Question of the week: grade the trade deadline

[Brock Beauchamp]

I know fans are prone to overreaction, but I can't give this an F grade. There are interesting pieces, though I'm pretty underwhelmed and unhappy. Time will tell, but as with everything on the Twins for the past two years, the optics are terrible.

[USAFChief]

F.

F*** you Pohlad, F*** you Falvey.

 

[cHawk]

They completely gutted the team. Maybe that’s what they ultimately needed to do, but it’s disappointing nonetheless. The near future seems pretty bleak to me.

[Irishman]

25 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

F.

F*** you Pohlad, F*** you Falvey.

 

Completely agreed with you, USAChief.

[Squirrel]

10 minutes ago, cHawk said:

They completely gutted the team. Maybe that’s what they ultimately needed to do, but it’s disappointing nonetheless. The near future seems pretty bleak to me.

Gutting the team is a strategy for the future. But they gutted the team for pieces that are not about rebuilding anything. I wouldn’t be happy with it either way, but I could live with it if we got returns that were worthy of it. And they also traded pieces that were very wtf. It was a money grab, plain and simple with no real plan for the future. I feel bad for the players who remain. How completely and utterly demoralizing. And every single one of them are probably thinking how can I get out of here.

[Irishman]

This was a real bad day for Twins fans.   We did not deserve this.  Very disappointing!!

[bunsen82]

1. Increased draft capital (likely the biggest win) 

2. Gave away Stewart,  this one was dumb.  This trade was the worst of the bunch.  

3. Varland . . .  I still want to cry.  What did we trade him for in Roden and Rojas,  potentially a very good 1st/Base Outfield bat and a AA pitcher.  On paper it looks ok.  Again though,  It still doesn't feel any better. 

4.  Jax for Bradley.  This one creates a heck of a lot more questions than answers.  Both Jax and Bradleys value have gotten tanked in the last month.  So we traded for a backend starter with 1 plus plus pitch.   He will either be our closer of the future or we have much bigger plans for the tear down, and he is immediately one of our starters and we try to rebuild his value.  Value wise its fair - but a tear down for the future this one is odd as he only has 4 more years of control.  If we are trading Varland why are we taking on Bradley, even if you think the bullpen is a luxury and can be rebuilt.  

5. Duran - for Tait and Abel.  This is by far the highest upside of any of the trades and likely the one most feel is the fairest trade of all.  If we are doing a full rebuild and trade Ryan, Ober and Lopez then Abel immediately slots into the rotation.   With Tait we can have dreams of him turning into someone like a Yadier Molina.   When we wake up though what will we see.  

6. Expirings - Castro, Coloumbe, Bader, Paddack -  We got a flyer on a Catcher Jimenez and got some cash savings.  Value wise the best trade we did,  however it primarily is on the paper side which is just helping to clean the slate for new ownership.  Garret Horn for Coloumbe, Pitcher honestly looks like he may have a chance.  Calculator aside this is one I can get behind.   34 SO in 24 innings.  Castro for Armstrong (flyer), and Ryan Gallagher has had a good season,  and there is something to work with there.  Again a solid trade.     

So from me they get a C.  For the most part they got pretty good value, on someone like Beef Stew they definitely left some value on the table,  don't trade him if thats all you are getting back.  This tells you the return ultimately wasn't the goal.  They ensure we will lose the rest of the season which sucks,  but we should get very good draft picks.  For 2 months of suckage I will take it.  So for where we were already going to be sellers I am ok with this outcome.  The real question is do we trade the starts which if this is a reset/rebuild you have to.  This also makes more sense as to why we picked up a Jax.  He will immediately slot into the rotation,  and is a potential flip, or possibly one of our key cogs for the next couple of year.   I am starting to get flashbacks to the late 2000's watching teams led by Brian Dozier or the late 90's led by Radke.  For the next couple years that is what I am seeing of this team led by Buxton.  I truly hope it leads to something better than the most recent rebuild.  

