You obviously need an Insider account to view the full list with his scouting notes, but Law put out his Top 100 today:

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12211713/top-100-prospects-2015-including-kris-bryant-byron-buxton-more-mlb

 

6 Twins are included:

 

#2 - Byron Buxton - gives him 80 grades on speed and arm, says can play 70 grade defense in center. Still has all the tools and athleticism, but Injuries pushed his timeline back a full year.

 

#15 - Miguel Sano - Thinks if his arm strength doesn't come back after Tommy John surgery, it will speed up a move to a new position. Thinks more likely to see majors in 2016 vs. this year after missing last season. 80 power, obviously.

 

#30 - Alex Meyer - Thinks it would be a waste of his two plus pitches (fastball, slider) if he were moved to the bullpen. Should show up this year. (I like where Law spots him, I still believe he's definitely the Twins top starting pitching prospect over Berrios and Stewart)

 

#43 - Nick Gordon - Thinks he'll stay at SS and play it well, improved a lot his final HS season and first professional season. Also mentions CF if somehow he doesn't stick. Cites strong contact skills and approach for his age.

 

#53 - Kohl Stewart - Four pitches, all with potential to be plus. Fastball up to 97, swing and miss slider. Potential to front a rotation with development, and needs to work on the changeup.

 

#97 - Jose Berrios - 93-96 with his fastball, curveball is best secondary pitch but not consistent enough yet. Mentions he's seen a lot of Berrios in his time, and still thinks lack of height and fastball plane could push him to bullpen. Ceiling of #3 starter.

He has always used the same two comments in regards to Berrios. 

Kiley over at Fangraphs listed Berrios as the Twins 3rd best prospect back in October.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/evaluating-the-prospects-minnesota-twins/

He has always used the same two comments in regards to Berrios. 

 

Yeah, he's basically saying that again here to justify how low he has him I think. The direct quote is: "I've always had a sense Berrios' height and lack of life or plane on his fastball would push him to the bullpen."

Twins questions from his chat:

Lots of people in MN think Stewart is a bust b/c of his low strike out totals. Can you calm them down?

Klaw (1:48 PM)

 

That's stupid. He's barely out of HS and was as much a thrower as a pitcher when he was drafted. I think the Twins have already done a hell of a job with him.

 

Correa breaks his leg, loses a season and climbs in the rankings but Sano loses a season and gets dropped 10 spots? What gives?

Klaw (1:48 PM)

 

Correa didn't lose a season. Try again.

 

I'm hoping you're wrong on Berrios, although 97th isn't necessarily awful. He looked pretty darn good against older competition in the Futures Game and WBC. Being a fly ball type of guy at Target Field can't hurt right?

Klaw (1:59 PM)

 

I don't think being a flyball guy is a good thing unless you're in Petco or AT&T Park. And Berrios' fastball is going to get squared up.

 

Is Max Kepler completely out of time at this point to become a viable major leaguer?

Klaw (2:02 PM)

 

No, not at all. I think he's a big leaguer in some form, but to be an everyday player his BP power must show up in games.

Kiley over at Fangraphs listed Berrios as the Twins 3rd best prospect back in October.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/evaluating-the-prospects-minnesota-twins/

 

I like the information Kiley pull's more than his rankings of prospects on lists, I've found. Lot's of good stuff from him though.

 

I still would rank Berrios behind Meyer and Stewart on my list. He's closer to them after last season, but I sill like Meyer and Stewart's "stuff" way better. Berrios is going to have a few "above average" pitches if you believe everything you read, whereas Meyer and Stewart may have multiple "plus" to "plus-plus" pitches. Berrios does get the higher marks on command and things like work ethic, but that doesn't push him above guys with better stuff for me.

I like the information Kiley pull's more than his rankings of prospects on lists, I've found. Lot's of good stuff from him though.

 

I still would rank Berrios behind Meyer and Stewart on my list. He's closer to them after last season, but I sill like Meyer and Stewart's "stuff" way better. Berrios is going to have a few "above average" pitches if you believe everything you read, whereas Meyer and Stewart may have multiple "plus" to "plus-plus" pitches. Berrios does get the higher marks on command and things like work ethic, but that doesn't push him above guys with better stuff for me.

Meyer is WAY older than both, one would expect his pitches to be more developed.  He's also still having command issues.  I'd take Berrios, Stewart then Meyer. We have to wonder how advanced Stewart and Berrios will be when they reach Meyer's age.

