Twins Choose Savings Over Substance in Paddack Trade

[Matthew Taylor]

The Twins have made their first move of the trade deadline and it's already left a sour taste. Chris Paddack has been traded to the Detroit Tigers for catching prospect Enrique Jimenez. At first glance, it looked like your typical deadline deal. Paddack hasn’t been good this year, holding a 4.95 ERA overall and a 6.04 ERA since June. Trading him for a lottery ticket type of prospect seemed fair enough at the time.

But then the details started to come out and it quickly became clear that this wasn’t just about getting something in return for a struggling pitcher. It was reported that the Rays and Yankees had also shown interest in Paddack. That should have given the Twins some leverage. If multiple teams are interested, you’d expect the front office to work that into a better return. Let them bid. Drive up the price. Do the smart baseball thing. But that didn’t happen.

Instead, it was revealed that Randy Dobnak was included in the deal as well. That changes the calculus entirely. Dobnak has bounced between the majors and Triple-A for a few years now, but his recent performance has been rough. This year alone he has a 7.57 ERA with the Saints, after middling seasons in 2023 and 2024. On top of that, he’s making $3 million this year, which means he’s still owed about $1 million the rest of the season, plus another $1 million buyout at the end. There is no real value there for a team in a playoff race.

And yet, there he is, packaged in the deal. That tells you everything you need to know about the Twins' true motivation. This wasn’t about acquiring the best prospect available for Chris Paddack. This was about dumping salary. It’s not hard to imagine that the Rays and Yankees weren’t willing to take on Dobnak’s money as well as the entirety of Paddack's remaining contract, but the Tigers were. In exchange, the Tigers didn’t have to give up a better prospect. The Twins took the cheaper deal, not the better one.

That’s not to say Enrique Jimenez is a bad player. He’s a switch-hitting catching prospect in rookie ball and has some upside. But he’s a long shot. A true lottery ticket. The kind of player you might take if you were also getting something else or had no leverage. The Twins had leverage. And they still took the lighter return because it let them get out of paying Dobnak.

It’s disappointing. Not surprising, but disappointing. The Pohlad family clearly has one foot out the door, and their top priority at this deadline is saving money. They’ve already slashed payroll heading into the season, and now with the deadline finally here, they’re not even pretending to try to get the best baseball value. They’re prioritizing their bottom line. And that money isn’t going back into the team. Not this year, not next year, and especially not while a sale is looming.

This is the kind of trade that makes you nervous about what’s to come. If the front office is being told to prioritize savings over value, how many more deals like this are we going to see? Are they going to keep attaching bloated contracts to semi-valuable players just to get rid of money, even if it means taking weaker returns? Is that the game plan?

Maybe Jimenez ends up being something, and in a few years we’ll look back on this trade a bit more kindly. But right now, it’s hard to feel anything but frustrated. The front office probably could have done better. They just weren’t allowed to.

What do you think? Was there a better deal to be made? And does this trade make you worried about what the rest of the deadline will look like?

View full article

[Cory Engelhardt]

I think we should revisit this thought on ONLY making deals for cost-savings after the entirety of the deadline is through. But really, neither Paddack or Dobnak were to be on the 2026 team right?

[Fire Dan Gladden]

The Jim Bowden of TD strikes again...

Sometimes you can accomplish both saving money and getting a quality prospect. Does anybody here think that Paddack would have gotten a top-ten prospect without the Dobnak inclusion?

We complain about the Twins finances all the time, but all teams do this sort of move. Sometimes we need to look outside our little bubble of contempt at ownership and see what this truly looks like: a quality move for the Twins.

 

[mickster]

Could be an off-season signing?????  If the price is right, might be a good back end option as we don't seem to have many in our system that are better.

[DJL44]

Do you really think the Yankees had an issue with the $1.5M left on Randy Dobnak’s contract? That money doesn’t count toward luxury tax calculations since he’s off the 40-man roster. 