[bunsen82]

13 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

Gutting the team is a strategy for the future. But they gutted the team for pieces that are not about rebuilding anything. I wouldn’t be happy with it either way, but I could live with it if we got returns that were worthy of it. And they also traded pieces that were very wtf. It was a money grab, plain and simple with no real plan for the future. I feel bad for the players who remain. How completely and utterly demoralizing. And every single one of them are probably thinking how can I get out of here.

Other than the Paddack trade and Correa trade,  the rest weren't about money.  Trading Varland, Stewart and Jax, all those are at minimum or extremely low sellers telling you the firesale is not about the money.  It was to ensure we lose.   Losing was a bigger priority than the maximizing the value we received in trades which is sad.   Now I can see some value,  although rebuilding for 2028-2030, Bradley is a very weird piece to pick up as that is when he is basically up.  Maybe the Twins see someone they can rehab from the Rays,  hopefully its more like Ryan than Emilio Pagan.  

[Squirrel]

11 minutes ago, bunsen82 said:

Other than the Paddack trade and Correa trade,  the rest weren't about money.  Trading Varland, Stewart and Jax, all those are at minimum or extremely low sellers telling you the firesale is not about the money.  It was to ensure we lose.   Losing was a bigger priority than the maximizing the value we received in trades which is sad.   Now I can see some value,  although rebuilding for 2028-2030, Bradley is a very weird piece to pick up as that is when he is basically up.  Maybe the Twins see someone they can rehab from the Rays,  hopefully its more like Ryan than Emilio Pagan.  

I can’t be don’t agree with this take at all. You sell off a team to rebuild. We sold low on a lot of good pieces for a mediocre return. That is not rebuilding. And you said the other day that money was the reason for Duran. This was a seller’s market and we had goods to sell … we came back with less than. This isn’t about rebuilding or retooling. We didn’t get the pieces to do either.

[Brett]

In the aggregate, too much was taken from the active roster. What is Buxton thinking right now? What about all the starters?

The first time Sands comes into a game to hold a 2-1 lead, I think I’ll just turn the TV off and go to bed.

[Possumlad]

B for me. Would've have preferred a strong return on Jax, but can't argue much with any other deal. 

Been very surprised by the hyperbolic board reaction. "Gutted the team," "Tear it down," etc.

Of the guys we traded, only Duran & Jax likely could have been meaningful parts of a winning Twins club in the future.

Duran & Jax = Meaningful pieces of a potential championship squad 

Correa = Aging vet now playing around league average level for $30MM/yr. Good riddance.

Bader & Castro = generically useful bench/utility guys on a good club. Not hard to find replacements in FA or minors. (Castro also a FA after this year). 

Varland, Stewart, Coulombe, France = Bullpen version of Bader & Castro. I could pretend I'm bummed to lose them, but who really cares.

Note that Paddack, Coulombe, Bader, Castro, and France were all FAs after this season.

Overall I'm more excited to watch the team for the remainder of the year than I was a week ago. Let's give the young guys some run & start to build around the next great core.

 

 

[Unwinder]

I'd give it a C+. I think that selling was a very reasonable choice, and it was wise to go all-in. 

I was ready for a rebuild. I was excited to accumulate a lot of good prospects and watch the team grow from the ground up into another competitive window down the line. I was on board! But then came salary-dump moves like Correa, head-scratchers like Stewart for Outman, and filthy betrayals like Varland.

And intellectually, I know that we got reasonable value back on most of the trades, but I envisioned a huge sell-off giving us a loaded farm system, and what I see instead is a few intriguing pieces. My expectations were probably unreasonable. I saw someone point out that we came out a little bit ahead in terms of trade value by most measures. I've seen national sources give us positive grades. But do I see anyone saying "the Twins are going to be scary in three years?" "Five years?" Of course not!

Maybe the sell-off continues in the offseason. Maybe the starting rotation goes next, and brings us a bigger haul. But it's hard to feel confident about that because of the weird "be mediocre NOW" moves like getting Outman and Bradley. It was a very frustrating trade deadline!

