2014 MLB Draft Thread

[markos]

While true, I have read from knowledgeable people that we don't view any of these guys as the answer at SS due to defensive questions. To the other question, I have not seen anyone suggest Gordons bat will profile at 3B. I have heard he "may" develop 10-15 HR power and nobody thinks he will be a .300 hitter.

 

Gordon's bat doesn't necessarily have to profile at 3B in order for him to be valuable at 3B. Here are three batting lines that don't fit the standard 3B profile (two from last year, one from Twins history).

 

a) .280, 14 HR, .746 OPS, 102 OPS+

.267, 10 HR, .706 OPS, 82 OPS+

c) .290, 4 HR, .725 OPS, 90 OPS+

 

a = Manny Machado (6.4 bWAR)

b = Nolan Arenado (3.9 bWAR)

c = Nick Punto 2006 (3.7 bWAR)

 

All of these players provided significantly above-average value due to their defense. Gordon's defensive profile at SS - average to above-average fielding, plus-plus arm - would make him an ELITE 3B. Most people here are concerned that he will be moved off of SS for some reason. It depends on the reason, but if it ends up being range related, he still has the potential to provide well above-average defense at 3B. And at that point he still doesn't need to hit much to be valuable.

[tobi0040]

It's not just that the organization has this tendency. Beyond the reasons spelled out in responses above, players across the sport also simply move off SS regularly.

 

Does moving off the premium position of SS exist as a risk with Gordon? Of course, but I don't think any of the players you list came into the organization with the high ratings for their defense that Gordon currently gets.

 

One exception to that rule is Polanco. He was only 16 when he signed, but he was supposed to be a "defensive wizard" who will not hit.

[tobi0040]

Gordon's bat doesn't necessarily have to profile at 3B in order for him to be valuable at 3B. Here are three batting lines that don't fit the standard 3B profile (two from last year, one from Twins history).

 

a) .280, 14 HR, .746 OPS, 102 OPS+

.267, 10 HR, .706 OPS, 82 OPS+

c) .290, 4 HR, .725 OPS, 90 OPS+

 

a = Manny Machado (6.4 bWAR)

b = Nolan Arenado (3.9 bWAR)

c = Nick Punto 2006 (3.7 bWAR)

 

All of these players provided significantly above-average value due to their defense. Gordon's defensive profile at SS - average to above-average fielding, plus-plus arm - would make him an ELITE 3B. Most people here are concerned that he will be moved off of SS for some reason. It depends on the reason, but if it ends up being range related, he still has the potential to provide well above-average defense at 3B. And at that point he still doesn't need to hit much to be valuable.

 

I think (a) was a little misleading. Machado got the attention for that line because he was 20 years old, and a .739 OPS at 19 the year before in 51 games.

[kab21]

One exception to that rule is Polanco. He was only 16 when he signed, but he was supposed to be a "defensive wizard" who will not hit.

 

Polanco is still a defensive wizard. The problem is that he has a fringy arm for a SS.

 

There are usually two reasons why SS prospects move off of SS in the minors. One is arm strength and the other is physical size although there are quite a few fairly large SS's. Gordon has a cannon for an arm and he's not expected to get bulky at all (Beckham comparison ruined). He will fill out a little but he should remain more than agile enough for the position.

[tobi0040]

Polanco is still a defensive wizard. The problem is that he has a fringy arm for a SS.

 

There are usually two reasons why SS prospects move off of SS in the minors. One is arm strength and the other is physical size although there are quite a few fairly large SS's. Gordon has a cannon for an arm and he's not expected to get bulky at all (Beckham comparison ruined). He will fill out a little but he should remain more than agile enough for the position.

 

 

OK, we are parsing words. Polanco was supposed to be a lock to stick at SS. We have moved several guys off SS, some were more of a surprise than others. Another example would be Levi, I am guessing we thought he had a good chance to stick at SS or we would not have taken him in the first round.

 

It does happen elsewhere too, it just seems like this organization moves them off more conistently.

