<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Twins Prospects: What a Difference a Week Makes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://knuckleballsblog.com/2012/02/10/twins-prospects-what-a-difference-a-week-makes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://knuckleballsblog.com/2012/02/10/twins-prospects-what-a-difference-a-week-makes/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=twins-prospects-what-a-difference-a-week-makes</link>
	<description>&#34;Like butterflies with hiccups&#34;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 14:15:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: birdofprey</title>
		<link>http://knuckleballsblog.com/2012/02/10/twins-prospects-what-a-difference-a-week-makes/#comment-11852</link>
		<dc:creator>birdofprey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:06:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://knuckleballsblog.com/?p=10754#comment-11852</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting topic. I only have one conclusion to draw from these lists, and that is that the number of players a team has on the list tells you nothing-nothing whatsoever- about the organization&#039;s skills at drafting. Here are a couple of interestinf facts:

On MLB.com&#039;s Top 100 Prospects, 50 of them were drafted in the first round between 2007 and 2011. By my calculations, given that the Twins only once during those years drafted higher than the #20 slot, (Hicks at #14 in 2008?) as many as 45 of those 50 players had zero chance of being a Twins prospect.
As for draft strategy, I can&#039;t help but side a little more with Jim&#039;s notion of more &quot;purposeful&quot; drafting as opposed to TT&#039;s best player available notion. In 2011, of the 50 players drafted, I believe 27 were left-handed pitchers. A coincidence maybe, but it sure wreaks of purpose, don&#039;t you think?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting topic. I only have one conclusion to draw from these lists, and that is that the number of players a team has on the list tells you nothing-nothing whatsoever- about the organization&#8217;s skills at drafting. Here are a couple of interestinf facts:</p>
<p>On MLB.com&#8217;s Top 100 Prospects, 50 of them were drafted in the first round between 2007 and 2011. By my calculations, given that the Twins only once during those years drafted higher than the #20 slot, (Hicks at #14 in 2008?) as many as 45 of those 50 players had zero chance of being a Twins prospect.<br />
As for draft strategy, I can&#8217;t help but side a little more with Jim&#8217;s notion of more &#8220;purposeful&#8221; drafting as opposed to TT&#8217;s best player available notion. In 2011, of the 50 players drafted, I believe 27 were left-handed pitchers. A coincidence maybe, but it sure wreaks of purpose, don&#8217;t you think?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TT</title>
		<link>http://knuckleballsblog.com/2012/02/10/twins-prospects-what-a-difference-a-week-makes/#comment-11850</link>
		<dc:creator>TT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:59:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://knuckleballsblog.com/?p=10754#comment-11850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;I believe most of the players who become superstars or even stars in the Big Leagues… in other words, the players teams need to have extended runs of competitiveness… do not completely bypass these “top prospect” lists.&quot;

That is no doubt true. Most of those players are not going to develop quickly enough to bypass the lists entirely.  On the other hand, you will find all sorts of stars who were left off these lists for periods during their minor league careers. Usually in the low minors, but also later when they failed to develop quickly enough to match the hype. 

For instance Torii Hunter made the BBA list at number 79 in 1997. That was the only time he was on their list.  Chris Parmelee was on the list in 2007 along with Glenn Perkins, for the second time, and Kevin Slowey. But Scott Baker, Brad Radke and Joe Nathan never appeared on the BBA lists at all.  

In 2008, Carlos Gomez, Delios Guerra and Nick Blackburn made the list. In 2009, it was Ben Revere and Wilson Ramos. In 2010, it was Hicks, Gibson and Sano. 

If you really want to see a clunker from the Twins perspective look at the 1992 list. They had six players on the list: David McCarty, Pat Mahomes, Midre Cummings, Willie Banks, Alan Newman and Todd Ritchie.  

So if the standard is that a player showed up on a list at some point in his career, even if at the last minute like Blackburn, then you are right.  But looking at one year&#039;s list isn&#039;t going to tell you much.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I believe most of the players who become superstars or even stars in the Big Leagues… in other words, the players teams need to have extended runs of competitiveness… do not completely bypass these “top prospect” lists.&#8221;</p>
<p>That is no doubt true. Most of those players are not going to develop quickly enough to bypass the lists entirely.  On the other hand, you will find all sorts of stars who were left off these lists for periods during their minor league careers. Usually in the low minors, but also later when they failed to develop quickly enough to match the hype. </p>
<p>For instance Torii Hunter made the BBA list at number 79 in 1997. That was the only time he was on their list.  Chris Parmelee was on the list in 2007 along with Glenn Perkins, for the second time, and Kevin Slowey. But Scott Baker, Brad Radke and Joe Nathan never appeared on the BBA lists at all.  </p>
<p>In 2008, Carlos Gomez, Delios Guerra and Nick Blackburn made the list. In 2009, it was Ben Revere and Wilson Ramos. In 2010, it was Hicks, Gibson and Sano. </p>
<p>If you really want to see a clunker from the Twins perspective look at the 1992 list. They had six players on the list: David McCarty, Pat Mahomes, Midre Cummings, Willie Banks, Alan Newman and Todd Ritchie.  </p>
<p>So if the standard is that a player showed up on a list at some point in his career, even if at the last minute like Blackburn, then you are right.  But looking at one year&#8217;s list isn&#8217;t going to tell you much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Crikket</title>
		<link>http://knuckleballsblog.com/2012/02/10/twins-prospects-what-a-difference-a-week-makes/#comment-11849</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Crikket</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:55:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://knuckleballsblog.com/?p=10754#comment-11849</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ll just agree to disagree on your first couple of points, TT, but as for it not being unusual for players to bypass these Top 100 lists entirely, I have to say I REALLY disagree, unless you&#039;re just talking about players who bypass the lists and go on to productive MLB careers. 

