Understanding What the Trade Deadline Means These Days

[Matt Braun]

And how the Twins can finally, eventually take advantage of the opportunity. 

The 2024 MLB trade deadline was high in sound and low in fury. What was once a time for splashy deals and headline-grabbing has morphed into an improve-on-the-margins bonanza, with the designations between “buyers” and “sellers” melting together into a homogeneous pot. The era of Zack Greinke moving at the last second is over, and the shape of the trade deadline is far different than it once was.

I think there are a few trends fueling this phenomenon. The most obvious is the new playoff structure: two more teams making the postseason tilts the balance of power toward sellers. Those few extra squads in the middle, potentially sellers in a separate time, live in a far less clear-cut world than they once did.

The mediocre franchises that were once dead in the water can fantasize about catching fire late to squeak into a final playoff spot. They become buyers as well, or, at least, no longer extreme sellers. Maybe they do a little of both. That’s how the 53-56 and dreadfully boring San Francisco Giants hold onto Taylor Rogers, Matt Chapman, and Blake Snell, while dealing away Jorge Soler, Alex Cobb, and Luke Jackson just to bring in… Mark Canha? It’s just weird.

That’s how the game is played these days. You’ll hear lawyer talk from executives like Jerry Dipoto about how the “seller” and “buyer” binary doesn’t really work anymore, and they’ll be correct; quite a few teams operate in both worlds.

Take the Cubs: they took a big swing to acquire Isaac Paredes, but dealt Mark Leiter Jr. to the Yankees. Hypocrisy? Not really. They identified that Leiter, a reliever—the standard currency of the trade deadline—doesn’t affect their future that much, while Paredes—an All-Star slugger three and a half years away from free agency—does. They aren’t going to make the postseason this year, but teams aren’t so narrow-minded as to think only about that. A deal is a deal, no matter if it comes in July or December.

There are two edges to this blade, but they both cut in the same direction. See, there are more playoff spots, which means more buyers and fewer sellers. However, that same playoff expansion means that the value of making the playoffs is lower, as is the quality threshold one needs to exceed to do it. The market is, sadly, being perfectly rational. With supply constricted, prices are high, but demand really doesn't rise to meet them, because many of the buyers can tell themselves they're already good enough, and because the value they derive from getting better once they're above that threshold is diminished.

You can see the way this all interweaves by looking at one of the trades made this week. Did you see the return Yusei Kikuchi commanded? A 4.72 career ERA! Half a season before he's a free agent! And he netted Toronto a new number-3 prospect, a potential starting outfielder, and a depth middle infielder. Holy crap. That makes Tarik Skubal worth a young Kirby Puckett and an old Nelson Cruz--but, like, a not-too-old one. Even a decade ago, we routinely saw teams give up way more than that at the deadline, but it was for better players, and the teams acquiring them felt both greater urgency and a greater confidence in being rewarded for aggressiveness than anyone feels these days.

Those players are so expensive because there’s an ever-dwindling pool of them available at the deadline. Remember the Giants and Cubs from earlier? Well, when they decide to hang onto their veterans, suddenly, the Skubals and Garrett Grochets of the world become ridiculously valuable. Cartoonishly so. Asking prices rise well above the comfort level of your average prospect-hugging executive, because there’s no real alternative to which to pivot. That causes everyone not ready to run as wild as AJ Preller in San Diego to balk.

The Twins find themselves in a tough place in this context. Their typical calculated, methodical team-building is harder to pull off with the new trade deadline ethos. You can wait all offseason for a trade to manifest, but when your options are limited in July, uhhh, it’s called a deadline for a reason; you have to pull the trigger eventually. They were slow to react as buyers before the expanded playoffs, and they’ve almost entirely punted the last two years, despite being solid contenders both seasons (although after the disastrous 2022 deadline, maybe that’s not a terrible thing).

In order to avoid another groan-inducing dud of a deadline, they’ll either have to find the chutzpah to hand over serious prospect talent for a stud or two, or build such a damn solid team in the offseason that the trade deadline becomes moot. Those are the only real options. Walking this narrow, lukewarm path will only keep them squarely in the middle—good enough to compete, but needing a lot of luck to make a deep playoff run. Let’s hope they decide well.

