Baseball America's Top 10 Twins Prospects

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 9:57 PM, Thrylos said:

So, if that were the case, why is not the pitcher with the highest upside, potential and stuff in the list?

 

Because 1.) he's now a reliever, 2.) his mechanics are all over the place and not very good, 3.) his velocity is all over the place, 4.) others above him are really good prospects too, 5.) some evaluators wonder if he'll be able to figure it out ever. 

 

I say that, and he's a tremendous person who I hope like crazy does figure it out and becomes a dominant late-inning reliever.

[Bob Sacamento]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 10:14 PM, Seth Stohs said:

There is a lot of confidence on Burdi, Chargois, Melotakis and Rogers all being ready by May 1st.

which would perfectly explain the Twin reluctance to spend heavy on the RP market.

[Seth Stohs]

Fair question is... Would Twins fans be more excited, and would Park rank higher on prospect rankings, if the Twins would have had to pay Park 5 years, $30 million, instead of 4 years, $12 million.

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 10:20 PM, Bob Sacamento said:

which would perfectly explain the Twin reluctance to spend heavy on the RP market.

 

I fully explains, in my mind, why they don't want to go beyond 1 year on any reliever.

[Ronald Zimmerman]

I am beginning to wonder if Johnson and our scout department know what the heck they are doing. We do not seem to pick and #1 and #2 draft that can make it right away or even make it at all. Don't think I have to list all the misses for the readers here.

[nytwinsfan]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 9:57 PM, Thrylos said:

So, if that were the case, why is not the pitcher with the highest upside, potential and stuff in the list?

Meyer may still have the highest upside and best raw stuff, but things like expected value (the area under the curve) and high floor also matter. You do understand that upside is only part of a player's value right and that you have to consider the probability of each outcome?

[Rosterman]

Pretty safe list. Amazingly, ALL these guys should make the major leagues!

 

[Ronald Zimmerman]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 10:27 PM, Ronald Zimmerman said:

I am beginning to wonder if Johnson and our scout department know what the heck they are doing. We do not seem to pick and #1 and #2 draft that can make it right away or even make it at all. Don't think I have to list all the misses for the readers here.

 

[Thrylos]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 10:28 PM, nytwinsfan said:

Meyer may still have the highest upside and best raw stuff, but things like expected value (the area under the curve) and high floor also matter. You do understand that upside is only part of a player's value right and that you have to consider the probability of each outcome?

 

I don't disagree with you.  You really arguing my point.  Part of which is that floor and results matter and I find the Meyer and Buxton cases more similar that non-similar.  If Meyer don't not fix his fatal flaws (a. mechanics b. staying healthy) his floor is not that high. If Buxton does not fix his fatal flaws (a. hitting the breaking stuff b. staying healthy) his floor is not that high.  Buxton probably has the highest ceiling in the list as far as position players go, but Meyer does too, as far as pitchers go.

 

My problem is with the inconsistency here for including Buxton and excluding Meyer.  That's all

[nytwinsfan]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 11:01 PM, Thrylos said:

I don't disagree with you.  You really arguing my point.  Part of which is that floor and results matter and I find the Meyer and Buxton cases more similar that non-similar.  If Meyer don't not fix his fatal flaws (a. mechanics b. staying healthy) his floor is not that high. If Buxton does not fix his fatal flaws (a. hitting the breaking stuff b. staying healthy) his floor is not that high.  Buxton probably has the highest ceiling in the list as far as position players go, but Meyer does too, as far as pitchers go.

 

My problem is with the inconsistency here for including Buxton and excluding Meyer.  That's all

You talk about relying (in part) on results, but Buxton's results over the last three years include one season with .944 OPS, one season with .867 OPS, and one year of injuries, plus (what even you have to concede) is a tremendously high floor of premium position defense.  In contrast, the last three years Meyer had ERAs of 2.99, 3.52 and 4.79 (importantly) in that order, plus horrible BB peripherals which Buxton's mediocre K peripherals are not comparable too.

