Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Photo

Tyler Jay Traded to Reds

  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#41 AlwaysinModeration

AlwaysinModeration

    Rochester Red Wings

  • Members
  • 2,294 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 02:09 AM

So, I just wasted the past hour reading through past threads on the 2015 draft. Interesting (and humbling) to reread what everyone one (included myself!) said about Jay and the others available.

My own comment about Benintendi:
http://twinsdaily.co...tendi/?p=344241
In many ways, Benintendi was another "miss" for me because I didn't foresee the flyball/launch angle/power revolution that was going to overtake baseball.

Interesting to read that thread and the Ben Revere comps he was getting.

Other draft pick threads from that day:
http://twinsdaily.co...-sixth-overall/
http://twinsdaily.co...ad-cheat-sheet/


Interesting reading those threads, thanks for posting. The best, by far, was a comment by a poster named “Captain Hindsight”:

“Seems like things are pointing to Jay. Manual, Callis and Mayo all have him as the Twins selection in their final mocks before the draft. I'd find that a highly disappointing selection if it turns out to be true as I'm concerned about how his body and stuff will hold up as a starter. Speaking of which, noticed he was sitting more 91-93 instead of 94-96 in his performance today.”
  • 70charger likes this

#42 twinsfanstreif

twinsfanstreif

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 663 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 02:51 AM

So, I just wasted the past hour reading through past threads on the 2015 draft. Interesting (and humbling) to reread what everyone one (included myself!) said about Jay and the others available. 
 
My own comment about Benintendi:
http://twinsdaily.co...tendi/?p=344241
In many ways, Benintendi was another "miss" for me because I didn't foresee the flyball/launch angle/power revolution that was going to overtake baseball.
 
Interesting to read that thread and the Ben Revere comps he was getting.
 
Other draft pick threads from that day:
http://twinsdaily.co...-sixth-overall/
http://twinsdaily.co...ad-cheat-sheet/


I just read through a bunch of those threads and only a few people even mention Benintendi with a user named monkeypaws saying they like him, a few others said they'd be ok with him. I did however find this gem of a comment from me (that I don't remember making)

twinsfanstreif
08 June 2015 - 06:42 PM
Jay is pretty much the only guy I would be disappointed with
  • birdwatcher, Dman and railmarshalljon like this

#43 bunt_vs_the_shift

bunt_vs_the_shift

    Elizabethton Twins

  • Members
  • 46 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 11 June 2019 - 05:50 AM

 

I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise, and you are correct. 

 

If you are suggesting I'm slow on the uptake here... You may be correct!

 

If I misread the venting for suggesting a different strategy, then that's my bad. I was just trying to make the point that it doesn't matter where he was drafted. The team has moved on, so no use in Jay taking up space and obstructing another player's development. Take the money. Next man up. 

  • Dozier's Glorious Hair likes this

#44 bunt_vs_the_shift

bunt_vs_the_shift

    Elizabethton Twins

  • Members
  • 46 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 11 June 2019 - 06:11 AM

 

I'm not sure ownership has ever made a commitment to use money like that. They are willing to spend less when rebuilding but have never shown any commitment to pushing payroll or using 'saved' money in that manner.

 

Respectfully disagree. It's impossible to attribute where specific money comes from for specific moves. You can say that they took certain money that came off the books from Player A and turned it into Player B. But how do you know that this player flipping money doesn't get invested into the analytics department, or the technology in Fort Myers, or something else of value... Sure, it may have gone towards a fancy cappuccino machine for Jim Pohlad, but I guess I don't really care because the Twins are 43-21 so I'm not going to bust their chops about trading Tyler Jay for cash. I'd like to think that cash went into the war chest, but who knows. Either way, I hope they turn it into some pitching!

 

 


#45 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 11,979 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 11 June 2019 - 06:34 AM



It's okay to call this pick a major bust, because it is...
  • USAFChief, James, nicksaviking and 4 others like this

#46 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,027 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 08:06 AM

 



It's okay to call this pick a major bust, because it is...

 

 

Couldn't agree more, Vanimal, and it's okay to admit it as long as it's not part of a false argument that the Twins are particularly good at busting draft choices.

  • gunnarthor and James like this

#47 puckstopper1

puckstopper1

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 401 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 08:36 AM

Too bad.Had high hopes for Jay when he was drafted.

