So... Why Trade Taylor Rogers?

[Stew]

We have no proven closer. But Rodgers wasn't approved closer. Plus he seems to get hurt. I like the competition we have . After the first two games pitching seems ok. Our hitters better get going.

[ashbury]

5 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Then it might not be accurate to say all teams start at 1/30?

 

22 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

It's completely accurate. 30 teams. That's where it starts

Please don't ever play poker with Chief for money.  But, if you do, please let me know so I have a chance to hustle up some side bets.

Play me for money.  I never can remember for sure whether a straight beats a four-flush.

But, in your own realm, if you had to construct a short playlist for mainstream/AOR radio, and your boss handed you a list of 30 songs with the initials HC* to choose from, if that list included Hotel California and Holiday in Cambodia, you wouldn't flip a coin between those two on the presumption that past performance wasn't predictive and that all 30 songs in the list were 1/30 to be what won't cause listeners to tune out.  I don't know what it means that you'd assign 1/30 to both the Dodgers and Pirates before game 1 of a season, either.

* I hope you'll entertain us with your list.

[Riverbrian]

2 hours ago, ashbury said:

 

Please don't ever play poker with Chief for money.  But, if you do, please let me know so I have a chance to hustle up some side bets.

Play me for money.  I never can remember for sure whether a straight beats a four-flush.

But, in your own realm, if you had to construct a short playlist for mainstream/AOR radio, and your boss handed you a list of 30 songs with the initials HC* to choose from, if that list included Hotel California and Holiday in Cambodia, you wouldn't flip a coin between those two on the presumption that past performance wasn't predictive and that all 30 songs in the list were 1/30 to be what won't cause listeners to tune out.  I don't know what it means that you'd assign 1/30 to both the Dodgers and Pirates before game 1 of a season, either.

* I hope you'll entertain us with your list.

As I plant my ice pick into the side of this rabbit hole.

I'll create a different rabbit hole. 

Chief... You get the Dodgers to win the World Series... I get the other 29 teams. Deal? 

 

Or... OK Poker... The Dodgers are holding a pair of Aces (D and H) The Giants are holding a 5C and 7H. Past performance suggests that these are great Odds for the Dodgers... Not Good for the Giants. 

The Flop is 4H 6D 8H. Based on what is happening on the playing table. Do the Odds Change?

 

I understand that there are some on this website that feel the Twins just punted 2022. I don't have that feeling. 

I think the Twins are holding K 10 suited. Let's see the flop. 

And yeah I know... I just teed up the word "flop" for the others to swing at. ? 

 

[Squirrel]

3 hours ago, ashbury said:

Please don't ever play poker with Chief for money.  But, if you do, please let me know so I have a chance to hustle up some side bets.

Play me for money.  I never can remember for sure whether a straight beats a four-flush.

I won't play Chief either ... but I'll take on the two of you ... I at least know what beats what and how to keep track of cards and assess the odds ... sort of ... enough that I would take on you two but not Chief ?

[ashbury]

41 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

Chief... You get the Dodgers to win the World Series... I get the other 29 teams. Deal? 

The opposite of 1/30 isn't 50/50.

[USAFChief]

2 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

As I plant my ice pick into the side of this rabbit hole.

I'll create a different rabbit hole. 

Chief... You get the Dodgers to win the World Series... I get the other 29 teams. Deal? 

 

Or... OK Poker... The Dodgers are holding a pair of Aces (D and H) The Giants are holding a 5C and 7H. Past performance suggests that these are great Odds for the Dodgers... Not Good for the Giants. 

The Flop is 4H 6D 8H. Based on what is happening on the playing table. Do the Odds Change?

 

I understand that there are some on this website that feel the Twins just punted 2022. I don't have that feeling. 

I think the Twins are holding K 10 suited. Let's see the flop. 

And yeah I know... I just teed up the word "flop" for the others to swing at. ? 

 

When I'm holding pocket aces and you're holding 5-7 off preflop, our odds are not the same. Not even close. That's a terrible analogy, as you don't know the flop before it happens. (And you won't see the flop anyway. You'll have folded to my raise.)

And the Dodgers, Twins, and Pitates don't have equal "preflop" Odds either. They're not each "1 in 30."

The Twins might end up outflopping the ALC or WC teams, but their odds are long and got a little longer by trading Rogers.

