PDA

View Full Version : Is first round pick in draft all that matters??



greengoblinrulz
06-01-2013, 06:04 PM
There is alot of talk about MN saving money to help later in the draft.
If so, that is ONLY to help out minor league depth as the Twins have shown over this century that they absolutely fail after the first round in developing major leaguers.
First Rounders since 2000 with double digit games w/MN
Joe Mauer, Denard Span, Kyle Waldrop, Glen Perkins, Trevor Plouffe, Matt Garza, Chris Parmelee, Ben Revere, Aaron Hicks w/Kyle Gibson on the doorstep & Byron Buxton/Jose Barrios in A ball
Second Round:more than 25 gms in majors since 2000
Jessie Crain, Scot Baker, Anthony Swarzak, Kevin Slowey.....none since 05
Third Round:
Jose Morales, Tyler Robertson, Brian Duensing
Fourth Round:
4gms from 2000s Jason Miller
Fifth Round:
No picks that actually appearred directly with MN after signing
Sixth Round:
Pat Neshek, Chris Hermann
Seventh Round:
Nobody since 1996s Chad Moeller's made the majors
Eighth Round:
Brian Dozier/Dinkelman are only to sign/appear with MN
Ninth Round:
Nobody since 1998
Tenth Round:
one player(Marty Cordova) since 1989 (Kyle Phillips who never played for MN)


Will you be upset if MN doesnt take the best player to save money

B Richard
06-01-2013, 06:14 PM
There of plenty of talented players/ potential HOFers who got drafted after the tenth round. Maybe the Twins haven't done the greatest job in late round drafting. Who knows though. At that point it's just a crapshoot.

Albert Pujols (13th)
Mike Piazza (62nd)
John Smoltz (22nd)
Keith Hernandez (42nd)
Ryne Sandberg (20th)
Jose Bautista (20th)
Jeff Kent (20th)
and many, many more. Including some guy whose name rhymes with Spolan Bryan.


To answer your question though, I don't think the talent distribution justifies saving some extra $$ on the 1st rounder. I'm not opposed to it in the abstract, but I don't think this is the year for it.

gunnarthor
06-01-2013, 06:34 PM
I generally agree with you, the best talent usually goes at the top of the draft and I would be very upset if the Twins didn't take BPA. The one exception would be if they took McGuire and managed to nab Manaea in the 2nd round. But I think that's nearly impossible and would much rather they took Stewart and played it straight the rest of the way.

That said, I think your expectations are too high on what you expect from the 2nd rounders. Over the last decade the Twins have developed several solid MLers from the second round, namely Baker, Crain, Slowey and even Swarzak has some value. That's more than the rest of the AL central teams combined. And they also traded 3 2nd rounders for Cabrera, Castillo and Diamond, so there was some additional value there.

greengoblinrulz
06-01-2013, 09:21 PM
Both of ya kind of make my arguement.......you can find a great HOF player in way later rounds than worrying about saving money to spend it on a 4th rounder.
2nd rounders also have solid value, but spend your money there & dont fret so much about 8th/9th/10th rounders if money is an issue.
Just wont like it under any circumstance if they go 'cheap' & dont take BPA.....esp for a defensive minded C w/limited offensive ability (according to scouts). We have enough Lehmans/Rohlfings in the organization

Badsmerf
06-02-2013, 12:52 AM
Rosario was taken in the 4th round. Maybe we shouldn't have drafted him? There is talented players later on in the draft, they just are not as abundant. Most of the top end talent is obviously taken right away, but kids develop differently and some are late bloomers. Baseball is great in that many late round drafts make it and contribute in the MLB, some even become Albert Pujols.

old nurse
06-02-2013, 01:17 AM
Jason Kubel round 12 in 2000, Blackburn round 29 2001,Matt Tolbert round 16 2004, Alex Brunet round 12 2005, Danny Valencia round 19 2006, All late round picks that played a little bit.

beckmt
06-02-2013, 01:44 AM
Still take the BPA and worry about the rest later. I will worry if it is Appel and Boris wants almost all the budget for the first 10 picks to sign him. Agree with the comment I saw earlier in a different post the Bud Selig may be worried about the same issue.

beckmt
06-02-2013, 01:45 AM
A lot of those players listed as later round picks, may have been difficult signs for many of the small to mid market teams. This was common back before this latest agreement with the major league players.

kab21
06-02-2013, 04:30 AM
first off the reason that they would try to save extra money is to basically trade that 2nd rd pick for mid/late 1st rd talent. That significantly changes your whole argument.

