Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Sickels: Top 20 Twins prospects for 2014

  • Please log in to reply
107 replies to this topic

#41 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,795 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 11:54 PM

By the way, Kepler definitely holding his own in the AFL.

#42 Oxtung

Oxtung

    I don't skinny dip. I chunky dunk.

  • Members
  • 1,680 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 12:36 AM

So, a LOOGY is not a prospect? This is not to say that Ibarra is an 'A' prospect, but how about a B-/C+ at least.

Also, Ibarra faced 245 batters in 47 appearances last season, which means that he faced, on average, over five batters each game. Sounds more like a setup role than a LOOGY, IMHO.


As good as Ibarra's 2013 season was, he has done little to distinguish himself the previous years. When you are 24 and starting the season at AA one season isn't enough to get you ranked.

That said, I think we all hope that his 2013 season translates to the Twins in 2014, regardless of how he is viewed as a prospect!

#43 Trevor0333

Trevor0333

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 01:17 AM

Too bad May has really appeared to have stalled out at AA. Had he performed as well as Meyer the roatation culd be looking a lot brighter.

I'm a little higher on Rosario too, I'd put him at B+.

#44 clutterheart

clutterheart

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,183 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 02:37 AM

So, a LOOGY is not a prospect? This is not to say that Ibarra is an 'A' prospect, but how about a B-/C+ at least.

Also, Ibarra faced 245 batters in 47 appearances last season, which means that he faced, on average, over five batters each game. Sounds more like a setup role than a LOOGY, IMHO.


B-/C+ seems high based on how Sickles grades
Who would you move down on this list?

#45 Trevor0333

Trevor0333

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 04:12 AM

B-/C+ seems high based on how Sickles grades
Who would you move down on this list?


I would say a LOOGY is basically a lefty specialist, if their ceiling is only being able to get lefties out I wouldnt qualify them much of a prospect.

#46 Joe A. Preusser

Joe A. Preusser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 842 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 05:57 AM

Well we will have to disagree on just how much difference a year makes when both are age appropriate for the league and how much statistics matter at RK ball, but that really wasn't my point. I want to know what the scouts see differently (as I said scouting reports matter more in the lower minors than statistics) between the three pitchers. Really the big thing here is we don't have much to go on for Jorge or Gonsalves at this point (or Thorpe outside of Sickels.)


I added height until I was almost 21, and was still adding upper body bulk until 23. Not sure if this was a usual growth pattern or not, but I've always thought that most guys don't get their adult body until 23-24. 17 to 18 seems like it wouldn't make that much difference, although of course everyone is different.

#47 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 15,406 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 06:24 AM

So, a LOOGY is not a prospect? This is not to say that Ibarra is an 'A' prospect, but how about a B-/C+ at least.

Also, Ibarra faced 245 batters in 47 appearances last season, which means that he faced, on average, over five batters each game. Sounds more like a setup role than a LOOGY, IMHO.


By their very definition and what they contribute to a MLB team, no, a LOOGY is not a prospect.

If the guy is dominant enough to be an 8th or 9th inning guy, he's a prospect... But you're kinda shooting yourself in the foot with the LOOGY label, which means he won't pitch more than ~40 innings a season.

#48 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,909 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 08:51 AM

I understand the value that the bullpen has on an MLB team. But Ibarra is a reliever, doesn't strike out a lot and walks too many. He can have a role with the Twins, and I hope he can. Just doesn't transfer into prospect rankings well.

#49 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,909 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 08:52 AM

As for Thorpe, it'll be interesting to see where he is in a year. But, yeah, when you're left-handed, tall and now hit 95 at age 17, it's going to vault you up the prospect rankings regardless of what the numbers say.

#50 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,733 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:05 AM

This whole Ibarra argument is about a 24 yr old RP'er that typically walks 4+ batter in 9 innings?

If you are a relief pitcher, kind of old and walk 4 every 9 innings then you better be striking out 15/9 in the minors. He had a nice ERA but I'm not sure if he is in my top 10 relief pitchers in the org.

#51 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,795 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:22 AM

I see 2014 as a chance for Ibarra to get to his career numbers and have a good overall season in AAA, earning a September callup.

