FanGraphs: Top 24 Twins Prospects

[DocBauer]

Look at the ceiling rating......almost no one is projected as an ACE....the issue is, none of these guys are even 2s or 3s on this rating......

And that's kind of my point actually. Does anyone really check out other team's projections like this? Are there many milb arms that are rated as #1 or #2 types?

 

I'm asking because it helps put things in perspective, yes? If the Twins have some guys listed as #3 types with at least some projectability, and so do most teams, then we'really pretty much in similar company. However, if there are quite a few teams that have young pitching prospects fully expected to be a quality or 2, then that makes me feel more nervous about our kids.

 

I've seen guys that were supposed to be studs flame out, and I've seen solid guys who turned out to be high end 2's and even 1'Santana that weren't supposed to be. I understand projecting things like this an inexact science, to say the least. I'm just wondering how we stack up to most or all other teams when it comes to these kind of projections.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Probably depends on when and who is doing the ranking.  Both Stewart and Berrios have been called aces by various prospect rankings over the years and Jay certainly had #2 projections put on him.  As have Meyer and Thorpe (pre-injury, of course).

yeah, this is subjective.  The Twins have plenty of ceiling in their farm right now, the biggest issue at the moment is that they have lots of question marks too. They've graduated many of the really big names, but that doesn't mean it's a weak system. If anything, it's deep. You can go 30 names down and still find guys who can be above average major leaguers... and not many systems can say that. What's lack at the moment is the star power. That could change just as easily. A couple of those B+ guys take big leaps and all of a sudden it's a top 5 system again. On that, I'm not too worried...

 

If you want some fun, go take a look at how Brian Dozier was ranked. That's my last point... plenty of low ranked guys can develop into impact players.  Problem is that it happens less, not that it doesn't happen.

[Mr. Brooks]

I find the Kiriloff ranking interesting, given his tool set, frankly.

I've heard Jason Kubel comps.

I'm not sure if that's pre knee injury or post, but I'd take another Kubel in this lineup.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I've heard Jason Kubel comps.
I'm not sure if that's pre knee injury or post, but I'd take another Kubel in this lineup.

 

Agreed. That Knee injury(ies?) was very sad.

[gunnarthor]

 

And that's kind of my point actually. Does anyone really check out other team's projections like this? Are there many milb arms that are rated as #1 or #2 types?

I'm asking because it helps put things in perspective, yes? If the Twins have some guys listed as #3 types with at least some projectability, and so do most teams, then we'really pretty much in similar company. However, if there are quite a few teams that have young pitching prospects fully expected to be a quality or 2, then that makes me feel more nervous about our kids.

I've seen guys that were supposed to be studs flame out, and I've seen solid guys who turned out to be high end 2's and even 1'Santana that weren't supposed to be. I understand projecting things like this an inexact science, to say the least. I'm just wondering how we stack up to most or all other teams when it comes to these kind of projections.

Well, if you're just looking at grades you're not going to see many above a 60.  That's a really high grade.  

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/top-21-prospects-los-angeles-dodgers/

 

The Dodgers Alverez - who hits 100 - and has good secondary projections only got a 60.   The same guy wrote both the Twins and the Dodgers write up so his conclusion was "There’s also blatantly obvious risk. Alvarez is young, raw and throws astoundingly hard which all present potential pitfalls. But this combination of body, delivery, arm strength and impact breaking ball is the stuff young aces are made of and the ceiling here is immense. I think this is one of the highest upside arms in the minor leagues."

 

But those kind of write ups are rare.  I think most of his prospect rankings will fall in the 45-55 FV (which is probably where they should).  He also has Jose De Leon, who we are bringing up a lot in our Dozer dream trades, as a "solid #3 or #4 starter."  

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

 

And that's kind of my point actually. Does anyone really check out other team's projections like this? Are there many milb arms that are rated as #1 or #2 types?

