Baseball America Grades 2009 MLB Draft by Team

[Seth Stohs]

Baseball America recently reviewed the 2009 drafts of each Major League team and gives them a letter grade.

 

The Twins get a B with recognition of Kyle Gibson and Brian Dozier. 

 

There were three or four As and a total of 9 teams with B or better.

 

Review and Discuss.

[nicksaviking]

It would have seemed foolish at the time, but it's been clear for several years now that the Twins would have been wise to take the two comp picks for Johan Santana instead of getting the grab bag of players they got from the Mets.  Can't play the hindsight game, but you can learn from it.  We've said for years that the Twins had little leverage as only a couple teams were involved in the trade discussions.  These days, the comp picks are leverage in themselves.

[bird]

It's important to note that these grades do not adjust for draft order. So, it should be reasonable to expect less than a B grade for a team like the Sox (D grade), who drafted #23, and it should be expected that a team drafting #9, like the Tigers (D grade), would fare better. Cleveland drafted #15 and was graded as C, so I'd suggest their fans should not complain (but of course they will). KC drafted #12 an got a B like the Twins, who drafted #22.

[ashbury]

I'd say 'B' is slightly generous for the Twins that year.  The grade is solely dependent on two players, as besides them only Herrmann has seen any major league time for the Twins at all.  And both are a near thing; Gibson is still more about promise than having actually established himself, and Dozier was nearly a washout at age 25 until they decided he could handle 2B.  I'd give them a C-; particularly for a team that has to do the low-budget thing well, they can't sustain themselves with drafts like that one.

[Winston Smith]

I was always happy with a B.

[ashbury]

Less to explain to pater and mater than the Gentleman's C.

[Rosterman]

The Twins drafted 50 players that year. Gibson, Dozier, Herrmann made it to the majors with the Twins. Mario Hollands (drafted 24th and not signed) later signed and made majors with Phillies. Ronnie Richardson didn't sign and is with the Padres organization. John Stilson didn't sign and is with the Blue Jays. R,J, Encinosa is with the Giants organization. Tony Bryant signed later with the Rockies.  Tyler Williams didn't sign and is with White Sox. Pat Light didn't sign but is now with Red Soxs. David Hurlbut didn't sign but did sign in 2011. Tony Davis is still playing, albeit in Indy ball after being released by Jays organization last year/ They only signed like 35 of the guys. Notable prospects that didn't pan out: Billy Bullock (traded for Scott Diamond), Brad Stillings, Matt Bashore, Dakota Watts, Ben Tootle, Dereck McCallum, Tobias Streich, Tyler Herr, Natt Tone, Steve Liddle, Kane Holbrooks, Buddy Monroe, Peter Kennelly. So, we have four guys from that draft still in the organization. A resignee, a journeyman ultility guy, a #4 starter, and an infielder with poer and speed but no average.

[drjim]

The Twins drafted 50 players that year. Gibson, Dozier, Herrmann made it to the majors with the Twins. Mario Hollands (drafted 24th and not signed) later signed and made majors with Phillies. Ronnie Richardson didn't sign and is with the Padres organization. John Stilson didn't sign and is with the Blue Jays. R,J, Encinosa is with the Giants organization. Tony Bryant signed later with the Rockies.  Tyler Williams didn't sign and is with White Sox. Pat Light didn't sign but is now with Red Soxs. David Hurlbut didn't sign but did sign in 2011. Tony Davis is still playing, albeit in Indy ball after being released by Jays organization last year/ They only signed like 35 of the guys. Notable prospects that didn't pan out: Billy Bullock (traded for Scott Diamond), Brad Stillings, Matt Bashore, Dakota Watts, Ben Tootle, Dereck McCallum, Tobias Streich, Tyler Herr, Natt Tone, Steve Liddle, Kane Holbrooks, Buddy Monroe, Peter Kennelly. So, we have four guys from that draft still in the organization. A resignee, a journeyman ultility guy, a #4 starter, and an infielder with poer and speed but no average.

 

And it was still probably a top 10 best draft in all of baseball. Says something about the draft and the expectations people should have.