View full article

[tony&rodney]

As noted by national writers, not even one top 100 prospect, from any list, was traded. Two players who made the All Star teams were traded, Tanner Scott and Paredes.

I do wonder if the 2022 trade deadline scarred Falvey (unlikely) but I also wonder how so many teams managed to exchange mediocre or worse players. One would think that in some cases there would be players wondering, "Wait, we traded for that guy?"

 

[gregens]

Here's a confession;  I'm sitting here throwing up my hands in confusion over the trade deadline. 

I've read all the posts on TD about what should have happened at the deadline and who's to blame for what did or didn't occur.

I don't know what they should have done because I don't know the financal constraints and which prospects the FO values the most.  I also don't know what the real timeline for Correa and perhaps Topa to be back in the mlb. 

I personally wish the Twins could have improved the pitching (starting or relief) at the deadline.   But I do know I value  healthy MLB players way more than I value any prospect in any minor league system.   A proven healthy consistent MLB track record trumps anything to me.

 

[Schmoeman5]

The Twins have Walker Jenkins a top 10 prospect who's future looks bright. If he continues to develop on an arc similar to let's just say someone like Langford. Eventually you will have to pay him in order to keep him. Right now his value as a trade piece is high. Why wouldn't a team trade a Jenkins or Holliday for a player like Skubal. I'd want to extend Skubal to complete the deal. I wind up with a frontline starter for several years. I might rue the day if my prospect turns out to be a  Mookie Betts. Thats the risk. In the same token, if Skubal is that guy who gets me over that hump and brings a championship. That's the reward.. I'd make that trade every time.  Lewis was a 1 1. He's a fine player but it was 6 years in the making. Lets just say Jenkins arrives in 26. I still have a prime Skubal for 1.3 years before he even arrives and another 3 or 4 depending on how long you extend him. But of course if my hands are tied by ownership there's not much I could do. JTOL. 

[gregens]

11 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

The Twins have Walker Jenkins a top 10 prospect who's future looks bright. If he continues to develop on an arc similar to let's just say someone like Langford. Eventually you will have to pay him in order to keep him. Right now his value as a trade piece is high. Why wouldn't a team trade a Jenkins or Holliday for a player like Skubal. I'd want to extend Skubal to complete the deal. I wind up with a frontline starter for several years. I might rue the day if my prospect turns out to be a  Mookie Betts. Thats the risk. In the same token, if Skubal is that guy who gets me over that hump and brings a championship. That's the reward.. I'd make that trade every time.  Lewis was a 1 1. He's a fine player but it was 6 years in the making. Lets just say Jenkins arrives in 26. I still have a prime Skubal for 1.3 years before he even arrives and another 3 or 4 depending on how long you extend him. But of course if my hands are tied by ownership there's not much I could do. JTOL. 

Yep, I trade Jenkins or Lewis plus any pitcher the twins have in the minors for Skubal everyday of the week.  Of course I'd try to lock Skubal into a long-term contract.

[Hrbeks Divot]

Great breakdown. The big question for me is always the money. I’m happy to trade prospects for know big leaguers IF the ownership is willing to cover the cost of it turns out poorly. If the front office takes a big swing and misses how do they recover? Ownership hasn’t shown that they will go out and spend to correct the mistake. The Twins aren’t a small market team but they operated like one. Until ownership opens up the checkbook a little bit the front office will proceed with trades and FA signings with caution.

[IndianaTwin]

1 hour ago, gregens said:

Here's a confession;  I'm sitting here throwing up my hands in confusion over the trade deadline. 

I've read all the posts on TD about what should have happened at the deadline and who's to blame for what did or didn't occur.

I don't know what they should have done because I don't know the financial constraints and which prospects the FO values the most.  I also don't know what the real timeline for Correa and perhaps Topa to be back in the mlb. 

I personally wish the Twins could have improved the pitching (starting or relief) at the deadline.   But I do know I value  healthy MLB players way more than I value any prospect in any minor league system.   A proven healthy consistent MLB track record trumps anything to me.

