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

[IndianaTwin]

3 hours ago, ashbury said:

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.

I enjoy projecting starters, so I decided to play with this, knowing that the first injury makes this all moot.

For reference, a pure five-man rotation would result in 32 starts for each, with a 33rd start for the top two, who I'll call Lopez and Ober. 

In comparison, I went through the schedule with the following plan:

1. Lopez starts every fifth day, unless that lands on an off day, in which case he opens the next series. He would start 36 games.
2. Ober also starts every fifth day, unless that lands on an off day or a Lopez start, in which case he takes the next available game. He would start 35 games. 
3. Ryan also starts every fifth day, unless that lands on an off, Lopez or Ober start, in which case he takes the next available day. He would start 34.
4. That leaves 57 games. If you want to maximize the remaining starts with No. 4 (I used SWR), he would get 32 starts and leave 25 for No. 5 (Paddack). They could easily be adjusted to balance the two a bit more evenly, however. 

So in summary, maximizing the starts of Lopez, Ober and Ryan would result in taking seven starts from SWR/Paddack and moving them to Lopez (3), Ober (2) and Ryan (2). 

Summarizing further...

• Lopez would have his rested first start, following by 29 starts on four days and six on five days. Lopez starts the last game before the All-Star Break and the first game after, so that doesn't affect his rest.
• Ober would have his rested first start, seven days off around the ASB, seven starts on five days and the remaining 26 starts on four days.
• Ryan would have his rested first start, a 10 day rest at the ASB, a start on six days, seven starts on five days and the remaining 24 starts on four days.
• If SWR's starts were maximized at 32, his first will be rested, with a 10 day rest at the ASB, seven starts on six days, six starts on five days and 18 starts on four days. The reason he has a bunch of six day rests is because when there is an off day that would already bump him back to five days, he is often bumped an additional day by starting the series with Lopez, Ober or Ryan. 
• Paddack would be throwing on a very inconsistent pattern. He'd only have six starts on four days, two on five days, seven on six days, two on seven days, four on eight days, two on nine days and one each on 10 and 11 days. What it looks like is 7-6-4-11-4-8-6-7-8-4-5-6-4-8-6-9-6-6-6-4-5-9-4-8-10 days off. I suppose there would be a few times when they could use him out of the bullpen a time or so in the breaks that are maybe eight days or longer, but the team has been reluctant to do that.

As noted, it would be possible to balance SWR and Paddack's starts to 29 and 28. If I just alternated SWR and Paddack in the remaining starts, they each have nine starts on four days, but only five on five days. Then they have 10 and 8 starts on six days respectively and a combined three starts on seven days, three on eight, two on nine and one on 10. 

So, while maximizing starts for Lopez, Ober and Ryan gets them seven additional starts, the tradeoff is that it uses SWR and Paddack on a much more inconsistent manner. When you combine the reality that this approach would rarely give Lopez/Ober/Ryan an extra day with the inconsistent usage it provides for SWR and Paddack, I think the better option is just to stay with the five-man rotation.  

 

   

[tony&rodney]

The idea of using Paddack ahead of Festa ruins my reading. Good exercise though.

Edited January 19, 2025 by tony&rodney
dumb mistake

[jorgenswest]

6 hours ago, Cody Christie said:

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.

It seems like it should be added that the Twins had 42 starts (25.9%) on 4 days rest last year without implementing a 6 man rotation. I also noticed that they did much better on 4 days rest than 5 or 6.

[ashbury]

1 hour 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.

The only way to spread the innings among 7 available arms is for someone to do as you say, every now and then.  Rocco tries it now and then, Alcala for a couple innings as an example. 

[I Never Bet On Sports]

7 hours ago, IndianaTwin said:

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.

 

I like the idea of a modified six man rotation where starters 5 and 6 piggy back almost all the time. Everyone still gets four days rest on 60 of the starts and five or more days on the other 102. On occasion, you could have 5 and 6 each start a game as in a true six man rotation to give the other starters an extra day or when you need to skip one start for one of your other starters.. This could limit the four days rest starts to under 50.

