It’s Time: The Twins Must Retire Johan Santana’s No. 57

[Cody Christie]

Johan Santana is arguably the best pitcher in Twins history. Here’s why it is time for the Minnesota Twins to retire his number.

Image courtesy of © Jerry Lai-USA TODAY Sports

Throughout their storied history, the Minnesota Twins have had the privilege of fielding some of the most dominant pitchers of their respective eras. From Bert Blyleven to Jim Kaat and even the steady presence of Brad Radke, the franchise has seen plenty of talent take the mound. However, when it comes to pure dominance, few pitchers in franchise history or baseball history can match Johan Santana’s run from 2000 to 2007.

For years, Twins fans have wondered why Santana’s No. 57 isn’t enshrined among the team’s retired numbers, and it’s time for the organization to right that wrong. Santana was an ace and one of his generation's most overpowering and consistent pitchers. His peak was short but brilliant, leaving a lasting impact on the franchise and the game itself.

A Resume Worthy of Immortality
When examining the numbers, Santana’s accolades speak for themselves. He was a four-time All-Star, a two-time Cy Young winner, and the 2006 pitching Triple Crown winner. He led the American League in ERA three times, topped the league in strikeouts three times, and posted the best WHIP in the AL on four occasions. He was the undisputed best pitcher in the game for multiple seasons, yet his contributions still feel somewhat overlooked on a historical level.

One of the most egregious injustices in baseball award history occurred in 2005 when Santana should have claimed his second consecutive Cy Young Award. Instead, voters honored Bartolo Colón, valuing his win total (21) over more meaningful statistics. Santana led the league in ERA+ (155), WHIP (0.97), strikeouts (238), and fWAR (7.2). It was a clear-cut case where veteran voters misjudged the true best pitcher in the league. Had he been appropriately recognized, Santana would have won three consecutive Cy Youngs, a feat only a handful of pitchers have achieved. Every pitcher with three Cy Youngs has either been inducted into the Hall of Fame or is expected to be enshrined.

A Peak That Stood Among the Best
If we compare Santana’s dominance to his contemporaries, the argument for retiring No. 57 becomes even stronger. From 2003 to 2009, only Roy Halladay provided more value according to fWAR, but even that comes with some nuance. During that span, Santana logged more innings, posted a higher strikeout rate, and maintained a lower ERA than Halladay. Few pitchers in that era could match Santana’s ability to take over a game, and his lethal changeup made him one of the most unhittable pitchers of his time.

Within the history of the Minnesota Twins, Santana is firmly in elite company. According to fWAR, he ranks as the fourth-best pitcher in franchise history, trailing only Blyleven, Kaat, and Radke. Unlike those three, however, Santana is the only pitcher in team history to win multiple Cy Youngs. No other Twins pitcher in the modern era has had such a sustained stretch of brilliance.

For pitchers with at least 100 starts in a Twins uniform, Santana ranks first in both strikeout percentage (K%) and Win Probability Added (WPA). He was arguably the team’s last true ace, a dominant force who gave the Twins a chance to win every time he took the ball. His presence on the mound was electric, and his impact went beyond just statistics. He was a defining figure of the 2000s Twins.

The Twins Need to Act
The Twins have been selective regarding retiring numbers, as they should be. However, that exclusivity should not come at the expense of deserving candidates. Santana’s tenure with the Twins may have been relatively short compared to others in franchise history, but his impact was undeniable. Out of players from the 2000s, only Joe Mauer’s No. 7 has retired, and there is a clear case for Santana to join him. 

While his Hall of Fame candidacy was cut short due to his injury-shortened career, that should not deter the Twins from recognizing his impact. Since he left the team, only four players have worn number 57 including Kyle Waldrop, Ryan Pressly, Hansel Robles, and Edgar García. The Twins have hesitated to give out his number because Santana’s peak was as dominant as any pitcher’s in recent memory, and his contributions to the team should be immortalized. 

The Minnesota Twins need to do what’s right: retire Johan Santana’s No. 57 and give him the honor he deserves. His brilliance on the mound defined an era, and it’s time for his legacy to be cemented in Twins' history forever.

Should the Twins retire Santana’s number? Leave a comment and start the discussion. 

 

View full article

[Wayne]

Plain and simple, yes.

[Karbo]

Absolutely, retire his number. I rank him right next to Kaat as best pitchers the Twins have had!

