Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store


Photo

2013 Draft

  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 J-Dog Dungan

J-Dog Dungan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 660 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 03:58 PM

With the end of the 2012 season (thank goodness it is finally over), I believe now would be a good time to start discussing the possible candidates for the Twins to choose with their fourth overall pick next year.

The prospects that I have heard the most about are Mark Appel, Ryne Stanek, and, just recently, Seth Manaea (I am only mentioning pitchers because I can really only see the Twins drafting a pitcher in the 4 slot. Appel, who was drafted this year at #8 (probably because he is represented by Boras), and didn't sign because he was looking for more than any team was willing to risk. Stanek is a good lefty that was drafted in 2010 by the Mariners, didn't sign, and just missed the cutoff for the 2012 draft, so he is entering in this draft and is looking like the #2 RHP option (could jump to #1 with a great performance this year) behind Appel. Manaea has just entered the conversation with a monster Cape Cod season. He is looking like he could be the top lefty taken in the draft this year.

Anybody else want to chime in? go right ahead :jump:

#2 maxisagod

maxisagod

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 321 posts
  • LocationThe Moon

Posted 05 October 2012 - 04:54 PM

Not sold on the fact the Twins will take a pitcher #1. I like everyone you mentioned, Manaea the best, Stanek, then Appel. But that's only 3 names and we pick 4th, and there's a drop off at pitcher after that. Austin Wilson? Clint Frazier? Austin Meadows? I'm hoping a clear cut top 4 or 5 player emerge and the Twins get one of player people thought about at 1-1.

#3 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,712 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 05:37 PM

Theree is still a whole spring of college and high school ball yet to be played. There is however they have a season inPuerto Rico yet to be played.. How will you know if Oscar Mercado is the real deal?

#4 greengoblinrulz

greengoblinrulz

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,759 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 05:44 PM

college/high scouting for the draft is definately NOT my forte.....you guys that do, do a fantastic job.....keep it up

#5 jtrinaldi

jtrinaldi

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 266 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 08:38 PM

college/high scouting for the draft is definately NOT my forte.....you guys that do, do a fantastic job.....keep it up

This years pitching class is one of the weakest Pitching classes ever. Much like last year's class, their is no for sure ACE in this draft. The year before produced several potential aces (Bundy,Gerrit Cole,Archie Bradley,Bauer). The 3 college pitchers (Appel,Stanek,Manaea) project to be #2's or #3's. Seeing the majority of the HIgh SChool first round talent, I think that Clint Frazier will be the best player from this class. Austin Meadows is likely to be a top 4 pick, and could end up being the Twins pick. The Twins are in desperate need of pitching, so their hand may be forced to take one of the 3 collegiate arms. Clint Frazier is a Left Fielder who is extremely athletic, who hits for average and has a decent amount of power. 2 High Schoolers that could make their way into the top 15 are Nick Ciuffo and Zack Collins.
Follow my photography, group page can be found here.
http://www.facebook....256164664420932

#6 twinswon1991

twinswon1991

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 256 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 08:43 PM

The Twins should take best player available no matter what whether it be a SP, C, SS, or another speedy OF. The team is 3-5 years at least from competing so there is no need to reach for anyone. They need to pray that the 2014 draft ends up as strong as the epic 2011 draft so they can get an "ace upside" arm picking in the top 5.

#7 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Database Manager

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,129 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 09:16 PM

I think the Twins will have options at P and OF, obviously, as there were many names mentioned above. One guy that I think is worth keeping an eye on is Jeremy Martinez, a HS catcher from California. The organization depth at catcher isn't great and Martinez is viewed as someone who can stay at the position and hit. The top of the first round might be a little early, but as we saw in 2012, taking a guy with a lower demand and banking some savings can really pay dividends later in the draft.

#8 joeboo_22

joeboo_22

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 173 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 09:16 PM

disagree on the large concept, they should take the best pitcher out there, unless there is a shortstop that is far and ahead better. No need for an Outfielder, the system is full of them, even if half of them pan out they are fine there.

