Twins Top Prospects - FanGraphs

[dbminn]

I haven't seen any notice on Twins Daily yet, so thought I'd leave this here.

 

Eric Longenhagen has posted his new Twins prospect list at FanGraphs. The lists aren't as exciting this year, as very little info is available about prospect progress in 2020. However, there are a few notable changes to the FG list and I recommend reading those players' blurbs:

• Alex Kirilloff moves to #1 on the list. He now has a 60 Future Value, which puts him in the potential star category. Lewis holds his grade and Larnach is bumped to 55 FV.
• Matt Canterino moves to #7 and will be at the back end of their "Top 100" (FanGraphs includes everyone with a 50 FV, so it ends up being about 125 players). Says he developed a new change-up in 2020 based on info the Twins shared from Instructionals. 
• Josh Winder jumps to #13, citing increased velocity and again, a new change-up, which could cause his "value to explode".
• 2020 Draft Pick Aleck Soularie is placed at #16. Sounds very boom or bust. A fun writeup.

Longenhagen talks about the Twins draft strategy at the end of the article. I fully agree. The Twins need to draft more up-the-middle athletes.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

Sorely lacking in top end pitching.......but if you keep drafting corner OF in round 1, that's going to happen....

[drivlikejehu]

 

Sorely lacking in top end pitching.......but if you keep drafting corner OF in round 1, that's going to happen....

 

And then there's Cleveland, who always has good pitching and an OF full of AAAA players. There's no simple, magic formula, or every team would follow it.

[Mike Sixel]

 

And then there's Cleveland, who always has good pitching and an OF full of AAAA players. There's no simple, magic formula, or every team would follow it.

 

They seem to be the exception, not rule....the magic rule is that earlier picks are more likely to be great than later picks. Using your first round picks on corner OF at least three times in the last five or so years is going to lead to a lack of up the middle defenders and pitchers. 

[jud6312]

 

Sorely lacking in top end pitching.......but if you keep drafting corner OF in round 1, that's going to happen....

Third highest ranked pitching prospect projected for multiple innings in the pen isn't a good thing?

[jud6312]

When comparing what the Indians have an abundance of vs. what the Twins have an abundance of, I think it's much easier to cobble together a passable outfield and win with pitching than it is the other way around.

 

I'd much rather have a dearth of high-end outfielders than pitchers like what the case is now.

[drivlikejehu]

 

They seem to be the exception, not rule....the magic rule is that earlier picks are more likely to be great than later picks. Using your first round picks on corner OF at least three times in the last five or so years is going to lead to a lack of up the middle defenders and pitchers. 

 

The draft is not the majority source of players for MLB clubs. There are international signings, trades, free agents, etc. 

 

In any case, this "magic rule" seems to have escaped the notice of more than just the Twins. The 1st overall pick in 2020 was a first baseman and the 2nd overall pick was a corner outfielder. 

 

In the 2019 draft, there were 5 'corner' players drafted before the Twins took a shortstop at #13, or 6 if you doubt that Riley Greene will wind up in CF. 

 

Which is to say, this "magic rule" doesn't exist.

[Mike Sixel]

 

The draft is not the majority source of players for MLB clubs. There are international signings, trades, free agents, etc. 

 

In any case, this "magic rule" seems to have escaped the notice of more than just the Twins. The 1st overall pick in 2020 was a first baseman and the 2nd overall pick was a corner outfielder. 

 

In the 2019 draft, there were 5 'corner' players drafted before the Twins took a shortstop at #13, or 6 if you doubt that Riley Greene will wind up in CF. 

 

Which is to say, this "magic rule" doesn't exist.

 

?

the rule that players drafted earlier aren't more likely to be better doesn't exist?

 

Huh. could have fooled all the analysts........and data.

 

Because I never said take a pitcher early, I said early picks are more likely to be great than later picks. I did say that if you consistently take corner OF (not one time, consistently), your system is likely to be lacking in impact players outside corner OFers. 

[drivlikejehu]

 

?

the rule that players drafted earlier aren't more likely to be better doesn't exist?

 

Huh. could have fooled all the analysts........and data.

 

Because I never said take a pitcher early, I said early picks are more likely to be great than later picks. I did say that if you consistently take corner OF (not one time, consistently), your system is likely to be lacking in impact players outside corner OFers. 

