diehardtwinsfan

He has been a strikeout machine in the minors. I think people are down on him due to the #4 projection he initially got. So far, he's exceeded expectations, and I have to think the 4/5 comparisons are a bit unfair at the moment. I've noted elsewhere that I'd be fine with him as a 3rd piece to De Leon and Alvarez. He's a safer prospect with some nice upside at this point.

I don't think we disagree here. I'm just saying that all of those things are somewhat murky and subjective as everyone values them differently. Ryan for instance, really liked those high floor picks in the mid-2000s because they were safe and pretty much guaranteed a major leaguer. Most of us at TD wouldn't have that same opinion (we certainly did at BYTO). I agree that if they like Greene the best, he goes 1-1... at least that's how I'd do it. The problem is that when that gap is not nearly as obvious, things like need do (and should) creep in. I'm hoping that there's a Harper or Strasburg in this draft making it an easy decision, but if there's no clear cut number 1... that's when it's really hard to cite BPA.

True, and they are falling further behind the Cubs and SF for doing so. Might make them more desperate knowing Kershaw can become a FA in 2 years... Nothing quite like telling Kershaw that they don't want to win.

Jorgen and I were talking about this privately and I should clarify this a bit... I wasn't necessarily responding to any one person (and that mistake is 100% on me). I'm responding to an idea that Santana is a 4/5 back end guy on a good team (which has been used to describe him on numerous occasions at TD, though not necessarily by you). He was a borderline top 30 pitcher this year. He's been in the top half of major league starters for 6 of his last 7 seasons. He's a very good pitcher. Will he be next year? Who knows. I get a bit tired of tossing around the 1-5s without any context of what those mean (and yes, I know we all disagree to an extent, but pegging an above average starter as a 4/5 seems a bit odd to say the least). Just as pegging guys like Mejia and Gonsalves as 4/5 upside is also unfair. They could settle into that, but both have ceilings much higher than that at this stage of their careers. Santiago, on the other hand, was not a good pitcher this year. Yes, his results in previous years were better, but he's done so with horrible peripherals that scream Nick Blackburn more than Ervin Santana. I hope that clarifies things a bit. I should not have accused anyone of slamming him.

This is another really good point that often gets missed, and it bothers me about these discussions. Just about every player has a period where they break into the league and struggle. In Santana's case, that's 2005-2009 where he spent some time up and down in the majors with one good year in 2008 but mediocre to bad years other than that. When we use an ML average, those numbers get averaged in when determining value, and that couldn't be further from the truth, which is that he's pitched in the 2/3 range for 6 of his last 7 seasons. That also goes for any youngish pitcher, and we often lack the patience without our own young pitchers (Gibson is a great example here) knowing that there could be quite a bit of growth just yet. Santana shouldn't be valued on 2005-2009. That was 7 seasons ago. He'll eventually move back down to that type of performance as he ages, but his last few seasons are a far better predictor of his aging curve and value then his early years.

His FIP may be league average. His results have consistently been better. Now that said, you're right that at some point he's going to fall off that cliff. No one is debating that... Just stop slamming the poor guy. He's a good pitcher

Yeah, that's fine. I was trying to be a bit more granular. I'd agree there's a pretty big gap between the up the middle positions and everyone else, with decent gap at SP too.

I'm not sure how I missed 2012 (and I should have went back to 2010), so you're point is valid. Now that said, I think the question is the type of pitcher that everyone seems to peg him for. He's a sub 4 ERA pitcher and has been doing that pretty consistently since 2010. yeah, there were some high 3s in there, but that still equates to a better than average major league pitcher. Even last year, with an ERA of exactly 4 in a half season, you're looking a pitcher who is a bit better than the average major league starter. That's not a back of the rotation type. The major league (not AL) average ERA for starting pitchers in 2016 was in the low 4s. Santana may not be a top 30 pitcher in 2017, I think we agree there, but I'm rather tiered of people tossing him aside as if he's a back of the rotation option. Just about (if not) every team in baseball likely had multiple spots in their rotation that Santana would have provided a significant upgrade, and that has generally been a true statement for Ervin since 2010. As to your other question, I do agree that the real question is what would you get back. I think it depends on what you value the return. A Gonsalves/Mejia type prospect both have the potential to be Ervin some day. Of course that means you have to absorb the good and the bad of 2005-2009 Ervin before you see 2010 Ervin (and there was only one decent year there in 2008). That's a pretty risky proposition on its own, so I've got to think that this would only be the headlining piece... Now that said, if Dozier is dealt for a few pitchers, I'm not sure I'd want a pitcher. I might go after that 3B prospect that Jimmer wants or even better a C prospect given how few of them we have in the system. I really like Garver, but beyond him, there's very little upside at C in our entire system, especially in the high minors.

And the hair. I cannot believe that you of all people forgot the hair.

Not on this issue. TR was a pretty stingy guy... and had a bit of a rep there in terms of what he wanted.

That's fine. 3rd piece doesn't have to be a pitcher.. or it can be a lower ranked one with more upside. I just think that De Leon + Alvarez isn't enough. There's way too much risk there. Neither of these guys are sure things... Alvarez in particular. He's effectively a slightly better than Lewis Thorpe type prospect pre-TJS. That's not a bad spec, but certainly not a low risk prospect.

I've said before I like Stewart, but certainly not as a second piece. If he's the 3rd piece to De Leon and Alvarez, I take it. If he's the second piece with Alvaraz not being included, I'm going elsewhere.

I'm going to go with "it depends" because I'm lazy and don't want to look it up Generally, I'd say that premium value goes in the following order: SP SS/C 2B/CF LF/RF 1B/3B/DH The kicker is figuring into where to slot RP value... which a few years ago was much lower than it is right now. Obviously, though, things like ceiling come into play. Dozier has a high ceiling as a 2B, and he is cheap. That gives him a ton of value that a lower ceiling 2B would not have. Same with pitching. A league average starting pitcher (roughly a 4.3 ERA and 180 innings) would have value, but probably not as much as Dozier.