[Patzky]

Now we're talking about money and hearing this Correa to Houston talk..

[arby58]

I like what they got back for Paddack - a young catcher who appears to have reasonable upside. The Dobnak stuff is just a sideshow. They got literally less than nothing out of Randy's long-term contract - I don't begrudge them trying to 're-gift' part of it to another team.

[bunsen82]

Ok - the entire premise of the article is absurd - more just a way to attack Falvey and the Twins.  Trades are made to create value for a team,  whether its financial, prospects or players.  Dobnak was a dead negative asset, no different than Desclafani in the Polanco trade.  On the Value calculator the Twins have a Value of 2.2 for the Catcher prospect (who I actually like)   and detroit was near 0 with Paddack and Dobnak basically cancelling each other out.  This was an overpay, and to the best of my knowledge we have no other players we are going to dump for salary,  unless we began to talk about Correa.  So what if we got an A ball player instead of 1 in rookie ball.  The difference would have been rather miniscule for Paddack.  Paddack, Vazquez and France were all going to be pretty tough sells. 

As to Bader, Castro, Coloumbe, Jax, Duran, Ryan we have a lot more leverage and they are lot better assets.  I think most will be pleasantly surprised after the trade deadline.  

[USAFChief]

4 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

The Jim Bowden of TD strikes again...

Sometimes you can accomplish both saving money and getting a quality prospect. Does anybody here think that Paddack would have gotten a top-ten prospect without the Dobnak inclusion?

We complain about the Twins finances all the time, but all teams do this sort of move. Sometimes we need to look outside our little bubble of contempt at ownership and see what this truly looks like: a quality mive for the Twins.

 

Wow. This is just all kinds of wrong.

Dobnak was included to save $2.2M, and doing so lowered the return.

Thats pretty much indisputable.

If youre ok with lessening the baseball side to increase ownership's pocketbook side, ok. But just say so. Don't pretend this is something else.

[Rod Carews Birthday]

I think that you are working too hard trying to pin some blame on the Twins ownership and leadership that really isn’t deserved.  They traded a middling pitcher who wasn’t going to be back next year, plus a poor AAA pitcher who also wasn’t in their plans, for salary relief and a prospect lottery ticket.  I think that’s actually a pretty solid return.  Bonus that the prospect is a catcher who could have some upside, albeit several years way from the majors.  This is a pretty normal deadline trade of a non-star (maybe even not very good) player.  

If you want to rage, you could say that the Twins traded a dependable (not good, but dependable to take the mound every five days) starting pitcher at a time when they are pretty short on starting pitchers and that is a sign that they are giving up on the season.  That would be true, but probably of little consequence, as the season is pretty much lost anyway.  They are merely getting some value out of spare parts, or if you prefer, items that have a near term expiration date.  

[USAFChief]

21 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Do you really think the Yankees had an issue with the $1.5M left on Randy Dobnak’s contract? That money doesn’t count toward luxury tax calculations since he’s off the 40-man roster. 

False.

Randy Dobnak counted against the Twins team salary for luxury tax purposes and would count against the Yankees as well. 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/minnesota-twins/cap/_/year/2025

Whether the Yankees care might be a valid point. But Dobnak would fall under the luxury tax.

[bunsen82]

4 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Wow. This is just all kinds of wrong.

Dobnak was included to save $1.2M, and doing so lowered tbe return.

Thats pretty much indisputable.

If youre ok with lessening the baseball side to increase ownership's pocketbook side, ok. But just say so. Don't pretend this is something else.

USAFChief,  whats to say Detroit wasn't willing to go any higher on prospects.  The Twins said they needed more especially in division but actually liked Jimenez more than what the Yankees or other teams were offering.  The compromise was eating cash on Dobnak.  The goal may have not been to lower cash paid out,  it may have just been the available avenue to complete the deal.  In either case,  prospect and money savings it looks like a really good deal.  But if you and others want to attack it,  have at it.  

