Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Article: Seth's Midseason Top 40 Twins Prospects: Part 3 (1-10)

jose berrios max kepler tyler jay nick gordon stephen gonsalves
  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#41 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,800 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 07:57 AM

 

Only looking at Polanco's 160 at bats in his specified sample vs Kepler's entire career is a terrible example.

I think you are the only one who read Thrylos' statement as "Polanco's recent numbers vs. Kepler's career numbers".  Go back and read it again, that wasn't explicitly written nor do I think it was even implied (especially considering the same post invoked their similar ages, which implies the author is far more interested in their current place on the development curve than minor league career numbers, which very few people cite as meaningful, ever).

 

And frankly, Polanco compares pretty well, especially with the added potential to be a middle infielder.  I have no problem with Kepler being ahead of Polanco, but I think it is fair to question how Kepler would be ranked #1 and Polanco #6 at this point.

 

 


#42 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,800 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 08:03 AM

 

By five months.

 

I am one of the stronger advocates here for age adjustment when evaluating prospects, but this is cutting it awfully fine. Especially if comparing a player from a baseball playing country to one that is not.

It was just a statement of fact, they are very close in age.  It made no absolute claims based on that fact that could be considered "cutting it awfully fine."  It wasn't claiming that Polanco is better than Kepler due to age, or that he can develop more, etc.  Just that, if Kepler gets points for taking a step forward on the development curve in the past 12 months, then Polanco might deserve similar credit for his recent performances too because he is similarly young.  Not necessarily equivalent credit, if Kepler gets bonus points for his unlikely origins, but comparable enough to cast doubt on the 5 spot gap between them in Seth's rankings (the context of the original post).


#43 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,075 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 08:53 AM

 

Then why don't they turn into big leaguers?

 

 

But they do. At a success rate pretty much the same or better than that of other organizations.


#44 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,190 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 09:06 AM

 

I think you are the only one who read Thrylos' statement as "Polanco's recent numbers vs. Kepler's career numbers".  Go back and read it again, that wasn't explicitly written nor do I think it was even implied (especially considering the same post invoked their similar ages, which implies the author is far more interested in their current place on the development curve than minor league career numbers, which very few people cite as meaningful, ever).

 

And frankly, Polanco compares pretty well, especially with the added potential to be a middle infielder.  I have no problem with Kepler being ahead of Polanco, but I think it is fair to question how Kepler would be ranked #1 and Polanco #6 at this point.

 

Maybe I read it wrong, but the crux of the argument in that post seemed to place great significance on 2016 Jorge Polanco.  Again, I have no issues with someone calling Polanco an equal or greater prospect than Kepler, I just think breaking down stats into super small sample sizes isn't that informative.  

 

2015 MiLB numbers;

 

Polanco - .288/.339/.386

Kepler - .322/.416/.531

 

That's not an insignificant difference. I have no idea if Polanco can play SS long term, but if he gets added pts for SS, then Kepler should for CF as well... the Twins seem equally likely to play Kepler in CF as Polanco at SS.  

 

I think they both have potential to be High OBP guys that this lineup desperately needs. 

Edited by alarp33, 13 June 2016 - 09:09 AM.

"The game has changed since I've entered, it's for bright, energetic negotiators moreso than anything I possess." - Terry Ryan 2007


#45 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 29,727 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 09:16 AM

 

But they do. At a success rate pretty much the same or better than that of other organizations.

 

In the last 10 years? Wanna take that bet?

 

And yes, the last 10 years matter more than guys drafted 25 years ago. The game has changed.

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. Oh, and I have at least one blog post now......The table on my first blog post is now fixed. Sigh.


#46 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,863 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 13 June 2016 - 10:05 AM

 

Maybe I am reading it wrong, but I didn't think that was the comparison implied. Just that Polanco's recent numbers stack up pretty well with Kepler's recent numbers, and he is younger and potentially plays a more important defensive position.

It is more about projection imo. Polanco projects as a fine player but Kepler has far more potential offensively. 

I could see a very good argument for placing Polanco as high as #3 and Kepler at #2 though.

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#47 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 15,800 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 10:33 AM

 

Maybe I read it wrong, but the crux of the argument in that post seemed to place great significance on 2016 Jorge Polanco.  Again, I have no issues with someone calling Polanco an equal or greater prospect than Kepler, I just think breaking down stats into super small sample sizes isn't that informative.  