#9 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,393 posts

Posted 05 October 2012 - 10:10 PM

Despite the lack of depth in the system you still take the BPA. Nobody will complain if they end up with an elite OF'er instead of an average starter. You can find average players elsewhere but elite players are what puts a team over the top. And if possible that's what you should be targeting at #4.

I hope that the BPA is a pitcher though because the Twins definitely need one.

#10 FirstRoundBust

FirstRoundBust

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 06:51 AM

Despite the lack of depth in the system you still take the BPA. Nobody will complain if they end up with an elite OF'er instead of an average starter. You can find average players elsewhere but elite players are what puts a team over the top. And if possible that's what you should be targeting at #4.

I hope that the BPA is a pitcher though because the Twins definitely need one.


Hmm, I call BS. Nobody should complain, but they will.
Lew Ford?

#11 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,286 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 08:05 AM

Despite the lack of depth in the system you still take the BPA. Nobody will complain if they end up with an elite OF'er instead of an average starter. You can find average players elsewhere but elite players are what puts a team over the top. And if possible that's what you should be targeting at #4.

I hope that the BPA is a pitcher though because the Twins definitely need one.


Hmm, I call BS. Nobody should complain, but they will.


I would have no problem if they take another OF, if they trade some. They have way too many OFs in the system right now and they better start trading them before they become Angel Morales.
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#12 Mave

Mave

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 09:41 AM

If this year's SP class is relatively weak, without the projectable front end guy, it would be pretty fun to see the team draft a high end SS who will stick with the position. They have been there in the top ten in the past couple of drafts. Anyone have any idea if they will/could be there this year?

#13 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,393 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:27 AM

Despite the lack of depth in the system you still take the BPA. Nobody will complain if they end up with an elite OF'er instead of an average starter. You can find average players elsewhere but elite players are what puts a team over the top. And if possible that's what you should be targeting at #4.

I hope that the BPA is a pitcher though because the Twins definitely need one.


Hmm, I call BS. Nobody should complain, but they will.


They will certainly complain on draft day but they won't be complaining when that OF'er has a >.900 OPS in the majors instead of getting a high 3's ERA starter.

#14 jtrinaldi

jtrinaldi

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 266 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:27 AM

If this year's SP class is relatively weak, without the projectable front end guy, it would be pretty fun to see the team draft a high end SS who will stick with the position. They have been there in the top ten in the past couple of drafts. Anyone have any idea if they will/could be there this year?

JP Crawford and Oscar Mercado are the 2 top shortstops. They are both great fielders, but cannot hit as well. They are a "Poor mans Lindor" and will go in the range from 10-15.
The top Player in the class of 2014 is a 3Baseman. Jan Hernandez.
Follow my photography, group page can be found here.
http://www.facebook....256164664420932

#15 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,051 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:58 AM

I have no problem taking another OFer, if they would be willing to deal top prospects for other players. However, they have never, ever, not once, done that under Ryan. If you won't do that, and you won't sign big time free agents, the only way to get pitching is to draft it.

I love how people are saying Appel can't strike guys out (another thread), and that he's a number 3 starter. Not one scouting report on line says those things, not one. If you could get a guy that is about 70-80% likely to be a number 2 starter, and who is ready to pitch in the majors in 2013 or 2014, would you trade the 4th pick if you were allowed to trade them? I would. So why not just take him (assuming he stays healthy)? They have zero, not one, starter in the minors as good as Appel.
Lighten up Francis....

#16 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,051 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 11:00 AM

[quote name='kab21'][quote name='FirstRoundBust'][quote name='kab21']Despite the lack of depth in the system you still take the BPA. Nobody will complain if they end up with an elite OF'er instead of an average starter. You can find average players elsewhere but elite players are what puts a team over the top. And if possible that's what you should be targeting at #4.

I hope that the BPA is a pitcher though because the Twins definitely need one.[/QUOTE]

Hmm, I call BS. Nobody should complain, but they will.[/QUOTE]

They will certainly complain on draft day but they won't be complaining when that OF'er has a >.900 OPS in the majors instead of getting a high 3's ERA starter.[/QUOTE]

Disagree, if they still have zero pitchers, and 6 outfielders, I'll still be complaining about that OFer. And, really, what are the odds a HS player has a .900 OPS, vs Appel being successful. What are the odds? Maybe 10-20% on the OFer, but Appel is very much more likely to be a good starting pitcher, not guaranteed, but much more likely.
Lighten up Francis....

