Carlos Correa Trade Buzz Is Heating Up

[SteveLV]

Correa is a wonderful player.

The Twins can afford him, but they cannot afford to field a truly competitive team around him with his salary.

However, it is dubious that the Twins can field a truly competitive team in any respect given the inherent inequities in MLB, so we might as well keep him and enjoy his play unless someone makes us a remarkably good offer and he agrees to the trade.

[FargoFanMan]

On 11/10/2024 at 10:00 AM, Major League Ready said:

This narrative that trading an established player means that the team should just go into a full rebuild is a bit of an overreaction.  Did the Brewers "trade everyone else" when the traded Burnes after winning 92 games in 2023?  No.  They went on to win 93 games in 2024.   

I agree that if they were able to get value for Correa that trading him might make sense. The only thing is is that the owners weren’t trying to sell a team for max profit. Trading away the face of this team might make sense. But it looks bad after just signing him. Unlike Burns who had only one year at $15.6 million left Correa has another 4 years and $130M+ left. Two different situations. Also, does everyone really think they’re gonna spend that extra $37M this year? Or $32M the next? That’s delusional. Also, who do they sign? From this years FA class? I’d take my chances with the 30 year old star shortstop who is the legitimate leader of this team. I think it would be a “classic” Twins mistake to trade him now.

[RpR]

1 hour ago, old nurse said:

So when the cable market lost 20% of their subscribers in the 5 years before Correa was signed, the Twins should not have been the least bit concerned about a revenue stream with the contract soon to be done?  After all with less viewers they are going to get more money from the local broadcasts to pay players. 

I would bet money they care more about fans in the stands than any TV money.

Lack of said same is why Griffith sold the team, he could not afford not too.

[RpR]

8 hours ago, TopGunn#22 said:

How about the 2001 Seattle Mariners.  In 1999 they traded away both Ken Griffey Jr. and Randy Johnson and in 2000 they still went 91-71 and qualified for the Wild Card. (they lost the division to Oakland by half a game).  They then completed the "Fire Sale" by letting Alex Rodriguez walk in FA to the Rangers at seasons end.  Coming into the 2001 season, without Griffey Jr. The Big Unit and A-Rod they won an American League record 116 games!!  

 

Yeah , How about the 2001 Mariners:

Five all-star players, and only 140 plus stolen bases.

[FargoFanMan]

2 hours ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

You "consider" trading Correa if you deem it improving your team for 2025 and into the future. If it's to dump salary you have a huge problem. But no way if you trade him don't expect to sign better players with the savings. Not happening. I'm not a big Correa fan, but I do know reality. 

Exactly! After all this talk about payroll in what universe are we expecting them to A.) get anything back worth putting on the field and B.) signing another group of free agents worth $37M that performs better than an all star, premium defensive shortstop? That’s a huge gamble on the FO side. I just don’t think trading Correa helps them now, helps the Pohlads sell this team or helps them in the future. I don’t see the play here and we’re all being duped by New York baseball writers. Wake up people! The Correa signing is what you all wished for the last 30 years!!! This isn’t MLB The Show where your trade a high priced 30 YO for 5 top 100 prospects. Live in reality.

[FargoFanMan]

Terrible article. Regurgitating NY media and thinking it makes sense is asinine at best. I give you this Nick Nelson, it’s driving people to your article which is exactly what Joel Sherman was trying to do for his. Touché sir at playing the outrage game!

[mnfireman]

1 hour ago, RpR said:

Yeah , How about the 2001 Mariners:

Five all-star players, and only 140 plus stolen bases.

+3 pitchers made the All-Star team, led by Freddie Garcia

[ashbury]

19 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

There have been (57) 90 win teams and (34) 93 win teams.  I would choose to look at 34 or 57 teams because it is far more meaningful.

When they start hoisting pennants at the ballpark for a 90- or 93-win season, I'll make sure to pay special attention to your tables.

Quote

However, both sets of data will tell you that the 2015 Royals did not pay a single player 25% of payroll and neither did any of the 57 teams that won 90 games.  

Nor did any other WS-winning team.  Because those teams had high enough payrolls.  You aren't even listening.

Quote

I made absolutely no comment about if a team had won the WS with a below average payroll.  

Yes and I corrected that oversight for you. You're welcome.  Your focus on 25% is mean-spirited toward players in the first place, but I explained why it's misguided as well - because only a failing team pays 25% to anybody.  See the Nationals for the past few seasons as an example.   The Twins likewise weren't paying anyone 25% until they right-sized their payroll.  25% is effect, not cause.  It's the effect of dropping payroll.  Selling off those players will not improve a team's chances at the WS.

Quote

I have been quite consistent in stating that the ability to spend 150 or 200% of what the Twins spend is advantageous and history would clearly support this conclusion.  

