Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

MinnCentric Forums


Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

The Mocks: 2014 MLB Draft (Twins Pick #5)

  • Please log in to reply
227 replies to this topic

#141 beckmt

beckmt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,025 posts

Posted 19 December 2013 - 10:02 PM

I like Kodak, keep stocking those pitchers, you can live without a good or very good shortstop, do not see Turner rated as great or can't miss You probably have a 1 in 3 chance of pitchers that develop taken in the first two rounds, so you need as many of these as you can get.

Edited by beckmt, 19 December 2013 - 10:04 PM.


#142 Kwak

Kwak

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,931 posts

Posted 19 December 2013 - 10:21 PM

Instead of BPA (best player available), this draft calls for the best college-level starting pitcher available (BCLSPA!). Reason? The depth of college-level talent in draft, the Twins need for starting pitching, and finally, this quote from Michael Lewis' Moneyball. as Billy Beane and the Oakland A's positioned themselves for the 2002 amateur draft:


(Bill James) looked into the history of the draft and discovered that ‘college players are a better investment than high school players by a huge, huge, laughably huge margin.’ The conventional wisdom of baseball insiders—that high school players were more likely to become superstars—was also demonstrably false... Paul DePodesta, the head of R & D for the Oakland A’s, made his own study of (Bill James’ theory). As a result of that study, the Oakland A’s front office, over the silent shrieks of their own older scouts were about to implement a radical new idea about young men and baseball (pgs. 98-99).


Four to watch between now and June:

Carlos Rodon, LHP, North Carolina State
Jeff Hoffman, RHP, East Carolina
Brandon Finnegan, LHP, Texas Christian
Tyler Beede, RHP, Vanderbilt


We can forget Rodon and Hoffman--they will be gone when the Twins select. Beede didn't want to sign last year, and command was reported as "an issue". Vague to be sure.

Among LHP Sean Newcomb has been touted above the others and is "...6'5", with mid-90's FB, and uses four-pitches." He had quite a bit of success in the Cape Cod League. Finnegan is a bit small (but then so is C.J. Wilson of the Angels!), but has more velocity than Newcomb and a plus slider. I would sure like to know more: mechanics, fielding skill, holding baserunners/pickoff move, and any past injury. But the twins need to reach for a "star" player, and not just a "safe", college pitcher.

#143 Don't Feed the Greed Guy

Don't Feed the Greed Guy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 485 posts

Posted 19 December 2013 - 10:49 PM

We can forget Rodon and Hoffman


The point is to see what happens between now and June, including a drop in performance by these two--to the point where they may be available at #5. Not likely, but a guy can dream, can't he?

#144 clutterheart

clutterheart

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 887 posts

Posted 19 December 2013 - 10:49 PM

This seems early. Every year there is a guy like Gray or even Bryant to a lesser extent who dominates to the extent they move up from 1st rounder, to top Pick.

I will wait until mid-college season to get too excited

#145 cmb0252

cmb0252

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,896 posts

Posted 19 December 2013 - 11:47 PM

This seems early. Every year there is a guy like Gray or even Bryant to a lesser extent who dominates to the extent they move up from 1st rounder, to top Pick.

I will wait until mid-college season to get too excited


It is never too early to talk the draft. Every year there are Buxton's and Harpers and Appels who stay at the top. While some top prospects will fall a majority will stay at the top. Jim Callis had an Ask BA about this.

#146 cmb0252

cmb0252

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,896 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 12:02 AM

Instead of BPA (best player available), this draft calls for the best college-level starting pitcher available (BCLSPA!). Reason? The depth of college-level talent in draft, the Twins need for starting pitching, and finally, this quote from Michael Lewis' Moneyball. as Billy Beane and the Oakland A's positioned themselves for the 2002 amateur draft:


(Bill James) looked into the history of the draft and discovered that ‘college players are a better investment than high school players by a huge, huge, laughably huge margin.’ The conventional wisdom of baseball insiders—that high school players were more likely to become superstars—was also demonstrably false... Paul DePodesta, the head of R & D for the Oakland A’s, made his own study of (Bill James’ theory). As a result of that study, the Oakland A’s front office, over the silent shrieks of their own older scouts were about to implement a radical new idea about young men and baseball (pgs. 98-99).


