Alex Kirilloff

[bird]

 

As an experiment a couple weeks back when we were discussing the topic, I took it upon myself to question my own skepticism aboutt precisely those two constant criticisms:

 

1. that they start older guys at lower levels when other teams do not, and

2. That they keep them there for a longer period

 

I reviewed the bios of our starting pitcher and compared it to the bios of the opposing starting pitcher. I made the comparison at every level, AAA doen to the GCL. I figured that, if the critics were accurate in what they were saying, we would usually discover that our pitcher was one or more of the following:

 

a. older than their guy

b. more tenured, meaning our guy started his career earlier than their guy

c. had pitched more professional innings than their guy

d. was an earlier round draft choice than their guy 

 

Now, I only reviewed a total of 12 box scores, so this hardly passes for a scientific analysis, but what I found not only suggests the criticism is invalid, but it seemed to suggest the opposite case might be more accurate. And keep in mind that we played farm teams of a wide range of organizations. I payed particular attention to the Cards, and our guy was younger, less experienced, and a lower draft choice in both comparisons.

 

Of the 12 comparisons I made, in only 3 cases was our guy older, more tenured by measure of the signing date of each, more experienced in terms of IP's under their belt, and a higher draft pick. Some, but not that many, of the comparisons were mixed. In other words, maybe our guy was a few months older than their guy but their guy was a 2nd rounder with 50 more IP's....that sort of thing. But clearly, I'll continue to remain extremely skeptical unless someone shows me the numbers. And frankly, I really don't believe there is a commonly-held belief out there among the KLAW-type pundits that the Twins fit into a minority category with respect to the placement and movement of prospects. KLAW and perhaps a couple others may honestly believe this, but that doesn't make it true. 

 

It'd be fun to see what the results looked like in a 2nd or 3rd look. I hope someone is willing to take a half hour and do this. Although I can tell you that 28 YO Nick Greenwood at AAA is gonna make me look foolish tonight.

 

[bird]

Mike Radcliffe has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with minor league promotion decisions.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Except that former front office people disagree, Seth. They don't generally like college guys in the entry levels.....I just saw another post on it today, not about the twins, but another team.

 

Then why is it that the average ages of the GCL and Appy leagues around 20 years old?  That means that for every Kirilloff, there's a 22 year old out there averaging it out.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the Twins aren't the only team out there to employ college players in rookie ball.

[blairpaul715]

Twins are not the only team , i agree, but just off the top of my head I am almost certain that the Braves have more young guys in all levels other than maybe AAA, than any other team.......but I wont research it, lol, just follow the Braves system pretty close.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Then why is it that the average ages of the GCL and Appy leagues around 20 years old?  That means that for every Kirilloff, there's a 22 year old out there averaging it out.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the Twins aren't the only team out there to employ college players in rookie ball.

 

I can't answer that, maybe I'm confounding the two leagues, and one is older? I'll just let it drop, and try my best not to bring that part up again.

[gunnarthor]

I don't really worry about the age of the prospect/where they are.  But in fairness to the Twins, since Brad Steil has taken over the farm director, the Twins have been doing extremely well in the prospect game.  He took over in 2012 and has pushed prospects a lot more than what was done before.  And while it's true that the Twins have had high draft picks, it seems like the farm system has created some pretty nice prospects that weren't high draft picks - Kepler and Polanco (signed in 09) both had break out seasons and were pushed by Steil.  Berrios was a supp pick that would go in the top 10 of a redraft.  Gonsalves (4th rd) is ranked in the top 100.  Steil pushed Rosario (4th rd) through mid-season promotions.  Same with Duffey (5th rd, I believe).  And I'm sure Seth could name another half dozen non first rounders that were pushed as well.

 

We do need to see some better transitions to the majors but I'm not sure that's on the minor league guys as opposed to the ML coaches.  

[bird]

 

Twins are not the only team , i agree, but just off the top of my head I am almost certain that the Braves have more young guys in all levels other than maybe AAA, than any other team.......but I wont research it, lol, just follow the Braves system pretty close.