 

Here's the thing, Gregens: This is the internet. We all know everything and announce it loudly.

I hope my sarcasm is plenty obvious, but I appreciate your naming the reality that we don't have all the information. I think most of us need to collectively remind ourselves of that reality on a regular basis when we make declarative statements about what needs to we think should happen.

A few weeks ago on a Game Thread, I made this comment on Rocco. I think the same general principles apply to front office decisions.

---------------------------------------

In actuality, I'm not sure I have a strong opinion on Rocco either way. But my general thought process on him is: 

1. Rocco is smarter than me. He also has information that I don't have.
2. Every move Rocco makes is intentional. He doesn't make decisions without a thought process (and to anticipate a comment, I think considering "hunches" and "feel" is part of his thought process, including considering whether or not to go with that hunch).
3. Given Nos. 1 and 2, when there's a move that I wonder about (and Vazquez DHing is an example), I try to consider things from every angle I can imagine and try to figure out what that thought process might be. 
4. In response, sometimes I say, "Hmm. I hadn't thought that, but it makes sense." And I enjoy the process of considering something from a new angle. Sometimes I post my thoughts.
5. Sometimes I say, "Okay, that's defensible, but I'm not convinced." Sometimes, but probably not as often, I post my thoughts.
6. Sometimes I say, "Hmm. I still can't think of anything." If I post anything, it's probably in the form of a question.
7. In the case of Nos. 5 and 6, I tend to revert to No. 1.

That may or may not work for others, but it works for me.

[IndianaTwin]

In order to avoid another groan-inducing dud of a deadline, they’ll either have to find the chutzpah to hand over serious prospect talent for a stud or two, or build such a damn solid team in the offseason that the trade deadline becomes moot. 

I agree with Bigfork, the real time to show that chutzpah is in the offseason, but with a slight variation.

Indications are that we should plan for a payroll-neutral offseason. Even if there is an increase from this year, I think it's very unlikely that it's going to be anywhere close to the 2023 total. With raises projected to basically match the money that's coming off the books, that doesn't look to me like a Walker Jenkins for a stud-type situation.

Rather, to me, that points to the greatest likelihood in picking up a stud being an Arraez-for-Pablo type trade, meeting a team on an MLB-level position need-for-position need swap. (Don't think of Pablo's current salary -- when this happened it was basically salary-neutral. If I'm reading b-r.com correctly, the Twins actually reduced salary at the time of the trade.)

It would probably be unpopular, but if Lee/Lewis/Larnach/Miranda have convinced the team they can pull this off, think of trading an Arb2 (right?) Willi Castro for an Arb2 pitcher that can become Pablo-like.

[Rufus]

It is hysterical to watch the feeding frenzy at the trade deadline every year and how the fans and media pressure teams into making stupid trades   I am glad the Twins didn't get caught up in it again this year.  Why mess up your team chemistry for a couple of mediocre additions?  Festa seems like he might be able to handle the 5th starter spot just as well as any of rumored trade pickup ups and it didn't cost any prospects.  If he falters Paddock should be back in a couple of weeks  Don't panic!

[Eris]

Verlander and Scherzer were traded last year. 
 

There are 20-22 teams in contention for a playoff spot. This makes it a sellers market for impact players and most teams were not willing to pay that price. I am not sure if this is the new normal. 
 

Snell was the obvious big time impact player. I’m curious to know what prospects were offered and what the sticking points in any potential transactions were. 

[Whitey333]

Simple fact is Falvey had a choice to add to the team and he did not.  To add a player from Toronto from the fringe pile is not acceptable.  If that is all Falvey can do he should be replaced.

[NYCTK]

Yet another reason expanding the playoffs was incredibly stupid. 

[USAFChief]

There is no doubt the 6-teams-per-league playoff structure has impacted in-season trades. I don't think front offices should be surprised by that.

But I think this year was unique in that there was an unusually small number of tradeable players on bad teams. I think in most years there'll be more names dealt. Won't ever be cheap though. 

