Keith Law top 25 prospect update- good news for Sano
Posted 24 May 2012 - 02:12 PM
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
Posted 24 May 2012 - 05:28 PM
Posted 24 May 2012 - 05:58 PM
Edited by asmus_ndsu, 24 May 2012 - 06:03 PM.
Posted 24 May 2012 - 07:48 PM
Current level: Low Class A (Beloit)
Preseason ranking: 28
He's cooled off since the scorching early start, and striking out a lot more than you'd like, but he has enormous raw power (.551 slugging this year) and enough ability to hit to see him as a middle-of-the-order bat down the road with a .260-.280 average but 30-40 jacks.
Posted 24 May 2012 - 08:22 PM
ESPN wouldn't be thrilled if we post the whole list....but there are 3 AZ starting pitchers in the top 20....we should really be trying to figure out how to get their 2nd or 3rd best SP prospect....if you have a specific question, I'll answer it.
Yes, can we hire Superman to turn back time so we can convince Bill Smith that the Twins needed to be sellers at the trade deadline last year? Seems to me AZ turned out to be interested in Jason Kubel after all.
I'm assuming one of those prospects is Tyler Skaggs. I was just looking at what kind of draft picks would have been available had the Twins kept Johan Santana and gotten the draft picks after the 2008 season instead of getting fleeced by the Mets. That year the Angels lost Mark Teixeira to the Yankees and Franscicso Rodriguez to the Mets. Had Santana's Elias ranking been higher than Rodriguez following the 2008 season the Twins could have stolen Mike Trout from the Angels, if it had been higher than Teixeira's, the Twins could have snagged Skaggs too. Obviously there are a ton of variables that could have influenced these picks so don't pile on and rip me, I just found it intersting and thought I'd share.
Edited by nicksaviking, 25 May 2012 - 06:03 AM.
Posted 25 May 2012 - 12:04 PM
Posted 25 May 2012 - 12:32 PM
Edited by StormJH1, 25 May 2012 - 12:34 PM.
Posted 25 May 2012 - 02:21 PM
I'm pretty sure the only reason that Insider currently only exists in order to get people to buy/receive the outdated ESPN magazine, which by all accounts is awful. Though I did like there last big breaking story of: EXTRA EXTRA: College players smoke weed!!1!!
yes, I think pasting something you have to pay for (so, you know, Law and others have jobs) is wrong. So yes, freakin' ESPN too. Why is their intellectual property not worth protecting?
Posted 25 May 2012 - 02:44 PM
well, it's still here, so clearly the owners of this site are cool with it. I'm likely out of this site for a while if that's true.
Please, its one article and its relevant to the Twins, you act like people are posting every insider article here on a daily basis. ESPN could choose to do a paywall like other sites (you get x number of articles for free insider a month, then you have to pay) instead they choose not to. Would anyone on here really sign up for a 1 month account just to read a small blurb from law on the top 25?
Posted 25 May 2012 - 09:13 PM