 

It's fun to debate the list though.

Edited January 29, 201511 yr by jimmer

Yeah, he's basically saying that again here to justify how low he has him I think. The direct quote is: "I've always had a sense Berrios' height and lack of life or plane on his fastball would push him to the bullpen."

 

I think he had Berrios ranked 90-100 last year.  Or maybe he made a comment about how he just missed the list last year.  If he basically didn't move at all from last year, seems a bit stubborn.

Edited January 29, 201511 yr by tobi0040

Twins questions from his chat:

Lots of people in MN think Stewart is a bust b/c of his low strike out totals. Can you calm them down?

Klaw (1:48 PM)

 

That's stupid. He's barely out of HS and was as much a thrower as a pitcher when he was drafted. I think the Twins have already done a hell of a job with him.

 

...

 

Is Max Kepler completely out of time at this point to become a viable major leaguer?

Klaw (2:02 PM)

 

No, not at all. I think he's a big leaguer in some form, but to be an everyday player his BP power must show up in games.

 

I'm with Law. Stewart was primarily working on his FB command the entire season, and basically never used his best strikeout pitch, the slider. And guess what? He was pretty good just doing that (2.59 ERA, 1.13 WHIP).  He'll get to ramp that up this year.

 

I still love Kepler, think this is the make or break year. I'd bet on him "making."

 

Meyer is WAY older than both, one would expect his pitches to be more developed.  He's also still having command issues.  I'd take Berrios, Stewart then Meyer. We have to wonder how advanced Stewart and Berrios will be when they reach Meyer's age.

 

It's fun to debate the list though.

 

It's not that his pitches are "more developed," it's that they are better. Better velocity, better plane, better movement. The only thing holding him back (according to the Twins) is that (because he's so tall) he can lose his mechanics, leading to walks. I don't think they hurt him as much as the Twins would lead you to believe, because he also racks up those K's.

 

Just for fun, here is MLB.com's scouting grades on their pitches, etc...:

 

Meyer: Fastball: 70 | Slider: 65 | Changeup: 50 | Control: 45 | Overall: 60

Stewart: Fastball: 70 | Curveball: 55 | Slider: 65 | Changeup: 55 | Control: 55 | Overall: 60

Berrios: Fastball: 60 | Curveball: 55 | Changeup: 55 | Control: 50 | Overall: 60

So, according to MLB.com, Berrios has the same overall score as Meyyer, but he's also 5 years younger.

 

I'll be interested in seeing other rankings, like BAs.  I've never been much of a fan of MLB.coms listing myself. personal preference.

Edited January 29, 201511 yr by jimmer

I think he had Berrios ranked 90-100 last year.  Or maybe he made a comment about how he just missed the list last year.  If he basically didn't move at all from last year, seems a bit stubborn.

 

He wasn't ranked, may have just missed. But I do agree it seems a bit stubborn after last year. I think he sees him as (and I do too) a poor man's Yordano Ventura, who he had at #50 going into last year and he voiced the same height and FB plane issues with.

So, according to MLB.com, Berrios has the same overall score as Meyyer, but he's also 5 years younger.

 

I'll be interested in seeing other rankings, like BAs.  I've never been much of a fan of MLB.coms listing myself. personal preference.

 

Yeah, which says to me Berrios doesn't have the same ceiling, and they see the difference in "stuff."

 

I'm not the biggest fan of MLB.com's either, but they include information like that, that other sites don't. I don't subscribe to BA, BP, ESPN insider, and others for no reason!

 

Baseball America has Berrios at #3, ahead of Stewart (#4) and Meyer (#5), by the way, saying "If he continues to progress, then he projects as a No. 3 starter."

 

On Stewart they say: "if he can miss more bats and stay off the DL he could reach a ceiling as a No. 2 starter."

Edited January 29, 201511 yr by Steve Lein

Greinke number two starter because Clayton Kershaw is on the team or actual number two starter?

Yeah, which says to me Berrios doesn't have the same ceiling, and they see the difference in "stuff."

 

I'm not the biggest fan of MLB.com's either, but they include information like that, that other sites don't. I don't subscribe to BA, BP, ESPN insider, and others for no reason!

 

Baseball America has Berrios at #3, ahead of Stewart (#4) and Meyer (#5), by the way, saying "If he continues to progress, then he projects as a No. 3 starter."

