keith law chat April 4th

[cmb0252]

If Grey/Appel are both gone by #4, would Bryant make sense for the Twins?

[h=6]Klaw 1:14 PM ET[/h]Two of Appel, Gray, Manaea, Anderson, and Shipley will be there, by definition. I'd be surprised if they didn't take one of those guys.

 

Re your Twins answer above, has Stanek fallen to the point that he's not even one of the top 5 college arms?

[h=6]Klaw 1:26 PM ET[/h]I'd say he's not clearly among them, but I could see a team choosing him over a Shipley or an Anderson given track records and Arkansas's pitch-calling, which has him throwing too many sliders.

 

For those of you who don't know who Shipley is law answered the following question:

What is the ceiling for Braden Shipley and what is the most reasonable expectation for him?

[h=6]Klaw 1:53 PM ET[/h]Great athlete, chance for three plus pitches. If that's not a potential ace, it's pretty close. He doesn't have the command or the present breaking ball to be that, but that's his best-case scenario outlook.

 

Also for more info on Shipley, if you have insiders, law saw him last week and here is his right up:

 

MLB Scouting Shipley, Judge, more - ESPN

 

"I saw him Thursday night at home against Fresno State, a relatively cold evening, where he started out at 92-95 for two innings but backed off to 89-92 for the remainder of his outing, perhaps owing to the temperature." Says he has heard his fastball has hit 99 and is a 60 pitch. His best pitch is a 65+ change up and had a solid-average curve.

 

[lightfoot789]

Does Chris Anderson have the stuff to be a #2 starter in MLB and do you trust his upside enough to make him an early top 10 pick?

[cmb0252]

Does Chris Anderson have the stuff to be a #2 starter in MLB and do you trust his upside enough to make him an early top 10 pick?

 

Anderson definitely has the stuff and size to be a #2. Maybe more. If he keeps pitching the way he is, outside of last week which he still had a 10/1 K/BB ratio, I think he has a good chance to go in the top ten.

 

Pierre might be a better person to ask because He is the leader of the Anderson bandwagon around here. When I said Anderson only had 2 current above average pitches he schooled me with several great articles I had never read talking about Anderson's solid change up.

 

Personally any of the pitchers outside of Appel and Gray scare me a little due to the lack of at least one 70+ grade pitch. the season is still young and Anderson/Manaea have silders which have the potential to be 70s while Shipleys change up could end up being a 70. I just like big numbers!

[Jeremy Nygaard]

With two months to go, I still don't thinl Anderson or Shipley are top 5 talents. From what I've gathered the Twins aren't super high on Shipley.

 

The most interesting thing I've heard about this draft is about prep arms. Typically the Twins wouldn't consider it in the Top 5, but this year "anything goes".

[kab21]

I'm okay with the Twins going with Meadows, Bryant and maybe Frazier if Appel and Gray are gone. There are a couple of pitchers that can get into that mix but I still contend that high draft picks are about getting difference makers instead of just filling holes.

[cmb0252]

I'm okay with the Twins going with Meadows, Bryant and maybe Frazier if Appel and Gray are gone. There are a couple of pitchers that can get into that mix but I still contend that high draft picks are about getting difference makers instead of just filling holes.

 

I think you nail it. If the twins don't rate any of the pitchers as high as Gray/Appel take a bat like last year. There are plenty of solid arms, like JO last year, who will be around at ~40. Clearly Keith Law doesn't agree with us though

[Mike Sixel]

Neither do I. People say the Twins' minors degraded because it is hard to pick good players in the 20s, now they might go two straight years picking in the top 5 and pass on high end pitching, and many of those same people are saying it isn't a problem because they can pick great pitchers in round 2........ Since the Twins refuse to sign it, and they will not trade for expensive players, where do people think they'll get top flight pitching if they keep passing on it in the draft? Appel would be their best SP right now, and for the next 4 years.