I really like it if your 5th and 6th starters are one lefty and one righty (not an option for the Twins currently). I also like it if those two starters typically go fewer innings per start. You can have them go 4-5 innings max or twice through the order max. If the starter gets in trouble, you bring in a reliever to finish the inning and then the 6th starter starts the next inning. You should expect to get 8 innings on average from most of their piggy back starts which helps offset the lost bullpen arm.

Another consideration here I like if you want a true 5 man rotation is to start the season with the 5th  and 6th piggy backing until one proves themselves the better starter. Then you send the other down to AAA. Many seasons the Twins seem to have a tight race for the 5th starter. In this scenario, you could start the season with an extra reliever for the first four games and bring up the sixth starter for game 5 assuming you have options remaining. If you need to bring up an emergency long reliever due to some back to back short starts you can send down the sixth starter if needed to bring someone else up for a spot start or someone to fortify the bullpen short term.

[IndianaTwin]

3 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

The idea of using Paddack ahead of Paddack ruins my reading. Good exercise though.

Doubtful they’d use Paddack ahead of Paddack. Starters rarely pitch two days in a row. 😄

[terrydactyls]

The question this article asks is if the Twins could use a six-man rotation.  The only possible answer is:  Yes, they could.  All the comments are responding to a question not asked:  Should the Twins use a six-man rotation.

[dxpavelka]

13 hours ago, ashbury said:

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.

If the # 1 doesn't fight for the ball every 5 days is he REALLY a # 1.

[LambchoP]

Let's wait to see if we even have 5 healthy and effective starters, let alone 6, that deserve a full-time rotation spot. I'd go with the hybrid method if anything. Our bullpen usually throws a lot of innings. To keep our relievers healthy and from being over worked, I don't think we can spare the roster spot on a SP number 6 for long periods of time.

[ashbury]

9 hours ago, terrydactyls said:

The question this article asks is if the Twins could use a six-man rotation.  The only possible answer is:  Yes, they could.  All the comments are responding to a question not asked:  Should the Twins use a six-man rotation.

The headline asked that question.  The article itself examined both sides of the question, and came down with a conclusion that was a measured "yes".  The comments have been thoughtful.

Did you read more than the headline?  What's your position on the topic?  Could you answer it?  Should you?  😀

[terrydactyls]

1 hour ago, ashbury said:

The headline asked that question.  The article itself examined both sides of the question, and came down with a conclusion that was a measured "yes".  The comments have been thoughtful.

Did you read more than the headline?  What's your position on the topic?  Could you answer it?  Should you?  😀

I started to read it but quit when I noticed it was different than the topic.  Do I have an opinion?  Nope.  Should I?  Why.  It ain't up to me so why waste time worrying.

[DJL44]

The trend is fewer innings per start and now we want fewer starts? Why would you want fewer innings from your best pitchers and more from the 20th best pitcher you can find?

[PatPfund]

The Twins don't have the pitching depth to even worry about this. One of the top three is coming off a serious shoulder injury and likely has an innings limit. #4 hasn't approached anything like a healthy season since 2019. SWR had a solid rookie year, but showed signs of wearing down at the end. The only pitcher you list in AAA that looks MLB ready is Festa, and even if he starts there (as Ober did two years ago), I have no doubt he'll be in the MLB rotation quickly due to injury (Ryan/Paddack?) or regression (SWR?) as Ober was two years ago. Zebby clearly needs more work in the minors, and Raya has rarely pitched more than 5 innings as a pro. Plus, there is also evidence (there was a recent Athletic article about the Dodgers' potential six-man) that lots of pitchers pitch worse on an extra day's rest. So, yeah it is possible, but this team needs to pray for general health, and use its minor league "depth" to spot spell IP limited starters, (And hope some of the other AAA assets like Adams and Morris step up. If they don't, and/or something happens to Lopez or Ober, we might be blackly laughing at SP depth articles by mid-May.

[bean5302]

In a word? No.

