Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

markos

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,430

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by markos

  1. markos
    This is a really good sign. I can't find the study right now, but someone went through all college hitters drafted in top of the first round over the past ten years or so. Strikeout-to-walk ratio is as good as you can get for a single, simple predictor. 1:1 or better, and they hit in the majors. Worse than that, and they were busts.
  2. markos
    I wish I had more time to write out my thoughts about an ideal front office (though for the most part would just be a re-iteration of what has already been said by other), but these two points sum up most of my thoughts: 1) I want to see a plan in action. Frankly, I don't necessarily care what the plan is, and I don't need to have it stated explicitly. But I just want to see the moves made at all levels (drafting, player development, trading, signings, etc) reflect a coherent strategy for the team. Again, I don't really care about the details too much - there are a lot of different ways to put together a winning team. 2) I want to see them exploring methods for gaining a competitive advantage. Yes, I definitely want to see them improve their analytics department, but in many ways that was the last war. I don't know what the next frontier is, but maybe it is something with player health, or minor league development strategies, or something else no one has even thought about yet. But I want the Twins to be the team that finds a next frontier and has other organizations trying to catch up to them, rather than the other way around.
  3. markos
    Dozier wasn't quite at Revere's elite contact level in the minors, but he was still very good: K% of only 11.4% with a walk rate of 9.5%. That gave him plenty of room to sacrifice contact for power and still be productive.
  4. markos
    I am starting to think that there is a specific player development problem in the Twins organization. I need some more time to flesh out this idea fully, so it may be incomplete and/or incorrect, but hear me out: There has been a disturbing pattern on the position player side, and it has to do with discipline and approach. In particular, many of the young guys brought up in the past 3 seasons have had the same general profile: aggressive free-swingers who don't make enough contact, and therefore don't walk enough and strikeout too much. Rosario, Santana, Vargas, Arcia, and Buxton to a varying extents all have this profile. Hicks and Sano aren't free-swingers, but they both have contact issues. I don't know if this approach is specific developed in the minors, or if it is just how these players play. But it has a few major drawbacks: 1) It works in the minors. Pitchers have worse stuff, and much worse control/command, so it is easier to have success with a free-swinging, aggressive approach. Similarly, they can get walks just by being passive. 2) It might work in the majors for a while. Rosario, Santana, Vargas and Arcia have all had stretches of really good hitting. But as big league pitchers adjust to them (or their luck changes), it is hard to maintain success without a solid plate-discipline foundation. So you end up with young hitters that are achieving "success" in the minors, but aren't able to translate their skills into (sustainable) success in the majors. I think there is a disconnect there, and I think it might even point to a fundamental issue with the Twins player development.
  5. markos
    In addition to talking to teams, the BA and MLB.com guys (and Law, too) actually go out and scout a lot of the top players. They can see what teams are also there, and the seniority of the scouts that get sent. It matters if a team's area scout is there, or if it is the scouting director or GM that shows up. That is one of the reasons that there is a lot of talk about Manning to the Twins - I guess Deron Johnson (Twins scouting director) has watched him several times. Yes, there is probably misinformation on both sides (in Moneyball, Billy Beane liked Nick Swisher so much he never saw him live and the A's barely sent any scouts there because they were afraid other teams might notice and pick him before their chance), but I do think many of the mocks are strong attempts to get things right based on legitimate sources of information.
  6. markos
    More or less. From Sickels this past offseason: "Palka was drafted by Arizona in the third round in 2013 out of Georgia Tech. He was traded to the Twins this past winter for catcher Chris Herrmann. Scouts have always respected Palka’s power but worried that his swing would be too long to work properly against advanced pitching. His strikeout rate is indeed high but so far the power has been enough to make him highly productive. This may or may not remain true in Double-A and higher, with production against left-handed pitching a particular question (.962 OPS vs. right-handers last year, but just .637 against lefties). Despite his size he is reasonably mobile, an effective baserunner and an adequate defender at either outfield corner as well as first base. I rather like Palka as a power-oriented role player. Grade C+."
  7. markos
    True. And if done smartly I would support that as well. Importantly, the Cubs have been able to bring in outside talent (of all levels: from elite to role-players; both safe and high-risk) without draining their farm system. Some of that is due to having money to burn, but lots of their moves have been savvy trades that the Twins could easily duplicate. Speaking of the Cubs, if they win the World Series this year I wonder if Jed Hoyer would be interested in being the top dog in another organization instead of playing second-fiddle to Epstein.