[Badsmerf]

You can find very good pitchers in the top 20. Chris Sale was selected at 13, Zach Wheeler at 6 in recent drafts. I know you can always cherry pick guys that make it, my point is that pitchers don't have to be selected number 1 to pan out. Drafting a position player would just be stubborn unless that player is far and away better than the next starting pitcher, which I don't think is the case. I'd rather have them draft a starting pitcher and see them not develop into a top of the rotation guy, then see them draft another toolsy HS outfielder (which they've done 4 of the last 8 drafts).

[Mike Sixel]

Their next pick is not in the top 20....

 

And I'm not the one making excuses for the farm system, others on this site are. Good drafting and developing can be done later in round 1 (or later), the Cardinals are proving that year after year.

[kab21]

Their next pick is not in the top 20....

 

And I'm not the one making excuses for the farm system, others on this site are. Good drafting and developing can be done later in round 1 (or later), the Cardinals are proving that year after year.

 

Start drafting for needs and you will get top 20 talent with top 5 picks. If there is a deserving pitcher then he should be drafted but if you reach for a pitcher then you won't be getting top end pitching.

[Mike Sixel]

What does reach mean? You doubt Appel is worth a top 5 pick last year or this year? Gausmann? Both were deserving last year, and they passed on them. There were guys who had them both rated ahead of Buxton, it was not a slam dunk nationally.

 

BPA is not some kind of black and white thing, like so many here make it out to be.

[gunnarthor]

What does reach mean? You doubt Appel is worth a top 5 pick last year or this year? Gausmann? Both were deserving last year, and they passed on them. There were guys who had them both rated ahead of Buxton, it was not a slam dunk nationally.

 

BPA is not some kind of black and white thing, like so many here make it out to be.

 

They specifically said that if Appel/Gray were off the board. No one has suggeseted by passing Appel this year.

 

We've been throught this a 100 times, the national consensus is that Buxton was ahead of Appel and Gausman. His high ranking by BA is the highest debut for a Twin since Mauer, a decade ago. It was a good pick.

 

If the top 3 guys are gone, the Twins should take the highest rated guy on their draft board. In this draft, it'll still probably be a pitcher. But if 1-3 are pitchers and 4-8 are the GA kids, SD 3 bagger/slugger and the catching prodigy, it doesn't make sense to reach down for the 9th best player.

 

BPA isn't absolute in that a lot of different places will have them viewed differently. KLaw revealed last year that he knew one team had Appel rated #7 on their draft board and reported that the Twins had Buxton #1, Appel #2 and Zimmer ahead of Gausman. But nearly all teams grab who they perceive as BPA when they pick, especially at the top of the draft. As the draft goes, the difference between players is minimal so the team might take position into account. For example, the Twins probably didn't have much difference between Gallo and Berrios at 33 last year but went with the pitcher. In a weak draft, there might not be much difference between #4 and #9 and in a good draft there might be a ton of difference. A few times teams have famously made non BPA picks - either to save money elsewhere (Pirates drafted Sanchez in 09 to save money to sign intl prospect Sano) or loved the risk of the fast ball (Bal took Hobgood in 09 b/c they wanted a RH fireballer to grow with their LH one).

[cmb0252]

BPA might not be a black or white thing for us fans, who don't get to see the twins board and only see the experts boards, but it is for the Twins front office. They have their board which took tons of time, scouting, resources, and debates to put together. The front office obviously knew the farm system needed pitching but took Buxton anyways because they thought he was the clear BPA. Appel wasn't the same guy he is today as he was last year.

 

P.S. Thanks for the inside info on Shipley. Always appreciated.

[PseudoSABR]

Don't we have like three guys in our starting lineup who were picked in the 20s in the first round?

[Mike Sixel]

cmb....you know everyone in the FO agreed that Buxton was #1?

 

gunnathor.....going into the draft, more than a few sites had Appel #1 last year. There was not this consensus you are stating, not in my recollection anyway. But that's not really my point. My point is, it is not always black and white. So, if Frazier is 1% better than the next pitcher, would you still pass on the pitcher, knowing our system? How big (or black and white) does the delta need to be?

