2017 MLB draft thread

[Mike Sixel]

Andy
1:16 Knowing that you think he's the #1 talent, would you pick Greene #1 if you were the Twins GM? While there's risk no matter who you pick, a HS RHP with huge velocity has more red flags than other categories.

 

Keith Law
1:17 No, I think a college 1b without another position has more red flags. The history of that profile is god-awful. I'd take Greene.

 

edit: I'm not sure what that means, other than he'd take Greene....though I guess he gave another category of red flags, now that i think about it, so I do know what it means.

[Oldgoat_MN]

 

I am also still on board with Greene, with Wright as a distance second choice.  Twins need talent and stuff, not more command and control pitchers.  They may be safer, but do not turn into aces.

But if they don't have command then they spend years in the minors putting up ridiculous numbers but are unworthy of being called up to MLB. See Berrios, Jose

[InfraRen]

From Jon Heyman's "Inside Baseball" post today on Twins:

 

Minnesota Twins

The Twins have the No. 1 pick in next month’s draft. While Hunter Greene, a right-handed pitcher and shortstop, seems to be the pick of many, one scout warns that the hype may have gotten a bit out of hand, and it seems possible Louisville first baseman Brendan McKay could get the first call. The scout says Greene is exceptional but thinks the publicity machine has gotten ahead of itself. “I’ve seen where he’s the best right-handed pitching prospect out of high school. But Josh Beckett and Dylan Bundy had more “now” to them. They had better breaking balls, and more swing-and-miss stuff,” the scout said. McKay seems like at worst the second choice or third choice. Royce Lewis, a shortstop/outfielder out of Junipero Serra in Orange County, Calif., is a great athlete the scout compares to Ian Desmond, and adds, interestingly, “He has a little Derek Jeter in him.”

 

https://www.fanragsports.com/mlb/inside-baseball-al-notes-white-sox-wont-rush-moncada/

[beckmt]

 

But if they don't have command then they spend years in the minors putting up ridiculous numbers but are unworthy of being called up to MLB. See Berrios, Jose

Given the current playoff structure an ace is a huge advantage.  You cannot discount that.  That is why I put Wright second if you are determined to take a college pitcher.  McKay may be here faster,but the Twins do not need more #3 starters, there are plenty of them in the system.

[Mike Sixel]

and here you go! (he must get a lot of questions, I think I asked this an hour before he started his chat, and it was 30+ minutes in before he answered!)

 

mike sixel
1:33 No Sam Carlson in your mock, unless I missed it. You don't think he's one of the top players, or he's not tied to any teams?

 

Keith Law
1:34 I ranked him in the top 20. I just don't think he's that likely to go in the first. He might be a sandwich/second-round overpay to buy him out of a good college (Florida) commitment, like Joey Wentz or Kevin Gowdy last year.

[Mike Sixel]

Kevin
1:36 Who is the first big leaguer from the 2017 draft class? Thanks for your time. Enjoyed your book!

 

Keith Law
1:36 I think McKay could appear this year as a LHS if someone wanted to move him fast.

[nicksaviking]

 

Sure, but command/control also referred to Garza, Slowey, Baker, Blackburn, Perkins, Duensing, Swarzak, Radke, Silva, Berrios and Gonsalves.  And stuff also included Durbin, Bullock, Hunt, Bashore, Boyd, etc.  (And guys like Garza and McKay have both.  It's not like McKay's stuff is bad.  He's arguably the #3 pitcher in the draft just based on stuff. Plus he's a lefty. Plus he's got great command/control. Plus he should be quick to the majors. Plus makeup.).

 

And if you just want to look at recent drafts, stuff got Kolek, Zimmer, Tate, Aiken, Fried, Appel, Groome etc drafted.  And we've seen command/control guys fall in the draft and look pretty good in hindsight.  (Nola, Finnigan, Wacha, Lynn every pitcher ever drafted by the Cardinals.)

 

I don't disagree that you can find good "command" type guys, perhaps even more of them than the "stuff" guys.

