Could the Minnesota Twins Embrace a Six-Man Rotation in 2025?

[Cody Christie]

Six-man rotations and extra days of rest are becoming a trend across baseball. Could the Twins embrace this approach because of their starting pitching depth?

Image courtesy of Left: © Matt Krohn-Imagn Images; Right: © David Banks-Imagn Images;

With spring training on the horizon, the Minnesota Twins enter 2025 with intriguing questions surrounding their starting pitching unit. Could they join the growing trend among MLB teams utilizing a six-man rotation? It’s a conversation worth having, especially considering recent changes across the league and the organization’s pitching depth.

The Six-Man Trend
In 2025, teams like the Dodgers, Red Sox, and Mets are expected to implement six-man rotations, mainly due to pitchers returning from injuries. The benefits of this approach are becoming increasingly evident. For the first time in MLB history, more starts occurred on exactly five days of rest than four in 2021. This trend has continued, with the gap widening in 2023 and 2024. As of last season, 42% of starts came on five days of rest compared to 32% on four.

There are multiple theories on why teams are embracing this change. Some suggest that extra rest helps keep pitchers healthier, while others believe it enhances individual performances. A six-man rotation can also lighten the bullpen’s workload or be a way to accommodate a surplus of capable starters. Whatever the reason, teams are increasingly experimenting with more rest between starts.

The Twins’ Rotation Options
Minnesota’s projected starting five for 2025 consists of Pablo López, Joe Ryan, Bailey Ober, Simeon Woods Richardson, and Chris Paddack. Each brings unique strengths, but questions remain about their durability. For example, Ober has faced durability concerns earlier in his career, Paddack returned from Tommy John surgery last season, totaling less than 100 innings, and Ryan missed extensive time with a right shoulder strain. Injuries are part of the game, but starters only have so many pitches per season and each additional one thrown adds a little bit to the risk. Spreading out their starts is one strategy to attempt to keep pitchers healthy.

The Twins also have notable depth at Triple-A, with promising arms like David Festa, Zebby Matthews, and Marco Raya waiting in the wings. This depth makes a six-man rotation a viable consideration, as it would allow Minnesota to ease the workload on their core starters while providing valuable MLB experience for their younger pitchers. This trio of young pitchers reached career highs in innings last season, so they will need to continue to build off those totals in 2025. 

The Pros and Cons of a Six-Man Rotation
Research and anecdotal evidence suggest that giving pitchers additional rest can have long-term benefits. Fewer days between starts could reduce injury risk, especially for pitchers like Ryan, who are coming off a season-ending injury. Additionally, Festa and Matthews — and especially someone like Raya — have yet to prove they can handle the rigors of a full MLB season without additional support. A six-man rotation could help these pitchers stay healthy and effective over the grind of 162 games.

Moreover, extra rest could optimize performance. While not universally proven, some pitchers thrive with an additional day between starts, showing improved velocity and command. These incremental gains could be crucial for a Twins team aiming to reclaim their AL Central crown.

Of course, a six-man rotation isn’t without drawbacks. It reduces the number of starts for the team’s top pitchers, potentially limiting the impact of Minnesota’s top 3 pitchers: López, Ober, and Ryan. Many projection models view those three pitchers among the AL’s best for next season, and taking innings away from them can result in lost value. Additionally, carrying an extra starter can strain roster construction, forcing tough decisions about bullpen arms or position players.

The Twins would also need buy-in from their pitchers. Some thrive on routine and may struggle with the adjustment to a different schedule. The pitcher may also need to be sold on why the Twins are moving to this model. For a six-man rotation to work, the team must communicate clearly and manage workloads effectively. 

A Balanced Approach?
The Twins could consider a hybrid model rather than committing fully to a six-man rotation. This approach might involve using six starters during stretches with heavy workloads, such as long road trips or weeks without off days while reverting to a traditional five-man rotation during lighter periods. Such flexibility would allow the team to reap the benefits of additional rest without losing too many starts from their top arms.

