tobi0040

Pretty much agree. I think it will be a tight, relatively wide open division. Not a particularly good division.

I don't see much resemblence to the Twins in 2011. The guys we had play really well in 2010 did not have the track record that Miguel Cabrera, Victor, etc. At the end of the day I think they still have the best lineup in division and I don't think it is really close. They outscored us by 42, Cleveland by 88, Chicago by 97, and KC by 106. So 90+ losses seems very, very unlikely.

I don't see them finishing outside of the top three in the division. They probably have two of the top three hitters in the division (Miggy and Victor), the other being Abreu. That will limite their downside. The pitching will take a huge step back, no doubt. Between age, payroll, and their farm system, this team is definitely a long term train wreck. This should work out perfectly with the Twins window.

Ashbury, It was a slightly fun shot at terry. But I think terry is wrong. I think we would miss a ton if we take one of the worst corner outfielders and throw him in center. Even for a few games.

oh contrare Brock. We have a 39 year old that our GM thinks can still play center.

Agreed. I think this year will be relatively open in the division. I could see three different teams winning, excluding KC and us (kc would be more likely than us though)

Kluber has to be a regression candidate. He peaked as the Indians 26th best prospect in 2010. In parts of three seasons he never had a league average ERA plus. Then at 28 he throws up a 7.3 WAR year with a 2.44 ERA They have some things going for them. But a few fewer wins from him seems certainly possible.

Leviathan, The preliminary twins discussions I have seen among posters here I think has included a fair assessment of twins regression candidates. I have seen Hughes, Santana, Escobar, Vargas, plouffe, and dozier all listed (could be others I forgot)

I think those are good points Jorgens about the pen and one win games. But implied there is that the pen has a repeat performance. Holland has been consistently really good. Herrera has had a bad year in the last three and last year was his best. But I am not really a believer in Wade Davis throwing up an ERA o 1.00 year in and out. By nature the pen is typically the most volatile position year over year. Shields had a WAR of 4.3 last year. Volquez replaces him and he has been really bad in many years since 2008. At the end of the day I think a lot of things need to break right for them to sniff 89 wins again. I will say 89 could take the division next year.

They lose Shields and his 3.20 era. Ventura's era was 3.20 with a 3.74 xFIP and a whip of almost 1.30. No reason to think the pitching is as good next year. Relatively average offense. I think defense and base running keeps them sniffing 500

To expand on the head-start for college players, obviously players taken earlier have an easier time accumulating WAR. The Twins had four high school players in the 14-30 draft range from 2004 to 2008 reach the big leagues. Plouffe, 2004 draft. Reached the show in 2010 (6 years). Parmelee, 2006 draft. Reached the show in 2011 (5 years) Revere, 2007 draft. Reached the show in 2010 (3 years) Hicks, 2008 draft. Reached the show in 2013 (5 years). A for instance would be Kyle Schwarber versus Nick Gordon. Looking out 6-7 years, Schwarber could have 5-6 under his belt verus 1-2 for Gordon. Even the people really high on Gordon think he needs 4-5 years in the minors.

Yeah, given the headstart college pitchers had, it makes sense they make it quicker and accumulate more WAR. Good stuff.

Really interesting stuff Jay. Thanks for the blog. One thing that jumped out at me was the teams at the top have a few guys with a ton of WAR. Kershaw has accumulated 39 and Trout 27, for example. The other thing that jumped out at me, was the composition of the Twins picks. Of the 8 position players, 7 were high school picks. Of the 11 pitchers, only 3 were high school pitchers (none very low, Waldrop 25, Ranville 39, and Boyd 55). We basically ignored high school pitchers with our lower picks and this is a group that yielded a lot of WAR. Kershaw, Bumgarter, Strasburg, etc.. A few organizations have made this a focus. The two that jump out are the Giants, who drafted , Bumgarter, Wheeler, and Cain (2002). They also drafted HS pitchers that didn't work out, Crick, Whitaker, and Alderson. Lincecum was a college pitcher, but a MLB ready one as he was up quick. And the Nationals, they drafted Strasburg, Giolito, Meyer, and two others that didn't work out as well (Willems and Smoker). That is 5 HS pitchers from 2006 to 2012.

