Twins Top Prospects - FanGraphs

[bird]

 

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?

 

Because there are several holdovers among the dozens of people who weigh in on all of this. As you know, I think it's simplistic to think that the FO is essentially the only consideration.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Because there are several holdovers among the dozens of people who weigh in on all of this. As you know, I think it's simplistic to think that the FO is essentially the only consideration.

 

Well, the FO makes the picks....and 4 of the 6 first rounders have been corner types, after the last one before they took over was a corner guy. That was my point.....that if you make those types of picks, you'll have a harder time having great pitching. Unless you trade for it or sign free agents. Harder, not impossible. 

 

I don't get how this is controversial. If they only picked pitchers, I'd say it is hard to have great position players......

[Dman]

 

Well, the FO makes the picks....and 4 of the 6 first rounders have been corner types, after the last one before they took over was a corner guy. That was my point.....that if you make those types of picks, you'll have a harder time having great pitching. Unless you trade for it or sign free agents. Harder, not impossible. 

 

I don't get how this is controversial. If they only picked pitchers, I'd say it is hard to have great position players......

 

It seems to me the FO is mainly interested in hard hit rate Offense in the early rounds with the exception of the two high school SS who both had questionable hit tools but were 5 tool players.  Those SS picks seem pretty risky to take where they were picked but I guess they felt good about them or they wouldn't have done it.  Keep in mind Lewis gave them a 1M discount which they used on Enlow who was supposed to be 1st round material essentially allowing them to have three first round picks if you choose to look at it that way.  We have a ways to go to find out if it was the right move or not.

 

I think Falvey is going to follow the Cleveland model and look for arms with traits they like in rounds 5-10 and reliever arms in rounds 11-20.  At least that seems like the way things are going.  If Sands and Windor work out it helps with the strategy of taking offense early.

 

I still think it wouldn't hurt to use a year every now and then to take pitching early especially when they have a comp pick.  Use the first pick on Offense then the second on a pitcher or vise versa depending on the players available.  There is no reason not to take some shots earlier in the draft IMO.

 

I know that since they pick late in the draft they want to go with the greatest offensive upside when they pick put the law of diminished returns has to kick in at some point and they need to look at positions outside of left field, first base and DH.  

 

Who knows maybe their strategy is the most prudent we will have to wait and see for a few more years but I think they should do what they can to have a surplus of pitching.  It is easily tradable for other assets you might need and needs to be refreshed due to injury and the likelihood of not being able to pay top dollar for it.  Yes you need offense too there is a balance but mixing it up makes the most sense to me.

[bird]

 

Well, the FO makes the picks....and 4 of the 6 first rounders have been corner types, after the last one before they took over was a corner guy. That was my point.....that if you make those types of picks, you'll have a harder time having great pitching. Unless you trade for it or sign free agents. Harder, not impossible. 

 

I don't get how this is controversial. If they only picked pitchers, I'd say it is hard to have great position players......

 

You initially had two opinions. Both are controversial.

 

I question whether it's an apt description to say the Twins are sorely lacking in top end pitching. Change my mind. It appears experts like FanGraphs and Gleeman think otherwise.

 

I also question whether top end pitching is as dependent as you seem to suggest on early draft choices. We can cite examples of top end starting rotations that are NOT loaded with that team's early choices, or that perhaps include early choices acquired later via trade, like Odorizzi was. So while I agree with you that it's great to pluck stud pitching prospects in the draft, I'm not yet ready, unlike you, to find fault with the selections our amateur scouting department has evaluated and recommended to the FO. (Again, the FO does not operate in a vacuum).

 

I think others are right in concluding that there's some FO strategy involved with the abundance of position players they've picked. That's reasonable conjecture. Three things I'm going to look for: 

 

1. Are they successful in turning lower round pitching prospects like Balazovic and Enlow into #1-3 starters.

 

2. Are they regularly successful at trading surplus assets for front line pitching help like they did in the Palacios/Odorizzi trade. Duran will be an early indicator.