What you are consistent about is trying to sell us on lowered expectations.  And you're outraged that I'm not buying.  You can't deny the fact that a WS has been out of the reach for below-average payroll teams for the past 20 years, so you set a new expectation of maybe 90 wins every now and then (elusive for the Twins since 2019).

Quote

I look at teams by revenue. 

Yes you do.

Who won the Beancounters League pennant this year?  Whoever it was, it's boring.

[BiggestRoccoFan]

Does anyone here seriously trust Falvey to make a competent trade?

Get new owners soon please and rid us of Falvey and Rocco.

If they are not going to invest in this current crop of players then trade everyone.

 

 

[Fatbat]

6 hours ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

Does anyone here seriously trust Falvey to make a competent trade?

Get new owners soon please and rid us of Falvey and Rocco.

If they are not going to invest in this current crop of players then trade everyone.

 

 

Lets start at trading ownership.

[rv78]

15 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

correlation and causation are not the same thing.....just sayin'

They are when you look at the number of Championships Correa has and will bring to Minnesota. 4 years from now it will still be zero. Just saying.

[Major League Ready]

7 hours ago, ashbury said:

When they start hoisting pennants at the ballpark for a 90- or 93-win season, I'll make sure to pay special attention to your tables.

Nor did any other WS-winning team.  Because those teams had high enough payrolls.  You aren't even listening.

Yes and I corrected that oversight for you. You're welcome.  Your focus on 25% is mean-spirited toward players in the first place, but I explained why it's misguided as well - because only a failing team pays 25% to anybody.  See the Nationals for the few seasons as an example.   The Twins likewise weren't paying anyone 25% until they right-sized their payroll.  25% is effect, not cause.  It's the effect of dropping payroll.  Selling off those players will not improve a team's chances at the WS.

What you are consistent about is trying to sell us on lowered expectations.  And you're outraged that I'm not buying.  You can't deny the fact that a WS has been out of the reach for below-average payroll teams for the past 20 years, so you set a new expectation of maybe 90 wins every now and then (elusive for the Twins since 2019).

Yes you do.

Who won the Beancounters League pennant this year?  Whoever it was, it's boring.

No.  I am definitely listening and have on several occasions written about the advantages of a higher payroll and even posted the results of all teams.  History is clear this is true.  We also definitely agree that elite free agents don’t take up as much payroll percentage for teams that are spending far more.  You have pointed out a mathematical certainty and why the highest revenue teams sign the most expensive players.  

Here is where we differ.  I understand and accept that the ability to spend more on payroll is driven by revenue.  Every adult follows this principle every day.  That’s not to say that teams should not occasion stretch payroll as far as they can.  However, the appropriate way to study how teams in the bottom half of revenue have succeeded is not looking at teams with far more ability to spend.  Did you notice the part where I tied this metric to spending capacity?  

You are hell bent on proving that spending is advantageous.  We all agree on this.  There is no argument.  I am interested in learning how teams with the same or less spending ability have succeeded.  That’s why I gathered this information on every 90 win team.  Call success whatever you like.  It can be WS winners or teams that have gotten to the WS or LCS or playoffs or 95 wins or 90 wins, we can use whatever measure you like use but looking for best practices in teams with $100M or $200M or $300M revenue advantage is conceptually horribly flawed.  When you can't accept that revenue drives spending, you're going to be constantly disappointed.
 

[Mike Sixel]

2 hours ago, rv78 said:

They are when you look at the number of Championships Correa has and will bring to Minnesota. 4 years from now it will still be zero. Just saying.

No, they aren't. Never has been, never will be. They just aren't. Seriously. Unreal.

[nicksaviking]

I have no interest in moving Correa just so the team has payroll flexibility to sign two or three lower tier free agents.

Honestly, that savings would go to do something like re-sign Santana and a starter like Andrew Heaney? Maybe a bottom tier relief pitcher too? That doesn't make this team better.

[nicksaviking]

9 hours ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

Does anyone here seriously trust Falvey to make a competent trade?

Get new owners soon please and rid us of Falvey and Rocco.

If they are not going to invest in this current crop of players then trade everyone.

 

 

The offseason trades made under Falvey's watch have overall been pretty good. Polanco was bad (but a push), but most of the others were pretty solid.

And that's presuming that Falvey was actually making the offseason and in-season trades. Likely it was Levine or mostly Levine, and quite possibly Jeremy Zoll, who is now being given back dated credit for past moves.

[Mike Sixel]

10 hours ago, BiggestRoccoFan said:

Does anyone here seriously trust Falvey to make a competent trade?

Get new owners soon please and rid us of Falvey and Rocco.

If they are not going to invest in this current crop of players then trade everyone.

 

 

Ryan, Lopez, say hi. The only really impactful trades during the off-season. 

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

Ryan, Lopez, say hi. The only really impactful trades during the off-season. 