[tony&rodney]

In the complete other direction, it would be cool to see young Twins players wearing the numbers of past stars. Walker Jenkins sporting #7 and that sort of thing would be awesome. I'm not a fan of #64, #74, or #83. Of course it really doesn't mean too much. Wouldn't it be neat to see Luke Keaschall wearing #27 or Zebby Matthews in #28?

In answer to the post I do hold up Johan as a superstar in Twins history but I'm thinking if Connor Prielipp or Dasan Hill could carve out a Johanesque career it should be in #57.

[bean5302]

Bert Blyleven was the best. In terms of value added lifetime or in a single season or even in a 3 consecutive year stint meant to favor Santana, Blyleven barely eeks out another victory.
1973 - 9.7 bWAR Blyleven
2004 - 8.7 bWAR Santana

Radke was not a "steady presence." He was an elite pitcher who retired at age 33, and he had a shot at the HoF if he hadn't decided to pitch a season with, literally, a broken shoulder. Radke had 3 consecutive seasons over 5 bWAR including 2 over 6 bWAR. From Radke's bWAR peak across 1998-2000, there were 3 pitchers who were better in bWAR in all MLB. Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez and Kevin Brown. Nobody else. Not even Greg Maddux.

Even using Fangraphs, Radke is #9 in MLB for fWAR from 1997-2001. The pitchers above Radke during that era?
Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Greg Maddux, Kevin Brown, Curt Schilling, Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina, Andy Pettite. That's it. Not a single one of them has less than 60 career bWAR and all of them are HoF worthy in terms of production. Guys below Radke? David Wells, Tom Glavine, John Smoltz, and all of then pitched years and years after 2001 just in case you're thinking they were in the last couple years of their careers.

Radke deserves way more respect than he gets. He was one of the greatest pitchers to ever play. I'd retire Radke's number before Santana.

[Doctor Gast]

I've seen them all. Johan Santana is by far the best. Yes it's about time, do it! He should be in the HOF.

[Cody Christie]

2 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

In the complete other direction, it would be cool to see young Twins players wearing the numbers of past stars. Walker Jenkins sporting #7 and that sort of thing would be awesome. I'm not a fan of #64, #74, or #83. Of course it really doesn't mean too much. Wouldn't it be neat to see Luke Keaschall wearing #27 or Zebby Matthews in #28?

In answer to the post I do hold up Johan as a superstar in Twins history but I'm thinking if Connor Prielipp or Dasan Hill could carve out a Johanesque career it should be in #57.

This is an interesting perspective. I wonder if teams have ever done this in the minor leagues as a player moves through the system. 

[tony&rodney]

On 3/16/2025 at 9:48 AM, Doctor Gast said:

I've seen them all. Johan Santana is by far the best. Yes it's about time, do it! He should be in the HOF.

I absolutely loved watching Johan Santana pitch. He was pretty dominant. Naturally, everyone will have their opinions and thoughts on various pitchers over time. There are also all types of statistics and analytics to use as one sees fit for their point of view. I would have a hard time placing Johan above any number of former Twins though. Guys like Bert Blyleven, Dean Chance, Jim Perry, Camilo Pascual, Jim Kaat, and Brad Radke were all really good pitchers. Pitchers who had shorter careers who were really good were Dave Boswell and Jim Merritt. As a LH pitcher myself I did enjoy Santana but he is part of a franchise that has had some really good pitchers. He is among the top ten, for sure.

[jkcarew]

Is Viola’s number retired? I actually don’t know. Only one CY with the club but a WS MVP makes up for that, and he was here longer and he was here first.

Not saying he is necessarily more deserving…just saying, Viola’s number should be retired first and then Santana’s.

Or just hang a banner that says “Changeup” and put both their numbers on it.😉

[tony&rodney]

The number retirement thing is a little odd. One can easily make an argument that Camilo Pascal was the greatest all time Twins pitcher, but his number is not retired.

I always hesitate to call anyone the greatest. MLB runs these obnoxious advertisements where the voices scream out that Shohei Ohtani is the greatest ever, greatest living, nothing ever like him, etc. Shohei is indeed a truly wonderful player who has done amazing things on a baseball field and his 2024 season was crazy good. But then you read that Barry Bonds had 10 (ten) seasons better than what Shohei put up last year. Perspective.

I just try to avoid the superlatives because we can enjoy excellence without making outlandish claims.