 

3. Are they right more often than wrong when they forego pitching in favor of position players in the draft. You criticized the Lewis selection IIRC, and I said at the time that the FO  is probably thinking that, of the four pitching prospects of equal status (Greene, McKay, Gore, and Wright), I'd bet two end up worse than Lewis and two better. We just don't know which two, and that's why Lewis isn't a misguided pick, especially given the Enlow bonus. But on this last point, I'm going to watch with interest what happens with all the pitchers selected within about five slots after these guys. Especially Cavaco, because there were a few highly touted pitchers still on the board when he was selected.

[Wercor]

Twins have plenty of shortstop draft picks, best part about drafting shortstops is they can play anywhere in the infield. When it comes to pitching on the other hand.....ouch, not good at drafting pitchers. Cleveland has magic formula of drafting pitching. Maybe its coaching, idk but twins need help in this area bad

[Dman]

 

You initially had two opinions. Both are controversial.

 

I question whether it's an apt description to say the Twins are sorely lacking in top end pitching. Change my mind. It appears experts like FanGraphs and Gleeman think otherwise.

 

I also question whether top end pitching is as dependent as you seem to suggest on early draft choices. We can cite examples of top end starting rotations that are NOT loaded with that team's early choices, or that perhaps include early choices acquired later via trade, like Odorizzi was. So while I agree with you that it's great to pluck stud pitching prospects in the draft, I'm not yet ready, unlike you, to find fault with the selections our amateur scouting department has evaluated and recommended to the FO. (Again, the FO does not operate in a vacuum).

 

I think others are right in concluding that there's some FO strategy involved with the abundance of position players they've picked. That's reasonable conjecture. Three things I'm going to look for: 

 

1. Are they successful in turning lower round pitching prospects like Balazovic and Enlow into #1-3 starters.

 

2. Are they regularly successful at trading surplus assets for front line pitching help like they did in the Palacios/Odorizzi trade. Duran will be an early indicator.

 

3. Are they right more often than wrong when they forego pitching in favor of position players in the draft. You criticized the Lewis selection IIRC, and I said at the time that the FO  is probably thinking that, of the four pitching prospects of equal status (Greene, McKay, Gore, and Wright), I'd bet two end up worse than Lewis and two better. We just don't know which two, and that's why Lewis isn't a misguided pick, especially given the Enlow bonus. But on this last point, I'm going to watch with interest what happens with all the pitchers selected within about five slots after these guys. Especially Cavaco, because there were a few highly touted pitchers still on the board when he was selected.

 

Since there will be many more good senior signs and essentially a surplus of players to choose from I wonder if that will change draft strategies for 2021.  This is a good year to have an many picks as possible IMO.

[Mike Sixel]

You initially had two opinions. Both are controversial.

 

I question whether it's an apt description to say the Twins are sorely lacking in top end pitching. Change my mind. It appears experts like FanGraphs and Gleeman think otherwise.

 

I also question whether top end pitching is as dependent as you seem to suggest on early draft choices. We can cite examples of top end starting rotations that are NOT loaded with that team's early choices, or that perhaps include early choices acquired later via trade, like Odorizzi was. So while I agree with you that it's great to pluck stud pitching prospects in the draft, I'm not yet ready, unlike you, to find fault with the selections our amateur scouting department has evaluated and recommended to the FO. (Again, the FO does not operate in a vacuum).

 

I think others are right in concluding that there's some FO strategy involved with the abundance of position players they've picked. That's reasonable conjecture. Three things I'm going to look for:

 

1. Are they successful in turning lower round pitching prospects like Balazovic and Enlow into #1-3 starters.

 

2. Are they regularly successful at trading surplus assets for front line pitching help like they did in the Palacios/Odorizzi trade. Duran will be an early indicator.

