Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Article: Twins Daily Draft Preview: Mock Draft v. 3.0

dakota hudson mlb draft draft justin dunn alex kirilloff
  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Draft Czar

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 3,059 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 08:11 AM

It's time to put my money where my mouth is.

I'm not sure how I'll stack up against the biggest names in the industry, but there are a few things here I feel really good about and a few things that I don't.

Lots of phone calls are being made and there will probably be at least a couple dramatic turn of events over the next eight hours. But that's what makes it so fun. Enjoy!The last one.

1. Phillies - Kyle Lewis, OF Mercer. The latest buzz has the Phillies taking prep CF Mickey Moniak. But in my original mock, I said I had a gut-feeling that Lewis was going to be the guy. I’m going to go with my gut on this one. (Previous: A.J. Puk, LHP, Florida)

2. Reds - Nick Senzel, 3B, Tennessee. The lack of college bats coming off quickly could be a trend… or the Reds just like Senzel this much. (Previous: Kyle Lewis, OF, Mercer)

3. Braves - Corey Ray, OF, Louisville. Like the teams above them, the Braves have dollar flexibility too. The Braves have a few more picks (#40, #44, #76) on the first day too that they can get creative with. (No change)

4. Rockies - Mickey Moniak, OF, California prep. I still don’t think it’s wise for the Rockies to pass on top-end pitching, but if Moniak doesn’t go first. This is his landing spot. (Previous: Jason Groome, LHP, New Jersey prep where I said this, “I’ve been told Groome is the wild card of this draft and to not be surprised if he takes an Appel-like tumble”)

5. Brewers - Zack Collins, C, Miami. I felt good about the Perez pick until the recent PED reports. The Braun stuff is too recent to go back to that well. I don’t feel great about Collins, but that’s the choice. (Previous: Delvin Perez, SS, Puerto Rico prep)

6. A’s - A.J. Puk, LHP, Florida. This would work out well for Billy Beane. I had Puk rated #1 on my board. (Previous:Nick Senzel, 3B, Tennessee)

7. Marlins - Braxton Garrett, LHP, Alabama prep. I won’t be shocked if Garrett is the first prep pitcher off the board based on all the good things I heard about him all spring. (Previous: Mickey Moniak, OF, California prep)

8. Padres - Cal Quantrill, RHP, Stanford. Exactly as I said before: Lots of talk that Quantrill has a deal with Padres at #24. That doesn’t make sense to me. Draft Quantrill at #8 and take one of the high price tag guys at #24. Regardless, Padres are going to leave the draft with two or three top talents. (No change)

9. Tigers - Riley Pint, RHP, Kansas prep. I really like Pint and if he falls into the Tigers lap… good for them. (No change)

10. White Sox - Blake Rutherford, OF, California prep. I’m going to stick with Rutherford here. I considered a tumble to the Mets more than getting popped early by the Brewers. Interesting talk that his inflated asking price might be due to the Phillies trying to push him down. (No change)

11. Mariners - Justin Dunn, RHP, Boston College. I continue to mock Dunn going before the Twins because I really hope he falls. (Previous: Zack Collins, C, Miami)

12. Red Sox - Zack Burdi, RHP, Louisville. I don’t like this pick here, but when something makes a ton of sense and nothing has changed two weeks later, why change it? (No change)

13. Rays - Gavin Lux, SS, Wisconsin prep. Lux is the top shortstop now that Perez has a red flag. (Previous: Dakota Hudson, RHP, Mississippi State)

14. Indians - Alex Kirilloff, OF, Pennsylvania prep. I’m going to leave this here, even though I wouldn’t mind him dropping one more pick. (No change)

15. Twins - Dakota Hudson, RHP, Mississippi State. I think Dunn, Quantrill and Kirilloff all would be in play if available. The price tags on the prep arms have become too inflated to feel great about getting them done. (Previous: Justin Dunn, RHP, Boston College)

16. Angels - Taylor Trammell, OF, Georgia prep. (No change)

17. Astros - Cody Sedlock, RHP, Illinois. (No change)

18. Yankees - Will Craig, 3B, Wake Forest. (No change)

19. Mets - Matt Thaiss, C, Virginia. (No change)

20. Dodgers - Jordan Sheffield, RHP, Vanderbilt. (No change)

21. Blue Jays - Garrett Whitley, RHP, Texas prep. (Previous: Kevin Gowdy, RHP, California prep)

22. Pirates - Nolan Jones, SS, Pennsylvania prep. (No change)

23. Cardinals - Delvin Perez, SS, Puerto Rico prep. There’s not a better potential landing spot for Perez. (Previous: Kyle Muller, LHP, Texas prep)

