About that farm system..

[Guest]

Because comparing the age a high school draftee makes it to AA with college draftees is a fair comparison?

 

JT Chargois didn't even pitch at AA until he was 25.  He was in the majors the next year.

 

Bard and Melotakis can't control where they pitch.  All they can control is getting hitters out.

Well, uh, yeah, success/age/level is one of the most common comparisons. Final post by me on this exchange.

[yarnivek1972]

Well, uh, yeah, success/age/level is one of the most common comparisons. Final post by me on this exchange.

IMO if it is valid for you to say that Tonkin did well at AA at age 22 it is valid for me to say that Melotakis reached AA in his 3rd pro season whereas it took Tonkin 5.

[jimmer]

 

IMO if it is valid for you to say that Tonkin did well at AA at age 22 it is valid for me to say that Melotakis reached AA in his 3rd pro season whereas it took Tonkin 5.

Tonkin came out of high school, Melotakis had 3 years of college ball.

 

So yeah while your point is true, it's not unusual for college draftees to get to the majors quicker than high school players.  

[yarnivek1972]

Tonkin came out of high school, Melotakis had 3 years of college ball.

 

So yeah while your point is true, it's not unusual for college draftees to get to the majors quicker than high school players.

Hey, I get it. By the same token, it would be pretty rare for a guy who played 3 years in college to be in AA by the time he was 22, because he was probably close to 21 when he was drafted. There was a different individual partaking in this conversation that didn't accept that fact.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'm not sure age and level are the only comparrisons.  Tonkin has obviously failed as a prospect, but that does not mean that Bard or Melotakis will. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

 But the Twins system did have some depth if not a bunch of 1/2 upside pitchers. So, we'll see but I suspect our system isn't quite as barren as some are worried about.

 

I wouldn't call it barren.  I wouldn't call it bountiful either.  It's alright, but it should probably be a bit better than that.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I wouldn't call it barren.  I wouldn't call it bountiful either.  It's alright, but it should probably be a bit better than that.

Pretty much this. What I find most depressing is that the position players are thriving - Gordon, Wade, et al - while the rotation arms are largely stalling out.

 

Given the 25-man roster, it'd be preferable the opposite was true (if I had to choose one or the other).

[Mike Sixel]

 

Pretty much this. What I find most depressing is that the position players are thriving - Gordon, Wade, et al - while the rotation arms are largely stalling out.

 

Given the 25-man roster, it'd be preferable the opposite was true (if I had to choose one or the other).

 

hard to thrive when the FO decides a 28 yo should be in AA......We still don't have much data to work with, but so far? So far I am not impressed with how they are handling RPs and the minors at all.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Pretty much this. What I find most depressing is that the position players are thriving - Gordon, Wade, et al - while the rotation arms are largely stalling out.

 

Given the 25-man roster, it'd be preferable the opposite was true (if I had to choose one or the other).

 

Right and if prospect for prospect trades were actually a thing that might help, but they're not.

 

Our pitching is in a hole that is going to take some good fortune to dig out of.  If even one of Jay or Stewart looked legit, it changes the whole dynamic.  But that's not where we sit today.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

hard to thrive when the FO decides a 28 yo should be in AA......We still don't have much data to work with, but so far? So far I am not impressed with how they are handling RPs and the minors at all.

Notice I specifically said rotation arms. I don't really understand the bullpen promotion strategy but the Twins have promising bullpen arms, I'm just not sure what they're doing with them right now.

 

But bullpens can be fixed a lot more easily than a rotation and the Twins rotation is a combination of old, mediocre, and ineffective. That's a big problem going forward.

 

Mejia and Berrios need to step up in a big way because there's no help for 2017 behind those two arms. Maybe Romero and Gonsalves enter the equation in 2018 but I'm not particularly bullish on them, either.

 

Having a rotation that averages 6.1 innings instead a rotation that averages 5.1 innings over the course of a season does wonders for making the bullpen look better. You're essentially eliminating full seasons from your two worst relievers (obviously, those two will still get work so it's more of a split between your worst 3-4 relievers but still, it's easier to build a pen when you don't need to roll out your sixth worst guy in the seventh inning twice a week).

[Mike Sixel]

The other thing people seem to be forgetting....ESan isn't exactly a spring chicken, and isn't signed forever.....so this problem gets compounded soon.

[bird]

 

Pretty much this. What I find most depressing is that the position players are thriving - Gordon, Wade, et al - while the rotation arms are largely stalling out.

 

Given the 25-man roster, it'd be preferable the opposite was true (if I had to choose one or the other).

