Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: Article: Should Twins Draft for Need or Best Available at Pick Number Four?

  1. #21
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,368
    Like
    413
    Liked 808 Times in 509 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by nicksaviking View Post
    How do you actually go about comparing a pitcher to an offensive player? They have zero relevant skill sets in common.
    True, but which on it's face is of more value. I'd argue that a pitcher, while pitching once every 5 games, has far more control on the outcome of the game than a hitter does over a 5 game period. While you cannot necessarily compare them apples to apples, it has more to do with what type of player they can be.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer gil4's Avatar
    Posts
    579
    Like
    146
    Liked 144 Times in 80 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan View Post
    Buxton was not universally considered BPA. Some looked at Appel, some Gausman, and apparently some thought it was Correa.
    I was in the Correa camp, but I try to keep quiet about it now. I am very glad the Twins chose Buxton.


    Quote Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan View Post
    Had the Twins taken Appel, we'd be looking at a top 10 overall pitching prospect likely destroying AA/AAA right now, and we need that far more than we need Buxton.
    That's not what the team that actually drafted him is looking at. Had the Twins taken Appel, we might be trying to figure out who the Twins should take with two high draft picks this year. I'll grant that at #2 he would have been a lot more likely to sign, but he might have held out for #1-slot money and that might have sent him back to school.

    Also, pitching is always a higher-risk proposition. We might be reading about him dominating AA, or we might be reading about medical reports and TJ surgery. Yes, position players have injuries too, but nowhere near the rate of pitchers.

    Meanwhile, Buxton is looking like he could possibly turn into a once-in-a-generation kind of talent, and Appel could still possibly fall to #4 this year. I am very glad the Twins chose Buxton.

  3. #23
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    3,232
    Like
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
    I think we are lucky enough to be in the situation where BPA will very likely be an area of need...pitching and 3B/1B.

  4. #24
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,290
    Like
    32
    Liked 131 Times in 81 Posts
    To me, this comes down to three questions....

    1) If Kris Bryant is on the board and Appel and Gray are not, is he the automatic pick or do they go with a college pitcher?
    The only way they don't go Bryant in this scenario is if they really think Stewart is something special.

    2) If Kohl Stewart is on the board (and Appel, Gray and Byant are gone) is he the automatic pick or do this go with a college pitcher?
    The opposite of the above answer.


    3) Can they come out of this fourth pick with ANY position player other than Bryant and we'll still think it was a good move?
    This place will explode.

    It's worth remembering that the Twins are working with a lot more data than we have. Gray/Appel, Bryant and Stewart really seem like the top 4 but not even BA, PG, Sickels or anyone else have perfect data on these guys. Not even the Twins...

  5. #25
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,368
    Like
    413
    Liked 808 Times in 509 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by gil4 View Post

    That's not what the team that actually drafted him is looking at. Had the Twins taken Appel, we might be trying to figure out who the Twins should take with two high draft picks this year. I'll grant that at #2 he would have been a lot more likely to sign, but he might have held out for #1-slot money and that might have sent him back to school.

    Also, pitching is always a higher-risk proposition. We might be reading about him dominating AA, or we might be reading about medical reports and TJ surgery. Yes, position players have injuries too, but nowhere near the rate of pitchers.

    Meanwhile, Buxton is looking like he could possibly turn into a once-in-a-generation kind of talent, and Appel could still possibly fall to #4 this year. I am very glad the Twins chose Buxton.
    I doubt Appel holds out at number 2, truth be told. He'd have cost us the full 5% more, no question. Even if he did, we'd be looking at 3 and 5 this year.

    The big issue I take with your post is the risk aversion to pitching. The problem is that to be successful, you have to have good pitching. This system is pretty void in that right now, and it's going to be a big issue for the next wave if they don't bring in more high upside talent. The problem with developed high upside talent is that it's impossible to get past AA and very expensive to get prior to that. They have a shot to add a Bundy, Tallison, etc. to their farm for the cost of the signing bonus, and they'd be silly not to do that. I get that there's risk, but this is where too much risk aversion can cripple a franchize, because the reward is higher too. They have to get some pitching.

    My personal strategy for this draft would be to draft one of Gray/Appel/Stewart and stock up on the strenghts of this draft, which is highschool pitching and catching. This draft seems fairly deep in those areas and they happen to be needs as well. We have enough cash that I think we would be able to sign some of those guys, regardless of who we take at 1-4.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer gil4's Avatar
    Posts
    579
    Like
    146
    Liked 144 Times in 80 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan View Post
    The big issue I take with your post is the risk aversion to pitching.
    My personal strategy for this draft would be to draft one of Gray/Appel/Stewart and stock up on the strenghts of this draft, which is highschool pitching and catching.
    The difference in reward has to justify the difference in risk. The odds of ending up with nothing are high with a HS pitcher. He needs to have a much higher upside to justify drafting him at #4. I would much rather take the high risk picks a bit later in the draft.

