PDA

View Full Version : BA mock draft



gunnarthor
05-11-2012, 12:18 PM
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/mock-draft/2012/2613371.html

Callis has Twins taking toolsy OFer Buxton. I think I still prefer Gausman but I understand why we'd take him if the Astros didn't. Another interesting thing, to me, was that catching prospect Stryker Trahan lasting to pick 30 and Giolito (sp) not being drafted. It would be pretty interesting if either of them were still around at #32.

righty8383
05-11-2012, 12:28 PM
I guess the wisdom behind Giolito is that teams in the top 10 may not want to take the risk, and teams below that know they would have to pay him well above slot to get him to sign. So if he IS still around at 32 the Twins would be stupid not to take him. With all that spending flexiblility they could just use much of the remaining top 10 round picks on college seniors that would sign for peanuts. In all honesty I don't think he gets out of the top 10. Klaw said in a chat yesterday that the latest medicals on him arm making teams a little more comfortable. I would not mind the Twins taking the Rochester kid at 32 or 42 if he's still around.

Shane Wahl
05-11-2012, 01:00 PM
Given the state of health for Baker, Gibson, Wimmers, Salcedo, Soliman, etc., and the fact that Pavano, Liriano, Marquis, and Blackburn all either will be gone or suck, it is laughable to think of taking Buxton.

tpb8
05-11-2012, 01:10 PM
Given the state of health for Baker, Gibson, Wimmers, Salcedo, Soliman, etc., and the fact that Pavano, Liriano, Marquis, and Blackburn all either will be gone or suck, it is laughable to think of taking Buxton.

Is the pitcher we're going to take at #2 stepping right into the rotation? Is he going to be our staff ace in 2013 and fill a huge hole? if the answer to both questions is no (it is) then you take the best player available, no matter the position. You don't draft for need. This isn't the NFL or NBA.

mike wants wins
05-11-2012, 01:25 PM
What if the BPA is a hitter at every pick? What if the hitter is .1% better, but you know you have no pitching depth in the minors or majors? IF Buxton is way better than the next guy on their board, take him, but be willing to trade prospects for pitchers, or to sign pitchers, or you may never have pitchers. That's all I'm saying. And, from what I read, there are plenty of doubters on line about Buxton. But pure BPA seems like a bad strategy to me, as you might have no pitchers in your system then, theoretically.

gunnarthor
05-11-2012, 02:12 PM
What if the BPA is a hitter at every pick? What if the hitter is .1% better, but you know you have no pitching depth in the minors or majors? IF Buxton is way better than the next guy on their board, take him, but be willing to trade prospects for pitchers, or to sign pitchers, or you may never have pitchers. That's all I'm saying. And, from what I read, there are plenty of doubters on line about Buxton. But pure BPA seems like a bad strategy to me, as you might have no pitchers in your system then, theoretically.

I think teams don't look at players as much as this guys #1, this guys #2. I think they tend to group guys in tiers. Tier 1 might be two guys (say Buxton and Gausman) that the team thinks is better than anyone in lower tiers. Tier 2 might be slightly larger and etc. The team would then pick a guy from the highest tier but might still have options. In this case, if the Astros took Gausman, the Twins would take Buxton b/c he's the only player in Tier 1. But if they had Zunino and Zimmer in tier 1 as well, then they could alter the pick and consider other things, including roster construction, $ demands, fan base appeal, in making that pick.

In this specific case, I think the Twins would consider Buxton. According to Klaw, Buxton is generally considered as the guy with the most talent in this draft. At #32, the Twins should have a wide enough pool of possible selections to take a pitcher in whatever tier they have left. Now, if somehow they're sitting at 32 and 3B prospect Schiffer falls to them (he's expected to go in the top 15) well, fine, you grab him. But that's not likely to happen.

mike wants wins
05-11-2012, 02:30 PM
Good point on the tiers. The other major ESPN scout has Buxton as the 2nd best OF prospect (insider article), so the love for him as number 1 is not universal. That said, I think he had him around 7th, I'd have to double check on that.

mike wants wins
05-11-2012, 02:45 PM
From the latest KLAW chat on ESPN:

J.P. (Baton Rouge)If the Astros don't take Buxton they will be punching themselves for the next 20 years.
Klaw (1:58 PM)
This is my feeling.