[Fatbat]

If you have a horse or 3 that work on 4 days rest better than the others, leave the nags in the stable and ride your show ponys.  More of a ranch than a farm saying.  
Is it just the velocity and spin rates that are blowing up elbows and shoulders or is a lack of offseason rest?  Kids these days can’t seem to carry a full bucket of water without tripping….. ok that’s probably not fair 🤷🏼‍♂️

[bean5302]

18 hours ago, Fatbat said:

If you have a horse or 3 that work on 4 days rest better than the others, leave the nags in the stable and ride your show ponys.  More of a ranch than a farm saying.  
Is it just the velocity and spin rates that are blowing up elbows and shoulders or is a lack of offseason rest?  Kids these days can’t seem to carry a full bucket of water without tripping….. ok that’s probably not fair 🤷🏼‍♂️

Not sure what this quote means, but case studies I've browsed show no injury prevention benefit from pitching on more than 5 days of rest. Proponents of the concept remain steadfast supporters of a hypothetical advantage that hasn't shown up in medical case studies. Like tapping the lid of the soft drink can before opening it will prevent the drink from overflowing.

The 6 man rotation proponents have practically reached cult-like status at this point. For years they've talked about teams who are expected to implement 6 man rotations, bolstering their cause with phrases like "the six man trend," though there hasn't been a trend because no teams have actually used it apart from the Angels. The "six man rotation" is almost always related to major injuries and spot starts, and there's always a starter which miraculously has 30 starts on the team. 27 starts would be the theoretical maximum for a planned and scheduled 6 man rotation.

The Dodgers are this year's definitely doing a 6 man rotation! Except I'd be willing to bet money they won't. The Dodgers are not going to trade Shohei Ohtani starts for Tony Gonsolin starts, especially when Gonsolin has an option, and has declined recently.

The drop off from a #1 starter to a #6 or AAA replacement starter is enormous. That's why the 6 man rotations doesn't actually exist. Teams are trying to win games, not lose them.

 

[TopGunn#22]

I like how Indiana Twin has laid out his "starts" over the course of a season.  It gives us a logical look how a 6-man rotation could play out.  Each team in MLB would have different reasons for a 6-man rotation. 

Take the Dodgers:  With the addition of Sasaki and with Yamamoto in the rotation along with Ohtani you have 50% of a 6-man staff accustomed to working in a 6-man staff.  Ohtani is coming off Tommy John surgery.  Yamamoto had injury issues last year.  In addition, with the other three, Snell, Glasgow and potentially Kershaw, each of those guys with their injury issues benefits from an extra day of rest.

The challenge for the Dodgers is how deep do each of their pitchers go in games, especially Snell and Kershaw, their 2 lefty's who recently have been 5 inning pitchers.  Dave Roberts biggest challenge will be managing a BP that, while his rotation will probably give him at least 5 good innings each outing,  will have a LOT of innings the BP will have to cover.

The Twins #4, #5 & #6 SP's are not of the caliber the Dodgers have.  I will also echo the idea that Paddack will not be on the Twins in 2025, so you're looking at SWR, Festa and Matthews as #4, #5 & #6.  With that, even though I think 2025 will see Festa and Matthews emerge, I'd stick with a 5-man staff and maximize my starts for Pablo, Ryan and Ober while having Varland and maybe one other pitcher that I could use for 2-inning stints 2 to 3 times per week.  Maybe that's how Raya breaks in to the big leagues.

A 6-man rotation makes perfect sense for the Dodgers.  It is an interesting consideration for the Twins, but the way our rotation will look after a Paddack trade, I don't see it working in 2025.  

[DJL44]

4 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Not sure what this quote means, but case studies I've browsed show no injury prevention benefit from pitching on more than 5 days of rest. Proponents of the concept remain steadfast supporters of a hypothetical advantage that hasn't shown up in medical case studies. Like tapping the lid of the soft drink can before opening it will prevent the drink from overflowing.

People need to get over the idea that starting pitchers are "resting" between starts like they're taking a 4 day nap. If they weren't working out on off days their muscles would atrophy and you would see performance slip as the season goes on. Ask a person training for a marathon if their training plan is to run once every 5 days and sit on the couch the other 4 days.