[Richie the Rally Goat]

1 hour ago, bunsen82 said:

Other than the Paddack trade and Correa trade,  the rest weren't about money.  Trading Varland, Stewart and Jax, all those are at minimum or extremely low sellers telling you the firesale is not about the money.  It was to ensure we lose.   Losing was a bigger priority than the maximizing the value we received in trades which is sad.   Now I can see some value,  although rebuilding for 2028-2030, Bradley is a very weird piece to pick up as that is when he is basically up.  Maybe the Twins see someone they can rehab from the Rays,  hopefully its more like Ryan than Emilio Pagan.  

Varland was so the Pohlads could make an interest payment on their yacht with France’s 300k left on his contract.

[Battle ur tail off]

F. Flat out Falvey didn't put much effort into this. 

This was a give away. Flat out sell off. Trading controllable pieces for low end prospects. No other team lets go guys like that unless they get a return with studly players. 

Garbage, terrible, embarrassing. 

Not only did they alienate all of their fans, they also put out a bat signal to the rest of the league that they can be taken to the woodshed on all trades, to future Free Agents, there is no reason to ever sign here. 

The ONLY good that can come of this is that the team is sold, and Falvey and Rocco are immediately canned. This would be the only acceptable outcome in my eyes.

[Battle ur tail off]

1 hour ago, Possumlad said:

B for me. Would've have preferred a strong return on Jax, but can't argue much with any other deal. 

Been very surprised by the hyperbolic board reaction. "Gutted the team," "Tear it down," etc.

Of the guys we traded, only Duran & Jax likely could have been meaningful parts of a winning Twins club in the future.

Duran & Jax = Meaningful pieces of a potential championship squad 

Correa = Aging vet now playing around league average level for $30MM/yr. Good riddance.

Bader & Castro = generically useful bench/utility guys on a good club. Not hard to find replacements in FA or minors. (Castro also a FA after this year). 

Varland, Stewart, Coulombe, France = Bullpen version of Bader & Castro. I could pretend I'm bummed to lose them, but who really cares.

Note that Paddack, Coulombe, Bader, Castro, and France were all FAs after this season.

Overall I'm more excited to watch the team for the remainder of the year than I was a week ago. Let's give the young guys some run & start to build around the next great core.

 

 

Duran, Jax, Varland. None of these guys should have been traded unless the return was fantastic. Why? They are CHEAP and under control!! 

Correa? I'm fine moving him but getting zero back needed to be they take everything but like 5 mil. Twins got fleeced on this one certainly. No other team takes returns for guys like this on star players and also pays over a third of their remaining contract. 

The expiring contract guys? Yes, fine move them for whatever you can get. Still seems like the return though was little to nothing for these guys either.

[Squirrel]

I’m going to reiterate something that is being lost. This was a SELLER’S MARKET. We should have gotten better returns and did not, especially for those with years of control left.

And what we got does not signal well to a future rebuild.

I don’t mind selling. It was the right call to make. But how this was done and the returns netted were not great, imo. 

[Twinkie in Deutschland]

The move was a necessity but not enough. The real thing would be if the Pohlads sold the team that will inject talent and bring the fans back to Target Field. Until they do, we will see empty stadiums and boos from Twins fans with I really hope they will do this, a chant every game saying "Sell the Team"

[Mike Sixel]

2 hours ago, bunsen82 said:

1. Increased draft capital (likely the biggest win) 

2. Gave away Stewart,  this one was dumb.  This trade was the worst of the bunch.  

3. Varland . . .  I still want to cry.  What did we trade him for in Roden and Rojas,  potentially a very good 1st/Base Outfield bat and a AA pitcher.  On paper it looks ok.  Again though,  It still doesn't feel any better. 

4.  Jax for Bradley.  This one creates a heck of a lot more questions than answers.  Both Jax and Bradleys value have gotten tanked in the last month.  So we traded for a backend starter with 1 plus plus pitch.   He will either be our closer of the future or we have much bigger plans for the tear down, and he is immediately one of our starters and we try to rebuild his value.  Value wise its fair - but a tear down for the future this one is odd as he only has 4 more years of control.  If we are trading Varland why are we taking on Bradley, even if you think the bullpen is a luxury and can be rebuilt.  

5. Duran - for Tait and Abel.  This is by far the highest upside of any of the trades and likely the one most feel is the fairest trade of all.  If we are doing a full rebuild and trade Ryan, Ober and Lopez then Abel immediately slots into the rotation.   With Tait we can have dreams of him turning into someone like a Yadier Molina.   When we wake up though what will we see.  

