Minnesota Twins 2nd Round Pick RHP Ryan Eades

[big dog]

Eades is a junior who uses Boras, correct? I hope the Twins can sign him. My guess is they did their due diligence on this. Hopefully we'll get to watch him in the CWS.

[Celebrity Weddings!]

And didn't Law have him in the 20s at some point?

 

This is about as sure sign as any that there's upside there. Law just plain doesn't care about back of the rotation starters.

[cmb0252]

This is about as sure sign as any that there's upside there. Law just plain doesn't care about back of the rotation starters.

 

He had Eades as high as #15 I believe at one point.

[boylan]

I've seen this numerous times already in the discussion about Eades. 77 strikeouts in 96 innings. He's not the top flamethrower in the draft obviously, but can't miss bats? That's 7.2 k/9 which seems like a solid number to me.

 

I think it's just that one guy over and over. Appel has 130K's/110ip as a reference. He's not going to strike out 3000 in the majors but he's not a soft throwing groundball pitcher. The scouting video I've seen is crap but from what I can tell he has a sinking fastball and a 12-6 curve that's quite decent. If he can get his circle change working he'll have a lot of the same look across three pitches. It works. Supposedly his fastball has little lateral movement but I can't tell from the tape I've seen.

 

I think Law's critique of his motion is suspect. I think it's pretty decent on the available tape - seen worse in the majors that's for sure. No one else echos Law's complaints.

 

I'm not all that thrilled with the pick but it's probably just the strength of draft issue coming into play.

[old nurse]

Eades had a low K rate but also a fairly low ERA. The use of aluminum bats in college makes any contact with the ball that much more of an adventure. His low ERA then would hint that although they make contact, it is not very good contact. With wood bats he might stand a better chance. Greg Maddux (a second round draft pick) had a k/9 of 6.1.

 

I do not know if Eades will develop the nasty pitches that Maddux had. I merely want to float the idea that given the low K rate his pitches must be doing something right to avoid a high ERA

[lightfoot789]

Great Pick!! This kid was the "Pitcher of the Year" in the Summer League that is considered the best in baseball. A 0.83 ERA in any league is excellent, but in the Cape Cod is exceptional. I defer to the experts. The Twins brass was lights out in last years draft in terms of pitchers. I beleive they might know more than us in terms of potential. PITCHER OF THE YEAR people. PITCHER OF THE YEAR -- Oh yea - he also went 8-1 while pitching for argueably the best team in college baseball in the best conference. Great Pick

[ThePuck]

Great Pick!! This kid was the "Pitcher of the Year" in the Summer League that is considered the best in baseball. A 0.83 ERA in any league is excellent, but in the Cape Cod is exceptional. I defer to the experts. The Twins brass was lights out in last years draft in terms of pitchers. I beleive they might know more than us in terms of potential. PITCHER OF THE YEAR people. PITCHER OF THE YEAR -- Oh yea - he also went 8-1 while pitching for argueably the best team in college baseball in the best conference. Great Pick

 

Cape Cod Pitcher of the Year in 2011, right...

 

and I'm not convinced the SEC is better than the ACC or Pac-12 in baseball...not that it really matters when it comes to drafting a single player from a conference.

[raindog]

democrats are in power so unicorns are no longer draftable because they're on the endangered species list.

....

[Pierre K.]

"I beleive they might know more than us in terms of potential."

 

At dang near 100 losses per year, what fact reinforces this statement?

[launchingthrees]

Yeah, Eades is more demonstrative of their philosophy than Stewart, Meyer, May, Berrios, Bard, Chargois, Joneses, Melotolakis (sp?).

 

Bolded will not be productive mlb starters and saying they miss bats as starters is a stretch.

[Brock Beauchamp]

"I beleive they might know more than us in terms of potential."

 

At dang near 100 losses per year, what fact reinforces this statement?

 

Given free rein, most of this board would struggle to make a MLB franchise look better than the 63 Mets, much less the 2012 Twins.

 

Let's just go ahead and kill the notion that anyone here is smarter than the average General Manager in MLB. These are highly trained, competent individuals... Who mostly look bad because they are competing against more highly trained, more competent individuals.

[lightfoot789]

Let's just go ahead and kill the notion that anyone here is smarter than the average General Manager in MLB. These are highly trained, competent individuals... Who mostly look bad because they are competing against more highly trained, more competent individuals.