 

3. Are they right more often than wrong when they forego pitching in favor of position players in the draft. You criticized the Lewis selection IIRC, and I said at the time that the FO is probably thinking that, of the four pitching prospects of equal status (Greene, McKay, Gore, and Wright), I'd bet two end up worse than Lewis and two better. We just don't know which two, and that's why Lewis isn't a misguided pick, especially given the Enlow bonus. But on this last point, I'm going to watch with interest what happens with all the pitchers selected within about five slots after these guys. Especially Cavaco, because there were a few highly touted pitchers still on the board when he was selected.

They could have signed enlow even with taking a more expensive first player..... they just didn't do that.

 

What great pitcher is on the roster that this front office developed? It's been plenty of time for at least one..... as for Lewis.... we'll see. He was the first overall pick, not the 20th..... so they better be right.

 

As for trading from surplus, pretty sure I've said that should be part of the strategy.

[Mike Sixel]

Did you read the fangraphs.com write ups? How many pitchers do they project as a number 2 or better?

[bird]

 

They could have signed enlow even with taking a more expensive first player..... they just didn't do that.

What great pitcher is on the roster that this front office developed? It's been plenty of time for at least one..... as for Lewis.... we'll see. He was the first overall pick, not the 20th..... so they better be right.

As for trading from surplus, pretty sure I've said that should be part of the strategy.

 

They paid overslot money to four others besides Enlow, and Enlow alone got a half mil above slot. But if your point is that Lewis wasn't much of a savings over Wright, McKay, or Gore, you're right. Greene cost a half mil more.

 

If you want to argue about the lack of top end pitchers drafted and developed over time? First, you seem to be violating a rule you chastise others for violation by bringing the former FO into a conversation about the decisions of the current FO. We all know what the roster looks like. It's not a disputed fact. Berrios is the lone frontline starter drafted and developed, and not under Falvey's watch. As for Lewis? Wright, Greene, McKay, and Gore were also in that same tier, right? I believe you were in favor of Greene? So you better be right. .

 

Again, we're looking at today's list and discussing today's FO. I think you're wrong in making a claim that the team is sorely lacking in top end pitching,ESPECIALLY when you look at it relative to other teams.

 

I'm pretty sure you were arguing that this team lacks #1-3 types, although you didn't bother to give comparisons. Maybe you're right. And you clearly argued that not drafting pitchers early is the reason. If they can't put together an elite rotation via another means, maybe your concern is merited.

[bird]

 

Did you read the fangraphs.com write ups? How many pitchers do they project as a number 2 or better?

 

 

This lacks context. How many such pitchers does the average team have that FanGraphs projects as a number 2 or better?

[drivlikejehu]

 

What great pitcher is on the roster that this front office developed? It's been plenty of time for at least one..... as for Lewis.... we'll see. He was the first overall pick, not the 20th..... so they better be right..

 

"Plenty of time"? Based on what logic? Absurd statement.

[Brock Beauchamp]

What great pitcher is on the roster that this front office developed? It's been plenty of time for at least one...

”Plenty of time”? Whaaaaat?

 

Their first draft was 2017. They essentially lost a development season in 2020, as did all of MLB.

 

Exactly how long do you think it takes to draft/sign and develop a great pitcher?

 

I’m far from assured that this front office has pitching locked down but you’ve been pretty unreasonable about their timelines from day one when you complained that they weren’t firing and replacing staff within two months of taking over what was a broken franchise at the time.

 

Never mind that drafting/signing is not the only way a franchise develops players. The Twins have shown with a myriad of pitchers, both starters and relievers, that they can acquire a veteran from another team (even highly respected ones like the Rays and Dodgers) and actually improve that pitcher’s results on the mound.

[bird]

 

”Plenty of time”? Whaaaaat?

Their first draft was 2017. They essentially lost a development season in 2020, as did all of MLB.

Exactly how long do you think it takes to draft/sign and develop a great pitcher?

I’m far from assured that this front office has pitching locked down but you’ve been pretty unreasonable about their timelines from day one when you complained that they weren’t firing and replacing staff within two months of taking over what was a broken franchise at the time.

