Was McNeil that bad a center fielder?

[roger_that]

Maybe I didn't catch enough innings of him playing center field, though I see quite a few, but it seemed to me he had decent range and good hands. Pretty strong arm, too. I was pleasantly surprised by how well he performed in the field. Mainly, I can't remember seeing him misplay a ball, or misjudge one . I never said to myself " A REAL center fielder woulda had that."

Small sample? Or was he an adequate center fielder? I'm sure Mullins is better, and Taylor is for sure, but I didn't see. McNeil as a problem in center. Obviously someone did.

[MFS62]

It will be an upgrade defensively at two positions. Mullins is a proven centerfielder and McNeil isn't, and McNeil is better than Baty at second. Baseball lore says that in order to win you have to be strong up the middle, and IMO this makes them a better defensive team and maybe a little better offensively.

Later

[smg58]

The Fielding Bible has McNeil at a -2 over 178 innings, which is probably not a big enough sample size to draw a firm conclusion. (Maybe he's close to average, or maybe he'd be a -15 over a full season.) Mullins was good in the past but is a -14 over 754 innings this year, which is... concerning. Taylor is a +8 over 700 innings, which would be awesome if he were hitting even a little bit.

[roger_that]

What I'm asking is "Did you see any particularly bad fielding by him in CF?"

I didn't.

[Frayed Knot]

What I'm asking is "Did you see any particularly bad fielding by him in CF?"

 

Not bad fielding but some less than ideal routes after balls.

[kcmets]

Kind of a dead-end thread.

[Cowtipper]

Well, when one takes a step back and earnestly considers the broader picture — not just the obvious elements on the surface but also the more subtle, intangible, often-overlooked aspects that constitute the entirety of a person’s performance or presence or overall vibe, if you will — it becomes apparent, or at least somewhat apparent, depending on one's perspective and internal criteria for evaluation, that while there was certainly something there, something that can’t and shouldn’t be dismissed outright, something that perhaps even had flashes of potential or, at the very least, instances of competence or adequacy (and adequacy, mind you, is far too often undervalued in today’s climate of relentless excellence), one must also contend with the fact — or rather, the impression, which can sometimes feel like a fact, depending on how it's framed and received — that in this particular instance, when placed alongside the other party in question, whose own merits deserve a separate and equally nuanced discussion in their own right, the original subject did not quite evoke the same response, or ignite the same resonance, or occupy the same energetic bandwidth, as it were, and while it would be patently unfair — and frankly a little reductive — to say that he was somehow lacking, or that he failed in any categorical or empirical sense, there remains, floating gently but persistently in the atmosphere, a vague yet undeniable sense that, despite his efforts (and they were, by all indications, earnest and respectable efforts), the other individual simply landed in a way that he did not, not because of any glaring fault or deficiency on his part, but more as a matter of alignment, chemistry, timing, or some ineffable quality that resists easy articulation but is felt nonetheless — a kind of quiet gravity, if you will, drawing attention just a bit more forcefully, and thus, in the grand constellation of performances or impressions or however one wishes to define such things, it’s not that he failed, but rather that someone else, in that same shared space, will succeed just a little more.

[roger_that]

The Mullins deal will obviously take some ABs away from McNeil, and some from Baty, all of Acuna's (who wasn't getting all that many ABs anyway), and a few from Vientos and Mauricio (when Baty plays 3B and McNeil is at 2B). I'd say he isn't a much more effective hitter than the lot of them put together, maybe a hair. Mullins is a 100 OPS+ guy (between 100 and 107) four seasons in a row, his only season out of that range being five years ago, when he put up a 137 OPS+. Overall, I'd have to say that I expect a roughly 100 OPS+ from McNeil, Baty, Vientos, and Mauricio put together going forward, so offensively I'd call Mullins a wash.

He will of course eat up Taylor's ABs, which is an improvement, but like Acuna, Taylor wasn't getting all that many ABs lately. He will still get some, because Mendy doesn't like sitting players on the bench permanently. So it's a minor improvement that Mullins represents in offense, which makes me ask how terrible McNeil was in center, because that's where the major gain from the deal will come, on defense.

You guys like to bitch about every misstep the Mets make, so maybe someone could point me to an IGT where McNeil's fielding was costly. I don't remember reading about it here, but again, I haven't read nor remembered every IGT.

I like the deal, but don't see where it improves the team very much. A little, sure.

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

I don't think McNeill was bad. it's just that the other guys are better. Soto is not a tremendous fielder so he needs someone in center with a ton of range.

[roger_that]

True enough. I just didn't personally witness that many balls (or any) falling between Soto and McNeil that were catchable by better centerfielders. Maybe it's just that I didn't watch the games that happened in, I don't know.

[Edgy MD]

McNeil was and is certainly decent and should be commended.

But he certainly wasn't going to be a defensive asset to a team with championship aspirations.

[ashie62]

Jeff took some strange routes to the ball but overall did very well

[roger_that]

McNeil was and is certainly decent and should be commended.

But he certainly wasn't going to be a defensive asset to a team with championship aspirations.

 

Every championship team has a few spots, either defensively or offensively or both, that were below average. I felt I could live with McNeil overall in CF.

Not that Mullins doesn't represent a shade of improvement, certainly over Acuna, whose roster spot he occupies, and I'll take improvement where I can get it. But the improvement is minor, all in all.