  7. #27
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,368
    Like
    413
    Liked 808 Times in 509 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by gil4 View Post
    The difference in reward has to justify the difference in risk. The odds of ending up with nothing are high with a HS pitcher. He needs to have a much higher upside to justify drafting him at #4. I would much rather take the high risk picks a bit later in the draft.
    The stats say otherwise. 1st round HS pitchers flame out at the same rate as 1st round college pitchers, with lefties being some of the highest flame outs... The HS pitchers that succeed tend to be better overall.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    859
    Like
    466
    Liked 81 Times in 61 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmb0252 View Post
    While experts might not agree who the exact BPA was last year obviously the Twins front office did. After spending a butt load of time and money they ended up taking a HS CFer over the three college arms. What does that tell you about their board? In the end who cares who Law or Callis or Sickels thinks is the best player? Not their jobs on the line.
    This is spot on. The Twins believe they got the best player available in last year's draft. It's early, but now we're starting to hear some incredible reports and comments, such as the ones quoted by Heyman today. For those of you who still disagree, and think we should have taken Gausman, I have a couple of questions for you. First, can you find me a comment or a report like "best player I ever saw", or "only comes around every ten years" attributed to Gausman? Second, since you're clearly basing your opinion on KLaw or someone who might've seen the player twice, why would you place more credibility on that opinion than on the collective opinion of a number of Twins scouts that have seen the player a number of times over the player's entire timeline? Or are you arguing that it's rational to take a lesser talent based on need? And if you are positing that, for example, Gausman is not a sufficiently lesser talent than Buxton, what's your basis for that?

  9. #29
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,242
    Like
    105
    Liked 103 Times in 75 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by birdwatcher View Post
    This is spot on. The Twins believe they got the best player available in last year's draft. It's early, but now we're starting to hear some incredible reports and comments, such as the ones quoted by Heyman today. For those of you who still disagree, and think we should have taken Gausman, I have a couple of questions for you. First, can you find me a comment or a report like "best player I ever saw", or "only comes around every ten years" attributed to Gausman? Second, since you're clearly basing your opinion on KLaw or someone who might've seen the player twice, why would you place more credibility on that opinion than on the collective opinion of a number of Twins scouts that have seen the player a number of times over the player's entire timeline? Or are you arguing that it's rational to take a lesser talent based on need? And if you are positing that, for example, Gausman is not a sufficiently lesser talent than Buxton, what's your basis for that?
    Appel would have been both "need" and BPA in 2012. The selection of Buxton had to include other factors in the decision--but the Twins provided no comment to justify their choice.

    As far as this thread "need" vs BPA--the Twins "need" impact players at all positions. Consider the lack of power on the active roster (for years) as well as in starting pitching. There really is no "wrong" position to draft, only "wrong" or "right" players.

  10. #30
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,756
    Like
    1
    Liked 103 Times in 73 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    Appel would have been both "need" and BPA in 2012. The selection of Buxton had to include other factors in the decision--but the Twins provided no comment to justify their choice.

    As far as this thread "need" vs BPA--the Twins "need" impact players at all positions. Consider the lack of power on the active roster (for years) as well as in starting pitching. There really is no "wrong" position to draft, only "wrong" or "right" players.
    I understand Appel being need but how is he BPA? Most experts saw Buxton as BPA then and most think he is now. It has actually been well documented that most experts still rather have Buxton to Appel. Bixton was picked because he was the best player in the draft. Plain and simple.

  11. #31
    Senior Member Double-A
    Posts
    151
    Like
    0
    Liked 9 Times in 5 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kab21 View Post
    3) Can they come out of this fourth pick with ANY position player other than Bryant and we'll still think it was a good move?
    This place will explode.
    You are probably right about the explosion, but I think if they go with another position player, I would really want to see how they do in the draft as a whole. Originally, I was very much appalled by the idea of going underslot for McGuire. Although, I'm still not thrilled about it, if they were able to really grab some high upside (hopefully arms, maybe Manaea) with the next several picks, I might be able to keep from exploding.

  12. #32
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,290
    Like
    32
    Liked 131 Times in 81 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Pitz View Post
    You are probably right about the explosion, but I think if they go with another position player, I would really want to see how they do in the draft as a whole. Originally, I was very much appalled by the idea of going underslot for McGuire. Although, I'm still not thrilled about it, if they were able to really grab some high upside (hopefully arms, maybe Manaea) with the next several picks, I might be able to keep from exploding.
    There's a long time between the 4th and the 43rd pick. There's also a lot of risk that another team could be trying the same thing or that guys don't drop. At this point my armchair scouting is pretty set on the big 4 since i think Stewart has separated himself a little and he matches the Twins needs.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    Appel would have been both "need" and BPA in 2012. The selection of Buxton had to include other factors in the decision--but the Twins provided no comment to justify their choice.