Never mind that drafting/signing is not the only way a franchise develops players. The Twins have shown with a myriad of pitchers, both starters and relievers, that they can acquire a veteran from another team (even highly respected ones like the Rays and Dodgers) and actually improve that pitcher’s results on the mound.

 

 

In tepid defense of Mike Sixtel, (coincidentally, I ingested some delicious mushrooms tonight ) I do understand his concern. Given a three year draft and development record, with 2020 being one of them, the amateur scouting people and Falvey passed over pitching in the first round. Mr. Sixtel may eat crow regarding one or more of Enlow, Raya, and Canterino picks, especially if he's open to comparing results team to team.

 

A couple things cross my mind. First, if the goal is to have the equivalence of first round drafts in your rotation? It's possible that Berrios, Pineda, and Maeda will anchor the rotation. These guys WERE first-rounders or the IFA equivalent. And the reality is that those two guys came to us for less cost and after much uncertainty was reduced. Pitching occupies its own special category when it comes to risk and uncertainty, right?

 

I don't know what a 30-team study will reveal, but we have a hint when we look at FanGraph's grades for CWS, CLE, and MIN. That's seven pitching prospects awarded a 45FV grade or better ( 3 of 7 are Twins), and all but one were drafted AFTER the first 20 overall selections, with the "outlier", Crochet, a projected reliever, picked 11th overall in his year. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the idea that it's essential to pick pitching early on in the draft.

 

Very few clubs are going to have a top 10 Power Ranking AND a top 10 prospect pipeline entering the 2021 season. The Twins will be one of them, it appears. This gives me hope that, if they have surplus positional talent, which we can envision certainly, that Falvey's pro scouts will continue to do well on the trade front more often than not. The recent evidence is promising: Maeda, Duran, Alcala, Celestino, Vallimont, Smeltzer, etc.

 

 

 

 

[Dman]

 

In tepid defense of Mike Sixtel, (coincidentally, I ingested some delicious mushrooms tonight ) I do understand his concern. Given a three year draft and development record, with 2020 being one of them, the amateur scouting people and Falvey passed over pitching in the first round. Mr. Sixtel may eat crow regarding one or more of Enlow, Raya, and Canterino picks, especially if he's open to comparing results team to team.

 

A couple things cross my mind. First, if the goal is to have the equivalence of first round drafts in your rotation? It's possible that Berrios, Pineda, and Maeda will anchor the rotation. These guys WERE first-rounders or the IFA equivalent. And the reality is that those two guys came to us for less cost and after much uncertainty was reduced. Pitching occupies its own special category when it comes to risk and uncertainty, right?

 

I don't know what a 30-team study will reveal, but we have a hint when we look at FanGraph's grades for CWS, CLE, and MIN. That's seven pitching prospects awarded a 45FV grade or better ( 3 of 7 are Twins), and all but one were drafted AFTER the first 20 overall selections, with the "outlier", Crochet, a projected reliever, picked 11th overall in his year. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the idea that it's essential to pick pitching early on in the draft.

 

Very few clubs are going to have a top 10 Power Ranking AND a top 10 prospect pipeline entering the 2021 season. The Twins will be one of them, it appears. This gives me hope that, if they have surplus positional talent, which we can envision certainly, that Falvey's pro scouts will continue to do well on the trade front more often than not. The recent evidence is promising: Maeda, Duran, Alcala, Celestino, Vallimont, Smeltzer, etc.

 

In 2018 the Royals took 3 pitchers in the 1st round,  Brady Singer, Jackson Kowar and Daniel Lynch.  They also Drafted Asa Lacy in the first round in 2020.  Singer is no longer a prospect as he pitched enough at the MLB level to no longer be considered a prospect. So KC got a pitcher to MLB in two years from drafting him.  That is pretty good but here is the rub the Twins took a guy who wasn't even drafted in 2017 and he pitched in MLB in 2019 so it only took Randy Dobnak two years to make it as well.  So who did the better job of development? Singers ERA in 2020 4.06.  Dobnaks ERA in 2020 4.05.  Granted Singers K9 is much better than Dobnaks and his WHIP slightly better as well and he is likely to be the better pitcher of the two but what it does show is that good pitchers can be found almost anywhere from the first round to not even being picked.  I personally think it shows that development is the true key to unlocking pitching success.