 

It doesn't work that way. When a club's draft slot comes up, they don't have a choice of equal projection at every possible position.

 

The averages are what they are because clubs try to pick the best players high in the draft, rather than drafting based on 'need.' 

 

The reason for that is how few draftees actually become impact players. Drafting more players at a certain position is useless if they don't pan out or are just so-so.

 

If you have to pick between a corner OF you project to be an all-star, and a pitcher that you project to be a #4 starter, you simply have to take the OF even if the system is short on pitching. All 30 clubs operate on that principle.

 

If clubs did draft based on 'need,' the draft statistics would be noticeably different (the average value of first round picks would be more uniform, rather than starting high and dropping off rapidly).

[Mike Sixel]

It doesn't work that way. When a club's draft slot comes up, they don't have a choice of equal projection at every possible position.

 

The averages are what they are because clubs try to pick the best players high in the draft, rather than drafting based on 'need.'

 

The reason for that is how few draftees actually become impact players. Drafting more players at a certain position is useless if they don't pan out or are just so-so.

 

If you have to pick between a corner OF you project to be an all-star, and a pitcher that you project to be a #4 starter, you simply have to take the OF even if the system is short on pitching. All 30 clubs operate on that principle.

 

If clubs did draft based on 'need,' the draft statistics would be noticeably different (the average value of first round picks would be more uniform, rather than starting high and dropping off rapidly).

I never said draft on need. I said if you draft corner OF over and over, your system will be short on other positions.

 

if you do this, you need to be willing to sign free agents for big dollars, or trade for good pitching. Which they've tipped their toes into, but not enough probably to be great.

 

But let's be real, there were pitchers taken not long after their picks, so it probably isn't black and white who is better.

 

If you don't draft and develop great pitching, you need to get it elsewhere

[amjgt]

 

?

the rule that players drafted earlier aren't more likely to be better doesn't exist?

 

Huh. could have fooled all the analysts........and data.

 

Because I never said take a pitcher early, I said early picks are more likely to be great than later picks. I did say that if you consistently take corner OF (not one time, consistently), your system is likely to be lacking in impact players outside corner OFers.

 

MORE likely to be lacking.

 

Very important word there. 

 

The Indians drafted four pitchers in the first round in the last decade and none of them have really amounted to anything. They acquired their pitching talent in other ways.

[amjgt]

My point is, you're treating it as more of a binary than it really is.

[Doctor Gast]

Thanks dbmin, for putting this information out there for us, I enjoyed it. I agree that we need to draft higher more impact middle fielders. It's alright to draft big bats/ no gloves but not to hord them.

[Major League Ready]

 

I never said draft on need. I said if you draft corner OF over and over, your system will be short on other positions.

if you do this, you need to be willing to sign free agents for big dollars, or trade for good pitching. Which they've tipped their toes into, but not enough probably to be great.

But let's be real, there were pitchers taken not long after their picks, so it probably isn't black and white who is better.

If you don't draft and develop great pitching, you need to get it elsewhere

 

I might agree with you but you are using a recent trend that may or may not indicate an organizational philosophy. The sample size you are using is too small to be meaningful. The last 20 1st round (incl supplemental) picks have been 10 pitchers and 10 position players.

[ashbury]

I might agree with you but you are using a recent trend that may or may not indicate an organizational philosophy. The sample size you are using is too small to be meaningful. The last 20 1st round (incl supplemental) picks have been 10 pitchers and 10 position players.

Your point about sample size is fair, but augmenting a sample with a different sample hurts more than it helps. At least, I hope my town, which had an E.Coli scare recently, doesn't go about assessing its water quality in this loose fashion.

 

[Major League Ready]

 

Your point about sample size is fair, but augmenting a sample with a different sample hurts more than it helps. At least, I hope my town, which had an E.Coli scare recently, doesn't go about assessing its water quality in this loose fashion.
 

 

Not sure what your point is here. You will have to elaborate. 20 years is a decent sample. Perhaps more to the point ... They allocated enough picks to pitchers early. They picked poorly with the exception of Berrios. I particularly hated the Tyler Jay pick.