[Thrylos]

Gibson was not a bad pick.  Thinking that he was picked 3 spots ahead of Mike Trout makes me cringe. Then they decided to pick Matt Bashore in the supplemental draft ahead of Billy Hamilton, Jason Kipnis and Nolan Arenado.  Brian Dozier in the 8th was a good pick, but overall the Twins got only 3 players who ever played in the majors from that draft (Herrmann too.)   Never mind the Bullocks, McCallums, Tootles and Streichs of that draft...

 

Sorry folks, that one has a C- all over it.

[drjim]

Give it the specific letter grade you want but BA has 7 drafts graded better, 2 the same, and 20 graded worse.

 

Obviously could always pick better players in hindsight but that strikes me as acceptable considering they picked in the 20s.

[Seth Stohs]

Yeah, the "could have taken player X" think serves no purpose.. and I think 2-4 draft picks a year that make it to the big leagues is probably pretty good, isn't it? Having two of them being  guys that have significant roles is really good. Of course, in 2009, they also signed Sano, Polanco and Kepler too. 

 

Hard to blame them on Bashore. Te guy was throwing left-handed and 97 mph before the draft. Can't really predict the kind of injuries he went through. 

[Rosterman]

But shows you the tough road of prospects. Why you should identify them for potential trades. And the luck other people can have drafting the guys the next time around. Maybe. We traded Bullock for Diamond, so that trade made us look good for a season and a half.

[drjim]

But shows you the tough road of prospects. Why you should identify them for potential trades. And the luck other people can have drafting the guys the next time around. Maybe. We traded Bullock for Diamond, so that trade made us look good for a season and a half.

Trades are fine but you also have to move prospects with actual value rather than repeat a theoretical position that is close to meaningless in reality.

 

29 other GMs are aware of the tough road for prospects too. It limits the opportunities beyond the handful of elite prospects.

[ashbury]

29 other GMs are aware of the tough road for prospects too. It limits the opportunities beyond the handful of elite prospects.

Some are, maybe not all 29.  I've seen it speculated that prospects are an overrated commodity in general and represent the current market inefficiency to exploit if you're brave enough (and agree with the assessment).

[Willihammer]

Trades are fine but you also have to move prospects with actual value rather than repeat a theoretical position that is close to meaningless in reality.

 

Not every prospect has a firm value. If you can dream on a guy, GM's will bite. I'd suggest LHP prospects are best for this. The Price, Peavy (twice), Gio, Miggy, and Teixeira trades exemplify that.

[old nurse]

 5 years out to judge high school and IFA is a little early. The early returns would be the class of 09 was not great. How do you asess how good a class is at this point? A college player that was a very good one should have  a few years in. With the Trout exceprtio, the very top of the 18 year olds are getting their first full season done with,. The IFA would be just starting to get a September call up.. Right now from the class of 09 you could come up with 20 players that have proved they are good players. The Twins have one in Dozier. Being that the Cards managed 5, that would put the Twins above average.

[drjim]

Some are, maybe not all 29.  I've seen it speculated that prospects are an overrated commodity in general and represent the current market inefficiency to exploit if you're brave enough (and agree with the assessment).

 

I also thought the "prospects are overrated" speculation came primarily from GMs who couldn't execute any trades. Prospects seem rated pretty properly to me.

 

It depends on what you are trying to acquire. In the context of this post I was thinking more of how we need to trade some of our second and third tier guys because they don't always work out, which is true, but also limits their value. This offseason they can be moved for a year or two of control of a overpaid corner OF, or perhaps an overpaid SP with some question marks (probably would take 2-3 of those prospects). Where the Twins are, I would rather just overpay for those commodities on the free agent market (for someone like Masterson) rather then expend into the prospect depth.

 

If you are talking about acquiring one of the elite guys available it will take elite prospects. I would certainly trade Meyer and/or Sano in the right deal, but I'm not sure there is a player available that would be worth those prospects. Perhaps I am overrating them...

 

Guys like Gordon, Stewart, Thorpe are great prospects to have in the system but they really don't have much trade value because they are so far from the majors, and they certainly won't move the needle much if the Twins are trying to get a really good major league player in return.

[TRex]

Special note to the 'Rays can do no wrong' crowd...

 

Even they are subject to an 'F' every now and then!