[Joe A. Preusser]

Good points made above.  Blylevin and Kaat are certainly deserving to have been retired.  Radke was an amazing pitcher and if we were to do so should be next pitcher # retired.  Santana is a close second.  Viola should also be considered.  All are deserving in my mind, just comes down to thresholds.   

Now, for an absolute no-brainer....hang KG's jersey in the rafters within 30 seconds of that sale becoming final.  

[Joe A. Preusser]

2 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

 

I always hesitate to call anyone the greatest. MLB runs these obnoxious advertisements where the voices scream out that Shohei Ohtani is the greatest ever, greatest living, nothing ever like him, etc. Shohei is indeed a truly wonderful player who has done amazing things on a baseball field and his 2024 season was crazy good. But then you read that Barry Bonds had 10 (ten) seasons better than what Shohei put up last year. Perspective.

"Better" is a completely subjective word.  Barry Bonds was truly great, aided significantly by illegal drugs.  I'm sure WAR or other stats like Bonds better many years.  I don't care.  Ohtoni taking up ONE roster spot and being one of.the best pitchers AND hitters in the sport is on a completely different level.  It's apples and oranges and it's not close.

 

 

[tony&rodney]

4 hours ago, Joe A. Preusser said:

"Better" is a completely subjective word.  Barry Bonds was truly great, aided significantly by illegal drugs.  I'm sure WAR or other stats like Bonds better many years.  I don't care.  Ohtoni taking up ONE roster spot and being one of.the best pitchers AND hitters in the sport is on a completely different level.  It's apples and oranges and it's not close.

 

 

Better is a subjective word as is best or even good. Why continue then with your good, better, best? I'm not understanding how your first sentence connects to anything else you said. These conversations have been ongoing for more than 100 years. My brother and I argued loudly about the merits of Killebrew versus Oliva. Truth was they were both great.

You will always have overwhelming support online for your claim about illegal drugs and Barry Bonds. Although he was tested more than any player ever 12 months a year, he never tested positive and has never admitted anything to date. He was also indicted, tried, and no evidence existed which resulted in Bonds being cleared. Notice I don't say Bonds did not use any substances. Good old clean Barry bothered a ton of people and he is still being punished for his personality. Meanwhile others who did test positive are in the H of F. Ohtani is really good and I tune in to watch him pitch and also when I think I can catch his at bats, but better or best just doesn't exist. I'm not a numbers guy but based just on pitchers I have talked to I would choose Barry every time over Ohtani. But that is just my opinion and I won't claim Bonds is better or the best ever in baseball. If I must choose by force, the choice is easy for me - Babe Ruth and it's not even close.

[Greglw3]

14 hours ago, Karbo said:

Absolutely, retire his number. I rank him right next to Kaat as best pitchers the Twins have had!

Jim Perry, Dean Chance, Camilo Pascual, Frank Viola, Luis Tiant, Bert Blyleven #1, Al Worthington who dominated in the pen for 5 years age 35-39, Dave Goltz. I wonder about retiring the number of a guy that broke Twins fans hearts by leaving as a free agent. The Twins offered him the same 20 MM/yr as the Mets but couldn’t match the years.

[Whitey333]

Yes.  Retire Johans number.  

[WinTwins162]

The biggest crime is Santana not getting past the first round in HOF voting. Conventional standards show 3 Cy Youngs and you are in the HOF. As in this article, Santana should have had 3, but even with 2 Cy Youngs, he should have string consideration, certainly getting more than 5% of voters his first year.

[bean5302]

17 hours ago, jkcarew said:

Is Viola’s number retired? I actually don’t know. Only one CY with the club but a WS MVP makes up for that, and he was here longer and he was here first.

Not saying he is necessarily more deserving…just saying, Viola’s number should be retired first and then Santana’s.

Or just hang a banner that says “Changeup” and put both their numbers on it.😉

Viola vs. Santana would be an interesting debate. Santana probably has the edge, but Viola isn't as far out of the conversation on a career basis.

[The Great Hambino]

55 minutes ago, WinTwins162 said:

The biggest crime is Santana not getting past the first round in HOF voting. Conventional standards show 3 Cy Youngs and you are in the HOF. As in this article, Santana should have had 3, but even with 2 Cy Youngs, he should have string consideration, certainly getting more than 5% of voters his first year.