[markos]

I think (a) was a little misleading. Machado got the attention for that line because he was 20 years old, and a .739 OPS at 19 the year before in 51 games.

 

I'm not sure why this is misleading. I was trying to point out that a player can be very valuable at 3B without having the standard 3B offensive profile - the 25+ HR, .800+ OPS in the Longoria/Beltre/Zimmerman mold. Machado's was incredibly valuable even though he didn't hit like a typical 3B. Yes, everyone is projecting even greater offensive production from him going forward because he is so young, but his age is completely independent of his 2013 value.

[nicksaviking]

New KLaw draft up. Has the Twins taking Gordon. Here is what he had to say:

Analysis: They have been on Gordon all spring. Assuming the big three arms are gone, as I project here, I think they go with Gordon over their second choice, Aaron Nola. |

 

Link here:,

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/draft/mock/?season=2014&version=3&source=Keith-Law-Mock-Draft

 

I think KLaw is off on this one. The Twins haven't been down to see Nola in over a month but have had people watch Newcomb regularly. I think Newcomb is their choice over Nola at this time.

[tobi0040]

I'm not sure why this is misleading. I was trying to point out that a player can be very valuable at 3B without having the standard 3B offensive profile - the 25+ HR, .800+ OPS in the Longoria/Beltre/Zimmerman mold. Machado's was incredibly valuable even though he didn't hit like a typical 3B. Yes, everyone is projecting even greater offensive production from him going forward because he is so young, but his age is completely independent of his 2013 value.

 

I guess the question is, did Machado's defense provide so much value, or was he getting a ton of attention because he was A) 20 years old and a piece of a resurgence for a franchise that had been down a long time?

 

I think at minimum it was a combination. I don't put much value n DWAR, he had a 4.3 in 2013, in the other 80 games he has compiled .8, it is a measure that tends to be volatile.

 

Utlimately, I agree a 3B can provide value without hitting 25-30 HR's. I guess for me when I look at the top 6-7 guys (Nola excluded as I am not a huge fan):

 

Aiken, Rodon, Jackson, Kolek, Gordon, Touki, and Newcomb, it just looks to me like the ceiling is the lowest for Gordon and that is why I would rather have someone else at #5.

[twinsfanstreif]

I think KLaw is off on this one. The Twins haven't been down to see Nola in over a month but have had people watch Newcomb regularly. I think Newcomb is their choice over Nola at this time.

 

This is not true, it was stated a week or so ago but there are reports that the Twins have been represented at almost all of Nola's starts including the conference tournament

[Twins33]

Moving these guys off SS could have as much to do with a finicky organization as the players inability to man the position. Dozier was an acceptable SS in the minors and after a poor initial tryout was moved to 2B. There is nothing I have seen from Dozier the last two years that would indicate he couldn't play SS.

For 1-2 years before Dozier came up all the talk was that he very likely could not stick at SS, so the fact that he moved to 2B was 100% expected.

 

Here's a link to fangraphs that has 2-3 excerpts mentioning it.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/daily-notes-your-brian-dozier-headquarters/

[Siehbiscuit]

I don't get all the "hate" for Nick Gordon. There are some very reputable analysts/scouts that have him as a top 3 prospect. I look at the tools and if he develops to the projections, I see the potential ceiling of Barry Larkin and a floor of a healthy version of Rafael Furcal. The biggest difference is the hit tool and how much it develops.

 

Shortstops that hit for power (Tulo, HanRam, ARod) are generational type players, but even then HanRam wasn't a very good defender at SS. Gordon looks to be the pre-ARod era SS (less Cal Ripken) and more like Larkin. This kid looks like a great player.

[tobi0040]

I don't get all the "hate" for Nick Gordon. There are some very reputable analysts/scouts that have him as a top 3 prospect. I look at the tools and if he develops to the projections, I see the potential ceiling of Barry Larkin and a floor of a healthy version of Rafael Furcal. The biggest difference is the hit tool and how much it develops.