 

No question about this. To me, it's been a triple-whammy buzzkill:

 

1. Injuries that leave huge question marks for us regarding Thorpe, Gonsalves, and Jay, among others.

 

2. Injuries that have caused major delays in the progress of Burdi, Shaggy, and Romero, among others.

 

3. The performance disappointment of Stewart.

 

I'm not ready to call Jay a mistake pick. Perkins gave us 9 WAR, and therefore exceeded what the average #22 overall pick did for their team. We heard plenty of opinions that Perkins was "only" a reliever and that we should have been able to snap up a solid starter at that slot, again with no mention of the 80% bust rate at that slot. Jay might very well do the same for us. I know people think we should have gotten an ace starter from that slot, but the reality is that the average production from #6 is about 9.5 WAR. I won't listen to an argument that says they should have known enough to pick the prospect selected a slot or two later, Benintendi in this case. 20% of the teams in baseball had a crack at him, so to fault those teams and conclude it's an indication of bad scouting isn't credible. If you want to argue that they should have a strategy to err on the side of a position player when someone with an ace ceiling isn't available, then I'll listen.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

No question about this. To me, it's been a triple-whammy buzzkill:

 

1. Injuries that leave huge question marks for us regarding Thorpe, Gonsalves, and Jay, among others.

 

2. Injuries that have caused major delays in the progress of Burdi, Shaggy, and Romero, among others.

 

3. The performance disappointment of Stewart.

 

I'm not ready to call Jay a mistake pick. Perkins gave us 9 WAR, and therefore exceeded what the average #22 overall pick did for their team. We heard plenty of opinions that Perkins was "only" a reliever and that we should have been able to snap up a solid starter at that slot, again with no mention of the 80% bust rate at that slot. Jay might very well do the same for us. I know people think we should have gotten an ace starter from that slot, but the reality is that the average production from #6 is about 9.5 WAR. I won't listen to an argument that says they should have known enough to pick the prospect selected a slot or two later, Benintendi in this case. 20% of the teams in baseball had a crack at him, so to fault those teams and conclude it's an indication of bad scouting isn't credible. If you want to argue that they should have a strategy to err on the side of a position player when someone with an ace ceiling isn't available, then I'll listen.

It's easy to look at each draft pick and say "yeah, I get why they did that and lots of teams passed on Player X" but ultimately, the fact the Twins haven't landed on a successful starter draft pick since Berrios is incredibly disappointing.

 

And frankly, I'm not even sure it was a bad pick as much as I question the development process of pitchers in this organization. If Stewart was brought up in the Pirates organization would he be having the same problems? Dunno. The guy certainly has the stuff to succeed and I have no idea why he can't put it together.

 

And if Stewart looked like a promising #3 starter on his way to Minnesota (or already here), that's suddenly not a bad pick at all. Not the ceiling you'd like to see from that high in the draft but any time you get a capable starter, you're doing okay for yourself with a pick.

 

It's really hard to identify when/where the Twins went wrong but it's apparent they've gone astray somewhere in the process.

[howieramone2]

 

Pretty much this. What I find most depressing is that the position players are thriving - Gordon, Wade, et al - while the rotation arms are largely stalling out.

 

Given the 25-man roster, it'd be preferable the opposite was true (if I had to choose one or the other).

King Theo's position players were ahead of his arms. Being a large market team, he was able to take the checkbook out. We have alot more top pitching prospects getting close to Target Field than we do position players. It's not going to happen today, tomorrow, or the next day, but the numbers say it will.

 

Saturday's game IMHO, was one of the biggest in years. He still has to go thru the trials and tribulations all young starting pitchers do, but I'm guessing Berrios, will enter next season as a 2/3 and fill in behind Santana nicely. To me this means we do not have to spend 100-150M in free agency on an ace quality starter, but can set our sights on a proven vet for half that.  Alot of good things are happening at One Twins Way.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

We have alot more top pitching prospects getting close to Target Field than we do position players.

Sure, but half the lineup is already 25-and-under and there are some options to fill one or two more of those spots (first base, for example). And the one spot that might open via trade - second base - has a guy tearing up Chattanooga at shortstop.

 

The lineup doesn't need any help because the help has already arrived.

 

But the pitching staff, well, there's Berrios and a few good bullpen arms coming. That's great to have but looking at the roster, it's not likely to be enough.

[Mike Sixel]

 

King Theo's position players were ahead of his arms. Being a large market team, he was able to take the checkbook out. We have alot more top pitching prospects getting close to Target Field than we do position players. It's not going to happen today, tomorrow, or the next day, but the numbers say it will.

 

Saturday's game IMHO, was one of the biggest in years. He still has to go thru the trials and tribulations all young starting pitchers do, but I'm guessing Berrios, will enter next season as a 2/3 and fill in behind Santana nicely. To me this means we do not have to spend 100-150M in free agency on an ace quality starter, but can set our sights on a proven vet for half that.  Alot of good things are happening at One Twins Way.

 

How long do you expect ESAn to:

 

a: be here

b: be really good

 

That's a risk for sure.