Obviously, that happens, but I believe most of the players who become superstars or even stars in the Big Leagues... in other words, the players teams need to have extended runs of competitiveness... do not completely bypass these &quot;top prospect&quot; lists.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll just agree to disagree on your first couple of points, TT, but as for it not being unusual for players to bypass these Top 100 lists entirely, I have to say I REALLY disagree, unless you&#8217;re just talking about players who bypass the lists and go on to productive MLB careers. </p>
<p>Obviously, that happens, but I believe most of the players who become superstars or even stars in the Big Leagues&#8230; in other words, the players teams need to have extended runs of competitiveness&#8230; do not completely bypass these &#8220;top prospect&#8221; lists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TT</title>
		<link>http://knuckleballsblog.com/2012/02/10/twins-prospects-what-a-difference-a-week-makes/#comment-11848</link>
		<dc:creator>TT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:37:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://knuckleballsblog.com/?p=10754#comment-11848</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;the Twins obviously intended for this imbalance to occur. &quot;

I doubt it. I think the Twins focus on getting the best players, regardless  of where they play.  And they have consistently drafted pitchers. In addition to Gibson, recent drafts first round choices have included college pitchers Bashore, Hunt, Wimmer and Gutierrez.  They just added Hudson Boyd, a high school pitcher, to that list last year. 

&quot;The Twins had some bad luck and some bad drafts a few years back&quot;

No more than normal. The Twins first round choices for three straight years from 1998-2000 were  Ryan Mills, BJ Garbe and Adam Johnson. That didn&#039;t prevent them from winning division championships. Mostly the evaluation of &quot;failed&quot; drafts is just impatience with how long it takes high school players to develop. Plouffe was drafted in 2004, the same year as Glen Perkins, and he has just reached the big leagues.

What is true is that they have been drafting in the lower half of the first round. Those guys aren&#039;t usually hyped to the point they are added to top 100 lists the day they are drafted. Until they do something in the minor leagues to grab people&#039;s attention, they are not going to rise above the crowd. And, for all the complaints about how slow the Twins are to promote players, their best prospects are often among the youngest players in their league. 

These lists are fun, but they don&#039;t have much meaning. Afterall, the Twins just signed Sean Burroughs to a minor league contract and he was at the top of most of these lists right up until he failed to live up to the hype at the major league level. And he is not that unusual. Its also not unusual for players to bypass these lists entirely.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;the Twins obviously intended for this imbalance to occur. &#8221;</p>
<p>I doubt it. I think the Twins focus on getting the best players, regardless  of where they play.  And they have consistently drafted pitchers. In addition to Gibson, recent drafts first round choices have included college pitchers Bashore, Hunt, Wimmer and Gutierrez.  They just added Hudson Boyd, a high school pitcher, to that list last year. </p>
<p>&#8220;The Twins had some bad luck and some bad drafts a few years back&#8221;</p>
<p>No more than normal. The Twins first round choices for three straight years from 1998-2000 were  Ryan Mills, BJ Garbe and Adam Johnson. That didn&#8217;t prevent them from winning division championships. Mostly the evaluation of &#8220;failed&#8221; drafts is just impatience with how long it takes high school players to develop. Plouffe was drafted in 2004, the same year as Glen Perkins, and he has just reached the big leagues.</p>
<p>What is true is that they have been drafting in the lower half of the first round. Those guys aren&#8217;t usually hyped to the point they are added to top 100 lists the day they are drafted. Until they do something in the minor leagues to grab people&#8217;s attention, they are not going to rise above the crowd. And, for all the complaints about how slow the Twins are to promote players, their best prospects are often among the youngest players in their league. </p>
<p>These lists are fun, but they don&#8217;t have much meaning. Afterall, the Twins just signed Sean Burroughs to a minor league contract and he was at the top of most of these lists right up until he failed to live up to the hype at the major league level. And he is not that unusual. Its also not unusual for players to bypass these lists entirely.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
