Cedric Mullins as a CF

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, oriole said:

It’s better for the future if you trade everyone on the major league roster for someone who might help later. That doesn’t mean you should do it though unless the return is equal or greater to your own evaluation of the player. I see no reason to give Mullins away and considering I don’t think you’re implying that they should just give him away I’m having trouble understanding the disconnect here. Mullins should net, IMO, a couple top 10 organizational prospects. That’s because I view him as an everyday CF with excess value based on the amount of control left and he’s cheap right now. If someone doesn’t offer that (and I don’t think they will right now) then I don’t see any reason to trade him. 

The disconnect is simple.

You said he has more value to the O's than he would have to any other team.

I disagree. 

I think that a team which views him as a potentially useful piece in a season in which they expect to compete for the world series should view him as being more valuable than a team that has the worst record in baseball.

What is the old saying, we finished last with you we can finish last without you?

If you pull Mullins off the 2021 Orioles attendance doesn't change, TV viewership doesn't change, the team finishes last either way.  By those metrics he's not valuable to the current club.

Now could Mullins be a useful part of a future competitive Oriole team?  Maybe.  Should that possibility be a factor in a decision to move him?  Yes. 

[oriole]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

The disconnect is simple.

You said he has more value to the O's than he would have to any other team.

I disagree. 

I think that a team which views him as a potentially useful piece in a season in which they expect to compete for the world series should view him as being more valuable than a team that has the worst record in baseball.

What is the old saying, we finished last with you we can finish last without you?

If you pull Mullins off the 2021 Orioles attendance doesn't change, TV viewership doesn't change, the team finishes last either way.  By those metrics he's not valuable to the current club.

Now could Mullins be a useful part of a future competitive Oriole team?  Maybe.  Should that possibility be a factor in a decision to move him?  Yes. 

I think the prudent thing to do would be to hold off on a trade until the teams own asking price is met. We’re not talking about super stars here. Whether it’s in Baltimore or elsewhere Mullins is a stretch to have any impact anywhere on viewership so I feel like that point is moot. 

[Ruzious]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

The disconnect is simple.

You said he has more value to the O's than he would have to any other team.

I disagree. 

I think that a team which views him as a potentially useful piece in a season in which they expect to compete for the world series should view him as being more valuable than a team that has the worst record in baseball.

What is the old saying, we finished last with you we can finish last without you?

If you pull Mullins off the 2021 Orioles attendance doesn't change, TV viewership doesn't change, the team finishes last either way.  By those metrics he's not valuable to the current club.

Now could Mullins be a useful part of a future competitive Oriole team?  Maybe.  Should that possibility be a factor in a decision to move him?  Yes. 

I think there's a point where you can put too much garbage on the field, and if the O's traded Mullins for prospects that aren't ready, they could reach that point, and people like me will stop watching.  

It's like the Seinfeld episode where Kramer is testing the limits of a car's gas tank - refusing to stop for gas.  At some point, the car's gonna run out of gas, and at some point - the team goes from last place to unwatchable.  

 

[Ruzious]

2 hours ago, Philip said:

All right, well I guess I have to grant that I am basing my comparison on absolutely nothing at all except my own enjoyment of each player, I would not compare Mullins to Markakis, even though I loved Markakis, and Mullins always appeared to need to be enjoying himself just as much as Jones does, where as Markakis on the other hand I don’t think I’ve ever seen him crack a smile, But I enjoyed him no less for all that. He just came across as all business. So they are very different on offense and on defense, and so what, they bring each other to mind, and I love them both. And that’s OK.

I always loved Nate McLouth, too, he had the best ever walk up music. I also loved Joey and David Lough, and I quite fond of Lew Ford as well, though I have no idea whether he was actually good with the glove or not. 
And I haaaaated Trumbo.

McLouth did have a nice streak with the O's towards the end of his career before hitting that final wall when he lost a step and just couldn't do what he used to do.  Players who can run and make those athletic plays always seem to be more enjoyable to watch.  Craig Gentry was like that - I thought he was a lot of fun to watch in the outfield and finished his career well with the O's.   

[Sports Guy]

Tough play tonight on the ball hit off Armstrong but it’s a play he should have made.  
 

Ended up costing the team 2 runs. 

[Ruzious]

It's a play he could have made - but not should have made.  It would have taken a highlight reel level catch to make that play.  And... he got a great jump on it. .Armstrong alone cost us the 2 runs.   

