Fangraphs (and other national publications) on the Twins

[Mike Sixel]

Baseball America Hot Sheet.....Romero is number 5 this week, Gonsalves number 7:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/rodgers-on-fire-whiff-of-success-for-kopech-prospect-hot-sheet/#MgOpgcoKZHu1KkWe.97

 

[Mike Sixel]

Hot Sheet chat:

 

Tom (Phoenix, AZ): The scouting report on Fernando Romero looks a lot like Michael Fulmer a year ago. Big time fastball, power slider, developing change. The k/bb rate is outstanding. Are we looking at a top 50-75 prospect?

Vincent Lara-Cinisomo: He will be in the discussion.
 

[Han Joelo]

 

Baseball America Hot Sheet.....Romero is number 5 this week, Gonsalves number 7:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/rodgers-on-fire-whiff-of-success-for-kopech-prospect-hot-sheet/#MgOpgcoKZHu1KkWe.97

Nice to see he's getting noticed.  Would love it if he is the real deal.

 

Romero I meant, but Gonsalves too.

[nytwinsfan]

Fangraphs article this morning on Buxton's struggles and how other players with similar struggles at a similar age have fared in their early careers. Definitely worth a read:  http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/what-byron-buxtons-struggles-have-meant-historically/

[Thrylos]

 

Fangraphs article this morning on Buxton's struggles and how other players with similar struggles at a similar age have fared in their early careers. Definitely worth a read:  http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/what-byron-buxtons-struggles-have-meant-historically/

 

Got to love it when according to that, the best possible comparable for Buxton is Willie Wilson...  

[Mike Sixel]

Thanks, I was actually going to do that work when I was on vacation next week, saved me hours....

 

Of course, this completely ignores the guys that hit like that and never got an actual chance.....

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don't really buy those Buxton "comparables" -- they are only looking at results and not components.  For example (using MLB non-pitcher numbers for league):

 

Willie Wilson, 1978

14.8 K% (league 12.0%)

7.2 BB% (league 8.7%)

.257 BABIP (league .282)

.061 ISO (league .123)

58 wRC+

 

Byron Buxton, 2016

36.7 K% (league 20.5%)

6.0 BB% (league 8.3%)

.311 BABIP (league .302)

.122 ISO (league .167)

45 wRC+

 

So Willie Wilson had a better performance, with far more reasonable components -- and did I mention he was largely in a bench role?  He spent the full season in MLB without any notable injuries, and started only 45 games.  42 times he was a pinch runner.  127 games played, 223 PA.

 

How is that remotely comparable to what Byron Buxton has done (and been asked to do) in 2016?

[Mike Sixel]

 

I don't really buy those Buxton "comparables" -- they are only looking at results and not components.  For example (using MLB non-pitcher numbers for league):

 

Willie Wilson, 1978

14.8 K% (league 12.0%)

7.2 BB% (league 8.7%)

.257 BABIP (league .282)

.061 ISO (league .123)

58 wRC+

 

Byron Buxton, 2016

36.7 K% (league 20.5%)

6.0 BB% (league 8.3%)

.311 BABIP (league .302)

.122 ISO (league .167)

45 wRC+

 

So Willie Wilson had a better performance, with far more reasonable components -- and did I mention he was largely in a bench role?  He spent the full season in MLB without any notable injuries, and started only 45 games.  42 times he was a pinch runner.  127 games played, 223 PA.

 

How is that remotely comparable to what Byron Buxton has done (and been asked to do) in 2016?

 

You know, not every article can be about every single thing.......this one is about using statistics of a very large sample size, to see what that can help us understand. It doesn't purport, in one article, to discuss every single piece of information about Buxton ever thought of.

 

I wonder, is this too optimistic? It assumes that we should only look at people under 22......is that really the right sample? 

 

Buxton has been asked to hit and field. He's been AWFUL at the first of those. Not medicore, not bad, but AWFUL. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

You know, not every article can be about every single thing.......this one is about using statistics of a very large sample size, to see what that can help us understand. It doesn't purport, in one article, to discuss every single piece of information about Buxton ever thought of.

That's not the basis of my criticism.  It's that they used the wrong statistics to select their sample, to the point where it's not a particularly meaningful comparison for Buxton.

It's like when Buxton was first struggling in MLB, and people pointed to Mike Trout's rookie struggles.  No, Mike Trout was never "struggling like Buxton" in MLB except maybe in batting average, and neither was Willie Wilson or most of the other guys on this list.

 

Randomly picking two more from the list -- Cliff Floyd had a 74 wRC+ for the years in question, a corner player waiting for his power to develop, basically the same as Torii Hunter did a few years later/older.  Would you say he "struggled like Buxton"? Matt Williams had a 50 wRC+ at age 21, then improved to a 92 at age 22 thanks to some serious power -- all with a .223 BABIP.  Is that comparable to Buxton?

