Could Pittsburgh use Mullins

[interloper]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think it was worse because he lost it to Wilkerson.  They decided that a utility infielder was a better choice for CF than Mullins.  They decision to not promote McKenna or Hays had more to do with their development than it did what was happening at the ML level.

I'm not convinced they sent Mullins down to facilitate his development.  I think they looked at him, looked at Wilkerson, and wanted Wilkerson in CF.  I think they have written Mullins off as a prospect.

That's.... that's exactly what I'm saying. How are you not hearing yourself? He lost the job because he couldn't hit - like AT ALL - and the mounting pressure from all that not hitting was getting to be a strain on him and the organization. So they sent him down to work on that.

Meanwhile, Elias doesn't want to - like you said yourself - go to McKenna or Hays. So they just throw whoever out there. If they weren't worried about Mullins' development they would have just kept him, but you can't keep a guy in the bigs with a broken swing. Wilkerson isn't any better defensively out there, that's obvious to see. But he could hit at least a LITTLE. And let's not forget Santander and Stewart got CF looks as well. 

Mullins didn't lose the job to any specific person, he just lost the job because he couldn't hit. He didn't lose it TO Wilkerson, he lost it to the Orioles' CF depth, of which there was none. But that's not because Wilkerson is a BETTER CF, it's just because it was obvious you had to protect the player a little bit and send him out. 

[interloper]

12 minutes ago, weams said:

If he can throw and he isn't a waiver guy, maybe a team like Pittsburgh could use him. If he can't and is, maybe we can give his slot to Mason Williams. Slow day here. 

You obviously don't think he's more than a waiver guy, so I fail to see why you created a thread saying the opposite. 

This website honestly makes me feel like I'm going insane sometimes.

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, interloper said:

That's.... that's exactly what I'm saying. How are you not hearing yourself? He lost the job because he couldn't hit - like AT ALL - and the mounting pressure from all that not hitting was getting to be a strain on him and the organization. So they sent him down to work on that.

Meanwhile, Elias doesn't want to - like you said yourself - go to McKenna or Hays. So they just throw whoever out there. If they weren't worried about Mullins' development they would have just kept him, but you can't keep a guy in the bigs with a broken swing. Wilkerson isn't any better defensively out there, that's obvious to see. But he could hit at least a LITTLE. And let's not forget Santander and Stewart got CF looks as well. 

Mullins didn't lose the job to any specific person, he just lost the job because he couldn't hit.

It makes a difference because his performance was so bad they played a guy with a poor bat out of position instead of playing him.

I am not sold at all about any "mounting pressure" factoring into the decision, frankly I think it is conjecture on your part.  I think they didn't keep him because he was just that bad.  They could have kept throwing Dan Straily out there right?

[weams]

Just now, interloper said:

You obviously don't think he's more than a waiver guy, so I fail to see why you created a thread saying the opposite. 

Because other have differing opinions. And Pittsburgh is actively looking. Since when are my opinions the end all on prospects!

[oriole]

26 minutes ago, weams said:

BTW, This is what I believe. Though not until later. 

I highly doubt it happens before the All Star Break and still maybe not until after this season. I thinks he’s got one more shot at staying around and if not, I think someone else would likely claim him. I’d DFA Smith Jr or Wilkerson before Mullins but it wouldn’t surprise me if he was the first OF to go. But I don’t think it’s particularly imminent. 

[NCRaven]

3 hours ago, weams said:

Why do the Orioles still have him if he is just bad?

I'm I the only one that thought you were just being a little sarcastic here?  

[interloper]

21 minutes ago, weams said:

Because other have differing opinions. And Pittsburgh is actively looking. Since when are my opinions the end all on prospects!

They're not, but I think starting a thread about trading a player who is quite obviously not a trade candidate only invites discussion centered around dunking on the player, which is precisely what has occurred. The OP reads as if you are pointing and laughing at the guy, IMO. 

Had the thread been about McKenna, now I can see that being interesting because it's more realistic. 

No one here holds the opinion that Mullins is a trade candidate. No one. 

[interloper]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It makes a difference because his performance was so bad they played a guy with a poor bat out of position instead of playing him.

I am not sold at all about any "mounting pressure" factoring into the decision, frankly I think it is conjecture on your part.  I think they didn't keep him because he was just that bad.  They could have kept throwing Dan Straily out there right?

1. Performance was so bad that he got cut, yes.

2. CF depth is so poor that Wilkerson is the next man up. 

Only the first is Mullins' fault. These are mutually exclusive events. 

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, interloper said:

1. Performance was so bad that he got cut, yes.

2. CF depth is so poor that Wilkerson is the next man up. 

Only the first is Mullins' fault. These are mutually exclusive events. 

