Thread: BA mock draft

I originally thought Zunino was the best pick, but now I'm convinced that drafting pitching, pitching, and more pitching is the way to go. It's not because the Twins need pitchers (they do), but because it's a great way to build a franchise (Think Rays). The only way the Twins will ever have a true ace is if they develop him in their organization. Free agent pitchers simply cost too much in the offseason. Even if a team has a surplus of good pitching, great prospects can be dealt for position players later on (Think Pineda for Montero). It looks as though scouts have soured on Appel because he can't get strikeouts and his production has declined this season. Out of all the pitchers, I think Kyle Zimmer has the biggest upside and is the best choice.

Zunino is hitting .245/.312/.457 in SEC games this year (25 games so far). Not exactly awe-inspiring numbers.

Originally Posted by Puckmen

Zunino is hitting .245/.312/.457 in SEC games this year (25 games so far). Not exactly awe-inspiring numbers.

Yeah, that's what made me want one of the pitchers over him. Gausman just threw a 9 inning, 5 hit, 11k game over Vanderbilt and has done pretty well against the SEC.

I want Gausman!

To me, none of the pitchers have established themselves enough to warrant further consideration for the #2 pick and Zunino doesn't have enough upside. If I had the choice I'd draft Carlos Correa over Buxton who hasn't shown enough power this spring and plays a less scarce position. The Twins could do a lot worse than to have two monster 3B prospects in the pipeline at the same time.

At the #2 pick, the Twins MUST pick the best overall talent. If that is Buxton, then its another toolsy outfielder. Is there an outfielder in our system with a higher upside? Its not like the Twins have ELITE talent outfielders waiting in the wings. Revere, Benson, Hicks are all good prospects, but not elite by any means (especially if Hicks can't hit RH pitching). I wish there was a Prior/Strasburg-type pitcher available, but there isn't. At #2, the Twins have to take the guy they think has the potential to carry a team. If Zunino was mashing the way he was last year, I would be right there with you Seth, but his SEC (best conference in NCAA) numbers are pretty pedestrian this year. I just hope the Twins don't take reach too far. Everyone in the top 5-6 is rated pretty similarly. Don't reach too far please!

Aside from the natural injury concerns that come with a pitcher, Buxton is no safer of a bet than the top arms. He looks exactly like Donavan Tate, the 3rd overall pick of the 2009 draft by the Padres. After one season he fell off BA's top 100 prospect list. If there was a sure thing postion player available, everyone would know and there would be no debate.

Personally I like Gausman at 2, good hard throwing front line starter. If Trahan or Giolito fall to 32 they're the obvious pick there, other then that Jake Barrett out of ASU and Patrick Ramsey of FSU are all viable options in the sandwich round. Ramsey is a possibility because the Twins have taken him before and Barrett seems like a quick to the Majors bullpen arm the Twins could use.

I think at #2, you have to take the BPA. Hopefully, we won't be picking this high very often, but if you are you have to take whoever you think is going to have the best major league career. It shouldn't even be a question unless you have two guys rated almost exactly the same on the board. After the #2, then you can manage the draft more for organizational needs.

Originally Posted by shanewahl

The point, also, is not that whoever they sign is going to be in the rotation by 2013. But it would be nice if that were a possibility for 2014.

Anyway, something like Mark Appel (RHP), Rock Rucker (LHP), Kevin Plawecki (C), Kyle Hansen (RHP) . . . would be nice.

I'd be REALLY disappointed if this were the Twins draft.

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Aside from the natural injury concerns that come with a pitcher, Buxton is no safer of a bet than the top arms. He looks exactly like Donavan Tate, the 3rd overall pick of the 2009 draft by the Padres. After one season he fell off BA's top 100 prospect list. If there was a sure thing postion player available, everyone would know and there would be no debate.

Tate has had some major off-field issues. I don't forsee that with Buxton and Buxton is a better athlete. Tate may have had more raw power but that is the only edge he had.

Law has them taking Buxton also....I like Gausman right now, I think.

Originally Posted by whydidnt

I think at #2, you have to take the BPA. Hopefully, we won't be picking this high very often, .

Here is another reason that you take the best player available and with the best ratings even if you do not have a foreseable need in that position:

You can trade him a year later to fill a real need. The better the prospect the better the return.

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

Law has them taking Buxton also....I like Gausman right now, I think.

Buxton's the wildcard. I think the Twins would pass on Zunino but if the Astros don't take Buxton, I'm not sure the Twins FO would be able to pass on his upside, even for Zimmer.

Originally Posted by thrylos98

Here is another reason that you take the best player available and with the best ratings even if you do not have a foreseable need in that position:

You can trade him a year later to fill a real need. The better the prospect the better the return.

I agree, but then you need to be willing to make trades of elite prospects....

Originally Posted by garrioch13

Tate has had some major off-field issues. I don't forsee that with Buxton and Buxton is a better athlete. Tate may have had more raw power but that is the only edge he had.

