REPORT: Twins Working to Acquire Padres RHP Chris Paddack

[tarheeltwinsfan]

59 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Padres beat writer mentions interest in Taylor Rogers, so who knows what may develop here (if anything):

 

 

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo !

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

The Padres don’t need a quarterback, so I’m sure Rodgers is not coming to them in a trade. 
 

C’mon people, spelling names isn’t that hard. 

Did it actually matter? Really? 

[Devilsadvocate]

45 minutes ago, Ryan_K said:

I am thinking a Paddack and Gore for Larnach, Rogers may be in play.

I'm thinking you're crazy... Gore straight up for Rogers may not even meet the Padres asking price. He was and still is a heck of a prospect.

[MN_ExPat]

38 minutes ago, Rigby said:

With these names thought Campusano might be in play - until they traded Caratini today.

Honestly, with the ask of Rogers, he would have to be (at least in my uneducated, slightly moronic mindset).

[MN_ExPat]

2 minutes ago, Devilsadvocate said:

I'm thinking you're crazy... Gore straight up for Rogers may not even meet the Padres asking price. He was and still is a heck of a prospect.

Gore straight up for Rogers would be a steal (at least in current moment) for the Padres.

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, MN_ExPat said:

Gore straight up for Rogers would be a steal (at least in current moment) for the Padres.

Agreed. Gore hasn't thrown a strike in two years, apparently....

[tarheeltwinsfan]

I am tired from Monday night's Final 4. I haven't recovered my sleep yet. And now this...Taylor Rogers? Say it ain't so Joe.  

[USAFChief]

I just can't see any scenario where the Twins deal Rogers. Doesn't make any sense.

[2wins87]

31 minutes ago, Azviking101 said:

I don't understand how Rogers' "value" using that trade scenario is only 7.2

You should read their explainer, there's a lot of work that went into it and most front offices use pretty similar models, though they could differ quite a bit on certain inputs.

The short answer is that Rogers is only under control for one more year and is already making a salary of 7.3 million. The 7.2 million valuation is his excess value over this one year of control. His total valuation would be 14.5 million for this year.

Paddack would be under control for 3 years, is only owed 2.3 million this year, and is likely to earn raises in arbitration up to a point that is probably similar to Rogers for his final year.  The 17.4 million valuation is his projected excess beyond those salaries over the total 3 years of control. Probably around half of that would be from this year since his salary will go up. So he's probably expected to be worth about 9 or 10 million per year for each of the next 3 years.

That's a pretty middling projection, and the projections clearly indicate Rogers is expected to be worth more this year. Paddack only has more value because of his years of control and cheaper salary.

The Padres might want Rogers, but it would clearly make the Twins worse and I hope the front office isn't seriously considering trading him if Paddack is the main piece coming back.

I would also hope that someone like Winder or Balazovic could at least perform similarly to Paddack in 2023 and 2024, so I don't really see why the front office should be so interested in Paddack's value those years. He seems like a mid rotation arm at best.  They have about half a dozen prospects in AA and AAA that project to be somewhere around there.

[nicksaviking]

Based on track record, the Twins were never going to extend Rogers nor sign a reliever if his caliber as a free agent.

Still, this just doesn’t seem to fit, though I can’t put my finger on why exactly. Really seems like SD needs an outfielder I guess?

[PseudoSABR]

13 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

The Padres don’t need a quarterback, so I’m sure Rodgers is not coming to them in a trade. 
 

C’mon people, spelling names isn’t that hard. 

I take exception to this.  It's not a matter of effort, which your post implies, nor is it a matter of lack or respect or whatever.  Some people's brains, like mine, don't discern errors because our brains fix them on the fly.  I have typos, misspellings and missing words because of this in everything I write.  And somehow I've managed to have three degrees in English, and one in law, having taught more than a 1000 students how to write.   Sure, proofreading helps prevent this, but for one line posts, it's not worth calling out.  

[roger]

2 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I just can't see any scenario where the Twins deal Rogers. Doesn't make any sense.

You are right Chief.  Which means he will probably be gone by the morning.  My question is what could the return be for Rogers AND Larnach.  Can’t see Larnach not being in the deal as he was pulled from tonight’s starting lineup?

[Mike Sixel]

Who says no?

Rogers, Larnach, Sanchez

San Diego catcher (any of their top three), Paddock, Hosmer, minor league player in the top ten...

 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

3 minutes ago, PseudoSABR said:

I take exception to this.  It's not a matter of effort, which your post implies, nor is it a matter of lack or respect or whatever.  Some people's brains, like mine, don't discern errors because our brains fix them on the fly.  I have typos, misspellings and missing words because of this in everything I write.  And somehow I've managed to have three degrees in English, and one in law, having taught more than a 1000 students how to write.   Sure, proofreading helps prevent this, but for one line posts, it's not worth calling out.  