 

This might be instructive. The Braves have a fairly depleted farm system. Logic tells us they will push prospects along, since they don't have better prospects at the next level due to this lack of depth. So, it would be easy to simply assume that this aggressive promotion pattern is a function of a philosophic approach rather than a function of need. 

 

Similarly, a few years back, very close to 50% of all the prospects the Twins drafted and subsequently signed were left-handed pitchers in that particular draft. This was clearly an attempt to correct a pitching deficiency within the pipeline. Now, maybe it was coincidentally a year where the available lefties with any promise were mostly college guys, or all the truly promising, signable lefties were off the board (as usual) by the third round or so, but I vaguely recall that we suddenly had this influx of college LH pitchers. Seth can probably give us some history, and maybe my feeble mind is wrong on this. But my point is that something like this will probably skew the demographics in the system temporarily, and general assumptions about placement and advancement philosophy might be less valid.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I can't answer that, maybe I'm confounding the two leagues, and one is older? I'll just let it drop, and try my best not to bring that part up again.

 

Both rookie leagues have more than HS players.  That was kind of my point. I don't have a problem rushing college guys through it, especially when they do well there (see Wade, Lamonte).  I just don't agree with the blanket statement that there's an industry standard to not put college guys there. It's a case by case situations. Guys like Tyler Jay get moved to high A.  Guys like Lamonte Wade end up in rookie leagues.

[bluechipper]

 

This might be instructive. The Braves have a fairly depleted farm system. Logic tells us they will push prospects along, since they don't have better prospects at the next level due to this lack of depth. So, it would be easy to simply assume that this aggressive promotion pattern is a function of a philosophic approach rather than a function of need. 

Keith Law ranked the Braves #1 in his midseason farm system rankings.

[Mr. Brooks]

Yeah the Braves system is absolutely loaded. They will win a playoff series before we do. They did what we should have done and actually traded assets of value and rebuilt.

[Major League Ready]

 

Yeah the Braves system is absolutely loaded. They will win a playoff series before we do. They did what we should have done and actually traded assets of value and rebuilt.

I agree with you but you have to have assets to trade that people want.  We4 had no pitching whatsoever that would have netted top prospects.  Our best two players were lost to concussions followed by Mauer's value dropping to nothing when he moved to first.  We could not got much in return for Cuddy so the FO took the compensation pick and got Berrios.  Who else could we have traded for top prospects?  This is when Mike's strategy of landing free agents and flipping them can help but that has not worked as of yet.  Fingers crossed someone ponies up for Santana.

[Mr. Brooks]

I agree with you but you have to have assets to trade that people want. We4 had no pitching whatsoever that would have netted top prospects. Our best two players were lost to concussions followed by Mauer's value dropping to nothing when he moved to first. We could not got much in return for Cuddy so the FO took the compensation pick and got Berrios. Who else could we have traded for top prospects? This is when Mike's strategy of landing free agents and flipping them can help but that has not worked as of yet. Fingers crossed someone ponies up for Santana.

Perkins when he was borderline elite.

Willingham after his first season.

Hughes after his first season.

Dozier anytime in the last 3 years.

Plouffe in the last 2 years.

Suzuki looked good early in his initial contract.

Fien had a really good year.

Santana this year.

Gibson after last year.

 

Of those:

Perkins, Dozier and Hughes would have gotten really good returns.

 

Willingham,and Gibson would have gotten good returns.

 

Plouffe, Suzuki, Santana would have gotten okay returns.

 

Fien might have gotten a lot to ticket or two.

[bird]

 

Keith Law ranked the Braves #1 in his midseason farm system rankings.

I should have said HAD, my bad.

 

Their system became good due to the incredible flurry of prospects received via trade and their most recent drafts. Those events are too new to alter the situation to which I was referring. And I'll bet that, when someone reviews their promotion patterns in a year or so they'll ring that prospects aren't advancing at a faster pace than most other teams. The teams pushing their prospects will be the teams who are now at the bottom of the heap in terms of pipeline depth.