 

Also, Buxton was a LOT younger comparative to Meyer when he put up those results, even conceding that age is less (although not un-) important for pitching prospects.

 

Finally, has Buxton been unable to hit breaking stuff in the minors? I find that hard to believe, given the numbers he's put up. What is your evidence for that?

 

Buxton's floor (unless he gets seriously hurt) is a gold glove, high SB, mediocre to poor hitting CF. Meyer's is that he never learns to find the strike zone and retires in two years.

 

I actually might agree that Meyer should still be in the top 10, but there is simply no comparison w/ Buxton. You can't take Buxton's very limited play at the majors, including a lot of time overcoming an injury and take away from the above. You just can't.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 10:14 PM, Seth Stohs said:

There is a lot of confidence on Burdi, Chargois, Melotakis and Rogers all being ready by May 1st.

 

And yet not one of them was ready last year, when they needed help? In just one month, they are going to improve that much?

[Mike Sixel]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 10:23 PM, Seth Stohs said:

Fair question is... Would Twins fans be more excited, and would Park rank higher on prospect rankings, if the Twins would have had to pay Park 5 years, $30 million, instead of 4 years, $12 million.

 

for me, it is his age that holds me back from ranking him high, and his competition level. 

[markos]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 10:23 PM, Seth Stohs said:

Fair question is... Would Twins fans be more excited, and would Park rank higher on prospect rankings, if the Twins would have had to pay Park 5 years, $30 million, instead of 4 years, $12 million.

His contract doesn't impact my expectations at all, since once the Twins won the bidding there was basically zero leverage for Park to get much more than that. I would have been more excited if the winning bid was higher, or if multiple teams had made the maximum $20M bid. 

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:13 PM, Mike Sixel said:

And yet not one of them was ready last year, when they needed help? In just one month, they are going to improve that much?

 

Can you argue that any of them were? Melotakis missed the whole year. Burdi had struggled most of the year and just starting to turn it around, and Chargois was solid in AA but in his first year back from Tommy John. I could argue Rogers could have come up and contributed out of the bullpen, but not the other three.

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:14 PM, Mike Sixel said:

for me, it is his age that holds me back from ranking him high, and his competition level. 

 

From a prospect ranking standpoint, I completely agree...

 

With that question, I kind of went a different direction and just wondered aloud if people would be more excited about him if the Twins would have had to pay more.

[Mike Sixel]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:41 PM, Seth Stohs said:

Can you argue that any of them were? Melotakis missed the whole year. Burdi had struggled most of the year and just starting to turn it around, and Chargois was solid in AA but in his first year back from Tommy John. I could argue Rogers could have come up and contributed out of the bullpen, but not the other three.

 

Rogers for me, yes.

 

The others? No, but then why would they be ready just 4 game weeks later? What could have changed that fast that we should now be confident in them?

[Mike Sixel]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:42 PM, Seth Stohs said:

From a prospect ranking standpoint, I completely agree...

 

With that question, I kind of went a different direction and just wondered aloud if people would be more excited about him if the Twins would have had to pay more.

 

 

Ah. No idea, this is the only place I talk baseball.....but I wouldn't. Get me an elite, young, Cuban hitter....then we can talk.

[nicksaviking]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:42 PM, Mike Sixel said:

Rogers for me, yes.

 

The others? No, but then why would they be ready just 4 game weeks later? What could have changed that fast that we should now be confident in them?

 

I agree the guys in the minors weren't lighting the world on fire but we also should consider who they would have been replacing. The bullpen absolutely needed an influx of strikeouts.

 

They had no problem calling up Hicks, Rosario, Santana, Buxton, Vargas, Polanco and Sano because their skill set and/or position was something the offense had to have at the moment and many of those guys could have used more seasoning.