Secondly I don't think they should do that. come out of this draft with one of Appel/Gray/Bryant/Stewart.

diehardtwinsfan
06-02-2013, 08:18 AM
As with most later round picks, there are guys who have talent but are much more raw and not nearly the sure thing that the first/second rounders are. I'm not sure the logic in ignoring the rest of the draft. Good players can be found further down. But like others said, it takes more time, and there's a much higher bust rate.

jorgenswest
06-02-2013, 09:12 AM
I think they should spend the money in the first round.

However, there is no way to look at any draft previous to last year for comparison. The idea of saving money is to be able to sign a guy in the second who may have fallen 10 spots because teams knew they couldn't meet his contract demands because of the cap and slot.

There was no cap before last year. The comparison doesn't work.

I suppose if the three teams before the Twins all sign guys expected to use all of the slot, the Twins might consider the strategy. They would do so knowing that the three teams above them wouldn't have the flexibility. If any do draft a guy in order to save, the Twins can't follow and hope that two guys drop due to contract demands.

Thrylos
06-02-2013, 09:16 AM
The other thing that needs to be added to the equation is that about half of the players selected after round 12 or something (and that includes college seniors who sign) do not sign, and they usually wait to get drafted higher. With the hard slots now, this percentage will be higher.

diehardtwinsfan
06-02-2013, 10:21 AM
Every year there are guys who drop due to signability concerns... In the past the large market teams threw money at them to make it work. That isn't as much of an option now, so saving money in the first round to get that tough sign might work if you really really really like the guy. There's more risk there as you don't know who is going to fall, but if you have a list of guys that you'd be happy with, it makes sense.

In this draft, I have a sneaking suspicion that the guy who's going to fall that some team is going to do this with is Manaea. I could easily see Houston going with Moran for 4M and then drafting and signing Manaea for something very similar to that in the second round. They'd have the cash to do it, and they just walked away with 2 top 10 talent guys. If the big 3 are gone at #4 or 5, that's where the Reese Maguire type signing makes sense for Minnesota or Cleveland, as I doubt Stewart goes under slot, and I don't see Houston, Colorado, or Chicago having the money to get Manaea in the second when they drafted guys who will sign for something pretty close to slot.

Kwak
06-02-2013, 11:21 AM
Or maybe it just says the Twins are poor at drafting. Combine this thread with the previous one(s) on why the Twins shouldn't use free agents to build a team.

jorgenswest
06-02-2013, 12:02 PM
Or maybe it just says the Twins are poor at drafting. Combine this thread with the previous one(s) on why the Twins shouldn't use free agents to build a team.

The Twins need to draft well. They need to use the international market well. It looks like they drafted well last year. They have some good players coming through from the international market. While they certainly had a few poor drafts while they were on top of the AL Central, I don't think there is any reason to believe that they do a poor job of drafting players.

birdwatcher
06-02-2013, 12:28 PM
The Twins need to draft well. They need to use the international market well. It looks like they drafted well last year. They have some good players coming through from the international market. While they certainly had a few poor drafts while they were on top of the AL Central, I don't think there is any reason to believe that they do a poor job of drafting players.
Well said.

birdwatcher
06-02-2013, 12:34 PM
Compare their draft record to any other team in the AL Central, especially for rounds #2 and later. If you believe the Twins are crappy at drafting, then you may as well make a blanket statement that every team is crappy at drafting, with maybe one or two exceptions, and that the Twins are less crappy than most.