[diehardtwinsfan]

Seems to me that a draft that can net 2 major leaguers (one of whom is a borderline all star) is a pretty good draft. 2-3 major league players per draft is generally considered a good thing. Won't complain if they get more, but it wasn't a bad draft... especially considering where they picked.

[chamoman]

Thanks for the link, Seth.

 

C-?

 

Like comparing managers or stars, fans' perception of their own team's draft success or lack thereof is interesting.  Posters here seem to dwell on mistakes instead of an actual objective comparison. Look at Round 1 from that draft (http://www.baseballamerica.com/draftdb/2009xrnd.php?rnd=1); maybe 30% are average big leaguers? Yes, the Twins whiffed on Trout, but so did almost everyone else- but everyone else whiffed on Dozier (including the Twins seven times).

 

Bashore was a bust, but Bullock netted Scott Diamond (1.4 bWAR with Minnesota), and the Twins have gotten 1.2 bWAR from Gibson and 8.6 from Dozier. It's not the best, but it certainly isn't the worst.

 

As an aside: I can't wait to see how the 2012 draft class develops. The Twins seem to be heading toward an enormous amount of success there: Buxton, Berríos, Melotakis, Chargois, Walker, Z. Jones, Duffey, Taylor Rogers, J. Fernández, and even Zack Larson and DJ Baxendale. Maybe the reliever-heavy strategies in 2012 and 2014 weren't so bad after all. We'll see, of course.

[gunnarthor]

Nice link.  Dozier was a really nice steal in that draft.  I think it's important for people to realize how tough drafts are.  Two starters in one draft is very good, esp when you're drafting in the bottom third.  

[bird]

Give it the specific letter grade you want but BA has 7 drafts graded better, 2 the same, and 20 graded worse.

 

Obviously could always pick better players in hindsight but that strikes me as acceptable considering they picked in the 20s.

Yeah, a B- might be slightly charitable even given the fact that no consideration is being given to the draft order. But a C- is a bit harsh. Gibson and Dozier are nothing to sneeze at.

 

And giving them a lower grade might mean that you'd give lower grades all around. It doesn't make a lot of sense to look at draft results for any team in a vacuum. 

 

Looking at a single draft year of course doesn't prove or disprove anyone's notion about whether the Twins are any good at scouting and drafting. As someone who strongly believes they're not bad at it, I'm happy with any evidence that suggests they are, which this grade does. 

[tobi0040]

I think a B is a tad low.  I view Dozier as a borderline all-star given the position he plays and Gibson a #2-3 starter in his prime.

 

If you added a borderline all star and good starter every draft, you would have a ton of talent in house to field a really good team, even before free agency.

 

It is the drafts like 2006 and 2007 where you get a whole lot of nothing that kill your team.

[bird]

Special note to the 'Rays can do no wrong' crowd...

 

Even they are subject to an 'F' every now and then!

The Rays, in my view, are the best example of how having one of the very top selections in the draft for a decade really bumps up the IQ. Their fans are starting to grouse about how they stink at drafting and development now...

[Brandon]

Yeah, the "could have taken player X" think serves no purpose.. and I think 2-4 draft picks a year that make it to the big leagues is probably pretty good, isn't it? Having two of them being  guys that have significant roles is really good. Of course, in 2009, they also signed Sano, Polanco and Kepler too. 

 

Hard to blame them on Bashore. Te guy was throwing left-handed and 97 mph before the draft. Can't really predict the kind of injuries he went through. 

I would give them an A if you count the international signings.  Andy MacPhail once said his goal in the draft was to find me up each year.  with both players having a big role I Think a B is a solid grade.  A c is if one of those 2 were just a bench player.  

[bird]

Some are, maybe not all 29.  I've seen it speculated that prospects are an overrated commodity in general and represent the current market inefficiency to exploit if you're brave enough (and agree with the assessment).

This may have some merit in theory at least, because I think what we're seeing is a shift in strategy by a lot of teams to one that more closely emulates the current strategy of teams like the Cards, Twins, Cubs, and Royals, who concentrate their energies on developing players. Even the Yanks and Red Sox appear to be going in this direction, so if more teams place a higher value on their own prospects, they may be willing to pay a higher price for someone else's too.