 

I would say that most viewers on this site were pleased with last years draft and the shape of the minor league system. That being said - maybe Ryan and his Scouts do know talent and how to build a franchise from the draft. The Twins problem for the past 30 years is that you can't get Top free agents to come here. Thus the need for a great farm system (which we have) - Have some faith in that portion of the organization at least. Great Draft in my eyes thus far. 1 Potential Ace and some quality upside pieces to fill in the roster down the line.

[PseudoSABR]

Bolded will not be productive mlb starters and saying they miss bats as starters is a stretch.

Four for seven ain't bad, says someone slimmer than meatloaf.

[launchingthrees]

Four for seven ain't bad, says someone slimmer than meatloaf.

 

2 of 5 best case scenario.

[launchingthrees]

.

 

Let's just go ahead and kill the notion that anyone here is smarter than the average General Manager in MLB. These are highly trained, competent individuals... Who mostly look bad because they are competing against more highly trained, more competent individuals.

 

You realize this is the same team signed that correia and Pelfrey this offseason after claiming the priority was starting pitching right? The FO is a laughingstock.

[DaveW]

This thread makes me me miss BYTO

[DaveW]

You realize this is the same team signed that correia and Pelfrey this offseason after claiming the priority was starting pitching right? The FO is a laughingstock.

 

It doesn't take a detective to realize Ryan and Co realized that 2013 was going to be a rebuilding year, that is exactly why they brought in "stop gaps" for the rotation such as Correia and Pelfrey who would be around 1 (or 2) years tops. I am pretty confident the Twins make a splash in 2014. The Twins only have 46 mil committed to 2014 thus far (51 mil once arb is figured out) which means they will have up to 45-55 mil to spend this upcoming off-season. That is a lot of coin, esp when you realize pitchers like Gibson, Meyer will all be close, and Arcia and others should be ready as well. 2015 (once Sano, Rosario, Buxton? May, Meyer and more are ready the Twins only have 28 mil committed (prob 35 mil with arb)

 

THAT is how you build a winner, just see the Texas Rangers model (where they had a lot of good young cheap players and then supplemented that with a couple of good free agent signings in Beltre and Darvish. The Twins could literally do the exact same thing.

[TheLeviathan]

I've always thought hemming and hawing over the MLB draft is a bit silly. Unless you're talking about a college player you've seen extensively, most everyone here is gleaning all their information second or third-hand at best. It's exciting to project and debate, but I think it's really strange to start penciling anyone in as a starter or wiping them out as a wasted pick.

 

It's just impossible to know at this point.

[bird]

Eades doesn't strike anyone out and is at best a marginal third rounder. The next 9 guys taken are preferable options. No idea what is going on with this team. Trevor Williams, Cody Reed, Blake Taylor, and Tom Windle will be better than Eades.

 

You may be right, Shane, but apparently a whole roomfull of pro scouts disagrees with you. It would be fun to put together a contest: everyone pick 3 prospects the Twins passed on that you predict will be better than the guy they took. And then review those predictions at the end of each season. The winner, after 5 years, gets to personally hand the pink slip to Ryan. And immediately take over.

[DaveW]

I've always thought hemming and hawing over the MLB draft is a bit silly. Unless you're talking about a college player you've seen extensively, most everyone here is gleaning all their information second or third-hand at best. It's exciting to project and debate, but I think it's really strange to start penciling anyone in as a starter or wiping them out as a wasted pick.

 

It's just impossible to know at this point.

 

Yup! I think only the first round can have a bunch of "scrutiny" (see: Ben Revere pick) sometimes the 2nd round, but anything past that, anyone pretending they have some exclusive thoughts on these players besides the scouting reports online are just kidding themselves.

[kab21]

I've always thought hemming and hawing over the MLB draft is a bit silly. Unless you're talking about a college player you've seen extensively, most everyone here is gleaning all their information second or third-hand at best. It's exciting to project and debate, but I think it's really strange to start penciling anyone in as a starter or wiping them out as a wasted pick.

 

It's just impossible to know at this point.

 

It's clearly better to not have opinions. I really don't have a problem with this draft. Not thrilled with Turner but he's still a C+/B- pick.

[bird]

"I beleive they might know more than us in terms of potential."

 

At dang near 100 losses per year, what fact reinforces this statement?

 

Of course. What were we thinking? Pierre, you're a voice of reason. Impeccable logic, sir.