Yeah, 4/5 seems a bit low for Stewart. He's pitched like an 1/2 all though the minors, and while he may not be one, he gets plenty of swings and misses, more than enough to be an average to above major league pitcher. Yeah, I know that minor league success doesn't always correlate to major league success, but it's also very true that guys that stick in the majors often tend to progress towards their minor league averages. Stewart has a 1.16 WHIP, 3.06 ERA, 9.74K/9, and 2.11 BB/9 for his minor league career and has generally been younger than his league. He also does a good job keeping the ball in the park, and that includes 9 starts in the PCL (yes, SSS I know). He's not a mediocre add. He's a pretty good bet to do what Santiago did last season (at least in terms of ERA) with a significantly better upside long term. If De Leon, Alvarez, and Stewart were on the table. I'd run with it.

He's been pitching like this since 2010 averaging 30+ starts and a sub 4 ERA. Since 2010, only last year he did not do this. My frustration with projections as they are cited as gospel truth and no seems to look at their accuracy, and even less can understand how confidence plays into them. Santana will eventually fall off a cliff. That's a fact. The question is when and who absorbs the risk.

Yes, but the expiration date on a Dozier is probably in Feb... That's when you take 90 cents on the dollar... Problem is that we don't know which other teams are involved. SF is rumored... Perhaps that's only there to drive up LAs price... who knows.

Potentially yes, but I'm not sure the Dodgers have much in terms of other options. They had poor production at 2B and Dozier is the best option available. Period. Kintzler is going to cost something similar and gets to renegotiate his contract as a part of the deal. They can go in with the team they have, but they run the risk, in particular knowing that their opponents got better... I don't want this to drag out too long, but I don't think LA holds all the leverage. LA has leverage, but so does MN. I think Dozier should be traded, but I don't want Levine/Falvey to take what they can get. If they think that is under valued, by all means ask for more. I'd think the famous PTBNL could certainly be in play here.

I swear we have this BPA debate every year. It's easy to look back at past drafts and see WAR and go "you hit this one or missed that one," but in the present, that is much more murky. The problem with BPA is that it is subjective. Obviously when a Harper shows up in the draft, there's little question, but short of a clear cut standout that everyone agrees on, not so much. There's all sorts of things that contribute to BPA: Ceiling, floor, speed to the show, position, teachable, mental makeup, injury risk, etc. We cannot even agree on which order these should be in, so to simply say get the BPA really sells it short. We don't know what constitutes the BPA until well after the draft (and that assumes that people can develop in a vacuum regardless or the org, and that too is a questionable assumption).

Jermaine Palacios comes to mind, but he's pretty far away and didn't quite follow up his impressive rookie campaign. Arraez could also potentially move there if he's blocked by Polanco and Gordon. That said, 3B isn't hard to find decent talent in FA. I wouldn't sweat that one too much, except that I'd keep Sano there as long as possible. He should be able to play through his arb years there... perhaps not so much when he's ready to be a FA, but he's young and athletic enough that this won't be a problem for now.

Given the need for major league pitching, I would probably target a guy like Stewart. Problem of course is on LADs side, as guys like that equate to depth as well. Honestly, I'd have no problems with Stewart or a younger high-upside kind of guy. From a needs standpoint though, I'd go with another pitcher close to the show. I'd put De Leon and Stewart in the rotation on day one and send Hughes to the pen unless he showed something in the spring I wasn't expecting, Santiago packing, and possibly trade ESan too. My rotation from day 1 would be De Leon, Stewart, May, Gibson, and Berrios with Mejia in AAA. Dufey might be in AAA too and remain a starter. If Hughes earned a job, one of the three of De Leon, Stewart, and Berrios opens in Rochester.

To be clear, I'm not against trading him. I'm just annoyed by people brushing him off like he's a mid-to-back of the rotation type guy. Santana has been a pretty good pitcher for years now. You're right in that he's going to fall off at some point, and we'd be better to not have that contract when it happens. That could happen next year, or three years from now... who knows. But that said, I'd definitely move him if someone gave me a borderline top 100 prospect plus another one around top 150..

I'm not sure what Poletero is in Spanish, but Pelotero means baseball player Now that said, Sano will always be a big guy. That has nothing to do with his conditioning. He's built like a football player and could quite possibly have been in the NFL. I wouldn't get too concerned about that just yet. It may be an issue down the road, and I'm sure Sano knows full well that his next big contract will likely be impacted by it.

For all that talk of projections, has anyone actually published the failure rates of these projection systems? I'm truly curious here, b/c whether it's fangraphs, steamer, whatever, everyone talks about these like their gospel truth and I've seen nothing published indicating how accurate they actually are.

I pretty much only follow Sickles on the letter grades. I have no idea whom else assigns them, and not many do. What I'll say is this, Arcia and Kepler both topped out at B/B+ grade prospects at one point on that scale. Anyone B- and above is a pretty good prospect, and in the top 150 on most lists, cause John is stingy. Dozier, I'm pretty sure, might have hit a B- at one point (but I could be wrong here), and a guy like Alvarez (whom we all covet), was on the border between a C+ and a B- last year. Once John is done with his list, no doubt Alvarez will be a bit higher going into 2017, but I doubt he's an A level prospect (note that there is no A+ grade). Bottom line, those are good prospects. So, if I'm getting a couple of B graded prospects for Santana, he's probably gone.

All we need is a guy from the Indians organization who has Falvey's password and can dump the contents of the super secret Twins DB into the public for the world to see.