6 Trade Packages Minnesota Twins Could Land for Jhoan Duran and Griffin Jax

[Patzky]

2 hours ago, Matthew Taylor said:

The Twins got 2 top-100 prospects for Jose Berrios. They're not getting 2 top-100 prospects for Duran or Jax. A package deal of them? Yes, they could get two top-100 guys for them.

Or we keep them..

[SF Twins Fan]

38 minutes ago, Wedman13 said:

No, the article says a package deal.

"teams look at what the Twins are asking for to acquire Duran or Jax -- at least two top-100-caliber prospects -- and aren't inclined to spend a whole lot of time workshopping deals for a top-10 starter this season with two more years of club control"

Directly from the original article.... Asking price is for either not both.  Teams looking to acquire either Duran OR Jax are being asked for two top 100-caliber prospects.

[Walser]

Obviously it would be much wiser to keep them (assuming no teams are willing to massively overpay) though that Mets deal is enticing. Not interested in any of the others, even though we need a catcher.

[Greglw3]

None of these deals is good enough for even one of Jax Duran. 

A fair trade for a sure thing top tier major leaguer at a position of extreme need for the Phillies would be Aiden Miller and Justin Crawford for Jhoan Duran.

The Twins have stumbled through the last several years, plagued by mediocre to poor offenses.

This deal probably still favors the Phillies as there is no guarantee that either Crawford or Miller ever becomes the impact guy Duran is. One the plus side for the Twins, if they both become impact players, then Duran was worth it.

[1985Fan]

No way should this FO trade either Jax or Duran, period. I don’t want Falvey to be a factor in the future of the franchise. He shouldn’t be here after new owners take over. 

[Blyleven2011]

1 hour ago, Doctor Gast said:

I don't trust this FO to pull off a significant trade, especially with LAD. Absolutely not with NYY, Our window is still open, so. Absolutely no lotto tickets, I don't care if they are high. Twins need to trade for young, impactful, MLB-ready players that fit our needs, no redundant players. If LAD agrees with Rushing & Ferris, I'd be very happy. But I doubt they would. That's the only one.

CWS said that they are open to trading one of their outstanding rookie catchers (O Quero or Teel) to diversify their rebuild. There are very few high-caliber young catchers out there. If any team can land either we can secure a trade, Much like what we did when we traded Garver for Falefa & then turn around & trade him to NYY to complete our trade with NYY. My requirements are rigid; if no team can meet them. Then no deal. No trade is better than a bad trade.

 

I concur , we trade one or the other , do not do a package deal and short change ourselves , if your trading both , do it separatelyand get a better return ....

If 1 of Jax or Duran is traded , I'm not trading players with team control for prospects years away ,  retooling is trading for major league ready plays ...

Here's my proposal , we just finished with the dodgers  , trade one or the other we are retooling not rebuilding

we want right handed outfield ( pages ) , he has impressed me , we need catching but I'm not sure ( rushing ) is the answer but I guess we could gamble that he sticks at catcher  , some lnow more if he will , I hear all kinds of reports , okay there are our 2 top players to trade for , I want at least another healthy  prospect to complete the trade ...

We are trading a strength ( valuable pitching ) with team control to fill a need ( offense and catcher ) with team control , plus anything else we can pry away  .. 

I think alot of people would be happy with this trade and I believe if the front office trades 1 or the other it is going to be Jax because he is 3 years older than Duran  ...

I like Jax,  but I'd do this trade  ...

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, Blyleven2011 said:

I concur , we trade one or the other , do not do a package deal and short change ourselves , if your trading both , do it separatelyand get a better return ....

If 1 of Jax or Duran is traded , I'm not trading players with team control for prospects years away ,  retooling is trading for major league ready plays ...

Here's my proposal , we just finished with the dodgers  , trade one or the other we are retooling not rebuilding

we want right handed outfield ( pages ) , he has impressed me , we need catching but I'm not sure ( rushing ) is the answer but I guess we could gamble that he sticks at catcher  , some lnow more if he will , I hear all kinds of reports , okay there are our 2 top players to trade for , I want at least another healthy  prospect to complete the trade ...

We are trading a strength ( valuable pitching ) with team control to fill a need ( offense and catcher ) with team control , plus anything else we can pry away  .. 

