Did Nick Gordon’s Second Half Turn Him From Prospect to Suspect?

Berardino's list was heavily weighted for highest ceiling. With that in mind, I can't disagree with the list and think its great to have a guy like Gordon at #8.

 

I have Gordon as my No. 3 prospect in the system, one spot ahead of Wander Javier, due in large part to the advances he made as a hitter

Really?  I am not sure how "advances he made" would put him ahead of Javier.  From all reports, Javier looks to have a better bat and a better glove than Gordon.

The only reason to have Gordon higher than Javier is due to MiLB level.  AA vs Rookie level.    Gordon's floor is much higher.  

Berardino's list was heavily weighted for highest ceiling. With that in mind, I can't disagree with the list and think its great to have a guy like Gordon at #8.

Graterol is the one that I would move down - not out of the list, but below Gordon.  Sample size is so miniscule that it's still all tool based assumption.

Ratings like this are almost completely arbitrary, invested to spur discussion rather than "prospect value."

I agree with most of the other commenters. I think it reflects that the Twins have a stronger system than they did a year ago more than any other symptom.

Every #1 pick has to learn to overcome struggles at some point. Hopefully Gordon is getting that out of the way now, so he can hit MLB and not look back.

Bernadino is a pretty poor reporter, in my opinion.  His articles are mostly rehash of what others have said either nationally or in other local publications.  He rarely breaks Twins news and I highly doubt he has the pedigree to be judging prospects and compiling a ranking. I tend to take what he says with a grain of salt.  With that said, the BA rankings clearly stated that they were based on ceiling.  Gordon is probably a major league player with the ability to show flashes, but won't be THE guy in a lineup or team.  Hopefully he turns into a solid second baseman and helps the Twins win baseball games, but he was never a guy that I was hanging my hat on that he'd be a major contributor the way I looked at Sano, Buxton, Kepler, and Rosario.  At the end of the day, the rankings are just that; they don't really mean anything until the players begin to produce.

I begin and end with this:  He's 22 yrs. old......

By my standards my prospect ranking system is the most accurate one out there and I ranked Gordon the 2.6th best prospect in the system.

All kidding aside, Bernardino had a set criteria for his list and he is excluding other criteria. And that gives room for discussion. We could make a list based off of highest floor and that would give us different results.

Gordon really needs to produce against lefties... Otherwise he'll be unplayable if/when he is called up.

I'm in no rush calling him up to the majors until he can improve in that skill. And really, I wouldn't be comfortable with it until he is moderately successful (.650+ OPS) after ~400 PAs.

I still think it makes sense to dangle him in a package trade for a top of the rotation arm.

I think this was the point of ranking him #8.  He will probably be a solid major league regular and while cheap a bargain. That has value to lower market teams.  Just bring back the correct pitcher.  Would not package him for Cole unless not much else goes, but Archer if you could use him as the biggest piece, otherwise with one of the Twins outfielders. 

I think it's fair for Gordon's second-half struggles to downgrade him some on the prospect lists, and for it not just to be a function of higher-upside prospects joining the organization/being recognized. He had an ok year; it started really well offensively and ended pretty badly. It's not an unusual occurrence for a prospect to hit a stumbling block when they start getting into the high minors, but while Gordon is young for his level (and has been at every stop) it's still a reasonable cause for concern.

He also didn't do a lot to prove that he really can stick at SS at the major-league level, either. He didn't disqualify himself either, but taken in aggregate, last season is more of a "he justified the promotion" sort of season rather than a "he's ready to keep advancing" one.

I'd like for him to repeat at AA and see how it goes. He's got some things to work on and repeating a level at his age is fine. he's still a prospect, but right now he's not showing enough to say "we can't deal him".

It really is not about attacking the messenger (reporter in this case), everyone should have a list that reflects their own evaluation, but rather this is a fun list because it raises questions and therefore gives us the fun of speculation and discussion.  I have no dislike for any of our MN reporters, the more articles the better for me.

Gordon at 8 is fine with me.  I think his second half decline raised questions about the validity of the first half.  Each year the reviews and reports seem to have a slightly less optimistic look at Gordon.  It appears to me, if I combine the various TD and other reports that he will be a fine average major leaguer, but not a star.  Which is fine, but it is nice to know that we actually have some others in the system now that have higher potential.

​My biggest question in Kirilloff. I want to hope, but I need a full season of ball to see where the injuries have put him.  I am much higher on Rooker.