 

 

[Major League Ready]

14 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I say again, a team serious about competing in 2022 doesn't trade Rogers.

And if they seriously thought they had a legit shot at being a serious contender as opposed to a wildcard team hoping to get really hot against superior teams, they would have been delusional to think they were a serious contender.  Therefore, they would have been incompetent to manage to that delusion. Fans can have this "we need to contend every year" mantra.  Front offices need to manage the team's long-term interests.  It's really easy to manage for the current year.  Any team could just trade away the farm for the current year or two.   You may have noticed teams don't operate this way.  The Dodgers had numerous opportunities to elevate their teams but held on to their prospects.  Maintaining success is far more difficult.

[Riverbrian]

10 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

Or... OK Poker... The Dodgers are holding a pair of Aces (D and H) The Giants are holding a 5C and 7H. Past performance suggests that these are great Odds for the Dodgers... Not Good for the Giants. 

I know that you read the un-bolded part because you quote it accurately. I'm not so sure you read the bolded part though based on the bolded part of your response. 

7 hours ago, USAFChief said:

When I'm holding pocket aces and you're holding 5-7 off preflop, our odds are not the same. Not even close. That's a terrible analogy,

I'm not sure why we are spinning our wheels at this elementary level.

Let's Continue. 

7 hours ago, USAFChief said:

That's a terrible analogy, as you don't know the flop before it happens. 

Not knowing the flop before it happens is a big part of my point. 

7 hours ago, USAFChief said:

(And you won't see the flop anyway. You'll have folded to my raise.)

Yep... with a minimum raise I'm folding that. When I played poker... I folded a lot of hands... close to 80% of them. I was patient. However, in Baseball, you can tank... but you can't fold. All teams will see the flop... they are required to see the flop.

 

7 hours ago, USAFChief said:

 

And the Dodgers, Twins, and Pitates don't have equal "preflop" Odds either. 

I know I covered this earlier. but it keeps get hammered like I didn't. So... just to make sure I will bold it again. 

10 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

Past performance suggests that these are great Odds for the Dodgers... Not Good for the Giants

The next line is probably the crux of the discussion. 

7 hours ago, USAFChief said:

They're not each "1 in 30."

There are 30 teams. That's where it starts... with a franchise. They all have the same license to compete without advantage or disadvantage. There are no rules that state that the Mariners must fail and the Mets must succeed. This is also rather elementary.

I'll quote my original sentence. 

 

21 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

Start at 1/30 and adjust that up and down based on how the talent performs. Every team needs it to come together.

And this again. 

10 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

The Dodgers are holding a pair of Aces (D and H) The Giants are holding a 5C and 7H. Past performance suggests that these are great Odds for the Dodgers... Not Good for the Giants. 

The Flop is 4H 6D 8H. Based on what is happening on the playing table. Do the Odds Change?

 

Just for clarity here is what I believe. 

The Dodgers are the best run organization in baseball. I've held them up as an example for years along with the Rays.  I believe the Dodgers will win more than 95. They may not because all teams still need it to come together but I believe they will. 

Back to poker

The Dodgers buy multiple draws. They don't get to buy specific cards... they buy multiple draws.  

Last year... the Twins didn't have multiple draws... they had crappy Happ and Shoemaker cards and they held those cards with no draw to replace them.

This year when it comes to starting pitching... we have better cards and we have re-draws. I think that's significant.

I understand that you feel differently. 

 

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

 

The Dodgers are the best run organization in baseball. 

 

They're serious about contending.  They don't make this trade. And they sure as **** don't do "asset management." They collect the best possible players they can, each and every year. 

Did they trade the expiring contract of Kenley Jansen last spring?

[Major League Ready]

34 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

They're serious about contending.  They don't make this trade. And they sure as **** don't do "asset management." They collect the best possible players they can, each and every year. 

Did they trade the expiring contract of Kenley Jansen last spring?

I find it astounding when fans don't understand it is essential to success for an organization with half of the Dodgers revenue to practice asset management.   It's fanatical thinking with no regard for the realities of the requirements for mid-market vs large market teams.  The twins have to produce in the neighborhood of 2X WAR per every dollar spent.  It's a financial / mathematical certainty.

[Otto von Ballpark]

On 4/9/2022 at 12:03 AM, USAFChief said:

A team serious about competing in 2022 doesn't trade Rogers.