 

Shortstops that hit for power (Tulo, HanRam, ARod) are generational type players, but even then HanRam wasn't a very good defender at SS. Gordon looks to be the pre-ARod era SS (less Cal Ripken) and more like Larkin. This kid looks like a great player.

 

Saying you think the guy has less upside than 5-6 others does not translate to hate.

 

Barry Larkin has a career .295 BA and .815 OPS (9 silver sluggers) and won 3 gold gloves. I don't see anyone saying he is a gold glove SS. They say good instincts, strong arm, some even say above average. And nobody is saying .815 OPS or 400 career SB. If I thought this was attainable for Gordon I would be thrilled at #5.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Saying you think the guy has less upside than 5-6 others does not translate to hate.

 

Barry Larkin has a career .295 BA and .815 OPS (9 silver sluggers) and won 3 gold gloves. I don't see anyone saying he is a gold glove SS. They say good instincts, strong arm, some even say above average. And nobody is saying .815 OPS or 400 career SB. If I thought this was attainable for Gordon I would be thrilled at #5.

 

I think we all would be. He'd be going to the hall of fame. The real issue is that people see him more as a .730 OPS type guy with decent defense. That's still not bad (essentially Elvis Andrus), but at 5 overall, I'd much rather they get a guy who is more likely to be a perennial all star. I'm not sure Gordon is that guy. I won't cry if they draft Gordon, but part of me hopes that someone ahead of them grab him so that we don't have him there. I really want Aiken, Rodon, Jackson, Touki, or Kolek. All, to me, ,are fare more likely to be dominant... and given that this may be the last time in a while that they are picking this high, I hope they get a guy with a really high ceiling, even if it takes them 5 years to develop him.

[Twins Twerp]

I love how some of us follow the draft for months and have good conversations about prospects. Then a week beforenthe draft we have ppl come on and talk about Gordon's low floor and Nolas low floor. Yet, even us draft nuts are not scouts and I would venture to say that cmb and one other guy are remotely qualified tontalk about prospects. The pundits and scouts and periodicals have Nola and Gordon ranked in top 6 range. This to me means both would be good picks. We have to wait 4 years to see if Nola is a success and possibly 7 for Gordon. The book is still out on guys until they get about 1000 ab's. So we'll see I. 5 years if Gordon was a good pick or not.

 

What I am trying to say is we are all ignorant (Socratic method).

[Kwak]

I don't get all the "hate" for Nick Gordon. There are some very reputable analysts/scouts that have him as a top 3 prospect. I look at the tools and if he develops to the projections, I see the potential ceiling of Barry Larkin and a floor of a healthy version of Rafael Furcal. The biggest difference is the hit tool and how much it develops.

 

Shortstops that hit for power (Tulo, HanRam, ARod) are generational type players, but even then HanRam wasn't a very good defender at SS. Gordon looks to be the pre-ARod era SS (less Cal Ripken) and more like Larkin. This kid looks like a great player.

 

"Hate"? Ok, he's your favorite--but that's really incendiary because other raise legitimate questions concerning Gordon. At 5th overall, teams need to look for big impact players--foundation stones of a rebuilding franchise. Does Gordon qualify as one?

 

Consider that some tools are more valuable to a team than others The "hit" tool, the "power-hitting" tool, and the "starting pitching" tool are more valuble than the fielding tool. Many American-born teen-age SS just can't stay at SS because the either get too big, or they never really had the skill-set in the first place. These guys were SS's because they were the best player on their team(s) since 8 years-old. Can Gordon transistion to a new position? Is Gordon's lofty ranking based on him being a SS (as I think) or, is it as a position-player/hitter (in general) and his skills and value as a player remain unchanged at a different position? If he is SS or else--then it is way too risky for 5th overall given the Twins minor league stable of position players--unless Gordon is a premium hitter. There in lies the quandary (and the discussion)--but it's not hate.