I think alot of people would be happy with this trade and I believe if the front office trades 1 or the other it is going to be Jax because he is 3 years older than Duran  ...

I like Jax,  but I'd do this trade  ...

You aren't getting Pages for a RP. He's put up more than 3 war this year and has more control left than either RP. He's a star. If that was offered, the Twins should say yes, and the Dodgers should fire their GM. 

[Blyleven2011]

Just now, Mike Sixel said:

You aren't getting Pages for a RP. He's put up more than 3 war this year and has more control left than either RP. He's a star. If that was offered, the Twins should say yes, and the Dodgers should fire their GM. 

LA needs pitching desperately  , it's worth asking  and isn't Duran or Jax considered a star , more so Duran  ...

Don't under estimate the urgency the dodgers have to repeat as world series champions ...

If there desperate,  let's see how desperate  ...

[Mike Sixel]

2 minutes ago, Blyleven2011 said:

LA needs pitching desperately  , it's worth asking  and isn't Duran or Jax considered a star , more so Duran  ...

Don't under estimate the urgency the dodgers have to repeat as world series champions ...

If there desperate,  let's see how desperate  ...

I mean, it is possible. He's obliterating his forecasts....but I'd be surprised. Who is their CF when Pages leaves?

[Vanimal46]

If Falvey accepts any of these trades for both Duran and Jax I’m hacking into their network so he can’t file the paperwork in time. 

[darin617]

It's a good way to get a catching prospect. My only concern is that teams will value catchers higher than most positions.

[Doctor Gast]

24 minutes ago, Blyleven2011 said:

I concur , we trade one or the other , do not do a package deal and short change ourselves , if your trading both , do it separatelyand get a better return ....

If 1 of Jax or Duran is traded , I'm not trading players with team control for prospects years away ,  retooling is trading for major league ready plays ...

Here's my proposal , we just finished with the dodgers  , trade one or the other we are retooling not rebuilding

we want right handed outfield ( pages ) , he has impressed me , we need catching but I'm not sure ( rushing ) is the answer but I guess we could gamble that he sticks at catcher  , some lnow more if he will , I hear all kinds of reports , okay there are our 2 top players to trade for , I want at least another healthy  prospect to complete the trade ...

We are trading a strength ( valuable pitching ) with team control to fill a need ( offense and catcher ) with team control , plus anything else we can pry away  .. 

I think alot of people would be happy with this trade and I believe if the front office trades 1 or the other it is going to be Jax because he is 3 years older than Duran  ...

I like Jax,  but I'd do this trade  ...

There are some catchers that are out there. I have doubts about them sticking at catcher, but Rushing isn't one of them. He's a leader & handles pitchers well for being a rookie. He's blocked behind Will Smith at catcher but because of his bat; he can play 1B but is blocked there so they try him in the OF but catcher is his primary position. IMO, a RH hitting cOFer to platoon with our deep LH hitting cOFers isn't a priority.

[Wedman13]

3 hours ago, Cory Engelhardt said:

I know, but if you look at Passan's original quote, he wrote it as the Twins are looking at 2 top 100 prospects if they are to trade either Jax or Duran. Just because the headline here wrote it differently doesn't change that.

I'm not dying on this vine but the article says "the Minnesota Twins are open to trading both Jhoan Duran and Griffin Jax, two of the most electric relievers in baseball, as a package deal. The asking price? Two top-100-caliber prospects."

not a huge deal, but it completely changes the direction of the entire article.  As I was reading the proposals, I'm saying heck no to every one of the proposals for a 'package' of both Duran and Jax.  Not even close.  For one of them it's a great article and worth re-reading.

and yes, I did go back and click the Passan link, but given the article is quoting him that shouldn't be required.  It's all good, I do like and appreciate these articles, and it was a simple mistake.  I'm hoping we sell, sell, sell

[Wedman13]

1 hour ago, SF Twins Fan said:

"teams look at what the Twins are asking for to acquire Duran or Jax -- at least two top-100-caliber prospects -- and aren't inclined to spend a whole lot of time workshopping deals for a top-10 starter this season with two more years of club control"

Directly from the original article.... Asking price is for either not both.  Teams looking to acquire either Duran OR Jax are being asked for two top 100-caliber prospects.