One of the side effects of those PED-era ballots getting overstuffed as players that would otherwise be shoo-ins kept failing to clear the hurdle:  some players that absolutely warranted serious consideration would get lost in the wash and fail to get the minimum to stay on.  Johan - along with Kenny Lofton, Jim Edmonds, Johnny Damon, and I'm sure several others -  definitely deserved the opportunity to let their cases develop over time.  I think if Johan were to show up on the ballot today, he'd not only stay on, he'd get elected within five years.

There could be some pretty strong veterans committee classes in the next decade

[Joe A. Preusser]

12 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Better is a subjective word as is best or even good. Why continue then with your good, better, best? I'm not understanding how your first sentence connects to anything else you said. These conversations have been ongoing for more than 100 years. My brother and I argued loudly about the merits of Killebrew versus Oliva. Truth was they were both great.

You will always have overwhelming support online for your claim about illegal drugs and Barry Bonds. Although he was tested more than any player ever 12 months a year, he never tested positive and has never admitted anything to date. He was also indicted, tried, and no evidence existed which resulted in Bonds being cleared. Notice I don't say Bonds did not use any substances. Good old clean Barry bothered a ton of people and he is still being punished for his personality. Meanwhile others who did test positive are in the H of F. Ohtani is really good and I tune in to watch him pitch and also when I think I can catch his at bats, but better or best just doesn't exist. I'm not a numbers guy but based just on pitchers I have talked to I would choose Barry every time over Ohtani. But that is just my opinion and I won't claim Bonds is better or the best ever in baseball. If I must choose by force, the choice is easy for me - Babe Ruth and it's not even close.

All fair points.  I wasn't intending to start a PED conversation, only responding to the previous poster's assertion that Bonds was consistently better than Ohtani.  The only point I was trying to make was that when you have a legit 2 way superstar player like Ohtani (or Ruth) it just isn't possible to compare them to superstar 1 way players.  My 'subjective" comment was intending to illustrate that point,  as was the apples/oranges comment.  Clearly I tapped it out too quickly and could have been more succinct in my wording.  🙃

[Keith Anderson]

absolutely

[TopGunn#22]

I think Santana should have his #57 retired.  But I also think anybody who made the HOF should be a no brainer too.  Kaat wore #36 but had to wait DECADES to get in.  Joe Nathan, the greatest Twins relief pitcher of all time also wore #36, and he just might be elected sometime as well.

This is similar to the Vikings with Paul Krause in the HOF and Harrison Smith being a very qualified candidate who also wore #22.  If Harry the Hitman gets in, I'd love to see Paul Krause honored as well.  Krause is in the HOF and is the all time interceptions leader, yet he didn't make either the 1960's or 1970's All Decade Team for the NFL.  Somehow Larry Wilson made it instead.  Good player, but his team never won a playoff game.

This also gives a little more credibility to tony&rodney's idea of letting future players wear those numbers and make their own legends.  It worked for Harrison Smith wearing #22.  

[Road trip]

On 3/16/2025 at 11:27 AM, bean5302 said:

Bert Blyleven was the best. In terms of value added lifetime or in a single season or even in a 3 consecutive year stint meant to favor Santana, Blyleven barely eeks out another victory.
1973 - 9.7 bWAR Blyleven
2004 - 8.7 bWAR Santana

Radke was not a "steady presence." He was an elite pitcher who retired at age 33, and he had a shot at the HoF if he hadn't decided to pitch a season with, literally, a broken shoulder. Radke had 3 consecutive seasons over 5 bWAR including 2 over 6 bWAR. From Radke's bWAR peak across 1998-2000, there were 3 pitchers who were better in bWAR in all MLB. Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez and Kevin Brown. Nobody else. Not even Greg Maddux.

Even using Fangraphs, Radke is #9 in MLB for fWAR from 1997-2001. The pitchers above Radke during that era?
Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Greg Maddux, Kevin Brown, Curt Schilling, Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina, Andy Pettite. That's it. Not a single one of them has less than 60 career bWAR and all of them are HoF worthy in terms of production. Guys below Radke? David Wells, Tom Glavine, John Smoltz, and all of then pitched years and years after 2001 just in case you're thinking they were in the last couple years of their careers.

Radke deserves way more respect than he gets. He was one of the greatest pitchers to ever play. I'd retire Radke's number before Santana.

This perhaps shows the weakness of using WAR to evaluate pitchers.  Look, I agree, Radke was very good, but more in terms of longevity and durability than peak value.  He was consistently above league average but rarely elite, as shown by his best ERA+ seasons:

1997: +120
1999: +135
2004: +136

But beyond those three years, it's a whole lot of slightly above average (105-115), although almost never below average.  He was very consistent.