 

My point is not so much buxton/Appel, but ignoring need in the face of something so uncertain as baseball drafts is not necessarily a good idea. Would you really draft an OFer every single year, if that was the BPA? If so, how would you have MIF and SP?

[cmb0252]

Oh I highly doubt everyone in the front office agreed Buxton was the number one guy but in the end they took a position of strength over a position of need. These guys aren't dumb so that should tell you what they think of him.

 

Also, you aren't wrong at all in thinking organizationly need should be some what of a factor. Im not disagreeing with that. If the twins grade two guys similar then I hope they would be smart and grab the need. Problem is when you go in saying we are drafting X and skip on guys they grade significantly higher for that need.

[Mike Sixel]

We are 98% in agreement on that, if there is a signficant difference, take the better player.

[70charger]

I somewhat doubt that they do a "simple rank" of players and then go BPA. More likely they grade them out, say, on a 1-100 scale. If a 97 is on the board in front of a 91, go with the 97 no matter what. If two 91s are on the board, take the one who plays the position you need.

 

If you are starved of pitching and a 91 pitcher is on the board behind a 92 centerfielder, then I think still take the pitcher. It isn't black and white, but it isn't that nuanced either.

[kab21]

My point is not so much buxton/Appel, but ignoring need in the face of something so uncertain as baseball drafts is not necessarily a good idea. Would you really draft an OFer every single year, if that was the BPA? If so, how would you have MIF and SP?

 

We of course know that that pitching can't be acquired in trades because the Twins don't do that. Wait a second... They traded two OF'ers this offseason for 3 pitchers.

 

We know that the Twins aren't active in Latin America. Wait a second... The Twins have signed Sano (maybe a 3Bman), Polanco and Minier for big money in the last 4-5 yrs attempting to address MI/3B.

 

Yes, if the two players are really close then they should go for the pitcher. The problem is that Meadows, Frazier and Humphries appear to be closer to Appel and Gray than the pitchers below Manaea. Imo right now Manaea could be the key to the draft but he's still only the 3rd pitcher while the Twins pick 4th.

[Oxtung]

I'd just like to point out Kab21 and I had a great back and forth with a quite a bit of research involved a couple of weeks ago about acquiring Ace pitchers. My conclusion was that if you want that truly elite Ace you have to draft it in the first round (Price, Verlander, Lincecum, Weaver, Kershaw, etc... It is possible to get this in the international signings too but it rare. Only King Felix and Carlos Zambrano fit the bill in the last 15 years). If you want a very good pitcher who can put up Ace like seasons once or twice you can get that pitcher in later rounds or international signings (Haren, Shields, Jaime Garcia, John Lester, etc...).

 

You can read the full interaction starting with my post here:

http://twinsdaily.com/twins-minor-league-talk/5559-article-draft-board-v-2-0-3-13-a-4.html#post90489

 

I wonder how hard it is to find elite hitters outside the first round. If there are certain positions where elite players are unavailable outside the 1st round, like pitching, perhaps BPA isn't the way to go in drafts. Perhaps position needs to play a bigger role in drafts. Interesting thought. Does anybody know of any studies that have looked into this?

[kab21]

I think the biggest part of the back and forth was figuring out how many to include in the ace category. The 8 that you picked doesn't allow us to make any statistical conclusions because the sample size is too small. Including near aces brings a little more clarity to the subject and you start seeing trends.

 

College pitchers that become aces usually get drafted really at the top (like Appel should) or at least in the top 10-15. HS pitchers that become aces are scattered throughout the first rd and that makes sense also. They pitched against all kinds of competition and usually significant projection and time is required for that to happen.

 

The disappointing trend is that int'l FA's rarely turned into #1/2's. the suprising trend was that there were a lot of #2's that were picked in later rd from college ball. If you look at the list (Haren, Wilson, Hudson, Lee, Webb, Harden, Oswalt) though it's not filled with many stuff pitchers (other than Harden) but guys that excelled on control.

