Jump to content

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

The Store


Photo

Article: Draft a College Pitcher? Are you sure?

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,490 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 05:05 AM

You can view the page at http://www.twinsdail...er-Are-you-sure

#2 Mr. Ed

Mr. Ed

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 827 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 05:57 AM

Given the recent washouts of Bashore, Tootle and Hunt, due in part to injury, I'd be very leery of a college pitcher. A shame that some of these guys get over-worked in college. One reason a number of kids by-pass it for a shot in the bigs on draft day.

#3 roger

roger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 322 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 06:23 AM

Does this tell us we should trade down to #12? Oh, I forgot, this isn't the NFL and we can't do that! Bah!!!

#4 Han Joelo

Han Joelo

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 117 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 06:51 AM

Cool research. I think the NFL draft skews the way people look at the baseball draft a tad. Totally different beasts. The risks with pitchers are enormous comparatively, as pointed out above. I'm not sure if this is a fair comparison, but compare Zunino and Appel/Zimmer whomever, with Montero and Pineda. Go with the guy who plays every day at a premium position, and then like every other team, hope you can find the next Roger Clemens a bit lower.

#5 ScottyB

ScottyB

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 596 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:13 AM

I'm hoping that the Astros take Buxton, so the Twins aren't tempted to take another 'toolsy' high school outfielder. They already have a glut of outfielders - Benson, Hicks, Morales and others. I could see taking Zunino or Correa, but depending on healing, I'm still intrigued by Giolito. He's a clone of Verlander and the Twins have a desperate need for a true ace. That being said, Appel, Zimmer and Gausman would also be good choices. With next year's projected starting rotation of Blackburn, Hendricks, and at this point I don't know (maybe Swarzak, Diamond and Gibson). They desperately need starters. 2014 looks to be the year the next crop of players comes through. But I do trust the Twins to make the right choice. Despite the busts they have drafted, they have also drafted some nice pieces in the first round - Mauer, Parmalee, Ploufe, Revere, Span, and Perkins on the current team, plus guys like Hunter and Cuddyer. They do need some scouts who can spot pitchers.

#6 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,303 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 26 April 2012 - 08:19 AM

Well, I would agree with the conclusion if: a. there were more data showing the WAR of others ie. college position players, high school pitchers and high school position players, so we can compare b. Career WAR is an interesting metric for thing like HOF. WAR/season is more important and esp since a lot of the players in the list are still active So unless I see the comparisons, I cannot really say that the data support the hypothesis ;)
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#7 Boom Boom

Boom Boom

    Hydraulic Choppers

  • Members
  • 1,122 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 08:27 AM

Pitchers are half of your team. The Twins shouldn't be afraid to draft a good one.

#8 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,490 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 08:30 AM

Correct, to some degree. i agree that it isn't fair to those that are still playing which is why I mentioned the likes of Verlander and Lincecum. The per-year thing is good, but I think you also want at top pitcher to give more than 2-3 years like Prior, great as they were. And, I thought about how it would look, relative to high school pitchers or hitters or college hitters, but at the same time, I think this tells the story for college pitchers and says that as optimistic as we want to be about a college pitcher, it may should be tempered. It's not to say that drafting a high school bat is better or worse.

#9 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,135 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 08:53 AM

Don't you have to compare that to hitters, to understand which offers more likelihood of success? Half the roster is pitchers, you need 5-7 starters. If you dont' draft pitchers high EVER because they are risky, how do you ever get pitching? That's the part people can't answer...."never draft a pitcher high, because it is risky", then how do you ever get pitching?

#10 Shane Wahl

Shane Wahl

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,092 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:22 AM

I probably wouldn't care about not drafting a solid college pitcher with the 2 pick if I could rest assured that the Twins were going to chase a top 50 MLB pitcher on the market in the offseason or make a trade for one.

#11 edavis0308

edavis0308

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 576 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:26 AM

I feel there should be one more dimension looked at - career WAR of pitchers drafted by team. Example - compare the drafting of pitchers of the Rays over the past few years compared to the Twins. EDIT: to build on that, it might show who has superior scouting in the late rounds compared to teams that aren't as good that frequently draft toward the top of the round.

