Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins Daily’s Instant Draft Reaction: WTF?


    John  Bonnes

    We set a record for page views yesterday, approaching 100,000. A lot of that was on our Day 1 Draft Day thread. And starting at about the 500th comment or so, the reaction could be summarized in three letters: W. T. F.

    To the community’s credit, that was not the thought process immediately, when the Twins surprised everyone by picking prep shortstop Royce Lewis first overall. That’s because a good chunk of the wonks on this site understand there is a strategy that can accompany just such a pick, one which I explained in a series of tweets, starting with this one, yesterday afternoon. You can click through, but I’ll give the gist…

    Twins Video

    Saving money on the first overall pick is a common strategy for MLB teams and has been used with much success. Drafting Lewis, who was considered along with Kyle Wright and Brendan McKay, to be a half step below Hunter Greene in terms of talent, could essentially give the Twins extra quality in some of their following picks. Again, click on the tweet for the details.

    So Lewis was the surprise pick at #1, but we heard reports that he was the pick because he gave the Twins a discount which they could use to essentially accumulate higher picks later in the draft. That’s a solid strategy; additional quality picks helps both with risk mitigation and with higher upside. And it costs nothing but a little negotiation.

    Plus, selfishly, it makes the rest of the night that much more fun. The Twins had two more picks last night, the 35th and 37th picks and lots of leftover money. Signing Lewis “below slot” gave them the opportunity to sign some higher ranked players who seemed to “tumble” down the draft board, not because there was anything wrong with them, but because they wanted more money than teams above the Twins in the draft (but below them in leftover money) could offer.

    What’s more, the most obvious of those players was a high school pitcher from Burnsville. Sam Carlson was projected to be a mid-first round pick. He’s a pitcher. He’s a hometown boy. And the fact that he was available at pick 35 made it seem like the Twins and he had conspired to allow him to fall into the Twins lap.

    Except that isn’t what happened.

    The Twins picked a college outfielder, Brent Rooker at 35. They picked a prep (Canadian) pitcher, Landon Leach, at 37. Both are legitimate top 100 prospects, but neither was a top 20 or even perceived to be a top 30 pick. In fact, one could reasonably project that both of them could also sign “under slot.” Carlson ended up going 55th to the Mariners who don’t seem to have the money to sign him.

    So WTF happened?

    We won’t find out all the signing amounts for several days, but I’ll float some scenarios, and you can add your own in the comment below.

    1. Lewis didn’t sign for less than slot. I think that it’s already been reported that he did, but these moves make a lot more sense if Lewis' agent, Scott Boras, didn’t let Lewis sign for less than slot, or something happened that the Twins weren’t sure they had that extra money.

    2. The Twins got sniped before #35. Whoever the Twins targeted with the 35th pick, was taken before they got their pick. Which would mean that either the player’s agent was incompetent, or the Twins didn’t get word to the player to make sure teams knew they needed to pass, or another team called their bluff or figured out a way to get their own leftover money.

    3. A Carlson deal fell through. But they why do the Mariners take him at #55? They have to know they can sign him if they're going to use their second round pick on him, right?

    4. The Twins have no intention of using their whole $14M draft budget. They saved money to save money. This just seems crazy. It would be a complete betrayal.

    5. They're going to use the money on Day 2. OK, but now the top picks are already done. (Late add: track the Day 2 moves on Twins Daily's Day 2 Thread!)

    We are all left scratching our heads. Perhaps we'll get more information that clarifies what we witnessed. Or maybe this is the mess it appears to be.

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    None of the Twins moves make much sense under the premise that the Pohlads want the Twins to win an eventual World Series. I've been convinced by a friend that this is a flawed premise. If you view Twins moves with the premise that the Pohlads want to have a profitable season, all the moves make perfect sense.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is the longest i've gone in my Shadow Draft without flipping a pick out in some time I get the whole wanting the Pohlads to spend every dime allotted to them. But at the end of the day, it comes down to who did you get? So far, they've gotten an athletic middle-of-the-field player with a good swing and a good idea at the plate, a college corner guy who mashed this year and a high school pitcher with a good delivery and a decent chance at having good stuff. And in this draft, it seems like some of the name brand commodities aren't at all different from their generic substitute. 

     

    If the previous administration had done that at any point in the last five years, it would've saved some wear and tear on my liver.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I think if you jump to conclusions based on the three picks it is not that the Twins have a problem. Judgments based of an incomplete picture is destructive. When the draft is over and players are signed, then whine away. Extra cash still can be spent in later rounds than round 2.  Any late round draft pick can be enticed to sign    There could be several drafted, all it takes is one.  As Thyrlos pointed out inadvertently with all of the late selections of Minnesota players, none of them panned out. What harm is there having a couple million in signing money to entice a high school player or two. One has to be patient and see what is drafted.

