DocBauer

I've noticed a strong tendancy by the current braintrust to severely limit IP by college pitchers, if they throw at all. As I recall, Sands didn't throw at all his first draft year before sort of exploding on the scene in 2019. Obviously an attempt to not overwork an arm coming off a full season of college ball. (Some pitchers are often "abused" in regard to IP or lack of rest between big games, etc.) As I recall, it was initially thought Canterino might not throw at all last season before he did on a limited basis after a short break.

Awesome. Thank you. I don't do Twitter so good news. Despite so little information at my fingertips, for some reason, this selection excites me more than the others.

TINY detail but actually 90th from BA. But why quibble about 2 spots? Kind of reminds me of college football recruiting where a kid comes from a small school or a low population state so he isn't ranked as high as some other kids. Then he goes to a couple of camps and performs as well or better against higher regarded recruits and everything changes. BA lists him currently as 17yo and 6' 1" and 200lbs. While Hawaii is probably about as far away from being a baseball recruiting hotbed as you can get, if you are the team CF and have that size and power, you'd like to think the arm could stretch out enough to play RF in a couple of years. Once again, power, but hit ability and BB to go along with some SO. A definite pattern with our FO. Take the elite athlete where you can, but otherwise look to the best triple slash line you can find.

FWIW, Baseball America had him at 166. Not blowing smoke, just looking at the positives. Drafted by the Cardinals in 2018 and they have an obvious history for scouting well. As previously pointed out by Tom above, 3rd in the SEC in OPS in 2019. Lead his team in 2019 in BA, OB, and SLG. That's not bad stuff. Slow start in an abbreviated 2020, but had 5HR and 12-8 BB/SO before cancellation of the season. He appears to be earmarked for LF. And yet, he was tried at 2B and CF at times. Clearly, if he was just an athletic stiff, no team much less one in the SEC, would have tried him in those spots. Once again, the FO looking at projectability. Notice a trend with their first 2 picks? Hit ability, power and potential power, SO but also BB and OB potential.

No insult intended, but when I read the Baseball America profile on him they mention massive forearms and his power and being limited to 1B only where he is anywhere from average to below average, and I suddenly flash back 30yrs ago to Steve Balboni. To his credit, he's seen as an average to maybe above average hitter with maybe as much power as any hitter in the draft. He strikes out a bunch, but is not afraid to take walks. Does this remind anyone of a less athletic version of Sano? Also, to be fair, his is only a draft eligible sophomore. So with a little time, conditioning and work, perhaps he will be a competent to good 1B. I hate to make comparisons, but Jeffers surprised a lot of people. But hard work has reportedly turned him in to a pretty solid catcher defensively. I'm not sold at this point on the choice. But even being a 1B "only" there is real value if he can hit with that kind of power potential and field his position solidly. Not everyone has to be an elite athlete who can play anywhere. If he's something close to Hrbek the sequel, I'd be very pleased.

Also forgot to comment on the great athlete aspect, I've always liked pitchers who were good athletes. Never understood why being athletic was only tied to being a position player. Being a good overall athlete as a pitcher should only help mechanically, provide health and conditioning, as well as being able to field your position.

Got him for a little over slot? Are you projecting or stating it's a done deal?

Interesting to me the FO is not breaking trends in this draft. Select position players you think can succeed that have at least one proven tool and build on the rest. Instead of grabbing a pitcher to grab a pitcher, look at mechanics, look for at least one great pitch, look at spin rate, and then project what that pitcher can be in 2-4yrs with proper coaching. Only time will tell if they are right, but they certainly have conviction in their process. In regard to Raya in particular, any HS pitcher with mechanics and spin rate and 2 solid/good breaking balls, not hard to project additional growth and velocity over the next couple of years. If signed, he's suddenly 94-95mph in a couple years with spin and even better breaking stuff and someone teaches him some sort of change, well, there you go. Suddenly you have a really nice looking 21yo ready for AA.

With all that went wrong that year, I was surprised they still won 78 games. It's why I wasn't that surprised when things began to turn around in 2019. Mauer coming out in catcher gear one last time was one of the greatest and most emotional sports moments I've experienced.

