In fairness, the Cubs are in a position to spend on guys like Jon Lester and we are not.

If you need pitching to win, the Twins lack an avenue some teams have. That is part of the equation.

Now we can point to guys like Arrietta or even Ervin that we could get, but it is not a level playing field. Please note, I don't want to start a debate that we could sign an ace. The fact is we won't.

Sure, the Cubs have resources unavailable to the Twins but the Indians have a damned fine rotation (which Falvey is largely credited with building) and they don't have any more resources than the Twins.

 

The idea behind avoiding early-round pitching isn't entirely about money, it's about opportunity cost. As we've seen with Stewart and Jay, pitching flames out at a high rate, higher than positional players.

 

And if you have good positional players, you can always make trades.

 

And given that arms are something of a crapshoot, then you go grab a ton of arms in the lower rounds and hope some of them pan out (as the Twins did with Enlow in the third round).

 

I don't know how many talented young players left to be drafted by the Twins in order to make this draft get a passing grade.

Well, they got Enlow in the third round and have the money to sign him. Most everybody considers that a pretty good get.

 

And if you have good positional players, you can always make trades.

This is absolutely a factor, too.

 

Sure, the Cubs have resources unavailable to the Twins but the Indians have a damned fine rotation (which Falvey is largely credited with building) and they don't have any more resources than the Twins.

 

The idea behind avoiding early-round pitching isn't entirely about money, it's about opportunity cost. As we've seen with Stewart and Jay, pitching flames out at a high rate, higher than positional players.

 

And if you have good positional players, you can always make trades.

 

And given that arms are something of a crapshoot, then you go grab a ton of arms in the lower rounds and hope some of them pan out (as the Twins did with Enlow in the third round).

 

It's not clear to me that it is as easy to get controllable SP in trade as your posts are implying....

 

No, pitching shouldn't be the first priority. What you feel will be the best MLB player should be the first priority.

 

Unless you think the Cubs have been doing things all wrong for the past five years by mostly avoiding pitching in the first two rounds and entirely in the first round (until this year when they picked at the bottom of the pile).

Cubs is not Twins. Cubs is a big market team and its owner is willing to spend to win. Drafting best possible pitchers and developing might be the best way for our Twins to field a contending team. Good pitching usually beats good hitting right?

 

Cubs is not Twins. Cubs is a big market team and its owner is willing to spend to win. Drafting best possible pitchers and developing might be the best way for our Twins to field a contending team. Good pitching usually beats good hitting right?

The Indians seemed to do okay last season and they don't have more money than the Twins.

 

"Good pitching beats good hitting" is only looking at the end result. What happens if you have 13 good hitters? Don't you think it's possible to acquire good pitching at that point?

 

The fact is that we have no idea whether this was a good or bad draft. Only time will tell the outcome and declaring a failure on June 13th, 2017 is incredibly short-sighted.

 

It's not clear to me that it is as easy to get controllable SP in trade as your posts are implying....

No, it's not easy but it's not impossible, either. The 2016 Indians, who went seven games in the World Series, drafted zero players in their rotation.

 

What I don't get is how people who generally accept advanced baseball strategy are so reluctant to accept that this is a legit strategy used by modern teams. Is it a good strategy in the long run? Well, I guess we'll find out sooner or later.

 

No, it's not easy but it's not impossible, either. The 2016 Indians, who went seven games in the World Series, drafted zero players in their rotation.

 

What I don't get is how people who generally accept advanced baseball strategy are so reluctant to accept that this is a legit strategy used by modern teams. Is it a good strategy in the long run? Well, I guess we'll find out sooner or later.

 

I'm not rejecting it at all......but it isn't any easier to trade for a cost controlled guy than it is to draft one. You may recall acquiring Vance Worley, Alex Meyer, and Trevor May recently, for example.

 

I'm not rejecting it at all......but it isn't any easier to trade for a cost controlled guy than it is to draft one. You may recall acquiring Vance Worley, Alex Meyer, and Trevor May recently, for example.