As the 2025 season approaches, the Twins’ depth and the evolving landscape of pitcher usage make a six-man rotation an intriguing possibility. While not without challenges, the potential health and performance benefits could outweigh the risks. With pitchers like Festa, Matthews, and Raya ready to contribute, Minnesota has the depth to experiment with this progressive strategy.

The six-man rotation is no longer a radical idea, as some of baseball’s top organizations are embracing the idea. It’s becoming a viable option for teams seeking a competitive edge. For the Twins, it might just be the key to navigating the marathon of a season while keeping their pitching staff fresh for October.

Should the Twins switch to a six-man rotation for 2025? Would the hybrid approach work for the team? Leave a comment and start the discussion. 

View full article

[GNess]

The so called Hybrid approach seems best if you have to choose. It is tough enough to find any quality starting pitchers let alone 6 of them who could be regularly counted upon.

I do like reducing BP games if that is an effect.

[D.C Twins]

nope....

[mikelink45]

Not that long ago there was a four-man rotation and then we moved into the era where we use all 13 pictures with all the bullpen action. Hard to watch and think about these changes and what they mean. The biggest question is can you find six really good starters? Maybe we're lucky and can do it. 

[ashbury]

I want to say "no", mainly because of the simple math of "13-6=7" for the work to be spread among the bullpen arms. 

But if certain assumptions are true (or can be made to be true), maybe it works:

• If 28 starts instead of 32 starts results in a par of 7 innings per start instead of the current 6, due to there being more time to recover between starts, then you are back to your best starters pitching a good proportion of the season's innings.
• If your 40-man roster carries enough bullpen arms with minor-league options remaining, then you can identify your core of 5 or so relievers who you hope will stay with the big club all year, and shuttle the two remaining spots up and down to St Paul.
• Those shuttle relievers need to be worked like rented mules during their stints with the big club, and go to St. Paul mainly for rest and staying in tune, meaning that there is additional workload at St Paul for the castoff veterans that our front office is fond of signing.

If instead the 40-man roster is littered with guys who have to be DFAed every time you send them to St Paul, you end up losing the good ones on waivers and wind up with a ragtag assortment of arms no one else wants.  Meanwhile if one or more of your 6 starters is like SWR was last season, delivering 5 good(ish) innings per start, you begin to risk overworking your bullpen even if you use the shuttle system, because roster rules require you to leave a pitcher down there for many days at a time (they keep changing this and I can't remember the current rule).

If the plan is to hook the starter at the first sign of trouble and 5 innings is satisfactory per start, then some other simple math takes over.  162*9=1458 innings to cover, and 5*28=140 innings per starter, times 6 equals 840 innings, leaving 618 innings to be covered by 7 spots in the bullpen.  Last year the Twins bullpen pitched 588 innings, and many of us felt at the time that this was straining things with 8 arms.  The manager and pitching coach would have to change their strategy with 6 starters, in the opposite direction they have trended - of trusting perhaps their top 3 veteran starters, but not the young'uns.

So I still want to say "no".  😀

[tony&rodney]

If any change were to take place a four person rotation is a better idea if a team uses a fifth starter or bullpen day on those days when games are clumped together. The Twins would use their top five near seven times in March/April and the fifth guy/opener on four occasions. A six person rotation has your best four guys going only five times in that schedule. 

Keep the five man rotation and use the bullpen or occasional starter (Paddack if still around) on those occasions where management wants to skip a starter's turn. Most starting pitchers can return on the fourth and fifth day after a start without any issues.

[dxpavelka]

Totally wrong approach.  Not even a 5 man rotation but a 5 day rotation.  # 1 guy starts every 5 days regardless.  The lower the guy is in the rotation the more likely he gets skipped because of off days or rain outs.  I'm shocked that the analytics crowd hasn't picked up on this.  Why would your run your # 4 or 5 guy out there when your # 1 or 2 last pitched 5 days ago and is ready to go and gives you a much better chance to win.  Not to mention your # 1 or 2 guy give you a much better chance of not taxing your bullpen than your # 4 or 5 or, heaven help us, the dreaded "bullpen game."