24. Padres - Matt Manning, RHP, California prep. Manning will fall due to money demands. Quantrill won’t. So while Manning gets the bigger bonus, he won’t go before Quantrill. (No change)

25. Padres - Will Smith, C, Louisville. Nobody has the helium of Smith right now. (Previous: Chris Okey, C, Clemson)

26. White Sox - Eric Lauer, LHP, Kansas State. (Previous: Gavin Lux, SS, Wisconsin prep)

27. Orioles - Kyle Muller, LHP, Texas prep (Previous: Eric Lauer, LHP, Kent State)

28. Nationals - Jason Groome, LHP, New Jersey prep. The Nationals always seem to both a) not get scared away and :cool: get their way. (Previous: Alec Hansen, RHP, Oklahoma)

29. Nationals - Robert Tyler, RHP, Georgia. (No change except I had him 28 previously)

30. Rangers - Josh Lowe, 3B, Georgia prep. (No change)

31. Mets - Bryan Reynolds, OF, Vanderbilt. (Previous: T.J. Zeuch, RHP, Pittsburgh)

32. Dodgers - C.J. Chatham, SS, Florida Atlantic. (Previous: Joey Wentz, LHP, Kansas HS)

33. Cardinals - Buddy Reed, OF, Florida. (No change)

34. Cardinals - Logan Shore, RHP, Florida. (No change.)

---
Bonus picks

35. Reds - Kevin Gowdy, RHP, California prep. (Previous: Forrest Whitley, RHP, Texas prep)

40. Braves - Ian Anderson, RHP, New York prep. Braves have been rumored to be working on a “package” deal: bat at #3 and arm here. (No change)

42. Phillies - Joey Wentz, LHP, Kansas prep. The Phillies are going to get to someone, though no idea who that is. (Previous: Braxton Garrett, LHP, Alabama prep)

What do you think?

Click here to view the article

#2 tobi0040

tobi0040

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 5,693 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 08:45 AM

The projections on Hudson vary prett wildly. I guess that is why he may be available at 15. I would not hate the pick, especially if he signed for a little less and we were able to pay up with our next pick.


http://www.chicagono...ate-university/
  • gunnarthor likes this

#3 operation mindcrime

operation mindcrime

    Minnesota Twins

  • Member
  • 3,081 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 08:48 AM

If Groome is available we should take him!

#4 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    What's His OPS?

  • Member
  • 12,619 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 09 June 2016 - 08:49 AM

It's very possible I could have missed the article on college catchers, but what's the story on Matt Thaiss? If he's good enough to be projected at 19, I wouldn't mind a C at 15...


#5 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Moderator
  • 14,731 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:13 AM

If Groome is available at #15, I'd like the Twins to think about taking him. Heck, if the Twins' BPA is on the board at #15 I'd take him, sign-ability be damned.

 

The Twins aren't totally cap-strapped and can create some flexibility, with over $8M to spend. With the success rate of guys picked after round 10, they can draft 30 college seniors and offer 5K to all of them for all I care.

 

Even if they can't get a deal done, they'll have a top 3 pick next year and #16, then they can pull all the shenanigans the Padres, Braves and Phillies are pulling this year. If the Twins had #1 and #16 next year, they could likely get two top 10 guys; I would be more excited about that than whomever they would have otherwise gotten to sign at #16 this year.

  • bluechipper and Dman like this

#6 tobi0040

tobi0040

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 5,693 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:16 AM

If Groome is available at #15, I'd like the Twins to think about taking him. Heck, if the Twins' BPA is on the board at #15 I'd take him, sign-ability be damned.
 
The Twins aren't totally cap-strapped and can create some flexibility, with over $8M to spend. With the success rate of guys picked after round 10, they can draft 30 college seniors and offer 5K to all of them for all I care.
 
Even if they can't get a deal done, they'll have a top 3 pick next year and #16, then they can pull all the shenanigans the Padres, Braves and Phillies are pulling this year. If the Twins had #1 and #16 next year, they could likely get two top 10 guys; I would be more excited about that than whomever they would have otherwise gotten to sign at #16 this year.



I posted this to the wrong draft thread initially. But the same thoughts as you:

If Groome is a 1-1 talent in this draft, I would completely punt on my second round pick and take him at 15. They could draft me and pay me $20k.