[gunnarthor]

 

Perkins when he was borderline elite.
Willingham after his first season.
Hughes after his first season.
Dozier anytime in the last 3 years.
Plouffe in the last 2 years.
Suzuki looked good early in his initial contract.
Fien had a really good year.
Santana this year.
Gibson after last year.

Of those:
Perkins, Dozier and Hughes would have gotten really good returns.

Willingham,and Gibson would have gotten good returns.

Plouffe, Suzuki, Santana would have gotten okay returns.

Fien might have gotten a lot to ticket or two.

Perkins is the only one of those that might have gotten a good return.  The rumors for Willingham were a Sean Gilmartin type.  Dozier was seen by a fluke by the league for years - Klaw called him a AAAA player until last year (Plouffe as well).  Gibson was hurt and until after last year didn't have real trade value.  Not sure why you'd trade Gibson after last year.  The argument on TD was whether or not you extend him.  Suzuki was shopped and there was no market. 

 

The Twins have had two solid trade chips - Perkins and Span. They held onto Perkins for a few different reasons.  Baseball wise, they thought he'd be part of the next winning team and they were sorta right.  He also signed a very team friendly contract and it showed the locker room that the team was committed to making these players part of the winning team. 

 

Twins are shopping Santana now but I doubt that a market emerges.

 

The burn it to the ground idea doesn't really fit with ownership.  While the Astros were happy to lose 105+ games and get a zero rating and no attendance, the Pohlads won't allow it.

[Mr. Brooks]

Perkins is the only one of those that might have gotten a good return. The rumors for Willingham were a Sean Gilmartin type. Dozier was seen by a fluke by the league for years - Klaw called him a AAAA player until last year (Plouffe as well). Gibson was hurt and until after last year didn't have real trade value. Not sure why you'd trade Gibson after last year. The argument on TD was whether or not you extend him. Suzuki was shopped and there was no market.

 

The Twins have had two solid trade chips - Perkins and Span. They held onto Perkins for a few different reasons. Baseball wise, they thought he'd be part of the next winning team and they were sorta right. He also signed a very team friendly contract and it showed the locker room that the team was committed to making these players part of the winning team.

 

Twins are shopping Santana now but I doubt that a market emerges.

 

The burn it to the ground idea doesn't really fit with ownership. While the Astros were happy to lose 105+ games and get a zero rating and no attendance, the Pohlads won't allow it.

Right, of course I should have known. Our guys never have any trade value. It can't be that they had value and we chose not to trade them

Nevermind that every year multiple guys are traded who have similar profiles to the guys I just listed, the league must have just banded together to boycott our players.

[gunnarthor]

 

Right, of course I should have known. Our guys never have any trade value. It can't be that they had value and we chose not to trade them
Nevermind that every year multiple guys are traded who have similar profiles to the guys I just listed, the league must have just banded together to boycott our players.

Show me a comp trade for Suzuki or Hammer.  Show me the market for Plouffe and Santana.  GMs knew what Hammer was and that's why the Twins got him on a 3 year deal.  Same with Hughes.  GMs aren't typically stupid. All the guys - except Perkins and Dozier - are placeholder types.  They are fine to have - every team has some - but they don't typically bring back much in trades.  Esp when they have years remaining on their contract. 

 

As to Dozier, he had his break out season at 27 two years ago.  As mentioned, Klaw thought it was a fluke season and others probably agreed with him.  And there was no point in trading him (or Gibson) after last year. 

[Major League Ready]

 

Perkins is the only one of those that might have gotten a good return.  The rumors for Willingham were a Sean Gilmartin type.  Dozier was seen by a fluke by the league for years - Klaw called him a AAAA player until last year (Plouffe as well).  Gibson was hurt and until after last year didn't have real trade value.  Not sure why you'd trade Gibson after last year.  The argument on TD was whether or not you extend him.  Suzuki was shopped and there was no market. 