 

So far his career is more like AWA Jobber Kenny "the sod buster" Jay than former all star pitcher Joey Jay...

That Twins 2nd baseman - #29 - he doesn't run, he "ca-rew-zes" - Earl Weaver


#48 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 13,948 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 10:59 AM

 

Couldn't agree more, Vanimal, and it's okay to admit it as long as it's not part of a false argument that the Twins are particularly good at busting draft choices.

 

I'd agree, there's been 6 GMs during during that run and all three of those picks were overseen by only one regime. From what I'm seeing from the club now, I'm much more comfortable that the organization is getting optimal intel on the guys they are selecting.

 

  • Carole Keller, birdwatcher and wsnydes like this

#49 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,695 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 11:15 AM

 

I'd agree, there's been 6 GMs during during that run and all three of those picks were overseen by only one regime. From what I'm seeing from the club now, I'm much more comfortable that the organization is getting optimal intel on the guys they are selecting.

Why is that? I'm not necessarily disagreeing but the new FO has had three drafts now and two trade deadlines and have managed only one top 100 prospect (Lewis). The 2017 draft doesn't stand up well just a couple years out. It's way too early to make any judgments but i'm wondering where your optimism is coming from.

  • h2oface likes this

#50 Danchat

Danchat

    Pro Bowl Armchair QB

  • Members
  • 4,466 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 11:55 AM

Why is that? I'm not necessarily disagreeing but the new FO has had three drafts now and two trade deadlines and have managed only one top 100 prospect (Lewis). The 2017 draft doesn't stand up well just a couple years out. It's way too early to make any judgments but i'm wondering where your optimism is coming from.

At this point it’s way too early to evaluate the Falvine drafts. We have a ways to go before we know if they are good drafters / international prospect finders.

Edited by Danchat, 11 June 2019 - 11:55 AM.

Check out my work at Purple Pain, a Vikings forum: 

Mock Draft 2019

Running Back Rankings - 2019 Draft Class


#51 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,695 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 11:57 AM

 

At this point it’s way too early to evaluate the Falvine drafts. We have a ways to go before we know if they are good drafters / international prospect finders.

Yeah, I said as much. Was wondering where he was finding his optimism on those drafts.


#52 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 13,948 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 11:58 AM

 

Why is that? I'm not necessarily disagreeing but the new FO has had three drafts now and two trade deadlines and have managed only one top 100 prospect (Lewis). The 2017 draft doesn't stand up well just a couple years out. It's way too early to make any judgments but i'm wondering where your optimism is coming from.

 

All areas of the organization appear to now revolve around gathering, analyzing and utilizing as much data as possible. We're still going to see draft busts, that's likely inevitable, but at this time I don't think it's going to be for a lack of due diligence.

  • beckmt likes this

#53 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 7,177 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:00 PM

Why is that? I'm not necessarily disagreeing but the new FO has had three drafts now and two trade deadlines and have managed only one top 100 prospect (Lewis). The 2017 draft doesn't stand up well just a couple years out. It's way too early to make any judgments but i'm wondering where your optimism is coming from.


Our farm system is catastrophically overrated if our 2017 draft doesn't stand up, as 3 of our top 9 prospects are from that draft class.

#54 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 29,458 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:07 PM

 

Our farm system is catastrophically overrated if our 2017 draft doesn't stand up, as 3 of our top 9 prospects are from that draft class.

 

The thing about they system I wonder.....Houston just keeps pulling up good to great players. MN has pulled up Garver and, um, who in the last two+ years for their debut? And who is likely to come up this year? I might be missing someone, but there doesn't seem to be much actual help coming up right now (or recently).

  • h2oface likes this

It's IL now, btw, not DL.....


#55 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,027 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:15 PM

My "optimism" is based on this:

 

1. Falvey didn't dismantle the scouting capacity of the organization. They kept a lot of strong talent evaluators whose prowess has served a number of GM's.

 

1a. I'm skeptical that the problem has ever been faulty due diligence. Bad draft strategy? To an extent. Luck? Yep.

 

2. They DID cull the herd, but more importantly, they added personnel.

 

3. In very dramatic ways, they added resources to the evaluation effort. This is in the form of both advanced observational technology AND improved methodology.

