2017 MLB draft thread

[FlauerPauer]

 

It'll be interesting to see who's strategy wins... Falvey's long-term view, or Levine's short-term view. IMO, if the choice is pitcher A - someone who may arrive in the MLB in ~2 years, but only projected to be a #2/3, or pitcher B - someone who may arrive in the MLB in ~4-5 years, but projected to be a #1, I'd take gamble on pitcher B. 

 

I think you need to go #1 route.  The Twins have yet to show the ability to make a splash for a top SP in the FA market (not that necessarily should) and have yet to show the ability to develop a top tier SP.  Now, granted there is a different FO mindset and different minor league instructors, but I think you need to take the chance.

 

I've been reading that Gore's pitches are already better than Greene's.  From my eye, he seems to have a smooth delivery.  Velocity is there.

 

Wright is very similar, just throws from the right side and is two-three years ahead of Gore.

 

To me, it's between those two guys and comes down to @vanimal46 point.

[Thrylos]

 

Why?

 

He should go straight to FL, after getting a few weeks off. Assuming he is good to very good, he can start in A+ or even AA next year.

 

It's about their willingness to be aggressive, certainly the White Sox would be....

 

 

That's what the Twins did with Garza (kinda - he started in Beloit, but moved to the majors his second season)  and were ready to do with Gibson (started in A+ and in AAA to begin his second season) before he blew his elbow.

Baker, Slowey, Perkins all were up in their third seasons.   Pushing the signing deadline up, really helps pushing the timetable, since the olden days high draft picks would sign late and miss their first season.

 

No reason a college arm cannot help the Twins in 2018

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

It's more of a general skepticism since many factors play into their ETA... Injuries, ineffectiveness, etc.

 

Maybe I'm just jaded because all of the awesome RP prospects (Burdi, Reed, Melotakis) were advertised as near-MLB ready players. 3-4 years later and we're still waiting..... 

 

Probably fair, but that is the nature of a later round picks...  especially pitchers.  Most of these guys had injury issues.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

It'll be interesting to see who's strategy wins... Falvey's long-term view, or Levine's short-term view. IMO, if the choice is pitcher A - someone who may arrive in the MLB in ~2 years, but only projected to be a #2/3, or pitcher B - someone who may arrive in the MLB in ~4-5 years, but projected to be a #1, I'd take gamble on pitcher B. 

 

Understand the point.  Personally, while I'm usually a long term guy, this is a scenario (unless there's some plan to break the bank in FA) where short term makes more sense.  I could see picking up a falling HS guy at 35/37,  but I have to think with 1 it makes far more sense to go with Wright or McKay.

[FlauerPauer]

 

Understand the point.  Personally, while I'm usually a long term guy, this is a scenario (unless there's some plan to break the bank in FA) where short term makes more sense.  I could see picking up a falling HS guy at 35/37,  but I have to think with 1 it makes far more sense to go with Wright or McKay.

 

This is what I'm thinking.  You can't take three high schoolers with your first three picks.  I mean you can, but don't expect production for at least three years.

[Willihammer]

If it were up to me there would be two guys in play at 1-1: Lewis and Adell. They have to get value out of #1 and these guys provide the best combination of risk, projectability, and price.

 

Lewis: his price is capped because he's a 2nd tier guy ranked n the 4-7 range on most mocks.

He's the 5th youngest HS position player among the MLB.com's top 100, and will be 18 years and 1 week old on draft day; we know there's an inefficiency with these guys. And, he's a UC Irvine commit- not considered to be an elite program.

His risk is capped because he's not a pitcher. He plays an up the middle position.

Projectability- if scouts are right then the sky is the limit because the industry loves him as a 5 tool, projection guy.

 

Adell: his price is capped because he's a 3rd tier guy ranked in the 9-22 range on most mocks. The industry wide concern about swing and miss tendencies is keeping a lid on his stock price. However in actual games he clubbed 24 HRs against 9 strikeouts.

He's the 7th youngest prep bat among the top 100 and will be just over 18 years, 2 months on draft day, which again, is a bit of an inefficiency.