     

    Which great top prospects are left to sign? 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     I double checked this to be sure. I'm slightly off. The Cubs took a pitcher in the supplemental round a few years back, which is technically the first round.

     

    And they seem to draft pitchers about 2/3rd the time in the second round. So, yeah, I was close, just a bit off in the details.

     

    No pitchers in the "true" first round, though. And the Cubs picked high from 2011-2015, no lower than ninth overall and as high as second overall.

     

    They did take 2 pitchers last night... But I get your point. It's different to pick at 26 and 30 compared to 2 though 9 overall. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    None of the Twins moves make much sense under the premise that the Pohlads want the Twins to win an eventual World Series. I've been convinced by a friend that this is a flawed premise. If you view Twins moves with the premise that the Pohlads want to have a profitable season, all the moves make perfect sense.

    I think the Pohlads have virtually zero input in the draft. Why would they? That's a Steinbrenner move and the Pohlads have never been those types of owners.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My initial reaction is option number 2 above. The player they wanted to fall didn't, so they ended up getting burned.

     

    I like the Rooker pick, but Leach was a reach, and a pretty big one at that.

     

    I would hope they're targeting Blayne Enlow to start the picks today.

     

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    They did take 2 pitchers last night... But I get your point. It's different to pick at 26 and 30 compared to 2 though 9 overall. 

    Yeah, anything lower than 20 and you're meddling in potential second round guys anyway. The lines blur after pick 15 or 20, depending who you ask.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    And therein lays my problem with the draft conversation every year. We all pick our guys and get disappointed when they're not chosen by the Twins.

     

    But, come on, this is the sixth draft that Twins Daily has recorded. I encourage everyone who participated in previous draft threads to go back and read their comments. It will instill some humility in your certainty over whether this draft was good or bad.

     

    And therein lays my problem with the draft conversation every year. We all pick our guys and get disappointed when they're not chosen by the Twins.

     

    But, come on, this is the sixth draft that Twins Daily has recorded. I encourage everyone who participated in previous draft threads to go back and read their comments. It will instill some humility in your certainty over whether this draft was good or bad.

     

    Tyler Jay. Kohl Stewart. 5 of 6 terrible seasons. Breslow. Belisle. Tepesch.

     

    I think some skepticism is warranted. Others don't.

     

    Rooker will turn 23 this year, 23. He'll be at least 25 before he plays in MN. 

     

    KLAW didn't have the canadian in his top 100, so he wasn't "universally" in the top 100.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    While I would have preferred Greene as well, a draft pick has zero impact on attendance.

     

    Any prospect that is highly touted and reaches MLB might nudge attendance upward but not a draft pick.

    I agree that attendance would not be directly affected. However, I think that buzz and fan interest would rise, leading to more brand awareness and positive press for team that needs it at this point. 16k for a first place team last night (yes, it was a Monday). 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Tyler Jay. Kohl Stewart. 5 of 6 terrible seasons. Breslow. Belisle. Tepesch.

     

    I think some skepticism is warranted. Others don't.

     

    Rooker will turn 23 this year, 23. He'll be at least 25 before he plays in MN. 

     

    KLAW didn't have the canadian in his top 100, so he wasn't "universally" in the top 100.

    Sure, the former regime missed on some really ugly-looking pitching drafts a few years back.

     

    And they didn't take pitching this year, but that's still a problem in the eyes of many. In my opinion, emulating an Epstein approach is rarely a bad strategy. Isn't that what we screamed for year after year after year under Ryan? But then the Twins do just that and people still scream about it.

     

    I disagree that Rooker will be 25 when he reaches Minnesota. Sure, it's possible, but he profiles as a guy who could be here next year as a 23 year old. For him to reach Minnesota has a 25 year old, he'd have to spend nearly 2.5 seasons in the minor leagues. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not if the Twins got the pick right.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I agree that attendance would not be directly affected. However, I think that buzz and fan interest would rise, leading to more brand awareness and positive press for team that needs it at this point. 16k for a first place team last night (yes, it was a Monday). 

    The only thing that impacts attendance is prolonged winning. Even the promotion of a Jose Berrios or Byron Buxton or Miguel Sano only nudges attendance upward for a brief period of time.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Sure, the former regime missed on some really ugly-looking pitching drafts a few years back.

