Keith Law Ranks Twins Minor League System #3, Seven in Top 100

[alarp33]

 

Can anyone paraphrase what he thinks of Berrios, Kepler and Polanco?  I'm curious if he still has concerns about Berrios' height, Kepler being a "tweener" and if Polanco can stay at short.

 

I won't go into much detail since its his content; 

 

Berrios - few too many long balls potentially

Kepler - finally stayed healthy, nothing about tweener.  5 tools

Polanco - good defender at 2b or 3b

 

You can usually find ESPN the Mag (and Insider) for like ~$15-20 for a year, it is so worth it for Keith Law's content alone, and then you throw in all the other stuff and it is a steal

[Mike Sixel]

Berrios: the only thing holding him back from being higher is the plane on the fastball, but he has everything else. so, yes on the height.

 

Kepler: better hitter than I thought, but with less power. should be plus defensively, as long as his arm holds up.

 

Polanco: projects as above average starter at 3B or 2B, but not at short (for defensive reasons, still for O)....likes his hitting a lot

[Mike Sixel]

Ha, ninjad again, but I'll leave that much there. I've previously asked KLAW about how much can be shared, and that seems reasonable.......

 

Really, for the tiny amount of money, it is worth insider for KLAW and the other MLB prospect stuff. Then, if you like the NFL draft, that is gravy.

[nytwinsfan]

Great if Polanco can play 3B, but everything I've heard from everyone else, including scouts and prospects experts, is that he doesn't have the arm for it.  A little skeptical that Law doesn't even mention that, if only to refute that quite common perception. It is fine if he disagrees with those who say Polanco doesn't have the arm for it, but the fact that he doesn't even mention it suggests he didn't even consider what other scouts have to say.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

It's why I don't put a ton of stock into minor league stats, pitchers especially.  Is he working on mechanics, the change-up, command, etc?  If his only goal was to rear back and blow it past everyone, I bet his strikeout total would be a bit higher, but would that make him better in the long term?  

 

I just think its so premature to write off this type of athlete, who has such great stuff, a little more than two years into his pro career (and 2+ years removed from being a QB)

Nobody is writing him off, but he has A LOT of work to do.  It would be like if I decided to build my own house, I could make all the plans, work on my hammering technique, etc., but at some point I actually have to build the darn thing or my wife will never believe I can do the job well.

 

To continue my odd analogy, I'd say Kohl Stewart is still in the pre-built basement, practicing with his hammer.  He still has potential, but he's taking a non-standard route in fulfilling it so far, which means his chances of success are probably lower, which means he gets a lower rank in most prospect lists.  That's hardly slighting him, it's just the facts of the situation.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

and spent much of his time in high school working on a different sport

FYI:

 

Stewart pitched on the varsity team beginning as a sophomore, at a suburban southern private school with an elite baseball program:

http://www.maxpreps.com/athlete/kohl-stewart/9fqJ1PTpEeKZ5AAmVebBJg/gendersport/baseball-stats.htm

http://www.stpiusx.org/page.cfm?p=1607&teamID=129

He participated in 8 "Perfect Game" events (basically a combine for the top HS talent in the country), as early as age 16, 2 years before he was drafted:
http://www.perfectgame.org/Players/Playerprofile.aspx?ID=281876

He may have been a potential college QB too but he wasn't a sandlot player from the backwoods.  He wasn't Nick Gordon in his amateur baseball experience, but I'm not sure he was any more raw/inexperienced than your average top high school draft talents.

[alarp33]

 

Nobody is writing him off, but he has A LOT of work to do.  It would be like if I decided to build my own house, I could make all the plans, work on my hammering technique, etc., but at some point I actually have to build the darn thing or my wife will never believe I can do the job well.

 

To continue my odd analogy, I'd say Kohl Stewart is still in the pre-built basement, practicing with his hammer.  He still has potential, but he's taking a non-standard route in fulfilling it so far, which means his chances of success are probably lower, which means he gets a lower rank in most prospect lists.  That's hardly slighting him, it's just the facts of the situation.

 

I've seen someone compare him to Nick Blackburn on this board. 