 

The Twins have had two solid trade chips - Perkins and Span. They held onto Perkins for a few different reasons.  Baseball wise, they thought he'd be part of the next winning team and they were sorta right.  He also signed a very team friendly contract and it showed the locker room that the team was committed to making these players part of the winning team. 

 

Twins are shopping Santana now but I doubt that a market emerges.

 

The burn it to the ground idea doesn't really fit with ownership.  While the Astros were happy to lose 105+ games and get a zero rating and no attendance, the Pohlads won't allow it.

I was about to answer with pretty much the exact same response and of course the next posts was your post.  I have stated here a few times it was crazy to hang on to Perkins and the extend him was one of the things this FO did for which I cant find any form of justification.  Hughes and Willingham no way bring a meaningful prospect according to everything reported.  Plus, I suspect most people here would have come unglued had the traded Hughes after the 2013 season.  Like Perkins, the Hughes extension was incredibly ill-advised and the timing was downright dumb.  Why not wait until he had a year remaining and make that decision with better information.  We would not be paying him the next two years for in likelihood very little contribution.    

 

Many baseball fans expect their  team can trade mediocre players for front of the rotation prospects.  No wonder they are disappointed and think management just does not get it.

 

Gibson would have to have been traded mid-season last year to garner good value.  He came down to earth the 2nd half.  Posters here would have come unglued had they traded Gibson last year while in contention after sucking for multiple years in a row.  To suggest they should have traded him last year is a bit disingenuous or unreasonable at best.

[Mr. Brooks]

I was about to answer with pretty much the exact same response and of course the next posts was your post. I have stated here a few times it was crazy to hang on to Perkins and the extend him was one of the things this FO did for which I cant find any form of justification. Hughes and Willingham no way bring a meaningful prospect according to everything reported. Plus, I suspect most people here would have come unglued had the traded Hughes after the 2013 season. Like Perkins, the Hughes extension was incredibly ill-advised and the timing was downright dumb. Why not wait until he had a year remaining and make that decision with better information. We would not be paying him the next two years for in likelihood very little contribution.

 

Many baseball fans expect their team can trade mediocre players for front of the rotation prospects. No wonder they are disappointed and think management just does not get it.

 

Gibson would have to have been traded mid-season last year to garner good value. He came down to earth the 2nd half. Posters here would have come unglued had they traded Gibson last year while in contention after sucking for multiple years in a row. To suggest they should have traded him last year is a bit disingenuous or unreasonable at best.

1) I don't expect front line talent for mediocre players.

Fair value is just fine for me.

 

2) People coming unglued on Twins Daily should have absolutely zero bearing on the FO's decisions, so I'm not sure how that is even relevant to the discussion.

[jimbo92107]

I am an atheist. In all the time I've been watching baseball, I have never detected the slightest difference in performance whether or not a player is religious. Some guys wear it on their sleeve, some keep it private, but all of them seem to realize that the ballpark is not a church (post-game prayer fests notwithstanding). 

 

Being a Christian will not determine whether or not Alex Kirilloff makes it in the pros. I'm sure he and his father realize that hitting major league pitching will require an approach that includes film study, careful planning, zone hitting, situational hitting, etc. If Kirilloff can combine all that with his sweet swing, then he has a chance to be a good hitter at the mlb level. If he can't do all that, then even magical beings won't help him hit that outside curve. 

[Loosey]

I know this has been a topic discusses over and over again on Twins Daily but I am going to bring it up but in a different way. 

 

Do the Twins promote their minor leaguers too slowly?

 

I am going to answer my own question with an answer of No and Yes.  It seems to me, that that overall the time Twins young prospects play in the minors is about normal and are promoted to the major leagues in an amount of time I am fine with.  However, the way in which they are promoted bothers.  Take Kiriloff for example.  The kid is absolutely destroying Rookie Ball.  It is clear he can hit against that level of competition.  Why don't the Twins promote him to Cedar Rapids? 