But it does matter that they would rather have Wilkerson out there.  You have to be that much worse to get replaced by Wilkerson than if you were to be replaced by your average AAA glove first centerfielder.

[interloper]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But it does matter that they would rather have Wilkerson out there.  You have to be that much worse to get replaced by Wilkerson than if you were to be replaced by your average AAA glove first centerfielder.

I'm arguing that there was no "rather". It doesn't matter one bit who the player is. They could have put a dog out there or Mike Trout, you cannot have a ML player struggling that bad for that long who isn't Chris Davis. You just can't. Your only option is to send that poor guy down before he's all over the news like Davis was. And he doesn't deserve that because he's just a prospect. 

He was sent down for the protection of the player, not because they WANTED Wilkerson INSTEAD. 

[Camden_yardbird]

Pretty knowledgeable on Pittsburgh.

1.  Mullins has done things in the minors that warrant his continued 40 man roster status.  Those suggesting that was it,  and he ain't got it, don't understand process and learning curve aren't a mesa for everyone.  Most players do not ascend to a sustained production and stay there.  Some take 2-3 tries, so ascend but then crater.

2.  Mullins would probably be of some interest to Pittsburgh if acquisition wasnt too costly.  They do not have a lot of high minor guys with the defense for what is a spacious outfield.

3.  The Orioles need mullins for depth and those who dont think they do are the same people that thing that development is a mesa.  If alberto fails you need Wilkerson in the infield.  If both fail you need mullins, etc.  

I would say there is a ton more evidence Alberto will pumpkin up than Mullins' performance last year in baltimore is indicative of his career trajectory.

[weams]

26 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

I'm I the only one that thought you were just being a little sarcastic here?  

I was. Questionly though. 

[weams]

4 minutes ago, Camden_yardbird said:

Pretty knowledgeable on Pittsburgh.

1.  Mullins has done things in the minors that warrant his continued 40 man roster status.  Those suggesting that was it,  and he ain't got it, don't understand process and learning curve aren't a mesa for everyone.  Most players do not ascend to a sustained production and stay there.  Some take 2-3 tries, so ascend but then crater.

2.  Mullins would probably be of some interest to Pittsburgh if acquisition wasnt too costly.  They do not have a lot of high minor guys with the defense for what is a spacious outfield.

3.  The Orioles need mullins for depth and those who dont think they do are the same people that thing that development is a mesa.  If alberto fails you need Wilkerson in the infield.  If both fail you need mullins, etc.  

I would say there is a ton more evidence Alberto will pumpkin up than Mullins' performance last year in baltimore is indicative of his career trajectory.

Good post. The info I was looking to generate. 

[NCRaven]

I assume that Mullins is still in our system for two reasons.

1) Someone in the front office - Elias or his development staff - believe that Mullins still has talent that can be harnessed; or

2) Just like 95% of minor leaguers, someone has to play the position, even if he'll never be a successful major league player.  We don't want routine fly balls off of Akin or Kremer dropping into centerfield for a double all the time.

[interloper]

10 minutes ago, weams said:

Good post. The info I was looking to generate. 

Were you though? I remain skeptical. I am never really able to figure out what your intentions are on most of your posts. I don't mean that in a disrespectful way, I'm just being honest. It's been an ongoing source of frustration for me on this site for years, and it just is what it is. 

15 minutes ago, Camden_yardbird said:

Pretty knowledgeable on Pittsburgh.

1.  Mullins has done things in the minors that warrant his continued 40 man roster status.  Those suggesting that was it,  and he ain't got it, don't understand process and learning curve aren't a mesa for everyone.  Most players do not ascend to a sustained production and stay there.  Some take 2-3 tries, so ascend but then crater.

2.  Mullins would probably be of some interest to Pittsburgh if acquisition wasnt too costly.  They do not have a lot of high minor guys with the defense for what is a spacious outfield.

3.  The Orioles need mullins for depth and those who dont think they do are the same people that thing that development is a mesa.  If alberto fails you need Wilkerson in the infield.  If both fail you need mullins, etc.  

I would say there is a ton more evidence Alberto will pumpkin up than Mullins' performance last year in baltimore is indicative of his career trajectory.

I agree with most of this. I think Mullins has value to the Orioles to remain on our 40-man as a depth option. Plus he's already on the 40-man, you know? It's not always easy to add a player back to the 40-man later, because then you have to cut someone.

However I can't see a trade scenario with Mullins. He's essentially worth just cash at this point, and I think the depth is worth more to the O's right now than the cash. He's a liability to add to anyone's 26-man roster. He just has too much to prove and Pittsburgh would be better off seeking true upside in a CF prospect, or at least a capable fill-in guy.