[JD-TWINS]

12 hours ago, Hrbeks Divot said:

Great breakdown. The big question for me is always the money. I’m happy to trade prospects for know big leaguers IF the ownership is willing to cover the cost of it turns out poorly. If the front office takes a big swing and misses how do they recover? Ownership hasn’t shown that they will go out and spend to correct the mistake. The Twins aren’t a small market team but they operated like one. Until ownership opens up the checkbook a little bit the front office will proceed with trades and FA signings with caution.

Am not an apologist for ownership but this trade prospects for a veteran or two and if it doesn’t work out, spend your way out of it……..sounds like Roulette.

I completely disagreed with the $30M slash of payroll……..Team is back to 2021 spending in ‘24…….sucks! That said, they spent $154M last year and won a playoff series. Buxton - Lewis - Correa are all coming back in ‘24 in better health than in ‘23………. a “we should be just fine” in ‘24 mentality is not surprising! Add some expectation for a guy that finally broke through with a 117 OPS+, Kirilloff, - as well as Julien and Wallner at the same level or better………”we should be just fine”………. DeSclafani & Topa contributing with just a bit of positivity with Paddack & Varland both appearing competent after ‘23 playoffs “we should be just fine”.

Not terribly surprising they didn’t go out and spend a bunch or even similarly to ‘23, IMO. Spending in ‘24 doesn’t show deep commitment but the positives going into ‘24, in January/February can be rationalized into ownership not needing to do much more.

[NYCTK]

47 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

There is no doubt the 6-teams-per-league playoff structure has impacted in-season trades. I don't think front offices should be surprised by that.

But I think this year was unique in that there was an unusually small number of tradeable players on bad teams. I think in most years there'll be more names dealt. Won't ever be cheap though. 

I think last year was the exception. The Mets pulled the cord only 6.5 games out of the Wild Card, and did so in extremely dramatic fashion, selling off players that weren't just rentals. That'd be like if the Cubs sold off Bellinger, Imanaga, and/or Neris. 

[NYCTK]

59 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

Am not an apologist for ownership but this trade prospects for a veteran or two and if it doesn’t work out, spend your way out of it……..sounds like Roulette.

I completely disagreed with the $30M slash of payroll……..Team is back to 2021 spending in ‘24…….sucks! That said, they spent $154M last year and won a playoff series. Buxton - Lewis - Correa are all coming back in ‘24 in better health than in ‘23………. a “we should be just fine” in ‘24 mentality is not surprising! Add some expectation for a guy that finally broke through with a 117 OPS+, Kirilloff, - as well as Julien and Wallner at the same level or better………”we should be just fine”………. DeSclafani & Topa contributing with just a bit of positivity with Paddack & Varland both appearing competent after ‘23 playoffs “we should be just fine”.

Not terribly surprising they didn’t go out and spend a bunch or even similarly to ‘23, IMO. Spending in ‘24 doesn’t show deep commitment but the positives going into ‘24, in January/February can be rationalized into ownership not needing to do much more.

They quite clearly had a need at SP and refused to even look at adding anyone in free agency. They had no interest in actually contending, only wanting to compete. 

[LambchoP]

Who could have seen this coming? Twins bust on another trade deadline and then for the next week we get daily articles explaining why it wasn't our guy's fault. The asking prices were too high, nobody wanted to trade with us in division, we have NO money to add any salary whatsoever......Oh wait no, Falvey said that wasn't the case now lol. Really dude?

Asking prices are high sure, but that's what it takes to win a championship. Nobody would do intra division trades. Really? The Royals were able to figure it out.  Money is not an issue? Then why did we not add anyone of real value when the needs of this team are obvious even to the occasional fan. Not to mention why we haven't dumped some of the dead weight on this team like Farmer or Theilbar. Well we're stuck paying them, so we have to keep playing them even if they sacrifice wins. It's insane... We have a good minor league system, you can't tell me there's nobody to replace those two that would not easily put produce them by a mile.

[chpettit19]

12 hours ago, Rufus said:

It is hysterical to watch the feeding frenzy at the trade deadline every year and how the fans and media pressure teams into making stupid trades   I am glad the Twins didn't get caught up in it again this year.  Why mess up your team chemistry for a couple of mediocre additions?  Festa seems like he might be able to handle the 5th starter spot just as well as any of rumored trade pickup ups and it didn't cost any prospects.  If he falters Paddock should be back in a couple of weeks  Don't panic!