Four to watch between now and June:

Carlos Rodon, LHP, North Carolina State
Jeff Hoffman, RHP, East Carolina
Brandon Finnegan, LHP, Texas Christian
Tyler Beede, RHP, Vanderbilt

Since 2002 the A's have had 27 first round picks/supplemental first round picks. From 2002-2011 they only drafted college players with Swisher, Blanton, and Hudson Street being the only true big leaguers. Sonny Gray looked great in limited time last year. Since 2012 they have drafted 4 players in the first/supplemental first round and they all were HS players. Almost 12 years later I don't see any validity to that study.

On the flip side after the 2013 draft BaseballAmerica released a series on the draft looking at HS vs College, value per draft position, and value per drafted players actual playing position. None of their data suggested that you shouldnt draft high school players. Obviously HS players have a higher bust rate, just as pitchers have a higher bust rate than position players. Risk vs reward.

Plain and simple, the Twins need to draft BPA regardless of position or proximity to the majors. Seems to be working out with Buxton for us and Russell for the A's.

#147 Joe A. Preusser

Joe A. Preusser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 805 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 04:06 AM

The point is to see what happens between now and June, including a drop in performance by these two--to the point where they may be available at #5. Not likely, but a guy can dream, can't he?


Last year for a period of time I agonized of the "fact" that Manea wouldn't be available to the Twins at 4. Definitely a lot of time for changes to occur, but fun to start talking about it now.

#148 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 6,339 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 06:00 AM

To be clear, I have no issues drafting a SS with that pick. I agree with what someone else said in that at that pick, get an impact guy. I don't see Turner being that guy. If I had good reason to think he's a JJ Hardy (when he's hitting well), or Tulo, yes, I'd be all over that. Gatewood could be that, though there's questions about his defense. Turner seems more like a one trick pony. I want the ace.

#149 Don't Feed the Greed Guy

Don't Feed the Greed Guy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 485 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 06:06 AM

Since 2002 the A's have had 27 first round picks/supplemental first round picks. From 2002-2011 they only drafted college players with Swisher, Blanton, and Hudson Street being the only true big leaguers. Sonny Gray looked great in limited time last year. Since 2012 they have drafted 4 players in the first/supplemental first round and they all were HS players. Almost 12 years later I don't see any validity to that study.


[FONT=arial]Oakland has drafted a college player in the first round with ten of their last twelve picks, since 2002—the last two years being the notable exceptions. In 2013, sixteen of their top twenty picks were college players—fourteen of twenty in 2012, but with five of the top seven picks being high schoolers. Those numbers are pretty close to the Twins,who picked fourteen of twenty college players in 2012, and sixteen of twenty in 2013.
Oakland’s College Draftees by year:

2011: 19 of 20; 2010; 15 of 20; 2009; 14 of 20; 2008: 16 of20; 2007: 18 of 20; 2006: 15 of 20; 2005: 13 of 20; 2004: 17 of 20; 2003: 20 of20; 2002: 20 of 20.
It appears that Oakland was more rigorous in their pursuit of college ballplayers in the early 2000’s. But even in 2002, several high school players were taken in the later rounds.

