bird

This is just me, but like your adamant view on the flexibility and opportunity issue, I'm a rigid believer that there is not an acceptable prospect return for a MLB stalwart (Pressly) when losing him converts a pothole into a sinkhole. Not anticipating being in contention in 2019? I certainly HOPE this FO doesn't think like that, although they gave us reasons to be suspicious with their clumsy sell/buy antics at the deadline two years ago. So yeah, getting what we hope will be a good return will take some of the sting out of this lousy decision, it's far from consoling me in the present. I have a bigger problem with letting all those relief prospects walk without some semblance of a return than I do with not giving them a chance. They may have simply concluded in some cases that they didn't have great futures, I don't know. And in one or two cases, the timing simply boxed them into a corner because of injury complications in particular. In Hindsight, Bard might be the one who got away, although he sports a 0.1 YTD WAR (not the perfect metric, but good enough for this). None of the others, given opportunities with new teams, are lighting it up. Anderson, -0.1 WAR; Chargois, -0.1 WAR; Burdi, -0.5 WAR; Curtiss, 0.0 WAR and DFA'd; Derek Rodriguez, -0.5 WAR; Randy Rosario, -0.2 WAR. My guess is that if this FO picked any of these guys up today as unfamiliar names to test them as bullpen options, we'd hear a lot of screaming about it.

I agree 100% with your first point. But how many drafts have taken place since Falvey took over? How many pitchers from those drafts in all of baseball are now successfully holding down a spot in any team's bullpen? It's not realistic to think Falvey has some secret sauce regarding pitching. Other teams develop pitchers well too. And even if he IS some sort of guru, successful development is ultimately a function of extracting the best from real talent, and we know the raw pitching talent at the upper levels is a bit thin.

Such a terrifically written article, Nick. It's not just the uncertainty each prospective solution presents, although that's a massive challenge in and of itself. I mean, it's really mind-boggling to review that list of off-season of RP options. Still, I wanted them to take their chances on ONE of those options. The larger problem for ALL teams is the extra performance volatility involved with bullpen guys. You point this out with our own examples: the quick fade for Reed, the injury to Hildy, and the mystery that is Romero. Are they going to get upside volatility from someone? Duffey perhaps? Who knows? Maybe they think they know. These big splash disappointments and unexpected downfalls illustrate the need to play a numbers game, and in that regard, I thought Falvey did that fairly well coming into the season. Maybe not. But we shouldn't ignore how often solutions seemingly come out of nowhere, as the emergence of guys like Harper show, or the sudden greater effectiveness of an up and down guy like Liam Hendriks instruct us. I hope this FO feels urgency and desperation. I'm perfectly fine with them scrambling for options with Ian Krol, Cody Allen, Hutchinson, Cano, and the like. However, just as I wanted one big splash FA in the off-season, I want one acquisition of a guy who has a ton of performance inertia going on in 2019. They'll pay too much, but it is what it is.

Yes.

Yes. That's it. They wanted a dude with a 6.50 era in the bullpen. Were afraid Reed might get better. No chance of that with this dude.

Aren't you quibbling a bit? I mean, if the "actual help" arrived 3 years ago, it's a problem? What about the incredible emergence of so many of these guys who don't quite meet your arbitrary standard of having arrived for the first time in the last two years? What's wrong with the "actual help" that HAS arrived? This is a top 5 team. No organization relies solely on its system to fill every hole every year. At least now we can celebrate a FO who will go get us Cruz, Marwin, Cron, etc. Everyone acknowledges that the system hasn't produced an ace. It's quite possible they STILL don't have one in the system.

Cave was a 6th round pick and has experience. He also has better overall tools than Wade, which is probably why Wade lasted until the 9th round. My thinking is that both of these guys have been over-rated at times by many here, but Cave probably is and will be the superior player. Again, my friend, I think you're perpetuating a falsehood when you say other systems are sending "good and great prospects up again" while the Twins are not again. This is nonsense again. The majority of their team WAR this year has been derived from "good and great players" they have sent up. If that weren't true, this team wouldn't have a top 5 power ranking and W-L record. As for this list, we're looking at TD's 31-40 ranked prospects, for heaven's sake. Anyone who is dreaming on this collection becoming important players for the big club needs to recalibrate their thinking. We can lament that the prospects getting their shot this season aren't much to get excited about, and that's true, but look around. Outside of the flurry of Top 10 guys like Tatis and Jimenez, there aren't a ton of clubs bringing up better players than Arraez, Cave, and Astudillo, let alone Littell, Stewart, et al. So let's not pretend there's this big difference going on.

Rocco Baldelli: "He's consistently taking good at bats." This is a phrase he's uttered about any number of his players, but not about Sano. Does Sano simply lack mental discipline? I have trouble believing he just needs an appointment with the eye doctor or a bunch of time hitting off a tee. Gotta believe there's something more to these swoons.