 

Frankly, there might not be a good comparable for Buxton's struggles.  Here's a list with similar criteria to the article (1966-2011, age 21 or 22 seasons, less than 80 wRC+, min 100 PA) except also requiring a K rate above 25%, and a BABIP above .250:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=np&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=100&type=8&season=2011&month=0&season1=1966&ind=1&team=0&rost=0&age=21,22&filter=44474&players=0&sort=18,d

 

A lot of sluggers waiting for their power to develop, and a lot of plain ol' bad hitters.  And most of them still out-performed Buxton 2016 too...

[Mike Sixel]

Got it.

 

I agree.....there aren't many players that have hit as badly that even got this many ABs, because guys that wRC+ a 49 don't usually get more than 100 ABs and they are gone.

 

but, you have to pick some sample......though I don't get why age is so important. Are 23 year olds that hit badly not a good comp? What happens if we expand it to everyone 24 and under? I bet the numbers of failures goes up even more. 

 

Frankly, guys that hit this badly rarely get to play in the majors. It's only his defense and his natural talent that is allowing him to have a chance at all. It is also all that really offers much hope.

[sthpstm]

 

Baseball America Hot Sheet.....Romero is number 5 this week, Gonsalves number 7:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/rodgers-on-fire-whiff-of-success-for-kopech-prospect-hot-sheet/#MgOpgcoKZHu1KkWe.97

I think the 4.2 walk rate they mention for Gonsalves should be understood in the context of 4 starts with a high walk rate of 8.2 (starts 1,2,3, and 6) and the other 6 starts (starts 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10) a rate of 2.25.  It seems like a guy working to adjust to his level and showing success in that process. 

It's hard not to get excited about this guy!

[Mike Sixel]

Today's prospect chat:

 

Dougy
2:21 Do you still believe in Buxton?

 

Eric A Longenhagen
2:21 Yes.

 

Diego
2:26 Outside of guys in the pre-season top 100, who are 1 or maybe 2 guys with power bats that could be up soon?

 

Eric A Longenhagen
2:27 So, upper-level power bats who aren't big time prospects? Okay, we can do that...
Daniel Palka. 55, maybe 60 raw pull power. Swing will be tough to make work but I think he could be a nice platoon option, maybe yank out 15 HRs that way.

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

I think the 4.2 walk rate they mention for Gonsalves should be understood in the context of 4 starts with a high walk rate of 8.2 (starts 1,2,3, and 6) and the other 6 starts (starts 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10) a rate of 2.25. It seems like a guy working to adjust to his level and showing success in that process.

It's hard not to get excited about this guy!

I never really got in his bandwagon, but I am starting to think he's more legit than minor league mirage lefty.

[jimmer]

 

Today's prospect chat:

 

Dougy
2:21 Do you still believe in Buxton?

 

Eric A Longenhagen
2:21 Yes.

I look forward to the day Buxton isn't talked about on the PROSPECTS chat, :-)

[tobi0040]

I look forward to the day Buxton isn't talked about on the PROSPECTS chat, :-)

He will either not be talked about because he is not a prospect. Or he will be talked about as a prospect punchline, a la Mark Appel. I don't think he will be a punchline but that is what will happen if he doesn't pan out.

[nicksaviking]

Reading the posts it now occurs to me that others actually didn't like the Willie Wilson comp. I know we all want Willie Mays, but Willie Wilson was a really good player and played nearly two decades. Even with the Buxton hype circa 2014 I'd think we all should have been happy with a Willie Wilsonesque career.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Reading the posts it now occurs to me that others actually didn't like the Willie Wilson comp. I know we all want Willie Mays, but Willie Wilson was a really good player and played nearly two decades. Even with the Buxton hype circa 2014 I'd think we all should have been happy with a Willie Wilsonesque career.

By "others" you just mean Thrylos.

 

I would have responded the same as you -- 26.5 WAR from ages 23-28 (~4.5 WAR per year) would be a fantastic outcome even for a hyped Buxton -- but I disliked the selection process that chose Willie Wilson as a comp.  It's just not particularly meaningful, even beyond the usual tenuous "meaning" of statistical comps.

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

Jason: Puig, Buxton, and Conforto are all patrolling AAA outfields. Who’s been the most disappointing, the most to blame, ruined the most by others, the least likely to succeed in the future, and the most likely to succeed in the future?

 

Paul Swydan: Disappointing: Puig

 

Jeff Zimmerman: Disappointing: Puig

 

Paul Swydan: Most to blame: Puig, probably.