Look at this list of second round picks. If you want to find a player with a career WAR over 21 you need to go back 33 years to Frank Viola. Chargois is a hot prospect and you have some decent role players here. But if you did a study to weigh the value of 1-1 versus 15 and 56 I am guessing 1-1 comes out by a wide margin, even if you start with the premise that this is not an Alex Rodriguez, Bryce Harper type 1-1 year. If you start at 2009 and go back, you have 50 second round picks. 42 of the 50 (84%) have a career WAR of less than five.

To be quite honest, I would rather see the Twins try something like this and fail than not to try at all.

http://www.baseball-...pe=franch_round
  • dgwills likes this

#7 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Draft Czar

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 3,059 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:17 AM

I'd be surprised if Groome is even on the Twins board. I just posted on the other thread that along with a high price tag, he also has "off field" issues. I couldn't get anything more specific than that. This was from the same person that told me a could weeks ago that Groome was going to slide.

  • notoriousgod71 likes this

#8 tobi0040

tobi0040

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 5,693 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:35 AM

I'd be surprised if Groome is even on the Twins board. I just posted on the other thread that along with a high price tag, he also has "off field" issues. I couldn't get anything more specific than that. This was from the same person that told me a could weeks ago that Groome was going to slide.


Not even remotely surprising. Meanwhile the Nats come away with a 1-1 talent at 28, just like they did at 16 with Lucas Giolito in 2012.

The only thing I can remember us doing under the slotting rules is go above slot with Gonsalves, who also had "character issues" and/or mystery around why he was sliding. By any account that worked out great for us. Not sure why we would not try more of it.

#9 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Moderator
  • 14,731 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:41 AM

Interesting. "Off field" issues didn't stop the Twins from drafting Gonsalves, though no two issues are the same.

 

Even if it's not Groome, I'd still go BPA sign-ability be damned. In every other pro draft, teams trade picks, both up and down in that draft and in future drafts. MLB has a unique quirky caveat about getting a free pick the following year if you can't sign one of your top guys, the Twins should really take advantage of this. The NFL and NBA expect their picks to play right now, yet they still trade for the rights to future picks. In baseball, a guy you pick in 2018 could still beat a guy drafted in 2014 to the majors.

 

Some day I think a smart team is going to come around and de-value the recency of their picks in exchange for the ability to hoard picks for a particular draft thus being able to play puppet master and pull all the strings.


#10 Bob Sacamento

Bob Sacamento

    Member

  • Member
  • 1,396 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon
  • Twitter: tturbo420

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:50 AM

With Groome already decommitting to Vandy and going to the Chipotle JC where he'd be allowed back in the draft in 2017, he's already posturing himself to get paid what he wants or come back next year for it

  • gunnarthor and howieramone2 like this

#11 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    G.O.A.T.

  • Moderator
  • 14,263 posts
  • Locationthe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:57 AM

The real question is how much better next year's class will be... and that's a dangerous assumption to make this far out on it's own.If that class is significantly better, then trying to accommodate Groom makes some sense.It's probably worth asking how much he wants though first.If he's asking 8M, it's pointless to waste time.He's not coming here.

  • markos likes this

#12 Bob Sacamento

Bob Sacamento

    Member

  • Member
  • 1,396 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon
  • Twitter: tturbo420

Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:01 AM

 

The real question is how much better next year's class will be... and that's a dangerous assumption to make this far out on it's own.If that class is significantly better, then trying to accommodate Groom makes some sense.It's probably worth asking how much he wants though first.If he's asking 8M, it's pointless to waste time.He's not coming here.

Rumor has it he's asking for top 3 pick money so something close to ~7M if it's true


#13 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Draft Czar

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 3,059 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:03 AM

Gonsalves much-publicized "issue" was about a teammate who was smoking weed and Gonsalves not throwing him under the bus. I talked to Stephen about it, it was all very overstated. He dropped because his curveball never took steps forward. Different deals.

 

Groome committed to Chipola and a lot of people believe it's because he couldn't get admitted to Vanderbilt. The latest rumor has Braves popping Anderson at #3 and hope to end Groome's slide at #40.

  • gunnarthor and Bob Sacamento like this

#14 Bob Sacamento

Bob Sacamento

    Member

  • Member
  • 1,396 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon
  • Twitter: tturbo420

Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:07 AM

 

I'd be surprised if Groome is even on the Twins board. I just posted on the other thread that along with a high price tag, he also has "off field" issues. I couldn't get anything more specific than that. 

Off field issues could mean so many different things.  Is that he's a standup dick?  Didn't stop the Twins from taking Kohl Stewart.  Is it that he was suspended for 30 days by New Jersey Baseball because of school registering issues?  Is it recreational drugs?  Is it his work ethic? Is he dumb as a box of rocks? etc.

