POLL: Grade the Paddack-Rogers trade.

[cHawk]

Say what you want about the Twins’ FO, but they certainly aren’t boring.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I gave it a B. Makes the rotation a bit better at the expense of the pen. I wasn't counting a ton on Rooker. Given his swing and miss tendencies, he may not ever really amount to much in the majors. Wish him the best though. 

[Unwinder]

I'm not specifically very excited about it, particularly losing Rogers, but for some reason this was the closure I needed for the offseason. I'm now ready to move forward and see what we can do with what we were able to get.

[chpettit19]

A. Rooker is a nothing piece to me. It's likely he was going to be DFA'd if he wasn't traded so that's whatever to me. Pagan has been a very successful reliever in the bigs before. And Paddack was a top 40 global prospect who also had great success as a rookie. Are either of them guaranteed to get back to those levels this year or in the next year or 2 until their respective control runs out? Absolutely not. But I like the calculated risk here. 

As for Rogers, I'm going to miss him and think it will hurt the pen not having him, but the pen was very good when he was hurt last year. Certainly not because of him being hurt, but it's evidence that they can succeed without him. The Twins have produced very successful bullpens under Falvine and Wes and I have faith they can repeat that this year. Hopefully without the first half meltdown like last year. 

But overall the thought process is more than sound in this trade. 1 year of a second tier reliever (Rogers is not Hader or Hendricks) for 3 years of a young pitcher with 1 very good season under his belt and a whole bunch of very promising peripherals in the years his ERA wasn't stellar is a good move. I'll miss Rogers, but that doesn't mean the thought process (which is all we can grade on now) wasn't very good. They get an A from me.

[LastOnePicked]

17 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

They get an A from me.

I know we disagree on this, but I appreciate your reasons here. I think we'll now be much worse in late innings without Rogers, and I fear Paddock's UCL tear will become a very big issue. But here's hoping you're right.

[twins_89]

I'd give the deal a C grade for this season and a B grade when factoring in the next couple of years. I think the trade makes the Twins worse in 2022, but has the potential to really help the team in 2023-24.

[chpettit19]

20 minutes ago, twins_89 said:

I'd give the deal a C grade for this season and a B grade when factoring in the next couple of years. I think the trade makes the Twins worse in 2022, but has the potential to really help the team in 2023-24.

The question then really is how quickly (well first of all if, but then how quickly) they can get Paddack to the pitcher they think he can be. If they get him back to his rookie season self after the first month or 2 this trade makes the Twins better in 2022 and 2023 and 2024. Really it comes down to being able to get Paddack to the pitcher he was as a prospect and his rookie year. If they do that this trade is an absolute steal for the Twins.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I gave it a C simply because it’s hard to say what will happen but ultimately, this is a pretty big gamble and I think it will end up either an A or F with not a lot of room for middle ground. 

[LewFordLives]

I give it a D.  The only reason I don't give it an F is because Rogers was probably gone after the season anyway.

People can look at all the peripheral stats they want, but the fact is Paddack hasn't been good for the last two years. This tells me either the league has figured him out or he's playing hurt. I don't believe this trade made the Twins better. Maybe Falvine sees something in him that us mere mortals do not. I hope they're right.

[Rosterman]

The question is was Rogers coming back strong? Is he a true closer, or just a setup man, albeit a solid lefty arm.

 

As setup, he an be replaced. We have Moran. The Twins maybe felt he was being paid too much. But they sent along money.

 

Basically were going to send out Rooker, and if waived OFF the 40-man, would they have lost him for nothing, which they would've done if they added Garlick.

 

They got a starter that may still hit his prime. A solid mid-relief guy. And someone for the farm.

 

The Twins still don't have a closer. Which they still didn't have with Rogers, this year or last.

 

I just wonder if they could've expanded the trade bigtime. Taken, say, Hosmer and $15m, plus catcher Luis Campusano - and given them Gary Sanchez and Griffin Jax and Drew Strotman (or both) in return, and keep the extra $6m.

[darin617]

D, because we had to pay almost all of Rogers salary and still got back a questionable starter. Rooker wasn't going to ever be a full time player so no loss there. The PTBNL better turn out to be a diamond in the rough.

[Crackedfungo]

Duran will out pitch Rogers this year.  Alcala needs more high leverage innings.  Since they really didn't miss Rogers in the back half of the year (and with only this year left before we have to pay him), and we get a young potentially repairable starting pitcher for 3 years to boot - SOLID B.  Rooker was redundant.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

4 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

A. Rooker is a nothing piece to me. It's likely he was going to be DFA'd if he wasn't traded so that's whatever to me. Pagan has been a very successful reliever in the bigs before. And Paddack was a top 40 global prospect who also had great success as a rookie. Are either of them guaranteed to get back to those levels this year or in the next year or 2 until their respective control runs out? Absolutely not. But I like the calculated risk here. 

As for Rogers, I'm going to miss him and think it will hurt the pen not having him, but the pen was very good when he was hurt last year. Certainly not because of him being hurt, but it's evidence that they can succeed without him. The Twins have produced very successful bullpens under Falvine and Wes and I have faith they can repeat that this year. Hopefully without the first half meltdown like last year. 

But overall the thought process is more than sound in this trade. 1 year of a second tier reliever (Rogers is not Hader or Hendricks) for 3 years of a young pitcher with 1 very good season under his belt and a whole bunch of very promising peripherals in the years his ERA wasn't stellar is a good move. I'll miss Rogers, but that doesn't mean the thought process (which is all we can grade on now) wasn't very good. They get an A from me.