  8. markos
    I obviously didn't make myself clear. I'm not advocating to "stay the course" (and frankly I have no idea why you decided you needed to quote a phrase that I never used in my comment). I think this organization absolutely needs a change in philosophy AND execution. And I want a new GM to come from outside the organization. And yes, I would prefer to win sooner than later. But I'm not willing to change course just for the sake of change. I would prefer to bring in a new GM that would: a) methodically clear dreck from the current roster continue to acquire assets to the minor league system c) provide playing time to the young players so they can develop at the big league level d) the team might not be really good until 2018, but set up to continually compete for several years thereafter. I would hate to see a new GM that would: a) use prospects to dump existing salary decimate the farm system to trade for good-but-not-great, expensive veteran talent c) sign free agents during one of the weakest free agent classes in years d) the team might be okay in 2017 and 2018, but then rebuilding will start anew. Basically, I would prefer the Cubs/Astros model rather than the Padres/Diamondbacks model, and honestly would prefer the current mess with the Twins to what the Padres and Diamondbacks have done over the past 18 months. (You apparently feel differently?) If the Twins promoted internally, I would be disappointed, but I would comfort myself that they didn't hire someone like Dave Stewart. I have certain standards for a GM and don't necessarily trust the Pohlads to meet them. I certainly don't think admitting that is the same as arguing that nothing should change and "stay the course" is the best plan.
  9. markos
    I definitely will add my voice to the chorus hoping for an outside candidate for GM. However, I do have my reservations. There is a chance, maybe even a good chance, that after 6 straight mediocre-to-terrible seasons, the new GM will have a win-now (or win-soon) mandate from ownership. We all saw how quickly AJ Preller gutted the Padres farm system. At least someone from within the organization would have (or should have) an appreciation of the time and effort it has taken to rebuild the system over the past several years, and would hopefully be willing to ride it out for a couple more seasons. It would be exceedingly frustrating to see someone new come in and trade away Polanco, Stewart, Gordon, Jay, Gonsalves, Jorge, Wade, et al for quick fixes. And if (or once) that effort fails, to have to watch the rebuilding start anew. Now the right GM hire probably wouldn't make that mistake, but I'm not convinced the Pohlads would make the correct choice. During the interview process, it is certainly possible they would prefer a candidate that promises wins sooner rather than later.
  10. markos
    ... but I agree with basically everything. In order to compete this year, they needed the established players to hold the line, so to speak, and they needed a few of the young guys (Buxton, Sano, Berrios) to turn into superstars. So far neither is happening.
  11. markos
    Steamer and ZiPS both projected Dozier to be a top-10 2B prior to this season. Both expected Plouffe to be just slightly below average 3B. From purely an offensive perspective, Steamer and PECOTA all projected Dozier, Plouffe and Escobar to hit better than they currently are, some of them significantly. Looking at the rest-of-season projections, all three projection systems are still projecting them to hit better over the remainder of the season. Now the projection systems all predicted the Twins to not be very competitive this season, so it is quite likely that Twins fans and management ALSO overvalued them. But I think 'underperforming' is a perfectly apt description for how Dozier, Plouffe and Escobar have performed so far.
  12. markos
    I would add that he also can't seem to figure out when (at at what terms) to offer extensions. Suzuki, Hughes and Dozier were all questionable extensions.
  13. markos
    I think, based on their results from last year, that everyone (ownership, front office, and field staff) all thought they had the core of a contending team in place with Dozier, Plouffe, Mauer, Suzuki, Perkins, Gibson, Santana and Hughes, and that they didn't need to do much other than let the young guys (Sano, Buxton, Rosario, May et al) continue to develop.
  14. markos
    It was originally devised by Bill James to rate pitching performances. You start the game with 50 points, and then points are added or subtracted for the various good (Ks, outs, etc) and bad (hits, homers, walks) events of the game. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_score People have created other flavors, but that is the general concept.
  15. markos
    I used Baseball-reference, though I relied on my own observations about the hard contact. Within the limited scope of a AAA emergency starter making a spot-start, I completely agree that Duffey did the job. However, I took from Nick's article that he thought Duffey showed something more in the start, so much so that he should be considered for a permanent call-up. That was the point I was trying to counter. He might (might!!) be better than Milone going forward, but that's almost entirely based on Duffey's performance from last year, not his 1 strikeout, lots of contact outing from yesterday. And I don't think he showed anything from this start that would justify putting him ahead of Berrios (or even Meyer?) in the promotion queue. (Though I've been a pessimist with Duffey from the beginning, so I'm probably a little biased here.)