 

4. The investment in both human and technological resources on the player development side will make the evaluators look even better. This area has been IMO their most important achievement.

 

5. I remain steadfastly optimistic that we'll see future first round busts. They can't profile these prospects to determine which will be victims of health or victims of demons.

  • gunnarthor, James, nicksaviking and 1 other like this

#56 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 29,458 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:17 PM

 

My "optimism" is based on this:

 

1. Falvey didn't dismantle the scouting capacity of the organization. They kept a lot of strong talent evaluators whose prowess has served a number of GM's.

 

1a. I'm skeptical that the problem has ever been faulty due diligence. Bad draft strategy? To an extent. Luck? Yep.

 

2. They DID cull the herd, but more importantly, they added personnel.

 

3. In very dramatic ways, they added resources to the evaluation effort. This is in the form of both advanced observational technology AND improved methodology.

 

4. The investment in both human and technological resources on the player development side will make the evaluators look even better. This area has been IMO their most important achievement.

 

5. I remain steadfastly optimistic that we'll see future first round busts. They can't profile these prospects to determine which will be victims of health or victims of demons.

 

agreed that the resources and process seems better. Hard to say if that is generating better results yet, but I think it will. We'll see if it generates great results.....that's what really matters.

It's IL now, btw, not DL.....


#57 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,695 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:19 PM

 

My "optimism" is based on this:

 

1. Falvey didn't dismantle the scouting capacity of the organization. They kept a lot of strong talent evaluators whose prowess has served a number of GM's.

 

1a. I'm skeptical that the problem has ever been faulty due diligence. Bad draft strategy? To an extent. Luck? Yep.

 

2. They DID cull the herd, but more importantly, they added personnel.

 

3. In very dramatic ways, they added resources to the evaluation effort. This is in the form of both advanced observational technology AND improved methodology.

 

4. The investment in both human and technological resources on the player development side will make the evaluators look even better. This area has been IMO their most important achievement.

 

5. I remain steadfastly optimistic that we'll see future first round busts. They can't profile these prospects to determine which will be victims of health or victims of demons.

I like this answer and I agree with most of it. I do think that we have to wait on results but some of our recent drafts have looked pretty good and I'm hoping that the FO finds more Polancos, Keplers and Berrios in the future. 


#58 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,027 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:24 PM

 

Our farm system is catastrophically overrated if our 2017 draft doesn't stand up, as 3 of our top 9 prospects are from that draft class.

 

If the results were 100% reliant on Rule 4 results, I might agree. My theory is that increasingly, successful teams will be relying on IFA acquisitions and adroit, opportunistic active management of player assets, especially trade market decisions. Right now, about 40% of our roster regards English as a second language.

 

I just read somewhere that BA had moved both Balazovic and Larnach into its Top 100. A big if right now, but if Lewis, Kirilloff, and Graterol regain their status, the system isn't overrated if one accepts FanGraph's current #7 ranking, for example.

  • gunnarthor likes this

#59 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,695 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:25 PM

 

Our farm system is catastrophically overrated if our 2017 draft doesn't stand up, as 3 of our top 9 prospects are from that draft class.

I'm not sure that's true. Balazovic and Arraez have probably already moved Enlow out of the top 10. And maybe more than one pick from this year could figure into our top 10. I wouldn't be surprised if Lewis and Rooker are the only 2017 picks on our top 10 in a month or so. But Lewis is a heck of a get and he makes our farm system pretty strong. 

 

I think the criticism I have with our system right now is that it's deep but not really tall, if that makes sense. We have a ton of players who could become solid MLers, which is great. We don't have that many who could become better than solid. And this recent draft seemed to add a bunch of future solid players but lacks that upside. 

  • birdwatcher likes this

#60 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 7,177 posts

Posted 11 June 2019 - 12:27 PM

The thing about they system I wonder.....Houston just keeps pulling up good to great players. MN has pulled up Garver and, um, who in the last two+ years for their debut? And who is likely to come up this year? I might be missing someone, but there doesn't seem to be much actual help coming up right now (or recently).


I guess I'd have to ask how many of these players that Houston is bringing up were acquired since October 2016.
Falvine's first draft picks haven't even been in the system 2 years yet, but I think we have a lot of good prospects that are right around the corner (hopefully).
  • birdwatcher likes this