 

On Stewart they say: "if he can miss more bats and stay off the DL he could reach a ceiling as a No. 2 starter."

 

Based on the ratings I have seen, between MLB, BA, BP, etc.  They seem to all have Berrios in the 30-45 range, then Law is the outlier at 97. 

Law is stubborn and can be quite a jerk to anyone who disagrees with him, but to be fair, his concern with Berrios has always been his height (and thus the plane of his fastball).  Seeing as this isn't something Berrios can improve upon, it probably would be pretty hypocritical of Law to significantly change his evaluaiton.

 

So I'll just let Law continue to stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that plenty of pitchers have succeeded with the same issues that Berrios has and hope Berrios makes him eat his words.

Law is stubborn and can be quite a jerk to anyone who disagrees with him, but to be fair, his concern with Berrios has always been his height (and thus the plane of his fastball).  Seeing as this isn't something Berrios can improve upon, it probably would be pretty hypocritical of Law to significantly change his evaluaiton.

 

So I'll just let Law continue to stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that plenty of pitchers have succeeded with the same issues that Berrios has and hope Berrios makes him eat his words.

 

To an extent I agree.  He can't fix his height. But some guys, Pedro,Roy Oswalt, etc. did succeed without being 6'5.  So a year like last year tells me he inched closer to those guys.

To an extent I agree.  He can't fix his height. But some guys, Pedro,Roy Oswalt, etc. did succeed without being 6'5.  So a year like last year tells me he inched closer to those guys.

Another point about his height: there has been some interesting research going on (either BP or Fangraphs, I can't seem to find the article right now) about how the change in the strike zone (moving lower), and the hitters adjusting their swing planes to compensate, has allowed short pitchers to get away with pitching up in the zone. The general idea is that a swing geared to hit pitches thrown low in the zone by tall pitchers (sharp downward plane) will struggle with pitches thrown up in the zone by shorter pitches (flatter plane) since the swing plane doesn't match the plane of the pitch. 

 

I think the article referenced Sonny Gray and Marcus Stroman as two short pitchers who seem to be able to pitch up in the zone effectively. As an example of a hitter who demonstrates this a little bit, Mike Trout's kryptonite is the strike in the upper-third of the zone. He kills it in the lower part: http://www.fangraphs.com/zonegrid.aspx?playerid=10155&position=OF&ss=2014&se=2014&type=5&hand=all&count=all&blur=1&grid=10&view=bat

Another example would be Brandon Moss: http://www.fangraphs.com/zonegrid.aspx?playerid=4467&position=1B/OF&ss=2014&se=2014&type=5&hand=all&count=all&blur=1&grid=10&view=bat

Stroman is a beast.  Love that guy. And he's 5'9" 185.

 

And I'd bet Trout adjusts to the pitchers adjusting to him :-) Best player on the planet.

Edited January 30, 201511 yr by jimmer

Keith Law released his Twins top 10 prospect list today.

 

1. Buxton

2. Sano

3. Meyer

4. Gordon

5. Stewart

6. Berrios

7. Thorpe

8. Rosario

9. Polanco

10. Minier

 

It is a solid article worth reading if you have insider. He talks about Santana vs polanco, names Thorpe is sleeper next year (was his last year), and gives most of his rankings 11-19.

 

11. May

12. Reed

13. Burdi

14. Kepler

15. Michael

16. Hu

17. Harrison

18. Cederoth/gonsalves (both were labeled at 18)

Keith Law released his Twins top 10 prospect list today.

 

1. Buxton

2. Sano

3. Meyer

4. Gordon

5. Stewart

6. Berrios

7. Thorpe

8. Rosario

9. Polanco

10. Minier

 

It is a solid article worth reading if you have insider. He talks about Santana vs polanco, names Thorpe is sleeper next year (was his last year), and gives most of his rankings 11-19.

 

11. May

12. Reed

13. Burdi

14. Kepler

15. Michael

16. Hu

17. Harrison

18. Cederoth/gonsalves (both were labeled at 18)

Thanks for posting that.  Couple thoughts:

 

1) No Walker.  Until he improves his strike zone he really isn't much of a prospect for Klaw.

2) Nice to see Michael ranked high again.  I think we've tended to write him off but he's still young enough to maybe become a Nick Punto type UI.  

3) He still seems to like Rosario, despite a bad year.  That's good.

4) The complaint on Klaw has been that he likes ceiling/young guys too much.  But sometimes that works out.  He was a big believer in Arcia before the rest.  And now he has Minier in the team top 10.  Hope he's right on that too.