[bird]

You realize this is the same team signed that correia and Pelfrey this offseason after claiming the priority was starting pitching right? The FO is a laughingstock.

 

I'm kinda curious as to what YOU would have done much differently. Perhaps you and Pierre could put your heads together and come up with a better blueprint for next year.

 

Laughingstock indeed.

[TheLeviathan]

It's clearly better to not have opinions. I really don't have a problem with this draft. Not thrilled with Turner but he's still a C+/B- pick.

 

You misunderstand. Having an opinion - "projecting and debating" - about the player profile is one thing. Stating with any certainty that anything is a certainly good or certainly bad pick is where I get annoyed. Many of these kids don't even have film or have a grand total of 30 seconds of it online. Let's not pretend any of us are gurus.

 

I think the interesting thing is to talk about how they project. What direction the team's scouting appears to be headed. Those sorts of things. But this thread is filled with people basically writing guys off. It's just impossible to know at this point.

[Oxtung]

Given free rein, most of this board would struggle to make a MLB franchise look better than the 63 Mets, much less the 2012 Twins.

 

Let's just go ahead and kill the notion that anyone here is smarter than the average General Manager in MLB. These are highly trained, competent individuals... Who mostly look bad because they are competing against more highly trained, more competent individuals.

 

Just to nitpick, because that's what I do, I think there are at least a few people on this board that are probably smarter than most of the front office. That doesn't mean we would run the organization better though.

[Brock Beauchamp]

2 of 5 best case scenario.

 

It must be nice going through life with such certainty about everything that's going to happen.

[Brock Beauchamp]

You misunderstand. Having an opinion - "projecting and debating" - about the player profile is one thing. Stating with any certainty that anything is a certainly good or certainly bad pick is where I get annoyed. Many of these kids don't even have film or have a grand total of 30 seconds of it online. Let's not pretend any of us are gurus.

 

That's just it; at some point, everyone here needs to admit that when it comes to the MLB draft, we're talking out of our asses regarding virtually any player out of the top ten talent pool.

 

Who here has seen Eades throw a baseball in anger more than ten time total? If someone has, good for them. Now remember how much we preach SSS. Did you see more than one entire start? Well, Johan Santana had pretty bad days in his prime so you can't say much of anything with any kind of certainty after seeing just one start. So did you see two starts? Now we're getting somewhere but still not perfect.

 

And the chances that anyone here has seen more than three full starts from a guy like Eades is zero percent.

 

So we have to rely on scouts and experts, who probably haven't seen these guys that much, either. They're basing their information off each other and the limited exposure they have to each player (they're only human, they can't watch everyone).

 

The only truly qualified people in this situation are the MLB franchises. They have teams of scouts, roving each area and watching the guys they want multiple times to get a feel for them.

 

It's just fine to say "I don't like that pick for reasons A and B". Hey, we're all entitled to an opinion and want to see certain strategies followed in the draft. What's foolish is to say "this was a bad pick because this player isn't blah blah blah" when nobody has even seen him play.

 

That just makes you look very foolish in the eyes of those who have been following the draft for 10+ years. We've seen far too many rodeos to make any half-cocked, uninformed statements like that because we just don't know enough to be certain of anything.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Just to nitpick, because that's what I do, I think there are at least a few people on this board that are probably smarter than most of the front office. That doesn't mean we would run the organization better though.

 

I wouldn't rule that out but there are far more moving parts in a franchise than just saying "I want Player A" and going to get him.

 

Even the best armchair analysts on this board have a pretty miserable track record when it comes to being right (and the truly smart ones are the first to admit it).

[snepp]

(and the truly smart ones are the first to admit it).

 

I will do no such thing.

[TheLeviathan]

Even the best armchair analysts on this board have a pretty miserable track record when it comes to being right (and the truly smart ones are the first to admit it).

 

Even some of the best general managers, scouting departments, and managers have droughts of miserable decision-making. The very idea that a bunch of guys that haven't seen 1% of the dudes who will be drafted in anything but grainy videos should immediately temper any conviction of future predictions.

 

I'm all about talking on how a 6'10 behemoth with a fastball cna help improve his game, or how his peripherals might transfer to the pro game. What I don't understand is declaring "X was a bad pick because he won't be a major leaguer" - well, the vast majority of these guys won't be, but don't pretend your insights are so superior as to make that declaration without some serious doubts.