Shane Wahl
05-11-2012, 02:57 PM
Is the pitcher we're going to take at #2 stepping right into the rotation? Is he going to be our staff ace in 2013 and fill a huge hole? if the answer to both questions is no (it is) then you take the best player available, no matter the position. You don't draft for need. This isn't the NFL or NBA.

"Best player available"--as though that is at all clear, especially when comparing high school and college players. Come on.

Thrylos
05-11-2012, 03:03 PM
I guess the wisdom behind Giolito is that teams in the top 10 may not want to take the risk, and teams below that know they would have to pay him well above slot to get him to sign. .

Not from this year on based on the new CBA... Paying above slot will pretty much be an extinct practice. I think that Giolito will go in the top 10-15 picks.

J-Dog Dungan
05-11-2012, 03:13 PM
Unfortunately, as it has been expressed many times this year, there isn't that "number one" candidate for a SP that the Twins should be taking. However, I think that no matter who is available at the #2 position, the Twins need to take a SP, even if their top choice for starter isn't the best player available. The Twins will continue their slide into horrificality if they don't spend a quality number of draft picks on plausible SP prospects.

Shane Wahl
05-11-2012, 03:16 PM
The point, also, is not that whoever they sign is going to be in the rotation by 2013. But it would be nice if that were a possibility for 2014.

Anyway, something like Mark Appel (RHP), Rock Rucker (LHP), Kevin Plawecki (C), Kyle Hansen (RHP) . . . would be nice.

James
05-11-2012, 03:25 PM
The point, also, is not that whoever they sign is going to be in the rotation by 2013. But it would be nice if that were a possibility for 2014.

Anyway, something like Mark Appel (RHP), Rock Rucker (LHP), Kevin Plawecki (C), Kyle Hansen (RHP) . . . would be nice.
The reports I've been reading are starting to question Appel a bit. He has good velocity, but something in his delivery doesn't translate to strike outs. The more I read on college pitchers, the more I am like Gausman. But it's all speculation at this point anyway. Let's hope whoever they pick turns out to be a future Twins HOF member at their respective position.

Thrylos
05-11-2012, 03:30 PM
Anyway, something like Mark Appel (RHP), Rock Rucker (LHP), Kevin Plawecki (C), Kyle Hansen (RHP) . . . would be nice.

I suspect that you are talking about the later rounds with the names other than Appel, correct?
Pretty sure that Rucker will follow on Hicks' footsteps and end up being drafted as an OF.

J-Dog Dungan
05-11-2012, 03:42 PM
I think an easier way to show people who are the lead options for the draft in certain positions would be to make a draft depth chart with data about the players along side of a mock draft. Then, people would be able to see the stats of the player as well as where pundits are expecting them to get picked.

Thrylos
05-11-2012, 03:54 PM
I think an easier way to show people who are the lead options for the draft in certain positions would be to make a draft depth chart with data about the players along side of a mock draft. Then, people would be able to see the stats of the player as well as where pundits are expecting them to get picked.

Unlike basketball and football, the baseball stats are pretty much meaningless for comparison purposes. Not only the level of competition between let's say a Pac-10 University and a High School in Montana are different, the players do not have to play right away. So a lot of the picks are "speculative" in nature looking at raw stuff and projections. Like a 6-6 170 lbs high school kid who throws 91-92 has only 2 pitches but has good control and command, could with work project to be a mid 90s top of rotation guy, if the other pieces, like the mechanics etc are there. So pre-draft stats are somewhat meaningless...

Shane Wahl
05-11-2012, 03:56 PM
I suspect that you are talking about the later rounds with the names other than Appel, correct?
Pretty sure that Rucker will follow on Hicks' footsteps and end up being drafted as an OF.

I thought I had read that Rucker was more likely to pitch? Anyway, I am talking about Twins picks, 2, 32, 42, and 63.

Shane Wahl
05-11-2012, 04:01 PM
I think the tier system is pretty accurate to what goes on. Let's say that the Twins have needs: starting pitchers (including some lefties), third basemen, and catchers. . . is the "BPA" crowd really going to ignore this? I mean if the Twins had a history of trading prospect depth for major league players, that would be one thing. That doesn't really happen too much (though it is true that something's got to give with the OF situation), so all I am saying is that maybe some need-consideration is quite necessary.

