Article: Should Twins Draft for Need or Best Available at Pick Number Four?

[Pitz]

3) Can they come out of this fourth pick with ANY position player other than Bryant and we'll still think it was a good move?

This place will explode.

 

 

You are probably right about the explosion, but I think if they go with another position player, I would really want to see how they do in the draft as a whole. Originally, I was very much appalled by the idea of going underslot for McGuire. Although, I'm still not thrilled about it, if they were able to really grab some high upside (hopefully arms, maybe Manaea) with the next several picks, I might be able to keep from exploding.

[kab21]

You are probably right about the explosion, but I think if they go with another position player, I would really want to see how they do in the draft as a whole. Originally, I was very much appalled by the idea of going underslot for McGuire. Although, I'm still not thrilled about it, if they were able to really grab some high upside (hopefully arms, maybe Manaea) with the next several picks, I might be able to keep from exploding.

 

There's a long time between the 4th and the 43rd pick. There's also a lot of risk that another team could be trying the same thing or that guys don't drop. At this point my armchair scouting is pretty set on the big 4 since i think Stewart has separated himself a little and he matches the Twins needs.

[Turd Furgeson]

Appel would have been both "need" and BPA in 2012. The selection of Buxton had to include other factors in the decision--but the Twins provided no comment to justify their choice.

 

As far as this thread "need" vs BPA--the Twins "need" impact players at all positions. Consider the lack of power on the active roster (for years) as well as in starting pitching. There really is no "wrong" position to draft, only "wrong" or "right" players.

 

This is incorrect. At least most sources, thought Buxton was the best player in the draft let alone the best pick available at #2. Most saw Appel as a #2 or #3 starter as his ceiling, not a #1 pitcher.

 

I agree with your second paragraph though. The Twins have multiple needs. Pitching stands out, obviously but don't reach for a pitcher if you don't have to and everyone should bear in mind that the odds are heavily against said pitcher being a positive contributor in the majors. Particularly if that pitcher is drafted out of high school.

[jorgenswest]

This article at Puckett's Pond was written a year ago, but seems just as relevant today.

 

What type of player should the Twins draft? - Puckett's Pond - A Minnesota Twins Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More

 

High school pitchers are the most risky, least likely to reach the majors and take the longest to get there. However, if they make it they do relatively well. College hitters look to be the safest bet. Do we take Bryant if he is available? Do we take Stewart knowing that many high pick high school pitchers never make it?

 

Is the risk worth it? According to this article most aces come from high picks.

 

2013 MLB Draft: Where have past ace pitchers been drafted? - The Crawfish Boxes

[TheLeviathan]

Am I the only one that might feel better if they do go with Bryant if he's there with the first pick? This organization and pitcher development is hardly a match made in heaven.

 

Why waste a high value pick on a position this organization struggles to evaluate? (I'm being more devil's advocate here, but I've been chewing on it more and more)

[jokin]

Am I the only one that might feel better if they do go with Bryant if he's there with the first pick? This organization and pitcher development is hardly a match made in heaven.

 

Why waste a high value pick on a position this organization struggles to evaluate? (I'm being more devil's advocate here, but I've been chewing on it more and more)

 

No, you're not alone. I gotta think Bryant will be the BPA by #4. The risks in taking him are way lower for the organization---and---he potentially takes over almost immediately in the lineup, in the hole left by Willingham's imminent departure. I think the combined strategy of signing legitimately talented FA SPs and trading for established minor league talent is the best way for this organization to go.

[Mike Sixel]

This is incorrect. At least most sources, thought Buxton was the best player in the draft let alone the best pick available at #2. Most saw Appel as a #2 or #3 starter as his ceiling, not a #1 pitcher.

 

I agree with your second paragraph though. The Twins have multiple needs. Pitching stands out, obviously but don't reach for a pitcher if you don't have to and everyone should bear in mind that the odds are heavily against said pitcher being a positive contributor in the majors. Particularly if that pitcher is drafted out of high school.

 

so how do you get pitching then? If you always fear to take one, how do you get five of them? If the odds are low, don't you take even more, so some do work?

[TheLeviathan]

No, you're not alone. I gotta think Bryant will be the BPA by #4. The risks in taking him are way lower for the organization---and---he potentially takes over almost immediately in the lineup, in the hole left by Willingham's imminent departure. I think the combined strategy of signing legitimately talented FA SPs and trading for established minor league talent is the best way for this organization to go.

 

Yeah, I'd almost rather the Twins take a bat at that pick because they are just miles better at evaluating hitters IMO. Then spend the next couple picks going for high upside arms. Bryant would have a spot on this team anytime he wants, he doesn't have to play in the field. Our DH is currently occupied by a "catcher", we'll have a spot for him.

 

I think that's who I'm rooting for us to get and then, like you said, supplement the pitching via trade.

[Turd Furgeson]

so how do you get pitching then? If you always fear to take one, how do you get five of them? If the odds are low, don't you take even more, so some do work?

 

Well, not that you can't take a pitcher at the top of the draft, but I'd prefer to take one that's of the Taillion, Bundy, Cole breed. If there's a position prospect who's equal, I'd generally prefer them because their success rate is much higher.

 

I'd say traditionally, to load up on stand out arms in the latin american free agency market, and in later rounds of the draft, but to be honest I'm not caught up on where MLB is with all of that currently.

[kab21]

While Stewart isn't quite at the same tier that Taillon, Bundy or Cole was, he isn't that far away from that type.

 

Latin arms have a poor success rate as above average starters. Relievers are a different story though.

 

I'm still a BPA guy but currently 3 of the top 4 BPA's are pitchers and imo Shipley has made a case to be the 5th although there are several guys in that tier. If Bryant is there (and not Gray/Appel) then I don't think you can pass on that kind of middle of the order bat that could be up for good in 2015.