This might actually be good news for Hildenberger and for the team. Even the more acute cases, from what I've read, don't require surgery. His program will involve resting the arm to calm it down, a rehab stint to strengthen that muscle group, and then a throwing program, which puts him on a schedule to return to action by late August. I don't think there's much doubt that this injury was affecting his abiity to snap off his pitches as he did before the breakdown. This is the same injury that shut down Strasberg a couple years ago. All that said, I doubt the team will count on his return in time to be a postseason asset. I sure hope not.

Depends upon how you define it and who you ask. I think the consensus is that our "blue chip" prospects are Lewis, Kirilloff, Graterol, Larnach and maybe Balazovic. Thses are propect who are listed in Top 100 pubs. But it's important to consider who the team may regard as untouchable. This could be a function of a shortage at that position or a function of valuing someone more that the pundits do. My guesses would be that the Twins may consider all of the above as untouchable, plua others like Urbina, Javier, Enlow, Thorpe, Duran. We'll probably never know who they have in this category, if any. Other systems have more "blue chip" prospects, but not many. And perhaps a half dozen teams have depth that matches up fairly well with what the Twins have, and the 2019 Rule 4 draft likely closed the gap with a few teams. Of the top of my head, San Diego has ungodly depth AND some primo talent, as does Atlanta. Tampa, Houston, the Dodgers, and the Yankees have depth. If talent was distributed evenly, no team would have more than 4 players among the top 120 prospects. Given that the Twins have 5 and several teams have even more, we find that there is a huge disparity between the have-nots like Boston, KC, DC, and SF and those at the top, but it's fluid enough so one good (or bad) year of Rule 4, IFA, and trades can turn things upside down.

1. I described Odorizzi as an All Star candidate and a Cy Young candidate. Why? Because he is regarded this season as such. I did not say he came to us as such, did I? But you apparently missed my point, which is that a middling Twins prospect, the type you contend is not worth much, was worth enough to get Odorizzi. The Twins literally have 3 dozen better prospects than Palacios, who was their 4th or 5th best SHORTSTOP prospect. Actually, FanGraphs gives Palacios a 35FV, and I count 41 Twins names on their list with 40FV or higher, and many I didn't list are at Palacios' 35FV. 2. You appear to be out of touch and dismissive with everyone's opinion but your own. Is there any expert opinion on prospects you respect or find credible? I'll give you the opinions of two expert sources. Note that they don't use the word awesome or any other rather juvenile description of these prospects. That was YOUR word. a. FanGraphs, in their Scoreboard report, listed 41 Twins prospects. I listed most of the roughly 35 that earned a 40FV or better. Four of those prospects are in their Top 100. BA has those four plus Balazovic in their Top 100 prospects. Down towards the BOTTOM of this list you claim has no value? Players like Smeltzer, Gonsalves, and Blankenhorn, and I promise you that you'd be laughed out of the room if you described these prospects as having no value to a professional evaluator. As I said, maybe individually each prospect's value isn't massive, but collectively? There's tons of value. b. Sickles, in HIS last report, listed more Twins prospects as having a B- grade or better than all but maybe one other system IIRC. He describes these guys as having a good chance to become every day players, or at least role players in MLB. The Twins had almost two dozen of these prospects. So yeah, pretty much a whole team's worth of what you call awesome prospects. BTW, yes, it's commonly understood that half of these prospects will peter out. Neither FanGraphs or Sickles named just about every player and neither did I. Back to the OP: the Twins don't need to freak out about losing prospects because they have an abundance of value, not because, as you opined, they don't have any prospects that are worth much.

Any chance you might respond to the points made? I don't believe anyone called YOU delusional. This is spite of your statement that "most Twins prospects aren't worth much", which some may think is a delusional point of view. I respectfully questioned your definition and provided facts. Care to support what you said?

Maybe your definition of "worth much" is unique. We have a handful of prospects that everyone with a pedigree thinks is extremely vauable: Guys getting 50FV and up grades. Larnach, Graterol, Kirilloff and Royce. We have plenty of prospects that any franchise would absolutely love to have. It's a long list! Javier, Balazovic, Arraez, Duran, Miranda, Cavaco, Severino, Rooker, Thorpe, Urbina, Rortvedt, Enlow, Gordon, Blenkenhorn, Alcala, Gonsalves.. We could go on, because many many others fit exactly in the same value category as Jermaine Palacios fit when he was traded for an All Star and Cy Young candidate named Jake Odorizzi. To name a few Palacios-like names: Jeffers, Wade, Walner, Baddoo, Raley, Celestino, Jax, Lewin Diaz, Teng,Moran, Berroa, Canterino, Costello, Rijo, Sands, Leach, Kiersey, Maciel, Mack... These last names are prospects who garner 40FV value grades from FanGraphs, like Palacios did with an exception or two. The Twins have half again more of these 40FV and 45FV prospects than the average club does. Especially collectively, they're worth a lot.