 

But I'm going to be extremely disappointed if the guy we get at 1:1 is akin to one of the control guys you listed. The fact that Nola, Finnigan and Wacha are the success stories from the "command" legion should throw up huge red flags, none of them are worthy of the first overall pick.

[Willihammer]

I'll also be disappointed if we draft another Slow-Bake-Burn pitcher. But, I don't think that describes McKay. No he doesn't light up the radar gun and he's not 7 feet tall but he has struck out 36% of batters he faced this year. By comparison Greene struck out 40% of the... high schoolers he faced.

[gunnarthor]

 

Lance Lynn was by no means a control guy while he was pitching in the SEC.

 

Also, Danny Hultzen had elite control in college, was a lefty, and had similar stuff to McKay, but he never made it to the majors.

He wasn't really a stuff guy.  An old write up on him - 

 

"They took one such pitcher in the supplemental round, Lance Lynn. Lynn, a college right-hander out of Ole Miss, throws a sinking fastball, a change-up and a decent slider. He relies heavily on his fastball and change, along with a bulldog mentality that allows his less than dominating stuff to play up. For what it's worth, Lynn does have excellent mechanics, as well as a large, solid frame that should bode well for his future durability. Still, he profiles as no more than a third or fourth pitcher, in a system that's already well stocked with similar players. Still, he is a consistent performer who takes the ball every time out, which does have good value."

 

Danny Hultzen was the guy I was trying to remember that is a scary comp for McKay in that they are both high floor, lefties etc.  Yeah, that would suck.

[gunnarthor]

 

I don't disagree that you can find good "command" type guys, perhaps even more of them than the "stuff" guys.

 

But I'm going to be extremely disappointed if the guy we get at 1:1 is akin to one of the control guys you listed. The fact that Nola, Finnigan and Wacha are the success stories from the "command" legion should throw up huge red flags, none of them are worthy of the first overall pick.

No, I wasn't trying to compare McKay to Nola or Wacha (although if those drafts were redone today, both would go much higher). McKay is a top 3 guy (at a minimum) which is way ahead of any of those other "control" guys.  

[gunnarthor]

Callis inbox - http://m.mlb.com/news/article/229630538/pipeline-inbox-mlb-draft-prospects-on-rise/?topicid=151437456

 

Has a few things. First, he thinks Romero would have gone pretty high in the draft but is now likely to fall to a team with multiple early picks. (hey, that's us!).  He mentions that Wright has pitched himself into the conversation for 1/1 but still thinks the Twins are leaning McKay (which is what a lot of reporting has said).  

[FlauerPauer]

From what I have read this is a relatively weaker than drafts in the past couple years.  With that knowledge, I think this is why we're seeing so many different possibilities for 1:1.  At the end of the day, I don't think this draft will be judged on the first overall pick, of course it is the biggest pick of the draft for the Twins; however, if that pick becomes a bust, but they hit on a couple of their other picks, then it can be a successful draft.

 

I really like what I have read about McKay.  Greene seems like too much of a wildcard at this point.  We also need to look at the needs of the team.  How many lefty starters does the minor league system comprise of? I'm struggling to think of top three rotation (projected) guy other than Gonsalves that throws from the left side.  Take the best player that fills your needs.

[Loosey]

 

What difference does it make they're apples to oranges. Gonsalves was never suspended, never overweight, his character never really in question. Boy scout stuff compared to Romero who is screwing up his life before our eyes.

I agree.  Gonsalves was the opposite of Romero.  He put his Catholic High School teammates ahead of himself and took the bullet by not ratting on who was smoking weed. He then went on to get suspended for that.  

[markos]

 

Danny Hultzen was the guy I was trying to remember that is a scary comp for McKay in that they are both high floor, lefties etc.  Yeah, that would suck.

Shoulder injuries suck. I'm not sure there is any good way to predict who is or isn't going to succumb to one.