[ashbury]

Not sure what your point is here. You will have to elaborate. 20 years is a decent sample. Perhaps more to the point ... They allocated enough picks to pitchers early. They picked poorly with the exception of Berrios. I particularly hated the Tyler Jay pick.

I was referring to the front office having undergone a pretty complete turnover by now. Tyler Jay has zero relevance to the current administration, unless you believe Jim Pohlad was instructing Terry Ryan, "no, no, forget that Benintendi chump, Tyler Jay is the guy you want," and is still offering his drafting acumen to FalVine.

 

Sometimes a small sample is the only sample one has for study.

 

[Major League Ready]

You make a good point. My approach was too generic.

[4twinsJA]

Really looking forward to young pitchers getting an opportunity at MLB level this year. Probably would have seen a few more of them last year if had been a regular length season. Chalmers, Duran, Ober, Colina, I think Balazovic is a year away may be late season.

[The Wise One]

 

Sorely lacking in top end pitching.......but if you keep drafting corner OF in round 1, that's going to happen....

Sean Johnso,n who has run the draft since the 2017, draft has drafted 2 OF, 2 SS and 2 players who play bat in the first round. That is not keep drafting OF. The results of the drafting as a success or failure is a few years away, much to the chagrin of the impatient. 

Complaining about the old regime never gets old around here. They are history. They are not of active part of the decision making. It does not matter as to what the Twins will or could be.

[The Wise One]

 

I was referring to the front office having undergone a pretty complete turnover by now. Tyler Jay has zero relevance to the current administration, unless you believe Jim Pohlad was instructing Terry Ryan, "no, no, forget that Benintendi chump, Tyler Jay is the guy you want," and is still offering his drafting acumen to FalVine.

 

Sometimes a small sample is the only sample one has for study.
 

The drafting of Jay shoots  down the "draft corner outfielder" theory 

[bird]

 

Sorely lacking in top end pitching.......but if you keep drafting corner OF in round 1, that's going to happen....

 

While I see how we might conclude that they're sorely lacking in the pitching category right now, I'm not sold that this is true. As a very flawed reality check on this, I compared the prospect lists FG has for CWS, CLE, and MIN.

 

CWS has two 50FV pitching prospects, Kopech (trade acquisition) and Crochet (#11 overall). Looking a bit deeper, I really doubt the Twins would trade places when it comes to pitching talent, or ANY position, frankly. Top heavy is an undertatement.

 

CLE has an enviable system. Its strength is MI, especially IFA guys. Pitching? Two 50FV guys. McKenzie got a taste of MLB last year. A frail-looking guy with electric stuff. Some worry about his durability. Same goes for Espino, the other guy, who so far is not maintaining his increible velo, his calling card, into the middle innings. Got compared to MadBum in that regard.

 

MIN has three 50 FV guys. Balazovic, Duran ("a trade and development success story", says the author), and Canterino, whose question mark is his unorthodox delivery that makes one question if he ends up as a RP.

 

The Twins, aren't loaded with pitching prospects, but their strength is clearly position players, a diverse mix, mind you, not all corner guys.

 

I've been in this community long enough to have heard criticism about the team's ability to eevaluate and develop players at virtually every position. We were incapable of drafting and developing catchers not that long ago. I recall we couldn't find and develop middle infielders.  I've pushed back on these things, but in the past I have seen merit in arguments that our pitching development was suspect. But, like many, I think I'm seeing some signs that this is no longer a weakness, and may be close to becoming a strength.

 

Interestingly, of the seven pitchers in these three systems who earned a 50FV, not one of them was a top 10 draft pick (Crochet was #11, none of the others were even top 20 guys).

[The Wise One]

The current AL Cy Young winner was a FV 45 in 2018 according to fangraphs. 3 of the 12  45 or greater FV are pitchers, ergo 3 potential Cy Young winners. In 2017, Bieber did not even make the list as having an FV. Fangraphs ratings are something but not really. Nick Gordon had a 55 FV. 50 FV have included Romero, Tyler Jay and Gonsalves. Where are they now

[bird]

 

The current AL Cy Young winner was a FV 45 in 2018 according to fangraphs. 3 of the 12  45 or greater FV are pitchers, ergo 3 potential Cy Young winners. In 2017, Bieber did not even make the list as having an FV. Fangraphs ratings are something but not really. Nick Gordon had a 55 FV. 50 FV have included Romero, Tyler Jay and Gonsalves. Where are they now

 

 

I'm unclear about what point you're making. I think it's common consensus here that FanGraphs and others are often right on their rankings and grades, and they're wrong pretty often too.  