Kwak
06-02-2013, 01:50 PM
Compare their draft record to any other team in the AL Central, especially for rounds #2 and later. If you believe the Twins are crappy at drafting, then you may as well make a blanket statement that every team is crappy at drafting, with maybe one or two exceptions, and that the Twins are less crappy than most.

So what is your point (which apparently only includes the ALC)? That all teams draft poorly but the Twins were dead last because they won't sign a decent free agent? Or, the Twins are just plain unlucky? The minor league affliates (exception Elizabethon) have been losing too--just more bad luck? or is it the Twins employ a poor strategy of baseball which compels them to be consistent losers? There hasn't been a wholesale change in personnel so we can't point fingers and say "it was those guys." Some teams are winning--even at the minor league level (without benefit of free agents). We can't claim because of "promoted talent"--because we have all seen the failures of the promotions from Rochester. So what else is there--besides poor drafting?

greengoblinrulz
06-02-2013, 05:02 PM
Compare their draft record to any other team in the AL Central, especially for rounds #2 and later. If you believe the Twins are crappy at drafting, then you may as well make a blanket statement that every team is crappy at drafting, with maybe one or two exceptions, and that the Twins are less crappy than most.
What I was saying, First rounders are the only 'true' pick where you're getting a 'sure?' thing, so dont skimp on the money...take BPA, everyone should take that approach.
Im not saying skip the rest of the draft as you obviously need to fill levels......but if anyone in latter rounds WAS a sure thing, they'ld be picked earlier.

howieramone
06-02-2013, 05:49 PM
So what is your point (which apparently only includes the ALC)? That all teams draft poorly but the Twins were dead last because they won't sign a decent free agent? Or, the Twins are just plain unlucky? The minor league affliates (exception Elizabethon) have been losing too--just more bad luck? or is it the Twins employ a poor strategy of baseball which compels them to be consistent losers? There hasn't been a wholesale change in personnel so we can't point fingers and say "it was those guys." Some teams are winning--even at the minor league level (without benefit of free agents). We can't claim because of "promoted talent"--because we have all seen the failures of the promotions from Rochester. So what else is there--besides poor drafting?
The reasons for the Twins current woes are very complicated, but if you need a quick answer and don't care how factual it is, poor drafting will work.

birdwatcher
06-02-2013, 06:57 PM
So what is your point (which apparently only includes the ALC)? That all teams draft poorly but the Twins were dead last because they won't sign a decent free agent? Or, the Twins are just plain unlucky? The minor league affliates (exception Elizabethon) have been losing too--just more bad luck? or is it the Twins employ a poor strategy of baseball which compels them to be consistent losers? There hasn't been a wholesale change in personnel so we can't point fingers and say "it was those guys." Some teams are winning--even at the minor league level (without benefit of free agents). We can't claim because of "promoted talent"--because we have all seen the failures of the promotions from Rochester. So what else is there--besides poor drafting?

My point is pretty simple kwak, so try to follow along. Contrary to whatsome of you critics say, the Twins aren't crappy drafters. In fact, they're pretty good. I used the ALC to make the comparison easier for you. All teams have some bad stretches, some bad luck, and some good luck.

And check your facts, kwak. The current records of our A and A+ teams are nothing less than spectacular. A lot of that is due to good drafting, and it's easy to see how having a high draft order can quickly make a difference.

As for selections past the first round, I don't completely agree that its a complete crap shoot. It seems to me the scouting-intensive teams might logically unearth a gem in each draft that a less diigent organization would miss.

As for the rest of your post, kwak, wow. Some ofyour logic is perplexing to me, so you must be right.

ThePuck
06-02-2013, 10:45 PM
My point is pretty simple kwak, so try to follow along. Contrary to whatsome of you critics say, the Twins aren't crappy drafters. In fact, they're pretty good. I used the ALC to make the comparison easier for you. All teams have some bad stretches, some bad luck, and some good luck.