 

To use your analogy - if I've built a house before (played in college or at the least didn't spend half my time in HS playing football), I may be quicker to reach the end goal.  If you've never built a house, but have better tools, are stronger, taller, etc... I bet there's a pretty good chance in the end your house turns out better than mine

[alarp33]

 

FYI:

 

Stewart pitched on the varsity team beginning as a sophomore, at a suburban southern private school with an elite baseball program:

http://www.maxpreps.com/athlete/kohl-stewart/9fqJ1PTpEeKZ5AAmVebBJg/gendersport/baseball-stats.htm

http://www.stpiusx.org/page.cfm?p=1607&teamID=129

He participated in 8 "Perfect Game" events (basically a combine for the top HS talent in the country), as early as age 16, 2 years before he was drafted:
http://www.perfectgame.org/Players/Playerprofile.aspx?ID=281876

He may have been a potential college QB too but he wasn't a sandlot player from the backwoods.  He wasn't Nick Gordon in his amateur baseball experience, but I'm not sure he was any more raw/inexperienced than your average top high school draft talents.

 

Of course he has plenty of experience, played much better HS competition than Buxton, but many of these kids are working full time on their craft, lots of mechanics go into being a major league player. At the very least, he was as focused on football as baseball, and that does put him slightly behind the learning curve.   

[clutterheart]

 

Which stats? He keeps the ball in the park and had an absurd 59% ground ball rate.  

 

I'll take the professional scouts opinion on his stuff over the numbers (which aren't even that bad other than the low K rate) for someone who has only been in pro ball for 2+ years, and spent much of his time in high school working on a different sport

 

 

Yeah me too, scouting reports are the only reason why nobody is writing him off.  I do think #53 is aggressive but.K-Law knows his stuff so I am willing to trust his judgement. Once he starts hitting AA & AAA statistics become much more predictive.   But by any measure his stats-to-date are not all that impressive

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I've seen someone compare him to Nick Blackburn on this board. 

 

To use your analogy - if I've built a house before (played in college or at the least didn't spend half my time in HS playing football), I may be quicker to reach the end goal.  If you've never built a house, but have better tools, are stronger, taller, etc... I bet there's a pretty good chance in the end your house turns out better than mine

Well, we've all read a lot of things on this board.

 

No one is disputing that Stewart, based on his background, has better odds of success than another pitcher with a 4.9 K/9 in high-A.  Doesn't mean those odds or level of potential success are high enough to deserve a higher prospect ranking right now.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Of course he has plenty of experience, played much better HS competition than Buxton, but many of these kids are working full time on their craft, lots of mechanics go into being a major league player. At the very least, he was as focused on football as baseball, and that does put him slightly behind the learning curve.   

If this statement is true at all, I'd put the emphasis on "slightly."  Virtually no one comes out of high school as anything close to a finished product, it shouldn't take 2.5 years (and counting) of full-time professional experience to catch up on that learning curve.

 

In fact, if he really did have a lack of focused amateur experience before being drafted, isn't it just as likely that early projections about his ceiling and pitching style were perhaps wrong?  That his pro experience since then has shown him to be a very different kind of pitcher than anticipated?  That, plus injury, seems more likely than the idea that he's still making up for being unusually raw, or that he's approaching his development in a drastically different manner than other pitching prospects.

[nicksaviking]

 

Fans who underrate him are solely looking at his strikeout total.  Not a whole lot of guys throw 96+ and have the size/athleticism to throw 100 pitches a game.  

 

To paraphrase the write-up, Klaw says even if the strikeout totals don't improve a ton, he has an extremely high ceiling

 

But last we heard, he wasn't throwing 96 MPH, he was throwing 92-94 AND not striking guys out. I'm glad he's in the top 100, but no pitcher who can't miss bats has a high ceiling. Hopefully Stewart figures it out.

 

I've seen someone compare him to Nick Blackburn on this board. 

 

 

I haven't seen that comp, but I don't see what's wrong with it. Blackburn was ranked #56 on BA's 2008 prospect list and relied very heavily on his sinker but struggled to miss bats at every level. That seems at least like a pretty defensible comp.

[Kwak]

 

But last we heard, he wasn't throwing 96 MPH, he was throwing 92-94 AND not striking guys out. I'm glad he's in the top 100, but no pitcher who can't miss bats has a high ceiling. Hopefully Stewart figures it out.

