I won't copy the whole thing, but here are two sentences from the ESPN analysis of the Wimmers' pick.....
“There's some question whether he'll hold up as a starter, but I think average fastball/two plus pitches/control is a starter, until his performance proves otherwise. Wimmers is the closest thing to a Mike Leake this draft class has, although he's not the athlete that Leake is and hasn't pitched in a major baseball conference as Leake did.”
Law did say he thought he was the closest to the majors of any pitcher in that draft (well, him or Chris Sale).
Look, I get the pick, I just don’t see him as anywhere likely a #2. Name the number two pitchers (like, the 30-50th best pitchers in the league, maybe 20-35). Do we think it is LIKELY that Wimmers is (was) that? 20% likely? I just don’t think most pitchers reach that, especially not pitchers with an average or below average FB. His likely upside is a 3, with a more likely outcome a 4/5 if he's a starter someday. That’s mostly because that is the likely outcome for most pitching prospects that end up starters, not because he is a bad pitcher. Heck, most become relievers if they even make the majors.
I did not kill the pick at the time, but I also didn’t expect him to be a 2. I expected him to be up this year, as a 4/5, with him becoming a 3/4 over a year or two.
Great post. A few people posting above don't realize how good a #2 or #3 starter is. No way Wimmers had that sort of upside. A #2 starter is a Matt Cain type and a #3 is a Gio Gonzalez or Jon Lester type. The Twins had an ace in Santana but other than that they have had no #2 recently and maybe 1 season each from Baker and Frankie as #3's.