Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Introducing the 2024 Consensus MLB Draft Board


    Jamie Cameron

    For the third consecutive draft cycle, I'm releasing the Consensus MLB Draft Board, combining rankings from as many public boards as we can find to help you navigate the 2024 MLB Draft.

    Image courtesy of Brock Beauchamp

    Twins Video

    Welcome to the 2024 MLB Consensus Draft Board!

    What is the Consensus MLB Draft Board?
    This is the third draft cycle for which I’m co-authoring content, alongside @Jeremy Nygaard, who has probably forgotten more about the draft process than I’ll ever know. When I first started, I found I was craving a tool that cut through some of the noise and variance of different draft rankings and industry boards, so I decided to create a consensus board.

    Following Arif Hasan’s original NFL consensus board format, the premise is simple; the board combines all industry boards I can find into a composite ranking for each player. The final number of ‘input’ boards is impossible to know at this early date, but it will likely be in the 8-12 range by the time we get to July. The rationale is that there’s value in consensus, particularly to more casual fans of the MLB Draft.

    How is the Board Organized?
    It should be relatively easy to orient yourself to the board. For each player, you’ll find their current consensus ranking, position, name, age, height, weight, handedness, and school. Additionally, you’ll find a write-up of 150-200 words per player in the top 50, which I have been working on since February.

    One note regarding rankings on this board: Most industry boards make major updates on a monthly basis, typically toward the end of the month. As such, there’s some ‘lag time’ between other boards you read and those rankings being reflected in the consensus. Simply put, it takes a little time to process major updates, and they usually come in clusters.

    What’s Coming Next?
    One of the biggest advantages of having the board as a page, as opposed to a Google Sheet, is the possibility of real-time updates. Last year, I published three versions of the consensus board. This approach allows daily updates, if and when we want to publish them.

    Early in the draft cycle, you can expect an update every week or two. We’re also thinking through possibilities that would make the write-ups collapsible, and allow us to track movement of players up and down the board, as I did in previous cycles. For now, it’s a simply organized top 50, which you can expect us to expand upon more frequently than in 2023.

    When the board is final, I expect there will be 150-200 write-ups of players and a total of around 300 players listed.

    What You Can Do to Support This Project
    The publication of this board at Twins Daily, Brewer Fanatic, and North Side Baseball is the culmination of a ton of work, with the aim being to create a draft board that casual and hardcore MLB Draft fans can find useful. I’d like to share some public appreciation for Brock Beauchamp, who helps turn ideas into real-life projects at all three of these sites. This wouldn’t be possible without him.

    If you enjoy this resource, I’d appreciate it if you'd consider sharing it, retweeting it, and passing it along to others. In order to grow the board, add features, increase the time I can put into it, and so on, I need to show that folks find it useful. Anything anyone reading this can do to support that, I’ll be truly grateful for.

    There’s much more to come as the draft cycle really gets going. For now, I hope folks enjoy this first top 50. If you have feedback, thoughts, or comments, we’d love to hear them, to help us improve the board.

    View the Draft Board

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Riley Quick

    Fort Myers Mighty Mussels - A, RHP
    In his second professional outing, Quick went three innings. He gave up no runs and no hits. He walked three and had five strikeouts.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Featured Comments

    My question is with 12 of the first 15 picks being hitters it seems the Twins would be in a good spot to have their pick of some really good arms at 21.  However, Since this draft isn't overly deep and it feels like the bats drop off pretty significantly outside the top 10 and then again around the top 60 or so will the Twins focus on hitters early in the draft and hope to find pitchers who have fallen for various reasons?  

    They have two picks in both the 1st and second rounds so it seems like Hitter\pitcher in each round keeping it balanced makes sense and I hope they do that.  Still I like how your consensus board worked out for them as I think pitcher at 21 will be the best value, but who knows who might fall as a hitter that makes it a tougher choice.  Just curious to know what you think their strategy might be or what yours would be.

    54 minutes ago, pierre75275 said:

    What picks do the Twins have in the top 150 players?

    Can that be added to the article?

    21, 33, 60, 69, 96 in the top 100. There'll be a ton of content that covers the draft bonus pools, picks Twins have etc. down the road. Also, if you click into the board, Brock added the team logo in each slot where the Twins pick (you should see a little TC next to pick 21, for example).

    14 minutes ago, Dman said:

    My question is with 12 of the 15 picks being hitters it seems the Twins would be in a good spot to have their pick of some really good arms at 21.  However, Since this draft isn't overly deep and it feels like the bats drop off pretty significantly outside the top 10 and then again around the top 60 or so will the Twins focus on hitters early in the draft and hope to find pitchers who have fallen for various reasons?  

