Cedric Mullins as a CF

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Part time players can be core IMO.  Lowenstein and Roenicke were core on the 1983 team and Rettenmund was core on the 1970 team IMO.

Murray and Ripken were core players…not those guys.

Brooks and Frank were core players…not Rettenmund.

Most teams don’t have a lot of core guys.  That doesn’t take away from the other players.  They have a ton of value and are needed but they aren’t core players.

[maybenxtyr]

44 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well, that’s a far different thing to say than he’s a guy you build around.  

How do you figure? He fills a position of need, doesn't really have a ready replacement, and is not a FA until 2026(?)...so, yes he is 1 of 9 building blocks required to field a team.

[wildcard]

20 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Next week? I dunno. 
 

You discount the possibility of trades, FA acquisitions, and fast risers from the minor leagues. All we do is sit here and look at who we have in the farm system and project when they’ll arrive. That’s a bit lazy, IMO. 
 

We simply can’t count on Hays to stay healthy.  Unreliable players aren’t something you plan on building around. Same with Santander. 
 

Stewart’s OBP skills are the only reason I’d want to keep him around but he’s a defensive liability on a team with Mancini and Mountcastle. 
 

wildcard, don’t worry. These guys will move on and there will be new players for you to fawn over and project amazing things from small sample sizes. Kjerstad, Hudson Haskin, who knows. It’ll be fine. 

I am not saying there will never be new players.  But there has to be someone better than Santander and Hays to replace them.   Elias has enough to do to improve 2B/SS/3B.   That is a pretty heavy lift to occur before the 2022 season.  When the O's have someone better to add to the outfield I am all for it.   

I think Stewart's defense has improved  this year  and his offense is a work in progress that shows power and good potential OBP.   He just needs to be more consistent.   

I don't have a problem with Mancini and Mountcastle defensively at 1B.

[foxfield]

9 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Part time players can be core IMO.  Lowenstein and Roenicke were core on the 1983 team and Rettenmund was core on the 1970 team IMO.

There is an important distinction to the role referenced above.  First, when you say core, you really mean excellent "role" player.  Second, in regards to Lowenstein and Roenicke they were both healthy and interchangeable making the sum of both of them greater than their individual worth.

This is important because so far...Hays, Santander are not interchangeable.  They are both good to very good players who do not stay healthy enough to rely on.  Of course that could change, but either of them being healthy enough for 100 games is not the same thing as having either/or for 162.  That is massive difference.

But I also agree that their past health doesn't mean they will continue to have issues.  Adam Jones was not necessarily consistently healthy early and then he was...

[wildcard]

28 minutes ago, foxfield said:

There is an important distinction to the role referenced above.  First, when you say core, you really mean excellent "role" player.  Second, in regards to Lowenstein and Roenicke they were both healthy and interchangeable making the sum of both of them greater than their individual worth.

This is important because so far...Hays, Santander are not interchangeable.  They are both good to very good players who do not stay healthy enough to rely on.  Of course that could change, but either of them being healthy enough for 100 games is not the same thing as having either/or for 162.  That is massive difference.

But I also agree that their past health doesn't mean they will continue to have issues.  Adam Jones was not necessarily consistently healthy early and then he was...

If you think a player has to play 162 games to be a core player most teams including the O's rarely have a core player.

A core player to me is a productive player that the team relies on over a season.   I think Santander and Hays will be productive players who the O's can rely on to help the team win over a good part of the season even if they are on the IL from time to time.

That said core players can be traded if a better players comes long.

 

[Yossarian]

2 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

I'm a fan of Mullins, but comparing him to Betts might be extreme.  How about Adam Jones w/ better plate discipline and less of an arm.  I would be happy w/ that.

I was thinking if Mullins turns out to be Brett Gardner or Jacoby Ellsbury, I could live with that.  I love watching him play and he is on a roll right now.  I don't think he is Mookie Betts or Ichiro - but he has developed into a great player, both offensively and defensively, and if he is not careful he could see himself starting on the All Star team this year.  I hope this is the first of many.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

If you think a player has to play 162 games to be a core player most teams including the O's rarely have a core player.

A core player to me is a productive player that the team relies on over a season.   I think Santander and Hays will be productive players who the O's can rely on to help the team win over a good part of the season even if they are on the IL from time to time.

That said core players can be traded if a better players comes long.

 

How can you rely on a player who misses 40% of the season?  That is the exactly opposite of reliability.

[Tony-OH]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

See this is what I’m talking about.

People are trying to comp him to Betts and now Ichiro.