I don’t agree with your grade, but very much agree with your logic. I voted a C, thinking, C+/B-…. But probably should have gone B

[Richie the Rally Goat]

2 hours ago, darin617 said:

D, because we had to pay almost all of Rogers salary and still got back a questionable starter. Rooker wasn't going to ever be a full time player so no loss there. The PTBNL better turn out to be a diamond in the rough.

Are you worried Pohlad can’t afford another yacht?

[TopGunn#22]

I gave it an "A."  We gave up a good pitcher in Taylor Rogers.  One I very much liked as a Twins fan.  We were able to send Rooker packing which to me was a win.  We got back a young SP with good potential who we have 3-years of control.  We also got back Emilo Pagan who was lights out closing games for Tampa Bay before being traded to the Padres to be a set up man.  Pagan will now be our primary closer.  But I think Duran and possibly Alcala could also get opportunities.  Taylor Rogers will be a free agent next year.  Maybe we sign him back ala Rick Aguilera ?    (Doubtful).  

[RpR]

I gave it a C , average for what Twins FO does; they have not made an above average move since 2019, although they have tried to keep the defense above water.

[darin617]

1 hour ago, Sconnie said:

Are you worried Pohlad can’t afford another yacht?

No, it's just a bad trade when you give up a talented lefty closer and have to pay all but the minimum for a starter who hasn't been good since 2019.

[ashbury]

I chose 'C'.  The concept is strong, to trade a reliever for a good starter, but the elbow risk says to me the deal isn't as good as it looks.

[Monkeypaws]

I gave it a B. As a somewhat Padres fan, I remember watching Paddack pitch his rookie season, and wishing the Twins had such a talent.

Well, it comes at a cost and risk, but when healthy, this guy can pitch. 3 years of control helps the grade too.

[jimbo92107]

I have a slight advantage here, having actually seen Chris Paddack start games for the Padres. This is an A grade trade. Wait until you see this guy throw a baseball, whoa boy. If Wes Johnson can tweak Paddack's motion to put a bit less stress on the elbow, he could be a great pitcher. I'm talking perennial Cy Young candidate. 

Flip side, I hate to see Taylor Rogers go. Not just his performance, but he's a great guy, and developed from inside the organization. His twin bro is on the Giants; maybe now they'll get to hang out together a bit more. I wish him all the good luck.

[Danchat]

4 hours ago, Crackedfungo said:

Duran will out pitch Rogers this year.  Alcala needs more high leverage innings.  Since they really didn't miss Rogers in the back half of the year (and with only this year left before we have to pay him), and we get a young potentially repairable starting pitcher for 3 years to boot - SOLID B.  Rooker was redundant.

That's a hot take... Duran has never faced MLB hitting and has only 16 not very good innings at AAA under his belt, and has also never been a reliever at the MILB level. Rogers is a top 10 reliever in the league and looked healthy and sharp in spring training... so I wouldn't bet on it, but I'll sing the Twins' praises if this happens.

Methinks we need to lower our expectations down a little bit - the Padres were willing to pay a high price for Rogers for a good reason.

[Puckett34]

Gave it a B. Likely worse overall for 2022, but hopefully much better outlook for 2023-2024. Hope Rooker and Rogers do well in SD.

[TwinsDr2021]

I gave it a C, they traded a first round pick for a soon to be 31 year old relief pitcher, not a great return for a 1st round pick, but Rooker wasn't living up to expectations. a FA RP next year for a few years of control for a fairly young pitcher (by Twins standards) so that part was pretty good.

I don't see how it could really go down, unless of course Rooker is really good in SD, but it could go way up if Paddack turns into a serviceable starting pitcher and if Pagan pitches well.

[Old fox]

It seems like this trade has an equal number of (+) and (-). I have enjoyed watching T. Rogers the paste few years, however, he had some short comings and his injury to his finger may cause future problems. Paddock has his own short comings. Therefore is Pagan more valuable than Rooker? I feel there are some excellent prospects closer to fulfilling the closer position than a starter pitcher position.  
This 2022 roster appears to be one of the better rosters the Twins have fielded for the past several years. The 2022 roster has some ??? but are more easily fixable than in the past.  Now all that’s left, is production and injuries.  

[KBJ1]

This is a tough one to gauge. We needed a closer, which Rogers, as good of a setup man as he was, never was. So subtracting from any already mediocre at best  bullpen does not help.

If Paddock & Pagan stay healthy AND  return to form, this is an A trade. If they don't (50/50) then it's and F trade and the season is lost before it has begun.

For a team that wants to contend, getting a sure fire closer would have the much preferred move. 

[Crackedfungo]

18 hours ago, Danchat said:

That's a hot take... Duran has never faced MLB hitting and has only 16 not very good innings at AAA under his belt, and has also never been a reliever at the MILB level. Rogers is a top 10 reliever in the league and looked healthy and sharp in spring training... so I wouldn't bet on it, but I'll sing the Twins' praises if this happens.

Methinks we need to lower our expectations down a little bit - the Padres were willing to pay a high price for Rogers for a good reason.

How is that humble going to taste by years end?  Did you see Duran's debut?  He has UNHITTABLE stuff, and seems pretty unflappable as a rookie with 2 men on and 0 outs.

  

[USAFChief]

37 minutes ago, Crackedfungo said:

How is that humble going to taste by years end?  Did you see Duran's debut?  He has UNHITTABLE stuff, and seems pretty unflappable as a rookie with 2 men on and 0 outs.

  

Ahem...

[Danchat]

3 hours ago, Crackedfungo said:

How is that humble going to taste by years end?  Did you see Duran's debut?  He has UNHITTABLE stuff, and seems pretty unflappable as a rookie with 2 men on and 0 outs.

  

I'll eat my humble pie when the season ends and Duran's season is officially better than Rogers'. ?