Article: Twins Minor League Report (5/13): Baller-Zovic

[bird]

 

This miss on Tyler Jay looks worse than your run-of-the-mill bust because the whole thought process that went into it was flawed. They went after college relievers trying to exploit some non-existent market inefficiency. It was such a bad idea it only took a year to see that it wasn't going to pay off. They'd have been better off throwing darts than executing that terrible plan.

 

 

Yeah, I think it's harsh and simplistic, but there's some validity to that argument. 

 

Even back in 2015, if you weren't drafting in the top third of the first round, pretty much all the high velo starters were off the board, usually in the first handful of picks. They may have mistakenly convinced themselves that Jay profile more as a starter, as scouts were suggesting.

 

Flawed as it was as a strategy, if the goal was to populate the ranks with some fireballers, the relievers were what was out there. In this day and age, when every prospect is seemingly throwing gas, it would be a terrible plan for sure. Rogers and Duffy were not throwing 95 when they were drafted as 5th and 11th rounders.

 

Frankly, I think the much larger problem was gambling that most of these max effort guys would avoid injury for one (Melotakis, Bullock, Hunt, Gutierrez, Burdi, and Jones ALL suffered injuries), and then failing to either retain or convert guys like Chargois, Bard, Burdi, and a number of others into some semblance of a return.

 

One could argue that taking ANY high velo pitcher, starter or not, is a bad strategy. Look at the data. It's littered with casualties and TJ guys like Hunter Greene.

[ashbury]

Roger, this has nothing to do with this comment... but I figured you should know that Ben Rortvedt was just promoted to AA Pensacola... 

Is there a corresponding move, or will they keep three catchers at AA?

[bird]

 

If the Twins knew Rogers was going to be this good, they would have taken him earlier. His success has nothing to do with Jay's failure.

 

Jay, Gordon, Stewart, were Ryan's last three number 1 picks, before that?

 

Buxton, Levi Michael, Alex Wimmers, Gibson, Hunt, Guteriezz, Hicks.....

 

So, three legit ML players out of ten. Jay, Gordon and Stewart were all top 10 picks (meaning the ML team was bad.....).  (One of the three good ones he traded for Murphy.....) and maybe Gordon turns out. Miss on one? Sure. Miss on two? Maybe ok. Miss on all three in a row?

 

That's not good enough, if your strategy is to NOT sign big time FAs, not trade top prospects for players, and to build in the draft and IFA......

 

 

This isn't a comparative analysis, so I won't touch on points you're making that aren't relevent.

 

But the relevence of Rogers, Hildenberger, Bard, and any number of OTHER successful later round picks is to refute the implication that's always there when the draft record gets called into question. Which is the question of competence at talent evaluation. They didn't reverse a frontal lobotomy in time for the 11th round.

 

In a reasoned comparative analysis, Buxton, Gordon, Gibson (for sure!) and Michael would all be judged to be good decisions. Hicks too, but he was over ten years ago. Stewart, probably not, but that case is open.

 

As I've argued for awhile, having much of an edge in the draft is pretty much fiction these days because of observation technology, spending limits, and widespread emphasis on reliance on homegrown talent by almost every team now, including the Yankees.

Edited May 14, 2019 by birdwatcher

[h2oface]

 

The next two picks after Jay were Benintendi and Carson Fulmer.

 

Walker Buehler was picked at #24 in the first round by the Dodgers!

[h2oface]

 

Yes, we know. 

 

Fulmer is back in AAA after posting about a 7 ERA, a 2 WHIP, and -1.1 WAR over about 100 IP. No one is much more excited about Carson in Chicago than we are about Tyler here, or than the Orioles are about the #4 pick, Dillon Tate, who is also floundering in AA.

 

The lesson: we're gonna win more than we lose, but we're gonna lose occasionally. Like everyone else.

 

So why not trade them ALL right away, while everyone thinks they have hope? Trade for MLB talent all the time, right away, as soon as they show promise. Using the analytical approach, aren't the all important probability odds indicating that would be the best way to build a team, then, since the odds are overwhelmingly indicating that most all picks will fail? Like the all decision to constantly employ the shift. It's all about the odds. Activate the moves by percentage probabilites. And then, with the same reasoning, why ever be concerned with draft picks when it comes to free agency? Even if it is a number one pick, odds are the pick will be a waste of time, anyway.

 

Edited May 14, 2019 by h2oface

[h2oface]

 

Late next year for Gaterol? I hope not. Because with their lack of depth, that means a lot of starts by lesser pitchers.

If Balazovic is dominant for two months, promote him again. He could be up next year.