 

If the Twins need a SS, they aren't going to call up Adam Walker, even if he's the hottest hitter in Rochester. It still seems that the Twins will call up the pitcher who's pitching the best in Rochester, even if he's say Pat Dean but what they really need is a guy who can get a strikeout in a clutch situation.

[Mike Sixel]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 3:46 PM, nicksaviking said:

I agree the guys in the minors weren't lighting the world on fire but we also should consider who they would have been replacing. The bullpen absolutely needed an influx of strikeouts.

 

They had no problem calling up Hicks, Rosario, Santana, Buxton, Vargas, Polanco and Sano because their skill set and/or position was something the offense had to have at the moment and many of those guys could have used more seasoning.

 

If the Twins need a SS, they aren't going to call up Adam Walker, even if he's the hottest hitter in Rochester. It still seems that the Twins will call up the pitcher who's pitching the best in Rochester, even if he's say Pat Dean but what they really need is a guy who can get a strikeout in a clutch situation.

 

I won't disagree on not being thrilled with how they run the pitching.....

[clutterheart]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 7:39 PM, Thrylos said:

Given that only the following would satisfy my criteria:

 

2.) JO Berrios
4.) Nick Gordon
5.) Tyler Jay
8.) Kohl Stewart
9.) Stephen Gonsalves
10.) Nick Burdi

 

Gordon second season in a row under .700 OPS, second season in a row under .970 fielding percentage, not sure if his focus is baseball or celebrity; the only thing I hear about this guy is a. excuses about his performance ("started cold", "had a bad month", etc) b. how much potential he has and c. bloodlines.  Speed was supposed to be a virtue:  He stole 25 bases (75% success rate) in 535 PAs.  This is right at Daniel Palka (24 SB, 77% success, 575 PAs) vs Ben Revere (44 SB, 77% success, 374 PAs in Midwest League in 2008) 

 

The first rule of Low Minors Fielding % is you do not look at Low Minors Fielding %

The second rule of Low Minors Fielding % is you do NOT look at Low Minors Fielding %

 

Glance at error rates if you must, but…Fielding % only becomes meaningful around AA or AAA.  For low minor guys you have to rely on scouting reports and everything I have seen on Gordon’s fielding ability is glowing.

 

His bat:

Here is Gordon’s progression as a 19 year old in Low A:
April - 75 AB .267/.305 /.347 - Not so great

May- 103 AB .204/.305 /.233 - Oh my God  Guess we should start drafting a new SS of the future

June - 82 AB .293/.370/.341 There we go, things are getting better

July - 97 AB .309/.349/.423 Wow that scrawny kid is slugging in .400s?

Aug - 103 AB .311/.355/.437  Double Wow!

Sept -  21 AB .286/.318/.429 (5 games but not bad playoff production)

 

Furthermore he hit .699 OPS over 57 games as a SS in E-town as an 18 year old rookie.  You're questioning that?

 

Ridiculous

 

Its fine to question Gordon if you must, but use meaningful data or observations from watching him....

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:41 PM, Seth Stohs said:

Can you argue that any of them were? Melotakis missed the whole year. Burdi had struggled most of the year and just starting to turn it around, and Chargois was solid in AA but in his first year back from Tommy John. I could argue Rogers could have come up and contributed out of the bullpen, but not the other three.

Seth, I think you are missing Mike's point.  Which is, saying these guys will be ready May 1st, when they weren't ready on September 1st, sounds more like wish-casting than pragmatic planning.

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:42 PM, Mike Sixel said:

Rogers for me, yes.

 

The others? No, but then why would they be ready just 4 game weeks later? What could have changed that fast that we should now be confident in them?

 

Improved control... something... once Burdi figures it out, it's just a matter of time. After what he did in the AFL, it's clear he's closer. Chargois throws just as hard as Burdi. He was the Lookouts closer at the end of last season, with Burdi setting him up. Also close. And Melotakis is lefty and throws 97. Very reasonable to think that he proves himself healthy and gets up quickly. 