Seth Stohs
05-11-2012, 04:40 PM
This is why I choose not to worry too much about the draft. Like everyone else, I want the Twins to pick the "right" player too. Reports are all over the place on each of the players, and frankly, none of the 'experts' know who is going to pan out. To be honest, most of them probably won't.

That's why I'll primarily wait, read what I can, and hope that whoever the Best Player Available on the Twins board is the 'right' player...

But I would probably lean toward Zunino with the #2 pick.

peterb18
05-11-2012, 05:44 PM
I agree with Seth. I would go with Zunino, the catcher from Florida. You are getting the number 2 rated player in the draft---plus you can solidify the catcher position for years to come(the catcher thing is a real problem the Twins). Then Joe would be free to play 1st and catch on occasion. Pitchers(outside of a few exceptions) are usually a developmental thing. We can get some quality in the next few picks. The problem with the Twins in the past is there selections of pitchers. Hasen't worked out well.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
05-11-2012, 07:04 PM
I originally thought Zunino was the best pick, but now I'm convinced that drafting pitching, pitching, and more pitching is the way to go. It's not because the Twins need pitchers (they do), but because it's a great way to build a franchise (Think Rays). The only way the Twins will ever have a true ace is if they develop him in their organization. Free agent pitchers simply cost too much in the offseason. Even if a team has a surplus of good pitching, great prospects can be dealt for position players later on (Think Pineda for Montero). It looks as though scouts have soured on Appel because he can't get strikeouts and his production has declined this season. Out of all the pitchers, I think Kyle Zimmer has the biggest upside and is the best choice.

Puckmen
05-12-2012, 08:24 AM
Zunino is hitting .245/.312/.457 in SEC games this year (25 games so far). Not exactly awe-inspiring numbers.

gunnarthor
05-12-2012, 09:15 AM
Zunino is hitting .245/.312/.457 in SEC games this year (25 games so far). Not exactly awe-inspiring numbers.

Yeah, that's what made me want one of the pitchers over him. Gausman just threw a 9 inning, 5 hit, 11k game over Vanderbilt and has done pretty well against the SEC.

30whales
05-13-2012, 01:33 PM
I want Gausman!

twinkiesfan11
05-14-2012, 02:29 PM
To me, none of the pitchers have established themselves enough to warrant further consideration for the #2 pick and Zunino doesn't have enough upside. If I had the choice I'd draft Carlos Correa over Buxton who hasn't shown enough power this spring and plays a less scarce position. The Twins could do a lot worse than to have two monster 3B prospects in the pipeline at the same time.

Siehbiscuit
05-14-2012, 03:04 PM
At the #2 pick, the Twins MUST pick the best overall talent. If that is Buxton, then its another toolsy outfielder. Is there an outfielder in our system with a higher upside? Its not like the Twins have ELITE talent outfielders waiting in the wings. Revere, Benson, Hicks are all good prospects, but not elite by any means (especially if Hicks can't hit RH pitching). I wish there was a Prior/Strasburg-type pitcher available, but there isn't. At #2, the Twins have to take the guy they think has the potential to carry a team. If Zunino was mashing the way he was last year, I would be right there with you Seth, but his SEC (best conference in NCAA) numbers are pretty pedestrian this year. I just hope the Twins don't take reach too far. Everyone in the top 5-6 is rated pretty similarly. Don't reach too far please!

nicksaviking
05-14-2012, 03:21 PM
Aside from the natural injury concerns that come with a pitcher, Buxton is no safer of a bet than the top arms. He looks exactly like Donavan Tate, the 3rd overall pick of the 2009 draft by the Padres. After one season he fell off BA's top 100 prospect list. If there was a sure thing postion player available, everyone would know and there would be no debate.

nfisch22
05-14-2012, 03:37 PM
Personally I like Gausman at 2, good hard throwing front line starter. If Trahan or Giolito fall to 32 they're the obvious pick there, other then that Jake Barrett out of ASU and Patrick Ramsey of FSU are all viable options in the sandwich round. Ramsey is a possibility because the Twins have taken him before and Barrett seems like a quick to the Majors bullpen arm the Twins could use.

whydidnt
05-14-2012, 08:51 PM
I think at #2, you have to take the BPA. Hopefully, we won't be picking this high very often, but if you are you have to take whoever you think is going to have the best major league career. It shouldn't even be a question unless you have two guys rated almost exactly the same on the board. After the #2, then you can manage the draft more for organizational needs.

garrioch13
05-16-2012, 11:18 AM
The point, also, is not that whoever they sign is going to be in the rotation by 2013. But it would be nice if that were a possibility for 2014.