It’s not like we traded him for prospects. Were the 1988 Twins not serious about contending when they exchanged Brunansky for Herr? The 2004 Red Sox when they traded Garciaparra at the deadline?

[Otto von Ballpark]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

They're serious about contending.  They don't make this trade. And they sure as **** don't do "asset management." They collect the best possible players they can, each and every year. 

Did they trade the expiring contract of Kenley Jansen last spring?

Even the Dodgers have traded away pieces of the major league roster, if they felt they could derive greater benefit from the player they are receiving in return. Pollock for Kimbrel is the most recent example; Maeda for Graterol is another.

[USAFChief]

27 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Even the Dodgers have traded away pieces of the major league roster, if they felt they could derive greater benefit from the player they are receiving in return. Pollock for Kimbrel is the most recent example; Maeda for Graterol is another.

But that's not this "asset management" claptrap. It's assembling the best team possible by getting the best players possible, for the current year. They didn't view Maeda as "value" due to being a starter "with team control." They viewed Graterol as the better asset because a shutdown reliever means more. 

Kimbrel is more of the same. They want the guy with more impact on Ws and Ls.

They're not playing for "rotation depth" in 2024.

[Otto von Ballpark]

55 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

But that's not this "asset management" claptrap. It's assembling the best team possible by getting the best players possible, for the current year. They didn't view Maeda as "value" due to being a starter "with team control." They viewed Graterol as the better asset because a shutdown reliever means more. 

Kimbrel is more of the same. They want the guy with more impact on Ws and Ls.

They're not playing for "rotation depth" in 2024.

I think “asset management” may only be a secondary or even tertiary justification for the Rogers trade. We wanted another starter with upside for 2022 too.

[tony&rodney]

The Padres do this trade because they get a closer for MLB minimum, their chances to win games this year improve, and they are now below the CBT limit plus they didn't see any use for either Pagan or Paddack on their team for 2022.

The Twins do this trade because, despite it costing them more money (around $4. million), they believe that Paddack will be a decent pitcher next year. Simply put, Falvey put a premium on acquiring Chris Paddack; it was his sole focus in dealing with San Diego. 

The Twins are nowhere near a limit where their profit margins for 2022 are endangered, unless the entire team tanks and attendance falls to near one million fans. 

We can agree or disagree with the current regime and how they assess the potential utility of individual talents/players. The judgment is always rendered by the won/loss column.

The comment section is not for objective thoughts and my personal take is that the Twins will not be better in 2022 due to this trade. I also don't believe this trade saves any money for 2023. Nevertheless, I will agree that Rogers could get injured and miss most of the year while the Twins see Pagan and Paddack resurrect their flagging careers. As a Twins fan, I hope Rogers is excellent all year and has a long productive career while Paddack pitches spectacularly for the Twins in leading them through  post seasons. 2 down, 160 to go.

 

[jorgenswest]

The Padres improved their rotation for 2022 by replacing Paddack with Manaea. They improved their bullpen by unloading a reliever in Pagán that had been below replacement level the last two years with Rogers at the top of their pen. They will concern themselves with 2023 later.

The Twins win projection for 2022 drops with this move. The outlook for 2023 is better. This is a move I would have been behind prior to Correa’s signing. Why not win the Manaea deal with someone like Woods-Richardson instead? That would be the move of a team serious about contending, They could be in the Padres spot with Rogers and Manaea.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

I think “asset management” may only be a secondary or even tertiary justification for the Rogers trade. We wanted another starter with upside for 2022 too.

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. You'd trade for Manaea then, not deplete your 2022 bullpen.

[Otto von Ballpark]

1 hour ago, jorgenswest said:

The Twins win projection for 2022 drops with this move.

By how much? At least one source (ZiPS at Fangraphs) appears to have projected Paddack for 1.7 WAR and Rogers for 1.0.

https://www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&type=zips&team=0&lg=all&players=0&sort=19%2cd

[Riverbrian]

3 hours ago, USAFChief said:

They're serious about contending.  They don't make this trade. And they sure as **** don't do "asset management." They collect the best possible players they can, each and every year. 

Did they trade the expiring contract of Kenley Jansen last spring?