There probably should be a distinction between:

true prospects
minor leaguers who have something to contribute, potentially, in MLB
minor leaguers who don't have something to contribut, potentially, in MLB

There is some overlap in between those first two groups in terms of who actually gets to the big leagues. Ibarra is more likely to get a cup of coffee than at least one top 20 prospect in the Twins system, for instance.

#52 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,795 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:24 AM

Also, Ibarra somewhat followed the Aaron Hicks path . . . struggles first year after promotion, repeats, does well.

#53 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,082 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:30 AM

I added height until I was almost 21, and was still adding upper body bulk until 23. Not sure if this was a usual growth pattern or not, but I've always thought that most guys don't get their adult body until 23-24. 17 to 18 seems like it wouldn't make that much difference, although of course everyone is different.


But young pro athletes are often the "early peakers" in size, particularly height -- that's how they get to be the young pro athletes! I don't know anything about it really, but I suspect they are less likely to grow late (particularly height and any natural muscle/weight).

I was just skimming through past GCL seasons for Thorpe comparables, and I noticed that Clayton Kershaw put up similar stats in that league at age 18. But Kershaw was already 6'3" and 215 lbs at that point, and he's basically the same size now at age 25.

#54 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,082 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:50 AM

By the way, Kepler definitely holding his own in the AFL.


Yes. Small sample size and all, but it's encouraging to see him 3-9 against both lefties and righties, with zero Ks against LHP too. He looked pretty bad against LHP this year, and still hasn't shown much power against them in the minor league career.

#55 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,733 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:53 AM

I see 2014 as a chance for Ibarra to get to his career numbers and have a good overall season in AAA, earning a September callup.

There probably should be a distinction between:

true prospects
minor leaguers who have something to contribute, potentially, in MLB
minor leaguers who don't have something to contribut, potentially, in MLB

There is some overlap in between those first two groups in terms of who actually gets to the big leagues. Ibarra is more likely to get a cup of coffee than at least one top 20 prospect in the Twins system, for instance.


I have no idea what you are talking about in the first paragraph. His K and BB rates have been consistent (mediocre) throughout the minors. Even if he gets a cup of coffee his upside is so low that he shouldn't rank anywhere near a top 20 list.

#56 drivlikejehu

drivlikejehu

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,206 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 10:44 AM

Mediocre relief pitchers are easily acquired by a club. The whole point of a prospect is to provide something that can't just be picked up cheaply elsewhere.

#57 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 9,082 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 10:56 AM

Sickels has Duke Welker in the "Others to Watch" group. I might put him in there for his awesome name alone, but his age and numbers suggest Jim Hoey lite, no? (Hoey was on the opposite end of the awesome name spectrum, however)

#58 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,733 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:10 AM

Sickels has Duke Welker in the "Others to Watch" group. I might put him in there for his awesome name alone, but his age and numbers suggest Jim Hoey lite, no? (Hoey was on the opposite end of the awesome name spectrum, however)


He's a guy to watch since he's a hard thrower and sometimes those guys just click at some point in the majors and become really good. Or they just suck like Hoey. I think he falls into the 2nd category and I'm not very interested.

#59 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 12,909 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:13 AM

Remember also that Ibarra can again become a minor league free agent after the season. Last year, he signed quickly to return. This year, he may have some other options, so if the Twins want to keep him, they may have to put him on the 40 man roster before the World Series is over.

I like Ibarra. Really liked what I saw from him in (admittedly) one start in Beloit several years ago. Not sure if he's a 40 man roster guy though.

#60 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,795 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:52 AM

I have no idea what you are talking about in the first paragraph. His K and BB rates have been consistent (mediocre) throughout the minors. Even if he gets a cup of coffee his upside is so low that he shouldn't rank anywhere near a top 20 list.


2013 was a very good year for him. His best. What I mean is that in Rochester, his K rate dropped and his BB rate went up a bit. Rochester: 6.9/4.4, career: 7.8/3.9. If his 2013 H/9 numbers are not an anomaly and he maintains something similar, a return to his 7.8/3.9 K/BB makes him a more ideal candidate for adding to the 40-man and being a potential contributor at the end of next season.