[tobi0040]

I love how some of us follow the draft for months and have good conversations about prospects. Then a week beforenthe draft we have ppl come on and talk about Gordon's low floor and Nolas low floor. Yet, even us draft nuts are not scouts and I would venture to say that cmb and one other guy are remotely qualified tontalk about prospects. The pundits and scouts and periodicals have Nola and Gordon ranked in top 6 range. This to me means both would be good picks. We have to wait 4 years to see if Nola is a success and possibly 7 for Gordon. The book is still out on guys until they get about 1000 ab's. So we'll see I. 5 years if Gordon was a good pick or not.

 

What I am trying to say is we are all ignorant (Socratic method).

 

I would argue that what is being said about Nola and Gordon here is similar to what scouts say. Most scouts have the ceiling of Aiken, Rodon, Jackson, and Kolek higher. The pitchers all have front line starter ceilings and Jackson 30+ HR ceiling. The most consistent reports about Nola is that he has very good control and a plus fastball and his other pitches need work. He is 21. Gordon looks like, athletic, hit tool may develop, will stay at short. Very strong arm. But nobody is saying perennial all star, gold glove, silver slugger, etc.

 

The other pitchers, Newcomb and Touki...if you look at their stuff alone look like potential #1 or #2 starters. Albeit less of a chance to be in the big's as Nola.

 

I completely agree we won't know for 5 years.

[tarheeltwinsfan]

The risk for pitchers has to be accepted because a so very few position players have transitioned to starting pitchers and succeeded at the major league level. The restriction on SS has been raised because 2B is no longer a fall-back position for a "failed" SS, and the 5th OA draft slot is so valuable. Teams typically target a guy who is projected to be a top hittero starting pitcher. Gordon is neither of those--his projection was a solid fielding SS who "hits well for a SS". Hence my question (which didn't receive a response)--is Gordon viable at 3B? Both as a fielder and as a hitter? If so, then he can be drafted 1-5. But if not, then pass on him.

 

What?

[kab21]

I think we all would be. He'd be going to the hall of fame. The real issue is that people see him more as a .730 OPS type guy with decent defense. That's still not bad (essentially Elvis Andrus), but at 5 overall, I'd much rather they get a guy who is more likely to be a perennial all star. I'm not sure Gordon is that guy. I won't cry if they draft Gordon, but part of me hopes that someone ahead of them grab him so that we don't have him there. I really want Aiken, Rodon, Jackson, Touki, or Kolek. All, to me, ,are fare more likely to be dominant... and given that this may be the last time in a while that they are picking this high, I hope they get a guy with a really high ceiling, even if it takes them 5 years to develop him.

 

Peoples expectations at SS are clearly too high if a .730 OPS is mediocre. Andrus has a .685 OPS. The 5th best qualified SS in baseball last year had a .738 OPS. The overall MLB average was a .680 OPS. If Gordon was merely a .730 OPS guy then he would be an occasional all star. Strangely that's exactly what you want.

 

Personally I have his ceiling in the .290/.350/.440/.790 range. That is an almost every year all star.

[cmb0252]

New "final" draft boards from Crawford and Law.

 

Law:

1. Aiken

2. Rodon

3. Kolek4. Gordon

5. Jackson

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/draft/mock/?season=2014&version=3&source=Keith-Law-Big-Board

 

Crawford:

1. Aiken

2. Rodon

3. Gordon

4. Kolek

5. Jackson

 

http://mlbdraftinsider.com/2014/06/the-really-final-board/

[Mike Sixel]

Huh, so people don't universally have 5-10 players above Gordon. Weird.

[Mike Sixel]

Tried to watch teh Crawford chat, but "unfortunately this chat has reached capacity".....

[kab21]

OK, we are parsing words. Polanco was supposed to be a lock to stick at SS. We have moved several guys off SS, some were more of a surprise than others. Another example would be Levi, I am guessing we thought he had a good chance to stick at SS or we would not have taken him in the first round.

 

It does happen elsewhere too, it just seems like this organization moves them off more conistently.