[Kwak]

It seems to me that this thread is about looking backwards.  A one-year  draft to serve as a single data point.  What does it really mean?  I infer the following:  the Twins found two players to fill gaping holes in their roster--spots held by impostors of major league talent.  (I do hope that they continue to improve because there is ample room for improvement).  Apparently Bill Smith didn't completely destroy the franchise as has been alledged on these boards.  We should hold that thought when evaluating his performance--oops, he's already gone? Oh, well... .Even college players progress slowly through the Twins system.  But, it's not clear that that is a good thing.  Whatsisname's grade of Twins performance?  I place it  right after my 8th Grade English teacher's grade I received in relevance.

[tobi0040]

It seems to me that this thread is about looking backwards.  A one-year  draft to serve as a single data point.  What does it really mean?  I infer the following:  the Twins found two players to fill gaping holes in their roster--spots held by impostors of major league talent.  (I do hope that they continue to improve because there is ample room for improvement).  Apparently Bill Smith didn't completely destroy the franchise as has been alledged on these boards.  We should hold that thought when evaluating his performance--oops, he's already gone? Oh, well... .Even college players progress slowly through the Twins system.  But, it's not clear that that is a good thing.  Whatsisname's grade of Twins performance?  I place it  right after my 8th Grade English teacher's grade I received in relevance.

 

Be careful....it has been alleged that Ryan has "no say in the draft" as well as "Ryan only has input on the first pick".  

 

So the Dozier pick goes to the draft team  (SARCASM)

[bird]

Thanks for the link, Seth.

 

C-?

 

Like comparing managers or stars, fans' perception of their own team's draft success or lack thereof is interesting.  Posters here seem to dwell on mistakes instead of an actual objective comparison. Look at Round 1 from that draft (http://www.baseballamerica.com/draftdb/2009xrnd.php?rnd=1); maybe 30% are average big leaguers? Yes, the Twins whiffed on Trout, but so did almost everyone else- but everyone else whiffed on Dozier (including the Twins seven times).

 

Bashore was a bust, but Bullock netted Scott Diamond (1.4 bWAR with Minnesota), and the Twins have gotten 1.2 bWAR from Gibson and 8.6 from Dozier. It's not the best, but it certainly isn't the worst.

 

As an aside: I can't wait to see how the 2012 draft class develops. The Twins seem to be heading toward an enormous amount of success there: Buxton, Berríos, Melotakis, Chargois, Walker, Z. Jones, Duffey, Taylor Rogers, J. Fernández, and even Zack Larson and DJ Baxendale. Maybe the reliever-heavy strategies in 2012 and 2014 weren't so bad after all. We'll see, of course.

 

No conclusions to be drawn, but interesting that, aside from Trout, I'm not sure there's another one of the ten drafted after Gibson that you'd trade for him. And maybe an equal number drafted ahead of him you'd refuse in a trade for Gibson.

[bird]

It seems to me that this thread is about looking backwards.  A one-year  draft to serve as a single data point.  What does it really mean?  I infer the following:  the Twins found two players to fill gaping holes in their roster--spots held by impostors of major league talent.  (I do hope that they continue to improve because there is ample room for improvement).  Apparently Bill Smith didn't completely destroy the franchise as has been alledged on these boards.  We should hold that thought when evaluating his performance--oops, he's already gone? Oh, well... .Even college players progress slowly through the Twins system.  But, it's not clear that that is a good thing.  Whatsisname's grade of Twins performance?  I place it  right after my 8th Grade English teacher's grade I received in relevance.

If you read the comments carefully, Kwak, I think you'll find that virtually every commenter so far has been careful not to infer a whole lot from it. You're probably the first to infer anything dramatic.

 

I'm on this site every day and have been for years. I honestly cannot recall a single commenter who has alleged that Smith completely destroyed the franchise, for one. Second, most criticisms of Smith have rightly been about his trades, not the draft. And third, Smith had very very little to do with and by his own admission, practically no real input on the selection of one player over another in Rule 4 drafts.

 

College players do not progress more slowly in the Twins system than in other systems. I think you're perpetuating a longstanding myth here that is not substantiated by a close look at the record.