Anyway, something like Mark Appel (RHP), Rock Rucker (LHP), Kevin Plawecki (C), Kyle Hansen (RHP) . . . would be nice.

I'd be REALLY disappointed if this were the Twins draft.

garrioch13
05-16-2012, 11:22 AM
Aside from the natural injury concerns that come with a pitcher, Buxton is no safer of a bet than the top arms. He looks exactly like Donavan Tate, the 3rd overall pick of the 2009 draft by the Padres. After one season he fell off BA's top 100 prospect list. If there was a sure thing postion player available, everyone would know and there would be no debate.

Tate has had some major off-field issues. I don't forsee that with Buxton and Buxton is a better athlete. Tate may have had more raw power but that is the only edge he had.

mike wants wins
05-16-2012, 11:57 AM
Law has them taking Buxton also....I like Gausman right now, I think.

Thrylos
05-16-2012, 12:38 PM
I think at #2, you have to take the BPA. Hopefully, we won't be picking this high very often, .

Here is another reason that you take the best player available and with the best ratings even if you do not have a foreseable need in that position:

You can trade him a year later to fill a real need. The better the prospect the better the return.

gunnarthor
05-16-2012, 12:39 PM
Law has them taking Buxton also....I like Gausman right now, I think.

Buxton's the wildcard. I think the Twins would pass on Zunino but if the Astros don't take Buxton, I'm not sure the Twins FO would be able to pass on his upside, even for Zimmer.

mike wants wins
05-16-2012, 12:48 PM
Here is another reason that you take the best player available and with the best ratings even if you do not have a foreseable need in that position:

You can trade him a year later to fill a real need. The better the prospect the better the return.

I agree, but then you need to be willing to make trades of elite prospects....

nicksaviking
05-16-2012, 12:57 PM
Tate has had some major off-field issues. I don't forsee that with Buxton and Buxton is a better athlete. Tate may have had more raw power but that is the only edge he had.

Tate was lauded much more than Buxton is now, he was supposed to be the best athlete in the draft. If Strausburg wasn't such a no-brainer Tate may have gone #1. The 2009 draft class was very strong, while everyone agrees this one is not. Tate may have off-field problems but it isn't affecting his playing time. He looked good on paper but he is not producing against competent talent. His power all but disappeared.

mlhouse
05-16-2012, 01:45 PM
THe Twins need to take either Gausman or Appel at #2. Then at #32 hope a guy like Chris Stratton or Brian Johnson falls to that pick. At #42 maybe Alex Wood or Cory Jones. Three college arms in the top 42 is the way to go. Not one of them, even Gasman or Appel, seems to project as a #1 starter, but that is what the draft has to offer. If Gausman or Appel can get to the majors quickly as a #2 type of guy, and one of the other two becomes similar to Scott Baker, and does so fairly quickly, the Twins can rebuild their pitching staff. IF they get lucky, they get 2 starters from this draft and another starter from Gibson/Wimmers within two years (if I ran the team the #1 guy would be in the starting rotation the day he signs, why not?).

I understand the "upside" appeal of Buxton, and that is hard to pass up. But he is a HS player and even if he is rushed will take 3-4 years to get to the majors. We have other similar prospects (Hicks) and they simply need to rebuild the staff right now, not 5 years from now.

Shane Wahl
05-16-2012, 04:39 PM
It is not clear that Buxton is far and away the best player. That is the problem with the BPA approach. Zimmer, Appel, and Gausman might be all fairly interchangeable, so taking one of them would be what I would do.