 

In my mind it would make sense for him to finish this season in A- ball in Cedar Rapids.  My reasoning is it will give him that many more AB's against a higher level of competition.  It will also possibly help him jump start his season next year so he isn't spending the 1st month of the year trying to figure it out since he had a month or two to do it this year.

 

Once that level is mastered have him get to the next level.  Once they are at AA then slow them down.  Let the player get a full season or two of AA and a season of AAA.  Instead the Twins seems to often slowly move guys from Rookie to A- to A+ and then rush them up once they get to AA.  I think it would make more sense to have them playing in high level minors (AA and AAA) for 3 year instead of playing 3 years of rookie and A ball and then 1 year of AA-AAA combined.

 

RANT OVER.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Do the Twins promote their minor leaguers too slowly?

 

 

No. 

[Loosey]

 

No. 

Do you think Kirilloff should finish the season in E-Town?  I think overall their timing to the big leagues is fine, but I just wonder if more time in the high minors would help prepare them for the majors better vs 3 years between Rookie ball and A ball.

 

 

[gunnarthor]

 

I know this has been a topic discusses over and over again on Twins Daily but I am going to bring it up but in a different way. 

 

Do the Twins promote their minor leaguers too slowly?

 

I am going to answer my own question with an answer of No and Yes.  It seems to me, that that overall the time Twins young prospects play in the minors is about normal and are promoted to the major leagues in an amount of time I am fine with.  However, the way in which they are promoted bothers.  Take Kiriloff for example.  The kid is absolutely destroying Rookie Ball.  It is clear he can hit against that level of competition.  Why don't the Twins promote him to Cedar Rapids? 

 

In my mind it would make sense for him to finish this season in A- ball in Cedar Rapids.  My reasoning is it will give him that many more AB's against a higher level of competition.  It will also possibly help him jump start his season next year so he isn't spending the 1st month of the year trying to figure it out since he had a month or two to do it this year.

 

Once that level is mastered have him get to the next level.  Once they are at AA then slow them down.  Let the player get a full season or two of AA and a season of AAA.  Instead the Twins seems to often slowly move guys from Rookie to A- to A+ and then rush them up once they get to AA.  I think it would make more sense to have them playing in high level minors (AA and AAA) for 3 year instead of playing 3 years of rookie and A ball and then 1 year of AA-AAA combined.

 

RANT OVER.

There's more than just statline to look at but even that shows some things to work on.  Kiriloff is walking in less than 2% of his at-bats.  It's been 36 games and he's already in the higher rookie league.  And he also has to adjust to the environment, stuff that doesn't show up on a stat sheet.

 

Lastly, I could be wrong, but aren't their rules regarding what happens when you take a player out of the rookie leagues that say they can't be put back in?  

[d-mac]

 

No. 

 

Then it's settled then! /s

[Seth Stohs]

 

Do you think Kirilloff should finish the season in E-Town?  I think overall their timing to the big leagues is fine, but I just wonder if more time in the high minors would help prepare them for the majors better vs 3 years between Rookie ball and A ball.

 

Depends on the individual. Nick Gordon has moved up pretty fast. Stewart and Gonsalves have moved up quite fast. Kirilloff could end this season with a week in Cedar Rapids... and maybe even starting for them if they make the playoffs, but he should continue playing every day. He's already playing against guys 2 years older than him. 

[Loosey]

 

Depends on the individual. Nick Gordon has moved up pretty fast. Stewart and Gonsalves have moved up quite fast. Kirilloff could end this season with a week in Cedar Rapids... and maybe even starting for them if they make the playoffs, but he should continue playing every day. He's already playing against guys 2 years older than him. 

You know more about minor league stuff than me.  In my own head it just seems counter intuitive to have guys spending equal time in lower levels as they do in uppers, especially if they are dominating a lower level like it appears Kirilloff is (at least using his statline). 