 

Paul Swydan: Ruined most: Conforto, easily. Terry Collins is an idiot.

 

Jeff Zimmerman: Agree again

 

Jeff Zimmerman: Ruined is Buxton

 

Paul Swydan: Least likely to succeed? Buxton

 

Paul Swydan: Most likely: Conforto

 

Paul Swydan: Just as soon as Terry Collins is fired.

 

Jeff Zimmerman: I would switch the last two. Conforto is a mess IMO

 

Paul Swydan: DISAGREEMENTS!

[Brock Beauchamp]

I shake my head at any notion of a "ruined" player who is 22 years old.

 

This isn't a dish towel. It's a human being who plays baseball and has barely entered adulthood. We're not talking about child abuse here or something that emotionally scars a human for life.

 

Anyway, not really arguing with the idea the Twins (or other teams) haven't helped their prospects in any way, I simply don't care for that word in reference to a human being.

[jimmer]

I liked Willie Wilson.  He was an All Star a couple times.  He was a very good player for like a 4 year span or so. 

 

Having said that, if all Buxton becomes is a Willie Wilson type player, I'll be disappointed. We keep lowering the bar for Buxton.  Starting to think most people will be perfectly happy if he just becomes a serviceable OF.  This guy was a #2 overall pick and a top 20 prospect for four years with three of those years being a top 2 prospect. 

 

Many brag so much about our farm system over the last few years, but now we're fine with the crown jewel of that vaunted system to end up like Willie Wilson?  A Willie Wilson isn't a major factor in turning around a ball club.  A Willie Wilson isn't a perennial All Star.  He's a supporting character.  Now, teams need players like that, for sure, but if a Willie Wilson is your #1 team prospect, maybe your farm system isn't all that.

[Thrylos]

 

By "others" you just mean Thrylos.

 

I would have responded the same as you -- 26.5 WAR from ages 23-28 (~4.5 WAR per year) would be a fantastic outcome even for a hyped Buxton -- but I disliked the selection process that chose Willie Wilson as a comp.  It's just not particularly meaningful, even beyond the usual tenuous "meaning" of statistical comps.

 

I think that you could do better than Willie Wilson with the second overall draft pick in that draft.  

 

Let us not forget that in addition to a whole bunch of arms that were drafted after Buxton (including the one I wanted the Twins to pick, Giolito,) there were a couple of all star SSs (Addison Russel and Corey Seager) who were selected after Buxton.  And not to mention the catcher who was  selected right after him.  Plus the Twins did not need a centerfielder then.

 

I think that all these guys will be more impactful that Willie Wilson was.  That's why I don't like the comparison.

If Buxton were a third round pick, I'd have no issues with the Willie Wilson comparison, but the Twins' club try to pass him as "the best player available", which likely is not the case.  

We can revisit in 5 years or so.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Having said that, if all Buxton becomes is a Willie Wilson type player, I'll be disappointed.

 

 

I think that you could do better than Willie Wilson with the second overall draft pick in that draft.

 

According to B-Ref, Willie Wilson had 46 career WAR -- 31 of it during his six likely team control seasons (ages 23-28, ignoring his age 22 season spent as a pinch runner) :

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/wilsowi02.shtml

 

That career WAR would be 4th best ever among 2nd overall picks:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?overall_pick=2&draft_type=junreg&

[jimmer]

 

I think that you could do better than Willie Wilson with the second overall draft pick in that draft.  

 

Let us not forget that in addition to a whole bunch of arms that were drafted after Buxton (including the one I wanted the Twins to pick, Giolito,) there were a couple of all star SSs (Addison Russel and Corey Seager) who were selected after Buxton.  And not to mention the catcher who was  selected right after him.  Plus the Twins did not need a centerfielder then.

 

I think that all these guys will be more impactful that Willie Wilson was.  That's why I don't like the comparison.

If Buxton were a third round pick, I'd have no issues with the Willie Wilson comparison, but the Twins' club try to pass him as "the best player available", which likely is not the case.  

We can revisit in 5 years or so.

Here's Wilson's career line: .285/.326/.376   wRC+ of 94 (career fWAR of 37.8).  He's like the Coco Crisp of his time .266/.327/.403 wRC+ of 97 (career fWAR of 30). Same type of player, just Wilson was healthier in his prime. Anybody want Buxton to be the next Coco Crisp? Coco was a good player, but he was a supporting player.

 

Wilson had 6 seasons where he was over 100 wRC+ (same as Coco).  He never broke 120 in wRC+ (same as Coco). He finished with 37.8 fWAR in 16 mostly full seasons ('78-93).  For a 4 year span he was a great defender, the rest of the time a good one.  Two All Star games (both as a reserve). A gold glove, two silver sluggers and a batting title.