[TheLeviathan]

The Cubs also smartly turned a one year FA contract into Jake Arrieta.  

 

And when you're talking about high upside pitchers, every one counts a lot.  Right now maybe you could argue Santana/Berrios is a wash with Lester/Hendricks, but we have no Arrieta and far less prospect capital than they do. 

 

And that, largely, is due to much more aggressive international spending.  Something Terry Ryan treated like the plague.

[howieramone2]

 

How long do you expect ESAn to:

 

a: be here

b: be really good

 

That's a risk for sure.

Santana to this point has shown no signs of decline. We have him for next season and I recently read we have a team option for 2019. I'm very hopeful he can fill a slot in the rotation for the next 2 years. We should have others to do the heavy lifting by 2019.

[gunnarthor]

 

 

 

And that, largely, is due to much more aggressive international spending.  Something Terry Ryan treated like the plague.

Ryan spent his whole international budget, every year.

 

It's ridiculous to compare the Twins to the Cubs, a team with a 200m payroll last year. They have resources and advantages that destroy any credible comparison. Compare the Twins to Cleveland. That's fair and that's the org we took Falvey from. He's going to mimic them.

 

My guess is that the Twins won't trade Santana unless they crater. He's signed to a good deal and what we want back for him - top pitching close to the majors - is something a team that needs Santana isn't likely to have.  Santiago might get moved since he's a FA at the end of the year but I could see the team trying to extend him during the season.  At the end of the day, the likeliest way to add pitching is to move Dozier in the offseason because Gordon or Vielma can move up to the majors next year. And they can see what's on the FA market in the 3/45 bin.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

And they can see what's on the FA market in the 3/45 bin.

I'd like to see them aim a bit higher than that. The Twins payroll is really low and Mauer comes off the books after 2018. Sano, Rosario, Kepler, et al won't get significant money until 2020 or so. That should give the Twins an opportunity dive into $100m waters to pick up a capable free agent pitcher.

 

Given the arms in the system, the Twins *should* be able to backfill the 4/5 rotation spots internally. I'd like to see them aim for a 2/3 in free agency.

[howieramone2]

 

The Cubs also smartly turned a one year FA contract into Jake Arrieta.  

 

And when you're talking about high upside pitchers, every one counts a lot.  Right now maybe you could argue Santana/Berrios is a wash with Lester/Hendricks, but we have no Arrieta and far less prospect capital than they do. 

 

And that, largely, is due to much more aggressive international spending.  Something Terry Ryan treated like the plague.

King Theo went way over for one year only. I question whether those 16 year-olds have made it to Chicago yet. He did spent big on Soler the Cuban, but traded him for Wade Davis. King Theo's success is much more tied to using his checkbook wisely, than aggressive international spending.

 

This plague you speak of, is followed by the vast majority of teams. TR is gone, let it go.

[gunnarthor]

 

I'd like to see them aim a bit higher than that. The Twins payroll is really low and Mauer comes off the books after 2018. Sano, Rosario, Kepler, et al won't get significant money until 2020 or so. That should give the Twins an opportunity dive into $100m waters to pick up a capable free agent pitcher.

 

Given the arms in the system, the Twins *should* be able to backfill the 4/5 rotation spots internally. I'd like to see them aim for a 2/3 in free agency.

I'd like to see that too but the Pohlads hired a guy who came from an organization that specifically didn't rely on FA. Until the Pohlads actually spend more than 4/45 in fA, I don't think we should expect it.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'd like to see that too but the Pohlads hired a guy who came from an organization that specifically didn't rely on FA. Until the Pohlads actually spend more than 4/45 in fA, I don't think we should expect it.

I think payroll will be linked to attendance. If the Twins start winning and fans start showing up in greater numbers, I suspect the Pohlads will open the checkbook because it's the smart business decision. Last season, attendance dropped under 2m for the first time since Target Field opened. If a winning baseball team gets you back to 2.3m, it makes all the sense in the world to drop some money in free agency, build a legit winner, and try to get that attendance back up over 2.5m the following season. And then 2.7m. Etc etc.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Ryan spent his whole international budget, every year.

 

It's ridiculous to compare the Twins to the Cubs, a team with a 200m payroll last year. They have resources and advantages that destroy any credible comparison. Compare the Twins to Cleveland. That's fair and that's the org we took Falvey from. He's going to mimic them.

 

The Cubs also went into the Cuban market with much more frequency.  I didn't bring up the Cubs comparison, some other poster did.  I can only respond to their example.  Relax.

 

The Cubs went over once and were willing to go get Soler and several others outside of that.

