meter, the number of spring training ABs in which he's shown no progress has been worth some fraction of the ABs he has left to show he should be kept on the roster. Maybe one-third or 40 percent or something. (Then again, putting him out there regularly increased the chance of injury. For a brief moment I thought that had worked out.)

[Aristotelian]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

Looks like the answer to the title question is "yes".   He could have bad spring and still the O's starting centerfielder.   

Service time for Austin Hays took priority over performance in ST.

Not surprising. Imagine if roster decisions were made based on performance during the most recent 50 ABs. Nobody would know their role, players would be in constant competition with each other, and it would look like the organization has no idea what it's doing.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Not surprising. Imagine if roster decisions were made based on performance during the most recent 50 ABs. Nobody would know their role, players would be in constant competition with each other, and it would look like the organization has no idea what it's doing.

Exactly.    The O’s are a little unique in that they had so many open spots and players competing for them without much of a major league track record.    But at the end of the day, spring training numbers aren’t much of an indicator.

[foxfield]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

Looks like performance in spring training meant nothing to any player.  

I think it meant a lot.  Not what we wanted necessarily.  But I think Rickard for example won a job in spring training as did Jackson.  I don't think either of those things were certain going in.  No the stats by Hays and Diaz didn't win them jobs, but was that the intent?  I don't think so.  Regardless, I think performance meant a lot.  Just not as much to the composition of the 25 man roster as some may have hoped for.  

There is going to be lots of change.  Already has been.  Relax, take it in.