On the downside, he's he's a Louisville commit. That's a top program and could raise his price.

Risk- position player, up the middle guy.

Projection- Best all-around tools in the draft according to MLB.com. His in-game production is tops in the country.

 

I'd estimate Lewis' signing bonus to be around $1.50-$1.75 less than the $7.77 slot. For comparison I'm looking at Brendan Rodgers who in 2015 was generally considered a fringe top tier guy and was taken third by the Rockies, who signed him for $5.50, which was $1.22 under slot. Rodgers was a Texas A&M commit which is a more prestigious school than UC-Irvine.

 

For Adell, I'm looking at Clint Frazier as a comp. Considered among the best prep bats of his class, he was mocked around #7-9, and drafted #5 by the Indians who signed him for $3.5M, which was $0.29 under slot. Frazier was a Georgia commit, not the most prestigious program, but managed to get a strong bonus from the Indians. With that in mind I'd guess savings for Adell would be capped at #4 slot money- a pick or two above his highest mock position. #4 slot is $6.15m, and would be $1.62 under slot.

 

A guy like Wright or McKay would almost certainly come as cheap, and possibly cheaper than these two. But the risk part of the equation is less favorable IMO, particularly for Wright who is a one-way player. Ceiling is also lower for both, although some scouts are in love with McKay's bat.

 

To me, you try to get more savings at 35, possibly by taking Rooker. Bank another $0.50 if possible. Then use the ~$2.00 to spam a bunch of high school arms in the following rounds.

[Mike Sixel]

 

If it were up to me there would be two guys in play at 1-1: Lewis and Adell. They have to get value out of #1 and these guys provide the best combination of risk, projectability, and price.

 

.....clipped for space

 

To me, you try to get more savings at 35, possibly by taking Rooker. Bank another $0.50 if possible. Then use the ~$2.00 to spam a bunch of high school arms in the following rounds.

 

I can't see how Lewis doesn't have leverage.

 

While I don't agree this is a good plan, I admire you have been consistent on it, and that you have really thought it out. I think you are under selling Wright, and your whole post reads like "never take a pitcher high", which I can't agree with.

[ashbury]

I don't see the purpose of saving money on the #1 pick in order to try to play bonus-pool games with the later picks.

 

Look at the history of #35 or #37 June draft picks over the years, to be reminded that these picks are hardly sure shots by that point in the draft. Yes they're prospects, not suspects - but still projects, too - 50/50 to contribute in any meaningful way at the major league level, 20% to have a real career, <5% to be in a HoF conversation. The sure things are gone by then.

 

Pick the guy at 1:1 who you think will produce the most in his career, and negotiate hard beforehand (all the feinting we're currently seeing) but ultimately pay him. Play games with all the rest of the picks if you want.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?overall_pick=35&draft_type=junreg&query_type=overall_pick&from_type_jc=0&from_type_hs=0&from_type_4y=0&from_type_unk=0

 

 

[Willihammer]

 

I don't see the purpose of saving money on the #1 pick in order to try to play bonus-pool games with the later picks.

I don't think the Twins should necessarily play bonus pool games with later picks either, as in reaching up for a first round guy with their 3rd round pick or something. If the opportunity is there, go for it, but priority one IMO should be to sign everyone they draft. That involves saving some money so that if they get the next one of these guys they have the spending power to snatch them from the cold ivory jaws of college.

 

BTW if you want the Twins to spend freely with the top pick, then you probably want them to take one of the HS kids. College guys typically are cheaper.

[ashbury]

BTW if you want the Twins to spend freely with the top pick...

That isn't what I meant. I meant that money takes a back seat to getting the guy you want.

 

And of course it can be a close decision. If the top brass sees, say, 3 guys as indistinguishable, when all the fuzz of risk and upside and floor are combined, sure, you could pick the one who agrees to sign cheapest. I am just saying that the bonus should be a completely secondary consideration - nearly an afterthought, once the choices are ranked for potential. At the end, yes negotiate hard. But, if you see even a sliver of daylight between your choice and the also-rans, then at 1:1 don't be penny-wise pound-foolish.