[ashbury]

14 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

Totally wrong approach.  Not even a 5 man rotation but a 5 day rotation.  # 1 guy starts every 5 days regardless.  The lower the guy is in the rotation the more likely he gets skipped because of off days or rain outs.  I'm shocked that the analytics crowd hasn't picked up on this.  Why would your run your # 4 or 5 guy out there when your # 1 or 2 last pitched 5 days ago and is ready to go and gives you a much better chance to win. 

A good question, and I think it would be very interesting to ask it of someone like Pablo Lopez, someone I believe to be as much a student of the game as a prime athlete and skilled pitcher.  I am guessing that the answer we might get is that, even if he doesn't like to admit it, he appreciates the occasional extra day between starts because it's a strain to pitch every 5 days without a break, and his performance will be better.  But I'm not the athlete, just the asker, and it's only a guess on my part.

[Linus]

I believe the Twins are already using the hybrid approach.  They had guys skip starts and also stayed with a five man rotation early on when they could have skipped the fifth spot.  
No way on the 6 man rotation.  I’m not taking away starts from the top three to hand them to a 6th starter.  Plus I highly doubt the starters would go deeper in games so the bullpen has the same load with one fewer pitcher.

[Linus]

26 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I want to say "no", mainly because of the simple math of "13-6=7" for the work to be spread among the bullpen arms. 

But if certain assumptions are true (or can be made to be true), maybe it works:

• If 28 starts instead of 32 starts results in a par of 7 innings per start instead of the current 6, due to more time to recover between starts, then you are back to your best starters pitching a good proportion of the season's innings.
• If your 40-man roster carries enough bullpen arms with minor-league options remaining, then you can identify your core of 5 or so relievers who you hope will stay with the big club all year, and shuttle the two remaining spots up and down to St Paul.
• Those shuttle relievers need to be worked like rented mules during their stints with the big club, and go to St. Paul mainly for rest and staying in tune, meaning that there is additional workload at St Paul for the castoff veterans that our front office is fond of signing.

If instead the 40-man roster is littered with guys who have to be DFAed every time you send them to St Paul, you end up losing the good ones on waivers and wind up with a ragtag assortment of arms no one else wants.  Meanwhile if one or more of your 6 starters is like SWR was last season, delivering 5 good(ish) innings per start, you begin to risk overworking your bullpen even if you use the shuttle system, because roster rules require you to leave a pitcher down there for many days at a time (they keep changing this and I can't remember the current rule).

If the plan is to hook the starter at the first sign of trouble and 5 innings is satisfactory per start, then some other simple math takes over.  162*9=1458 innings to cover, and 5*28=140 innings per starter, times 6 equals 840 innings, leaving 618 innings to be covered by 7 spots in the bullpen.  Last year the Twins bullpen pitched 588 innings, and many of us felt at the time that this was straining things with 8 arms.  The manager and pitching coach would have to change their strategy with 6 starters, in the opposite direction they have trended - of trusting perhaps their top 3 veteran starters, but not the young'uns.

So I still want to say "no".  😀

I loved this post just because of the “work like rented mules” comment.  My Dad grew up on a farm and my childhood was filled with sayings like this.  My favorites were when a Twins batter would strike out with a man on third - “he couldn’t hit a pig in the ass with a spade” (for the non farmers a spade is a shovel) or if a hitter he didn’t like got a hit “even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while”.  Memories…..

[ashbury]

23 minutes ago, ashbury said:

But I'm not the athlete, just the asker, and it's only a guess on my part.

Following up, because I had an idea after posting....