The Dodgers... I don't know... they are one of a tiny fraction of teams that have actual starting pitching depth already in place (the Padres may be the other fraction) so that changes the context.

However... Yeah I think the Dodgers make the deal because you are really selling Friedman short if you think he ignores value. Potentially 70 Innings from Rogers for potentially 450 innings from Paddack. He makes the deal.

I don't think you mean to be specific about the Dodgers exactly... I think you are making a general point that winning teams don't make this deal so any team will do for discussion purposes.

I think pretty close to all 29 teams make this trade. They all get the value difference. None of them ignore value. 

17 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

The Padres improved their rotation for 2022 by replacing Paddack with Manaea. They improved their bullpen by unloading a reliever in Pagán that had been below replacement level the last two years with Rogers at the top of their pen. They will concern themselves with 2023 later.

The Twins win projection for 2022 drops with this move. The outlook for 2023 is better. This is a move I would have been behind prior to Correa’s signing. Why not win the Manaea deal with someone like Woods-Richardson instead? That would be the move of a team serious about contending, They could be in the Padres spot with Rogers and Manaea.

Maybe Woods-Richardson wasn't who the A's were looking for? 

Maybe the A's scouting department really likes these Angeles and Martinez kids.

Maybe when looking at the Twins roster in trade discussion, the Ask was significantly higher for specific players on the Twins roster that the A's were interested in.  

Maybe the Twins were more interested in Montas because of the extra year. 

Maybe the Manaea deal put Paddack on the Market and the Twins got a deal done just before opening day. 

Maybe the Padres called the Twins. Maybe they liked Rogers. 

I guess... Maybe... simply saying that the Twins should have just won the Manaea deal makes it sound like the Twins can just go get whoever they want... when they want them. 

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

27 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. You'd trade for Manaea then, not deplete your 2022 bullpen.

Maybe they tried to trade prospects for Manaea, but Oakland turned them down? It's easy to say in hindsight that the Twins should have beat San Diego's offer, but:

1. That's not how trade negotiations work -- we don't have perfect information (probably only what Oakland chooses to share to get their desired outcome)

2. We don't know exactly how Oakland values our prospects either, as compared to San Diego's. Maybe we felt that we offered more but Oakland didn't agree.

[glunn]

Pagan looked very good in today's game. He could make this trade a winner for the Twins.

[tony&rodney]

Falvey has stated that he has attempted to acquire Paddack since 2017. We should accept that rationale. The many moves this last month were attempting to improve the team. We will know the answer by October. These moves were not related to finances or asset management, just according to the ideas put together to make the team better. We can agree or disagree with the trades. San Diego clearly thought their side of the trade benefitted their team as did the Yankees and Rangers in the other major trades.

When individuals state that the Twins cannot win this year, they forget the Atlanta Braves and San Francisco Giants from last season. They also forget the 1987 and 1991 Twins among a host of many other teams. The Twins are not favored as they were last season but they could catch a wave and ride players like Buxton, Correa, and Polanco to the playoffs. I am a fan of Trevor Rogers but a long time Twins fan and am very hopeful that the pitching of Chris Paddack and others makes Falvey look good in 2022. 

[Will Goodwin]

Long-term, I see the value in this trade. Pagan and Paddack have above-average ceilings with multiple years of team control remaining, while Rogers was set to be a free agent. However, for 2022, this move doesn't appear to be a needle-mover. I actually think the Twins will be worse off this year because of it.

Paddack has declined over the last two years since a breakout rookie season, and while Pagan can still sling it, he's a downgrade compared to Rogers. Also, the Twins have plenty of right-handed firepower in their bullpen, and now are down to just Coulombe and Thielbar for lefties. Not to mention that Rogers is an all-star closer.

[TheLeviathan]

It definitely could be a step back for this year.  If Rogers is healthy and at his best he's among the best left handed relievers in the game.  At the same time, he was likely gone in a short while and we get a guy in Pagan who has been very good in the past and has some peripherals that indicate it wouldn't take much to get back there.  If Paddock hits....that's a lot more innings of help than either of the relievers.

One thing is for sure.....Duffey has never had a problem letting the moment be "too big" for him.  I hope the loss the other night leads us to go with Duran and Alcala in crunch time situations.  Even at his best that hasn't been Duffey's strength.