 

What does this mean for this draft? Appel might be in the Verlander/Price/Strasburg tier of draftees but if you're looking for a collegiate pitcher as an ace it probably isn't happening. Perhaps one of the guys in this draft can become Sheets/Weaver but the odds are against. You are more likely getting a #3/4 starter if you go the college route. If you really want an ace then start looking at the wild card HS pitchers similar to last year's Max Fried. He kind of has that Kershaw/Bundy type of awesome scouting report but there is significantly more risk and time required for a HS pitcher to make it. So far there are very few similar HS pitchers that have popped up on my radar.

 

The hitting thing would be interesting to look at sometime. I feel fairly certain that latin players would have a significantly higher success rate. This is especially true in the MI.

[diehardtwinsfan]

In terms of elite hitters not in the first round, seems to me that Trout was a supplemental. Pujols wasn't a 1st rounder. Morneau (pre-concussion) was pretty elite as well but he wasn't a first rounder. I'm sure it's like anything, you are far more likely to find an elite hitter in the first round, but the odds drop the further back you'd get... I suspect that you can find more very good hitters in later rounds than you do pitchers.

[cmb0252]

Trout was a first rounder. So were Harper, both Upton's, heyward, Braun, fielder, mauer, longo, tulo, and so on and so on. Most elite guys, batting or pitching, come from the first round or internationally.

 

There are only about 10-15 aces in all of baseball and about 15-20 true #2s so yes, finding an ace in general is super hard. If there is a pitcher that profiles to be an ace, Appel or Gray, go for him. If not take the best talent (which could still be a pitcher).

[Oxtung]

I think the biggest part of the back and forth was figuring out how many to include in the ace category. The 8 that you picked doesn't allow us to make any statistical conclusions because the sample size is too small. Including near aces brings a little more clarity to the subject and you start seeing trends.

 

College pitchers that become aces usually get drafted really at the top (like Appel should) or at least in the top 10-15. HS pitchers that become aces are scattered throughout the first rd and that makes sense also. They pitched against all kinds of competition and usually significant projection and time is required for that to happen.

 

The disappointing trend is that int'l FA's rarely turned into #1/2's. the suprising trend was that there were a lot of #2's that were picked in later rd from college ball. If you look at the list (Haren, Wilson, Hudson, Lee, Webb, Harden, Oswalt) though it's not filled with many stuff pitchers (other than Harden) but guys that excelled on control.

 

What does this mean for this draft? Appel might be in the Verlander/Price/Strasburg tier of draftees but if you're looking for a collegiate pitcher as an ace it probably isn't happening. Perhaps one of the guys in this draft can become Sheets/Weaver but the odds are against. You are more likely getting a #3/4 starter if you go the college route. If you really want an ace then start looking at the wild card HS pitchers similar to last year's Max Fried. He kind of has that Kershaw/Bundy type of awesome scouting report but there is significantly more risk and time required for a HS pitcher to make it. So far there are very few similar HS pitchers that have popped up on my radar.

 

The hitting thing would be interesting to look at sometime. I feel fairly certain that latin players would have a significantly higher success rate. This is especially true in the MI.

 

I just want to clarify a few things. My goal when I started my original research was to find out where the truly elite pitchers come from and if it is possible to find them outside of the first round. I looked at the yearly ERA top 10 lists. If a person was listed in multiple seasons in the top 10 I called them an elite Ace. There were 8 of those. I didn't just "pick" them arbitrarily.

 

Second, I see no difference from a statistics perspective between 8 pitchers and let's say 16 pitchers. Both are way to small to be anything other than SSS.

 

However, if you do include the fringe "aces" there were still only about 3 of the top 20ish pitchers that were drafted after the first round. I think it's safe to say we both agree that if you want to get an ace, whether that is an elite ace or a fringe ace, you are going to find it in the first round or not at all.