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Ruzious said:

It's a play he could have made - but not should have made.  It would have taken a highlight reel level catch to make that play.  And... he got a great jump on it. .Armstrong alone cost us the 2 runs.   

Highlight reel was the night before.

He was there easily and the ball hit the top and middle part of his glove.  That means he was there, just didn’t catch.

If a MLer gets his glove on the ball, especially that part of the glove (ie it wasn’t just off the end of the glove where he barely got to it), they should catch it.

[Frobby]

6 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Highlight reel was the night before.

He was there easily and the ball hit the top and middle part of his glove.  That means he was there, just didn’t catch.

If a MLer gets his glove on the ball, especially that part of the glove (ie it wasn’t just off the end of the glove where he barely got to it), they should catch it.

I was at the game.   It would have been a great play if he’d caught it.   He had to run a very long way at top speed, just like the play the night before.   Not many CF would have been able to reach it.   Very difficult play but it was disappointing to see him drop it after covering all that ground to reach it.   

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I was at the game.   It would have been a great play if he’d caught it.   He had to run a very long way at top speed, just like the play the night before.   Not many CF would have been able to reach it.   Very difficult play but it was disappointing to see him drop it after covering all that ground to reach it.   

Totally disagree that a lot of CFers don’t catch that.  There may be some who don’t because they aren’t true CFers but these are the greatest players in the world.  
 

Plenty of guys catch balls like that everyday.  He just missed it.  

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Totally disagree that a lot of CFers don’t catch that.  There may be some who don’t because they aren’t true CFers but these are the greatest players in the world.  
 

Plenty of guys catch balls like that everyday.  He just missed it.  

Since I was at the game, I don’t have the benefit of having seen it on replay several times.    Watching it live, it sure didn’t look that way to me.  

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Since I was at the game, I don’t have the benefit of having seen it on replay several times.    Watching it live, it sure didn’t look that way to me.  

That’s because you are biased and probably don’t know a lot about the other 31 ML starting CFers.

I hate it when people say things like, only a few people make that play.  That wasn’t some overly difficult, impossible play.  He just had to run a lot.  He was there in plenty of time and just misjudged it. He had to back hand it, which makes it harder but it’s a play he should have made.  

[Frobby]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

That’s because you are biased and probably don’t know a lot about the other 31 ML starting CFers.

I hate it when people say things like, only a few people make that play.  That wasn’t some overly difficult, impossible play.  He just had to run a lot.  He was there in plenty of time and just misjudged it. He had to back hand it, which makes it harder but it’s a play he should have made.  

I don’t think I’m that biased.   Like I said, I didn’t have the benefit of seeing it on replay.   

Does anyone know, is there a place to get Statcast data on individual plays?    I’d love to be able to see the sprint spreed, route efficiency, jump, catch probability etc. for a specific play.    That would make discussions like this a lot less subjective.   
 

[Ruzious]

47 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Totally disagree that a lot of CFers don’t catch that.  There may be some who don’t because they aren’t true CFers but these are the greatest players in the world.  
 

Plenty of guys catch balls like that everyday.  He just missed it.  

When you're running full speed after covering a ton of ground like that and trying to make a back-hand catch with full extension, you can't assume anybody would catch that.  All those factors combined made it a very tough play.    

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

When you're running full speed after covering a ton of ground like that and trying to make a back-hand catch with full extension, you can't assume anybody would catch that.  All those factors combined made it a very tough play.    

I can assume it because these are the greatest athletes in the world at their sport.

Tough catch?  Yes, sure.  But tough doesn’t mean he gets a pass for missing it when he was right there or that only a few guys could make it.  That’s just wrong.

And btw, even if only a few guys could make it, HE was one who should because he was there and in plenty of time.  Again, it didn’t just glance off the end of the glove.  It hit the middle of the glove.  He was there in plenty of time And should have caught it.  I guarantee you he says he should have caught it.

[Ruzious]

43 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

That’s because you are biased and probably don’t know a lot about the other 31 ML starting CFers.

I hate it when people say things like, only a few people make that play.  That wasn’t some overly difficult, impossible play.  He just had to run a lot.  He was there in plenty of time and just misjudged it. He had to back hand it, which makes it harder but it’s a play he should have made.  

C'mon, if anyone's earned the right to not be called biased, it's Frobby.  Nobody said it was an impossible catch,; we just disagree on the level of difficulty.