 

Predicting pitching is so freaking hard. Looking back over the past 10 drafts, how many pitchers drafted in the top-10 actually turned into legitimate top-of-the-rotation pitchers? There have been ~50 pitchers selected, and the (super subjective) list of Aces is something like: 

Bumgarner

Price

Strasburg

Harvey

Cole

 

Obviously some of the recent guys still have time, and you can quibble with these names. But there are a lot more failures than successes. And every kind of failure, too. High-upside vs high-floor, college vs HS, safe vs. risky. Each category has its successes and (more) failures.

 

I have no clue what the right decision is. Without an elite college hitter on the board, any decision they make can be easily second-guessed. 

[nicksaviking]

I'll also be disappointed if we draft another Slow-Bake-Burn pitcher. But, I don't think that describes McKay. No he doesn't light up the radar gun and he's not 7 feet tall but he has struck out 36% of batters he faced this year. By comparison Greene struck out 40% of the... high schoolers he faced.

I'd like to see Greene miss more bats, but Wimmers and Gibson struck out a lot of guys in college and pretty much everyone pre-draft said their stuff wasn't going to miss too many in the majors however they had good command to make up for it. I haven't read anything (though I probably haven't read enough) to indicate that most people think McKay will be a strikeout per inning kind of guy. I'm just really, really struggling with the velocity.

 

I'll compromise, if Greene's too risky for the front office to stomach because he's a 17-year-old high schooler I'll take Wright.

[d-mac]

 

I hope this DH only stuff is widely believed and totally BS.

I have a hard time believing that a guy who is capable of stealing 17 bases is incapable of playing even a corner spot.

 

Sometimes I think KLaw gets a bit lazy with his analysis on some players and tends to default to stereotypes based on position and body type. 

[markos]

 

I'd like to see Greene miss more bats, but Wimmers and Gibson struck out a lot of guys in college and pretty much everyone pre-draft said their stuff wasn't going to miss too many in the majors however they had good command to make up for it. I haven't ready anything (though I probably haven't read enough) to indicate that most people think McKay will be a strikeout per inning kind of guy. I'm just really, really struggling with the velocity.

 

I'll compromise, if Greene's too risky for the front office to stomach because he's a 17-year-old high schooler I'll take Wright.

I'm struggling with his velocity as well. I do take a little bit of solace in the fact that, in general, lefties are able to get away with less velocity. Bumgarner, Lester, Quintana all average in the 91-92 range. It is possible that there isn't much difference, practically speaking, between Wright at 92-95 and McKay at 90-93 given their respective handedness. 

[Willihammer]

 

I'd like to see Greene miss more bats, but Wimmers and Gibson struck out a lot of guys in college and pretty much everyone pre-draft said their stuff wasn't going to miss too many in the majors however they had good command to make up for it. I haven't ready anything (though I probably haven't read enough) to indicate that most people think McKay will be a strikeout per inning kind of guy. I'm just really, really struggling with the velocity.

 

I'll compromise, if Greene's too risky for the front office to stomach because he's a 17-year-old high schooler I'll take Wright.

A little bit unfair because Wimmers and Gibson needed elbow surgery after being drafted but I get your point. K-rate certainly isn't 100% predictive. But as a rule we'd have to expect k's to go down as players approach the majors. So its a reasonable, objective proxy for "stuff" as any. In that respect you'd have to say McKay's stuff is as good if not better than Greene's, even if he doesn't throw as hard or wear a size 38 inseam.

[Thrylos]

 

Shoulder injuries suck. I'm not sure there is any good way to predict who is or isn't going to succumb to one.

 

Predicting pitching is so freaking hard. Looking back over the past 10 drafts, how many pitchers drafted in the top-10 actually turned into legitimate top-of-the-rotation pitchers? There have been ~50 pitchers selected, and the (super subjective) list of Aces is something like: 

Bumgarner

Price

Strasburg

Harvey

Cole

 

Obviously some of the recent guys still have time, and you can quibble with these names. But there are a lot more failures than successes. And every kind of failure, too. High-upside vs high-floor, college vs HS, safe vs. risky. Each category has its successes and (more) failures.