 

 

I haven't seen that comp, but I don't see what's wrong with it. Blackburn was ranked #56 on BA's 2008 prospect list and relied very heavily on his sinker but struggled to miss bats at every level. That seems at least like a pretty defensible comp.

So, Stewart = Blackburn the Second  ?   Woo-Hoo!!

[alarp33]

 

But last we heard, he wasn't throwing 96 MPH, he was throwing 92-94 AND not striking guys out. I'm glad he's in the top 100, but no pitcher who can't miss bats has a high ceiling. Hopefully Stewart figures it out.

 

 

I haven't seen that comp, but I don't see what's wrong with it. Blackburn was ranked #56 on BA's 2008 prospect list and relied very heavily on his sinker but struggled to miss bats at every level. That seems at least like a pretty defensible comp.

 

Stewart doesn't throw a sinker - so what are the comparisons to Blackburn other than being RH pitchers for the Twins org.

[alarp33]

 

If this statement is true at all, I'd put the emphasis on "slightly."  Virtually no one comes out of high school as anything close to a finished product, it shouldn't take 2.5 years (and counting) of full-time professional experience to catch up on that learning curve.

 

In fact, if he really did have a lack of focused amateur experience before being drafted, isn't it just as likely that early projections about his ceiling and pitching style were perhaps wrong?  That his pro experience since then has shown him to be a very different kind of pitcher than anticipated?  That, plus injury, seems more likely than the idea that he's still making up for being unusually raw, or that he's approaching his development in a drastically different manner than other pitching prospects.

"Stewart came into pro ball as a football player who was just learning how to pitch, and in that context, it's impressive how far he has come already just two years into his career with the Twins." 

 

You and I are looking at A-ball stats, the person who has seen Stewart pitch, and does prospect evaluation for a living disagrees with you. 

[Thrylos]

 

Stewart doesn't throw a sinker - so what are the comparisons to Blackburn other than being RH pitchers for the Twins org.

 

Strikeouts or lack of.  Same reason Blackburn was known as Blac_burn

[alarp33]

 

Strikeouts or lack of.  Same reason Blackburn was known as Blac_burn

 

Gotcha, anyone who has low A-ball K totals = Nick Blackburn.   We should look nothing into their stuff, pitching style, delivery, frame etc.  

[nicksaviking]

 

So, Stewart = Blackburn the Second  ?   Woo-Hoo!!

 

And I get that Blackburn is a punchline now, but he wasn't always. He was a top 100 prospect and pitched well enough for the Twins to (foolishly) give him a pre-arb extension. Not that we shouldn't all be disappointed if Stewart doesn't turn out to be what was advertised with the #4 overall pick.

 

However Blackburn should be held up as an example of what's wrong with sinkerballers who don't strike guys out. It's not like when he didn't get a groundout he was giving up screaming liners everywhere, Blackburn's career LD% is lower than Clayton Kershaw and Chris Sale. You just can't rely on the guys behind you to get 90% of your outs.

[alarp33]

 

And I get that Blackburn is a punchline now, but he wasn't always. He was a top 100 prospect and pitched well enough for the Twins to (foolishly) give him a pre-arb extension. Not that we shouldn't all be disappointed if Stewart doesn't turn out to be what was advertised with the #4 overall pick.

 

However Blackburn should be held up as an example of what's wrong with sinkerballers who don't strike guys out. It's not like when he didn't get a groundout he was giving up screaming liners everywhere, Blackburn's career LD% is lower than Clayton Kershaw and Chris Sale. You just can't rely on the guys behind you to get 90% of your outs.

 

Stewart is not a sinkerballer! 

[nicksaviking]

 

 

Gotcha, anyone who has low A-ball K totals = Nick Blackburn.   We should look nothing into their stuff, pitching style, delivery, frame etc.  

 

No, usually they don't even make it to the majors as Blackburn did for six years. Not many guys dramatically increase their K totals from low A ball, low A ball is usually where they peak.

[nicksaviking]

 

 

Stewart is not a sinkerballer! 

