I guess if a guy played last year with the MLB club, it is hard to say they graduated this year. A difference of definition I guess. Of those, which ones have been good so far?

I guess if a guy played last year with the MLB club, it is hard to say they graduated this year. A difference of definition I guess. Of those, which ones have been good so far?

 

It takes time. Morneau needed about 1000 ML at bats before he became the Morny we remember. It's unusual for young guys to be good right away. Hicks, Arcia, Pinto are going to struggle but it doesn't mean they won't be good. That's part of rebuilding.

Agreed, gunnarthor, which is why I argue to bring up players faster....so they are productive sooner. There is risk in every approach, I'd rather roll the dice on the faster process, but I realize not everyone agrees.

Agreed, gunnarthor, which is why I argue to bring up players faster....so they are productive sooner. There is risk in every approach,

 

I'd rather roll the dice on the faster process, but I realize not everyone agrees.

 

 

 

Here, here. I concur with your view, which is increasingly becoming the preferred route among a growing number of GMs. It's easy to see why, the really good prospects now require a huge upfront cost in bonus money- it's always nice to see a quicker return on your investment. And more importantly, although I haven't seen an official study to confirm it, there have to be a huge number of guys, likely a majority, who hit their career-year peak while still under initial team control and there are only a few teams that can absorb and remain competitive with multiple 9-figure, multi-year, busts embedded within their roster like parasites. The math is simple, if guys are hitting their peaks at age 27 or 28 in their 5th or 6th year of control, there's a fighting chance that you can get an extra 2 or 3 years of peak performance at pre-FA prices by promoting faster and either flipping him before the last minute to maximize return or buying out a few FA years early on at a discount with an extension. This methodology also forces a team to make the decision to be competitive more often, and not go into extended hibernation like the Twins and other clubs have been wont to do- good for the fans and great for the bottom line if the risks are managed well and play out to expectations.

 

Thankfully, I trust the Twins have learned their lesson on slow-playing their top picks and are soon finally in a position to have to make these kinds of decisions.

Edited April 9, 201412 yr by jokin

Agreed, gunnarthor, which is why I argue to bring up players faster....so they are productive sooner. There is risk in every approach, I'd rather roll the dice on the faster process, but I realize not everyone agrees.

 

Well, looking over the last decade or so these players debuted at these ages w/Twins:

20 - Rivas

21 - Ortiz, AJ, Hunter, Guzman, Santana, Adam Johnson, Mauer, Liriano, Casilla,

22 - Milton, Radke, Lohse, Rincon, Cuddy, Morneau, Kubel, Durbin, Crain, Garza, Gomez, Revere, Ramos, Hendriks, Arcia

23 - Mays, Romero, Restovich, Baker, Perkins, Slowey, Benson, Parmelee, Hicks

24 - Dougie Baseball, LeCroy, Jones, Kielty, Bartlett, Boof, Span, Plouffe, Pinto

25 - Koskie, Guerrier, Neshek, Blackburn, Valencia, Waldrop, Swarzak, Gibson

26 - Buchanan, Ford, Duensing

 

This obviously isn't everyone - no need to look at Morales or Miller but it's a decent list. Not sure age tells us much. Obviously, the better players got up faster, which isn't surprising. (I think everyone except Hendriks and Casilla in the 22 or younger groups had been ranked in the top 100 at some time). I tend to think that the Twins are more willing than other teams to let "old" prospects contribute. (In the 24 and older group only Gibson - who had TJ surgery - was ranked by baseball america, I believe). It looks like the Twins have tended to get the franchise type players and the first division complementary players get their feet wet by 22 and hope to establish them within two years of that.

 

I guess I'm just not sure that the Twins have been holding elite talent back. I know some people thought Cuddy should've been a regular before 05/06 and injuries held back guys like Kubel and Gibson and some guys struggled after being called up (Hunter, AJ, Johnson).

There is risk in every approach, I'd rather roll the dice on the faster process, but I realize not everyone agrees.

 

You're right -- not everyone, I'd even say most everyone, agrees. From the same article (which is actually Chris Crawford's work, not KLaw as I originally mentioned):

"It's exponentially worse to put a kid at too high a level than to do the opposite in terms of his development, both physically and mentally."

 

Thankfully, I trust the Twins have learned their lesson on slow-playing their top picks and are soon finally in a position to have to make these kinds of decisions.

 

Specifically, which top picks were "slow-played"? I don't think you'll be able to come up with any bullet-proof (or even well armored) examples.

The last couple of seasons the Twins have been more aggressive in both promoting and cutting players. I suspect that the change in Minor League Director had something to do with this.

 

The other difference could be, drafting in the 20's versus top 5.

 

Look at Buxton, he has owned every league thus far. Of course you are going to move him. Garza was probably the exception at 25, but he moved because he was ripping it up too.

Edited April 9, 201412 yr by tobi0040