Twins Draft Blayne Enlow, Seven More

Agreed, I'd like to see the Pohlad's go over by 4% but that might be pushing it.

I'm a hopeless optimist, but I suspect they get close this year.

 

Believe what you will. There is a direct correlation between the teams that spend money, and World Series championships. When a "small market" team wins (ala Royals) it's an aberration.

 

Championships I would agree with, although early 2000's....Marlins, Angels, White Sox, Phillies would disagree.  But I also look at the last 4 World Series runner-ups...CLE, KAN(x2), STL all outside the top 10 in payroll.  

 

We aren't going worst to first because we sign 1 big ace this offseason, or because we leave 100k in our draft pool on the table.  I can easily get behind those that want to speed up the win process( have a 4 year old who says 'I wish I could go to a game when Twins actually win :-)  ).  

 

But I also understand that slow burn is likely the way to go for a 'small market' team who's business model is to be fiscally conservative.  :-)

Put me down as disappointed they passed on Carlson. He seems like an advanced version of Leach, so why not take the local kid?

 

They may have actually had Enlow ranked higher (klaw did) and had a deal worked out with him prior and Leach was a money saving move. Just a thought, or they had a deal with Carlson and expected him to drop to the 3rd but the Mariners messed it up. Who knows

 

Put me down as disappointed they passed on Carlson. He seems like an advanced version of Leach, so why not take the local kid?

Call me a homer if you want (I'm sure there is a little of that going on), but the local kid was a legit first rounder.  Instead, the team went with a Canadian pitcher ranked 101.  That was another disappointment for me.

 

Even if they saved a ton of money, I can't help but think they could have gotten themselves a home town discount on the local kid, so there is still a chance they would have just as much money to go after the college bound prospects.

How are they "out of money?"

Alll the talk about big moves didn't really come to fruition. I still think they tried to get cute, and got burned. With the exception of one pick.

Hey, at least they got a few college pitchers that struggle to touch 90. Should turn out well.

 

They will probably have to go over slot on Enlow, De La Torre, Bechtold, and Widell all of who were very highly regarded and I would bet they saved somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5-3 million most of which will go to Enlow who was considered a 1st rounder. You have to remember that the slot values were evened out more than year's past so it is harder to save money and signability is an inexact science, it's really not as straight forward as some people on here are making it out to be

Call me a homer if you want (I'm sure there is a little of that going on), but the local kid was a legit first rounder.  Instead, the team went with a Canadian pitcher ranked 101.  That was another disappointment for me.

 

Even if they saved a ton of money, I can't help but think they couldn't have gotten themselves a home town discount on the local kid, so there is still a chance they would have just as much money to go after the college bound prospects.

 

Have you watched tape on both of them?

 

Calvin Faucher RHP Senior UC Irvine  6'1 175lb slot 137K

 

That's the right kind of senior pick.

 

Agreed, I'd like to see the Pohlad's go over by 4% but that might be pushing it.

Ditto that.  4% would give them an extra half million or so to spend on top of the slot, plus anything else they might have left over.

 

Here is my very quick take this far.

 

I am not comfortable with Lewis as your once in 17 years first overall pick. Looks like speed is his best weapon. Not much power at this point. Won't stick even on the left side of the INF.

 

And it looks like we went underslot on several other picks as well to draft a fringe late first rounder in Enlow. The General value in this area does not warrant i think not getting your best player at 1-1, I don't have proof that we don't view him 1-1. But we offered McKay money and it seems few had him 1.

 

And I read that Enlow has seen his velocity dip from 92-94 to 89-91 this spring. Has anyone brought this up? I didn't see it as I skimmed through.

A decent thought provoking question may be, if the Twins did NOT have Lewis at the top of their board, has the haul so far warranted not taking the best guy 1-1?

 

For the sake of argument, let's just assume they didn't. We will never know if they did or didn't.

Have you watched tape on both of them?

I've seen tape of Carlson's slider. That is good enough for me. It's a tremendous pitch.

I think you're underestimating Lewis's talent. He's a legit 1-1 pick. KLAW, for example, likes him better than last year's first overall pick, Mickie Moniak. Callis called him a legitimate choice for first overall. He might not be "universally considered a great hitter," but basically everyone with a professional opinion says his hit tool is/could be anywhere from plus to plus-plus. Longenhagen gives it a 60 future value, for example, which would make him an allstar. His frame is still pretty lanky (he very recently turned 18), so it's easy to imagine him adding power as he gets older, as well. Not to mention that he'll likely play an up the middle position even if he moves off SS.

 

My personal hope was that they'd nab Gore or Greene 1-1 (in that order), but I think Lewis is a very good pick. It's not like he's some fringy first rounder. Most outlets have tagged him with a 55FV, which is the same as Gore, McKay, and Wright (the latter two are 60FV for some) depending on where you look.

The .377 average and 4 HRs scare me. I know HS stats aren't supposed to mean anything, but they are relevant when you get over 220 ABs and go 1-1. There was a rare phenom arm and a couple really good college pitchers sitting there. In case you are wondering Jeter hit over .500 all 3 years of HS and struck out once his senior year.