[ashbury]

That involves saving some money so that if they get the next one of these guys they have the spending power to snatch them from the cold ivory jaws of college.

 

BTW if you want the Twins to spend freely with the top pick, then you probably want them to take one of the HS kids. College guys typically are cheaper.

I want to add another angle: HS draftees don't cost more because you get a better prospect as a result of their age and status. They cost more because you have to buy out their college degree. You alluded to it, and indeed many of these kids relish the excuse to skip further schooling and start making money. But if they are getting good advice, from family or from professionals (shhhh!), they have to take into account that if they ruin their ACL/UCL/lats/whatever at age of 22 say, what will they do with their lives? Starting college then would be less than ideal, although of course it's hardly impossible. With more money in the bank, the player assesses his chances differently.

 

At 1:1 the dollars are higher than for the rest of the team's picks, so the internal calculations may not be typical. But no, I don't advocate drafting high schoolers just to show my willingness to spend to field a winning team.

 

Paying a high schooler is like deciding to pay to drive on a toll road. If the road takes you where you want to go, it may be worth it to you. If it goes somewhere only close, and another road is more direct and gets you there better anyway, why would you?

[twinsfanstreif]

I've been watching someone clips from a mechanics expert named Brent Pourciau and they are very interesting. I will say I don't know how legit this guy is but he has a professional business out of it and used to work for a ML scouting department. He has videos of pretty much all the top prospects. In short he thinks Greene could be a TJ candidate if a team doesn't let him develop right, most notably allowing him to maintain his athleticism and strengthening his lower half. He doesn't like McKay at all, he is very concerned about Wright's injury potential because of poor leg leverage (i.e. all arm), and he likes Gore however the clip he used is from Last year and he is concerned that once he matures he might loose some of his flexibility which is the source of most of his leverage. This guy is hyper critical in all of his clips so there is that to keep in mind but I would recommend checking it out

[Willihammer]

 

I want to add another angle: HS draftees don't cost more because you get a better prospect as a result of their age and status. They cost more because you have to buy out their college degree. You alluded to it, and indeed many of these kids relish the excuse to skip further schooling and start making money. But if they are getting good advice, from family or from professionals (shhhh!), they have to take into account that if they ruin their ACL/UCL/lats/whatever at age of 22 say, what will they do with their lives? Starting college then would be less than ideal, although of course it's hardly impossible. With more money in the bank, the player assesses his chances differently.

 

At 1:1 the dollars are higher than for the rest of the team's picks, so the internal calculations may not be typical. But no, I don't advocate drafting high schoolers just to show my willingness to spend to field a winning team.

 

Paying a high schooler is like deciding to pay to drive on a toll road. If the road takes you where you want to go, it may be worth it to you. If it goes somewhere only close, and another road is more direct, why would you?

I think you answer your own question in the first paragraph. I don't want the Twins to draft the next Barry Bonds in the 2nd round and watch him go to college because they couldn't come up with an extra $5k. Which is exactly what happened when the Giants drafted him in 1982. They couldn't quite get the high school kids to make that assessment about his future in baseball and life that favors him going to the pros. Or Randy Johnson, Mark Texeira, Tim Lincecum, etc.

 

We're not that far apart- I too want the Twins to draft someoneo at the very top of their board. Where we differ is I think given the bonus rules, price has to be a bigger consideration. There is value to be had later in the draft -if you can sign it.

[Thrylos]

 

If it were up to me there would be two guys in play at 1-1: Lewis and Adell.

 

Can they pitch?