I'm asking because it helps put things in perspective, yes? If the Twins have some guys listed as #3 types with at least some projectability, and so do most teams, then we'really pretty much in similar company. However, if there are quite a few teams that have young pitching prospects fully expected to be a quality or 2, then that makes me feel more nervous about our kids.

I've seen guys that were supposed to be studs flame out, and I've seen solid guys who turned out to be high end 2's and even 1'Santana that weren't supposed to be. I understand projecting things like this an inexact science, to say the least. I'm just wondering how we stack up to most or all other teams when it comes to these kind of projections.

I think you basically have to look at overall prospect lists to see who is projected ace material. Guys ranked in the top 10 or 20 in the league are the ones projecting to that I would guess. Guys in top 50 overall probably have potential to be maybe?

[Badsmerf]

It's not that cut and dry. There are numerous threads on here dissecting what classifies an Ace and where they come from. The higher up in the draft a team picks the better chance they have. A good number of international players sign young, like so many international players, that it is almost like a lottery ticket. Some teams are better at identifying that caliber talent than others. The twins, have been pretty bad at it. Even with Santana and liriano, the twins are very low on the list of teams with pitchers having high WAR seasons. I've complied the numbers in the past, and am on my phone so not going to do it right now.

[clutterheart]

My criticism is not comparing them to the other "established" sites (that have not seen people play either.)

 

Nobody who have seen Diaz and Kiriloff play the last year, and knows what they are doing and are not biased, would had rank them at those relative positions.

 

Just sayin'

Opinions vary. If my memory serves me right you had Levi Michael ranked pretty high last year. So who's to say which process is the best way to evaluate prospects. I for one enjoy reading what non-twins fans think of my team's prospects.

[DocBauer]

It's not that cut and dry. There are numerous threads on here dissecting what classifies an Ace and where they come from. The higher up in the draft a team picks the better chance they have. A good number of international players sign young, like so many international players, that it is almost like a lottery ticket. Some teams are better at identifying that caliber talent than others. The twins, have been pretty bad at it. Even with Santana and liriano, the twins are very low on the list of teams with pitchers having high WAR seasons. I've complied the numbers in the past, and am on my phone so not going to do it right now.

And that's part of what I'm asking and getting at. We have no idea, a few years from now, just how much someone like Berrios and Gonsalves and others could improve and who could emerge. (Nor does anyone, do they?) I don't pretend to be an expert on scouting or projecting. Whole lot of people smarter and more experienced than I am on these matters. I think the more good player, or pitcher, options you have available, the better chance you have to find that guy or two to really step forward.

 

And I do agree that some teams have done better at finding this talent in the past. The Ray's and Cardinals come to mind. But I think the question is still valid, how many other teams have prospects that are "identified" as true top of the rotation starters. I ask this out of honest curiosity as a long time baseball fan who has seen many completly washout that were supposed to be virtual locks to be stud pitchers, and others who evolved in to all star talents.

 

So should there truly be great angst that reports like this list the Twins with a number of solid but not top of the rotation arms? Or is that how most teams prospect lists look.

 

I guess I'm just saying I don't know how many teams out there truly have virtual locks vs almost everyone just hoping to develop what they have to the best of their ability and see what happens.

[Badsmerf]

I'd say elite talent is identified more often than it isn't. Most of the top pitchers around the league were highly regarded coming up. Some break through later; usually after an organizational change or adding a new pitch. Kershaw is an example of a guy always highly regarded while Jake arrieta could be an example of a guy developing late. Even arrieta was a top 100 prospect though. I would like to say an Ace has never developed without being identified in prospect lists.... but I'm sure there is an example somewhere.

[gunnarthor]

 

I'd say elite talent is identified more often than it isn't. Most of the top pitchers around the league were highly regarded coming up. Some break through later; usually after an organizational change or adding a new pitch. Kershaw is an example of a guy always highly regarded while Jake arrieta could be an example of a guy developing late. Even arrieta was a top 100 prospect though. I would like to say an Ace has never developed without being identified in prospect lists.... but I'm sure there is an example somewhere.