 

Am I saying don't take pitchers in the 1st round and rely on undrafted pitchers, heck no.  In Lynch, Kowar, and Lacy I think the Royals are on the cusp of having a young, tough, legitimate rotation.  I think those first round picks are going to develop quickly and have good stuff to boot. But here's the rub Cleveland got Bieber in the 4th round in 2017 and he was the best pitcher in the American league last year.  You don't HAVE to grab pitchers in the first round to find success.

 

If the Twins get Sands and Winder to MLB this coming year that 2018 draft with Larnach and Jeffers at the top starts to look pretty special.  It is too early to bank on that happening but you can see what the FO is thinking.  Go with the fairly sure thing in predicting offense early in the draft then take your cracks at pitching which is much more volatile and can be found in the later rounds and developed.  To me that seems to be their plan.  I still think that they should take pitching early and late some years because you can trade good pitching for anything you want in baseball.  If you can identify good pitchers you should take them because every team is looking for pitching and lot's of teams have an excess of other players.

 

In conclusion I don't think there is a one size fits all strategy, but right now I trust this FO.  I think the decisions they make are based on good data and good strategies.  Certainly I like to quibble but I don't have all the data that they have.  Personally I don't think we have too much to complain about.  They are not perfect but I think they as good as and or better than most.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

In tepid defense of Mike Sixtel, (coincidentally, I ingested some delicious mushrooms tonight ) I do understand his concern. Given a three year draft and development record, with 2020 being one of them, the amateur scouting people and Falvey passed over pitching in the first round. Mr. Sixtel may eat crow regarding one or more of Enlow, Raya, and Canterino picks, especially if he's open to comparing results team to team.

 

A couple things cross my mind. First, if the goal is to have the equivalence of first round drafts in your rotation? It's possible that Berrios, Pineda, and Maeda will anchor the rotation. These guys WERE first-rounders or the IFA equivalent. And the reality is that those two guys came to us for less cost and after much uncertainty was reduced. Pitching occupies its own special category when it comes to risk and uncertainty, right?

 

I don't know what a 30-team study will reveal, but we have a hint when we look at FanGraph's grades for CWS, CLE, and MIN. That's seven pitching prospects awarded a 45FV grade or better ( 3 of 7 are Twins), and all but one were drafted AFTER the first 20 overall selections, with the "outlier", Crochet, a projected reliever, picked 11th overall in his year. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the idea that it's essential to pick pitching early on in the draft.

 

Very few clubs are going to have a top 10 Power Ranking AND a top 10 prospect pipeline entering the 2021 season. The Twins will be one of them, it appears. This gives me hope that, if they have surplus positional talent, which we can envision certainly, that Falvey's pro scouts will continue to do well on the trade front more often than not. The recent evidence is promising: Maeda, Duran, Alcala, Celestino, Vallimont, Smeltzer, etc.

I also understand the concern but any evaluation of the front office is judging the race after the first or second lap. 

 

The reality is that no great pitchers have yet to emerge from the first three rounds of the 2017 or 2018 drafts. Sure, Singer looked promising but his debut was hardly breath-taking. The Angels have a guy who looks passable but little more. Neither were ranked higher than 50-ish on any major prospect ranking scale at any time.

 

Again, my point isn't to state definitively that the Twins have mastered development of pitchers, it's to call into question Mike's statement that boils down to "if they're good at developing pitchers, they should have developed a great one by now".

 

Because, since Falvine took office, literally zero of 30 teams have drafted and developed a "great" pitcher out of the first three rounds of the draft. And that's talking solely about the draft and not even international signings, which have a much longer timeline that often cannot be judged in six years, much less three or four.