Wait, you have given up on Jay Ranvile? This guy has potential. I kid. Plouffe, Perkins, and Garza repesent 28.6 WAR according to Bref. That would definitely be a net positive, even if you include the busts from those two drafts. Just for fun, Delmon had a WAR of 1.1 while here, from 2008 to 2011. During that stretch, Garza accumulated 11.3. It was actually the best stretch of Garza's career by WAR. Ouch.

Jay, I think one could argue going back farther than 2006. High school players can take 5 to 6 years before they arrive and accumulate WAR. Most college players are down at least 2 years. If you add 2004 and 2005 the twins add Perkins, plouffe, and garza. We have from that point six players that have arrived (hicks, Gibson, revere, garza, plouffe, and Perkins). Given the lowest pick we had was I believe hicks at 14, I am guessing that draft record is in the top half, maybe even before an adjustment for draft position.

My memory is not great here, but I remember Hicks's arm being ahead of his range and instincts. He was never the athlete that many feel Buxton is. I think I read Buxton tied Bo Jackson's time from home to 1B, best ever for a right hander. I get you on the overall point of players not meeting expectations, especially right away.

I am pushing back against some concluding your analysis proves we didn't draft well while ignoring your caveats, like draft position.

Respectfully, that is not really the case. Parker's analysis includes players that were drafted before the Twins had the chance to pick. My analysis includes player we could have actually taken. Our draft position in the first round, 20, 28, 14, 22, 21, and 30. Then a slew of picks like 46, 50, and 55, which the Twins likely had more of as we lost more players to free agency. If you look back, the track record of players in the top 5 and 10 versus where we have drafted is quite substantial. So to include guys in that range and then conclude we didn't draft well is pretty poor analysis. The Red Sox had a draft position similar to us over this period. The Red Sox actually had 15 first round picks if we add the supplementals as we did for the Twins, only two players have reached the big leagues (Bard and Kelly), for a total Bref WAR of 3.4. I think you have to account for some players, like Longoria, Price, Lincecum, Bumgarter, etc. not being available when we picked. Out of the 50-60 guys in our range, we have one guy that has made an all star game that we missed on. Almost all of MLB missed on him as well.

You are gettting no argument from me that we put too much emphasis on the draft. But to be fair, anytime you compare our pick and go back 10-20 players, with hindsight you are almost never going to want the guy you drafted. I don't think that is a phenomenon limited to the Twins. The Cards are gospel around here. Here are the picks they made from this time period: 2011 Kolten Wong 2B Hawaii 2010 Zack Cox 3B Arkansas 2010 Seth Blair RHP Arizona State 2010 Tyrell Jenkins RHP Henderson (Tex.) High School 2009 Shelby Miller RHP Brownwood (Texas) HS 2008 Brett Wallace 3B Arizona State 2007 Peter Kozma SS Owasso (Okla.) HS 2006 Adam Ottavino Wong has a 1.5 WAR. Miller’s WAR is 5.6. Kozma .9. Wallace is -.6 I think they are the only one’s to reach the big leagues. About the same WAR as Revere and if Gibson had 3 years under his belt on the initial path our track record would be better than the almighty Cards. Heck, if we add their 2005 and 2004 picks, Rasmus, Green, and Lampert and add in Garza and Plouffe we easily top them. Again, other organizations supplement in areas the Twins have not. Here is a list prior to 2004 for them: 2003 Daric Barton C Marina HS (CA) 28 2001 Justin Pope RHP U. of Central Florida 28 2000 Blake Williams RHP San Marcos, TX 24 2000 Shaun Boyd 2B Oceanside, CA 13 1999 Chance Caple RHP Texas A&M U. 30 1998 J.D. Drew OF No School 5 1997 Adam Kennedy