#17 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,393 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 06:34 PM

I guess you're right about the complaining part. After all there was complaining this year that the Twins didn't take a toolsy OF'er named Trout instead of a top 5 talent pitcher. and that was before Trout played like Mays this year. And there has been complaining that the Twins didn't take Appel instead of Buxton. There was even complaining that the twins didn't take ethan Martin because he had the magical stuff instead of Aaron Hicks a few years ago. some are just born complainers.

I'm not sure if you know this but there's only one Appel in the draft this year. I like him at #4 (if he's there) but I'll take another OF'er if he is the BPA. Of course that toolsy OF'er might bust but the track record of pitchers in the top 9 picks for nearly a decade is pretty mediocre also. Let's not forget that some consider this to be a mediocre year for pitching. The list looks even worse if you take out the 3 no doubt elite draft prospects (Prior, Verlander, and Price).

Pitchers in the top 9 from 2001-2009

Prior
Brazelton
Floyd
Karp
Chris Smith
VanBenschoten
Griffin
Bullington
Gruler
Loewen
Everts
Greinke
Francis
Sleeth
Stauffer
Maholm
Danks
Verlander
Humber
Niemann
Rogers
Sowers
Bailey
Townsend
Romero
Pelfrey
Hochevar
Reynolds
Lincoln
Morrow
Andrew Miller
Kershaw
Price
Moskos
Detwiler
Weathers
Parker
Matusz
Crow
Strasburg
Hobgood
Wheeler


#18 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,632 posts

Posted 08 October 2012 - 07:07 PM

BPA has it's limits (especially when trading for potential pitching prospects is like pulling teeth). I agree that if there's one clear cut guy far above the rest that you take him. I'm not sure that was the case this year with Buxton, nor is it the case looking at what we have so far next year. The Twins need pitching, and something that can help sooner than later. Guys like Zimmer, Gausman, and Appel (though there were obvious signability issues there) could have been pitching in AA this season and be a potential call up next year.

Sure, I love those toolsy guys, but baseball history is littered with toolsy players that never made it. Those college pitchers may never be Santana part two, but their floors were a Scott Baker and the likeliness that they hit that is pretty high. Given the team's abundance of OF guys and the org needs, I would have thought that this was a no-brainer.

#19 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,393 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:43 AM

[COLOR=#333333]Those college pitchers may never be Santana part two, but their floors were a Scott Baker and the likeliness that they hit that is pretty high.[/COLOR]


The list above that I posted (all pitchers #1-#9 from 2001-2009) indicate that their floors were probably not Scott Baker and that it was unlikely that they hit it.

#20 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,712 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 06:49 AM

[COLOR=#333333]Those college pitchers may never be Santana part two, but their floors were a Scott Baker and the likeliness that they hit that is pretty high.[/COLOR]


The list above that I posted (all pitchers #1-#9 from 2001-2009) indicate that their floors were probably not Scott Baker and that it was unlikely that they hit it.


Despite evidence to the contrary, I will believe what I want.

#21 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,393 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:04 AM

[quote name='old nurse'][quote name='kab21'][QUOTE][COLOR=#333333]Those college pitchers may never be Santana part two, but their floors were a Scott Baker and the likeliness that they hit that is pretty high.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

The list above that I posted (all pitchers #1-#9 from 2001-2009) indicate that their floors were probably not Scott Baker and that it was unlikely that they hit it.[/QUOTE]

Despite evidence to the contrary, I will believe what I want.[/QUOTE]

Awesome:th_alc:

#22 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    Old Geezer

  • Members
  • 1,375 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:35 AM

[quote name='old nurse'][quote name='kab21'][QUOTE][COLOR=#333333]Those college pitchers may never be Santana part two, but their floors were a Scott Baker and the likeliness that they hit that is pretty high.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

The list above that I posted (all pitchers #1-#9 from 2001-2009) indicate that their floors were probably not Scott Baker and that it was unlikely that they hit it.[/QUOTE]

Despite evidence to the contrary, I will believe what I want.[/QUOTE]

Words to live by!!!! :)

May all our prospects be All Stars and the beer be free.


