Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

Five Twins make Baseball America's Top 100

  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#41 markos

markos

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,212 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 08:00 AM

 

Well, the league OPS was 11 points higher. Ballpark might have added some too? 28 points of OPS is well within the range of those factors, or just normal variation.

I guess I wouldn't call it microscopic, but I wouldn't point to it as evidence of definitive improvement either.

His wRC+ (which purportedly adjusts for league and ballpark factors) increased from 112 to 117. As to whether or not that 5-point increase in wRC+ is meaningful, well, that is certainly debatable. 


#42 zenser

zenser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 477 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 08:16 AM

Law has Lewis at 25 behind Gore (14) and Greene (22) but ahead of Wright and McKay.Gordon at 37 and Romero at 47.

  • birdwatcher, gunnarthor, nicksaviking and 4 others like this

#43 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 7,982 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 08:24 AM

This list kind of makes all of our trade offers for Archer and others funny and sad.

Another list might make our trade offers for Archer look reasonable, however.
  • gunnarthor, nicksaviking, Oldgoat_MN and 2 others like this

It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All Star

Game and an old timer's game. - Vin Scully


#44 Tomj14

Tomj14

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 320 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 08:28 AM

 

Another list might make our trade offers for Archer look reasonable, however.

Yes, Law has Gordon 37 and Romero at 47, so those two and 3 others isn't horrible.

 

If the twins front office is think Gordon is closer to 30 than 100, then maybe trading Polanco and Romero (and others) for Archer is the right thing to do. Sign Frazier and let Esocbar and Adrianza handle SS until Gordon is ready later this year or next.

Edited by Tomj14, 23 January 2018 - 08:47 AM.


#45 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 12,589 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 09:21 AM

His wRC+ (which purportedly adjusts for league and ballpark factors) increased from 112 to 117. As to whether or not that 5-point increase in wRC+ is meaningful, well, that is certainly debatable.


I think minor league wRC+ only considers league, not park, which would muddy the waters further.

#46 howieramone2

howieramone2

    Just say no to myths!

  • Members
  • 1,043 posts
  • LocationMaple Grove/Schaumburg

Posted 23 January 2018 - 09:48 AM

 

Just one prospect out of the top ninety is nothing to get real excited about guys.

The future star power is basically teenagers. The system is deep, and in the next year or so, we will see plenty of helium. One of the top 10 teams in baseball, with one of the top 10 farm systems in the not too distance future. The franchise, could not possibly be more healthy. 

  • Dman likes this

It's official. We received more for board scapegoat John Ryan Murphy, than we did for board favorites Pinto, Arcia, and Vargas combined.


#47 howieramone2

howieramone2

    Just say no to myths!

  • Members
  • 1,043 posts
  • LocationMaple Grove/Schaumburg

Posted 23 January 2018 - 09:54 AM

 

This list kind of makes all of our trade offers for Archer and others funny and sad.

It seems we as Twins fans' think our prospects are way better than other do. Based on this list we aren't getting a top end starter without Lewis in the trade.

Imagine how upset we would be if we traded Berrios in a couple of years for a couple of prospects rated in the 90's and a couple outside the top 100's.

There are probably 10-15 starters out there that would be acceptable to me. I don't lust after the mythical ace, and Lewis is untouchable.

It's official. We received more for board scapegoat John Ryan Murphy, than we did for board favorites Pinto, Arcia, and Vargas combined.


#48 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Minnesota Twins Whine Line Host

  • Members
  • 8,910 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 23 January 2018 - 10:25 AM

Gordon dropped 30 spots.
2016, #53
2017 #60
2018 #93.


Some player's value peaks way before he sees Major league pitching. I fear that's going to be the case with Gordon.

As time goes on his flaws will be pointed out more (not able to hit LH pitching even a little bit, not able to stick at SS)

#49 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Minnesota Twins Whine Line Host

  • Members
  • 8,910 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 23 January 2018 - 10:30 AM

Law has Lewis at 25 behind Gore (14) and Greene (22) but ahead of Wright and McKay. Gordon at 37 and Romero at 47.


Sigh... Every time I read about Gore I think what could have been. I like Lewis, but Gore was my draft crush...
  • Twins33, Oldgoat_MN, h2oface and 1 other like this

#50 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,653 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 10:50 AM

 

Sigh... Every time I read about Gore I think what could have been. I like Lewis, but Gore was my draft crush...