 

I have no clue what the right decision is. Without an elite college hitter on the board, any decision they make can be easily second-guessed. 

 

Here are the College Pitchers who were taken 1-1 in past drafts since 2007:

 

Price

Strasburg

Cole

Appel

 

Other than Appel who is yet to be determined, I'd say that College pitchers who were taken 1-1 have been pretty successful.

 

 

[d-mac]

 

Sure, but command/control also referred to Garza, Slowey, Baker, Blackburn, Perkins, Duensing, Swarzak, Radke, Silva, Berrios and Gonsalves.  And stuff also included Durbin, Bullock, Hunt, Bashore, Boyd, etc.  (And guys like Garza and McKay have both.  It's not like McKay's stuff is bad.  He's arguably the #3 pitcher in the draft just based on stuff. Plus he's a lefty. Plus he's got great command/control. Plus he should be quick to the majors. Plus makeup.).

 

And if you just want to look at recent drafts, stuff got Kolek, Zimmer, Tate, Aiken, Fried, Appel, Groome etc drafted.  And we've seen command/control guys fall in the draft and look pretty good in hindsight.  (Nola, Finnigan, Wacha, Lynn every pitcher ever drafted by the Cardinals.)

 

As far as college pitchers go, just based on age and lack of development time command/control will always win out over stuff. It's much more difficult for a college pitcher lacking command/control (both are needed to get outs at the major league level) to develop it than say a younger HS arm. But high school arms may never develop either (or both) the command/control or the stuff to get major league hitters out. 

 

Both McKay and Wright pitch in high quality college conferences, so it seems completely irrational to knock a guy that allows over 30% fewer hits per nine, 20% fewer walks per nine, and 25% more K's per nine because his fastball sits 1-2 mph lower than a pitcher that focuses solely on pitching. 

[d-mac]

 

Given the current playoff structure an ace is a huge advantage.  You cannot discount that.  That is why I put Wright second if you are determined to take a college pitcher.  McKay may be here faster,but the Twins do not need more #3 starters, there are plenty of them in the system.

 

Does Wright have much more upside than McKay, though? McKay bests Wright in contact suppression, walks, and strikeouts. It's not like Wright is a fireballer or has some outstanding swing and miss pitches. His upside is based on the always nebulous "projection" buzzword. 

[d-mac]

 

I'd like to see Greene miss more bats, but Wimmers and Gibson struck out a lot of guys in college and pretty much everyone pre-draft said their stuff wasn't going to miss too many in the majors however they had good command to make up for it. I haven't ready anything (though I probably haven't read enough) to indicate that most people think McKay will be a strikeout per inning kind of guy. I'm just really, really struggling with the velocity.

 

I'll compromise, if Greene's too risky for the front office to stomach because he's a 17-year-old high schooler I'll take Wright.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ McKay pitches against better competition than Gibson did in the B12 and much better than Wimmers in the B1G. And he bests both in K rate and has much control than Wimmers ever did. I have no idea how Wimmers ever got the label as control artist he really struggled with walks his first to years at OSU. Also, Gibson was never the same pitcher after his arm injury. 

[bird]

 

Shoulder injuries suck. I'm not sure there is any good way to predict who is or isn't going to succumb to one.

 

Predicting pitching is so freaking hard. Looking back over the past 10 drafts, how many pitchers drafted in the top-10 actually turned into legitimate top-of-the-rotation pitchers? There have been ~50 pitchers selected, and the (super subjective) list of Aces is something like: 

Bumgarner

Price

Strasburg

Harvey

Cole

 

Obviously some of the recent guys still have time, and you can quibble with these names. But there are a lot more failures than successes. And every kind of failure, too. High-upside vs high-floor, college vs HS, safe vs. risky. Each category has its successes and (more) failures.

 

I have no clue what the right decision is. Without an elite college hitter on the board, any decision they make can be easily second-guessed. 