Johan Santana was never on a top 100 list.  

 

If you're using something like Sickel's definition of an ace, you're probably right that most are identified.  If you're going off of ML results, many pitchers slip through and are far better - even pitching at ace levels - without being heavily regarded in the minors.  

[gunnarthor]

 

This is what I thought. A lot of guys that appear to be peak as below average at their positions compared to the rest of the league, and backend starters. Even Gordon scares me. Where do you think he would rank at SS in 5-7 years with the glut of awesome SS's around the league in the majors and minors. He might be a good prospect and SS for US, but maybe not so much once you look at what other systems have at SS in the majors of minors. 

 

Would be interesting if you compared Gordon to each teams top SS in the majors or minors and see who you would take.

I think you're overstating the shortstop talent pool.  It's not surprising that most prospect lists (team wise and top 100) have lots of shortstops (and starting pitchers).  That's where the best players play.  But right now the majors have maybe 4 legit elite short stops (Seager, Lindor, Russel and Bogaerts) and two more elite third baseman playing short (Correa and Machado) and Crawford if you like him.

 

After that, it's not that much.  If Gordon can be avgish defensively and avgish offensively - meaning that he can play defense well enough as Nunez did this year and hit something around a .320 wOBA, he's a 2.5-3 WAR player.  (Basically, Nunez this year).  If his defense is better than avg by just a tick or he hits better than that, he's even better.  And if he can develop some doubles power (his ISO this year wasn't great), he can improve even more.

[Badsmerf]

You found one! Should have came to mind right away for me. Santana is unique because he was on the mlb roster from the age of 22 on. So he really made his strides in the big leagues.

[jimmer]

Crawford is an awesome defensive shortstop. EASILY top 5 defensively and probably top 3. And he finished 4th in WAR for NL players.  He's a fantastic shortstop, and there are few I'd take over him when taking into account the whole package.

[gunnarthor]

 

You found one! Should have came to mind right away for me. Santana is unique because he was on the mlb roster from the age of 22 on. So he really made his strides in the big leagues.

Depending on what you want to consider an "ace" guys like Radke, Buehrle, Kluber, Dallas Keuchel, Jose Quintana, and John Lackey were also never top 100 prospects.  All of those guys have a claim to being an "Ace" - either several 5 WAR seasons or even a couple Cy Young awards.  

[Bob Sacamento]

 

You found one! Should have came to mind right away for me. Santana is unique because he was on the mlb roster from the age of 22 on. So he really made his strides in the big leagues.

Santana is one of those rare Rule V draft guys who turned into a very impactful MLBer although he wasn't always regarded as so.  Thank Houston for leaving Santana (a 20yo Low A ball pitcher) available and thank Florida for drafting and trading him to Minnesota for Jared Camp.

 

Here is Johan's scouting report all the way back to 2000, he was the 8th ranked prospect in the system behind Cuddyer, Restovich, LeCroy, Garbe, Rivas, JC Romero, Lohse, and ahead of Rincon and Mills:

 

 

 

Background: The Twins, with the first pick, acquired Santana in a prearranged Rule 5 trade with the Marlins in December. He must make the Twins’ Opening Day roster or be offered back to the Astros, his former organization. It might be a longshot for him to stick because he has no experience above the Midwest League.

 

Strengths: Santana has a loose, live arm and a fastball that ranges anywhere from 88-94 mph. He throws a good curveball with a wide, sweeping break and an advanced changeup for his age. Santana’s command of the strike zone and his success in winter ball in Venezuela improve his chances of sticking in Minnesota.

 

Weaknesses: The history of the Rule 5 draft is littered with pitchers who couldn’t make the jump from low Class A to the big leagues, or whose careers were harmed by the attempt. Santana must handle the big league environment and the possible inactivity.

 

The Future: Unless Santana fails in spring training, the Twins have committed themselves to carrying him as the third reliever in the bullpen behind Eddie Guardado and Travis Miller.