 

I hope not either. It is clear, with pitching decisions that need to be made for next year, that these guys need to get an audition and see how close they really are. They could be. Regardless of all those who think they know, and even get paid to make the decisions - nobody knows until they have the opportunity and get a look. Nobody. 

 

Oh..... and Graterol still wants his consonant back.......... good job on Balazovic, though. 

Edited May 14, 2019 by h2oface

[Taildragger8791]

 

So why not trade them ALL right away, while everyone thinks they have hope? Trade for MLB talent all the time, right away, as soon as they show promise. Using the analytical approach, aren't the all important probability odds indicating that would be the best way to build a team, then, since the odds are overwhelmingly indicating that most all picks will fail? Like the all decision to constantly employ the shift. It's all about the odds. Activate the moves by percentage probabilites. And then, with the same reasoning, why ever be concerned with draft picks when it comes to free agency? Even if it is a number one pick, odds are the pick will be a waste of time, anyway.

 

I think that would be a legitimate way to reinforce or anchor a rotation, seeing as how developing starting pitching is such a crapshoot and it's rarely available in free agency. You just need to be able to afford to keep/extend the more expensive older players you'd be getting in return. Almost nobody is trading 22 year old front-end starters under cost control for less than a mint.

 

Hitting is more reliably developed and easier to acquire in free agency, so I'd be more hesitant to blow the prospect equity on a bat. You'll run out of prospects in a hurry going 3-for-1 in trades just to fill out your lineup.

[bird]

 

I think that would be a legitimate way to reinforce or anchor a rotation, seeing as how developing starting pitching is such a crapshoot and it's rarely available in free agency. You just need to be able to afford to keep/extend the more expensive older players you'd be getting in return. Almost nobody is trading 22 year old front-end starters under cost control for less than a mint.

 

Hitting is more reliably developed and easier to acquire in free agency, so I'd be more hesitant to blow the prospect equity on a bat. You'll run out of prospects in a hurry going 3-for-1 in trades just to fill out your lineup.

 

 

Really solid answer.

 

I wonder if our baseball people (not just Falvine, as others have brains and a voice in the matter) have developed a more conscious preference for position players due to the greater predictability and lower risks. It may not be an accident that Larnach, Lewis, Kirilloff, Gordon, Javier, Urbina, and now Enmanuel Rodriguez are our largest investments. Oh, and Wes Johnson, Rapsodo, Trackman, and a bunch of additional coaches.

 

 

[blindeke]

 

If you were to steadfastly and objectively COMPARE first round draft results for a ten year period going backwards from 2018, as I have many times, and I mean COMPARE results against the other 29 teams, you could not possibly declare the results to be dismal on a relative basis. In every draft, with almost no exceptions, teams will have "passed" on a player or two within the next ten picks or so of their own who surprised the pundits and has outproduced most every earlier pick. So either ALL teams are dismal in absolute terms if that fact represents failure, or you have to cut them all some slack.

 

In that time frame, Tyler Jay may be the one pick that truly stands out as a clear bust. Stewart probably qualifies too. There were a couple of horribly unproductive draft classes where no one panned out. For example, only one player within ten picks of Levi Michael made it in 2011.

 

If you did a random check of any five teams you assume have a better track record with those top 30 first round selections, as I have a number of times, you'll discover that every one of them has at least one bust, and more commonly two or three. In other words, equally or more dismal.

 

 

Well since you've looked at this more closely than I have, of last 25 Twins' 1st round picks, how many had a meaningful MLB career? Is this a good rate relative to other teams?

[rdehring]

 

Roger, this has nothing to do with this comment... but I figured you should know that Ben Rortvedt was just promoted to AA Pensacola... 

Thanks, Seth.  And that is great news as he edges closer towards being with the Twins.  Also saw that Arraez moved up to Rochester.  Curious if he will stay or is short-term while Gordon is on the IL....again.

[bird]

 

Well since you've looked at this more closely than I have, of last 25 Twins' 1st round picks, how many had a meaningful MLB career? Is this a good rate relative to other teams?

 

 

No, I haven't gone back 25 years, because most of the scouts and other talent procurers from the distant past have been replaced. Going back even ten years is a bit of a stretch, although MANY of the same people from 2009 are still scouting and weighing in on draft prospects in 2019. But it's important to consider how much has changed in talent evaluation and draft strategy, especially within the last few years.

 

I can't substantiate this, but I've come to believe that the percentage of "hits" with first round picks over the last 4-5 drafts will be much higher than even back in 2012 and 2013. If you look at those drafts, you'll see only three or four bona fide superstars emerging from each of those drafts. I doubt Mike Trout or Aaron Judge would make it to the tail end of the first round today. But that's sheer speculation on my part.

Edited May 15, 2019 by birdwatcher