Excellent points. We may be seeing affirmative signs that this FO sees the value of prospects differently than we're used to seeing from our FO. By that, I mean that they think about what they need to do development-wise to INCREASE value of individual prospects. We see a handful of arguments repeatedly that deserve rebuttal. One is the "trade them all" talk buttressed by a generalized conclusion that prospects fail and therefore should be traded with cherry-picked anecdotes. It's good to remind ourselves that none of the core players on the 26 man roster EVER had more trade value than they do today. Not one of them. Evidenced by the standings and by the fact that it's the performance of that home grown core that is the key driver of the team's success, none of those core players could be traded right now without compromising the whole shebang here in 2019. My hope is two-fold. First, that they have untouchables and trade from excess. And since our scarcity is pitching, I hope that guys like Thorpe and Enlow and Duran are untouchable. Second, I hope they trade the excess players whose value in the market is relatively high compared to who they regard as a comparable asset. For example, I hope they dangle Arraez rather than Gordon and Rooker rather than Larnach if they have them in the same category in terms of their ceilings as core MLB players. Teams rarely trade established players for prospects they project to be role players. I think the Palacios for Odorizzi trades are rare, especially at the deadline. It's wishful thinking to expect Zander Wiel and LaMont Wade, Jr. to fetch you something better than, say, someone's Bryce Harper or Tyler Duffey. This FO has focused on building up prospect capital and now we get to see more hints about their prowess at horse-swapping. Fun stuff!

Jeremy Tanner should start a blog.

There's three things I don't accept: 1. That exorbitant strikeout rates aren't bad. They're bad. 2. That a K is no worse than any other out. It's worse. 3. That Sano's current K rate is what it's gonna be. Why can't he improve his contact rate and/or reduce his whiff percentage? I don't know squat, but I just wonder if he can do wrist strengthening exercises or something else to reduce those failed check swings. Isn't this a massive problem for him? Anyone have thoughts?

Yes, this is a remarkable thing! A dozen position players with a 1 WAR or better (a LOT better in most cases). It seems to be this team's year. Sit two guys down and watch their replacements be run producers.

I blame Jim Pohlad.

Of course they drafted him, silly! The portable air foil machine the Area Assistant Director of Amateur Talent Evaluation carries around detected an under-drag coefficient anomaly just above the grip on his bat. They'll simply outfit him with the correct bat and adjust the position of his left thumb by a quarter inch. Presto.

I think it's absolutely critical to understand this: the reason a well-run team like Houston can deal from their prospect capital is because even after dealing some of it, they still had an abundance of talent. Secondly, the talent that shaped the big club's success came together quickly. Last time I checked, SI had Houston #1 in their Power Rankings, and FanGraphs ranked their prospect pipeline #5. They did not ever compromise the strength of either system as they began their progression. In the same two publications, SI ranked the Twins #2 in the Power Rankings and FanGraphs ranked their prospect pipeline #7. These are dramatically higher grades for the Twins than even three months ago! The point is, this really IS the first time where the Twins can deal from a similar position of overall strength as Houston has enjoyed for quite some time. Houston wasn't giving up their versions of Kirilloff, Graterol, and Lewis, and they wouldn't have. To their infinite credit, they absolutely fleeced Pittsburgh for Gerrit Cole, and they may have snookered the Twins to land Pressly, who knows? It's not particularly instructive to mention some random or even a specific Houston move and suggest that the Twins should have done that. It's not reasonable to expect the Twins to have stumbled into the Gerrit Cole trade, and Verlander wasn't coming here, right? That said, NOW, not then, but NOW, they DO have enough prospect capital to ship off 3 prospects and a surplus MLB starter like Houston did for a talent like Cole if a sweet deal like that shockingly surfaces. That foursome has combined to give the Pirates 0.2 WAR, most all of it the .6WAR from Colin Moran, the 6th overall pick in 2013. So yeah, lets hope someone gets stupid enough to give us a Cole type talent for a trade headlined by Nick Gordon. We'll see, but now that they have both a loaded MLB roster (still on paper inferior to a few teams IMO) and fairly decent depth among Tier 2 prospects, and also financial clout, let's see what happens.

mlhouse, you can see by the number of likes to your post that we absolutely eat up these first-hand reports! Yours was so excellent! Please do us an enormous favor and do it often!

The modern era must've started this year?

Man alive, what a weird draft! I have nothing in the way of conclusions as to the strategy of this thing. Only six out of 40 picks are HS prospects, and two of those at least are by all appearances kind of salutatory selections, the Stillwater pitchers headed to Oregon State. But hey, they may have a price in mind, who knows. So that leave four prospects who may or may not be worthy of an overslot offer, three of them pitchers. I sure hope they represent this year's Balazovic. It somehow feels like this 4YR JR designation is some sort of flaw with a drop-down box in the database and not some sort of incredibly intense tactical decision. My Lord! Weird draft. Weird. But hey Mr. Sixel, even though they're not early selections, they sure as heck got you your pitchers via Rule 4.

Tell us why please.

Yes. An odd and perplexing draft! But I'm sure LaVelle will give us the lowdown. /s