Meh.

Another wtf pick. A pitcher who has a fastball around 86-88?

Ouch "Kind of the pitcher we associate with the Twins".

 

Because he's a "touch and feel" guy and throws 88 MPH.

From Fangraphs chat right now:

 

Minnesota picks LHP Charlie Barnes from Clemson to start 4th round
#96 on my top 100, potential plus changeup.
1:50 87-90 for me in Louisville a few weeks ago.

 

I think there is video also, but it's blocked at work, so I 'm not sure.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-prospects-chat-mlb-draft-day-2/

 

Guessing Burns or Beck weren't signable?

 

 

 

From Fangraphs chat right now:

 

Minnesota picks LHP Charlie Barnes from Clemson to start 4th round
#96 on my top 100, potential plus changeup.
1:50 87-90 for me in Louisville a few weeks ago.

 

I think there is video also, but it's blocked at work, so I 'm not sure.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-prospects-chat-mlb-draft-day-2/

 

Are they sure they're just not mistaking his FB for a changeup?

Loss like they are looking for pitchers with plus secondary pitches.

Yeah would have preferred a little more ceiling there but who knows. Should be signable, maybe save a few $$ also.

A crafty lefty. Not impressed. Need these guys but we have plenty already. Ok we've saved some money now. Time to use it on some HS projection before we get too deep here.

The Twins could still take other guys that fell, but there's not necessarily a reason to do so immediately.

Yeah would have preferred a little more ceiling there but who knows. Should be signable, maybe save a few $$ also.

With all the money we're saving we're going to have the best rounds 11-40 ever. They are all going to be able to make it to AA. Great organizational depth

I'm ok with Barnes. He was 108 on BA list. Good secondary stuff and understanding of how to pitch. That's not bad.

Barnes had strong K/9 (10+) and BB/9 (sub 2) numbers in a solid conference this year. But a 8.70 H/9 means he was extremely hittable. 

He really knows how to let the defense do the work for him ... my kind of guy.

 

http://www.twincities.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/20111107_042125_rdm-Terry-Ryan.jpg?w=620

 

Barnes had strong K/9 (10+) and BB/9 (sub 2) numbers in a solid conference this year. But a 8.70 H/9 means he was extremely hittable. 

 

Maybe he can become a Mark Beuhrle mid-rotation guy.

 

By the way, what the heck happened to Ryan Eades? Wasn't he supposed to move quick?

Edited June 13, 20179 yr by InfraRen

Burns sounds like a smaller version of Gonsalves, sounds like a great pick in the 4th round, if he pitched in the mid 90s he probably would've been a 1st rounder

 

Burns sounds like a smaller version of Gonsalves, sounds like a great pick in the 4th round, if he pitched in the mid 90s he probably would've been a 1st rounder

 

Also, if Royce Lewis had a 80 Power Tool, none of would have questioned the pick.

 

Things are starting to come together a bit more, right? 

 

Would we be less confused if it went 1 - Lewis, 2 - Enlow, 3 - Rooker, 4 - Leach? At the end of the day the order doesn't matter if they all sign, but there's some real talent in there. 

 

Haven't got through the thread, so maybe this has been addressed. If you take Enlow there and he doesn't sign, you lose a lot more money than if you take him where you did and he doesn't sign. Sound strategy.

How many more of today's picks will be qualified with "probably will sign for under slot"?

 

I'm trying to trust the process, but I'm struggling to see the vision so far.

 

 

 

Also, if Royce Lewis had a 80 Power Tool, none of would have questioned the pick.

 

If he had an 80 power tool, he would have been the clear BPA and there would have been no question who we were picking

 

Haven't got through the thread, so maybe this has been addressed. If you take Enlow there and he doesn't sign, you lose a lot more money than if you take him where you did and he doesn't sign. Sound strategy.

Can the top ranked guys still out there potentially be signed at this point, or likely to go to school, etc? 

 

Tanner Burns, Alex Scherff, Garrett Mitchell, Daniel Cabrera, etc

 

Haven't got through the thread, so maybe this has been addressed. If you take Enlow there and he doesn't sign, you lose a lot more money than if you take him where you did and he doesn't sign. Sound strategy.

 

Ignoring the risk he doesn't drop, yes. there is risk there....

 

If he had an 80 power tool, he would have been the clear BPA and there would have been no question who we were picking

 

Yep. That was my point.

 

Ignoring the risk he doesn't drop, yes. there is risk there....

 

Of course there's some risk, but if you know you have to offer what other teams don't... and the agent repeats those demands to other teams... not a whole lot of risk.

 

Can the top ranked guys still out there potentially be signed at this point, or likely to go to school, etc? 

 

Tanner Burns, Alex Scherff, Garrett Mitchell, Daniel Cabrera, etc

 

I think the Twins could get creative if they want. But I know at least one of those names never made it onto the Twins board.

 

With all the money we're saving we're going to have the best rounds 11-40 ever. They are all going to be able to make it to AA. Great organizational depth

Have you been listening to all the college "redrafts"  being taken? There is a ton of talent that goes unsigned. Something like one out of 8 players here on out.

Every round the Twins go into carrying savings puts them at an advantage.

 

I think the Twins could get creative if they want. But I know at least one of those names never made it onto the Twins board.

 

Was just reading more about Scherff, like what I read.

I think the Twins could get creative if they want. But I know at least one of those names never made it onto the Twins board.

Don't have to be specific or name the person but can you elaborate as to why? Character concerns? Health? Talent?