Ryan was actually a deadline trade when we sent Cruz to Tampa

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, Squirrel said:

Ryan was actually a deadline trade when we sent Cruz to Tampa

Oh ya! D'oh. 

[Squirrel]

20 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Oh ya! D'oh. 

🙂
still was a good trade, though

[Unwinder]

The fanbase seems to think that Correa is going to want out to go someplace more competitive, but if that were the case then why did he want the no-trade clause in the first place? Is there some trade scenario OTHER than the Twins getting cheap and trying to dump salary that he was trying to evade? 

[Mike Sixel]

15 minutes ago, Unwinder said:

The fanbase seems to think that Correa is going to want out to go someplace more competitive, but if that were the case then why did he want the no-trade clause in the first place? Is there some trade scenario OTHER than the Twins getting cheap and trying to dump salary that he was trying to evade? 

He wants to choose where he ends up. And maybe get a small bump in pay. 

[TheLeviathan]

I'm on board with shopping him.  Not to dump salary necessarily (although his injury problems the last few years could make that contract something of an albatross soon), but to see if we can find a way to reshape our roster.

The number one issue this team has is that we literally don't know who should be playing where except for maybe SS, CF, RF, and catcher.  Everyone else it's a complete mess.

[Mike Sixel]

10 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

I'm on board with shopping him.  Not to dump salary necessarily (although his injury problems the last few years could make that contract something of an albatross soon), but to see if we can find a way to reshape our roster.

The number one issue this team has is that we literally don't know who should be playing where except for maybe SS, CF, RF, and catcher.  Everyone else it's a complete mess.

Well, then you don't know who the SS is either. Didn't you just make the problem worse?

[TheLeviathan]

36 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Well, then you don't know who the SS is either. Didn't you just make the problem worse?

Possibly!  But his leg/foot problems already may be making an issue of that.

Part of the problem also is....are any of the younger players majoe league shortstops?

[laloesch]

2 hours ago, Unwinder said:

The fanbase seems to think that Correa is going to want out to go someplace more competitive, but if that were the case then why did he want the no-trade clause in the first place? Is there some trade scenario OTHER than the Twins getting cheap and trying to dump salary that he was trying to evade? 

it's a way for him to control the situation if the Twin's get cold feet and think about dumping him.  All he has to do is drop his no trade clause should the team approach him with the right offer. 

[Seansy]

On 11/10/2024 at 2:51 PM, Major League Ready said:

If it's reasonable that would suggest it's a model proven to succeed.   Name a mid market teams that has succeeded in the past 20 years while paying one player 25%.  The closest would be the 2019 Nationals who were above average in revenue but not so far above that it negates any value for comparison.  They paid Max Scherzer 21.5% of payroll.  Their next two highest paid player represented a combined 22% so the three of them were 44% of payroll.  The Twins will be paying Correa/Lopez and Buxton roughly 55%.  

If this was a good model there would be several examples of it succeeding.  There are not.  Actually, teams don't even try.  The argument would be that front offices don't understand it's a good model.

The bigger issue is the drop in payroll. That's what's caused the ratios to get out of whack.

Given how talented Buxton, Correa, and Lopez are we are still paying them less than their production by a good amount.

Also, Correa's salary drops by 4.5M after this year too. 

Trading Vasquez, Paddack, and even Castro should take priority over trading any of Buxton, Correa, or Lopez if salary relief is needed.

[Mike Sixel]

5 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

Possibly!  But his leg/foot problems already may be making an issue of that.

Part of the problem also is....are any of the younger players majoe league shortstops?

Maybe Lee, but not anyone else close to the majors

[TheLeviathan]

31 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Maybe Lee, but not anyone else close to the majors

Lee is my thought too.  Is he a viable SS?  If so, then the equation is considerably different.

[dxpavelka]

On 11/11/2024 at 12:21 AM, RaoulDuke said:

Thats a good bullpen not a lock down bullpen.

Duran/ Jax/ Stewart are studs but they need 2-3 guys more preforming at a 7th/ 8th inning setup level to be lockdown and just end games in the 7th if they are up.

Some of that has to come from within so whoever rises to the top from Varland/ Alcala/ Sands/ Paddack can fill a spot.  They should sign at least one if not two Jax/ Stewart level guys with some track record to truly make the pen a weapon.  

They also need lefties badly.  At least one, if not two, of those setup level guys needs to be left handed.  Thielbar isn't it, Funderburk isn't it, Moran isn't it, they need a lockdown lefty.  Preferably its the best late inning arm you add.

 

I don't think there is such a thing as a lock down bullpen.  Unless you're got Mariano Rivera.

[Twins_Fan_in_NJ]

If the Twins had their choice, they'd trade Correa. But, it's not their choice. It's Correa's. He got the no-trade clause for a reason. He's not going anywhere.