 

But I get it is case by case basis and I know there is learning curve outside of baseball as well.  And Stats don't tell the whole story.

[d-mac]

 

I know this has been a topic discusses over and over again on Twins Daily but I am going to bring it up but in a different way. 

 

Do the Twins promote their minor leaguers too slowly?

 

I am going to answer my own question with an answer of No and Yes.  It seems to me, that that overall the time Twins young prospects play in the minors is about normal and are promoted to the major leagues in an amount of time I am fine with.  However, the way in which they are promoted bothers.  Take Kiriloff for example.  The kid is absolutely destroying Rookie Ball.  It is clear he can hit against that level of competition.  Why don't the Twins promote him to Cedar Rapids? 

 

In my mind it would make sense for him to finish this season in A- ball in Cedar Rapids.  My reasoning is it will give him that many more AB's against a higher level of competition.  It will also possibly help him jump start his season next year so he isn't spending the 1st month of the year trying to figure it out since he had a month or two to do it this year.

 

Once that level is mastered have him get to the next level.  Once they are at AA then slow them down.  Let the player get a full season or two of AA and a season of AAA.  Instead the Twins seems to often slowly move guys from Rookie to A- to A+ and then rush them up once they get to AA.  I think it would make more sense to have them playing in high level minors (AA and AAA) for 3 year instead of playing 3 years of rookie and A ball and then 1 year of AA-AAA combined.

 

RANT OVER.

 

Kiriloff might be a bad example, he is not walking, like at all. His BB% in 156 PAs is just 1.9%. BB% and K% tend to stabilize quickly at 100+ PAs, so it's not like there is a SSS issue here anymore. For perspective Eddie Rosario's BB% in E-town was 9.1%, it is a huge red flag, IMO.

 

But yes, overall I think you are correct. I think moreso, the Twins are too agressive with highschool and IFA hitters in AA and AAA and too conservative with college hitters in the low minors. I think it's best to get college position players up to AA as quickly as possible. I think it's imperative for most position players to get in the neighborhood of 500-800 PAs between AA and AAA, unless they dominate with a BB/K north of 0.80. 

[70charger]

 

I know this has been a topic discusses over and over again on Twins Daily but I am going to bring it up but in a different way. 

 

Do the Twins promote their minor leaguers too slowly?

 

I am going to answer my own question with an answer of No and Yes.  It seems to me, that that overall the time Twins young prospects play in the minors is about normal and are promoted to the major leagues in an amount of time I am fine with.  However, the way in which they are promoted bothers.  Take Kiriloff for example.  The kid is absolutely destroying Rookie Ball.  It is clear he can hit against that level of competition.  Why don't the Twins promote him to Cedar Rapids? 

 

In my mind it would make sense for him to finish this season in A- ball in Cedar Rapids.  My reasoning is it will give him that many more AB's against a higher level of competition.  It will also possibly help him jump start his season next year so he isn't spending the 1st month of the year trying to figure it out since he had a month or two to do it this year.

 

Once that level is mastered have him get to the next level.  Once they are at AA then slow them down.  Let the player get a full season or two of AA and a season of AAA.  Instead the Twins seems to often slowly move guys from Rookie to A- to A+ and then rush them up once they get to AA.  I think it would make more sense to have them playing in high level minors (AA and AAA) for 3 year instead of playing 3 years of rookie and A ball and then 1 year of AA-AAA combined.

 

RANT OVER.

 

I keep seeing this, and I do note the fact that you say it "seems" like they get promoted slowly in the low minors and quickly in the high minors. It's gaining traction simply because it gets repeated again and again and again.

 

I've asked this before and no one stepped up to the plate. I'll ask it again. Where is the proof? Isn't the burden on the people who continue to assert this as if it's fact? I'm legitimately interested to know whether this is real, but until you can back it up, saying "it seems like" isn't going to cut it. 

 

Put up or shut up.