A team that is unwilling to trade top prospect bats for top prospect arms, like the Twins, cannot afford to select bats, because there are too many of them in the system already.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I've been watching someone clips from a mechanics expert named Brent Pourciau and they are very interesting. I will say I don't know how legit this guy is but he has a professional business out of it and used to work for a ML scouting department. He has videos of pretty much all the top prospects. In short he thinks Greene could be a TJ candidate if a team doesn't let him develop right, most notably allowing him to maintain his athleticism and strengthening his lower half. He doesn't like McKay at all, he is very concerned about Wright's injury potential because of poor leg leverage (i.e. all arm), and he likes Gore however the clip he used is from Last year and he is concerned that once he matures he might loose some of his flexibility which is the source of most of his leverage. This guy is hyper critical in all of his clips so there is that to keep in mind but I would recommend checking it out

 

if anyone could predict TJ candidates with any accuracy, they'd already be doing it at the team level, and we'd see less. 

[drivlikejehu]

 

I think you answer your own question in the first paragraph. I don't want the Twins to draft the next Barry Bonds in the 2nd round and watch him go to college because they couldn't come up with an extra $5k. Which is exactly what happened when the Giants drafted him in 1982. They couldn't quite get the high school kids to make that assessment about his future in baseball and life that favors him going to the pros. Or Randy Johnson, Mark Texeira, Tim Lincecum, etc.

 

We're not that far apart- I too want the Twins to draft someoneo at the very top of their board. Where we differ is I think given the bonus rules, price has to be a bigger consideration. There is value to be had later in the draft -if you can sign it.

 

If it's small dollars you're talking about (not literally 5k of course - but say a few hundred thousand), there are other ways to carve out additional space. Clubs often overdraft some college seniors in rounds 5-10 as a way of adding a little bit of breathing room. Those picks are very unlikely to pan out anyway, so it's a good trade-off if it helps sign someone higher in the draft, or to sign someone after round 10 for a moderate but > 100,000 bonus.

[InfraRen]

Klaw Chat going on.

 

Carlson tidbit:

 

Nate
3:30 who do you see falling in the draft and taking an over slot sandwich round deal?
Keith Law
3:31 Pick a dozen high school arms after the group of Greene, Gore, Hall. Half of them will do what you said. Enlow seems likely to do that. Carlson too.

 

 

Very interesting on Gore/Greene:

 

Logan
3:42 I asked you about a month ago about Beck to the Braves, and we both agreed that would be a stretch.. I'm hoping for for Gore/Lewis, but just wondering who you think has the higher upside between the two?
Keith Law
3:43 Gore. People I trust talk about Gore in terms that they're not even using for Greene.

 

 

 

Interesting on Gore - maybe a scenario like Jeremy laid out could happen with Gore 1 and someone else "top 15" like at 35.

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Klaw Chat going on.

 

Carlson tidbit:

 

beat me by seconds!

 

I might ask again, why Carlson isn't in round 1....

[Willihammer]

 

If it's small dollars you're talking about (not literally 5k of course - but say a few hundred thousand), there are other ways to carve out additional space. Clubs often overdraft some college seniors in rounds 5-10 as a way of adding a little bit of breathing room. Those picks are very unlikely to pan out anyway, so it's a good trade-off if it helps sign someone higher in the draft, or to sign someone after round 10 for a moderate but > 100,000 bonus.

Yeah, they can go up to 5% over their pool without any penalty. $700k or so.

Of course I don't know the exact price points for every player the Twins will draft this year. All I know is every year there are guys they take and don't sign. How nice would it be to have Kolten Wong or George Springer? Or Brent Rooker, who they may very well end up drafting again, and paying anyways. It seems clear that to stop these guys going to college you have to be willing to spend more than a couple hundred grand over slot sometimes.

[Vanimal46]

Tim
3:40 Question regarding McKay/Greene - assuming they don't take the mound after the draft - are they likely to try their hand at both pitching and hitting next year or will they likely be headed straight to the mound w/o concern for how well they hit this year?

 

Keith Law
3:40 McKay will almost certainly do both. Greene's future is on the mound, IMO.

[Mike Sixel]

Fascinating answer on Gore....

[drivlikejehu]

 

Yeah, they can go up to 5% over their pool without any penalty. $700k or so.

