Cedric Mullins as a CF

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

The whole “build around” concept is a bit of a misused term here.    Nobody ever built a team around Al Bumbry, but we were very happy to have him in our starting lineup for a decade or so.    I doubt anyone ever said “Al Bumbry is an untouchable,” yet there he was, playing his whole career with the Orioles.   

I don’t know exactly how good Mullins will be  long term, but I do know there’s one huge takeaway from the first 60 games of this season: he’s a WAY better hitter left-on-left than he ever was right-on-left.    You can take that to the bank.   And that makes him a significantly better player than he was up until now in his career.   As I said in a prior post, he’d be hard pressed to finish below .800 OPS this year.   Longer term, I think there’s a reasonable chance he settles in at .770+.   And that’s a really nice CF.
 

His approach is way better right now…the swing changes are real.

Its definitely encouraging.

[maybenxtyr]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The whole “build around” concept is a bit of a misused term here.    Nobody ever built a team around Al Bumbry, but we were very happy to have him in our starting lineup for a decade or so.    I doubt anyone ever said “Al Bumbry is an untouchable,” yet there he was, playing his whole career with the Orioles.   

I don’t know exactly how good Mullins will be  long term, but I do know there’s one huge takeaway from the first 60 games of this season: he’s a WAY better hitter left-on-left than he ever was right-on-left.    You can take that to the bank.   And that makes him a significantly better player than he was up until now in his career.   As I said in a prior post, he’d be hard pressed to finish below .800 OPS this year.   Longer term, I think there’s a reasonable chance he settles in at .770+.   And that’s a really nice CF.
 

You said it much better than I did when mentioned building around him. Perhaps build with him would have been the better terminology. Either way, he's been a very excellent surprise this season.

[BohKnowsBmore]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

The whole “build around” concept is a bit of a misused term here.    Nobody ever built a team around Al Bumbry, but we were very happy to have him in our starting lineup for a decade or so.    I doubt anyone ever said “Al Bumbry is an untouchable,” yet there he was, playing his whole career with the Orioles.   

I don’t know exactly how good Mullins will be  long term, but I do know there’s one huge takeaway from the first 60 games of this season: he’s a WAY better hitter left-on-left than he ever was right-on-left.    You can take that to the bank.   And that makes him a significantly better player than he was up until now in his career.   As I said in a prior post, he’d be hard pressed to finish below .800 OPS this year.   Longer term, I think there’s a reasonable chance he settles in at .770+.   And that’s a really nice CF.
 

On the topic of where he "settles in," I think it's worth noting that he's putting these numbers up in what has been a fairly depressed offensive environment relative to recent years. League-wide OPS is .708 at the moment, down from .740 last year, and the lowest it's been since 2014 (.700***). Prior to 2014, it has not been this low over the course of a season since 1992.

*** Currently, BA and OBP are actually both down relative to 2014, but SLG is up.

[Hallas]

4 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Of course the second part of that statement matters.  It’s absurd to say otherwise.

And it’s a SSS regardless.  All I’m saying is that for half of this season, he hasn’t been that good.  I’m not saying he hasn’t had a good year but since the context of the conversation is hes a guy you build around and I assume people aren’t dumb enough to build around a 730 OPS guy, they are absolutely looking at the SSS of April and so far in June.

 

As I said, the second part does matter, but only in two cases: if you don't think he's ever going to achieve enough to be a player worthy of an extension, or if you think that his 10 week sample of 2021 is almost the same as if he did nothing.  You don't get to cherry pick a one month sample sandwiched between 6 weeks of MVP level performance and say that's his true talent level.  I don't even know why you'd do this, because you can use linear regression against his past performance to reach the same conclusion.

 

To get more to the point, his K rate, isolated power, and BB rate are all well past the point where you'd consider the majority of his current performance level statistically significant. His batted ball metrics are also quite improved and also statistically significant.  He passes the eye test.   So at least for me he has definitely moved the needle a bit, but not enough.

[Sports Guy]

5 hours ago, Hallas said:

 

As I said, the second part does matter, but only in two cases: if you don't think he's ever going to achieve enough to be a player worthy of an extension, or if you think that his 10 week sample of 2021 is almost the same as if he did nothing.  You don't get to cherry pick a one month sample sandwiched between 6 weeks of MVP level performance and say that's his true talent level.  I don't even know why you'd do this, because you can use linear regression against his past performance to reach the same conclusion.

 

To get more to the point, his K rate, isolated power, and BB rate are all well past the point where you'd consider the majority of his current performance level statistically significant. His batted ball metrics are also quite improved and also statistically significant.  He passes the eye test.   So at least for me he has definitely moved the needle a bit, but not enough.

And to me, you don’t get to cherry pick 6 weeks or 10 weeks or whatever you want to use from this year to say he is a guy you build around.

That is the true focus of this debate.  It’s the “build your team around” part.