I can promise I put effort into things not on a sport's message board....

[Mike Sixel]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

Who says no?

Rogers, Larnach, Sanchez

San Diego catcher (any of their top three), Paddock, Hosmer, minor league player in the top ten...

 

 

 

I think that's not enough for the twins....

[2wins87]

18 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

The Padres don’t need a quarterback, so I’m sure Rodgers is not coming to them in a trade. 
 

C’mon people, spelling names isn’t that hard. 

I'll never understand how this misspelling is still so common after Rogers has been with the Twins 6 years.

There is literally only one famous "Rodgers" for the dozens of famous "Rogers" in film, television, sports, or whatnot.

[nicksaviking]

5 minutes ago, 2wins87 said:

I'll never understand how this misspelling is still so common after Rogers has been with the Twins 6 years.

There is literally only one famous "Rodgers" for the dozens of famous "Rogers" in film, television, sports, or whatnot.

And Hammerstein carried that collaboration anyway.

[Richmond Dude]

7 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Who says no?

Rogers, Larnach, Sanchez

San Diego catcher (any of their top three), Paddock, Hosmer, minor league player in the top ten...

 

 

 

Trading Sanchez away is probably the most certain way to ensure that he regains his form and even makes the All-Star game.

[jorgenswest]

Just now, Richmond Dude said:

Trading Sanchez away is probably the most certain way to ensure that he regains his form and even makes the All-Star game.

Even in a bad year for him Sanchez had a DRC+ last year of 106. Garver was 110. DRC+ takes into account the quality of opposing pitchers a batter has faced. Sanchez performance against those pitchers was 6% better than league. 

[Riverbrian]

42 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

Well ... I hope you have your life alert handy incase you fall over and can't get back up

My wife always helps me back up.

[USAFChief]

16 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Who says no?

Rogers, Larnach, Sanchez

San Diego catcher (any of their top three), Paddock, Hosmer, minor league player in the top ten...

 

 

 

The Twins aren't taking Hosmer's contract. No chance.

[baul0010]

The Twins need to make this happen... Then I can stop checking in every five minutes!

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, USAFChief said:

The Twins aren't taking Hosmer's contract. No chance.

Agreed. 

[AlwaysinModeration]

17 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I just can't see any scenario where the Twins deal Rogers. Doesn't make any sense.

“Hey Derek, I hear you are looking for SP, I need a starting OF.  How about Paddack for Larnach?”

”Hey AJ, that’s sounds possible, although Paddack had a down year.  Would like more pitching than that.  You sent Gore down to Single A last year, but he could still turn it around.  Could be included?”

”I’d have a hard time parting with Gore, even after last year.  I’d need a good reliever.  Would you throw in Rogers?”

”Oof, you’re killing.  Hang on, let me call you back.”

[Riverbrian]

In theory… isn’t it possible that Larnach was pulled to head to Minnesota not San Diego. 
 

Larnach being included is the part that doesn’t make sense, Rogers makes perfect sense. 

[nicksaviking]

I like the thought but with the Twins off until Friday I don’t think that would matter.

But there’s no deal yet so it could be a fluid situation and the Twins just made sure all possible parts were in play. Party A, “How about Larnach?” Party B, “Well what about Kepler instead?”

[howeda7]

This trade might have made sense in December. But saying you're contending and then trading your closer the day before opening day for a non-sure thing starter is just bizarre and does not help you in 2022 even if it's a good trade long-term. If they're trying to win in 2022, this is foolish. If they're not trying to win in 2022, fine, but then WTF were the last 3 weeks about.

[howeda7]

14 minutes ago, AlwaysinModeration said:

“Hey Derek, I hear you are looking for SP, I need a starting OF.  How about Paddack for Larnach?”

”Hey AJ, that’s sounds possible, although Paddack had a down year.  Would like more pitching than that.  You sent Gore down to Single A last year, but he could still turn it around.  Could be included?”

”I’d have a hard time parting with Gore, even after last year.  I’d need a good reliever.  Would you throw in Rogers?”

”Oof, you’re killing.  Hang on, let me call you back.”

Yes, I'll include my closer for a pitcher in A ball. We're in win now mode!

[DJL44]

I'm okay with trading Rogers if they also get Dinelson Lamet.

[Riverbrian]

1 minute ago, nicksaviking said:

I like the thought but with the Twins off until Friday I don’t think that would matter.

But there’s no deal yet so it could be a fluid situation and the Twins just made sure all possible parts were in play. Party A, “How about Larnach?” Party B, “Well what about Kepler instead?”

The Padres should have tough 40 man considerations like we do and they have Abrams still hanging around not on the 40 man. 
They have lots of OF prospects but need a big leaguer OF NOW,

Larnach doesn’t fit that need an OF now plus he would occupy a 40 man spot.
 

Kepler or Kiriloff would be what the Padres want. I assume of course.