Not improving the team can also "mess up your team chemistry." Dan Hayes has an article on The Athletic quoting players about being disappointed they didn't get any reinforcements. "Disheartened" was the word they used. There's pros and cons to both making moves and not. Not making moves can also disrupt the clubhouse. 

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

I think last year was the exception. The Mets pulled the cord only 6.5 games out of the Wild Card, and did so in extremely dramatic fashion, selling off players that weren't just rentals. That'd be like if the Cubs sold off Bellinger, Imanaga, and/or Neris. 

The Rays did it this year.

[Rufus]

31 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Not improving the team can also "mess up your team chemistry." Dan Hayes has an article on The Athletic quoting players about being disappointed they didn't get any reinforcements. "Disheartened" was the word they used. There's pros and cons to both making moves and not. Not making moves can also disrupt the clubhouse. 

 

32 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Not improving the team can also "mess up your team chemistry." Dan Hayes has an article on The Athletic quoting players about being disappointed they didn't get any reinforcements. "Disheartened" was the word they used. There's pros and cons to both making moves and not. Not making moves can also disrupt the clubhouse. 

 

[NYCTK]

very good point. and they sold off some very valuable pieces. I don't know why people are pretending there was nobody good that moved teams. Elfin is another player that I wish the Twins were on. But he's owed 4 million for the remainder of the season and 18 Million next, so that was never happening. God forbid the Twins pay for talent. 

[Rufus]

What players that were traded do you think would have helped the Twins?  Do you think the front office should have met the demands of the Tigers and White Sox for Fedde and Flarehty or gone beyond what the Astros gave for Kikuchi?

[Craig Arko]

From what I can tell, it means liquor stores should be doing land office business.

[chpettit19]

12 minutes ago, Rufus said:

What players that were traded do you think would have helped the Twins?  Do you think the front office should have met the demands of the Tigers and White Sox for Fedde and Flarehty or gone beyond what the Astros gave for Kikuchi?

jack Flaherty, Tanner Scott, Gregory Soto, Huascar Brazoban, JT Chargois, Lucas Erceg, Lucas Sims, Mark Leiter Jr, Yusei Kikuchi, Lane Thomas, Michael Kopech, Eric Fedde, Tommy Pham, Michael Lorenzen, Isaac Paredes, Jason Adams, Carlos Estevez, Jazz Chisholm, Zach Eflin, Yimi Garcia, and Randy Arozarena are all players I think are better than at least 1 player on the Twins current roster that were traded. I don't know what the demands for Fedde and Flaherty were (I don't believe it was Lee, Jenkins, or Emma with no wiggle room) so I don't know if I would've met them. No, I wouldn't have given up that much for Kikuchi.

All I was doing was stating that making mediocre trades isn't the only thing that can mess with a clubhouse. Not making deals can, too. "Disheartening" is not a great word to hear coming out of the clubhouse. Not making moves has consequences, too.

[JD-TWINS]

2 hours ago, NYCTK said:

They quite clearly had a need at SP and refused to even look at adding anyone in free agency. They had no interest in actually contending, only wanting to compete. 

I understand they weren’t aggressive by any means! DeScla - Varland were assumed to be a combined 5th starter. SWR in 6th slot as depth. Didn’t work out.

I see glass half full going forward…….IMO, SWR is serviceable as 4th starter, with only a couple clunkers in 18 starts. Gotta piece together 10 more starts in the 5th starter slot.

Assuming Paddack can get healthy over next 6 weeks, I see a complete/strong staff by September 10-15th.

Duran - Jax - Alcala - Sands - Varland - Paddack - along with some combination of 2 more guys from following ……….. Topa - Stewart - Thielbar - Okert - Headrick - Richards - Henriquez

Ryan - Ober - SWR - Lopez in Playoff Rotation …..this seems to work as a staff! Maybe what you say, competitive but not W.S. contenders? I like the Pen a lot………particularly if the 7th & 8th guys are Stewart & Topa.