 

It's instructive to look back and review what the scouts thought back at the time. I took a quick look at the five drafts from 2007-11. Rough count: of the 23 pitchers drafted within the first 10 picks, 12 made it to MLB. My best guess is that 10 or even fewer of the 23 were truly regarded as #1 types. A couple that weren't became aces, Bumgarner, the 6th pitcher taken and 10th overall selection in 2007, and Matt Harvey in 2010, 4th pitcher, 7th overall. The other aces or possible aces: Price, Strassberg, Taillon, Bundy, Cole. The failed aces: Matusz, Hobgood, Hultzen, Bauer, maybe Pomeranz?

 

This may be a lousy analysis and conclusion, but here goes: 

 

* When you have a shot at someone who is truly regarded as having a #1 ceiling, you take it.Your odds are roughly 50/50.

*You might find two consensus aces in the first round of a given draft, three in a great year. SO keep your expectations real if you don't have a top 3 pick. Your chances of getting lucky and finding one with the 5th pick? Really really bad.

* The kind of pitchers you'll end up with if you pick after the aces are gone? If you're lucky, you get Matt Leake, Mike Minor, and Drew Storen. Remember, that's IF you're lucky and avoid the injury guys, and that's IF you're picking in the upper third of the draft. If you're picking in the lowest third, you're lucky (or maybe good) if you get  Wimmers and Gibson. I know this last statement will be met with disbelief, but consider this: of the 14 pitchers selected BEFORE Gibson, maybe four or five of them have been better than he's been, and every one of them went 10th overall or higher (Strassberg, Minor, Leake, and Storen). And of the 14 pitchers selected immediately AFTER Gibson was selected, exactly none of them have been better. Zero.

* So yeah, it's a crapshoot. And the window is narrow.

 

Funny thing, I've read the mock drafts, and I swear there are two dozen mock selections that sound like they're going to be ten times better than Leake, Storen, and Minor, but I suppose someone said that about Ross Detweiler, Brian Matusz, Zack Wheeler, Barret Loux, Archie Bradley...

[twinsfanstreif]

I wonder if the Twins would surprise everyone and go a completely different direction like the Astros did in 2012, maybe like Royce Lewis. Doesn't seem like a very "Twinsy" thing to do but we haven't seen a draft from the new FO so who knows

[beckmt]

 

It's instructive to look back and review what the scouts thought back at the time. I took a quick look at the five drafts from 2007-11. Rough count: of the 23 pitchers drafted within the first 10 picks, 12 made it to MLB. My best guess is that 10 or even fewer of the 23 were truly regarded as #1 types. A couple that weren't became aces, Bumgarner, the 6th pitcher taken and 10th overall selection in 2007, and Matt Harvey in 2010, 4th pitcher, 7th overall. The other aces or possible aces: Price, Strassberg, Taillon, Bundy, Cole. The failed aces: Matusz, Hobgood, Hultzen, Bauer, maybe Pomeranz?

 

This may be a lousy analysis and conclusion, but here goes: 

 

* When you have a shot at someone who is truly regarded as having a #1 ceiling, you take it.Your odds are roughly 50/50.

*You might find two consensus aces in the first round of a given draft, three in a great year. SO keep your expectations real if you don't have a top 3 pick. Your chances of getting lucky and finding one with the 5th pick? Really really bad.

* The kind of pitchers you'll end up with if you pick after the aces are gone? If you're lucky, you get Matt Leake, Mike Minor, and Drew Storen. Remember, that's IF you're lucky and avoid the injury guys, and that's IF you're picking in the upper third of the draft. If you're picking in the lowest third, you're lucky (or maybe good) if you get  Wimmers and Gibson. I know this last statement will be met with disbelief, but consider this: of the 14 pitchers selected BEFORE Gibson, maybe four or five of them have been better than he's been, and every one of them went 10th overall or higher (Strassberg, Minor, Leake, and Storen). And of the 14 pitchers selected immediately AFTER Gibson was selected, exactly none of them have been better. Zero.

* So yeah, it's a crapshoot. And the window is narrow.