Most teams seemed to get about one, maybe two MLB players in that period. We got Revere, then flipped him for a minor leaguer. Gibson was moving quickly, was out 1.5 years of TJ, then had to be built back up (pitch counts, confidence, etc.). He was on his way up here, starting in 2012 and would have three full years under his belt. That WAR number would be much different. Part of this was circumstance versus being terrible relative to our peers. Not to mention, the 2004-2005 first rounders would have added 21 WAR to the equation (Garza and Plouffe). And nobody is knocking the Twins drafting from 2012 to 2014 either. I think what Chief is alluding to key. Prior to about 2012, the Twins all but ignored free agency and older international free agents. Then success on the field pushed us towards the back of the draft, exposing the fact that we have historically relied upon the draft and the draft only. Mike Trout could very well be the only guy out of those 50 or so drafted in our window to play in an all star game.

I think this is a tad misleading. Gibson, Meyer, and May could end up being anywhere between 40-60% of the starts this year. We drafted Gibson and traded guys we drafted for Meyer and May. Had Revere and Span been total busts we would not have gotten May and Meyer. Looking at the draft window, we took three pitchers in the first round (top 30 picks). Of those guys, it looks like we may be 1 for 3, which may actually be better than the rate of all the guys drafted. The other four guys were position players.

Very imperfect science here. I just took the five guys drafted behind us in each draft. 2006 (Parmelee – 20) – Ian Kennedy, Colton Willems, Maxwell Sap, Cody Johnson, and Hank Conger. Best pick, Kennedy. 2007 (Revere 28)– Wendell Fairley, Andrew Brackman, Josh Smoker, Nick Noonan, and Jon Gilmore. Best pick…great question. It might actually be Ben Revere. 2008 (Hicks, 14) – Ethan Martin, Brett Lawrie, David Cooper, Ike Davis, and Andrew Cashner. Best pick, probably Lawrie. (Gutierrez, 28) – Gerrit Cole (did not sign with NYY, no chance he would have with us), Lonnie Chisenhall, Casey Kelly, Odorizzi. (Hunt 31) – Bradley Holt, Zach Collier, Evan Fredrickson, Mike Montgomery, Connor Gillespie Best pick, probably Odorizzi. 2009 (Gibson, 22) – Jared Mitchell, Randall Grichuk, Mike Trout (just threw up), Eric Arnett, Nick Franklin. Bashore was 46th, I have never heard of the three guys behind him and I would have to look up another round. Best pick, Mike Trout. Gibson probably #2. 2010 (Wimmers, 21) – Kellin Deglan, Yelich, Gary Brown, Zach Cox, Kyle Parker. Best pick, Yelich 2011 (Michael, 30) – Mikie Mahtook, Jake Hager, Kevin Mathews, Brian Goodwin, and Jacob Anderson (Harrison 50 and Boyd 55). Dante Bichette, Blake Snell, Dwight Smith, Brett Austin, Kes Carter, Kevin Comer, Jace Peterson, Grayson Garvin, and James Harris. Have not heard of any of them. Kind of highlights the high bust rate in the draft, especially where we were drafting for many of these years.

This would be the prudent option. But the Hunter signing tells me the job is Hicks.

Between April and June, the choice really is should we give up on HIcks or give him one last chance. I could probably be swayed because he has a better shot at being a long term answer for us (albeit a long shot). Or do we make a defensive move, which will help two young pitchers (M and M) and hopefully assist in getting Ricky back on track. The defensive move is between two guys that have no shot at being the long term answer. My April prediction is Hicks gets one more shot and has a very short leash. If he flops again I think he is no longer with the Twins in July. Come June, I think Buxton or Rosario will be up here

One could argue that we made a few of these picks knowing that they were never going to be great MLB players. We went with more low risk guys. Unfortunately, the three that come to mind are: Wimmers at 21. The first thing you heard was 90 mph fastball with great control. Seems like a low bar here. Gutierrez at 28. A closer in college I believe, nobody was ever as high on him as they are on Burdi, who was taken much later. Revere at 28. Many were shocked he went in the first round. His bonus was $750K. The seven guys behind him all had larger bonuses, as did picks 37-40. In addition to luck, potentially development (hard to say), strategy played a role with a few of these. The one recently that comes to mind was Ryan Eades, although he was a second round pick.