Radke was a very skilled pitcher who found ways to get batters out.  He was an elite innings eater for his era.  But he was never a high strikeout guy, never a pitcher that opposing teams feared facing.  He had only a single All Star appearance (despite being on all the terrible late 90's Twins teams where the league had to find a Twins rep), and appeared once in the Cy Young voting lists.  He isn't remotely close on the Hall of Fame Monitor or Hall of Fame standards developed by Jaffe.  That all speaks to where he stood in the league.

Compare that to Santana's dominant run of ERA+

2002: +150
2003: +148
2004: +182 (a mere +50 over Radke's 2004, his best year)
2005: +155
2006: +129
2007 (Mets): +166

Santana was the best pitcher in MLB for that stretch.  Radke was never in that discussion, nor should he have been.

But I'm fine with retiring both of their numbers... loved watching both of them.  I would never choose him over Santana, but Radke is still among the best Twins pitchers of all time.

[bean5302]

3 hours ago, Road trip said:

This perhaps shows the weakness of using WAR to evaluate pitchers.  Look, I agree, Radke was very good, but more in terms of longevity and durability than peak value.  He was consistently above league average but rarely elite, as shown by his best ERA+ seasons:

1997: +120
1999: +135
2004: +136

But beyond those three years, it's a whole lot of slightly above average (105-115), although almost never below average.  He was very consistent.

Radke was a very skilled pitcher who found ways to get batters out.  He was an elite innings eater for his era.  But he was never a high strikeout guy, never a pitcher that opposing teams feared facing.  He had only a single All Star appearance (despite being on all the terrible late 90's Twins teams where the league had to find a Twins rep), and appeared once in the Cy Young voting lists.  He isn't remotely close on the Hall of Fame Monitor or Hall of Fame standards developed by Jaffe.  That all speaks to where he stood in the league.

Compare that to Santana's dominant run of ERA+

2002: +150
2003: +148
2004: +182 (a mere +50 over Radke's 2004, his best year)
2005: +155
2006: +129
2007 (Mets): +166

Santana was the best pitcher in MLB for that stretch.  Radke was never in that discussion, nor should he have been.

But I'm fine with retiring both of their numbers... loved watching both of them.  I would never choose him over Santana, but Radke is still among the best Twins pitchers of all time.

WAR is the best metric to evaluate player value. There is little room for debate on the subject, and while you could debate a little on the value of comparing pitchers in different eras using annual WAR directly due to how pitchers were utilized, WAR is king. It demonstrates how much value a player added relative to other players. What would have Blyleven's WAR / ERA+ looked like if he only had to pitch 5.0-7.0 innings? We'll never know, but WAR at least tells us how much value he added. In any case, Bert Blyleven was arguably one of the 10 greatest pitchers in MLB history, and arguably the 2nd best pitcher in MLB whereas Johan Santana was not remotely close career wise. Johan Santana was similar to a guy like Bret Saberhagen or Frank Viola.

On to Radke. I compared Blyleven to Santana as they were both Cy Young-like pitchers. I said Radke was among the elite. Santana was the best pitcher in MLB, period, but for a very short period. My argument is Radke was not "steady," but he also wasn't the best pitcher in baseball. Certainly a bonefide ace pitcher for many of the years he pitched. Radke constantly gets overlooked and downplayed in terms of his contributions. You're seriously downplaying 5+ WAR seasons as innings eater stuff. This is the kind of absolute crap I've come to expect from people when it comes to Radke.

How many Twins pitchers have produced a 5+ WAR season after the last time Radke did that for the 4th time in a Twins jersey? Three pitchers. Johan Santana 2x (2005-2006), Francisco Liriano 1x (2010) and Sonny Gray 1x (2023). How many pitchers in baseball produce 5+ WAR seasons a year? About 10. The top 10 pitchers in all of MLB. Downplaying Radke's level of production as durable innings eater stuff is ludicrously disrespectful.

Jim Kaat (HoF) career ERA+ of 108, and less career WAR (45.2) than Radke
Jack Morris (HoF) career average ERA+ of 105, less career WAR (43.6) than Radke.
Pablo Lopez's career ERA+ is 108.
Frank Viola's career ERA+ is 112.
Brad Radke's career ERA+ is 113 (45.6 career WAR all in a Twins uniform)
Bert Blyleven's career ERA+ is 118.