[Major League Ready]

12 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Falvey has stated that he has attempted to acquire Paddack since 2017. We should accept that rationale. The many moves this last month were attempting to improve the team. We will know the answer by October. These moves were not related to finances or asset management, just according to the ideas put together to make the team better. We can agree or disagree with the trades. San Diego clearly thought their side of the trade benefitted their team as did the Yankees and Rangers in the other major trades.

When individuals state that the Twins cannot win this year, they forget the Atlanta Braves and San Francisco Giants from last season. They also forget the 1987 and 1991 Twins among a host of many other teams. The Twins are not favored as they were last season but they could catch a wave and ride players like Buxton, Correa, and Polanco to the playoffs. I am a fan of Trevor Rogers but a long time Twins fan and am very hopeful that the pitching of Chris Paddack and others makes Falvey look good in 2022. 

Trading an all-star closer with one year of control for a set-up guy with two years of control and a high upside SP with 3 years of control is definitely asset management.  When you trade a 36 year old superstar with injury concerns and highly probably decline with 21.75M owed next year and a 16M option or 8m buyout the following year, that’s probably asset management.  When you add the fact the team’s top offense prospect plays the same position it becomes asset management, especially when you get an interim 3B in Urshela.  He is a great place holder for Miranda and he can play other positions when Miranda takes over.  Of course, he is also insurance if Miranda fals on his face.  They also bought low on him.  It’s certainly possible he could return to 2019/2020 form and be traded for value if that happens.  Sanchez filled a hole.  For all of these reasons, the Donaldson deal was great asset management.

Now, could it work out that SOME combination of Paddack / Pagan / Urshela and Sanchez make us a better team this year vs Rodgers / Donaldson / Garver and Rortvedt?  Sure, they are all players that have performed at high levels in the past. They managed to position the team for the future while building in some upside for this year.  However, these deals were more about the future than the present.

[Riverbrian]

4 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

 

Now, could it work out that SOME combination of Paddack / Pagan / Urshela and Sanchez make us a better team this year vs Rodgers / Donaldson / Garver and Rortvedt?  
 

You should probably add Correa to the first group. ?

[Major League Ready]

8 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

You should probably add Correa to the first group. ?

Obviously, he adds to the potential, but I was talking about moves that were about asset management and he does not fit into that category in the same way as the others.   I guess we could call it asset management if they trade him at the deadline. 

[laloesch]

On 4/8/2022 at 4:45 PM, dex8425 said:

If we have Graterol, do the Twins make the playoffs in 2020? We certainly don't win the division then. Maeda was the second best pitcher in the AL in 2020 and that was only because Bieber was incredible. Pressly hurts, because although Celestino and Alcala are both MLB pieces, I think we gave up 1.5 seasons of control of Pressly. Jury is still out on that one. 

Trading Brusdar Graterol for Kenta Maeda still makes me cringe.  Maeda is going to be 34 next season and to me it looks like the Twins are in semi rebuilding mode.  I understand why they did it, but i would have liked to seen them hang onto him.

[dex8425]

7 minutes ago, laloesch said:

Trading Brusdar Graterol for Kenta Maeda still makes me cringe.  Maeda is going to be 34 next season and to me it looks like the Twins are in semi rebuilding mode.  I understand why they did it, but i would have liked to seen them hang onto him.

Graterol has only thrown 67 innings his entire MLB career (including the innings with the Twins). Maeda threw that many in 2020 alone. Graterol wasn't very good last year either. 

[USAFChief]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

  When you trade a 36 year old superstar with injury concerns and highly probably decline with 21.75M owed next year and a 16M option or 8m buyout the following year, that’s probably asset management.  When you add the fact the team’s top offense prospect plays the same position it becomes asset management, especially when you get an interim 3B in Urshela.  He is a great place holder for Miranda and he can play other positions when Miranda takes over.  Of course, he is also insurance if Miranda fals on his face.  They also bought low on him.  It’s certainly possible he could return to 2019/2020 form and be traded for value if that happens.  Sanchez filled a hole.  For all of these reasons, the Donaldson deal was great asset management. 

Except that wasn't the trade. 

You're leaving out the 24 yr old catcher, with 5 years of team control and 27 year old SS with 2 years of control that the Twins traded. You're also leaving out Urshela is 30, Sanchez 29 and a free agent this winter. 

You seem to use "years of control " and age only when it suits your purpose.