  16. markos
    Duffey looked mediocre at best. Yes, the Nationals have a good record, but their overall offense is pretty mediocre - their team OPS+ (91) is actually lower than the Twins (95). And their offense is particularly weak when Harper isn't in the lineup, as was the case on Sunday. Duffey ended up with only 1 strikeout, just 5 swinging strikes, allowed 37% of batters to reach base, and gave up a lot of hard contact.
  17. markos
    I disagree with this on two different levels. First, the biggest question mark is durability - will his arm/shoulder will hold up to throwing 90+ pitches every five days for six month. Second, throwing a single pitch at 94 doesn't necessarily mean that he maintained his velocity. What was his fastball sitting at for that inning? If he was mostly 90-91 with one pitch at 94, that is very different than if he was 92-93. And one pitch doesn't really indicate how well his overall stuff held up. Was his slider still sharp? Was his command good? In the College World Series game he started last year, his velocity was fine throughout the game, but his slider got flat and his command deteriorated. Hitting 94 is better than not hitting 94, so I agree that it is a good thing. But I just don't think that single pitch, in and of itself, is very helpful in determining how Jay is transitioning to the starter role. A little helpful, better than the alternative, but not a huge deal without more context.
  18. markos
    It is hard for me not to get really excited about Stewart's start. Sure, it would have been better if he wasn't repeating the level, but I mostly don't care. The strikeouts are finally starting to show up - it might be a little extreme to say that this changes everything, but it changes everything. Now he just needs to stay healthy. Meyer has teased like this before. I've been hurt too much, so I'm just going to pretend like it isn't happening again...
  19. markos
    I'm not convinced that Park won't continue to be overmatched by better pitching, but he certainly has the power to crush mistakes. Hopefully he will continue to see, and take advantage of, mistakes going forward.
  20. markos
    If he keeps throwing 14K shutouts, that list is awfully short. LaMonte Wade strikeout update: 48 PAs, 4 Ks (8.3%), 6 BBs (12.5%).
  21. markos
    I think there will likely be a good pitcher available at #15. Over the past 5 drafts, that has been where a lot of "talented arm but injury/consistency/etc caused him to slip" pitchers have ended up: At 14: Kolby Allard (2015) Tyler Beede (2014) Jose Fernandez (2011) At 15: Sean Newcomb (2014) Braden Shipley (2013) At 16: James Kaprielian (2015) Touki Toussaint (2014) Lucas Giolito (2012) At 17: Brady Aiken (2015) Brandon Finnegan (2014) At 18: Phil Bickford (2015) Erick Fedde (2014) Sonny Gray (2011)
  22. markos
    What do you think about guys like AJ Puk and Alec Hansen? Both had 1-1 buzz prior to the spring, but both have had terrible and/or injured springs. Keith Law, in his latest top-50, has Puk at 13 and Hansen at 38. Put another way, is TJ + unknown performance (Quantrill) better/worse/same as (maybe) unknown injury + bad performance (Puk & Hansen)? I'm definitely intrigued by both, which means that I'm in the unfortunately position where I'm kind of hoping they perform okay but not great over the next two months so they will be available at #15.
  23. markos
    One thing I've been closely watching is Lamonte Wade's plate discipline. Last year he finished the year with 11 more walks than strikeouts, which is a really strong indicator of future success for later-round draftees. So far this year he is +2. He is a little old for low-A, but one to keep an eye on.
  24. markos
    From the Hardball Time Annual article I mentioned above: Historical WAR value of pre-free agent seasons for BA prospect grades: 80 - 25.0 75 - 18.0 70 - 11.0 65 - 8.5 60 - 4.7 55 - 2.5 50 - 1.1 45 - 0.4
  25. markos
    In the 2016 Hardball Times Annual, Jeff Zimmerman wrote an article that looked at historic scouting grades from the Baseball America top-100 and calculated the subsequent WAR for each specific grade. While everyone can always disagree about how to correctly calculate value, at least this methodology looks at the historical record and comes up with values that are better than arbitrary. And I think it will provide more intuitive results to your work here.
×
×
  • Create New...