    They have two picks in both the 1st and second rounds so it seems like Hitter\pitcher in each round keeping it balanced makes sense and I hope they do that.  Still I like how your consensus board worked out for them as I think pitcher at 21 will be the best value, but who knows who might fall as a hitter that makes it a tougher choice.  Just curious to know what you think their strategy might be or what yours would be.

    Thanks for reading and commenting, as always, I appreciate it.

    So, I'd tweak your language slightly. This impact is light on impact talent, especially at the top, but I think the college position player demo is really solid, especially through about 60 picks. College pitching is trending towards being stronger than last season also (which is a low bar to clear).

    It's really too early to say on strategy. I think this FO has shown that they believe they can find arms with unique traits later in the draft and trust their development staff to go to work (Ober, Varland etc are good examples). If I were guessing today, I'd think college hitter first as that's the strength of the first round, There is ample time for things to change thought, and this initial top 50 is still a little noisy with folks updating their draft boards around now (I'd expect a pretty decent shake up in the next two weeks throughout the top 50 or so picks.).

    Thanks, great job Jamie, This year's draft seems pretty weak compared to the last 2.

    We need more catching depth, I've been disappointed not drafting any decent defensive catching prospects in the past but we have a couple of good shots this year. MLB has Caleb Lomavita at 21 (Twins slot) and Jacob Covart you have listed at 38 while MLB has him at 80, he could be available when Twins draft 60.  Covart is maybe the better defensive catcher although his arm isn't as strong as Lomavita's, he still has a very good pop time.

    24 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

    Thanks, great job Jamie, This year's draft seems pretty weak compared to the last 2.

    We need more catching depth, I've been disappointed not drafting any decent defensive catching prospects in the past but we have a couple of good shots this year. MLB has Caleb Lomavita at 21 (Twins slot) and Jacob Covart you have listed at 38 while MLB has him at 80, he could be available when Twins draft 60.  Covart is maybe the better defensive catcher although his arm isn't as strong as Lomavita's, he still has a very good pop time.

    Much better class of college catchers this year. I think last I counted I have 7 legit catcher profiles in the current top 100 (last year it was 3). I like Lomavita and Cozart both, and Walker Janek is another guy to look out for in the 50-75 range currently.

    14 minutes ago, Doctor Gast said:

    Thanks, great job Jamie, This year's draft seems pretty weak compared to the last 2.

    We need more catching depth, I've been disappointed not drafting any decent defensive catching prospects in the past but we have a couple of good shots this year. MLB has Caleb Lomavita at 21 (Twins slot) and Jacob Covart you have listed at 38 while MLB has him at 80, he could be available when Twins draft 60.  Covart is maybe the better defensive catcher although his arm isn't as strong as Lomavita's, he still has a very good pop time.

    I personally don't think Cozart makes it much past their supplemental pick.  He's a solid overall catcher with a good arm, and is having a good season at the plate so far.  I think I might be inclined to pick him ahead of Lomavita right now

    I like the athleticism in Lomavita's profile, giving him maybe the highest upside defensively, but his approach at the plate is very aggressive and that scares me a bit.  Really good power though, just think he might be all power without much hit and almost no walks in professional ball.

    Malcolm Moore is probably in that late first round to supplemental range too, and his bat is heating up after a slow start.

    There is a lot more depth in the college catching ranks this year.  For potential second round picks I think Walker Janek is a name to watch.  I also think Derek Bender could be a sort of Jeffers-like pick for the bat if they really believe he can be coached on the defensive side.  Not sure how realistic that would be, his defense might be worse than Jeffer's was at the time of draft, I'm not really sure, just getting that from scouting reports.

    1 hour ago, Jamie Cameron said:

    So, I'd tweak your language slightly. This impact is light on impact talent, especially at the top, but I think the college position player demo is really solid, especially through about 60 picks. College pitching is trending towards being stronger than last season also (which is a low bar to clear).

    Do you think the top end talent on the College side really ends up being much worse than last year?

    Seems like Condon and Bazzana compare well against Langford and Crews, maybe a bit less defensive value?

    And I've seen knowledgeable people put Burns and Smith in a similar tier to Skenes.

    Obviously there is no Jenkins or Max Clark, and the high school class sounds like it might be historically bad overall. 

    Seems like the college class could more or less match last year's in terms of talent and depth though, no?

    12 minutes ago, 2wins87 said:

    Do you think the top end talent on the College side really ends up being much worse than last year?

    Seems like Condon and Bazzana compare well against Langford and Crews, maybe a bit less defensive value?

    And I've seen knowledgeable people put Burns and Smith in a similar tier to Skenes.

    Obviously there is no Jenkins or Max Clark, and the high school class sounds like it might be historically bad overall. 