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

 

I think you're overstating the shortstop talent pool.  It's not surprising that most prospect lists (team wise and top 100) have lots of shortstops (and starting pitchers).  That's where the best players play.  But right now the majors have maybe 4 legit elite short stops (Seager, Lindor, Russel and Bogaerts) and two more elite third baseman playing short (Correa and Machado) and Crawford if you like him.

 

After that, it's not that much.  If Gordon can be avgish defensively and avgish offensively - meaning that he can play defense well enough as Nunez did this year and hit something around a .320 wOBA, he's a 2.5-3 WAR player.  (Basically, Nunez this year).  If his defense is better than avg by just a tick or he hits better than that, he's even better.  And if he can develop some doubles power (his ISO this year wasn't great), he can improve even more.

In the majors and 24 years old or younger:

 

Seager, Lindor, Correa/Breg., Bogaerts, Russell, Story, T. Anderson, Swanson, Arcia, Marte, (Machado)...others at 25 and 26 years old.

 

In minors and ranked more highly than Gordron:

 

Crawford, Rodgers, Rossario, Albies, Torres, Mateo, Ademes, Newman, Barreto...others.

 

 

How many of these names would you objectively choose Gordon over? There are also names not even listed here. You could say that some of these guys might off SS, but that same argument pertains to Gordon. If Correa is moved off SS, then Bregmann would just move there, and would rather have either of them over Gordon. 

 

I like Gordon and think he's better than what we have had, but my spirits are dampened once I look around and realize that he is pretty average once compared to the rest of the SS talent out there.

 

 

[gunnarthor]

 

In the majors and 24 years old or younger:

 

Seager, Lindor, Correa/Breg., Bogaerts, Russell, Story, T. Anderson, Swanson, Arcia, Marte, (Machado)...others at 25 and 26 years old.

 

In minors and ranked more highly than Gordron:

 

Crawford, Rodgers, Rossario, Albies, Torres, Mateo, Ademes, Newman, Barreto...others.

 

 

How many of these names would you objectively choose Gordon over? There are also names not even listed here. You could say that some of these guys might off SS, but that same argument pertains to Gordon. If Correa is moved off SS, then Bregmann would just move there, and would rather have either of them over Gordon. 

 

I like Gordon and think he's better than what we have had, but my spirits are dampened once I look around and realize that he is pretty average once compared to the rest of the SS talent out there.

Sure, there are some currently elite short stops but that's normal.  Top prospect lists always have a lot of short stops (and RHP).  That's where the athletes are.  But what happens is that the players will move into tiers and the elite tier will be a few players - maybe 5-8 - and then you'll see another drop and another tier.  Gordon doesn't project to that top tier but he seems fairly capable of making that second tier.  mlbpipeline has him #47 in the game and #11 shortstop in the minors.  Some of the guys you like more will not make the majors until Gordon's been up for a bit and others will drop out of the elite status, etc.  I'd happily trade him for Lindor, of course, but he still profiles to be a pretty good player.    

[Bob Sacamento]

 

Well, if you're just looking at grades you're not going to see many above a 60.  That's a really high grade.  

 

As it should be, here is a guideline that Fangraphs uses for the 20-80 scale (Tool and Overall):

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/scouting-explained-the-20-80-scouting-scale/

 

A 60 tool throws a FB 92mph, while a 60 overall is considered a #3 or highend closer with a WAR 3.0

 

A 60 tool is hitting .280 avg, or 22-27 HR, or overall 3.0 WAR

 

A 80 pitcher throws 97 mph FB, while a 80 overall is considered a #1 with a WAR of 7.0

 

A 80 tool hits .320, hits 40+ HR, 7.0 WAR

[AlwaysinModeration]

Santana is one of those rare Rule V draft guys who turned into a very impactful MLBer although he wasn't always regarded as so. Thank Houston for leaving Santana (a 20yo Low A ball pitcher) available and thank Florida for drafting and trading him to Minnesota for Jared Camp.

