Senior Member
Posted 08 December 2017 - 09:41 AM
Yeah, he's fair. I'm not sure he's the best at the actual prospecting part - I like mlb.com's team a lot more and over the years, BP has had some great ones (but they keep getting hired by real teams).
A former AF SNCO who values integrity.
Posted 08 December 2017 - 09:43 AM
Law will be more correct on individual players, but in the aggregate he is not going to be a better prospect analyst than BA or mlb or bp.
Averaging his ranks with Sickels and Fangraphs will paint a really good picture.
Oops, you said a bad word :-)
Senior Member
Posted 08 December 2017 - 09:54 AM
Oops, you said a bad word :-)
Senior Member
Posted 08 December 2017 - 09:59 AM
Longerhagens is a very solid prospect analyst. I've always liked him.
Yeah, I like him too. I agree, look at BA, BP, fangraphs, Sickels, mlb.com and you'll get a lot better idea about a player/system. It's also interesting to see how different people view things - a player's height, are strikeouts a problem, how much is 'character' a thing, etc.But we really do have a lot of solid analysis for fans. I remember the dark ages where we were just told that the Twins had a couple pretty good prospects and couldn't really follow them.
A former AF SNCO who values integrity.
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:00 AM
Longerhagens is a very solid prospect analyst. I've always liked him.
I've liked Kiley and I also think Longerhagens is very good.MLB's prospect listing is the one I look at the least.
Edited by jimmer, 08 December 2017 - 10:01 AM.
Haighters gonna Haight
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:06 AM
but honestly who wasn't high on Buxton
The Astros? 
Nothing is so annoying as someone going on talking when I'm interrupting.
Senior Member
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:07 AM
I've liked Kiley and I also think Longerhagens is very good. MLB's prospect listing is the one I look at the least.
Senior Member
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:08 AM
Yeah, I like him too. I agree, look at BA, BP, fangraphs, Sickels, mlb.com and you'll get a lot better idea about a player/system. It's also interesting to see how different people view things - a player's height, are strikeouts a problem, how much is 'character' a thing, etc. But we really do have a lot of solid analysis for fans. I remember the dark ages where we were just told that the Twins had a couple pretty good prospects and couldn't really follow them.
A former AF SNCO who values integrity.
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:08 AM
The way I look at it, if I could only look at one list for all teams it would be mlb. It's the boring mainstream industry consensus.
But when I look at all the sources, it is the one I value the least, other than as a sanity check.
IMO, MLB gives too much credit for guys closer to the majors.
Senior Member
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:09 AM
IMO, MLB gives too much credit for guys closer to the majors.
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:34 AM
I think this is a fair take from Law.
What I like most about these moves are not necessarily the prospects they returned but the thinking that led to the moves in the first place. It shows an adaptability on the part of the front office. That money was originally slated for Marte. That didn't work out so they made a run at Ohtani. That didn't work out so they shuffled the money off to other teams in trade for prospects. All of this happened in a span of just three months.
Working in the margins like that is how mid-market teams get and stay competitive. The front office hasn't brought back a single "wow" player dating back to last deadline but they're consistently bringing in marginal guys who sometimes turn out to be long-term MLB contributors.
If you find a way to acquire a dozen marginal prospects over a few years, a couple of those guys will turn into quality MLB players and you've given up virtually nothing to acquire any of them (in this case, a couple of expiring contracts and fake money).
Senior Member
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:37 AM
I think this is a fair take from Law.
What I like most about these moves are not necessarily the prospects they returned but the thinking that led to the moves in the first place. It shows an adaptability on the part of the front office. That money was originally slated for Marte. That didn't work out so they made a run at Ohtani. That didn't work out so they shuffled the money off to other teams in trade for prospects.
Working in the margins like that is how mid-market teams get and stay competitive. The front office hasn't brought back a single "wow" player dating back to last deadline but they're consistently bringing in marginal guys who sometimes turn out to be long-term MLB contributors.
If you find a way to acquire a dozen marginal prospects over a few years, a couple of those guys will turn into quality MLB players and you've given up virtually nothing to acquire any of them (in this case, a couple of expiring contracts and fake money).
Conversely, you could say that the Twins originally zeroed in on a top prospect from Latin America (Marte), lost him somehow, zeroed in on another top prospect (Ohtani), didn't get him either. Pivoted to a former top prospect who lost some helium (Maitan) but were rejected and ended up settling for two C-level prospects.