You are quoting ESPN not the TD article we are commenting on

[Guest]

Passan is playing somebody.  Two unproven prospects, even if top-100s, do not equate to two top closers under team control for multiple years.  This is ********.

[Ghost of Kirby Puckett]

5 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

We'll wait for the OP to come back, but this part seems like I'm right? I could be wrong!

 In 2018, the Padres flipped Brad Hand and Adam Cimber to Cleveland for Francisco Mejía, a top-20 global prospect at the time. That deal saw two relievers with similar team control flipped for one high-end return. Now, the Twins may be looking to repeat history, albeit with even greater upside.

So what might a two-for-two top-100 swap look like? 

I just read that exact paragraph on ESPN🤫

[AceWrigley]

Great photo of Jax.

[TheLeviathan]

I am on board to deal both.

But not in the same deal!

[Blyleven2011]

2 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I mean, it is possible. He's obliterating his forecasts....but I'd be surprised. Who is their CF when Pages leaves?

Throw in Bader and  kiersey Jr for defensive purposes and pinch runner  ... 🤣

[Eris]

It is tough to get excited about this as prospect rankings are tossed around as if these have a lot of value. Gabriel Gonzalez was ranked 79 overall when he was acquired with Justin Topa, Darren Bowen, and Anthony DeSclafani + cash in the Jorge Polanco trade. 
 

18 months later Gonzalez he is the 8th ranked Twins prospect and a recent article on TD questions if he has a path to MLB. 
SEA re

[DJL44]

These deals seem fair for Jax. For Duran I want another player. A-ball with upside. Closers demand a premium.

[chpettit19]

Does anybody have an actual comp to suggest the Twins should realistically get more than these deals for either of these guys? Does anybody have an actual comp to suggest the Twins should even get these deals for either of these guys?

Robby Snelling (the big get for Scott last year) was on 1 top 100 list by the time he was dealt last year (MLB's). The other pieces in that deal were highly ranked in their system, but their system was awful because of previous deals (mostly the Soto deal) and graduations (Merrill). And Scott wasn't even the only MLB reliever in that deal. Hoeing is a good reliever who had 4 more years of control when he was included in that deal with Scott. And they combined to fetch Snelling who was a top 100 guy on 1 list and 3 guys who you don't want to look up because they are doing awful this year. 

Is there any other actual comp to suggest that it's realistic to demand more than 2 top 100 pieces for any reliever? Even with 2 more years of control? I very much think the demand of 2 top 100s is a good bar for the Twins to set, but there's so many posts here acting like that's not even enough. Is there a reason to believe that beyond not wanting to trade these guys? And I totally get not wanting to trade the talent we have. But I'll again ask, how else do you propose they improve this team? If they don't trade real talent how do they make the 2026 team better than the 2024 and 2025 teams? And if you're going to trade a piece or 2 of real talent you have to be realistic about the return in that trade. And I'm not sure there's a whole lot of people looking at what deals for relievers have actually been completed recently.

Garrett Crochet was just dealt with 2 years of team control left. And he returned 2 top 100 guys plus 2 other pieces. Do people really think an extra 1/3 of a season of Duran is worth nearly as much as a legitimate ace starting pitcher? That can't actually be people's stance.

[Rod Carews Birthday]

6 hours ago, Matthew Taylor said:

The Twins got 2 top-100 prospects for Jose Berrios. They're not getting 2 top-100 prospects for Duran or Jax. A package deal of them? Yes, they could get two top-100 guys for them.

Two top 100 prospects for a mid rotation starter.  For one year and change.  OK.  One top 100 prospect for the first year and one top 100 prospect for the second year.  Throw in something else for the partial year.  With Duran in particular you have a solid track record of absolute top production that is worth as much as Berrios.  The Cubs got Torres for 2 months of Chapman last year.  If you're going to sell, for goodness sake don't sell for pennies on the dollar. 

[jorgenswest]

They should only accept anunrealistic offer where the overwhelming consensus is an A+ deal for the Twins and BTV doesn’t think it is a fair deal.

They also need to manage this correctly. Let all of the teams fight over Jax. Hang up the phone unless the offer blows them away. Once Jax is traded at a high bar. Raise the bar for Duran and see if a team pays up.

A good outcome is the Twins retain both. A great outcome is they get two 55 FV players for Jax. Players with a future value of #3 starter or plus regular while retaining Duran. If they get a catcher in the deal they could take more risk with future value there. 