     

    And they didn't take pitching this year, but that's still a problem in the eyes of many. In my opinion, emulating an Epstein approach is rarely a bad strategy. Isn't that what we screamed for year after year after year under Ryan? But then the Twins do just that and people still scream about it.

     

    I disagree that Rooker will be 25 when he reaches Minnesota. Sure, it's possible, but he profiles as a guy who could be here next year as a 23 year old. For him to reach Minnesota has a 25 year old, he'd have to spend nearly 2.5 seasons in the minor leagues. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not if the Twins got the pick right.

     

    Based on what do you think the Twins will promote a guy to the majors in under 2 years? All the fast promotions this year?

     

    Also, these are the SAME scouts, right? It isn't the "previous regime". It is the same scouts. Also, this FO chose this bullpen, right?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Sure, the former regime missed on some really ugly-looking pitching drafts a few years back.

     

    And they didn't take pitching this year, but that's still a problem in the eyes of many. In my opinion, emulating an Epstein approach is rarely a bad strategy. Isn't that what we screamed for year after year after year under Ryan? But then the Twins do just that and people still scream about it.

     

    I disagree that Rooker will be 25 when he reaches Minnesota. Sure, it's possible, but he profiles as a guy who could be here next year as a 23 year old. For him to reach Minnesota has a 25 year old, he'd have to spend nearly 2.5 seasons in the minor leagues. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not if the Twins got the pick right.

     

    Epstein chose the top college hitter at number 2 and 7 (or whatever), not a HS kid under slot. Right? That would have been McKay this year. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Some of the people that are upset about not picking Carlson (myself included) are upset because the Twins passed (twice!) on a player that analysts universally had ranked as one of the top-20 players in this draft. It has nothing to do with where he was from, and everything to do with skipping over a very talented player.

    <emphasis mine>

     

    While I love all the coverage that media outlets give to the Rule IV draft, I think it is important to remember that each and every ML ball club (likely) spends more money to evaluate the talent available than all the media outlets combined. In addition, much of the media outlets opinions are based on talking to ML scouts, who have no obligation to give them their complete (or honest) evaluation.

     

    So while it is a nice talking point, these 'universally ranked' prospects rarely go where slotted (especially after the top 5-10).

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Right, I think the big difference in how you view things right now comes down to whether you want to focus on who they got or whether you wanna focus on who they didn't.

     

    I was strongly on Team Greene, but Lewis has crazy high upside, too. Sounds like a very complete, well-rounded player. I'm excited. If I look at Rooker's numbers too long I have to start fanning myself. Before anybody gets in an uproar about Leach, I'd encourage them to take a look at some of the video. Both his body and his mechanics look really good for a 17-year-old. There's a reason why Texas wanted him.

     

    If people didn't like Day 1 of the draft, hey, I get it. But I think it's pretty silly to try and say with certainty today that the Twins have had a bad draft, or that whatever strategy you think they had didn't pay off. For all we know, things may have worked out exactly as they intended.

    I don't get all the angst on Leach either. That is truly a situation where you accept some expertise from people who watch him or you aren't going to trust anything.

     

    The difference between 30 and 100 for hs rhs is really small. I'm pretty accepting of them finding someone they like from that pool and going for it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Also, these are the SAME scouts, right? It isn't the "previous regime". It is the same scouts. Also, this FO chose this bullpen, right?

    So it's the same guys who failed in the past with one approach and now take a different approach but are still the same guys so are automatically doomed to failure because they failed in the past with a different strategy under different leadership.

     

    This is my problem with these arguments. New leadership comes to the organization, keeps some of the old staff on, use a different draft strategy, but they still have past failures hang over their head because they're "the same guys".

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Based on what do you think the Twins will promote a guy to the majors in under 2 years? All the fast promotions this year?

     

    Also, these are the SAME scouts, right? It isn't the "previous regime". It is the same scouts. Also, this FO chose this bullpen, right?

    You can't conceive of a scenario where a front office might promote their own draft picks, a college bat at that, on a different timetable than prospects they inherited?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    My initial reaction is option number 2 above. The player they wanted to fall didn't, so they ended up getting burned.

     

    I like the Rooker pick, but Leach was a reach, and a pretty big one at that.

     

    I would hope they're targeting Blayne Enlow to start the picks today.

     

    I doubt Enlow signs. But as long as there isn't a Twins run on college relievers, I'll be happy. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Epstein chose the top college hitter at number 2 and 7 (or whatever), not a HS kid under slot. Right? That would have been McKay this year. 