#23 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,693 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:59 PM

BPA is a subjective phrase people like to throw around when they feel safer picking a bat. It should probably be changed to BBA; best batter available.

Of the top 10 pitchers this year in WAR, 5 were 1st round draft picks and 3 were highly sought after international free agents, while 2 were drafted outside of the first round. In 2011, 8 of the top ten were 1st rounders while 2 were outside of the first round. The offensive WAR leaders simlarly are made up of 1st round picks, but we see top offensive teams miss the playoffs all the time while strong rotations rarely miss out.

Missing out on a top outfielder can be overcome with postive contributions from the other postions on a daily basis. Your team can still make up for the runs lost from not drafting the All-Star centerfielder by getting solid contributions from players in other positions, but if your starting pitcher stinks, there's no rectifying the situation as the runs he gave up are already on the board and damage he's done is uncorrectable. Pitching is obviously more of a risk, but much, much more important.

Edited by nicksaviking, 09 October 2012 - 01:02 PM.


#24 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,712 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:19 PM

BPA is a subjective phrase people like to throw around when they feel safer picking a bat. It should probably be changed to BBA; best batter available.

Of the top 10 pitchers this year in WAR, 5 were 1st round draft picks and 3 were highly sought after international free agents, while 2 were drafted outside of the first round. In 2011, 8 of the top ten were 1st rounders while 2 were outside of the first round. The offensive WAR leaders simlarly are made up of 1st round picks, but we see top offensive teams miss the playoffs all the time while strong rotations rarely miss out.

Missing out on a top outfielder can be overcome with postive contributions from the other postions on a daily basis. Your team can still make up for the runs lost from not drafting the All-Star centerfielder by getting solid contributions from players in other positions, but if your starting pitcher stinks, there's no rectifying the situation as the runs he gave up are already on the board and damage he's done is uncorrectable. Pitching is obviously more of a risk, but much, much more important.


Would not the same single factor analysis of batters show the same trend as for pitchers? For the most part they would be high draft picks? If the analysis of the pitching prospects is of a low ceiling versus a higher ceiling batter, shouldn't you take the position player? Lastly, there were 20 hitters with a WAR above 5.2 and only 4 pitchers. That would leave me to believe that the probability of drafting a superstar with an early pick would be to grab the best player available even if it is a position player.
Also note that 3 of the top 10 pitchers were on playoff teams while 10 of the top 20 batter were on playoff teams

Edited by old nurse, 09 October 2012 - 01:23 PM.


#25 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,051 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:44 PM

How do you ever get a good pitcher if you will not draft them, will not trade away your future for them, and will not sign them to market deals, oh, and will not trade your good current players for prospects?

#26 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,051 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:47 PM

Given that there are 9 starting hitters, and 5 starting pitchers on a roster, would you not expect there to be more good hitters on playoff rosters? I do not think anyone is saying never pick a hitter, but some are basically never take a pitcher unless he is Strasburg.

#27 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,693 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:53 PM

Would not the same single factor analysis of batters show the same trend as for pitchers? For the most part they would be high draft picks? If the analysis of the pitching prospects is of a low ceiling versus a higher ceiling batter, shouldn't you take the position player? Lastly, there were 20 hitters with a WAR above 5.2 and only 4 pitchers. That would leave me to believe that the probability of drafting a superstar with an early pick would be to grab the best player available even if it is a position player.
Also note that 3 of the top 10 pitchers were on playoff teams while 10 of the top 20 batter were on playoff teams


The top batters are similarly first round picks and I acknowledged so, but my theory is that top position players are far less important that top pitchers. As I mentioned, on a daily basis, a team can make up for the lack of production from a super-star batter by having other quality players make up for the lost runs; you cannot do that with a starting pitcher. A good reliever can stop the bleeding, but he cannot get back those runs your league average starting pitchers contiunally give up.

