twinstalker

Yeah, they could get the same infield hitters in round 11-12 that they've gotten in rds 1s, 2, and 3 in the Falvey regime (except Keaschall). It's been a complete waste (except Keaschall). Get your infielders and outfielders internationally, for the most part after your first pick. Pick up wicked arms in the vacated spots.

There are Riley Quicks in every org. The Twins just don't go for his type that often. They prefer to waste their Rounds 1s and 2 pick on bad infielders or guys with no chance (see Tinney) when that area is the perfect spot to get arms like Quick. Every year. Some will become top relievers, some will stay starters, but if you don't know how to identify hitters there, please start taking guys like Eyanson, Perry, and Quick and stop wasting these slots!

Juan Holmann. I always find it...interesting...when Central Americans have German surnames. I have an acquaintance with such, but I never ask. I have another friend, not Latin, who told me his great-grandfather of the same name was a very famous/notorious person, someone I knew well from 20th century European history. I asked a lot of questions, but he didn't even know what I knew. He just knew he was a big deal.

Oof. Maybe save some money here, too, for the round 3 pick?

Yeah, but you're taking someone unworthy of the 2nd pick. And I'm pretty sure they're using money saved from the 2nd pick. It's a screwy logic

Nothing really to say. I've seen Renfrow all over the board. Law had him ~40 while MLB.com had him 123. Don't know BA's rank. Twins had a pitching plan which seems like it's not working after the college lower draft Ober-Matthews-Morris-Lewis-Culpepper string we had or thought we had. I'm not sure where we are with that. Are we still looking at that type? Is Renfrow that type?

A much, much worse hitting 1B than Sabato's ever been, and he's been bad.

Not sure of the point here. This guy won't hit. No way. You were responding to a comment about trading Tait for good value. Tait had his 15 minutes at the end of 2024. The excitement about him was fading when the Twins acquired him. Right now nobody would want him, except for maybe a meh middle reliever they're dumping after the season anyway. Maybe a little more. There's no reason to take a guy like this. If you need catching depth you take a college guy later. He better be way under slot, though I don't like that strategy, either.

This is a really bad pick and, worse, it's far earlier than he was supposed to go. It's super obvious, and I'm not sure I want to go through this all again. First, did we need a catcher? I realize that you don't draft for need, but why would you prioritize a catcher after just taking one? Because he's going to be good? He's not going to be good, he's not going to be able to hit at all. A K rate of 23% in college is like 30% in AA is like 40% in MLB. And it's not just striking out that will be the problem in MLB. He'll be partially hitting the ball when he does. Keith Law says he has no chance at the majors if he can't stay at catcher, suggesting that it's possible he won't even be able to stay at the position! This was perhaps the worst pick possible, and it extends a trend of the Twins doing this sort of thing. Please, let Sean Johnson go. My weird guess here is the Twins thought they'd get one of the top 2, and they had some sort of agreement with this guy to take him in the second round as a money-saving measure to paying other picks while getting a guy they think can catch. Knowing they would have to pay slot to the top 2.

Boston's table scraps are pretty good right now, though I still doubt they'd let him go if he could really help. They might have had a numbers problem, but keep in mind half the teams could have claimed him before us.

You're probably right in that tech sense, but I would seriously hope he's ready right now to punish A+, or we may have picked the wrong guy at #3.

LOL. You have absolutely no idea how he reacts to professional pitching. Jenkins is his same age and would have gone well before him in this draft. Lackey hit in a hitter's paradise, and everyone on his team was a stud, statistically. He may be good, or he may be overrated, but there's no sane way you take him over Jenkins right now. Let's see what his K rate is at A+, AA, and AAA, though he'll always be at least one year older than Jenkins was.

I don't believe in Rodriguez, I'm beginning to think Tait was a really bad trade (in hindsight), I think Houston is ahead of them somewhere in the second ten, and I think there are some others in the org that sneak into the top 10, mostly names not all that familiar to us, like Jhomnardo Reyes and a DSL guy I can't think of. Maybe Houston is top ten after running though the names in my head, but it's a grudging #10.

I think there are reasons to question this, but compared to the picks starting at #5, this looks genius. I think really bad decisions were made on Curiel, Rose, and even Booth. I liked Tyler Bell and to some extent Drew Burress, but I don't have extremely good reasons for taking Bell in particular over Lackey. Bell is maybe the guy I'd try to pay a couple million less, but I'm not really into doing that if the top guys are strong. I just don't know whether to believe Lackey is the man. He might be. For me the other two were no brainers, and I would have been fine taking Flora. Overall, despite doubts about Lackey, I would have been okay in some way with the top 3, Flora, Bell (at reduced cost) and maybe Burress or Lombard at much reduced cost. I wouldn't like the last two, but I probably wouldn't rant like I would with anyone else.

The walks and homers don't bode well for a Trey Yesavage comparison, but it's still a bit early. I honestly think this move of Quick to AA might have more to do with not having any AA pitchers.