Steve Lein
05-16-2012, 05:03 PM
what shanewahl said. I've seen guys who love Buxton, saying they'd slot him just ahead of Bubba Starling last year, but I've also seen guys who don't even rate him the #1 Outfielder in this draft. Personally, he's the scariest of all the prospects who have the potential to go in the top 3 to me and has by far the most bust potential. Might also have the highest ceiling, but that then makes a very large spectrum of possibilities for what he might develop into. I also knock him down a few pegs because one thing the Twins have is OF prospects. If we're rebuilding, they absolutely HAVE TO address the starting pitching problem. And by that I mean Top End talent. They are only going to get that at the #2 pick. There's not a single guy in the system who the experts would rate as having a #1 ceiling (keep in mind, #1 is different than an "Ace"), probably not even any #2 ceiling guys.

Was over at Jim Callis Baseball America chat today, and he answered my following question (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/chat/2012/2613413.html):

"Steve L. (Minneapolis, MN): I understand the "draft the BPA" ideology in baseball, but with the Twins SP prospects in the minors in dire straights, can you make the argument they have to draft a SP at #2? And as a follow up, is there another team in baseball worse off in high-end pitching prospects?

Jim Callis: You can definitely make the argument. The Twins don't have any obvious pitching answers in their system."

You don't rebuild for 2014 or 2015 by taking Buxton, that's my only issue with those who are referencing him when they say "get the best player available". I think you have to weigh "BPA" and "timetable-for/positional-need impact" if we're rebuilding for 2014, 2015. That heavily favors going after a SP. And just as a sidenote, I like Kyle Zimmer the best.

James
05-16-2012, 05:18 PM
what shanewahl said. I've seen guys who love Buxton, saying they'd slot him just ahead of Bubba Starling last year, but I've also seen guys who don't even rate him the #1 Outfielder in this draft. Personally, he's the scariest of all the prospects who have the potential to go in the top 3 to me and has by far the most bust potential. Might also have the highest ceiling, but that then makes a very large spectrum of possibilities for what he might develop into. I also knock him down a few pegs because one thing the Twins have is OF prospects. If we're rebuilding, they absolutely HAVE TO address the starting pitching problem. And by that I mean Top End talent. They are only going to get that at the #2 pick. There's not a single guy in the system who the experts would rate as having a #1 ceiling (keep in mind, #1 is different than an "Ace"), probably not even any #2 ceiling guys.

Was over at Jim Callis Baseball America chat today, and he answered my following question (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/chat/2012/2613413.html):

"Steve L. (Minneapolis, MN): I understand the "draft the BPA" ideology in baseball, but with the Twins SP prospects in the minors in dire straights, can you make the argument they have to draft a SP at #2? And as a follow up, is there another team in baseball worse off in high-end pitching prospects?

Jim Callis: You can definitely make the argument. The Twins don't have any obvious pitching answers in their system."

You don't rebuild for 2014 or 2015 by taking Buxton, that's my only issue with those who are referencing him when they say "get the best player available". I think you have to weigh "BPA" and "timetable-for/positional-need impact" if we're rebuilding for 2014, 2015. That heavily favors going after a SP. And just as a sidenote, I like Kyle Zimmer the best.
I totally agree with you that we need starting pitching. I think the argument other people were making was that you would take Buxton, and then trade some other outfield prospects for pitching prospects. You would have to assume then that other teams would give up pitching prospects for a guy like Aaron Hicks. The more I read up on the draft, the more I'm convinced that the Twins need to take Gausman or Zimmer. Appel still makes me a little nervous because of how much he has been used, and every thing I read said that his stuff should translate in more strike outs, but somehow doesn't.

gunnarthor
05-16-2012, 05:35 PM
You don't rebuild for 2014 or 2015 by taking Buxton, that's my only issue with those who are referencing him when they say "get the best player available". I think you have to weigh "BPA" and "timetable-for/positional-need impact" if we're rebuilding for 2014, 2015. That heavily favors going after a SP. And just as a sidenote, I like Kyle Zimmer the best.

I think I mostly agree with you. I guess if the Twins are confident that Buxton will turn into our Matt Kemp or are worried about the potential health issues (that we haven't been privy too) of a guy like Zimmer or Guasman, I'd rather they go with a starter. I haven't seen much to make me think that Buxton is without a doubt the BPA.

jtrinaldi
05-16-2012, 05:44 PM
The first 2 picks wil be Appel or Buxton, it just depends who the Astros take, they are the 2 upper echelon prospects in the draft.