This story was excerpted from AJ Cassavell's Padres Beat newsletter. To read the full newsletter, click here. And subscribe to get it regularly in your inbox.

Four thoughts on a sneakily eventful offseason week:

1. I understand the disappointment that Jackson Merrill didn't win the National League Rookie of the Year. I've been pretty vocal about it: I thought Merrill had a better season than Paul Skenes. I thought Merrill had a more impactful season than Skenes. I thought Merrill should have won the award.

But I¡¯m not sure about some of the anti-Skenes arguments I've seen from Padres fans this week. Skenes pitched and Merrill played every day? Yeah, that's how the sport works. Skenes didn't impact a playoff race? That's not exactly his fault (although I do think voters, for whatever reason, seemed to overlook Merrill's unprecedented clutchness). Skenes won a popularity contest? Ugh. I don't know ¡­ maybe? But have you seen Skenes' numbers? They're pretty excellent, too, and his starts were electric. (Side note: It's just such a bummer these two didn't face off when the Padres and Pirates met in August.)

Here's my final thought on the subject: I¡¯ll always think Merrill should have won. The second-place finish stings extra for the Padres, too, because they won¡¯t receive a Prospect Promotion Incentive Draft pick. But Skenes is a totally defensible vote and his winning the award is a totally defensible outcome. The biggest cause for disappointment is that Merrill turned in a season worthy of a runaway Rookie of the Year Award in most years -- including this year in the American League. And he wasn't rewarded for it.

2. Similar story with Mike Shildt, the runner-up for NL Manager of the Year, although I'm always happy when I don¡¯t have a vote for this particular award. Evaluating other teams¡¯ managers sometimes feels impossible.

I think Shildt did an excellent job in his first season at the helm in San Diego -- because I saw it every day. The Padres played fundamentally sound ball. They were excellent situationally. Their clubhouse thrived.

But I also wasn't around the Brewers. I didn't see enough of what Pat Murphy, the eventual winner, did for that team and that clubhouse.

Ultimately, voters probably decided that both Shildt and Murphy had an excellent season (and they did) but that Murphy did so with less talent at his disposal than Shildt. I can't exactly argue with that premise. Again, both were deserving.

3. On to some roster news: The Padres added three prospects to their 40-man roster on Tuesday -- righties Henry Baez and Ryan Bergert and lefty Omar Cruz. In doing so, they protected all three from being selected in next month's Rule 5 Draft. You can read more about what that means here.

The gist of the decision is this: The Padres viewed all three as potential depth pieces in the Minors next season. With pitching depth paramount, they didn't want to lose any of them.

I'm particularly intrigued to see Baez, MLB Pipeline's No. 7 Padres prospect, in Spring Training next year. He posted a 2.99 ERA across 126 1/3 innings at High-A Fort Wayne and Double-A San Antonio in 2024.

4. The Padres have some breathing room. Their 40-man roster now sits at 37 ahead of Friday's deadline to tender contracts to players. There'll be no roster crunch, like there has been in years past.

I'd still expect some activity. Luis Pati?o is the likeliest candidate to be non-tendered by the Padres. (Essentially, the team could cut Pati?o by declining to offer him a big league contract for next season. He¡¯s one of San Diego's eight arbitration-eligible players.)

There's also generally a flurry of movement around the league as other clubs grapple with their own roster decisions. Lots of fringe roster players become available this time of year.

So ¡­ is the next Jeremiah Estrada out there to be found?