Denny Hocking would like a spot on that bench.

"Its alive! Its alive!"

Totally get drafting position players first and arms a little later due to injury, and let's face it arms that just don't translate. The history of our FO here and before is to look for a "something" in arm and bead and work with it and develop it. All makes sense to me. I look at Sabato and I think Jeffers. Quality bat, but power potential, questions about defense. Is this a 1B version with even more power? Great if he is. But in a draft with more arms than most scouts can remember, why do I feel this wasn't the right choice?

Shows teams aren't afraid to draft and sign the top HS talent available, even with the deferred money involved.

If Meyer was 2 inches taller, I wonder if he would have been the #1? Everything is seemingly there except the traditional worries about downward plane and endurance not having that "classic" build.

Articles like this are always fun/interesting in a perverse kind of way. But they always remain pointless at the end of the day. The Trout example has always made me shake my head when brought up because most teams passed, therefore, all but 1 team made the same mistake. The Oelkers pick does hurt though as it proved to be so bad, and it was such a high pick.

And with the crazy state we find ourselves in, I wouldn't be surprised. All logic would dictate a college pitcher. Even at 27, it would appear the great depth this year should bring someone the Twins really like. But as crazy as things are, it wouldn't surprise if a HS player slipped down that far. I forget his name right now, but there is a TOP HS SS I've read of that might be right in the Twins wheelhouse if things play just right.

While owners, and ownership partners, make money off MLB, the very fact that CAN buy a team (in any professional sport) means they have the financial ability to do in the first place from all their other business and investments. Yes, they make a profit off that team, but they generally buy said franchise for the sporting/fun aspect or ego, or both. While it is very possible ownership cooks the books to some degree...not saying yes or no...the basic financial numbers don't appear to be in dispute. A full, normal ML season brings in around $10B. Half a season is around $5B. That's just easy math. No fan attendance would be anywhere from 25-40% of that revenue depending on what source you cited. So $5B easily becomes something like $3B, once again just doing basic math. There will be no milb season, yet many teams, including the Twins, are still paying their players. A pittance? Perhaps, but as pointed out, they are also still running their franchises and paying personnel, including a lump sum to the players previously, with ZERO $ coming in. Tell me again how there is no red at this point? The owners have every right, as owners of a business, entertainment or otherwise, to at least mitigate their losses for 2020. And let's be clear, not all teams and all financial situations are equal. Due to media deals and the such, it's possible teams like the Yankees or Dodgers, etc, might eek out a profit or break even without fans. Maybe. But what about the Twins, the Royals, etc, that are mid or small market teams? Ownership is going to lose money. Period. They are willing to do so because they also want baseball and none of them seem to want to sell. (Though this would be a poor time to do so if they did). But all that being said, they also can't expect their primary employees to play for 15% of their contract. (The Trout example of $30M being only $5M on the initial proposal). For the good of the sport, for any HOPE of harmony in the next CBA, they need something better than their initial sliding scale offer to the players. BUT, it is also on the players to decide getting paid is better than not getting paid. It is on the players to have a better grasp of the situation in the world taking place and to offer their own olive branch toward the people who pay them to keep their sport solvent and viable going forward. Are they so naive as to believe a world wide pandemic and a CBA around the corner, much less next offseason's market aren't going to be affected by all of this? Do they want baseball to be kicked in the shins and take multiple years to recover? Or would they rather join in the effort to make any financial losses, including to them, be short term vs long term? Sorry, but this is a 2 way partnership and a symbiotic relationship. Not picking a side, this is just reality. Both sides can play this smart for the good of careers and earnings and the continuation of the sport. OR, they can do what they have mostly done for my lifetime and bicker and argue about who "wins". If and when this gets settled and we have baseball in 2020, the best thing BOTH SIDES could do is look to the NFL and NBA with their revenue sharing and cap situations, whether hard or soft. The health and growth of those sports simply can't be ignored by MLB and the union any longer. And I put the onus on both sides, but more so on the players. It's time for a cap that also comes with a floor. But it also means even more sharing of revenue by ownership. Both sides have a lot to lose and so much to gain.