[big dog]

5 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Wow. This is just all kinds of wrong.

Dobnak was included to save $1.2M, and doing so lowered tbe return.

Thats pretty much indisputable.

If youre ok with lessening the baseball side to increase ownership's pocketbook side, ok. But just say so. Don't pretend this is something else.

Agreed. Why on earth would you include Dobnak, other than to save salary???

It must have worked like this- Detroit said we'd love to get Paddack and we'll give you this minorleaguer for him. The Twins say ok, but you also have to take Dobnak. In that case. Something like that, anyway.

If you are expecting the other team to absorb more cost, shouldn't you have to expect to get a somewhat lesser prospect in addition?

Did Detroit really think Dobnak had value? Did they start with "We'd like Paddack and Dobnak, what will it take?" I can't really believe that.

 

[Dman]

There's so much we don't know that we could run a ton of scenarios to get the narrative where we want it.  How do we know the Yankee's weren't low balling the Twins with a prospect outside their top 30?  It's not like Paddack was even close to the best arm out there.  Just a cheap one with some potential upside. Same with the Rays if there's a bargain to be had they are in.  Maybe they didn't like reaching into their top 20 for Paddack, 

Maybe the Tigers were just desperate for a deal because they didn't have much for starting pitching as yet another starter went down and were willing to move the needle to get a deal done sooner rather than later.  Even if meant taking on Dobnak's salary?

Bottom line we just don't know what the other deals were and you can spin this any way you want too.

[USAFChief]

33 minutes ago, Cory Engelhardt said:

I think we should revisit this thought on ONLY making deals for cost-savings after the entirety of the deadline is through. But really, neither Paddack or Dobnak were to be on the 2026 team right?

You seem to have missed the point  

On both statements above, BTW.

What they accomplish with other deadline deals doesn't change the outcome of this one.

[Cory Engelhardt]

3 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

You seem to have missed the point  

On both statements above, BTW.

What they accomplish with other deadline deals doesn't change the outcome of this one.

I just meant it doesn't necessarily mean it was ONLY done for savings. Yes the prospect they got back is pretty far away, but that doesn't mean he didn't have value too.

[DJL44]

5 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

False.

Randy Dobnak counted against the Twins team salary for luxury tax purposes and would count against the Yankees as well. 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/minnesota-twins/cap/_/year/2025

Whether the Yankees care might be a valid point. But Dobnak would fall under the luxury tax.

I don’t think Spotrac is correct.

”A team's Competitive Balance Tax figure is determined using the average annual value of each player's contract on the 40-man roster, plus any additional player benefits.” 
 

Dobnak is not on the 40-man roster and doesn’t count toward the CBT calculation for the Tigers unless they call him up and put him on the roster.

[bunsen82]

4 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

You seem to have missed the point  

On both statements above, BTW.

What they accomplish with other deadline deals doesn't change the outcome of this one.

And they won this trade basically hands down by every metric.  Ignore the money,  which prospect do you think would have made you happy,  then think if Detroit would have been willing to trade that prospect.  Detroit was desperate, just losing a starting pitcher.  This was likely the best deal the Twins could get all things considered,  you just don't like it, because cash almost $4.8 million was a significant part of the calculation.  

[USAFChief]

4 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I don’t think Spotrac is correct.

”A team's Competitive Balance Tax figure is determined using the average annual value of each player's contract on the 40-man roster, plus any additional player benefits.” 
 

Dobnak is not on the 40-man roster and doesn’t count toward the CBT calculation for the Tigers unless they call him up and put him on the roster.

So your contention is, if the Mets removed Juan Soto from their 40 man, he'd no longer count against their salary?

The Twins could waive Correa and his salary wouldn't count against the luxury tax?

 

... uh, you know, in the fantasy world where the Twins bump up against the tax...

 

[NYCTK]

26 minutes ago, Patzky said:

Now we're talking about money and hearing this Correa to Houston talk..