    Seems like the college class could more or less match last year's in terms of talent and depth though, no?

    I think you're right overall... just, to call this draft eligible HS class "historically bad" is... well, not gonna lie, that's unfair to them and all the work they put in as well as the sacrifices they make.  Seems to me that there was SOOO much hype surrounding last year's crop of HS kids (much of it deserved), that the kids coming up this year are compared unfavorably as a result.

    Not saying your "wrong" per se, just my two cents.

    Also... if you get the chance to watch Condon play this season, do so.  He's absolutely CRUSHING the ball, and playing some solid defense to boot.

    image.png.792e0d2d230420bfe0ab65c657ce35dc.png

    9 minutes ago, MN_ExPat said:

    I think you're right overall... just, to call this draft eligible HS class "historically bad" is... well, not gonna lie, that's unfair to them and all the work they put in as well as the sacrifices they make.  Seems to me that there was SOOO much hype surrounding last year's crop of HS kids (much of it deserved), that the kids coming up this year are compared unfavorably as a result.

    Not saying your "wrong" per se, just my two cents.

    Also... if you get the chance to watch Condon play this season, do so.  He's absolutely CRUSHING the ball, and playing some solid defense to boot.

    image.png.792e0d2d230420bfe0ab65c657ce35dc.png

    I wasn't intending to impugn the players.  There are going to be some really good players drafted out of the high school class.

    That is just what I've been seeing about the class as a whole, e.g. https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/2024-mlb-draft-class-could-be-among-weakest-ever-for-high-schoolers/

    2 hours ago, USAFChief said:

    Nitpic: the player profile listing name, age, ht/wt, school, Etc often doesn’t match the narrative. For example, player 1, Bazzana, lists him at 5'9", 170. Start reading and he's grown to 6'0" 200.

    Thanks for this. I'll work on getting this cleaned up on an update, hopefully overnight. Appreciate the feedback

    2 hours ago, 2wins87 said:

    Do you think the top end talent on the College side really ends up being much worse than last year?

    Seems like Condon and Bazzana compare well against Langford and Crews, maybe a bit less defensive value?

    And I've seen knowledgeable people put Burns and Smith in a similar tier to Skenes.

    Obviously there is no Jenkins or Max Clark, and the high school class sounds like it might be historically bad overall. 

    Seems like the college class could more or less match last year's in terms of talent and depth though, no?

    It's hard to compare everyone as we don't have a full body of work from anyone in this class, however, imo, no one in this years' class is cracking the top 5 last year. Crews and Langford are/were a cut above Bazzana and Condon. Might we feel differently in July? Possibly but I doubt it. Same goes for Skenes versus Burns and Smith. The two from this years' class have amazing stuff, but as a draft prospect, Skenes was above both imo.

    Let's revisit this in July, though.

    3 hours ago, 2wins87 said:

    I personally don't think Cozart makes it much past their supplemental pick.  He's a solid overall catcher with a good arm, and is having a good season at the plate so far.  I think I might be inclined to pick him ahead of Lomavita right now

    I like the athleticism in Lomavita's profile, giving him maybe the highest upside defensively, but his approach at the plate is very aggressive and that scares me a bit.  Really good power though, just think he might be all power without much hit and almost no walks in professional ball.

    Malcolm Moore is probably in that late first round to supplemental range too, and his bat is heating up after a slow start.

    There is a lot more depth in the college catching ranks this year.  For potential second round picks I think Walker Janek is a name to watch.  I also think Derek Bender could be a sort of Jeffers-like pick for the bat if they really believe he can be coached on the defensive side.  Not sure how realistic that would be, his defense might be worse than Jeffer's was at the time of draft, I'm not really sure, just getting that from scouting reports.

    I lean towards Covart cause I like his LH bat. It'll be interesting how things'll shake out. Unfortunately, IMO the Twins are more drawn to someone like Derek Bender as a catching prospect than the better defensive ones.

    18 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

    Comparing any class to last year's is fool's gold. It was truly epic at the top.

    I certainly thought this entering the season.

    The season Condon is having is truly epic too though.  A third of the way through the season he's slugging 1.185 and is on pace to crush the D1 HR record.

    I know the competition level in college can vary a lot from year to year, and you can't compare Condon and Langford without a lot of scouting looks at both.

    But it still has me wondering if the difference is going to be smaller than everyone assumed.

    On 4/1/2024 at 11:49 AM, 2wins87 said:

    I wasn't intending to impugn the players.  There are going to be some really good players drafted out of the high school class.

    That is just what I've been seeing about the class as a whole, e.g. https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/2024-mlb-draft-class-could-be-among-weakest-ever-for-high-schoolers/

    Apologies if I made it seem like I thought you were, totally not my intent.



    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...