If the offer is two FV 50 players I hope they pass. Players don’t start at their future value when they hit the majors. They will need to invest enough at bats or innings into a player playing below average for a few years to realize that future value of average regular or #4 starter. The hope would be by year 3. By the time they do hit that future value we will probably be talking about trading them soon after. They need to shoot higher than many of the players in the top 100 or they need to use their leverage and wait a year.

Meanwhile they really need to focus on the expiring contracts. That is the real work here. Duran wasn’t a top 100 prospect and needed 4 years to get the majors. Ryan wasn’t a top 100 prospect but in his fourth year he is among the best starters in baseball. The real work needs to be identifying those players outside the top 100 and target them in return for Castro, Bader, Coulombe and Paddack.

[chpettit19]

15 minutes ago, Rod Carews Birthday said:

Two top 100 prospects for a mid rotation starter.  For one year and change.  OK.  One top 100 prospect for the first year and one top 100 prospect for the second year.  Throw in something else for the partial year.  With Duran in particular you have a solid track record of absolute top production that is worth as much as Berrios.  The Cubs got Torres for 2 months of Chapman last year.  If you're going to sell, for goodness sake don't sell for pennies on the dollar. 

The Cubs got Chapman for Torres a decade ago, not last year. The Red Sox just gave up 2 top 100 prospects plus 2 dime a dozen prospects for 2 years of Garrett Crochet. He's no mid rotation starter. This idea that Duran or Jax are clearly worth at least 2 top 100 prospects isn't based on anything obvious. The Marlins couldn't get 1 consensus top 100 prospect for Tanner Scott and 4+ years of Hoeing last year.

[SF Twins Fan]

2 hours ago, Wedman13 said:

You are quoting ESPN not the TD article we are commenting on

The person who wrote this article misquoted the original article they linked.  I don't understand what you're not getting....

[Maybe Next Year]

Ok all you gung- ho let’s trade Duran, Jax and Ryan fans. Who the hell are you going to replace them with? We have been in dire need of pitching, have finally got three bonafide major leaguers performing very well and under control for 2-3 more years and we are now going to get rid of them for prospects! Duh! 

[chpettit19]

25 minutes ago, Maybe Next Year said:

Ok all you gung- ho let’s trade Duran, Jax and Ryan fans. Who the hell are you going to replace them with? We have been in dire need of pitching, have finally got three bonafide major leaguers performing very well and under control for 2-3 more years and we are now going to get rid of them for prospects! Duh! 

I'm not "gung-ho" to trade them, but they're not winning with this pitching. They didn't win with them last year. They aren't winning with them this year. How do you propose they win with them next year? They aren't going to have money to bring in some stud free agent. They haven't developed a position player worth a darn so I'm not sure why we should believe next year they're suddenly going to have a bunch of these guys suddenly be stars. 

How do you make this team better? How do you stop the 2026 team from just being the 2024 and 2025 team all over again? What would your plan be if it doesn't include trading any of the pitching?

[Wedman13]

55 minutes ago, SF Twins Fan said:

The person who wrote this article misquoted the original article they linked.  I don't understand what you're not getting....

That the entire article I read was baseless.  Comparing sending both guys in 1 deal for 2 top 100 prospects.  Why in the world would we send 2 sure fire MLB studs with team control for 2 prospects.  I, and most, read the articles, not diving into links.  Not sure why this is such a hot button for you.  OP made a mistake, he/she even compared to another 2 reliever trade.  - mistakes happen.

on the Duran or griffin alone aspect, it would have been a great article.

[Rod Carews Birthday]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

The Cubs got Chapman for Torres a decade ago, not last year. The Red Sox just gave up 2 top 100 prospects plus 2 dime a dozen prospects for 2 years of Garrett Crochet. He's no mid rotation starter. This idea that Duran or Jax are clearly worth at least 2 top 100 prospects isn't based on anything obvious. The Marlins couldn't get 1 consensus top 100 prospect for Tanner Scott and 4+ years of Hoeing last year.

Would you trade 1+ year of Berrios for 2+ years of Duran?  If I think I’m playoff bound and my bullpen is weak like the Dodgers, I would think that makes Duran worth two plus change.  Berrios was a “solid” starter.  Duran is more of a game changer for a team like the Dodgers.