 

2015 MiLB numbers;

 

Polanco - .288/.339/.386

Kepler - .322/.416/.531

 

That's not an insignificant difference. I have no idea if Polanco can play SS long term, but if he gets added pts for SS, then Kepler should for CF as well... the Twins seem equally likely to play Kepler in CF as Polanco at SS.  

 

I think they both have potential to be High OBP guys that this lineup desperately needs. 

That's fair, although I think Polanco's admittedly small MLB sample is encouraging -- he's looked pretty darn comfortable as a MLB hitter from day 1, which is refreshing.

 

I won't quibble any further with their prospect rankings, I am more concerned with the lack of MLB opportunity for Polanco.

  • alarp33 likes this

#48 blindeke

blindeke

    Member

  • Members
  • 464 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 10:42 AM

 

...looks like your wish has been granted :)!

 

http://minnesota.twi...ex.jsp?c_id=min

 

WHOOPSIES!


#49 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 17,431 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 06:13 PM

 

I like Seth's plan on Tyler Jay.  Was thinking they'd just taper off his innings with the Miracle. But maybe give him a look in the 'pen at AA just as a carrot and a reward for a solid season. Then, in 2017 start him again in Fort Myers, and if he comes out of the chute fast, get him into the Chattanooga rotation by May.

 

That's maybe my plan for 2016, but it certainly isn't for 2017. I'd have him star, as a starter, in Chattanooga. 


#50 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Twins World Champions in 2019

  • Members
  • 10,073 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 13 June 2016 - 07:05 PM

 

 

.. the Twins seem equally likely to play Kepler in CF as Polanco at SS. 

 

 

Unless they trade Buxton or he flops, Kepler will not play in CF. Plus, he really is not a centerfielder.

-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#51 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,190 posts

Posted 13 June 2016 - 07:38 PM

Unless they trade Buxton or he flops, Kepler will not play in CF. Plus, he really is not a centerfielder.


I think this year has proved we should never pretend to know what the Twins will do.... But he's made as many starts in CF as they've given Polanco at SS this year. Plouffe and Escobar have each been on the DL so there's been plenty of opportunity to get him in lineup. (I'm not saying he's not a SS, I'm saying it sure appears the Twins don't think he is)

"The game has changed since I've entered, it's for bright, energetic negotiators moreso than anything I possess." - Terry Ryan 2007


#52 FormerMinnasotan

FormerMinnasotan

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Members
  • 650 posts

Posted 16 June 2016 - 11:12 AM

But they do. At a success rate pretty much the same or better than that of other organizations.

I disagree, just look at Jose Berrios. Stud starter until this year and mysteriously the Twins can't translate Berrios' top tier talent into a top tier starting pitcher. It'll be the same when Stewart, Jay, Gonsalves, and Romero come up to the bigs. Pathetic, really...

#53 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 29,727 posts

Posted 16 June 2016 - 12:00 PM

 

I disagree, just look at Jose Berrios. Stud starter until this year and mysteriously the Twins can't translate Berrios' top tier talent into a top tier starting pitcher. It'll be the same when Stewart, Jay, Gonsalves, and Romero come up to the bigs. Pathetic, really...

 

I think it is a bit early to say that about Berrios......very early. And probably wrong.

  • 70charger likes this

It's been a fun year so far, GO Twins. Oh, and I have at least one blog post now......The table on my first blog post is now fixed. Sigh.


#54 FormerMinnasotan

FormerMinnasotan

    Pensacola Blue Wahoos

  • Members
  • 650 posts

Posted 16 June 2016 - 12:28 PM

I think it is a bit early to say that about Berrios......very early. And probably wrong.

First I hope I am wrong (I would love Berrios to be as good if not better than advertised). Secondly why is he struggling so much. A few clunkers are normal as he is human, but honestly most of the season for Berrios has a struggle. That's no like Berrios. At the rate Jose is pitching he won't even be called up in September as he can't even dominate AAA hitters right now. Sorry, just frustrated in the whole season and with Berrios' and Gonsalves' recent struggles it is hard to be over joyed when our top prospects aren't playing up to their potential.

#55 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 7,337 posts

Posted 16 June 2016 - 04:16 PM

Barring catastrophic injury, Berrios floor is a 4th starter.

That's his absolute floor.

Never ceases to amaze me how such tiny sample sizes can change people's perceptions.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: jose berrios, max kepler, tyler jay, nick gordon, stephen gonsalves