Edited by edavis0308, 26 April 2012 - 09:29 AM.


#12 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,135 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:27 AM

I'm with shanewahl on that, if I thought they'd change their DNA and sign LEGIT MLB starter(s) in FA, or trade prospects for one or more, sure, pass on pitching all you want in the draft....but in year three of their new stadium, they cut their payroll, and didn't sign one.

#13 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,840 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:32 AM

I raised a similar question in my inaugural blog entry yesterday, although I came at it from the POV of wondering about all those supplemental draft picks, and took a cherry-picker's approach to demonstrate that if the draft pool is thin one year you can end up with little or nothing even with several picks just after the real first round. What you (Seth) have done is a great start, toward the question of what to do with the #2 pick, but surely there exists somewhere a set of data that carries things further: separate the draftees by HS/College and Pitcher/Position-player, and use some metric (WAR as you have done) to assess the empirical record of what has worked the best among these four combinations. Anecdotal evidence (like what I wrote yesterday, or the "for every Justin Verlander at pick #2 I can find an Adam Johnson or even Mark Prior as a cautionary example) only goes so far. Indeed probably one or more major league teams already have done exactly this and it will have colored their choices the past decade or so. Focusing on Boston, Tampa, and Oakland's picks might be very instructive - if only to show that the opportunity to set oneself apart is past.

#14 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,714 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:39 AM

Shane's right, there is just no other way to get a front line starter, and you need two or three of them to compete these days. The Twins will never give a pitcher more than a four year deal, and the top guys ask for double that and usually settle for between 5-7 years. The only hope for the team is to get a stud in the system, then after a season or two offer to buy out a couple arbitration years in exchange for 2 free agent years and have him locked up for the first eight years of his career.

#15 minn55441

minn55441

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 517 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:40 AM

Is this the era of the new and improved Terry Ryan? Now that he actually has some money to spend will it change his approach to creating a roster? 2013 we have 1 starting pitcher under contract. I don't see us filling out the rotation from within. How much money will be devoted to FA's? I don't think any pitcher taken in this years draft will be part of the 2013 rotation. It would be nice if we could count of Wimmers and Gibson, but they are both big question marks. I would like to see us take Zunino with the #2 overall pick and then start loading up on arms, both College or younger for the seasons 2015 on out. The starting pitchers we need from a competitive 2013 need to come from outside the organization. Whether we aquire them through trade or free agency, it's up to Ryan to find a balance between value and price we have to pay.

#16 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,490 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:01 AM

Believe me, I'm NOT saying DON'T take a college pitcher with the #2 pick... but like any pick (but particularly college pitchers) there is no such thing as a sure thing. As many before us have said, there is no such thing as a pitching prospect. I think of the 5 picks in the top 72, I'd like to see at least two and probably 3 pitchers taken.

#17 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Daily Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 4,840 posts
  • LocationLake Tahoe, Nevada

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:10 AM

Believe me, I'm NOT saying DON'T take a college pitcher with the #2 pick...


I think what's needed is to trust the scouts, and if they can say "this is the guy" you just take him. Some years that's what happens at #1, #2, #3... If it's viewed as close between a couple of guys, then you look at this kind of historical/empircal study to maybe tip the balance.

#18 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:28 AM

I think we should draft Zunino. The guy in the thumbnail being my second choice (Zimmer).

#19 ssp833

ssp833

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 14 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:31 AM

Mike wants wins makes the exact same point I would - if you don't take a chance on a strikeout pitcher because it may be risky then you will never have any. Based on where the current strategy for building a pitching staff has gotten them, I so hope that they not only pick a hard throwing starter with number 2 but that they pick several more. And then do the same every year.

#20 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,135 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:05 AM

min55441...they had money to do that this year, and didn't. So, I see no evidence Ryan is a changed man. Which makes me sad, because I think they have a nice core with Mauer, Morneau, Span, Willingham...but once again, they've surrounded them with yuckiness.