 

Well I apologize if his sinking two-seamer isn't a sinker. Whatever the hell it is, it is clearly designed to get ground balls, just as a sinker does.

[markos]

 

It's why I don't put a ton of stock into minor league stats, pitchers especially.  Is he working on mechanics, the change-up, command, etc?  If his only goal was to rear back and blow it past everyone, I bet his strikeout total would be a bit higher, but would that make him better in the long term?  

 

I just think its so premature to write off this type of athlete, who has such great stuff, a little more than two years into his pro career (and 2+ years removed from being a QB)

I would trust the stats less and the scouts more in this case if there were any pitchers with results similar to Stewart's that thrived in the majors. The only name I've seen mentioned as a comparison is Jameson Taillon, who "struggled" with a 18.8% K% (basically league average) at A+, but otherwise has been consistently in the low-20s. I don't think that is much of a comp considering that K% is leaps and bounds better than Stewart's 12.8% at the same level. I've done a little bit of research, and looking at the 1st round HS picks from the past 20 years, there isn't anyone who struggled to miss bats like Stewart has and yet still went on to success in the majors. Am I missing someone obvious? Or are we all hoping that Stewart is a once-in-a-generation exception?

[dxpavelka]

 

I think the Law hates the Twins thing goes back maybe 5 years, but I haven't seen much indicating that's true in the last two or three years.

I always chuckle when local fans (not just here) whine about the national guys hating their team.  More often than not, the national guys could not care less.  It's usually far less about them hating a team and more about them not liking that team as much as the local fans do.  News flash people--prove something and the national folks will be gushing all over your team.  Until then, just shut up and enjoy the ride.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

"Stewart came into pro ball as a football player who was just learning how to pitch, and in that context, it's impressive how far he has come already just two years into his career with the Twins."

You and I are looking at A-ball stats, the person who has seen Stewart pitch, and does prospect evaluation for a living disagrees with you. 

Again, if Stewart really came into pro ball as a football player who was just learning how to pitch, any pre-draft projections for him were likely less reliable too.  You can't use minimal amateur experience as an excuse for less-than-stellar professional results, but cling to a top-of-the-rotation starter projection based on the same minimal amateur experience.

 

And there are others doing prospect evaluation (Sickels, Prospectus, MLB.com) who disagree with Law too, so your appeal to authority argument does little to advance the discussion.

 

Sickels has downgraded Stewart each year, from B+ to B to B-.  That looks about right to me.  Doesn't mean he still can't achieve the same success/ceiling as before, plenty of B- prospects turn out great, but each year that passes without substantial on-field progress toward that goal, the odds become a little longer.

[alarp33]

 

I would trust the stats less and the scouts more in this case if there were any pitchers with results similar to Stewart's that thrived in the majors. The only name I've seen mentioned as a comparison is Jameson Taillon, who "struggled" with a 18.8% K% (basically league average) at A+, but otherwise has been consistently in the low-20s. I don't think that is much of a comp considering that K% is leaps and bounds better than Stewart's 12.8% at the same level. I've done a little bit of research, and looking at the 1st round HS picks from the past 20 years, there isn't anyone who struggled to miss bats like Stewart has and yet still went on to success in the majors. Am I missing someone obvious? Or are we all hoping that Stewart is a once-in-a-generation exception?

 

Dallas Kuechel had a 5.0 K/9 rate in 2011, 4.9 in AAA in 2012, Sonny Gray's was 5.9 in 2012.  

 

I don't have time to look for more examples, but yes he can be a successful ML pitcher even though he had low K rates his 1st 2 years in the minors.  

 

Do I think he's going to be a K per inning guy in the majors? Doesn't appear that way, but I don't think him bumping his rate up to 7 is out of the question, and he can absolutely be a good major league pitcher

[alarp33]

 

 Doesn't mean he still can't achieve the same success/ceiling as before, plenty of B- prospects turn out great, but each year that passes without substantial on-field progress toward that goal, the odds become a little longer.

 

I don't disagree with you here at all.  My initial point was people seem to have written him off as a real prospect.  Is he a slam dunk ace? Far from it... but the potential is still there. 