And check your facts, kwak. The current records of our A and A+ teams are nothing less than spectacular. A lot of that is due to good drafting, and it's easy to see how having a high draft order can quickly make a difference.

As for selections past the first round, I don't completely agree that its a complete crap shoot. It seems to me the scouting-intensive teams might logically unearth a gem in each draft that a less diigent organization would miss.

As for the rest of your post, kwak, wow. Some ofyour logic is perplexing to me, so you must be right.

Yeah, this post isn't condescending at all...

Badsmerf
06-02-2013, 10:52 PM
I really wouldn't stick up for the Twins drafts birdwatcher. Prior to 2011, they were consistently rated as having poor drafts. Something changed in their drafting philosophy, because they changed from drafting safer picks to guys with high upside. Picking on the back end of the draft is only an excuse. Quality drafts include guys that can at least contribute in the MLB, and the Twins just haven't been very good at for a while.

howieramone
06-02-2013, 11:02 PM
I really wouldn't stick up for the Twins drafts birdwatcher. Prior to 2011, they were consistently rated as having poor drafts. Something changed in their drafting philosophy, because they changed from drafting safer picks to guys with high upside. Picking on the back end of the draft is only an excuse. Quality drafts include guys that can at least contribute in the MLB, and the Twins just haven't been very good at for a while.

But a very good one. I don't recall a Twin's draft ever being rated as poor. Source?

gunnarthor
06-03-2013, 10:33 AM
But a very good one. I don't recall a Twin's draft ever being rated as poor. Source?

Yeah, the Twins generally have been pretty well regarded in this area. A few years back, BA listed them as the 3rd best team over the last decade in drafting, focusing on getting a lot of value out of later round picks. I no longer have that link or the link to the 2004 draft grade which gave the team the best grade. Here's their grades from 05-08 period (http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/draft/2010/01/draft-grades-2005-08/).

Obviously, the Twins under Ryan/Radcliff were able to draft and develop a pretty good group of players and restock while still winning. That's pretty tough to do. The big change that Badsmerf is alluding to happened in 08 when Johnson replaced Radcliff as draft guru and we saw a change toward more hard throwing pitchers, none of whom have yet to make the majors, although Gibson will this year and Bullock was used to get Diamond. And last year the Twins drafted the BPA, which looks like it will work out for us. This should be another fun draft.

nicksaviking
06-03-2013, 10:56 AM
first off the reason that they would try to save extra money is to basically trade that 2nd rd pick for mid/late 1st rd talent. That significantly changes your whole argument.

Secondly I don't think they should do that. come out of this draft with one of Appel/Gray/Bryant/Stewart.

Right, the arguement to pick underslot basically is that the Twins COULD draft 2 first round caliber players. That being said, I agree, don't be foolish, pick one of the top four players. Quality not quantitiy.

Kwak
06-03-2013, 11:25 AM
Another member of the vaunted Class of '06 has been DFA'd--Tyler Robertson.

mike wants wins
06-03-2013, 11:39 AM
Twins got a B in 2008, more teams had better grades than had worse grades.
Twins got a B in 2007, more teams got worse grades than got better grades (that year looks really bad on BA)
Twins got a C in 2006, not good compared to most teams, only three had worse grades
Twins got an A in 2005, tied with 7 other teams for the best grade. Looked very good according to BA at the time.

I'm not sure how that is "good" or "bad" at drafting. One good year, one bad year, and two mediocre years. About median compared to other grades, according to BA. That's fine, I guess. Nothing to brag about, imo. YMMV, of course. But if you won't sign big time free agents, you have to be better at drafting than other teams, not about the same.

One interesting (to me) thing to see, several teams were consistently rated the worst, and not coincidentally they are now some of the worst teams in baseball.

howieramone
06-03-2013, 11:43 AM
Another member of the vaunted Class of '06 has been DFA'd--Tyler Robertson.
Funny you should mention the '06 class. Only 3 left on the team right?