Lopez is someone to look at, empirically, and b-r.com has the pieces thanks to its game log.  In 2024 he had 10 starts on 4 days of rest (i.e. the every-five-day pattern being suggested), out of his 32 starts.  If I added correctly, he pitched 61.0 innings in those games, and gave up 20 earned runs.  That's an ERA, on "short rest" by today's standards, of 2.90 if I haven't goofed up the math.

Compared to his season ERA of 4.08, that's a pretty strong difference.  He had several stinkers among his starts, and only one of those was on 4 days' rest.

There's a heavy chicken-and-egg factor here, or call it a hidden statistical bias, since the manager and pitching coach get to choose each game's starter, and perhaps they put Pablo in the game on 4 days' rest only when they felt that he was going well.  It's not the random process that good statistical analysis relies on, at all.  I'd also want to assort his starts by "how did he do in the start following the game he pitched on short rest," in case there might be a pattern there. Need to look at Pablo's 2023, etc.  Life is short, or at least my attention span is.

Still, it's a pretty intriguing argument in favor of the 5-day plan for your best pitcher if his first name is Pablo.  I'd want to look at similar analysis for Ober and Ryan, but unless they have a similar pattern, I'd advocate for "let Pablo be Pablo, and the others can go pound sand until they show they deserve the preferential treatment."  😀

[sweetmusicviola16]

4 minutes ago, Linus said:

I loved this post just because of the “work like rented mules” comment.  My Dad grew up on a farm and my childhood was filled with sayings like this.  My favorites were when a Twins batter would strike out with a man on third - “he couldn’t hit a pig in the ass with a spade” (for the non farmers a spade is a shovel) or if a hitter he didn’t like got a hit “even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while”.  Memories…..

Like. I grew up on the farm and still do farm. The old sayings can be Golden. To sum up the ending of the Twins  '24 with one would be, "everything's gone haywire."  And "like a bump on a log" would sum up the Twins off-season thus far pretty well.

[Linus]

1 minute ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

Like. I grew up on the farm and still do farm. The old sayings can be Golden. To sum up the ending of the Twins  '24 with one would be, "everything's gone haywire."  And "like a bump on a log" would sum up the Twins off-season thus far pretty well.

Or the myriad sayings involving manure……

[ashbury]

4 minutes ago, Linus said:

Or the myriad sayings involving manure……

Yeah, no kidding, Sherlock.  😀

[IndianaTwin]

9 minutes ago, Linus said:

Or the myriad sayings involving manure……

As a dairy farm kid, I can relate. 

[IndianaTwin]

15 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Following up, because I had an idea after posting....

Lopez is someone to look at, empirically, and b-r.com has the pieces thanks to its game log.  In 2024 he had 10 starts on 4 days of rest (i.e. the every-five-day pattern being suggested), out of his 32 starts.  If I added correctly, he pitched 61.0 innings in those games, and gave up 20 earned runs.  That's an ERA, on "short rest" by today's standards, of 2.90 if I haven't goofed up the math.

Compared to his season ERA of 4.08, that's a pretty strong difference.  He had several stinkers among his starts, and only one of those was on 4 days' rest.

There's a heavy chicken-and-egg factor here, or call it a hidden statistical bias, since the manager and pitching coach get to choose each game's starter, and perhaps they put Pablo in the game on 4 days' rest only when they felt that he was going well.  It's not the random process that good statistical analysis relies on, at all.  I'd also want to assort his starts by "how did he do in the start following the game he pitched on short rest," in case there might be a pattern there. Need to look at Pablo's 2023, etc.  Life is short, or at least my attention span is.

Still, it's a pretty intriguing argument in favor of the 5-day plan for your best pitcher if his first name is Pablo.  I'd want to look at similar analysis for Ober and Ryan, but unless they have a similar pattern, I'd advocate for "let Pablo be Pablo, and the others can go pound sand until they show they deserve the preferential treatment."  😀

I've wondered the same. What this doesn't take into account, however, is the cumulative fatigue of pitching on four days' rest after every start. It also has the effect of non-Pablos sometimes going on four days, sometimes six, and sometimes even seven, depending on where off days follow.