    It's pretty hard to compare individual players at different positions. For all we know, Epstein would have taken Lewis or somebody completely off everyone's radar at the 1-1 slot.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    So it's the same guys who failed in the past with one approach and now take a different approach but are still the same guys so are automatically doomed to failure because they failed in the past with a different strategy under different leadership.

     

    This is my problem with these arguments. New leadership comes to the organization, keeps some of the old staff on, use a different draft strategy, but they still have past failures hang over their head because they're "the same guys".

     

    What's different?

     

    They chose a toolsy HS OF/SS. That's EXACTLY what they did in 2 of the last 5 drafts with Buxton and Gordon.

     

    They then chose a HS pitcher not from the US, just like with Berrios. 

     

    The only real delta is Rooker, so far.

     

    I guess I just don't see the delta that you are seeing. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm going to wait to see what the Twins do from here on to complain. The hope is that savings from the Lewis pick will help them get a better player later on. Personally, I would not have done that because I don't think the current rules make that a good option any longer, but I'll go ahead and trust the process.

     

    But the Twins' recent draft history is nothing short of awful - Tyler Jay over Andrew Benintendi anyone? -- and warrants a healthy dose of skepticism, especially since most of the same people are still there.

     

    If they get the Lewis pick wrong, or if they missed on a potential HOF player in Greene or Wright or Gore to save a few bucks to pick someone with less upside later in the draft, then that will be a major blunder. 

     

     

     

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    You can't conceive of a scenario where a front office might promote their own draft picks, a college bat at that, on a different timetable than prospects they inherited?

     

    I can conceive it, yes. But I am only judging them on their actions so far. That's all we can really do.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    <emphasis mine>

     

    While I love all the coverage that media outlets give to the Rule IV draft, I think it is important to remember that each and every ML ball club (likely) spends more money to evaluate the talent available than all the media outlets combined. In addition, much of the media outlets opinions are based on talking to ML scouts, who have no obligation to give them their complete (or honest) evaluation.

     

    So while it is a nice talking point, these 'universally ranked' prospects rarely go where slotted (especially after the top 5-10).

    If nothing else, there has to be a better way than just reading rankings and flipping out. Especially since many of the same people would flip out if it was *too* close to the rankings.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    My initial reaction is option number 2 above. The player they wanted to fall didn't, so they ended up getting burned.

     

    I like the Rooker pick, but Leach was a reach, and a pretty big one at that.

     

    I would hope they're targeting Blayne Enlow to start the picks today.

     

    Just curious... how big of reach was Noah Syndergaard at 38 in 2010?  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What's different?

     

    They chose a toolsy HS OF/SS. That's EXACTLY what they did in 2 of the last 5 drafts with Buxton and Gordon.

     

    They then chose a HS pitcher not from the US, just like with Berrios.

     

    The only real delta is Rooker, so far.

     

    I guess I just don't see the delta that you are seeing.

    I hope the Twins can copy those results this year. It was a good draft!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I doubt Enlow signs. But as long as there isn't a Twins run on college relievers, I'll be happy. 

     

    I think they should have the $ to get Enlow to sign. Lewis is around $1MIL under per Doogie. Rooker might save some $, Leach should be under-slot (if he's not I have a big mark against Falvey and Levine in their first draft). I'd bet they have around $3MIL to throw at him.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    What's different?

     

    They chose a toolsy HS OF/SS. That's EXACTLY what they did in 2 of the last 5 drafts with Buxton and Gordon.

     

    They then chose a HS pitcher not from the US, just like with Berrios. 

     

    The only real delta is Rooker, so far.

     

    I guess I just don't see the delta that you are seeing. 

    Buxton and Gordon have been their only good first round picks in the past several years. And breaking down the draft into individual positions and players starts to get murky. We're literally dealing with two similar data points here, one of which doesn't even play the same position.

     

    Maybe it wasn't that they Twins liked Lewis so much, maybe it was because they didn't like McKay at all and refused to draft a pitcher at 1-1. That throws the entire analysis on its head.

     

    Any comparison to Berrios and Leach is eye-roll worthy on par with the Nishioka/Park comparsions.

     

    Berrios is a short latin player. Leach is a frickin' huge Canadian. They throw with the same hand so they have that in common.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    has a team ever come forward and said we messed up? like the day after a draft? i don't know, it seems unlikely. 

    I'm not expecting them to come out and say "Hey guys we really f***ed this up," but they'll need to provide some explanation for signing under slot and then reaching in the 2nd round. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...