Of course I don't know the exact price points for every player the Twins will draft this year. All I know is every year there are guys they take and don't sign. How nice would it be to have Kolten Wong or George Springer? Or Brent Rooker, who they may very well end up drafting again, and paying anyways. It seems clear that to stop these guys going to college you have to be willing to spend more than a couple hundred grand over slot sometimes.

 

Most of those guys were never going to sign though - it's not like the Twins failed to sign them, per se, so much as they were drafted on the off-chance that the player changed his mind about college.

 

Rooker is a bit different, but obviously clubs in general were not impressed at the time.

[beckmt]

Greene has the biggest upside and also the biggest bust factor.  Wright has #1/#2 upside, but only #3/#4 downside.  Depends on how the Twins feel.  I would be happy with either; but would be unhappy with most other choices.

[InfraRen]

Jacque Jones

4:03 What are your thoughts on Nick Gordon after some time in the minors, compared to at draft time, etc? Should Twins fans be excited?

Keith Law

4:03 Yes. He's a damn good player. He'll produce, and he'll be one of those players you want to argue is worth even more than the stats say.

 

 

I know not '17 draft related, but still fun

[Willihammer]

 

Most of those guys were never going to sign though - it's not like the Twins failed to sign them, per se, so much as they were drafted on the off-chance that the player changed his mind about college.

Could be. But again, we don't know their price point. Could be an extra $100 or $200k would have changed their minds. Have to think at some point counsel would step in and say, "take the money kid."

 

This is turning into a tangent but what a sh-t show the 2008 draft was. 5/6 of the best players were took, we didn't sign.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?team_ID=MIN&year_ID=2008&draft_type=junreg&query_type=franch_year&from_type_jc=0&from_type_hs=0&from_type_4y=0&from_type_unk=0

[Mike Sixel]

 

I may have asked this  (I know not '17 draft related, but we're talkin Klaw Chat)

 

I put this in the seth 1-5 post, not here....

[Roaddog]

If I was to pick a prep pitcher, it would be Gore, or Shane Baz. I just don't think Greene is that much better, and both of the other kids have better off speed.

[drivlikejehu]

 

Could be. But again, we don't know their price point. Could be an extra $100 or $200k would have changed their minds. Have to think at some point counsel would step in and say, "take the money kid."

 

This is turning into a tangent but what a sh-t show the 2008 draft was. 5/6 of the best players were took, we didn't sign.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?team_ID=MIN&year_ID=2008&draft_type=junreg&query_type=franch_year&from_type_jc=0&from_type_hs=0&from_type_4y=0&from_type_unk=0

 

Right, but if another team wanted to give Springer another 100 or 200k, they could have taken him before the 48th round.

 

I do think the Twins should have spent more on the draft, pre-penalty rules, but with respect to late-round HS picks they had the same approach as all the other clubs. 

 

There's also a selection bias in looking back, because clubs drafted thousands of HS players in late rounds that had potential but didn't pan out in college. Your argument depends on the ability of a team to know which mid-level prospects are actually worth signing, but if teams knew that, they would have drafted those players much higher.

[InfraRen]

Denny Hocking

4:40 Anything interesting rumor-wise around the Twins since you blessed us with your last mock?

Keith Law

4:40 Same names. I don't expect much to change until teams get in their draft rooms this weekend.

 

 

[Willihammer]

Right, but if another team wanted to give Springer another 100 or 200k, they could have taken him before the 48th round.

 

I do think the Twins should have spent more on the draft, pre-penalty rules, but with respect to late-round HS picks they had the same approach as all the other clubs. 

 

There's also a selection bias in looking back, because clubs drafted thousands of HS players in late rounds that had potential but didn't pan out in college. Your argument depends on the ability of a team to know which mid-level prospects are actually worth signing, but if teams knew that, they would have drafted those players much higher.

Right but it only takes, really one late-rounder working out to turn a regular draft into a good one. Two and its a heist.

 

$75,000 was our offer for Kolten Wong.

 

"I looked at it and said, ‘I don’t know about this, Dad. After taxes, it’s not even that much,”