 

Again, every high upside player counts a ton and those moves represent a large portion of the difference between the two clubs right now.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I think payroll will be linked to attendance. If the Twins start winning and fans start showing up in greater numbers, I suspect the Pohlads will open the checkbook because it's the smart business decision. Last season, attendance dropped under 2m for the first time since Target Field opened. If a winning baseball team gets you back to 2.3m, it makes all the sense in the world to drop some money in free agency, build a legit winner, and try to get that attendance back up over 2.5m the following season. And then 2.7m. Etc etc.

 

Attendance lags performance by a year, so good luck on that this off season. 

[ashbury]

I think payroll will be linked to attendance.

Linked, but you went on to suggest the correlation could be in the opposite direction. Don't spend just to spend, but if you spend and acquire good players, the attendance would follow, creating a virtuous circle.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Attendance lags performance by a year, so good luck on that this off season. 

Sure, it lags but the front office knows that better than we do. If a team is on the cusp of contention, the logical move is to push them further toward the front of the pack via free agency and spending. It's the smart move both competitively and financially.

 

Do you want to stall out at 2.3m attendees or push toward 2.7m? Never mind the added windfall from actually making the postseason and playing games.

 

And given the Twins current payroll, they have plenty of space to add money and still remain profitable, all the while creating a better financial environment going forward (because if we count the lag year, we should also count the inevitable boon year where a bad team sees high attendance).

[bird]

We can set aside talk about all the other reasons we don't have a competitive rotation, since we have almost universal agreement about the failings of trades and FA, and we don't have as huge of a gap in our views about IFA, especially after the pool-busting activity. I'm open to the argument that pitching development is a problem, because the results seem to point to it. I just want more process-specific evidence.

 

But getting back to farm system talent, the two things I push back on are statements that depict the system as worse (often MUCH worse) than it is, and statements about how lousy our scouting people are, often "supported" by some single anecdote. 

 

A couple of examples from just the last few postings, both comments from guys whose opinions I very much respect:

 

Brock made the observation that the Twins haven't produced a rotation arm since Berrios, which is obviously a true statement and a huge problem. To his credit, he hasn't slammed the scouting department and is humble enough to question development rather than conclude something about it in absolute terms.

 

Berrios was selected #32 in 2012, the same year Kevin Gausman, Kyle Zimmer, Max Fried, Mark Appel, and Andrew Heaney were selected #'s 4,5,7,8, and 9. We missed on all of them because of that darn Buxton. In 2013, Mark Appel, Jon Gray, Stewart, Trey Ball, and Phil Bickford went #'s 1,3,4,7, and 10. In 2014, we didn't have a shot at Aiken, Kolek, or Rodon and passed on Nola, Freeland, and Hoffman to take Gordon. In 2015, Dillon Tate, Tyler Jay, and Carson Fulmer (not Michael Fulmer!) went #'s 4, 6, and 8. In 2016, the 6 best pitching prospects were off the board when we took Kiriloff at #15, and no team thought a pitcher was a worthy pick for five slots before him.

 

So, I guess I'm still stubbornly holding on to an opinion that the long drought is much more a function of FA, IFA, and trades, maybe development, but I'm not sure. If Ynoa, Thorpe, and Romero come through, maybe IFA isn't the problem either. If Balazovic, Benninghoff, and Brasdural (sic) turn out to be studs...I don't know. I remain unwilling to be overly critical despite the disappointments. Except for of the sell discipline, disastrous trades, and sitting out FA opportunities.

 

Levi made the comment that the Twins have far less prospect capital than the Cubs. Sickles graded 14 Twins prospects as B- or better at the start of the season, and 8 of those are pitchers. He graded 12 Cubs prospects as B- or better, with 6 of those being pitchers. I'm not willing to have my own opinion on the matter, but when I look at those grades, I can't accept the opinion that the Cubs' prospect capital is far greater. BTW, 10 teams had more than 14 prospects that earned a grade of B- or better. The high was 18. And 4 teams had more than 8 pitching prospects graded that highly, the high mark being 11.

 

As an aside, if you really want something to complain about, move to Miami or LA. Each of those teams had a total of two players who warranted even a B- grade from Sickles. Two.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Linked, but you went on to suggest the correlation could be in the opposite direction. Don't spend just to spend, but if you spend and acquire good players, the attendance would follow, creating a virtuous circle.

I meant to use expectations and future attendance, not a reverse correlation.

 

Front offices should have a pretty good idea what to expect in attendance with each coming season. The in-season variation seems to be pretty small based on wins and losses, particularly early in the season.

[ashbury]

I meant to use expectations and future attendance, not a reverse correlation.

 

Front offices should have a pretty good idea what to expect in attendance with each coming season. The in-season variation seems to be pretty small based on wins and losses, particularly early in the season.

I'm not overly fixated on in-season attendance change. Kick-start the rebuild with serious talent, and attendance will respond in its own usual manner. I dispute the wisdom of waiting until the team is winning and attendance is higher to match, to open the checkbook a bit more. You hold back only if you doubt your talent evaluation skills.