 

Here is Johan's scouting report all the way back to 2000, he was the 8th ranked prospect in the system behind Cuddyer, Restovich, LeCroy, Garbe, Rivas, JC Romero, Lohse, and ahead of Rincon and Mills:

I know this isn't really too related, but reading that capsule (and wow that was a good move by the Twins), for some reason makes me think Lewis Thorpe is going to be drafted in the Rule 5.

[gunnarthor]

 

I know this isn't really too related, but reading that capsule (and wow that was a good move by the Twins), for some reason makes me think Lewis Thorpe is going to be drafted in the Rule 5.

Yeah, I was surprised they kept him off.  I'd take a flier on him.

[Bob Sacamento]

Well unless Thorpe jumped leaps and bounds since September, he's well off from contributing on a MLB roster.  In Lewis' last bullpen session in Ft Myers, he was throwing maybe 70% and he had difficulty throwing strikes with his fastball let alone his secondary.  He has potential but it'd be hard to hide him on a roster for the year.

[gunnarthor]

 

Well unless Thorpe jumped leaps and bounds since September, he's well off from contributing on a MLB roster.  In Lewis' last bullpen session in Ft Myers, he was throwing maybe 70% and he had difficulty throwing strikes with his fastball let alone his secondary.  He has potential but it'd be hard to hide him on a roster for the year.

How can he be that far behind? He had surgery well over a year ago.  

[Bob Sacamento]

 

How can he be that far behind? He had surgery well over a year ago.  

Thorpe came down with Mono during his rehab early this year so it set him back extensively

[Otto von Ballpark]

Well unless Thorpe jumped leaps and bounds since September, he's well off from contributing on a MLB roster. In Lewis' last bullpen session in Ft Myers, he was throwing maybe 70% and he had difficulty throwing strikes with his fastball let alone his secondary. He has potential but it'd be hard to hide him on a roster for the year.

Not saying it would be easy, but a team would have a built-in excuse/reason to leave Thorpe on the DL for 2 months, give him a month of rehab in the minors, and then put him on the MLB roster for July through September if they still wanted him. Heck, the Brewers almost did that with Zach Jones last year (except for adding him to the MLB roster), it's not out of the question someone might try it with the higher-upside Thorpe. Although I agree it does seem unlikely, so I am comfortable with leaving him unprotected.

[clutterheart]

Not saying it would be easy, but a team would have a built-in excuse/reason to leave Thorpe on the DL for 2 months, give him a month of rehab in the minors

Players taken as a rule 5 guy have to be on the active 25 man roster for 90 days. I don't think that will happen with Thorpe

[Seth Stohs]

 

Not saying it would be easy, but a team would have a built-in excuse/reason to leave Thorpe on the DL for 2 months, give him a month of rehab in the minors, and then put him on the MLB roster for July through September if they still wanted him. Heck, the Brewers almost did that with Zach Jones last year (except for adding him to the MLB roster), it's not out of the question someone might try it with the higher-upside Thorpe. Although I agree it does seem unlikely, so I am comfortable with leaving him unprotected.

 

problem is that if someone takes Thorpe and tries to get him through the season mostly on the DL, he'll go into the following year with basically three missed seasons. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

problem is that if someone takes Thorpe and tries to get him through the season mostly on the DL, he'll go into the following year with basically three missed seasons.

Under my plan, he'd only spend a third of the season on the DL, and he wouldn't have to be inactive during that time -- he could be in extended spring training (he might go there anyway).

 

It might prove to be a lost season developmentally, but Rule 5 seasons often are. Actually guys coming off surgery are kind of ideal Rule 5 candidates in some ways, because their development has already been interrupted -- they are likely to have a slow development year while they work their way back anyway. As opposed to taking a healthy pitcher and cutting their innings and activity for a year, artificially interrupting them.

 

But I think we all agree Thorpe is a long shot to be picked.