Where does Deolis Guerra fit?

by SethSpeaks on Jan 31, 2008 9:41 AM EST Comment 19 comments

I think that we can all agree that the 18 year old who pitched adequately in High-A ball likely fits in the Twins top 10. So, I am going to show the Twins top ten and ask you to vote for where he should be. Make sense?

I think that there should be plenty of discussion on these guys from the Mets. So, if you feel like adding some of your thoughts on the players and your thinking, leave comments. I think discussion will be very important for these.

Here are our choices for the Twins Top 10:

1 - Anthony Swarzak
2 - Tyler Robertson
3 - Trevor Plouffe
4 - Ben Revere
5 - Jeff Manship
6 - Brian Duensing
7 - Chris Parmelee
8 - Danny Valencia
9 - Nick Blackburn
10 - Oswaldo Sosa

Poll

Where should Deolis Guerra slot in?

#1 (ahead of Swarzak)

47 votes

#2 (behind Swarzak, ahead of Robertson)

17 votes

#3 (behind Robertson, ahead of Plouffe)

29 votes

#4 (behind Plouffe, ahead of Revere)

7 votes

#5 (behind Revere, ahead of Manship)

10 votes

#6 (behind Manship, ahead of Duensing)

2 votes

#7 (behind Duensing, ahead of Parmelee)

5 votes

117 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 19 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Arrgh......

I think we may have a quandry or something.

First, is Gomez still considered a rookie? I think he met the at-bats equirement to no longer qualify.

I would suspect that all three of the Mets pitchers would fit into the Top 10 somewhere.

Let's hope the Twins don't dump Nathan for two prospects and really screw this up.

check out Twinkies autograph collection at www.TwinsCards.com

by twintown on Jan 31, 2008 10:56 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Gomez

If BA ranks him, he's still officially a prospect.

Guys who are rushed to the majors are the most underrated prospects. Take Garza, for example. If he had stayed in AAA the rest of the year in 2006, he would have been #1 or #2 in all of baseball last year (depending on how you rated Hughes). But because he was rushed to the majors, he ranked between #12 to #20 overall, depending on the list.

I think Gomez is similar. He had a really good year in AA in 2006, all things considered. He was having a better year in AAA, then he got rushed to the majors. The one month he had consistent playing time in the majors and was healthy (June), he hit .299/.351/.403. Then he broke his hammate bone and the rest of the year is really tough to evaluate.

If he had stayed in AAA all year, he would have been an A- prospect and in the top 10 overall coming into the year, well ahead of Martinez. But he's underrated based on being rushed and the injury in 2007.

If he does in spring training what he did in June of 2007, he's the everyday center fielder and the center fielder of the future for the Twins. I'll take a .351 OBP with his speed and defense every day of the week. For reference, Castillo's OBP last year was .358, and we were happy with it, even though he looked like Mr. Sandford most of the time.

With Gomez's tools and adjusted record, he should be the number 1 prospect in the system.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 31, 2008 11:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree completely

Your Garza example is exactly right.
I think Gomez can be excellent. No, he didn't jump into the big leagues and dominate the way anyone would hope, but he isn't a worse player and in my mind a worse prospect.

We can vote on Gomez. I don't think he's a rookie because if he played in 58 games, he has way too much big league service time. But he has just 125 at bats. He had eight walks, 3 HBP and 3 SF, so 139 plate appearances. For what we're doing with the Mets players, we can slot him ni in an upcoming vote.

by SethSpeaks on Jan 31, 2008 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Guerra...

...probably has to be either #1 or #2. He was younger than Robertson, pitching at a higher level. Robertson had awesome numbers at Beloit while Guerra had ok numbers in Hi-A. Considering he was so young, I feel that he has to be ahead of Robertson...thus, I put him at #2. Need to see better numbers at Hi-A, which is where I suspect he will begin this season, before putting him #1 in the organization.

by roger on Jan 31, 2008 2:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I put Guerra ahead of Swarzak and Robertson

I guess I was higher on Swarzak until I read Seth's Q&A with John Manuel. Manuel says he's a two pitch pitcher and neither pitch is plus. He pegs him as a reliever unless he can add a better change.

And Robertson is really inconsistent, or at least reports on him are inconsistent. If he can smooth out his delivery consistently over the next year at Fort Myers, he could jump to the head of the class.

I guess Guerra has a lot of question marks about him too. But he throws harder than Robertson right now, is almost two years younger, and has a slightly bigger frame. I wouldn't flip them out until I see Robertson pitching better than Guerra consistently in the FSL.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 31, 2008 3:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Robertson

Saw Robertson at Twins Fest. He is a big guy with a lot of room to grow.

But yes, Guerra is bigger already and younger. I put him at #1, but I think what we're seeing here is that he is definitely a Top 3.

by SethSpeaks on Jan 31, 2008 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I put him

I put him behind Robertson at third. Partly becaue Swarzak is much closer, so has much less risk (it's hard for me too rank an 18 year old in A ball pitcher as #1) and I'm siding with those who think Robertson's delivery will be fine.

I'm going to vote too put Gomez directly behind where I put Guerra. It looks liek Guerra is getting voted number 1, but I'm voting Gomez #4 ahead of Plouffe.

I really hope they stick Gomez in AAA this year though.

