Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Brock Beauchamp

Site Manager
  • Posts

    32,401
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    328

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Brock Beauchamp

  1. And while I know some people love the idea of a two-way player, I simply don't know if that's possible in the modern game. There is so much specialization and the competition level is so high that I think you may end up with a guy who's mediocre at everything where he could be truly special at one or the other.
  2. Yeesh. That was some bad advice from him agent. As predicted, McKay fell to the Rays and there's no way he's getting 1-1 money at 1-4, where the pool is a full $2.5m lower.
  3. Buxton and Gordon have been their only good first round picks in the past several years. And breaking down the draft into individual positions and players starts to get murky. We're literally dealing with two similar data points here, one of which doesn't even play the same position. Maybe it wasn't that they Twins liked Lewis so much, maybe it was because they didn't like McKay at all and refused to draft a pitcher at 1-1. That throws the entire analysis on its head. Any comparison to Berrios and Leach is eye-roll worthy on par with the Nishioka/Park comparsions. Berrios is a short latin player. Leach is a frickin' huge Canadian. They throw with the same hand so they have that in common.
  4. It's pretty hard to compare individual players at different positions. For all we know, Epstein would have taken Lewis or somebody completely off everyone's radar at the 1-1 slot.
  5. So it's the same guys who failed in the past with one approach and now take a different approach but are still the same guys so are automatically doomed to failure because they failed in the past with a different strategy under different leadership. This is my problem with these arguments. New leadership comes to the organization, keeps some of the old staff on, use a different draft strategy, but they still have past failures hang over their head because they're "the same guys".
  6. The only thing that impacts attendance is prolonged winning. Even the promotion of a Jose Berrios or Byron Buxton or Miguel Sano only nudges attendance upward for a brief period of time.
  7. Sure, the former regime missed on some really ugly-looking pitching drafts a few years back. And they didn't take pitching this year, but that's still a problem in the eyes of many. In my opinion, emulating an Epstein approach is rarely a bad strategy. Isn't that what we screamed for year after year after year under Ryan? But then the Twins do just that and people still scream about it. I disagree that Rooker will be 25 when he reaches Minnesota. Sure, it's possible, but he profiles as a guy who could be here next year as a 23 year old. For him to reach Minnesota has a 25 year old, he'd have to spend nearly 2.5 seasons in the minor leagues. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not if the Twins got the pick right.
  8. Yeah, anything lower than 20 and you're meddling in potential second round guys anyway. The lines blur after pick 15 or 20, depending who you ask.
  9. I think the Pohlads have virtually zero input in the draft. Why would they? That's a Steinbrenner move and the Pohlads have never been those types of owners.
  10. And therein lays my problem with the draft conversation every year. We all pick our guys and get disappointed when they're not chosen by the Twins. But, come on, this is the sixth draft that Twins Daily has recorded. I encourage everyone who participated in previous draft threads to go back and read their comments. It will instill some humility in your certainty over whether this draft was good or bad.
  11. I don't know if that's true at all. I heard several scouts say Gordon "might stick at short". Some were higher on him than that. Today, it's pretty apparent he will stick at short. It's hard to predict where an 18 year old kid will be as a 24 year old because if he's 6'4", 220 lbs, it's going to be damned hard to "stick at short".
  12. I double checked this to be sure. I'm slightly off. The Cubs took a pitcher in the supplemental round a few years back, which is technically the first round. And they seem to draft pitchers about 2/3rd the time in the second round. So, yeah, I was close, just a bit off in the details. No pitchers in the "true" first round, though. And the Cubs picked high from 2011-2015, no lower than ninth overall and as high as second overall.
  13. And isn't his backup position supposed to be CF? Sure, there's a dropoff in value between SS and CF but it's not enormous.
  14. It's also the riskiest pick, by far. Sure, you might get a frontline starter but what's more likely is you get a #3 starter or a reliever or a guy that barely skates into MLB at all due to injury. There's a reason the Cubs deprioritized starting pitching prospects in recent years. I'm still not sold it's the right decision but there's merit to the idea. Since Epstein took over, the Cubs have drafted zero pitchers in the first round and a pitcher about half the time in the second round. Then they pile up arms further down the draft board.
  15. While I would have preferred Greene as well, a draft pick has zero impact on attendance. Any prospect that is highly touted and reaches MLB might nudge attendance upward but not a draft pick.
  16. I was also excited by the pick but it was definitely emotionally-based, Joe being from St Paul and everything.
  17. Yep, the top of the 2001 draft class was damned impressive. It's a bummer what happened to Prior.
  18. Yep. And they were hardcore statheads. That board is where I first learned about sabr and nearly all the posters on the board were deep into the emergent analysis of baseball stats.
  19. You could also say the Reds drafted Greene and the Reds have been a terrible franchise for a few years now. Then I could retort that they hired a new GM a couple of years back and he hasn't had time to mold the franchise. Then we could go in circles over the subject for hours.
  20. BYTO didn't exist in 2001. And, yes, there were loads of fans screaming for either Prior or Tex. I'd say around half the fans on ESPN at the time, most of which later moved to BYTO.
  21. Ah, they're kids. They're literally leaving a million dollars on the table with each lower pick. Plus, there's a pride element to it and maybe he wanted to be drafted by a particular team.
  22. Compared to front offices, yes. I don't have a spreadsheet with Greene's spin rate on it, do you?
  23. All I'm saying is that every single season, people praise/skewer the Twins for their first round pick. And, in the end, we'll know if they were right or wrong. As I mentioned earlier, the Mauer pick was highly controversial and loads of Twins fans screamed at the sky over taking Joe 1-1. And that turned out okay. It's not as if Lewis is a bum. He's a damned fine prep player. In 3-4 years, we'll start to see how this draft shakes out. This is why I don't get riled up about the MLB draft. We know far less about the players than other major sports drafts, the results are far more volatile than other sports drafts, and it takes much longer to see those results.
  24. Who said fans are stupid? I said they know virtually nothing, which is absolutely true.
×
×
  • Create New...