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:45 AM
Conversely, you could say that the Twins originally zeroed in on a top prospect from Latin America (Marte), lost him somehow, zeroed in on another top prospect (Ohtani), didn't get him either. Pivoted to a former top prospect who lost some helium (Maitan) but were rejected and ended up settling for two C-level prospects.
That would require some serious pessimism and intentional negativity to draw that conclusion.
1. They didn't somehow lose Marte, the dude failed a physical.
2. Ohtani gets to go wherever he pleases. We shouldn't be even the least bit surprised that location is not Minnesota.
3. The Maitan thing stinks but when you have a legit top 100 SS prospect in the high minors, recently drafted another SS at #1 overall, it's not really surprising a young foreign kid looks at that and says "no thanks, ima just gonna go over here to the team with the absolutely atrocious farm system so i can be in the majors in three years".
The front office took their shots and rolled with it as each punch failed to land. In the end, they ended up with a couple of interesting prospects without giving up anything except their own time.
Posted 08 December 2017 - 10:50 AM
I've liked Kiley and I also think Longerhagens is very good.MLB's prospect listing is the one I look at the least.
MLB's list is near the bottom for me too. I do like some of the things they do, but they seem to be the outlier far most often on guys.
Scouting Report: Power: 30, Hitting: 50, Arm: 60, Defense: 45, Speed: 45. "Line drive swing and shows good contact and on-base abilities. Double's power at his peak. Strong arm from 2B or the OF, stiff hands. Not a fast runner, but above average instincts on the bases. Skinny body doesn't look the part, but will sneak up on you. ACL surgery sapped much of his athleticism." (Probably)
Posted 08 December 2017 - 04:39 PM
For those reading prospect reviews, I'd check out 2080, Baseball Census, and Prospect 1500 for options for different perspective, often very good perspective.
One of the guys I really respect as far as his eye, John Calvagno, expanded his Notes from the Sally site to include the Appy League last year, so that's possibly applicable for Twins fans as well.
Co-Editor at CallToThePen.com, covering Twins, Braves, minor leagues, and all other baseball!
Haighters gonna Haight
Posted 09 December 2017 - 08:14 PM
Mod note: The original poster asked for posts about Twins prospects being written up, the conversation drifted (with apparent buy-in from that original poster) toward discussion of the analysts themselves, then to processes by the front office regarding prospects, and as of now a stray reference to Terry Ryan is turning this thread into a referendum on, well, Terry Ryan. I have removed the latter bunch, and ask please to keep it closer to the intended topic. You can always start a new thread if your thirst to discuss Terry Ryan is unquenched.
Nothing is so annoying as someone going on talking when I'm interrupting.
Senior Member
Posted 21 December 2017 - 09:48 AM
Good stuff on Tom Hackimer:
https://www.fangraph...-pitching-nerd/
I suspect he won't have trouble staying in the game, even if he never makes the bigs.
Junior Member
Posted 21 December 2017 - 11:31 AM
I did not see this anywhere in the string, so I thought I would add that Sickels updated his Top 20 Twins Prospects for 2018.
https://www.minorlea...spects-for-2018
That Twins 2nd baseman - #29 - he doesn't run, he "ca-rew-zes" - Earl Weaver
Senior Member
Posted 21 December 2017 - 12:13 PM
MLB's list is near the bottom for me too. I do like some of the things they do, but they seem to be the outlier far most often on guys.
I think I like MLB pipeline mostly because formatting. Its the first place I go to compare prospects/teams/positions and get high level capsules of prospects.Some others add more depth like fangraphs, but overall MLB's Jim Callis & Jonathan Mayo do a great job:
https://www.mlb.com/...ton/c-263755102
(buxton isn't a prospect anymore but...)
Senior Member
Posted 21 December 2017 - 12:19 PM
I think I like MLB pipeline mostly because formatting. Its the first place I go to compare prospects/teams/positions and get high level capsules of prospects.Some others add more depth like fangraphs, but overall MLB's Jim Callis & Jonathan Mayo do a great job:
https://www.mlb.com/...ton/c-263755102
(buxton isn't a prospect anymore but...)
It's also not updated at all. They do it once in early February and then just slot in draft picks/international signings/trade acquisitions in a list.