For posterity, Greene was the guy I wanted at 1-1 and it wasn't even close. He will be an absolute stud.

I've seen tape of Carlson's slider. That is good enough for me. It's a tremendous pitch.

It's a great pitch, he also has super awkward mechanics. A slider is no good if the player is constantly hurt due to a herky jerky wind up. Leach on the other hand is big and projectable with a smooth delivery, his fastball is a really good pitch with great movement. Also we got Enlow out of the deal who has one of the best curve balls in the draft

Monkey,

 

I guess the hang up for me is the historical value of guys after the first round. And the value within the first round and even within the top few.

 

We may find really cool write ups on guys. Probably still another 50 players on the board where you will hear "thought to be a first rounder last year" or something to that effect. But history shows the hit rate in the late rounds is really low.

 

With that view, taking less value at 1-1 and 35 and 37 to get more value here seems ass backwards to me.

Looks like Enlow is getting about 2 million. Hope they have enough to sway another talented high school pitcher!!

 

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017-amateur-draft

 

I have to say, as much as day one confused me, I really liked our day two draft. Enlow was a guy I thought we could take at 35 but might have been gone by then, so he's a first rounder in my head. I liked both the college pitcher picks even though neither profiles as an ace. I think de la Torre might surprise us but it's a good gamble pick and the juco third baseman also has some upside. And it seems like we've cleared enough space to nab at least one more well regarded HS prep arm (or Tristen Beck if we have more money than I thought) tomorrow.

No college pitcher profiled as an Ace in this draft...

 

Call me a homer if you want (I'm sure there is a little of that going on), but the local kid was a legit first rounder.  Instead, the team went with a Canadian pitcher ranked 101.  That was another disappointment for me.

 

Even if they saved a ton of money, I can't help but think they could have gotten themselves a home town discount on the local kid, so there is still a chance they would have just as much money to go after the college bound prospects.

There's no hometown discount for players getting drafted ha Agents deal with most of it. Couldn't afford Carlson and Enlow, so if they liked enlow more it was a great move.

 

Barreiro had a great take on the Twins today (paraphrasing):

Certain people that are perceived as too stupid to "understand the draft" as some, is completely ridiculous.

The burden of proof on this team refusal to spend money is on the team. Not the fan. The fan has every right to question these moves. They said they'd write the check...so write the damn check. Until then, then sentiment that this team is making copper wire out of pennies won't go away.

Maybe that's not the motivation behind this draft. But, it'll always be the assumption until they prove otherwise, which they never do. That sentiment is not the fault of Thebes fan for being skeptical. All criticism has been rightly earned. Those that feel otherwise are the unreasonable ones.

Podcast it is you didn't hear it. Very eloquently put, and spot on. It's on the Twins to change this wide-spread (not wide-spread enough, IMO) paradigm (shout out to Bonnes for use of his favorite word, paradigm).

 

It's hard because while I agree wholeheartedly with the Twins organization having some troubling issues with spending money, the criticism cites the one time I don't think it's fair to call them cheap. It's like when someone is bashing the political party you hate but they're doing it by citing the one thing you don't mind about that party.

 

Unless the Twins don't spend their allotted draft money overall (seems unlikely), they can't be called cheap for the draft. They didn't even invent this strategy.

 

I also feel very uncomfortable about the language used: those that aren't critical are the unreasonable ones. I think it's pretty clear that the people blasting the Twins for being cheap for the Lewis pick are ignorant of the draft process. You can call it stupid, you can say their strategy is bogus but calling it cheap shows a reflexive knee-jerk assumption with no consideration of the bigger picture.

 

No one is too stupid to understand the draft but a lot of people are too lazy to read a single article that explains it.

It's hard because while I agree wholeheartedly with the Twins organization having some troubling issues with spending money, the criticism cites the one time I don't think it's fair to call them cheap. It's like when someone is bashing the political party you hate but they're doing it by citing the one thing you don't mind about that party.

 

Unless the Twins don't spend their allotted draft money overall (seems unlikely), they can't be called cheap for the draft. They didn't even invent this strategy.

 

I also feel very uncomfortable about the language used: those that aren't critical are the unreasonable ones. I think it's pretty clear that the people blasting the Twins for being cheap for the Lewis pick are ignorant of the draft process. You can call it stupid, you can say their strategy is bogus but calling it cheap shows a reflexive knee-jerk assumption with no consideration of the bigger picture.

 

No one is too stupid to understand the draft but a lot of people are too lazy to read a single article that explains it.

It is very helpful to differentiate between stupid and lazy. I don't think the vast, vast majority of people are too stupid to understand. But these comments clearly show an intellectual laziness with how the draft works.

 

It is certainly fair to criticize the 1-1 pick, but if the Twins spend their draft pool (and they will) it is so, so lazy to call them cheap. It really is not the responsibility of the Twins to continually explain this to people. Especially if the host, as I suspect, doesn't want to let the truth get in the way of a continual criticism.

 

EDIT: To clarify, not the comments I directly quoted, but the quotes you were quoting originally.

Edited June 14, 2017 by drjim