[dbminn]

I'm enjoying the conversation about draft strategies. There also some debate about how the new FO has drafted. In the first round (including supplementals), Baseball Reference has:

 

4 1B/Corner OF - Larnach, Rooker, Wallner and Sabato

2 SS - Lewis and Kavaco

 

They already had Kirilloff from the draft of the previous year. The 4 OF/1B types were college players, the 2 SS from high school. 

 

IMO that's a lot of corner players at the top of the draft.

[The Wise One]

 

I'm unclear about what point you're making. I think it's common consensus here that FanGraphs and others are often right on their rankings and grades, and they're wrong pretty often too.  

Someone was lamenting that there were not many pitchers on the list. On one hand a 45 FV can lead to a Cy Young, which could be encouraging. Then there all the ones who failed. Worry about a ranking versus worrying about the actual talent is an odd thing

[BK432]

Plenty of representation on the Top 133 released on FG today - they do 133 to include everyone who is a 50 FV or better. Canterino has a 50 as was previously mentioned here but falls outside the top 100. Everyone else (Kirilloff, Lewis, Larnach, Jeffers, Balazovic, Duran) is in the top 82.

 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2021-top-100-prospects/

[Mike Sixel]

 

I might agree with you but you are using a recent trend that may or may not indicate an organizational philosophy. The sample size you are using is too small to be meaningful. The last 20 1st round (incl supplemental) picks have been 10 pitchers and 10 position players.

 

I'm doing the sample size of this FO....the old FO had a different philosophy....why would I talk about the old FO?

[Mike Sixel]

 

While I see how we might conclude that they're sorely lacking in the pitching category right now, I'm not sold that this is true. As a very flawed reality check on this, I compared the prospect lists FG has for CWS, CLE, and MIN.

 

CWS has two 50FV pitching prospects, Kopech (trade acquisition) and Crochet (#11 overall). Looking a bit deeper, I really doubt the Twins would trade places when it comes to pitching talent, or ANY position, frankly. Top heavy is an undertatement.

 

CLE has an enviable system. Its strength is MI, especially IFA guys. Pitching? Two 50FV guys. McKenzie got a taste of MLB last year. A frail-looking guy with electric stuff. Some worry about his durability. Same goes for Espino, the other guy, who so far is not maintaining his increible velo, his calling card, into the middle innings. Got compared to MadBum in that regard.

 

MIN has three 50 FV guys. Balazovic, Duran ("a trade and development success story", says the author), and Canterino, whose question mark is his unorthodox delivery that makes one question if he ends up as a RP.

 

The Twins, aren't loaded with pitching prospects, but their strength is clearly position players, a diverse mix, mind you, not all corner guys.

 

I've been in this community long enough to have heard criticism about the team's ability to eevaluate and develop players at virtually every position. We were incapable of drafting and developing catchers not that long ago. I recall we couldn't find and develop middle infielders.  I've pushed back on these things, but in the past I have seen merit in arguments that our pitching development was suspect. But, like many, I think I'm seeing some signs that this is no longer a weakness, and may be close to becoming a strength.

 

Interestingly, of the seven pitchers in these three systems who earned a 50FV, not one of them was a top 10 draft pick (Crochet was #11, none of the others were even top 20 guys).

 

The FO is totally different than those earlier statements about, say, catchers. I'm not sure why we are talking about the old FO still?

[Mike Sixel]

 

I'm enjoying the conversation about draft strategies. There also some debate about how the new FO has drafted. In the first round (including supplementals), Baseball Reference has:

 

4 1B/Corner OF - Larnach, Rooker, Wallner and Sabato

2 SS - Lewis and Kavaco

 

They already had Kirilloff from the draft of the previous year. The 4 OF/1B types were college players, the 2 SS from high school. 

 

IMO that's a lot of corner players at the top of the draft.

 

thanks for the data.....about this FO.