5) I think our top 15 or so prospects are pretty darn good.  Gets a little fuzzy after that but that's really nice prospect depth.  Kepler would probably be top 10 in a lot of other systems.

Klaw continues to hate on Berrios. I like Klaw but he turns irrational about specific players at times. I find it funny but he should probably be a little embarrassed because it's so obvious.

 

I don't think there's another national writer out there who puts Stewart ahead of Berrios after 2014.

Buxton at #2, others include Sano (dropping), Meyer, Nick Gordon, Stewart and Berrios

Klaw continues to hate on Berrios. I like Klaw but he turns irrational about specific players at times. I find it funny but he should probably be a little embarrassed because it's so obvious.

I don't think there's another national writer out there who puts Stewart ahead of Berrios after 2014.

I wouldn't call it hate. I have no problem with the ranking, seeing you know, it's his ranking. How many times has someone told you how great a band is, or a movie, or a TV show and then you watch it and you don't get it? Law is just going off what he has seen, what his contacts have told him, and off the things he values when grading prospects. Part of the fun of prospect lists is the debate IMO.

It's fine to believe that small stature works against establishing the kind of plane that leads to MLB success, but to make that case absolute is not only stubborn but lazy.  I'm sure there's various, scoutable skills, attributes, habitts that lead such pitchers to succeed; I'd like to know if Berrios possess any of those qualities, and Klaw sidesteps the inquiry.   Smart guy, but his self-satisfaction affects his craft.

Klaw continues to hate on Berrios. I like Klaw but he turns irrational about specific players at times. I find it funny but he should probably be a little embarrassed because it's so obvious.

 

I don't think there's another national writer out there who puts Stewart ahead of Berrios after 2014.

 

Agree on Berrios, but a couple of things:

 

1.) Stewart was better at Cedar Rapids than Berrios was a year earlier and definitely profiles (from a scout's perspective) higher.

 

2.) KLaw also likes Michael a lot. I believe before the 2011 draft, he ranked Michael as the 13th or 15th best player available in the entire draft. So, he's sticking by that too.

Agree on Berrios, but a couple of things:

 

1.) Stewart was better at Cedar Rapids than Berrios was a year earlier and definitely profiles (from a scout's perspective) higher.

 

2.) KLaw also likes Michael a lot. I believe before the 2011 draft, he ranked Michael as the 13th or 15th best player available in the entire draft. So, he's sticking by that too.

 

After watching the results, the Vikings had to change their opinion of Christian Ponder. 

Thanks for posting that.  Couple thoughts:

 

1) No Walker.  Until he improves his strike zone he really isn't much of a prospect for Klaw.

 

Law looks at Walker like I do, in that he never should have been in the rookie leagues or low-a ball to begin (which can be argued, obviously). Law isn't impressed by his HR numbers because that's what he would expect out of him against the lesser experienced competition he was facing. Add in the fact Walker hit .246 last year and he comes away unimpressed. I think we'll know a lot more about him in AA this year.

Ranking someone one of the top 100 minor leaguers=hating on him? Not sure I agree on that.

Ranking someone one of the top 100 minor leaguers=hating on him? Not sure I agree on that.

 

Hate is a strong word, but relative to others that have Berrios in the 30-40 range, Law is clearly the outlier.  Mayo still has Buxton 1, Berrrios 32.  He has the Twins as the top system.  6 in the top 36.

 

http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2015

Edited February 2, 201511 yr by tobi0040

Law looks at Walker like I do, in that he never should have been in the rookie leagues or low-a ball to begin (which can be argued, obviously). Law isn't impressed by his HR numbers because that's what he would expect out of him against the lesser experienced competition he was facing. Add in the fact Walker hit .246 last year and he comes away unimpressed. I think we'll know a lot more about him in AA this year.

 

This is another topic that keeps coming up that I hate. So, you think Walker should have jumped straight to Ft. Myers after being drafted as a 20 year old... he struggled there enough this year as a 22 year old... you think it would have made sense to start him there two years ago? I don't get that thinking. We saw what happened when the Twins started Levi Michael in High-A. Like Walker, he was young for his college draft class too. 

 

It doesn't mean that it shouldn't be part of his evaluation as a prospect. It's just that it would be silly to put a player in positions ahead of where they should be just because of some date of birth or background. They all need to be handled differently.