Radke gets the nod from me due to having a Twins WAR of 45.6 (2nd highest in Twins history behind Blyleven's 49.1) vs. Santana's 35.8. Like I pointed out, in Radke's era, he compared well to Hall of Famers. Again, Radke was not "steady;" he was not a mid rotation or back end innings eater guy, and he'd possibly have a Hall of Fame case if he'd have fixed his shoulder and kept pitching for another 5 years.

Radke also may have had the most instrumental role in saving the Twins from contraction of any player. Radke forced Pohlad to the negotiating table, and he forced the Twins to open up their wallets to attempt to compete, and then Radke accepted a competitive offer from the Twins whereas Santana forced his way out looking for the biggest contract in baseball regardless of impact to the Twins' roster. Radke's efforts brought the Twins back to competitive play just before contraction. Radke had a bigger impact on the Twins than Santana's short 4 years as a dedicated rotation member.

[tony&rodney]

8 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

WAR is the best metric to evaluate player value. There is little room for debate on the subject, and while you could debate a little on the value of comparing pitchers in different eras using annual WAR directly due to how pitchers were utilized, WAR is king. It demonstrates how much value a player added relative to other players. What would have Blyleven's WAR / ERA+ looked like if he only had to pitch 5.0-7.0 innings? We'll never know, but WAR at least tells us how much value he added. In any case, Bert Blyleven was arguably one of the 10 greatest pitchers in MLB history, and arguably the 2nd best pitcher in MLB whereas Johan Santana was not remotely close career wise. Johan Santana was similar to a guy like Bret Saberhagen or Frank Viola.

On to Radke. I compared Blyleven to Santana as they were both Cy Young-like pitchers. I said Radke was among the elite. Santana was the best pitcher in MLB, period, but for a very short period. My argument is Radke was not "steady," but he also wasn't the best pitcher in baseball. Certainly a bonefide ace pitcher for many of the years he pitched. Radke constantly gets overlooked and downplayed in terms of his contributions. You're seriously downplaying 5+ WAR seasons as innings eater stuff. This is the kind of absolute crap I've come to expect from people when it comes to Radke.

How many Twins pitchers have produced a 5+ WAR season after the last time Radke did that for the 4th time in a Twins jersey? Three pitchers. Johan Santana 2x (2005-2006), Francisco Liriano 1x (2010) and Sonny Gray 1x (2023). How many pitchers in baseball produce 5+ WAR seasons a year? About 10. The top 10 pitchers in all of MLB. Downplaying Radke's level of production as durable innings eater stuff is ludicrously disrespectful.

Jim Kaat (HoF) career ERA+ of 108, and less career WAR (45.2) than Radke
Jack Morris (HoF) career average ERA+ of 105, less career WAR (43.6) than Radke.
Pablo Lopez's career ERA+ is 108.
Frank Viola's career ERA+ is 112.
Brad Radke's career ERA+ is 113 (45.6 career WAR all in a Twins uniform)
Bert Blyleven's career ERA+ is 118.

Radke gets the nod from me due to having a Twins WAR of 45.6 (2nd highest in Twins history behind Blyleven's 49.1) vs. Santana's 35.8. Like I pointed out, in Radke's era, he compared well to Hall of Famers. Again, Radke was not "steady;" he was not a mid rotation or back end innings eater guy, and he'd possibly have a Hall of Fame case if he'd have fixed his shoulder and kept pitching for another 5 years.

Radke also may have had the most instrumental role in saving the Twins from contraction of any player. Radke forced Pohlad to the negotiating table, and he forced the Twins to open up their wallets to attempt to compete, and then Radke accepted a competitive offer from the Twins whereas Santana forced his way out looking for the biggest contract in baseball regardless of impact to the Twins' roster. Radke's efforts brought the Twins back to competitive play just before contraction. Radke had a bigger impact on the Twins than Santana's short 4 years as a dedicated rotation member.

Feels like more than a thumbs up is needed to your response. I agree with you wholeheartedly and I didn't necessarily need all of the supportive data to place Brad Radke as among the all time great Twins pitchers. In fairness I have followed and examined WAR from the start. I'm not sure what people missed or why Radke did not get the respect he deserved. He got (gets) it from me. I appreciate you putting the numbers forth to shine the light on Brad Radke.