If they're able to trade away Correa, that is the "rebuild" that I'm excited about. 

[tony&rodney]

The article is a stretch. Paddack had virtually no market. The Twins didn't want to hold him because he does nothing for them except as a fishing buddy for Brooks Lee. The Tigers made a call, conversations ensued, and a deal was completed. Unless this catching prospect actually reaches MLB, the entire deal is not noteworthy for the Twins. Besides now Dobnak is in Toledo which is closer to his home. 

[bunsen82]

2 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

So your contention is, if the Mets removed Juan Soto from their 40 man, he'd no longer count against their salary?

 

You do realize the implications of dropping him from the 40 man right?  

[DJL44]

2 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

So your contention is, if the Mets removed Juan Soto from their 40 man, he'd no longer count against their salary?

Yes, this is why the Red Sox wouldn’t call up Rusney Castillo.

[USAFChief]

3 minutes ago, bunsen82 said:

And they won this trade basically hands down by every metric.  Ignore the money,  which prospect do you think would have made you happy,  then think if Detroit would have been willing to trade that prospect.  Detroit was desperate, just losing a starting pitcher.  This was likely the best deal the Twins could get all things considered,  you just don't like it, because cash almost $4.8 million was a significant part of the calculation.  

Is it possible you undermined your own argument here?

Detroit was desperate therefore in better position to negotiate?

[bunsen82]

Just now, USAFChief said:

Is it possible you undermined your own argument here?

Detroit was desperate therefore in better position to negotiate?

No not undermining it at all.  They were desperate to do a deal,  but unwilling to increase the prospect capital.  The Twins may actually value Jiminez higher than detroit and the jump up to the next level was just too far for Detroit.  Why are you so hung up on the money?  Or do you dislike Jiminez that much?  You still didn't answer who you thought we could have got that was better.   

[DJL44]

It is possible the Tigers were much more willing to send cash to a division rival than a top prospect who might play against them in the future.

[JBK]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Remember how these trades turned out:

Johan Santana:    December 13, 1999: Traded by the Florida Marlins with cash to the Minnesota for Jared Camp (minors).

Dave Hollins for David Ortiz:  August 29, 1996: Traded by the Minnesota Twins to the Seattle Mariners for a player to be named later. The Seattle Mariners sent David Ortiz (September 13, 1996) to the Minnesota Twins to complete the trade.

 

 

 

 

[nicksaviking]

31 minutes ago, bunsen82 said:

Ok - the entire premise of the article is absurd - more just a way to attack Falvey and the Twins.  Trades are made to create value for a team,  whether its financial, prospects or players.  Dobnak was a dead negative asset, no different than Desclafani in the Polanco trade.  On the Value calculator the Twins have a Value of 2.2 for the Catcher prospect (who I actually like)   and detroit was near 0 with Paddack and Dobnak basically cancelling each other out. 

But the financial value only benefits the team, if the savings of that value is used to improve the team. They aren't going to use that financial savings to add players this year.

[USAFChief]

4 hours ago, bunsen82 said:

  Why are you so hung up on the money?  

Because including Dobnak served no other purpose than to save ownership $2.2M. None. Zip. Zilch. Thats it. Its quite simple. 

Furthermore, doing so inarguably lowered the prospect return, even if only by a tiny bit. 

That's the totality of it. Its not a matter of opinion. There can be no reasonable disagreement with either of these two points.

If you (and others) are OK with that, fine. I mean, I dont understand, but you're certainly entitled to worry about the Pohlad's finances more than their baseball team.

I, on the other hand, prioritize the baseball team.

 

 

[terrydactyls]

35 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Wow. This is just all kinds of wrong.

Dobnak was included to save $1.2M, and doing so lowered the return.

Thats pretty much indisputable.

If youre ok with lessening the baseball side to increase ownership's pocketbook side, ok. But just say so. Don't pretend this is something else.

I dispute this.  Therefore, by definition, it is not indisputable.