 

I have no idea why you continue to compare Gordon versus terrible comparables. You can't say that player X, Y and Z didn't stick so neither can player G. There were doubts that Michael could stay at SS on draft day. They thought he might stay at SS but most thought he was destined for 2B. As far as Polanco there is a singular reason that he isn't likely to stick and it's is his arm strength. This is not an issue for Gordon and scouts have expressed almost no doubts that he can stay at SS.

 

If you want to make an argument against Gordon then it needs to be based on something else instead lowering his status because of defensive concerns. In fact you should almost be giving extra points just because he is almost a lock to stick at SS since you have been so good at pointing out how many SS prospects have to move.

 

I have him behind Alex Jackson and the 3 big arms. I could also be talked into a lottery pick like Touki or a guy like Newcomb among others.

 

http://www.twinkietown.com/2011/6/6/2210383/minnesota-twins-select-levi-michael-in-first-round-of-2011-mlb-draft

[InfraRen]

While many on here want Jackson more than Gordon, both Law and Crawford have Gordon higher. Also interesting.

 

I don't claim to be in on things until maybe a month before the draft, but I've preferred Gordon for awhile. Just a feeling.

[InfraRen]

Darren Wolfson @DarrenWolfson

#MNTwins VP Mike Radcliff: "We don't have any absolutes in the top-4." Has a feel on how it'll go, but there's still uncertainty w/ Astros.

 

Also:

 

Andrew Renschen @InfraRen

@DarrenWolfson any clarity on what they'd do if Jackson AND Gordon are there at 5?

Darren Wolfson @DarrenWolfson

 

@InfraRen He wouldn't tip his hand that much. Was told Boras is a non-factor, but that can change. He also gushed about Gordon more so.

 

Radcliff definitely gushed about Buxton 2 years ago...

[cmb0252]

My final thoughts on Gordon.

 

He is universally thought of as a top 5 talent with BA being the only credible site I have seen him ranked out of the top 5 (6th). He is also universally thought to be a true SS. We are talking about ZERO experts have suggested he will move off the position. ZERO! Do readers know how rare it is? Recent top SS prospects Machado, Baez, Correa, Seager, Crawford, and Russell all had (some still do) questions about their chances to stick at SS to some degree. The only recent top SS prospect I can remember with zero concerns about sticking at the position is Lindor.

 

As for Gordon's defensive tools let's look at those. First, what are important tools for a SS defensively?

 

- Arm strength

- Quick feet

- Range

- Hands

- Instincts

 

Gordon has the best infield arm in the draft grading out from plus to plus-plus. He has plus speed with quick feet that leads to plus range. Hands and instincts are hard to measure but all accounts have them at plus to plus-plus. When we add all these together with his reported premium work ethic/character I don't see anything but a plus defender.

 

What about early reports that had him as "only" an above average defender? First thing you have to do when looking up scouting reports is check the date vs updated information. A lot of things can change in a week in the draft much less several months. Several months ago Rodon was the next David Price and undisputed #1 pick, Aiken was only the best HS lefty while most now have him as the #1 draft prospect, Nola was seen as a guy who had a 50/50 chance to end up in the pen because of size/delivery, and the best college bat was Turner. A lot can change!

 

What about the several Twins players who have moved off SS? Two were 16 year old international signings (don't believe either were top 20 international prospects their years), 1 was a 1st rounder (30th overall), one a 2nd rounder, one an 8th rounder, and none a top 5 pick. While they all have their strengths none have the complete package or pedigree that Gordon brings. Especially on the defensive side. Not all SS prospects are created equal.

 

I find it funny that I have become a Gordon apologists when I actually have 4 players ranked ahead of him on my personal board. There are plenty of players with higher ceilings than Gordon but he is far from the weak hitting/average defensive SS people around here make him out to be.

[tobi0040]

I have no idea why you continue to compare Gordon versus terrible comparables. You can't say that player X, Y and Z didn't stick so neither can player G. There were doubts that Michael could stay at SS on draft day. They thought he might stay at SS but most thought he was destined for 2B. As far as Polanco there is a singular reason that he isn't likely to stick and it's is his arm strength. This is not an issue for Gordon and scouts have expressed almost no doubts that he can stay at SS.