It's not about it being easier to trade, it's about going with players that deliver a higher hit rate and then trading off excess for something that fails more often, especially at lower levels.

 

I'm just making up these numbers but if positional players hit at 70% and pitchers hit at 55%, how hard is is going to be to stockpile positional players to shuffle around for pitching as you need it? It won't be easy but it won't be impossible, either, particularly if you throw a little excess into the deal to make it happen. And the pitcher you get in return is going to be more of a sure thing than the guy you would have drafted, particularly any prep arm.

 

And it's not as if the Twins are ignoring pitching, they've taken arms in rounds 3+.

 

It's not about it being easier to trade, it's about going with players that deliver a higher hit rate and then trading off excess for something that fails more often, especially at lower levels.

 

I'm just making up these numbers but if positional players hit at 70% and pitchers hit at 55%, how hard is is going to be to stockpile positional players to shuffle around for pitching as you need it? It won't be easy but it won't be impossible, either, particularly if you throw a little excess into the deal to make it happen. And the pitcher you get in return is going to be more of a sure thing than the guy you would have drafted, particularly any prep arm.

 

And it's not as if the Twins are ignoring pitching, they've taken arms in rounds 3+.

 

And, you are giving up 5-7 years of control of more than 1 player, for 2-3 years of control for 1 player.....you can't afford to miss that way. Not even a little. Imagine if they trade Gordon and Jorge for a number 4-5 type they only control for 3 years....

I'm really happy about Lewis. He's going to play a premium position. For so long the Twins have been weak at those spots. You can't just put a live body with a glove their anymore. Even if he ends up in the outfield he's a plus, plus, runner with a plus bat. Can't go wrong. Loooking forward to Royce.

Padres, A's, Cincinnati, Tampa. That's the top of my list. Teams that struggle with bad fan support, a middling market, and little immediate hope for the future.

 

After that, it becomes a mix of Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Kansas City. Maybe Toronto because of the exchange rate knee-capping their potential market and their dome stadium.

 

Honorary mentions to Arizona and Colorado for pretty obvious reasons, though their markets are solid.

Fun game. My bottom five would be:

 

Tampa

Cincinnati

Miami

Oakland

Detroit

 

I did want a college pitcher over Lewis but that is partly me being wrong and drafting for need. Lewis seems to be a pretty good prospect so ... still, I don't like bring Boras into our clubhouse.

Well, the thing is, if you don't want Boras in your clubhouse you're probably missing out on some pretty good talent.

 

Make the player deal with Boras, with a clause:  If the player is successful, you will flip him for a group of prospects.  Win for the player, with for the team and a win for the Boras.    :-)

How does the drafting of Royce Lewis affect Nick Gordon?

 

Wild guess / thinking big:  If Lewis shows ANYTHING in his first season, or 2, Gordon is part of a trade to get a really good Starting Pitcher.  

Board sentiment was overwhelmingly against McKay, so it's not really convincing now for posters to come back lamenting the fact that the Twins didn't pick him.

Don't confuse majority opinion with individual opinion.

 

Pitching should be the first priority. I understand the need to lure talents for the latter picks. In this case, Gore should be the one they drafted #1. 

Your opinion is not valid because the site owner says so    ....so there!

Edited June 14, 20179 yr by laloesch

 

How does the drafting of Royce Lewis affect Nick Gordon?

 

Wild guess / thinking big:  If Lewis shows ANYTHING in his first season, or 2, Gordon is part of a trade to get a really good Starting Pitcher.  

 

I'd ask, how does teh drafting of Lewis effect Eddie Rosario or Byron Buxton.....

 

The Twins have a very good pipeline of SS right now. Lewis is 3-6 years away. Gordon could be in MN this fall if he keeps hitting like this, though I'd guess next spring. 

 

I'll just end this now.  Try to be smarter.  