 

Funny thing, I've read the mock drafts, and I swear there are two dozen mock selections that sound like they're going to be ten times better than Leake, Storen, and Minor, but I suppose someone said that about Ross Detweiler, Brian Matusz, Zack Wheeler, Barret Loux, Archie Bradley...

This is exactly why you take Greene.

[beckmt]

 

It's instructive to look back and review what the scouts thought back at the time. I took a quick look at the five drafts from 2007-11. Rough count: of the 23 pitchers drafted within the first 10 picks, 12 made it to MLB. My best guess is that 10 or even fewer of the 23 were truly regarded as #1 types. A couple that weren't became aces, Bumgarner, the 6th pitcher taken and 10th overall selection in 2007, and Matt Harvey in 2010, 4th pitcher, 7th overall. The other aces or possible aces: Price, Strassberg, Taillon, Bundy, Cole. The failed aces: Matusz, Hobgood, Hultzen, Bauer, maybe Pomeranz?

 

This may be a lousy analysis and conclusion, but here goes: 

 

* When you have a shot at someone who is truly regarded as having a #1 ceiling, you take it.Your odds are roughly 50/50.

*You might find two consensus aces in the first round of a given draft, three in a great year. SO keep your expectations real if you don't have a top 3 pick. Your chances of getting lucky and finding one with the 5th pick? Really really bad.

* The kind of pitchers you'll end up with if you pick after the aces are gone? If you're lucky, you get Matt Leake, Mike Minor, and Drew Storen. Remember, that's IF you're lucky and avoid the injury guys, and that's IF you're picking in the upper third of the draft. If you're picking in the lowest third, you're lucky (or maybe good) if you get  Wimmers and Gibson. I know this last statement will be met with disbelief, but consider this: of the 14 pitchers selected BEFORE Gibson, maybe four or five of them have been better than he's been, and every one of them went 10th overall or higher (Strassberg, Minor, Leake, and Storen). And of the 14 pitchers selected immediately AFTER Gibson was selected, exactly none of them have been better. Zero.

* So yeah, it's a crapshoot. And the window is narrow.

 

Funny thing, I've read the mock drafts, and I swear there are two dozen mock selections that sound like they're going to be ten times better than Leake, Storen, and Minor, but I suppose someone said that about Ross Detweiler, Brian Matusz, Zack Wheeler, Barret Loux, Archie Bradley...

 

Wheeler and Bradley still have chances to have very productive major league careers, so on these the jury is still out.

[bird]

 

Wheeler and Bradley still have chances to have very productive major league careers, so on these the jury is still out.

 

 

Good catch. 

 

 

[caninatl04]

Does anyone have any updated thoughts on (overall) picks #35 and #37?  If not names, then positions?

 

I, myself, would go pitching, pitching, pitching.

 

 

[nicksaviking]

Here are the College Pitchers who were taken 1-1 in past drafts since 2007:

 

Price

Strasburg

Cole

Appel

 

Other than Appel who is yet to be determined, I'd say that College pitchers who were taken 1-1 have been pretty successful.

Price and Strasburg were concensus top picks though, there was little doubt about who was the top player in those drafts. The only reason Cole didn't stand out was because lots of people thought his teammate Trevor Bauer was better.

 

Maybe it's just me but McKay has the same kind of blasé ambiguity of the Bullinger and Hochaver drafts. Not saying he'll be that bad, but if anyone thought he was in the Price and Strasburg tier of prospects no one would be having a debate right now.

[Thrylos]

 

Maybe it's just me but McKay has the same kind of blasé ambiguity of the Bullinger and Hochaver drafts. Not saying he'll be that bad, but if anyone thought he was in the Price and Strasburg tier of prospects no one would be having a debate right now.

 

Well... the thing is that he has 3 MLB pitches right now.   The kid has a fastball that is flat and fast and "he is a great athlete" and nothing else.

 

This is not the NFL.  And even Cordarelle Patterson kinda bombed there.

 

You got to go with the surest thing closest to the majors.  At this point it is a no-brainer.  Really.  Even all the pundits have the Twins taking him 1-1.

 

Greene, yeah, alright.  Good luck