    As far as this thread "need" vs BPA--the Twins "need" impact players at all positions. Consider the lack of power on the active roster (for years) as well as in starting pitching. There really is no "wrong" position to draft, only "wrong" or "right" players.
    This is incorrect. At least most sources, thought Buxton was the best player in the draft let alone the best pick available at #2. Most saw Appel as a #2 or #3 starter as his ceiling, not a #1 pitcher.

    I agree with your second paragraph though. The Twins have multiple needs. Pitching stands out, obviously but don't reach for a pitcher if you don't have to and everyone should bear in mind that the odds are heavily against said pitcher being a positive contributor in the majors. Particularly if that pitcher is drafted out of high school.

  14. #34
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,512
    Like
    74
    Liked 162 Times in 103 Posts
    Blog Entries
    31
    This article at Puckett's Pond was written a year ago, but seems just as relevant today.

    What type of player should the Twins draft? - Puckett's Pond - A Minnesota Twins Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More

    High school pitchers are the most risky, least likely to reach the majors and take the longest to get there. However, if they make it they do relatively well. College hitters look to be the safest bet. Do we take Bryant if he is available? Do we take Stewart knowing that many high pick high school pitchers never make it?

    Is the risk worth it? According to this article most aces come from high picks.

    2013 MLB Draft: Where have past ace pitchers been drafted? - The Crawfish Boxes

  15. #35
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,820
    Like
    176
    Liked 661 Times in 373 Posts
    Am I the only one that might feel better if they do go with Bryant if he's there with the first pick? This organization and pitcher development is hardly a match made in heaven.

    Why waste a high value pick on a position this organization struggles to evaluate? (I'm being more devil's advocate here, but I've been chewing on it more and more)

  16. #36
    Twins News Team MVP
    Posts
    6,726
    Like
    870
    Liked 847 Times in 543 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    Am I the only one that might feel better if they do go with Bryant if he's there with the first pick? This organization and pitcher development is hardly a match made in heaven.

    Why waste a high value pick on a position this organization struggles to evaluate? (I'm being more devil's advocate here, but I've been chewing on it more and more)
    No, you're not alone. I gotta think Bryant will be the BPA by #4. The risks in taking him are way lower for the organization---and---he potentially takes over almost immediately in the lineup, in the hole left by Willingham's imminent departure. I think the combined strategy of signing legitimately talented FA SPs and trading for established minor league talent is the best way for this organization to go.

  17. #37
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Turd Furgeson View Post
    This is incorrect. At least most sources, thought Buxton was the best player in the draft let alone the best pick available at #2. Most saw Appel as a #2 or #3 starter as his ceiling, not a #1 pitcher.

    I agree with your second paragraph though. The Twins have multiple needs. Pitching stands out, obviously but don't reach for a pitcher if you don't have to and everyone should bear in mind that the odds are heavily against said pitcher being a positive contributor in the majors. Particularly if that pitcher is drafted out of high school.
    so how do you get pitching then? If you always fear to take one, how do you get five of them? If the odds are low, don't you take even more, so some do work?
    Lighten up Francis....

  18. #38
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,820
    Like
    176
    Liked 661 Times in 373 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jokin View Post
    No, you're not alone. I gotta think Bryant will be the BPA by #4. The risks in taking him are way lower for the organization---and---he potentially takes over almost immediately in the lineup, in the hole left by Willingham's imminent departure. I think the combined strategy of signing legitimately talented FA SPs and trading for established minor league talent is the best way for this organization to go.
    Yeah, I'd almost rather the Twins take a bat at that pick because they are just miles better at evaluating hitters IMO. Then spend the next couple picks going for high upside arms. Bryant would have a spot on this team anytime he wants, he doesn't have to play in the field. Our DH is currently occupied by a "catcher", we'll have a spot for him.

    I think that's who I'm rooting for us to get and then, like you said, supplement the pitching via trade.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    so how do you get pitching then? If you always fear to take one, how do you get five of them? If the odds are low, don't you take even more, so some do work?
    Well, not that you can't take a pitcher at the top of the draft, but I'd prefer to take one that's of the Taillion, Bundy, Cole breed. If there's a position prospect who's equal, I'd generally prefer them because their success rate is much higher.

    I'd say traditionally, to load up on stand out arms in the latin american free agency market, and in later rounds of the draft, but to be honest I'm not caught up on where MLB is with all of that currently.

  20. #40
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,290
    Like
    32
    Liked 131 Times in 81 Posts
    While Stewart isn't quite at the same tier that Taillon, Bundy or Cole was, he isn't that far away from that type.

    Latin arms have a poor success rate as above average starters. Relievers are a different story though.

    I'm still a BPA guy but currently 3 of the top 4 BPA's are pitchers and imo Shipley has made a case to be the 5th although there are several guys in that tier. If Bryant is there (and not Gray/Appel) then I don't think you can pass on that kind of middle of the order bat that could be up for good in 2015.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.