I think I'll put Mulvey right behind Manship and ahead of Duensing. Humber is a little tougher, but after examining the numbers, I think I'd definitely rank Blackburn better, and it's kind of a toss-up between him and Sosa. Sosa is younger with more upside, Humber is pretty close too what he is, but that's only ok. I think I'd rank him after Sosa, which will be #14 by the time the other 3 get added in.

So this deal did nicely thicken our farm system, it just makes me sick when I think we could have had John Lester and Jed Lowrie or Phil Hughes and Melky Cabrera.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Jan 31, 2008 5:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

i think it would be

nice if we traded some of our prospects for a dominant pitcher..... Bedard.....Hurang....Blanton...

by doofus04 on Jan 31, 2008 10:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

but...

Bedard would cost too many prospects.
Harang isn't available.
Blanton would cost too many prospects. (and is he really that much better than any of our top 3-4 starters?

by SethSpeaks on Jan 31, 2008 11:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Bedard

I dunno, I'd turn around and send the Orioles every guy we just got from the Mets and toss in a Denard Span or Brian Buscher or somebody as extra bonus to get Bedard. Then i'd try to sign him up long term immediately. That's better than what the Mariners were offering, I think.

Baseball is great because you cant take a knee or kill the clock. You gotta put the ball over the plate and give the other guy his damn shot E Weaver abridged

by AdamOnFirst on Jan 31, 2008 11:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't....

...trade these four guys for Bedard straight up. But I'm higher Gomez than most SABR people and I think Mulvey is a real find. I also think Guerra's the best pitching prospect this organization has had since Liriano (think Zumaya). And I think Humber can eat innings for several years as a reliable 12-12 4.5 ERA starter.

The upside of the Santana package is, in two years, Mulvey will be pitching better than Bedard and Gomez will be part of the core of the team as the lead-off hitter and everyday center fielder.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Feb 1, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

I wouldn't trade all four for Bedard, but it may have as much to do with the fact that I don't like Bedard at all.

by SethSpeaks on Feb 1, 2008 11:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't do it for Bedard...

but I would rather wait until after the Bedard trade goes through and trade the four Mets prospects plus Buscher for Adam Jones and Brian Roberts. This would shore up our 2008+ CF and 2B, as well as give the Orioles nine prospects (4 from Seattle, 5 from us) in exchange for Bedard and Roberts.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 1, 2008 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd look elsewhere...

I'd see about what the Giants would want for Matt Cain. He's signed through 2011, and SF might be willing to do something for 2-3 of our pitching prospects plus a CF prospect like Benson/Revere.

I would even consider Cuddyer (if SF insisted), but in that scenario, I would prefer SF including their 3B prospect Angel Villalona, ranked #29 overall by Baseball Prospectus.

Something like this:
SF: Cuddyer, Duensing, Mulvey, Benson
MIN: Cain, Villalona

Or this:
SF: Duensing, Blackburn, Benson, Ramos
MIN: Cain

by Adam Peterson on Feb 1, 2008 10:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Adam, you know I like the Cain idea...

I think because of our need for RH/leadership, I'd rather deal Kubel than Cuddyer, and I LOVE Kubel. So ideally, I'd hope to wait until at least midseason to up Kubel's value, get a guy like Nick Johnson to DH, and then do something like:

Kubel/Duensing/Blackburn/prospect for Cain.

I could get jiggy with that.

by djskilbr on Feb 1, 2008 7:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand the need for RH leadership...

but between Cuddyer and Kubel, if I had to trade one, I'd rather trade Cuddyer relatively high instead of trading Kubel relatively low.

That said, if Cuddyer-Cain are the two principals, I would want Villalona in return for us giving up any more prospects in the deal.

Also remember, it would take a couple prospects for us to get Johnson.

Also, I expect Cain's numbers to bounce back in a big way this year. Hopefully we can get Cain at a bit of a discount due to his 7-16 record last year (a number I don't put any stock into)

by Adam Peterson on Feb 2, 2008 7:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nooo!

Kubel will be the #3 hitter on this team by midseason. He just started showing what he could do in August and September of last year:

August
.364/.438/.509
September
.325/.404/.584

I'd rather have Kubel right now than Cain straight up. Then you throw in two top-ten prospects for a guy who's still a prospect? Please, step away from the Margarita.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Feb 1, 2008 8:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I LOVE Kubel...

I'm as big of a fan as anyone and think he'll put up damn good numbers. But to me we need RH bats. And Cain is a stud. I'd give up a DH, even a damn good one, plus prospects, for a frontline starter.

I can see your side, and as I said, I love the guy.

But I don't know how much we'd lose with Nick Johnson if he can just stay healthy, and Cain is a badass.

by djskilbr on Feb 1, 2008 10:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

As usual, I'm somewhere in between...

I wouldn't quite do Cuddyer-Duensing-Blackburn for just Cain. SF would have to add one or two prospects. I'd take Villalona and/or Nick Noonan / Emmanuel Burris. What makes this attractive to me is that at the top end of the trade, it's pitching in return for hitting. At the bottom end, it's hitting in return for pitching.

I'd do Cain-Villalona-Burris/Noonan for Cuddyer-Duensing-Blackburn-Benson in a heartbeat.

by Adam Peterson on Feb 2, 2008 7:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs