Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • entries
  • comments
  • views

Help me understand the Paddack move

Doc Munson



Twins Video

This article is not meant for me to give MY opinion, I have done that in a previous post. This is to beg the fan base out there to help me understand how this move makes any sense except to cut costs (yet we are also sending cash considerations to SD as well).

I liked Rooker, even though he is an "old" young guy and not much of a fit here. I don't have an issue moving him though.

My question is why move an All-Star Closer who is a significant clubhouse presence and a fan favorite for an average at best pitcher a not significantly better than any of our other current starters. and here is where I need help understanding.


Who is/should Paddack replace in the rotation? and how big of an upgrade is he over that pitcher?

As I stated earlier, unless there is already an injury we have not heard about, the only one who gets moved out of the rotation is Bundy and is Paddack a significant enough upgrade over Bundy to warrant sending out Rogers? or do we go 6 man?  But again this is not about my opinions.  


Help me understand, I legitimately cannot see the added value Paddack could bring.


Please explain how this move makes sense and who gets impacted.



Recommended Comments

One or both between Archer and Bundy will prove to unworthy of starting by Mid-May.   The Twins will figure is out a little later.  Paddack gives them depth when that happens and in the event of injury.  

Link to comment

Paddack had a really good FIP last year. He was the Padres opening day starter in 2020. He's 26 and was a top prospect. He's projected to throw 130 innings with an ERA in the low 4's in 2022. That's more innings than you're going to get from Rogers this year. Add in the cheap cost controlled 2023 and 2024 and that's why baseball trade values lists Paddack as much more valuable than Rogers. Rogers is a free agent after this year. 

Paddack will be in the rotation all year. Bundy and Archer will not. 

Link to comment

The Twins need starter innings in the grand scheme of things. You can pretty much say that April will be full of 3-4 inning runs by starters, so with careful management of the pitching staff, the Twins may actually win some games depending on piggy banking of pitchers.


Remember, Ober and Ryan MAY NOT be capable of 30+ solid starts.


The Twins hope Bundy AND Archer will take up some of the early season slack. Happily the April expansion of pitching rosters have given teams the ability to really stretch out proespects, and for the Twins that means that Ober and Ryan CAN probably pitch for the full season, push up against 150 innings at the least.


Paddack is a sold addition to the team going forward (moreso than Bundy and Archer). The Twins get Maeda back, hopefully, in 2023 (if not September of 2022). Gray is still around for another season.


No matter how we look at the grander scheme of things, Balazovic, Winder, Sands, Henriquez, Enloow all need to be workhouses - in the minors. In a pinch the Twins can call up Strotman or use Jax (if he isn't cut today). Dobnak is somewhere in the mix along with Smeltzer.


And looking forwards to 2025 you still have Ober, Ryan, Paddack...a couple of the above names, as well as Varland, Canterino, maybe Sammons, Woods-Richardson.


I'm thinking the front office is being clever, as well as planning for the longterm. 


Yes, the Twins needed a closer last year and, in the early months, Colome wasn't the guy. Rogers is a set-up guy. The Twins have Thielbar and Coulombe right now. Moran is in the wings. 

Link to comment

I am concerned about what MLBTR terms Paddack's "low-grade tear of the ulnar collateral ligament".  Three years of contract control don't mean much if part of a season is consumed by mysterious sub-par performance, followed by a diagnosis requiring surgery, then a year off for post-surgery rehab, and then a year of sub-par performance while the pitcher gets his feel back for his pitches.

Link to comment

So far nothing has moved me.  I can see the need for pitching depth. I have also discussed how Archer and Bundy are risks coming back from injury and poor performance. AND Paddack may be an upgrade over Bundy, but not at the risk of losing an All-Star Closer. I HOPE Paddack realizes his potential, I also HOPE Bundy has a strong bounce back year, and HOPE Archer does as well.  

And the "pitching depth" community will undoubtedly, yet incorrectly scream "I told you so!!"  When Archer/Bundy either get hurt or get moved out of the rotation for performance, but that misses the point here. My opinion isnt that Paddack isnt a decent pitcher, it is that the separation between him and our other #6-8 potential starters is not significant enough to move Rogers.

And if you truly intend to win this year, then you do not worry about losing him in free agency "for nothing". you keep together the team that gives you the best chance to win.

All of that being said, I am not a scout, my opiniosn are based on pure numbers on paper, and baseball is nto played on paper.  He COULD be a much better pitcher than I think he is, and I guess if our scouts believe he is a significant enough improvement over Bundy/Archer then I can support the move. I just dont personally see it based on numbers.


Link to comment

Based on your analysis that the separation between Paddack and our other 6–8 starters isn't significant, I understand your concern. I'm kind of assuming that the 6-8  starters for 2022 are Winder, and some combination of Smeltzer,  Balazovic (IL), Sanchez. Henriquez and Megill since that's who seems to be starting at AAA. Maybe in 2023 you could add Strotman, SWR, Varland, and Canterino, who are opening at AA, but probably not this year. If you accept that list, where I would disagree as I think Paddack is significantly better than anyone on that list except for Winder and maybe SWR or Caterino, both of whom are probably a full year away. 

So I think the play here is twofold. This year Paddack adds starting pitching depth that we will undoubtedly need given the 5 starters we have. I would expect both Winder and Paddack to get a minimum of 10 to 15 start each if only for injury and innings limits. That assumes everybody's reasonably effective and I think the odds on that with Bundy and Archer in the rotation are not real great. I think next year Bundy and/or Archer are gone, Winder and Paddack are in the rotation.  So this year he's needed depth and the expectation next year he is in the rotation every 5th day. Now all of that can go south if he gets hurt or is ineffective so there is risk. Is that risk worth one year of Taylor Rogers (I think it's a fair assumption that he would not be re-signed by the Twins once he hits the open market)? I think so but recognize that reasonable minds can differ.

Link to comment


Your framing of the question tells me why you're unconvinced. Taylor Rogers was an All-Star because he was in Denver during the All-Star break. I thought there were other years when he could have been considered, but he got his chance last year. You have also decided that the 26-year old Paddack will be no better than reclamation projects Bundy and Archer. It is like a polling firm asking if you wanted to vote for the no-good-so-and-so or their guy. 

I'm emotionally vested in Taylor Rogers' story and hate to see him traded. He has become a better pitcher than anyone projected and I do believe his absence in the clubhouse will be felt. That said, he wasn't an all-time great and his contribution on the mound can be made up for by the others in the bullpen. I don't know if they will, but it is possible.

We are seeing some of the philosophy of Falvey and Levine play out here. They aren't going to play huge dollars for relief pitchers and they aren't going to sign starters long term contracts. I don't know if they're right, but it seems to be how they roll. 

Link to comment

The one discussion that actually does speak to some value... the controllable yesrs.  I may be too focused on this year, since this is the only year we will have Correa. So i guess i figured that $35M could be spent on FA pitching, but yes with Bundy and Archer most likely not here next year, even with Winder, Balazovic, and other potential starters being a year closer, having another MLB capable pitcher locked in next year does make some sense. I guess though i still wouldnt have donebit at the expense of Rogers. If you cant have a dominant rotation, then need a doninant bullpen. Will be rooting for Paddack!!! Just wish we could have gotten him without Rogers. Oh well.

And then the IMMEDIATE question is...

Do we go with a 6 man? Or if we dont then who gets dropped?

Link to comment

Easy it saved money. Pretty small payroll from the richest owners. Aka just cheap when they want to

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Bweb said:

Easy it saved money.

Perhaps this is the part that is actually not explained by most viewpoints on this trade. The Twins will pay the salaries of Emilio Pagan ($2.3) and Chris Paddack ($2.25) plus MN sent San Diego $6.6 to pay all of Roger's salary minus the MLB minimum. So $11.15 - $7.3 (if MN kept Rogers) = $3.85 million. That is the increase in the roster expenditure, according to Baseball Prospectus. San Diego saved money and moved below the CBT (tax).

We paid the Padres to take Rogers off our hands because the Twins front office believes that the two pitchers MN gained could eventually become useful, hopefully next year. Pagan has had some success in the past and once upon a time Paddack was a top 100 prospect. Both could still deliver on their past promise, which will be known in the future. 

Link to comment
On 4/7/2022 at 2:23 PM, stringer bell said:

We are seeing some of the philosophy of Falvey and Levine play out here. They aren't going to play huge dollars for relief pitchers and they aren't going to sign starters long term contracts. I don't know if they're right, but it seems to be how they roll. 

You are correct in my opinion. It is also noteworthy that the Twins are not in on any competitive salaries for pitchers (@$10.0+ range), instead choosing lower prices with incentives. Athletes are incredible positive people because their focus must be very narrow to eliminate distractions that contribute to doubt. Thus, many will choose incentivized contracts when the large guaranteed contracts are not possible. Falvey is taking advantage of that to roll the dice. Buxton and Archer are two current examples. I wonder how this is perceived across the league by players. It looks like both opportunity and a place to avoid if possible at the same time. The next year seems like it will be pivotal. 

Link to comment

Because even league action SP is much harder to acquire.

Rogers is replaceable. He's above average, but not elite. If they're in contention later, they can add RP with deadline deals that cost marginal prospects.

Link to comment

not so fast minuses, even though the Twins have a 159 games to play in 2022 yet and saying the Twins will not having successful season.. l liked Rogers too but he was only a part time closer because his skills & stamina dropped considerable. I believe the pluses will prevail and Twins will be successful. The management & ownership seem to have turned the corner in evaluating risk &  moving in a timely fashion.


Link to comment

My take is that it’s more difficult to build a strong rotation than a strong bull pen. Most teams never have too many starters. Paddock has some success already and they believe he has an upside. They are also looking to save money in the next few years, where they’d have to pay Rogers around $30 million over three years. They must believe they can develop a closer from the current roster. 

Link to comment

FO said they saw something in Paddack. But I wouldn't be surprised if LAD had their eyes on Paddock and believed they could transform Paddack into someone they could use but they figured SD wouldn't trade him to them. So they contacted their old friend Falvey to make that transaction for them. Maybe they're waiting for the dust to settle before they work things out.

This actually makes more sense than our FO trading away our established closer for a struggling SP that doesn't really fit in this organization and try to fix him on the fly w/o any ST with us.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...