 

If you want to make an argument against Gordon then it needs to be based on something else instead lowering his status because of defensive concerns. In fact you should almost be giving extra points just because he is almost a lock to stick at SS since you have been so good at pointing out how many SS prospects have to move.

 

I have him behind Alex Jackson and the 3 big arms. I could also be talked into a lottery pick like Touki or a guy like Newcomb among others.

 

http://www.twinkietown.com/2011/6/6/2210383/minnesota-twins-select-levi-michael-in-first-round-of-2011-mlb-draft

 

First, we should be able to disagree without you telling me what I need to do.

 

I never compared Polanco to Gordon specifically. I painted a picture of a franchise that has moved off 7-8 guys from SS in the last 6-7 years, a trend I think is a little excessive in this organization compared to others around the league. I brought up Polanco because he was supposed to be a great defensive SS, but then we discovered his arm was not strong enough. I have also seen someone like Joe Mauer grow 4 inches and put on at least 40 pounds after his 18th birthday. So I don't know that anyone is every a lock to not fill out or grow.

 

At the end of the day that was not my major reason for not wanting Gordon at #5 anyway. I think his ceiling is not as high as other players that will be availalble. Nobody is saying he will be a .300 hitter, a power hitter, or a gold glove SS. So I don't see the upside that some of the others have.

[cmb0252]

Huh, so people don't universally have 5-10 players above Gordon. Weird.

 

I couldn't get in either. Heck, I still can't get in!

[maxisagod]

Jim Callis twitted the odds of Kolek fall to the Twins at 5 are better than you think.... which makes Jim Callis an impressive mind reader.

[tobi0040]

My final thoughts on Gordon.

 

He is universally thought of as a top 5 talent with BA being the only credible site I have seen him ranked out of the top 5 (6th). He is also universally thought to be a true SS. We are talking about ZERO experts have suggested he will move off the position. ZERO! Do readers know how rare it is? Recent top SS prospects Machado, Baez, Correa, Seager, Crawford, and Russell all had (some still do) questions about their chances to stick at SS to some degree. The only recent top SS prospect I can remember with zero concerns about sticking at the position is Lindor.

 

As for Gordon's defensive tools let's look at those. First, what are important tools for a SS defensively?

 

- Arm strength

- Quick feet

- Range

- Hands

- Instincts

 

Gordon has the best infield arm in the draft grading out from plus to plus-plus. He has plus speed with quick feet that leads to plus range. Hands and instincts are hard to measure but all accounts have them at plus to plus-plus. When we add all these together with his reported premium work ethic/character I don't see anything but a plus defender.

 

What about early reports that had him as "only" an above average defender? First thing you have to do when looking up scouting reports is check the date vs updated information. A lot of things can change in a week in the draft much less several months. Several months ago Rodon was the next David Price and undisputed #1 pick, Aiken was only the best HS lefty while most now have him as the #1 draft prospect, Nola was seen as a guy who had a 50/50 chance to end up in the pen because of size/delivery, and the best college bat was Turner. A lot can change!

 

What about the several Twins players who have moved off SS? Two were 16 year old international signings (don't believe either were top 20 international prospects their years), 1 was a 1st rounder (30th overall), one an 4th rounder, one an 8th rounder, and none a top 5 pick. While they all have their strengths none have the complete package or pedigree that Gordon brings. Especially on the defensive side. Not all SS prospects are created equal.

 

I find it funny that I have become a Gordon apologists when I actually have 4 players ranked ahead of him on my personal board. There are plenty of players with higher ceilings than Gordon but he is far from the weak hitting/average defensive SS people around here make him out to be.

 

Add Goodrum into the hopper, a second round pick that won't hack it at SS.

[cmb0252]

Don't know if this got posted yesterday :

 

http://sbb.scout.com/story/1408495-the-draft-board?s=381