[alarp33]

 

Again, if Stewart really came into pro ball as a football player who was just learning how to pitch, any pre-draft projections for him were likely less reliable too.  You can't use minimal amateur experience as an excuse for less-than-stellar professional results, but cling to a top-of-the-rotation starter projection based on the same minimal amateur experience.

 

 

Not sure I'm buying this part.  Amateur rankings are all based on projections of the likely scenario - just like prospect lists.  The amateur scouting report is likely pretty similar to the professional one thus far. Based on build, stuff, athleticism, command, etc.  Just because the results haven't matched up yet does not mean either are wrong.  Just like neither are for sure right, since its all just projection at this point.  

[Guest]

I finally got around to reading through Law's assessments of the seven guys he included in his rankings and a couple of things popped out to me. I'll try to comment without giving out too much detail concerning Law's firewall-protected work (and the price of Insider is well worth it).

 

Buxton:  Pretty much how I feel. His D is valuable right now and his bat should come around but will it come around faster if he spends more time in the minors or is counted on right away to play CF for the Twins?

 

Berrios: Law was more complimentary than I've ever seen from him on Berrios before. The height thing is now just a question of whether his "plane" will lead to higher than average gopher balls. I guess time will tell on that.

 

Kepler: Very complimentary, even (as he admits himself) bordering on placing unreasonable expectations on his shoulders.

 

Stewart: Encouraging, but that's getting beaten to death already on this thread so I won't add much to that discussion. I've said I'm looking for a breakout season from Stewart this year and Law seems to be, too. If it happens, he'll make both Law and me look smarter than we probably really are.

 

Jay: Took kind of a swipe at Illinois for using Jay in the pen. Made me wonder how things would have been different for him (and the Twins' chances of drafting him) if Jay had been a starter his last season at Illinois.

 

Polanco: Suggests that Polanco's ultimate position might be 3B. Interesting, given that I don't think he has played the position really at all, at least in the past few years. Made me wonder if it could be that the impetus for Plouffe ultimately getting traded would be to make room for Polanco, not Sano. While I'm not sure Polanco has the arm to play SS well in the big leagues, it could well be strong enough to play 3B and he'd almost certainly be a better defender there than Sano would. I'll be watching to see if he starts getting some work there in ST and/or Rochester.

 

Gordon: Law's view of Gordon's ceiling has certainly dropped, based on his first full season at Low A. Seems to me that might be somewhat premature/unfair, but his observations of Gordon's game last season were not inaccurate, imo.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Not sure I'm buying this part.  Amateur rankings are all based on projections of the likely scenario - just like prospect lists.  The amateur scouting report is likely pretty similar to the professional one thus far. Based on build, stuff, athleticism, command, etc.  Just because the results haven't matched up yet does not mean either are wrong.  Just like neither are for sure right, since its all just projection at this point.  

I didn't say it was wrong, but those projections come with big error bars, larger for rawer amateur talent.  There's no shame in admitting they probably missed a bit on Stewart, especially since so far it hasn't been a huge miss (i.e. BJ Garbe).  Occam's razor, that's probably the best explanation for his pro results so far.

[GACbaseball]

I think the most overlooked player on Twins Daily has to be Jorge Polanco. With how much scrutiny Buxton, Stewart, Gordon, Jay and all of the relievers get, and for how much we talk about Plouffe blocking Sano, is there any way that Dozier could potentially be blocking Polanco?

 

Polanco's bat is major league ready and his glove, while still needing a lot of work, profiles best at 2B. Dozier had a monster first half last year but struggled brutally in the 2nd half. The real Brian Dozier is likely somewhere in the middle - an average 2B who hits a lot of home runs with a low OBP. I would love to trade him at his peak value to upgrade pitching while also pushing a promising young player into substantial playing time. Obviously this would signal another "we aren't ready to compete" year, but frankly, I don't think we are ready to compete with the Royals in the AL Central. Why not position ourselves in better position for the prime years of Sano, Buxton and Berrios?

 

Before the Mets traded for Neil Walker, I would have loved to see a trade of Steven Matz and a high potential A-baller for Dozier and Phil Hughes.... Or Dozier, Tommy Milone, Kohl Stewart, Chargois/Burdi/Reed, and filler for Harvey, Syndergaard or DeGrom...