Given the potential pool of talent in June of 2014, I would be prejudiced toward drafting a college-level arm, without simply making that a default position. If 2014's version of Buxton or Russell are on the board, pick 'em. Problem is--unlike football and basketball drafts--talent scouts don't know if they have a Buxton or a bust until years later. That's why the statistics point toward betting on the college-level talent. That's where I'd lean, plain and simple.
[/FONT]

#150 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,132 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 08:26 AM

Instead of BPA (best player available), this draft calls for the best college-level starting pitcher available (BCLSPA!). Reason? The depth of college-level talent in draft, the Twins need for starting pitching, and finally, this quote from Michael Lewis' Moneyball. as Billy Beane and the Oakland A's positioned themselves for the 2002 amateur draft:


(Bill James) looked into the history of the draft and discovered that ‘college players are a better investment than high school players by a huge, huge, laughably huge margin.’ The conventional wisdom of baseball insiders—that high school players were more likely to become superstars—was also demonstrably false... Paul DePodesta, the head of R & D for the Oakland A’s, made his own study of (Bill James’ theory). As a result of that study, the Oakland A’s front office, over the silent shrieks of their own older scouts were about to implement a radical new idea about young men and baseball (pgs. 98-99).


Four to watch between now and June:

Carlos Rodon, LHP, North Carolina State
Jeff Hoffman, RHP, East Carolina
Brandon Finnegan, LHP, Texas Christian
Tyler Beede, RHP, Vanderbilt


That data was from 1.5 decades ago and it seems that it is not accurate any longer. Buxton and Stewart seem to be thought of pretty highly.

#151 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Draft Czar

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,511 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 09:20 AM

It sounds like the the focus is on about 12-15 guys right now. Obviously that will change over time. Since there is a lot of chatter on here already, I'm going to try to gather some more information and maybe put out a really early draft board sometime over my Christmas break.

#152 Vervehound

Vervehound

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 227 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 09:24 AM

While Nola screams Twin's type player I just don't see him being a top 5 or top 10 talent. Ryan has gone for upside the last two drafts and I see him doing that again this year.


nola has the stuff of a number 3 but the pitchability of a number 1. i think he could pull a danny hultzen and shoot up draft boards, but he's already pretty high. i'm all for upside myself, just stating that the twins are going to have a hard time not calling his name, imo.

#153 cmb0252

cmb0252

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,896 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:45 AM

It sounds like the the focus is on about 12-15 guys right now. Obviously that will change over time. Since there is a lot of chatter on here already, I'm going to try to gather some more information and maybe put out a really early draft board sometime over my Christmas break.


Never too early to talk the draft! Definitely would like to see your current board Jeremy and be able to compare it vs mine. I was planning to post mine the week before college baseball season started.

#154 cmb0252

cmb0252

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,896 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:54 AM

[FONT=arial]Oakland has drafted a college player in the first round with ten of their last twelve picks, since 2002—the last two years being the notable exceptions. In 2013, sixteen of their top twenty picks were college players—fourteen of twenty in 2012, but with five of the top seven picks being high schoolers. Those numbers are pretty close to the Twins,who picked fourteen of twenty college players in 2012, and sixteen of twenty in 2013.
Oakland’s College Draftees by year:

2011: 19 of 20; 2010; 15 of 20; 2009; 14 of 20; 2008: 16 of20; 2007: 18 of 20; 2006: 15 of 20; 2005: 13 of 20; 2004: 17 of 20; 2003: 20 of20; 2002: 20 of 20.
It appears that Oakland was more rigorous in their pursuit of college ballplayers in the early 2000’s. But even in 2002, several high school players were taken in the later rounds.

Given the potential pool of talent in June of 2014, I would be prejudiced toward drafting a college-level arm, without simply making that a default position. If 2014's version of Buxton or Russell are on the board, pick 'em. Problem is--unlike football and basketball drafts--talent scouts don't know if they have a Buxton or a bust until years later. That's why the statistics point toward betting on the college-level talent. That's where I'd lean, plain and simple.
[/FONT]


Tons of college level guys fail. Painfully Wimmers was considered the safest pick his year and we know how that has turned out. Hultzen was taking in the top 5 because he was a safe quick to the bigs lefty which hasn't turned out well for the Mariners. If you are only going by stats the Twins should take a college position player every year.