[ashbury]

11 minutes ago, IndianaTwin said:

I've wondered the same. What this doesn't take into account, however, is the cumulative fatigue of pitching on four days' rest after every start. It also has the effect of non-Pablos sometimes going on four days, sometimes six, and sometimes even seven, depending on where off days follow.

Well said, and my little bit of arithmetic only scratches the surface of the work needed.

Still if you could obtain an ERA of 2.90, instead of the 4.63 that Pablo had in his other games, you'd move mountains to get that if it was sustainable, and the other pitchers would just have to cope.

A modified rule could be "Pablo pitches 5 days from today, unless today's start was a stinker and we'll give him an extra day."

But it's not as simple as the "if" I just stated.  And yes, the other pitchers would complain about not being given a fair shake, if their numbers didn't pan out and they wanted to blame the irregularity between starts.  Maximizing Pablo's performance might not quite match maximizing the entire staff's.

[sweetmusicviola16]

My own opinion on a 6 man staff. No. It will make the bottom of the rotation weaker. It will take Lopez, Ryan and Ober from being in the 180's IP to probably in the 150's IP and make them less advantageous. The theory is that they'll pitch better and longer by having an extra day of rest. But my hunch is analytics will kick into its normal gear and state that they don't do as well after 3 times through the order and still get the early shower. Leave it alone. If they do switch to the 6 man the advantages of having TOR arms will be lost. If they did expand to the 6 man then imo trade Lopez and Ober, Ryan and replace them with top bats. Losing 80-90 IP's from these guys holds no appeal to me anyway. Just my opinions. 

[IndianaTwin]

A significant factor in the number of starts on five days having increased is the additional off days that were added to the schedule a few years ago. Each off day typically creates five starts that are happening on five days (or sometimes six). When they switched to starting the season on Thursday, they added four off days, which translates to 20 games being started with an extra day.   

If the Twins were to follow a strict five-pitcher rotation for the entire season, they would have only 60 starts on four days rest, 88 on five days and 4 on six days. Scheduled off days are a bigger factor in the number of extra days than is the idea of "giving someone an extra day" with a six-man rotation or a spot start by someone. 

That totals 152. There would also be five starts on nine days rest following the All-Star Game and it doesn't count the first five days of the season, though those are often either done on at least five days rest as well or are after a final spring training outing that didn't include a huge number of pitches. .

For what it's worth, I did the same math with a strict four-pitcher rotation. There would be 79 starts on three days rest, 73 on four days and 5 on five days, along with the four starts that would now be on seven days rest at the All-Star Break and the four starts at the beginning of the year.

 

[Doctor Gast]

29 minutes ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

My own opinion on a 6 man staff. No. It will make the bottom of the rotation weaker. It will take Lopez, Ryan and Ober from being in the 180's IP to probably in the 150's IP and make them less advantageous. The theory is that they'll pitch better and longer by having an extra day of rest. But my hunch is analytics will kick into its normal gear and state that they don't do as well after 3 times through the order and still get the early shower. Leave it alone. If they do switch to the 6 man the advantages of having TOR arms will be lost. If they did expand to the 6 man then imo trade Lopez and Ober, Ryan and replace them with top bats. Losing 80-90 IP's from these guys holds no appeal to me anyway. Just my opinions. 

That's my take also. There's a big difference between our #1-3 from our #4 &5, even more going down the line as far as stamina & ability. Except I don't like the idea of trading Lopez, Ober & Ryan. IMO good pitching trumps good hitting. I'm a big fan of long relief as far as giving the rotation & BP a break.

[stringer bell]

There might be a benefit to using the “best” pitcher more often, juggling the other guys into a more irregular schedule most likely negates the benefit of getting the #1 more starts and innings. It only takes one guy who is affected to negate the benefit. 

[stringer bell]

I actually think that with the Twins apparent depth in the bullpen, they’re best served with eight relievers. 