 

1) You don't know that was the guy they wanted

2) They paid under slot so they could draft the 29th ranked prospect at #76

3) Again, they are paying THE EXACT SAME amount of money to draft picks

 

Excuse me?  You better take a long look in the mirror and read up before telling someone to be smarter!  Yes the Twins did want McKay at 1:1, that was there first preference.  Now you may not like that and it seems to have your knickers in a twist, but i've read multiple reports including one on baseball America stating as such.  Yes, they wanted him badly at 1:1 but were not willing to pay him slot.  Don't like the message, don't read my post, but it is true like it or not Alarp.  The rest of your post is pointless.  I don't care what they are trying to save in later picks by paying under slot with the 1st pick.  At 1:1 that is not the pick to be skimping on in order save money for later signings. 

Edited June 14, 20179 yr by laloesch

 

True, but the wrong ones.  They drafted a reliever and attempted to turn him into a starter.  The other is a type one diabetic (big red flag for any athlete) and to be honest Stewart was over hyped and never lived up to the scouting reports from day one.

Care to expand why type 1 diabetes is a big red flag for athletes?

 

Care to expand why type 1 diabetes is a big red flag for athletes?

 

They tire. There is another type 1 diabetic draft eligible that is falling, according to reports, (partly) for that reason. Right or wrong, that's the belief of the industry. I don't think it should be, but clearly teams do according to what I read online.

 

welcome the site!

 

They tire. There is another type 1 diabetic draft eligible that is falling, according to reports, (partly) for that reason. Right or wrong, that's the belief of the industry. I don't think it should be, but clearly teams do according to what I read online.

 

welcome the site!

Was just curious, being a Type 1 myself, why it was such a red flag.  Never pitched above the townball level, so obviously my workload would be maybe 10% of that of a minor leaguer, and wanted to hear why others considered (or what they had heard from others) it such a big red flag.  Are there some things we deal with that others don't have to?  Absolutely, but to turn that (and this is all on an individual basis), I'd tend to believe that some prepare their bodies even better than some non-diabetics due to the physical and nutritional requirements that can be so instrumental in managing the disease.  Obviously adds another dynamic to scouting a ballplayer and wondering if it's an obstacle they can overcome.  (In my experience, it's caused me to be more diligent in my life in every aspect)

 

Anyway, don't want to turn the forum into a Webmd page on my 2nd post.  Been a lurker for a couple years now and finally joined, looking forward to getting to know some of you.

 

 

It seems clear from what I read today, the McKay had already decided to he wanted to go to Tampa Bay.  So his advisors put out the story, he would not deal on slot value.  This did not suit the first 3 teams, so not unexpectedlly they all passed.  System can still be gamed if the player takes the risk and makes it difficult to deal with for other teams.  

This issue needs to be fixed in the next collective bargining agreement, and feel the the MLB players will try and reduce the money to the newbies.  It happens in all the other sports the first contract is very team friendly. 

 

How does the drafting of Royce Lewis affect Nick Gordon?

 

Wild guess / thinking big:  If Lewis shows ANYTHING in his first season, or 2, Gordon is part of a trade to get a really good Starting Pitcher.  

I've heard a lot of people saying that Lewis doesn't have the arm for SS and he'll end up in CF. It's likely Lewis will not affect Gordon (who might be a 2B) whatsoever.

 

I've heard a lot of people saying that Lewis doesn't have the arm for SS and he'll end up in CF. It's likely Lewis will not affect Gordon (who might be a 2B) whatsoever.

Lewis' arm:  I've read the same thing, too.  I've also read the exact opposite. Weird...

 

It seems clear from what I read today, the McKay had already decided to he wanted to go to Tampa Bay.  So his advisors put out the story, he would not deal on slot value.  This did not suit the first 3 teams, so not unexpectedlly they all passed.  System can still be gamed if the player takes the risk and makes it difficult to deal with for other teams.  

This issue needs to be fixed in the next collective bargining agreement, and feel the the MLB players will try and reduce the money to the newbies.  It happens in all the other sports the first contract is very team friendly. 

 

I agree whole heartedly.