Jo Adell was mine ...


#51 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,425 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 11:52 AM

 

Some posters think a lot more highly of our farm system than all the other prognosticators. Rose colored glasses, perhaps. Time will tell

 

I respectfully submit that this is a mischaracterization. I can't think of a single poster, in this thread or others, who expressed a viewpoint radically different than the prognosticators. You pointed out the purported delusions of others. Let's hear YOUR thoughts, because maybe it's YOUR lens that needs a little buffing?;)Is it possible you think less of our farm system than (almost) all of the other prognosticators? Where do you think the system ranks?

 

Let's look at some numbers. Some facts. Personally, the opinions of the prognosticators and the numbers are all I have to go by. Where do you think the system stands relative to the 29 other teams? 

 

I think the system compares favorably (either a little better or a little worse) to a whole slew of organizations at right around #9. Atlanta, San Diego, NYY, CWS are systems that are standing out to the prognosticators and therefore to me. As the rankings come out, I believe you'll see those teams viewed in a tier (maybe I missed one or two), and then a whole group, including the Twins, in a second tier that probably includes TBR, MILW, PHIL, ASTROS, REDS, and maybe one or two others. 

 

What's YOUR opinion?

 

This list of 100 prospects shows a glaring reality about the difference between the haves and the have nots. If there was even distribution of top-end talent, every one of the teams would be represented by roughly four prospects among the top 120.Instead, ten teams claim 54 of the 100 spots on this list. I believe the Twins are one of nine teams with five or more selections. We are also being told by several prospect gurus that if the list was expanded to 120, we'd likely see a few more names from our system on the list, guys like Graterol, Kirillof, Jay, Romero, Badoo.

 

Time will tell, you're right about that, but I think you might be surprised by how many of the prognosticators believe this system ranks at the back end of the top ten systems. And I don't know of a single poster that's claiming the Twins' system is something other than what it is. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by birdwatcher, 23 January 2018 - 12:13 PM.

  • gunnarthor, h2oface and howieramone2 like this

#52 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,425 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 12:08 PM

 

This list kind of makes all of our trade offers for Archer and others funny and sad.

It seems we as Twins fans' think our prospects are way better than other do. Based on this list we aren't getting a top end starter without Lewis in the trade.

Imagine how upset we would be if we traded Berrios in a couple of years for a couple of prospects rated in the 90's and a couple outside the top 100's.

 

 

If those four prospects were Graterol, Javier, Romero, and Badoo? I don't think I'd be upset at all, assuming Berrios was traded from surplus.

  • gunnarthor and howieramone2 like this

#53 Tomj14

Tomj14

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 320 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 12:15 PM

 

If those four prospects were Graterol, Javier, Romero, and Badoo? I don't think I'd be upset at all, assuming Berrios was traded from surplus.

The teams looking to trade a top end sort of pitcher aren't trading because of surplus.

 

Are you willing to trade those for Archer or maybe a Mets starter? and do you think either team would take those 4 for their starter? I would trade them but I don't think it would be enough for the other team to make the trade, IMO.

Edited by Tomj14, 23 January 2018 - 12:16 PM.


#54 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 11,588 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 12:20 PM

 

Anyone think it possible that Rooker's bat ends up being bigger and better than Sano's?? Did I just commit blasphemy?

 

Hard to be bigger but could be better. The guy sounded like a work-a-holic in his pre-draft interviews. Seemed like a guy who was always looking to perfect his approach at the plate.

  • TNTwinsFan likes this

#55 jkcarew

jkcarew

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 177 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 12:39 PM

 

I'm not certain that you are looking at the correct data. 

 

Gordon's OPS:

2016: .721

2017: .749

OBP:

2016: .335

2017: .341

Thanks for the correction.I was including his 91 plate appearances in the 2016 Arizona fall league which enhanced the 2016 numbers.

 

It really comes down to what was going on in those last three months.The regression was across the board.We'll find out this year, I think.I'm worried, but on the other hand, there have been many 3-month blips in otherwise good and even great careers.


#56 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,425 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 01:13 PM

 

The teams looking to trade a top end sort of pitcher aren't trading because of surplus.

 

Are you willing to trade those for Archer or maybe a Mets starter? and do you think either team would take those 4 for their starter? I would trade them but I don't think it would be enough for the other team to make the trade, IMO.