I'm not going to get too excited about any Twins'  prospect until that prospect is a consensus top 25 in national rankings. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy reading about the Twins' prospects, and I wish them all well...but until then, I have my doubts about their chances of being real difference makers in the major leagues.

Bernadino is a pretty poor reporter, in my opinion.  His articles are mostly rehash of what others have said either nationally or in other local publications.  He rarely breaks Twins news and I highly doubt he has the pedigree to be judging prospects and compiling a ranking. I tend to take what he says with a grain of salt.  With that said, the BA rankings clearly stated that they were based on ceiling.  Gordon is probably a major league player with the ability to show flashes, but won't be THE guy in a lineup or team.  Hopefully he turns into a solid second baseman and helps the Twins win baseball games, but he was never a guy that I was hanging my hat on that he'd be a major contributor the way I looked at Sano, Buxton, Kepler, and Rosario.  At the end of the day, the rankings are just that; they don't really mean anything until the players begin to produce.

I appreciate and enjoy Berndino's writing. After all, he is a UNC Journalism School graduate.

My glass is half-full today.   While I feel that Gordon earned a slip down the rankings, pretty much everyone's top 10 makes me feel a little better than where we were a year ago.

I feel that if Gordon isn't a short-stop, I'd rank Luis Arraez ahead of him.  But we'll see.  Maybe he is a short-stop.

If a list is slanted toward up-side, I'm mildly surprised Akil Baddoo doesn't crack the top 10.  Regardless, I'm mildly optimistic that I can think of other names that are not even on this list that I feel have a very good chance of being useful down the road as either trade material or for the major league club.  Jermaine Palacios is another name that comes to mind in that regard. 

I think Gordon is too low at 8, but we're splitting some pretty fine hairs here debating a couple of spots on a top 10 list. There's a few guys loaded with potential that aren't even in the top 10 here.

I think his poor second half downgraded him somewhat. But young, talented and improving overall, he could be right back in the top 3-5 This time next year.

Defense is highly important, but error numbers, by themselves, don't trouble me. You can randomly look up error totals for a myriad of highly successful ML infielders, past and present, and you would be surprised by some of the error totals you would see while in the minors.

Furthermore, I don't think Gordon's second half makes him a suspect.

 

Chattanooga had a stacked lineup this year if you ask me, his ranks:

 

Doubles: 2nd (6th in southern league)

Triples: 1st (1st in southern league)

HRs: 4th

RBI: 3rd (8th in southern league)

Total Bases: 2nd (4th in southern league)

Walks: 3rd (13th in southern league)

SB's: 1st

 

Think of it this way: If he had compiled those numbers without the drastic 1st and 2nd half splits, would you still contemplate calling him "suspect"?

To be fair, when a prospect plays a full season at one level they tend to end up near the top of the lists in counting stats. He led the Southern League in plate appearances and had nearly 100 more ABs then his next closest teammate.

For what it's worth, my immediate takeaway from Royce Lewis being pegged as the "best defensive infielder" gives me major pause.

 

I hope he proves me wrong, but I don't think he makes it to the majors as an infielder and I don't know how anyone could slot him in that position at this point. You think there's questions about Gordon's defense? Those questions should be far bigger on Lewis right now.

I understand the concern, but Royce is far to inexperienced and raw at SS to really get a feel for his projection right now. He only played one year in the hole in high school, didn't he? With his athleticism to fall back on he probably didn't even learn the fundamentals of the position. This next year should hopefully give us a much better read on his infield ability.

P.S. It wouldn’t surprise me if Levine wants to get rid of most of the Ryan era draftees, or at least cuts them less slack. It would be human nature. It also wouldn’t surprise me if Berardino is plugged into management thinking - he may understand their analytical leanings better than most of the other press in town, which is more old school. That doesn’t mean the FO gives explicit guidance or leaks to Berardino, but it could mean that his ratings may reflect his reading of tea leaves.

I don't understand what aspect of "human nature" would cause Levine to want to get rid of Ryan-era draftees. Wouldn't that mean they want to get rid of Buxton, Berrios, etc.? The players don't really have a personal connection to the previous leadership, so I think there's zero chance Falvey or Levine will treat prospects differently based on who drafted them.

Of course, they may evaluate players differently, but that could work in either direction.

I agree with the rest of your post, but that part was way off base.