Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Atlanta's draft/develoment from BA

  1. #1
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,166
    Like
    97
    Liked 54 Times in 38 Posts

    Atlanta's draft/develoment from BA

    Ask BA: How Do The Braves Do It? - BaseballAmerica.com

    Interesting point from the article. "The Braves scout junior colleges as extensively and better than anyone. Righthander Kris Medlen, as well as Kimbrel and Simmons, are all juco products, as was Venters (who missed this season due to injury) and Tommy Hanson, who was a productive starter and then traded for Jordan Walden."

  2. #2
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    492
    Like
    3
    Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    From the article
    On the bigger question of whether teams get “extra credit” for their development success, it does play at least a small factor in how we rank players. In our discussions, organizations that have demonstrated consistent success in developing pitchers (the Rays and Cardinals are two that come to mind) lead to some expectation that their next wave of pitchers are also more likely to fix some of their remaining flaws before they reach the big leagues. It’s not a significant factor in our rankings, but it gets mentioned whenever we’re lining up Top 100 Prospect lists and our other rankings.

    To ashburyjohn. In regards to the Wacha thread comment. The question that the real smart minor league people here might know the answer to is this. Very few players come without flaws. Recently the Cards, Rays and Braves are all identified as teams that developed pitching. The question is then were the Twins drafting pitchers with less upside and fewer flaws or were they drafting similar to others and doing a poor job of coaching? They may have been drafting safer, hence there is no one with a Wacha fastball to develop.

  3. #3
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    3,161
    Like
    19
    Liked 195 Times in 123 Posts
    I would tend to think the Twins go for the low risk, less flawed guys. At least toward the top of the draft. Gibson wasn't thought to have flaws other than injury concerns, same with Wimmers. Berrios was a mechanically sound prospect, his concern was his size.

    In the middle rounds the Twins seem to get the guys with flaws, but really, don't all pitchers have them at that point? Sounds like they already helped Gonsalves work out some kinks from HS. On the other hand, what ever flaws they "fixed" with guys like Summers, Melotakis, Baxendale, Duffy, Boer and Boyd sapped a ton of strikeout potential despite having strong pitches and pre-draft beliefs that strikeouts would be their major attribute.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    492
    Like
    3
    Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nicksaviking View Post
    I would tend to think the Twins go for the low risk, less flawed guys. At least toward the top of the draft. Gibson wasn't thought to have flaws other than injury concerns, same with Wimmers. Berrios was a mechanically sound prospect, his concern was his size.

    In the middle rounds the Twins seem to get the guys with flaws, but really, don't all pitchers have them at that point? Sounds like they already helped Gonsalves work out some kinks from HS. On the other hand, what ever flaws they "fixed" with guys like Summers, Melotakis, Baxendale, Duffy, Boer and Boyd sapped a ton of strikeout potential despite having strong pitches and pre-draft beliefs that strikeouts would be their major attribute.
    Baxendale fit more the low ceiling c prospect mold with an average fb at best
    Boer was coming off a hand injury
    Melotakis, Boer and Duffey are converting to starters, that takes a few ticks off the FB and hence strikeouts as they build strength. It is a process. They can always go back to be being relievers. Boer probably should have been back in the pen by now

  5. #5
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    968
    Like
    3
    Liked 14 Times in 11 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by nicksaviking View Post
    I would tend to think the Twins go for the low risk, less flawed guys. At least toward the top of the draft. Gibson wasn't thought to have flaws other than injury concerns, same with Wimmers. Berrios was a mechanically sound prospect, his concern was his size.

    .
    . This fits with a lot of other aspects of the organization in terms of risk: hiring from within, keeping Gardy, and their approach to free agency. It's only when they have low expectations and are taking some risk anyway (late picks, young international talent) that they are willing to assume a higher level of risk.

  6. #6
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    2,166
    Like
    97
    Liked 54 Times in 38 Posts
    The Twins changed their pitching philosophy to the draft when Smith took over. Deron Johnson drafted flame throwers and high school pitchers a lot more than Radcliff ever did - Bullock, Tootle, Hunt, Gutierrez, Stewart, Boer, Bard, Williams, etc. He stopped drafting the control guys that Radcliff aimed for. And so far, Gibson is the only Johnson pitcher drafted to make the majors. We can argue whether or not it was a good change in philosophy but I don't think it's fair to say the Twins are still drafting low risk guys.

  7. #7
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,575
    Like
    7
    Liked 27 Times in 22 Posts
    Wimmers was more old school lower risk.
    If Pat Dean continues to pitch like he did for the 6 games in Rochester he stands a chance.
    Most of the draftees are high risk.
    Radcliff's ability to find starters outside of the first round were Baker, Slowey, and Blackburn. That is hardly a stellar record.

  8. #8
    Signability is job one.
    Can they pitch is #2.
    Number of pitches seem to be a development idea.
    Hard or speed is no longer a consideration but a risk.
    Even if the Twins were scouting junior colleges (where Puckett came from) or getting into the foreign marketplaces, they still seem to be lowguy on that totem pole.
    Basically, if you do have the budget to spend AND take chances, you do so...since the funds do not seem to carry over from year to year. You also try to get the best that you possibly can at the time, not go for volume of players.
    The Twins have also been god at looking at guys they didn't sign and going after them, at times, when they failed or became the odd man out in other organizations.
    I still like the idea of not signing draftpicks ALL the time and trading for them after they have a notch or two under their belts. But the question still remains, if you got x-$ for foreign draftpicks, you spend it. If you have x-$ for draftpicks, you spend it. If you have x-$ for payroll, you spend it. Then you look and what you have spent the monies on and then do soemthing more, if you can, by trading, long-term signings, etc.
    Joel Thingvall
    www.thingvall.com
    rosterman at www.twinscards.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.