 

Personally, I wouldn't trade those four prospects for a #2/3 starter like Archer. I'm aware that all four of them might fizzle, but history tells me that this is a remote possibility, and that it's much much more likely that injury to Archer turns it into a lopsided trade that sets the organization back. Javier might fizzle in AA, but he also might be a perrennial All-Star (Sickles). Graterol is one of the most exciting low-level pitching prospects in all of baseball, according to many, and projects as a potential ace. Romero projects as one rotation slot from Archer in terms of ceiling, and as a possible back end reliever otherwise, and is a year away at most. Badoo is starting to draw some pretty impressive comparables himself.

  • gunnarthor, Oldgoat_MN and howieramone2 like this

#57 markos

markos

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,212 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 01:38 PM

 

Thanks for the correction.I was including his 91 plate appearances in the 2016 Arizona fall league which enhanced the 2016 numbers.

 

It really comes down to what was going on in those last three months.The regression was across the board.We'll find out this year, I think.I'm worried, but on the other hand, there have been many 3-month blips in otherwise good and even great careers.

That makes so much more sense. Thanks for clarifying. 


#58 h2oface

h2oface

    Lifelong since '61

  • Members
  • 2,909 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 23 January 2018 - 06:28 PM

 

I respectfully submit that this is a mischaracterization. I can't think of a single poster, in this thread or others, who expressed a viewpoint radically different than the prognosticators. You pointed out the purported delusions of others. Let's hear YOUR thoughts, because maybe it's YOUR lens that needs a little buffing?;)Is it possible you think less of our farm system than (almost) all of the other prognosticators? Where do you think the system ranks?

 

Let's look at some numbers. Some facts. Personally, the opinions of the prognosticators and the numbers are all I have to go by. Where do you think the system stands relative to the 29 other teams? 

 

I think the system compares favorably (either a little better or a little worse) to a whole slew of organizations at right around #9. Atlanta, San Diego, NYY, CWS are systems that are standing out to the prognosticators and therefore to me. As the rankings come out, I believe you'll see those teams viewed in a tier (maybe I missed one or two), and then a whole group, including the Twins, in a second tier that probably includes TBR, MILW, PHIL, ASTROS, REDS, and maybe one or two others. 

 

What's YOUR opinion?

 

This list of 100 prospects shows a glaring reality about the difference between the haves and the have nots. If there was even distribution of top-end talent, every one of the teams would be represented by roughly four prospects among the top 120.Instead, ten teams claim 54 of the 100 spots on this list. I believe the Twins are one of nine teams with five or more selections. We are also being told by several prospect gurus that if the list was expanded to 120, we'd likely see a few more names from our system on the list, guys like Graterol, Kirillof, Jay, Romero, Badoo.

 

Time will tell, you're right about that, but I think you might be surprised by how many of the prognosticators believe this system ranks at the back end of the top ten systems. And I don't know of a single poster that's claiming the Twins' system is something other than what it is. 

 

Sorry. I don't have an opinion on prospect ratings. I find them frivolous. I let others play this game. Have at it. Have your fun. Perhaps means perhaps. It is not declaring purported delusions. Might be a bit of projection, there. I made an observation. I enjoyed your take.

 

So I stick with my parting statement as captain obvious as I might be. Time will tell.

Edited by h2oface, 23 January 2018 - 06:35 PM.


#59 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,653 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 06:39 PM

 

Sorry. I don't have an opinion on prospect ratings. I find them frivolous. I let others play this game. Have at it. Have your fun. Perhaps means perhaps. It is not declaring purported delusions. Might be a bit of projection, there. I made an observation. I enjoyed your take.

 

So I stick with my parting statement as captain obvious as I might be. Time will tell.

Wait, you don't have an opinion on prospect ratings but accused other posters of having rose colored glasses? That's .... something.

  • 70charger, dbminn, RaymondLuxuryYacht and 1 other like this

#60 h2oface

h2oface

    Lifelong since '61

  • Members
  • 2,909 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 23 January 2018 - 06:42 PM

 

Wait, you don't have an opinion on prospect ratings but accused other posters of having rose colored glasses? That's .... something.

 

Nothing wrong with rose colored glasses. I wear them sometimes, proudly. Had 'em on Sunday. That's...... another something.

Edited by h2oface, 23 January 2018 - 06:47 PM.