When you draft in the top 5 you have to go for star power, not safety. You just don't get many chances to draft those guys. (Yes, you can find stars later in the draft but it becomes significantly harder once you get out of the top 5 historically).

#155 2wins87

2wins87

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 270 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 12:41 PM

I seem to be in a minority here but so far I'm much more excited about Turner than Gatewood. We'll have to see how things shake out between now and the draft, but Gatewood seems to have too high of a probability of busting for me. Several evaluators have raised questions about his hit tool in games. Watching videos it looks like he's got a really pretty (and long) batting practice swing, but he rarely makes swings like it when facing live pitching, which makes me wonder how much of his raw power he'll be able to use. He'll have to make a lot of adjustments just to make it to the majors. I also don't think he'll stick at SS.

I think lots of people are dismissing Turner just based off of a lack of power potential. He doesn't have tons of raw power potential, but that doesn't mean he isn't incredibly athletic. Obviously he's got incredible speed, but I've also read really good reports on his bat speed, and general athleticism. I'm really impressed by the good reviews he's getting defensively despite switching to the position just a year ago and the fact that he wasn't heavily scouted going into college but immediately became a star, and has only continued to improve. To me that just speaks of natural athleticism and an incredibly quick learning curve.

#156 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,741 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 01:12 PM

We can forget Rodon and Hoffman--they will be gone when the Twins select.


Last year Manaea was in the same position as Hoffman and by June we were starting to wonder if Manaea would fall to the Twins in the 2nd round. Odds are Hoffman will be picked high but it's no lock. Rodon either. The Pirates picked Appel at #8 just two drafts ago.

#157 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Twins Mods
  • 5,741 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 01:22 PM

A list of Twins 1st round picks this century:

[TABLE="width: 269"]

2013

Kohl Stewart -

HS



2012

Byron Buxton -

HS



2012

*Jose Berrios -

HS



2012

*Luke Bard -

4Yr



2011

Levi Michael -

4Yr



2011

*Travis Harrison -

HS



2011

*Hudson Boyd -

HS



2010

Alex Wimmers -

4Yr



2009

Kyle Gibson -

4Yr



2009

*Matt Bashore -

4Yr



2008

Aaron Hicks -

HS



2008

*Carlos Gutierrez -

4Yr



2008

*Shooter Hunt -

4Yr



2007

Ben Revere -

HS



2006

Chris Parmelee -

HS



2005

Matt Garza -

4Yr



2005

*Hank Sanchez -

HS



2004

Trevor Plouffe -

HS



2004

*Glen Perkins -

4Yr



2004

*Kyle Waldrop -

HS



2004

*Matt Fox -

4Yr



2004

*Jay Rainville -

HS



2003

Matt Moses -

HS



2002

Denard Span -

HS



2001

Joe Mauer -

HS



2000

Adam Johnson -

4Yr



2000

*Aaron Heilman -

4Yr




[/TABLE]

Even if we're extremely generous and say the jury's still out on guys drafted after 2007, I count Perkins and Garza vs Mauer, Span, Plouffe, Parmelee and Revere. Even if you toss out Parmelee, the Twins had more success 2000-2007 drafting HS kids in the 1st round.

If we looked at the developing guys we still have some hope will turn into MLBers, it seems as though college players Gibson and perhaps Bard are all that's standing compared to Hicks, Harrison, Berrios, Buxton and Stewart.

League wide maybe college players are better, but the Twins seem to do better identifying the HS kids, at least the more well known guys who go in the 1st round.

Edited by nicksaviking, 20 December 2013 - 01:31 PM.


#158 Don't Feed the Greed Guy

Don't Feed the Greed Guy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 485 posts

Posted 21 December 2013 - 12:22 PM

That data was from 1.5 decades ago and it seems that it is not accurate any longer. Buxton and Stewart seem to be thought of pretty highly.


Buxton and Stewart offer a small sample size. The benefit of Bill James' longitudinal research is that multiple players were evaluated over several years of draft data.