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 6:16 PM, spycake said:

Seth, I think you are missing Mike's point.  Which is, saying these guys will be ready May 1st, when they weren't ready on September 1st, sounds more like wish-casting than pragmatic planning.

 

No, I fully get the point... I just think that an offseason can do wonders. When guys have the stuff that those guys have, they can move quick. Doesn't mean they will. They weren't ready on September 1, but that has nothing to do with whether or not they're ready May 1. A lot happens in that time.

[Mike Sixel]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 7:58 PM, Seth Stohs said:

No, I fully get the point... I just think that an offseason can do wonders. When guys have the stuff that those guys have, they can move quick. Doesn't mean they will. They weren't ready on September 1, but that has nothing to do with whether or not they're ready May 1. A lot happens in that time.

 

Well, I hope you are correct.

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 8:15 PM, Mike Sixel said:

Well, I hope you are correct.

 

No way to know. We'll find out. 

[bird]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 2:13 PM, Mike Sixel said:

And yet not one of them was ready last year, when they needed help? In just one month, they are going to improve that much?

 

 

We have to remember that Melotakis has been rehabbing behind the scenes from injury, so while the Twins have a very solid idea about where he stands, we do not. Burdi pitched in the AFL after the season was over and dominated, so it's no stretch at all to think he'll be better prepared for MLB to start 2016. Rogers was in the rotation all year, and his lefty splits were rather exciting, so it's also not hard to understand why they will consider him as a relief option. Chargois was in his first full year back from injury and was dominant towards the end of the season. Most project him to maybe be best served with just a little more time in the minors, depending on how his off-season program goes.

[Mike Sixel]

These guys will mostly be used as closers in the minors, meaning they will get 3 or so appearances a week in April (well, maybe not, since IA and Rochester start late, and there will be postponements).....so, after 12 more appearances the Twins will know they are ready or not, and 1-2 of them will be? That seems like hope to me. 

 

As for Rogers, he was ready to help in the bullpen last year, they chose, not to use him that way at all.

[h2oface]

 

  On 1/13/2016 at 8:45 PM, Seth Stohs said:

......Yes, that's what prospect rankings do. It has very little to do with stats and numbers and much more to do with upside, potential and stuff.

 

In other words, or my words...... It has to do with total opinion and bias with no firm criteria and standards, and everyone has an opinion, among other things. It can still be fun, though.

[TRex]

 

  On 1/14/2016 at 9:25 PM, Mike Sixel said:

These guys will mostly be used as closers in the minors, meaning they will get 3 or so appearances a week in April (well, maybe not, since IA and Rochester start late, and there will be postponements).....so, after 12 more appearances the Twins will know they are ready or not, and 1-2 of them will be? That seems like hope to me. 

 

As for Rogers, he was ready to help in the bullpen last year, they chose, not to use him that way at all.

In regards to why they could be better, I think you are overlooking spring training. The most important thing for each is to improve a breaking pitch. You are NOT going to be doing any tinkering with grips, etc. when working from the bullpen of a team looking for a playoff birth. However, that is all they will be doing for 6 weeks of spring training (before reporting to AAA).

[Seth Stohs]

 

  On 1/15/2016 at 12:27 AM, h2oface said:

In other words, or my words...... It has to do with total opinion and bias with no firm criteria and standards, and everyone has an opinion, among other things. It can still be fun, though.

 

On some level, yes... 

 

Everyone is different. For me, I factor in a bunch. Some is statistical. K rate, BB rate ( for hitters and pitchers), but also age to level of competition. I try to see as many of them in spring training, in Cedar Rapids, on milb.tv, getting to know them, their makeup, personality, work ethic, etc. Scouting reports... Stats become more important in my opinion as a player moves up, and the tools become skills. 

 

And then factor in other things, and then call it an educated guess... or a prospect ranking.