Tate was lauded much more than Buxton is now, he was supposed to be the best athlete in the draft. If Strausburg wasn't such a no-brainer Tate may have gone #1. The 2009 draft class was very strong, while everyone agrees this one is not. Tate may have off-field problems but it isn't affecting his playing time. He looked good on paper but he is not producing against competent talent. His power all but disappeared.

THe Twins need to take either Gausman or Appel at #2. Then at #32 hope a guy like Chris Stratton or Brian Johnson falls to that pick. At #42 maybe Alex Wood or Cory Jones. Three college arms in the top 42 is the way to go. Not one of them, even Gasman or Appel, seems to project as a #1 starter, but that is what the draft has to offer. If Gausman or Appel can get to the majors quickly as a #2 type of guy, and one of the other two becomes similar to Scott Baker, and does so fairly quickly, the Twins can rebuild their pitching staff. IF they get lucky, they get 2 starters from this draft and another starter from Gibson/Wimmers within two years (if I ran the team the #1 guy would be in the starting rotation the day he signs, why not?).

I understand the "upside" appeal of Buxton, and that is hard to pass up. But he is a HS player and even if he is rushed will take 3-4 years to get to the majors. We have other similar prospects (Hicks) and they simply need to rebuild the staff right now, not 5 years from now.

It is not clear that Buxton is far and away the best player. That is the problem with the BPA approach. Zimmer, Appel, and Gausman might be all fairly interchangeable, so taking one of them would be what I would do.

what shanewahl said. I've seen guys who love Buxton, saying they'd slot him just ahead of Bubba Starling last year, but I've also seen guys who don't even rate him the #1 Outfielder in this draft. Personally, he's the scariest of all the prospects who have the potential to go in the top 3 to me and has by far the most bust potential. Might also have the highest ceiling, but that then makes a very large spectrum of possibilities for what he might develop into. I also knock him down a few pegs because one thing the Twins have is OF prospects. If we're rebuilding, they absolutely HAVE TO address the starting pitching problem. And by that I mean Top End talent. They are only going to get that at the #2 pick. There's not a single guy in the system who the experts would rate as having a #1 ceiling (keep in mind, #1 is different than an "Ace"), probably not even any #2 ceiling guys.

Was over at Jim Callis Baseball America chat today, and he answered my following question (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...2613413.html):

"Steve L. (Minneapolis, MN): I understand the "draft the BPA" ideology in baseball, but with the Twins SP prospects in the minors in dire straights, can you make the argument they have to draft a SP at #2? And as a follow up, is there another team in baseball worse off in high-end pitching prospects?

Jim Callis: You can definitely make the argument. The Twins don't have any obvious pitching answers in their system."

You don't rebuild for 2014 or 2015 by taking Buxton, that's my only issue with those who are referencing him when they say "get the best player available". I think you have to weigh "BPA" and "timetable-for/positional-need impact" if we're rebuilding for 2014, 2015. That heavily favors going after a SP. And just as a sidenote, I like Kyle Zimmer the best.

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

what shanewahl said. I've seen guys who love Buxton, saying they'd slot him just ahead of Bubba Starling last year, but I've also seen guys who don't even rate him the #1 Outfielder in this draft. Personally, he's the scariest of all the prospects who have the potential to go in the top 3 to me and has by far the most bust potential. Might also have the highest ceiling, but that then makes a very large spectrum of possibilities for what he might develop into. I also knock him down a few pegs because one thing the Twins have is OF prospects. If we're rebuilding, they absolutely HAVE TO address the starting pitching problem. And by that I mean Top End talent. They are only going to get that at the #2 pick. There's not a single guy in the system who the experts would rate as having a #1 ceiling (keep in mind, #1 is different than an "Ace"), probably not even any #2 ceiling guys.

Was over at Jim Callis Baseball America chat today, and he answered my following question (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...2613413.html):

"Steve L. (Minneapolis, MN): I understand the "draft the BPA" ideology in baseball, but with the Twins SP prospects in the minors in dire straights, can you make the argument they have to draft a SP at #2? And as a follow up, is there another team in baseball worse off in high-end pitching prospects?

Jim Callis: You can definitely make the argument. The Twins don't have any obvious pitching answers in their system."

You don't rebuild for 2014 or 2015 by taking Buxton, that's my only issue with those who are referencing him when they say "get the best player available". I think you have to weigh "BPA" and "timetable-for/positional-need impact" if we're rebuilding for 2014, 2015. That heavily favors going after a SP. And just as a sidenote, I like Kyle Zimmer the best.

I totally agree with you that we need starting pitching. I think the argument other people were making was that you would take Buxton, and then trade some other outfield prospects for pitching prospects. You would have to assume then that other teams would give up pitching prospects for a guy like Aaron Hicks. The more I read up on the draft, the more I'm convinced that the Twins need to take Gausman or Zimmer. Appel still makes me a little nervous because of how much he has been used, and every thing I read said that his stuff should translate in more strike outs, but somehow doesn't.