Ichiro is one of the best all around players ever and is an easy HOFer.  Betts is on his way as well.

Mullins was able after thought prior to April.  He had a “normal” May and now all of a sudden, we are comping him to HOFers?

Its crazy.  Just enjoy Mullins for what he is doing now and let’s see if he can keep it up this year and next year.  If he can provide us a real sample size that he can keep this up, at that we can start making this statements.   But right now, we are about a month plus one series.  

This is a fair statement.

[wildcard]

12 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

How can you rely on a player who misses 40% of the season?  That is the exactly opposite of reliability.

Team management relies on that player to play well for 60% of the games and stocks the team with players that can fill in for injuries.

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Team management relies on that player to play well for 60% of the games and stocks the team with players that can fill in for injuries.

That’s a poor way to build a roster, at least if you have too many of those guys and you are already saying you need 2 more OFers that can play a lot.  So, that’s 5 OFers that you feeL comfortable playing extended time.  Not sure how many teams have that and say, yep those are reliable players.

[HowAboutThat]

I got a tremendous amount of very negative feedback when I lamented the prospect of seeing Mullins in a Yankee uniform( and yes i agree) But after reading this morning’s Athletic article About the needs of the various teams in the AL East, it’s not at all unlikely that Cashman will call Mike. I would hate to see Cedric in a Yankee uniform, but they’ve got a lot of stuff to offer, they’ve got some stupid pride, and they’ve got some desperate need in the outfield.

I was thinking that the Indians might want Santander, But Mullins might be more desirable right now. He’s had a good stretch, and it could be argued that this change is real, on the grounds that he is eliminated 1/2 of his hitting so he can focus on the other. Right or wrong, that is certainly a plausible argument that his improvement is real and lasting.

[Yossarian]

Just now, Philip said:

I got a tremendous amount of very negative feedback when I lamented the prospect of seeing Mullins in a Yankee uniform( and yes i agree) But after reading this morning’s Athletic article About the needs of the various teams in the AL East, it’s not at all unlikely that Cashman will call Mike. I would hate to see Cedric in a Yankee uniform, but they’ve got a lot of stuff to offer, they’ve got some stupid pride, and they’ve got some desperate need in the outfield.

I was thinking that the Indians might want Santander, But Mullins might be more desirable right now. He’s had a good stretch, and it could be argued that this change is real, on the grounds that he is eliminated 1/2 of his hitting so he can focus on the other. Right or wrong, that is certainly a plausible argument that his improvement is real and lasting.

Seeing Mullins in a Yankees uniform would induce a gag reflex in me that I don't think I could suppress.  Please, no.

[HowAboutThat]

6 minutes ago, Yossarian said:

Seeing Mullins in a Yankees uniform would induce a gag reflex in me that I don't think I could suppress.  Please, no.

Remember when Brian Roberts went to the Yankees? Mark Brown had a nice article that closed with, something like”goodbye Brian, you were a very good player on some very bad teams. You were Birdland…and now, Die, Yankee scum.” Or something like that.

I still laugh about that.

I felt the same way when Ichiro was traded to the Yankees. Never ever want to see him in a Yankee hat.

Edited June 7, 2021 by Philip

[foxfield]

24 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Team management relies on that player to play well for 60% of the games and stocks the team with players that can fill in for injuries.

And you referenced Lowenstein and Roenicke an example of that....But if the players you are stocking are all unavailable for 40% of the games your entire season your success depends entirely on the random 40% not overlapping.

The Orioles have some nice depth in the OF and more on the way.  I think reliability going forward is going to require more availability than either Hays or Santander have shown.  The good news is that either or both of them could in fact do that.  But eventually, if they keep missing time, someone else is going to take those spots.  They have not earned anything but the chance to keep getting reps.  

So to me they are more vying to be depended upon, but neither have locked down anything.

[wildcard]

6 minutes ago, foxfield said:

And you referenced Lowenstein and Roenicke an example of that....But if the players you are stocking are all unavailable for 40% of the games your entire season your success depends entirely on the random 40% not overlapping.

The Orioles have some nice depth in the OF and more on the way.  I think reliability going forward is going to require more availability than either Hays or Santander have shown.  The good news is that either or both of them could in fact do that.  But eventually, if they keep missing time, someone else is going to take those spots.  They have not earned anything but the chance to keep getting reps.  

So to me they are more vying to be depended upon, but neither have locked down anything.

Arbitration cost will catch up to them if they do not become less injury prone.  Santander is worth 2m this year. He may be worth 4-5m next year.  But the O's have to think he is going to be healthy for most of the season before they sign up for 8-10m the following year.