#28 maxisagod

maxisagod

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 321 posts
  • LocationThe Moon

Posted 09 October 2012 - 04:04 PM

Would not the same single factor analysis of batters show the same trend as for pitchers? For the most part they would be high draft picks? If the analysis of the pitching prospects is of a low ceiling versus a higher ceiling batter, shouldn't you take the position player? Lastly, there were 20 hitters with a WAR above 5.2 and only 4 pitchers. That would leave me to believe that the probability of drafting a superstar with an early pick would be to grab the best player available even if it is a position player.
Also note that 3 of the top 10 pitchers were on playoff teams while 10 of the top 20 batter were on playoff teams


The top batters are similarly first round picks and I acknowledged so, but my theory is that top position players are far less important that top pitchers. As I mentioned, on a daily basis, a team can make up for the lack of production from a super-star batter by having other quality players make up for the lost runs; you cannot do that with a starting pitcher. A good reliever can stop the bleeding, but he cannot get back those runs your league average starting pitchers contiunally give up.


I'm sure there are some real GM's who take the same approach to the draft, though they may not admit it to their fan base. I'm guessing it would be more common at the end of the 1st round than at the beginning. In most drafts, the talent can fall of quickly after a certain point at the top of first round, and like last year the argument is looking like it's over a potential All star hitter and a #2 pitcher, instead of All star hitter and a # 1 pitcher. It's funny, there are always some light hitting shortstops who make it into the 1st round projections, because there the best "True" player at their position. I think a lot of mocks and lists take position scarcity into account already.

#29 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 922 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 04:23 PM

Just curious: of the 13 WAR leaders among starters drafted as 1st rounders in 2011 and 2012, how many of those were available when the Twins order in the draft came up?

Thanks.

#30 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,712 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 04:28 PM

[quote name='maxisagod'][quote name='nicksaviking'][quote name='old nurse']Would not the same single factor analysis of batters show the same trend as for pitchers? For the most part they would be high draft picks? If the analysis of the pitching prospects is of a low ceiling versus a higher ceiling batter, shouldn't you take the position player? Lastly, there were 20 hitters with a WAR above 5.2 and only 4 pitchers. That would leave me to believe that the probability of drafting a superstar with an early pick would be to grab the best player available even if it is a position player.
Also note that 3 of the top 10 pitchers were on playoff teams while 10 of the top 20 batter were on playoff teams[/QUOTE]

The top batters are similarly first round picks and I acknowledged so, but my theory is that top position players are far less important that top pitchers. As I mentioned, on a daily basis, a team can make up for the lack of production from a super-star batter by having other quality players make up for the lost runs; you cannot do that with a starting pitcher. A good reliever can stop the bleeding, but he cannot get back those runs your league average starting pitchers contiunally give up.[/QUOTE]

I'm sure there are some real GM's who take the same approach to the draft, though they may not admit it to their fan base. I'm guessing it would be more common at the end of the 1st round than at the beginning. In most drafts, the talent can fall of quickly after a certain point at the top of first round, and like last year the argument is looking like it's over a potential All star hitter and a #2 pitcher, instead of All star hitter and a # 1 pitcher. It's funny, there are always some light hitting shortstops who make it into the 1st round projections, because there the best "True" player at their position. I think a lot of mocks and lists take position scarcity into account already.[/QUOTE]

By your logic then in 2005 the Nationals with the 4th pick rather than Ryan Zimmerman they should have taken Mike Pelfrey (first pitcher taken after Zimmerman). With a high pick you need to pick the best player available. More drafts than not it will be a pitcher, but if the right player is still available, you take that player. If you look at the pitchers taken in the top quarter of the draft between 2005-2010 you will find bonafide star pitchers taken within the first couple of selections. After that, a few pitchers that are stars, but twice as many flat out busts as stars and an equal number of serviceable number three pitchers as busts. Selecting a pitcher is no sure bet.

Edited by old nurse, 09 October 2012 - 05:01 PM.