BTW, has anyone figured out who goes in at shortstop if Lindor gets a concussion or something in the middle of a game? My guess is Baty or McNeil. Not good.

[Edgy MD]

Sure most (not all) championship teams have a sub-optimal situation somewhere in the lineup, but there is an old saying (Tim McCarver repeated it a lot) of championship teams being strong defensively up the middle.

Even in the age of three true outcomes, I get the impression that strikeout totals fall and balls in play totals go up when we get to the post-season, so a guy who can turn doubles and triples into outs has value. One thing too many defensive metrics overlook is that the outs a shortstop steals are potential singles something like 95% of the time. The outs a centerfielder steals are more frequently extra-base hits.

My guess is they are better with him than without him.

[roger_that]

Sure most (not all) championship teams have a sub-optimal situation somewhere in the lineup, but there is an old saying (Tim McCarver repeated it a lot) of championship teams being strong defensively up the middle.

 

 

As true as most truisms, I suppose.

I'd ask you to supply an example of a championship team that had better-than-average players, both offensively and defensively, up and down the lineup, but I don't care to make an argument out of that small point. Someone proposed once somewhere that the 1941 Dodgers came close, I think, but conceded that they did have one (out of sixteen) that was sub-par. It's certainly enough teams with a weak spot or two for me to be satisfied with "all." The 1969 Mets had an offensive disaster at 3B, for example, and the 1986 Mets had Santana's weak bat at shortstop.

McCarver said a lot of **** that was on the money, but some of it was just **** that sounded good and was hard to dispute.

And sure adding a decent player like Mullins helps. My point is that I'm not expecting him to be a difference maker--he's going to take innings away from some pretty good players who've helped the Mets all year. It's just my weak memory, admittedly, but I don't remember anyone bitching about McNeil's fielding that cost them a game or even a run. And we've got some world-class bitchers here.

[The Hot Corner]

BTW, has anyone figured out who goes in at shortstop if Lindor gets a concussion or something in the middle of a game? My guess is Baty or McNeil. Not good.

 

I would imagine that now that Acuna is in Syracuse, that Ronny Mauricio would replace Lindor at shortstop (in an emergency) since he spent the majority of his MiLB career (395 games) at shortstop. Brett Baty has never played shortstop during his professional career, so I don't expect him to start now with the Mets. Jeff McNeil has played 1 inning at shortstop during his MLB career. I love McNeil's versatility, but I don't wish to see him manning shortstop unless it is a dire emergency. If Lindor had to miss significant time, heaven forbid, then I would expect a quick call for Acuna to take his spot.

[Gwreck]

It is indeed Mauricio. He made 2 starts at short already this year when Lindor was getting the half-day off as DH.

[roger_that]

Thanks. Mauricio slipped my mind when I was wondering.

[roger_that]

I'd ask you to supply an example of a championship team that had better-than-average players, both offensively and defensively, up and down the lineup, but I don't care to make an argument out of that small point. Someone proposed once somewhere that the 1941 Dodgers came close, I think, but conceded that they did have one (out of sixteen) that was sub-par.

 

I decided to look up the 1941 Dodgers' roster to see if I remembered right. I think so, though they did have two players with flaws. Also they lost the Series that year to the Yankees, so not even a World's Champion.

If you're curious, here's the https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BRO/1941.shtml link . Mickey Owens' offense was what I remembered being cited as sub-par, but their eventual HoF shortstop Pee Wee Reese also had a weak year with the stick. I think I remembered correctly that all 8 starters were good defensively.

[Edgy MD]

Everybody has flaws, but any team would hope to improve.

And if this serves to improve (which certainly is an open question), then good.

(If you really want an example of a team who was optimal at every position, you cannot go wrong with the 1976 Reds, who sent seven of their eight regulars to the All-Star Game, and the eighth guy ended up with a Gold Glove, a 125 OPS, and some MVP support.

[roger_that]

Perhaps surprisingly, Ken Griffey Sr. on that '76 Reds team had a very poor dWAR, -1.8, that season, and certainly surprisingly (to me) so did one of those Gold Glovers, your 8th man, Cesar Geronimo, who posted a negative dWAR as well, -0.7. Unlike Tony Perez, whose negative dWAR (-0.4) might be chalked off to a "positional adjustment", Geronimo was not penalized for playing an "easy" position to play, and Griffey's poor dWAR is too big to be all "positional adjustment." https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/1976.shtml

[Lefty Specialist]

McNeil wasn't terrible, but there were a few balls that he didn't get to that I wondered if Taylor would have gotten them.

[roger_that]

McNeil wasn't terrible, but there were a few balls that he didn't get to that I wondered if Taylor would have gotten them.

 

Probably true, though I don't recall seeing those plays nor has anyone pointed me to the IGT(s) here expressing that thought. But say McNeil let a ball or two drop that a glove wizard like Taylor might have made a highlight-reel catch on. Is that hit or two or three comparable to the many, many hits McNeil got that Taylor would have popped up to the shortstop on?

And again, I'm not saying that picking up Mullins is a bad move--it just doesn't seem like a major move to me. McNeil was doing a decent job in CF, and he's been one of the Mets best hitters all year long, somewhat to my surprise. It's almost as if they expected him to be a defensive problem and when he wasn't, they traded for his replacement anyway.

P.S. and he cracked a hit against the Giants just as I was hitting the submit button.