[T.O.]

1 hour ago, Linus said:

Or the myriad sayings involving manure……

and shinola

[Blyleven2011]

Cody mentioned that a 6  man rotation  hasn't been universally tested  ....

Doesn't the baseball in Japan have a six man rotation ( ive heard they do ),  if so then it is time to study starting pitchers in Japan  ...

With extra rest from 5 to six , how do they fair with results  , fastball faster , better control or the opposite , by pitching every 6th game are they more apt to be stronger and less likely to have any arm injuries  ...

?????

[T.O.]

Unless the young pitchers can start getting beyond once or twice through the lineup there aren't six good starters.

[High heat]

I don’t think the roster moves are not done, I think one of the starters gets traded and it’s a moot point.  I’m just not sure it will be Paddock.  
 

I think one of the young starters SWR with a guy like Larnach and Vasquez  get moved in a deal.  Bring in a near mlb ready prospect. 

Then the Twins sign Rizzo to play 1B. 

 

 

[Karbo]

4 hours ago, ashbury said:

I want to say "no", mainly because of the simple math of "13-6=7" for the work to be spread among the bullpen arms. 

But if certain assumptions are true (or can be made to be true), maybe it works:

• If 28 starts instead of 32 starts results in a par of 7 innings per start instead of the current 6, due to there being more time to recover between starts, then you are back to your best starters pitching a good proportion of the season's innings.
• If your 40-man roster carries enough bullpen arms with minor-league options remaining, then you can identify your core of 5 or so relievers who you hope will stay with the big club all year, and shuttle the two remaining spots up and down to St Paul.
• Those shuttle relievers need to be worked like rented mules during their stints with the big club, and go to St. Paul mainly for rest and staying in tune, meaning that there is additional workload at St Paul for the castoff veterans that our front office is fond of signing.

If instead the 40-man roster is littered with guys who have to be DFAed every time you send them to St Paul, you end up losing the good ones on waivers and wind up with a ragtag assortment of arms no one else wants.  Meanwhile if one or more of your 6 starters is like SWR was last season, delivering 5 good(ish) innings per start, you begin to risk overworking your bullpen even if you use the shuttle system, because roster rules require you to leave a pitcher down there for many days at a time (they keep changing this and I can't remember the current rule).

If the plan is to hook the starter at the first sign of trouble and 5 innings is satisfactory per start, then some other simple math takes over.  162*9=1458 innings to cover, and 5*28=140 innings per starter, times 6 equals 840 innings, leaving 618 innings to be covered by 7 spots in the bullpen.  Last year the Twins bullpen pitched 588 innings, and many of us felt at the time that this was straining things with 8 arms.  The manager and pitching coach would have to change their strategy with 6 starters, in the opposite direction they have trended - of trusting perhaps their top 3 veteran starters, but not the young'uns.

So I still want to say "no".  😀

The only way I could see working well is if you have at least 3 good relievers that can go 2 innings every other day, and may occasionally need them a 2nd consecutive day. I don't see that with the Twins roster.

[old nurse]

A six man rotation would me that the team has enough relievers to pitch 70-80 innings or enough relievers with options or you can build your relievers up to being able to pitch 120 or more pitches a game. Each portion is not terribly realistic for the Twins. The back in the day pitchers going with that many pitches happened all the time argument can explain how the forces of pitching ion average over 5 mph faster is no different than the slower speeds. 

[old nurse]

6 minutes ago, Karbo said:

The only way I could see working well is if you have at least 3 good relievers that can go 2 innings every other day, and may occasionally need them a 2nd consecutive day. I don't see that with the Twins roster.

You wont see it on anyone’s roster. 

[Heiny]

I think it is an intersting option except that my opinion of Rocco being capable of managing a bullpen is not very good.  Much less trying to manage that bullpen and managing a starting staff with the way he likes to pull starters too early or too late.  I have no confidence in this working especially with Rocco as the manager.