The sampling is way too small, whether you take May out or not to even have mention that.  If he were 22 y/o And had a really strong history behind him, that would be different but he doesn’t.

[DrungoHazewood]

17 hours ago, Frobby said:

Mullins would have to post an OPS under .730 the rest of the year for his overall OPS to fall below .800.    So, that’s pretty strong.  Adam Jones only topped .800 twice in his illustrious career as an Oriole.   

You're jinxing it!  Just remember Roy Smalley* once had a .959 in the first half and a .589 the second.

*Some of the weirdest splits ever?  In '79 Smalley had a .959 first half, .589 second.  .985 at home, .606 on the road.  1.043 batting 2nd, .620 batting third.  

[Natty]

I well remember when Mullins was really struggling to hit. So they sent him to AAA,  he couldn't even hit there, so they moved him to AA. I also remember he was making mistakes out in CF.  He has greatly improved his fielding in center. And as for hitting it took him 3 years but...He is batting .325, 3rd in the AL. And he is leading the AL in hits with 75. Got All Star written all over him. 

[HowAboutThat]

Remember, true improvement is not incremental but transformative. Improvement is not going 3 to 6 to 7 to 8, but going from 7 to 8 to <trigger> 50 or 60.

Someone has to look a bit deeper at the details of Mullins’ current to verify or refute this, but it is quite possible that he DID find the trigger, and his new performance is his new normal.

Given the fundamental ability of every MLB prospect, it is often a question of subtracting the bad and refining the good rather than trying to create something completely new. Maybe it was as simple as only hitting from one side? I dunno, but digger sleepers than I can find whatever answer is available.

But for now, let’s just enjoy it.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

You're jinxing it!  Just remember Roy Smalley* once had a .959 in the first half and a .589 the second.

*Some of the weirdest splits ever?  In '79 Smalley had a .959 first half, .589 second.  .985 at home, .606 on the road.  1.043 batting 2nd, .620 batting third.  

Adam Jones, first 60 games of 2009: OPS of .946.

Adam Jones, last 102 games of 2009: .681*
* Broke s bone in his leg in Game 133 and missed the rest of the season.   Finished at .792.    

I remember that season like it was yesterday.  So, yes I’m aware that Mullins could hit for less than .730 OPS the rest of the year.   Things like that happen often enough.  
 

[foxfield]

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

You're jinxing it!  Just remember Roy Smalley* once had a .959 in the first half and a .589 the second.

*Some of the weirdest splits ever?  In '79 Smalley had a .959 first half, .589 second.  .985 at home, .606 on the road.  1.043 batting 2nd, .620 batting third.  

His brother was pretty good too.  Motivational speaker.  Almost single handedly responsible for Michael Jordan becoming the success he became...

 

[MurphDogg]

 

[Hallas]

12 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

And to me, you don’t get to cherry pick 6 weeks or 10 weeks or whatever you want to use from this year to say he is a guy you build around.

That is the true focus of this debate.  It’s the “build your team around” part.

The sampling is way too small, whether you take May out or not to even have mention that.  If he were 22 y/o And had a really strong history behind him, that would be different but he doesn’t.

How is it cherry picking to use the complete uninterrupted season to date?  That's 10 weeks of data, or about 40% of the season.  You're picking his worst month out of a larger sample, which is the literal definition of cherry picking.  (Per wikipedia: the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position.) Using the full season data is the opposite of cherry picking.  Unless you're trying to argue that the most recent season-to-date is a cherry picked sample. But that would truly be an absurd position.  Especially when you consider that his current season's data comprises more than one-third of his total ML plate appearances.

 

If you want to redefine commonly used terms like this then you're not really presenting good faith arguments.

[bobmc]

Tonight's amazing catch as a still photo!

 

[survivedc]

I can’t remember a stretch like this by another Oriole. The recent team had some fun players but I’m not sure if anything compares. Manny was just so steady, though there was a period you knew he would come up with the big hit. I seem to remember a walk off (or late inning anyway) grand slam that everyone knew was coming. Davis was fun for some nice stretches.

Maybe it is the surprise aspect of Mullins that makes it so fun.

[Sports Guy]

38 minutes ago, Hallas said:

How is it cherry picking to use the complete uninterrupted season to date?  That's 10 weeks of data, or about 40% of the season.  You're picking his worst month out of a larger sample, which is the literal definition of cherry picking.  (Per wikipedia: the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position.) Using the full season data is the opposite of cherry picking.  Unless you're trying to argue that the most recent season-to-date is a cherry picked sample. But that would truly be an absurd position.  Especially when you consider that his current season's data comprises more than one-third of his total ML plate appearances.

 

If you want to redefine commonly used terms like this then you're not really presenting good faith arguments.

You can use whatever data you choose.

But when discussing this and knowing that we are only using this season to determine things, I don’t see why it’s a big deal to split it in half when you have 2 extremes.  But hey, have at it the way you want it.