 

I also found it amazing that our lists of "Aces" were almost void of international signings.

[Jim H]

Was there a reason you didn't include Johan Santana? Perhaps he was signed too long ago?

[kab21]

I just want to clarify a few things. My goal when I started my original research was to find out where the truly elite pitchers come from and if it is possible to find them outside of the first round. I looked at the yearly ERA top 10 lists. If a person was listed in multiple seasons in the top 10 I called them an elite Ace. There were 8 of those. I didn't just "pick" them arbitrarily.

 

Second, I see no difference from a statistics perspective between 8 pitchers and let's say 16 pitchers. Both are way to small to be anything other than SSS.

 

However, if you do include the fringe "aces" there were still only about 3 of the top 20ish pitchers that were drafted after the first round. I think it's safe to say we both agree that if you want to get an ace, whether that is an elite ace or a fringe ace, you are going to find it in the first round or not at all.

 

I also found it amazing that our lists of "Aces" were almost void of international signings.

 

I'm not sure if you actually looked at my analysis. I had 25 on my list and there were 11 drafted after the 1st rd.

[Oxtung]

I'm not sure if you actually looked at my analysis. I had 25 on my list and there were 11 drafted after the 1st rd.

 

I have many times. I am sticking to my original assertion in my original post since no one has been able to come up with any reason to discredit the data (other than by arguing SSS which I don't disagree with but when you're talking elite pitchers you're always going to be talking SSS in which case you work with the data you have):

 

Data

Before 2001:

 

• 16 Aces
  
• 4 were 1st round draft picks
  
• 4 were international signings
  
• 8 were drafted after 1st round
  

 

 

Since 2001:

 

• 8 Aces
  
• 7 were 1st round draft picks
  
• 1 (King Felix) was an international signing
  
• 0 were drafted after 1st round
  
• 5 of the 7 drafted were taken in the first 12 picks.
  

 

Since you stopped responding to my posts in the other thread I assumed we had come to some kind of consensus or at the least an understanding. Your 11, of which I would argue several would never be considered aces by most people, ignore the data split that is seen since 2001. Expanding the list to 25 pitchers just to get a larger sample size, that still is too small eliminate small sample size errors, does not make them all aces. However even on your expanded list only 4 pitchers have been acquired since 2001, Haren, Wilson, Lester, Josh Johnson.

 

If you would like to discuss this further I suggest we go back to the previous thread so that the discussion is housed in 1 thread. Or perhaps start a new thread of it's own because it wasn't necessarily well related to the discussion in that thread either. I thought we had found some consensus in our discussion and was just trying to lend some statistics to what I saw as a related discussion in this thread since the work was already done.

[Oxtung]

Was there a reason you didn't include Johan Santana? Perhaps he was signed too long ago?

 

Yes and yes. As I show in the post just above this there is an interesting split with players acquired before 2001 and after 2001.

[Badsmerf]

Oxtung, I followed along with your research and disagree with your criteria for being an Ace. First of all, your list is too exclusive. You can't limit the sample to potential HOF pitchers, it has be more encompassing. Maybe we should move this to another thread, as it is an interesting discussion.

 

To start, define Ace pitcher. To me, an Ace pitcher is elite, not necessarily HOF worthy or even Cy Young caliber. There were 662 pitchers that saw MLB time last season, 88 of them were classified as "qualified" starters. I'm not purposing there should be 30 Ace pitchers for 30 MLB teams, but the top 20% would put it at about 17 for last season alone. I really don't think that is too gracious.

 

The problem with limiting it to super high caliber pitcher is the data will be skewed. Guys like Verlander and Strasburg are no-brainer top picks. They are few and far between, and your data proves that you need a top pick to grab one. However, lighten up on your standards and very high quality pitchers can be found later.

[J-Dog Dungan]

Man, as much as I love the Twins, I don't know crap about this year's draft. Been spending WAY too much time reading up on what the Vikings might do about their draft that I don't know anything about who the Twins might take.