J.C. Bradbury evaluates several of Bill James' theories in the following post. Scroll down to #9 if you want to read his entire rebuttal on James' theory on drafting college players. Here's his argument in a nutshell:
"The college draft pool is more certain: not only do we know the good players, we know the bad ones too. Part of the reason the returns to drafting college players are better is that teams stop drafting college players once the good ones are gone."

http://www.sabernomi...ith-bill-james/

Two other writers identify with James' research. Carl Bialik writes "Why it Pays to Go to College"

http://blogs.wsj.com...-go-to-college/

Bialik quotes several sources to prove his point, most notably Keith Scherer, an analyst for Baseball Prospectus. His findings:

"65 percent of the collegians earned at least one Win Share through their Age 30 seasons; only 41 percent of the high schoolers did the same.
Seven of the top 10 Win Shares earners through Age 30 were collegians.
The collegians account for 64 percent of all Win Shares earned by these two groups (again, through their Age 30 seasons).The high-school draftees earned an average of 15 Win Shares through age 30. Their college counterparts earned 26 Win Shares, a 65 percent lead over the high schoolers. (That difference of 11 Win Shares equals roughly four victories.)

Even if we consider only the pitchers who reached the majors, the collegians still do better: an average of 41 Win Shares for the college guys, 37 for the high schoolers.

http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=1811682

I've been surfing the net, trying to find other longitudinal studies that include more recent data. All the same, it would take a dramatic shift of success by high school players to overcome the weight of evidence that already exists--drafting a college-level ballplayer is a better bet than drafting a high school player.

Edited by Don't Feed the Greed Guy, 21 December 2013 - 12:25 PM.


#159 cmb0252

cmb0252

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,896 posts

Posted 21 December 2013 - 12:41 PM

Buxton and Stewart offer a small sample size. The benefit of Bill James' longitudinal research is that multiple players were evaluated over several years of draft data.

J.C. Bradbury evaluates several of Bill James' theories in the following post. Scroll down to #9 if you want to read his entire rebuttal on James' theory on drafting college players. Here's his argument in a nutshell:
"The college draft pool is more certain: not only do we know the good players, we know the bad ones too. Part of the reason the returns to drafting college players are better is that teams stop drafting college players once the good ones are gone."

http://www.sabernomi...ith-bill-james/

Two other writers identify with James' research. Carl Bialik writes "Why it Pays to Go to College"

http://blogs.wsj.com...-go-to-college/

Bialik quotes several sources to prove his point, most notably Keith Scherer, an analyst for Baseball Prospectus. His findings:

"65 percent of the collegians earned at least one Win Share through their Age 30 seasons; only 41 percent of the high schoolers did the same.
Seven of the top 10 Win Shares earners through Age 30 were collegians.
The collegians account for 64 percent of all Win Shares earned by these two groups (again, through their Age 30 seasons).The high-school draftees earned an average of 15 Win Shares through age 30. Their college counterparts earned 26 Win Shares, a 65 percent lead over the high schoolers. (That difference of 11 Win Shares equals roughly four victories.)

Even if we consider only the pitchers who reached the majors, the collegians still do better: an average of 41 Win Shares for the college guys, 37 for the high schoolers.

http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=1811682

I've been surfing the net, trying to find other longitudinal studies that include more recent data. All the same, it would take a dramatic shift of success by high school players to overcome the weight of evidence that already exists--drafting a college-level ballplayer is a better bet than drafting a high school player.


Here:
http://www.baseballa...es-it-all-mean/

#160 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,132 posts

Posted 21 December 2013 - 01:14 PM

You continue to reference articles from a decade ago using draft data from 2 decades ago. That had some relevance a decade ago but it doesn't matter when you are talking about individual top of draft talents. At #5 talent needs to evaluated on a case by case basis. It would be extremely foolish to form an opinion 7 months before the draft that ALL high school players should be avoided at pick #5.