 

[USAFChief]

33 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

jack Flaherty, Tanner Scott, Gregory Soto, Huascar Brazoban, JT Chargois, Lucas Erceg, Lucas Sims, Mark Leiter Jr, Yusei Kikuchi, Lane Thomas, Michael Kopech, Eric Fedde, Tommy Pham, Michael Lorenzen, Isaac Paredes, Jason Adams, Carlos Estevez, Jazz Chisholm, Zach Eflin, Yimi Garcia, and Randy Arozarena are all players I think are better than at least 1 player on the Twins current roster that were traded. I don't know what the demands for Fedde and Flaherty were (I don't believe it was Lee, Jenkins, or Emma with no wiggle room) so I don't know if I would've met them. No, I wouldn't have given up that much for Kikuchi.

All I was doing was stating that making mediocre trades isn't the only thing that can mess with a clubhouse. Not making deals can, too. "Disheartening" is not a great word to hear coming out of the clubhouse. Not making moves has consequences, too.

You missed the single best target, AJ Puk.

Currently sitting at 3 IP for Arizona, 1 baserunner allowed, 5 K's.

Left handed. 2.3 years of control.

Making less money than the stiff we got from Toronto. 

[chpettit19]

4 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

You missed the single best target, AJ Puk.

Currently sitting at 3 IP for Arizona, 1 baserunner allowed, 5 K's.

Left handed. 2.3 years of control.

Making less money than the stiff we got from Toronto. 

Yeah, not sure how I missed that one 

[Rufus]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

jack Flaherty, Tanner Scott, Gregory Soto, Huascar Brazoban, JT Chargois, Lucas Erceg, Lucas Sims, Mark Leiter Jr, Yusei Kikuchi, Lane Thomas, Michael Kopech, Eric Fedde, Tommy Pham, Michael Lorenzen, Isaac Paredes, Jason Adams, Carlos Estevez, Jazz Chisholm, Zach Eflin, Yimi Garcia, and Randy Arozarena are all players I think are better than at least 1 player on the Twins current roster that were traded. I don't know what the demands for Fedde and Flaherty were (I don't believe it was Lee, Jenkins, or Emma with no wiggle room) so I don't know if I would've met them. No, I wouldn't have given up that much for Kikuchi.

All I was doing was stating that making mediocre trades isn't the only thing that can mess with a clubhouse. Not making deals can, too. "Disheartening" is not a great word to hear coming out of the clubhouse. Not making moves has consequences, too.

 

[Rufus]

Some how I think the front office has a better understanding of what's going on than we do.   The Twins have won the Central 3 of the last 5 years and have a good shot this year, with improving  and younger teams each year, while the farm system continues to get stronger.  Those players you name all look good but most of them come with baggage of their own.   Mahle and Lopez looked great when they came over couple years ago,  how did that work out?

[chpettit19]

12 minutes ago, Rufus said:

Some how I think the front office has a better understanding of what's going on than we do.   The Twins have won the Central 3 of the last 5 years and have a good shot this year, with improving  and younger teams each year, while the farm system continues to get stronger.  Those players you name all look good but most of them come with baggage of their own.   Mahle and Lopez looked great when they came over couple years ago,  how did that work out?

The Rockies front office has a better understanding of what's going on than we do, but they're terrible. The idea that front offices are automatically correct is nonsense. The Central has been an historically bad division the last few years and the Twins finished under .500 in it twice. There's certainly room to question their moves. You make the argument yourself by pointing out Mahle and Lopez. Mahle and Lopez were horrid trades. Sometimes not making trades is horrid. Inaction is not automatically better.

You asked who was traded that I thought would help the Twins. I answered.

You claimed making mediocre trades could/would mess with the clubhouse. I provided information that players have stated that not making deals messed with the clubhouse.

Each time I say something you just move the goalposts. Not a productive conversation. This deadline isn't the end of the world. Rocco himself stated the time was now, though. Multiple players before the deadline stated publicly they were hoping to see moves. After the deadline multiple players expressed frustration and used the term "disheartened." Not making deals has it's own consequences.