This exercise was fun to read, and I'm sure you guys had a BLAST doing it. (With the exception of a few choice curse words when you lost someone you were hoping to pick, of course, lol). I'm not as plugged in to information that you all have, but I follow the draft, the international signings, season stats, milb reports, every milb ranking I can find, and, of course, the TD prospect handbook. Even still, being a Twins and Twins milb fanatic, it's hard to remember everything about everyone. Still, I went through each list and graded each category to the best of my ability/opinion. I tried to dismiss "closeness" in my mind and just look at talent and projection. I used a 6-1 point system. And believe it it was difficult at times, especially in regard to the OF, SP and BP. I dismissed the extra pitcher and extra hitter simply because those spots were just so hard to evaluate across the board. So I struck to main construct, and you can hate on me all you want for not getting extra credit for your selections there, lol. With all that being said, here was my final tally: Matt: 31 Seth: 30 Steve: 28 Ted: 27 Cody: 27 Jeremy: 25 Again, there were some tough choices here! I'd love 2/3 of something and have to make a judgement call. C: Matt INF: Matt OF: Steve SP: Ted RP: Seth You all did let Jeremy know what was going on, right?

Agree on swapping this version of Stashak for Littell. Makes sense. But I also believe Hill could make a huge difference and I want him and Wisler up to help the pen. Problem is I also want Adrianza up to help with depth and resting guys. So I'm not sure I can help much here. If my hands are tied...and they are...i vote pitching. Hill and Wisler and make the Littel/Stashak swap. And let me state once again, for the record, how much I DESPISE the new limited call up rule! Hopefully it will be changed before 2021 gets here. It's not just short sighted it's actually stupid.

FWIW, RHP Carmen Miodzinski from South Carolina has been mocked to the Twins a couple of times, including Baseball America. Read a mock today where SS Jordan Westburg from Miss St could go there. Big kid with hit and power potential who could stick at SS. I don't see it. Perfect year to go hard after good college arms.

First round picks wash out all tbe time, or never reach anything regarding great success. But 3 in a row like that really hurt, especially considering such a need for pitching at tne ML level. I was never that excited about Garbe, he just seemed too raw, but IIRC Mills and Johnson were pretty highly regarded. Was it bad luck or poor development from the old guard way of doing things back then? Considering neither Mills or Johnson did anything with anyone else, I'm going to go with bad luck. While nothing is proven yet, sure seems like the current FO and the new approaches have built up a system that could start paying real dividends in the field and on the mound soon.

While the Park signing was interesting, maybe a little exciting, it just didn't fit the construction of the team at all, especially with Sano moving to the OF. But the worst move was the trade of Hicks to the Yankees. He was rushed...just like Hunter had been years before and like Buxton was...and then dumped with no viable option to replace him. It wasn't trading him for Murphy that was so awful in of itself, it was not having a backup plan.

I also found his decision puzzling. I'm sure it can't be financial considering Big 10 money, but who knows. Wish I cod remember his exact comments, but again, something it not being fair to other seniors who weren't athletes losing out so no preferencal treatmen. Still puzzling to me.

College seniors can go back for another year or the NCAA, but there are catches there. 1] Can they afford to go back for another year of partial scholarship money and risk another year? 2] Is there money even available to them considering the state of athletics and funding across the country? 3] Will their school even let them come back? Wisconsin, for instance, stated they would not let seniors return as it was unfair to non athletes and the such who missed out. I think if you're a college senior selected in these 5 rounds you are pretty motivated to sign up.

Just throwing this out there. And probably deserves it's own OP. But despite some labor issues, and a couple work stoppages, the NFL and NBA have still seen far less labor angst than MLB. In fact, though tables could turn post-covid...and there is already early expectation/speculation...the NFL and NBA have vastly grown worldwide. Meanwhile, baseball is still stuck in some mire I don't understand. Is this the epitome of the "old boys network" we used to hear about? Is it remotely possible MLB owners are still carrying on archaic ideas from original ownership dating back 100yrs? Or are they just smarter than the players union where they see the realities of loss and diminished return that could have far reaching affects? (Already early reports the NFL could be cutting payroll next year by 40% vs normal annual raises)