#21 twinsfanstreif

twinsfanstreif

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 150 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:05 AM

I've heard a lot of people on here say that if we want an ace we have to draft him high in the first. This comment may be totally legit but does anyone know currently of each "ace" or ace caliber player in the majors how we're they aquired or what round were they drafted in? I would be curious to see the result because I feel this is a blanket statement with no research involved.

#22 scottz

scottz

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 130 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:37 AM

All I know is, other than a very few of the names mentioned (eg., Dan Reichert, Sean Lowe), just about anybody on that list could have stepped onto this roster and make an improvement to our rotation. Even if we ended up with a Charles Nagy or Rick Helling as a starter in 2 years, it would be an improvement over what we see here currently. If 78% of college pitchers taken in the top 25 picks over the last 31 years have made the bigs [(222-49)/222], and presumably made it fairly quickly, then that sounds like a pretty solid risk to me.

#23 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,135 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:46 AM

btw, I meant to, once again, thank Seth for his time and effort. Your contribution to the Twins' community is amazing.

#24 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,490 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:49 AM

I think what's needed is to trust the scouts, and if they can say "this is the guy" you just take him. Some years that's what happens at #1, #2, #3... If it's viewed as close between a couple of guys, then you look at this kind of historical/empircal study to maybe tip the balance.


It's all we can do. I'm not even going to pretend to know how to rank Buxton vs Zunino, much less Appel vs Zimmer vs Gausman. My point would be that whoever the Twins have at the top of their list when it's their turn to pick, that's who they should pick.

#25 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,490 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:49 AM

btw, I meant to, once again, thank Seth for his time and effort. Your contribution to the Twins' community is amazing.


I appreciate that! Thank you!

#26 twinsfanstreif

twinsfanstreif

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 150 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:02 PM

All I know is, other than a very few of the names mentioned (eg., Dan Reichert, Sean Lowe), just about anybody on that list could have stepped onto this roster and make an improvement to our rotation. Even if we ended up with a Charles Nagy or Rick Helling as a starter in 2 years, it would be an improvement over what we see here currently. If 78% of college pitchers taken in the top 25 picks over the last 31 years have made the bigs [(222-49)/222], and presumably made it fairly quickly, then that sounds like a pretty solid risk to me.


You have to take into account that guys like Adam Johnson technically made it to the majors. It's about the amount of guys that were affective. 50 of the 222 had a career WAR of 10 or more(keep in mind that Jason Marqis has a Career WAR of 12) that makes 22% were affective. Keep in mind that many people would be very upset if our #2 pick turned out to be like Jason Marquis. So really the 25 that had a WAR over 20 have been very good to elite and that's only 11% of college pitchers taken in the first round. Those numbers look much less promising.

#27 shs_59

shs_59

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 206 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:04 PM

GREAT ARTICLE SETH!!! I'm all about the Twins taking Pitchers (mainly college arms) in picks 32-72 Right now. With pick #2 overall in my mind, there should be no doubt on Byron Buxton, and if he's gone, then Either Zunino or Maybe Albert Almora, Devin Marrero, Lucas Gioloto, Carlos Correa.

#28 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,135 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:06 PM

Just read an insider article espousing Almora over Buxton, making Buxton not a no-brainer...
Lighten up Francis....

#29 twinsfanstreif

twinsfanstreif

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 150 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:26 PM

Just read an insider article espousing Almora over Buxton, making Buxton not a no-brainer...


Also on a draft chat done by perfectgame.com a scout was writing about how he is much higher on Correa than Buxton, he said Buxton is not a "5 tool" guy like everyone is saying but more like a 3 tool.

#30 Seth Stohs

Seth Stohs

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 7,490 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:31 PM

You have to take into account that guys like Adam Johnson technically made it to the majors. It's about the amount of guys that were affective. 50 of the 222 had a career WAR of 10 or more(keep in mind that Jason Marqis has a Career WAR of 12) that makes 22% were affective. Keep in mind that many people would be very upset if our #2 pick turned out to be like Jason Marquis. So really the 25 that had a WAR over 20 have been very good to elite and that's only 11% of college pitchers taken in the first round. Those numbers look much less promising.


Exactly this!! That was my point. The percent is likely a little better for a #2 pick, but even there, not a given.