 

All that adds up to a good supporting type player.  A clear starting caliber player, but not a star and not what you'd expect from all the praise Buxton has gotten. If some would be happy with that from Buxton, good for them.  Might end up being his ceiling.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Wilson provided tremendous value in the field and on the basepaths too.

 

If Buxton gets to 46 career WAR, and 31 WAR from ages 23-28, I really don't care how it breaks down as far as offense/defense/baserunning.  It's good.  Yeah, he's probably not a star into his 30's, but he's a star in his 20's with those WAR numbers for sure.

 

Crisp is at 29 WAR and very near the end of the line.  Also Crisp didn't have much of a peak, as he was only worth 13.9 WAR over his first 6 full seasons.

[bird]

 

I liked Willie Wilson.  He was an All Star a couple times.  He was a very good player for like a 4 year span or so. 

 

Having said that, if all Buxton becomes is a Willie Wilson type player, I'll be disappointed. We keep lowering the bar for Buxton.  Starting to think most people will be perfectly happy if he just becomes a serviceable OF.  This guy was a #2 overall pick and a top 20 prospect for four years with three of those years being a top 2 prospect. 

 

Many brag so much about our farm system over the last few years, but now we're fine with the crown jewel of that vaunted system to end up like Willie Wilson?  A Willie Wilson isn't a major factor in turning around a ball club.  A Willie Wilson isn't a perennial All Star.  He's a supporting character.  Now, teams need players like that, for sure, but if a Willie Wilson is your #1 team prospect, maybe your farm system isn't all that.

 

I can't recall the last time I read a comment that I'd describe as boastful about the Twins' farm system, so I question your perception in that regard. I am perhaps one of the frequent contributors here who mentions the rankings often. It's invariably mentioned in response to an opinion that the Twins are exceptionally bad at drafting and developing players and combined with an appeal that the commenter reconcile this fact with his own opinion. With the graduation of crown jewels like Sano, Kepler, Polanco, and Berrios, we're seeing the rankings justifiably fall into the 10-15 range, which is still not "bad". Connecting Buxton's success at a certain point in time, crown jewel or not, to the overall health of the farm system doesn't make much sense to me. 

 

On Buxton "only" measuring up to Wilson, I'd also be disappointed. His struggles are forcing me to recalibrate my hopes, which have been based on all the superlatives the scouts have dished out for years when it comes to Buxton's tools. The thought of recalibrating my hopes all the way down to the servicable category is not one I'm ready to entertain, but I guess I can adjust begrudgingly to a Willie Wilson outcome but I'll label him a semi-bust.

[jimmer]

Being disappointed if Buxton turns out like Willie Wilson or Coco Crisp is nowhere near calling him a bust. 

[Vanimal46]

Well, we made it! The Twins are now at complete irrelevancy in the recent Fangraphs chats... Sent in a couple of questions today but no dice. 

[Vanimal46]

This nugget was on KLaw's chat on Friday:

Brent: Is there something fundamentally flawed with Minnesota’s player development (looking at Berrios, Sano, Buxton, etc.), or is this just normal growing pains / the inherent unpredictability in prospects. I know projecting prospects is inherently a difficult task, but it just feels like there’s got to be more here…the player development seems fundamentally flawed. Thoughts? How do you even go about fixing something like this?

 

Klaw: I think the hitters’ issues are more the coaching staff – and I’ve mentioned that before – but with Berrios, look at all the pitching prospects who’ve come up this year and struggled out of the chute. It’s not just him and not just the twins.

[D. Hocking]

 

This nugget was on KLaw's chat on Friday:

Brent: Is there something fundamentally flawed with Minnesota’s player development (looking at Berrios, Sano, Buxton, etc.), or is this just normal growing pains / the inherent unpredictability in prospects. I know projecting prospects is inherently a difficult task, but it just feels like there’s got to be more here…the player development seems fundamentally flawed. Thoughts? How do you even go about fixing something like this?

 

Klaw: I think the hitters’ issues are more the coaching staff – and I’ve mentioned that before – but with Berrios, look at all the pitching prospects who’ve come up this year and struggled out of the chute. It’s not just him and not just the twins.

 

I wonder if the Fox Sports North people will have this discussion on tonight's broadcast...

 

[bluechipper]

This isn't necessarily a Twins question, but it is a former Twin and really interesting:

 

Tom Penney: Anyone under the radar right now that could help a team when rosters expand?

 

Eric Longenhagen: "Under the radar" for me is anyone that, say, beat writers aren't talking about. The Dodgers have had Jordan Schafer relieving and pinch running in the AZL and attempting steals every time he can. That might be a thing. They'd have to clear 40 man space, though.