Edited by Bob Sacamento, 09 June 2016 - 10:08 AM.


#15 tobi0040

tobi0040

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 5,693 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:10 AM

Rumor has it he's asking for top 3 pick money so something close to ~7M if it's true


The number I hear is $4m, which we could probably meet if we were creative. Most 17 year olds are not going to say no to $4m, IMO. Nobody in the second round or late in the first have a shot at $7M.

If our choices are 1-1 talent and punt on the second pick, or toolsy HS corner OF who will take 5-6 years to get here and likely will never hit for power....seems like an easy choice.

Edited by tobi0040, 09 June 2016 - 10:11 AM.


#16 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 9,841 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:43 AM

Some people think Groome is 1-1 talent but not all agree. And part of making it to the majors is factoring in other issues including make up.  Teams value those risks and act accordingly.  I don't know what the issues Groome has are but others do.  Keep in mind that HS pitchers aren't the safest bet in the first place, I'm not sure I'd throw my draft into chaos to take this guy.  If we draft him with plans to give him more than slot, we have to know he'll take it, otherwise we wasted those picks.  And if he's telling us he won't sign for (example) less than 4.3m, they might want to use the money on more players.  

  • howieramone2 likes this

#17 dgwills

dgwills

    Member

  • Member
  • 592 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:11 AM

 

I'd be surprised if Groome is even on the Twins board. I just posted on the other thread that along with a high price tag, he also has "off field" issues. I couldn't get anything more specific than that. This was from the same person that told me a could weeks ago that Groome was going to slide.

Off the field issues don't worry me too much in a teenager. At least not enough to pass on that kind of value. Plenty of time to grow up. Unless he's committing felonies of course. I do agree that it would likely bother the Twin's as they are pretty conservative.

Gutsy Mock draft on your part. Picking all those guys to fall out of the first 20 picks. Remind me to come back and give you some credit after the draft if you're close.

 


#18 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Member
  • 2,292 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:32 AM

 

If Groome is available at #15, I'd like the Twins to think about taking him. Heck, if the Twins' BPA is on the board at #15 I'd take him, sign-ability be damned.

 

The Twins aren't totally cap-strapped and can create some flexibility, with over $8M to spend. With the success rate of guys picked after round 10, they can draft 30 college seniors and offer 5K to all of them for all I care.

 

 

The $8 million is only for rounds 1-10, punting on every pick after round 10 wouldn't help them sign Groome.  

 

I'm guessing they'd have to go underslot in Round 2, and at least with one of the supplemental picks (not that I'm against going this route, just pointing it out)

 

Edited by alarp33, 09 June 2016 - 11:33 AM.

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


#19 Hrbowski

Hrbowski

    Minnesota Twins

  • Member
  • 2,544 posts
  • LocationA small town city

Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:35 AM

 

Off the field issues don't worry me too much in a teenager. At least not enough to pass on that kind of value. Plenty of time to grow up. Unless he's committing felonies of course. I do agree that it would likely bother the Twin's as they are pretty conservative.

Gutsy Mock draft on your part. Picking all those guys to fall out of the first 20 picks. Remind me to come back and give you some credit after the draft if you're close.

Just about every player who had makeup issues has been a disaster for the drafting team. Bubba Starlin, Donovan Tate, Tim Beckham, Matt Bush, Delmon Young, Josh Hamilton.... The only big time bust (non injury related) who didn't have makeup issues in high school was Josh Vitters.

It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain


#20 alarp33

alarp33

    Member

  • Member
  • 2,292 posts

Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:40 AM

 

Just about every player who had makeup issues has been a disaster for the drafting team. Bubba Starlin, Donovan Tate, Tim Beckham, Matt Bush, Delmon Young, Josh Hamilton.... The only big time bust (non injury related) who didn't have makeup issues in high school was Josh Vitters.

 

Josh Hamilton had makeup issues pre-draft? You'll have to refresh me on those, because pretty much every team thought he was the perfect prospect. 

 

Tim Beckham pre-draft scouting report:  "His makeup is a plus, as he displays an enjoyment of the game and energy on the field" - Baseball America

 

Donovan Tate http://www.perfectga...spx?article=852

 

Frankly, I can't see 1 inkling of make-up questions for any one of these guys except Matt Bush leading up to their draft.  This seems like odd revisionist history

 

 

Edited by alarp33, 09 June 2016 - 11:59 AM.

  • notoriousgod71 and d-mac like this

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




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: dakota hudson, mlb draft, draft, justin dunn, alex kirilloff