6. Expirings - Castro, Coloumbe, Bader, Paddack -  We got a flyer on a Catcher Jimenez and got some cash savings.  Value wise the best trade we did,  however it primarily is on the paper side which is just helping to clean the slate for new ownership.  Garret Horn for Coloumbe, Pitcher honestly looks like he may have a chance.  Calculator aside this is one I can get behind.   34 SO in 24 innings.  Castro for Armstrong (flyer), and Ryan Gallagher has had a good season,  and there is something to work with there.  Again a solid trade.     

So from me they get a C.  For the most part they got pretty good value, on someone like Beef Stew they definitely left some value on the table,  don't trade him if thats all you are getting back.  This tells you the return ultimately wasn't the goal.  They ensure we will lose the rest of the season which sucks,  but we should get very good draft picks.  For 2 months of suckage I will take it.  So for where we were already going to be sellers I am ok with this outcome.  The real question is do we trade the starts which if this is a reset/rebuild you have to.  This also makes more sense as to why we picked up a Jax.  He will immediately slot into the rotation,  and is a potential flip, or possibly one of our key cogs for the next couple of year.   I am starting to get flashbacks to the late 2000's watching teams led by Brian Dozier or the late 90's led by Radke.  For the next couple years that is what I am seeing of this team led by Buxton.  I truly hope it leads to something better than the most recent rebuild.  

I think this is a fair take.......but some of the returns make little sense, IMO. 

3 OFers? Do they believe in ERod, Jenkins, Gonzalez (or Larnach/Wallner/Buxton staying) at all? If so, what were they doing?

I kind of like Horn, IF they move him to RP and are aggressive. If this FO is in charge, he'll struggle as a starter for 3-4 years before they move him.....

The Duran trade may or may not be fair, but the Twins gave up the best player in the trade, and took all the risk. Not a fan. I'd want one more prospect back to even out that risk/reward ratio more.

Trading Stewart for a 28 year old makes no sense. They got too many guys back that are already on the 40 man. Trading Varland? They must really love what they got back, because there is no good reason to deal him at all.

I'm guessing that they just ran out of time to deal Ryan, and didn't deal Jeffers because they need two catchers. 

[nicksaviking]

The complete tear down means this organization failed. It's admirable that they recognize that.

But when there are going to be new owners, new front office and a new manager, the outgoing people, who just acknowledged failure, SHOULD NOT be the one's making these long term decisions. I don't want a new owner, with a new front office, with presumedly a different vision, stuck with guys that Derek Falvey wanted. Outside of the expiring contracts, these deals should never have been his call.

[bunsen82]

2 hours ago, Squirrel said:

I can’t be don’t agree with this take at all. You sell off a team to rebuild. We sold low on a lot of good pieces for a mediocre return. That is not rebuilding. And you said the other day that money was the reason for Duran. This was a seller’s market and we had goods to sell … we came back with less than. This isn’t about rebuilding or retooling. We didn’t get the pieces to do either.

I am not saying the MLB trade calculator is the gospel,  but value wise they really didn't do that bad (actually good value on most trades) other than Stewart.  I starting to be able to rationalize Outman as Buxton insurance for the next few years.  There is a cost to that, so honestly it makes a little more sense.  

So for 2 years of Jax, Duran, 1/2 year of Coloumbe, 5 years of Varland, Stewart 2 years

You got

Bradley SP MLB 4 years(upside to be #2, currently back end starter)

Abel  SP MLB  6 years (mid rotation starter)

Tait C A+ (very young, very good bat - looks to make the MLB as of now a lot of variability on how good)

Roden OF/1st 5 years (great numbers in AAA struggled in MLB will likely get some run next 2 months)

Rojas SP AA (Solid pitching prospect)

Outman OF MLB 3 years (Buxton insurance) 

Garret Horn SP A (Flyer coming off of tommy John)

 

2 Back end to mid rotation starter possibly #2 potential - a Jake Cave wannabe,  possibly our new RF or 1st baseman with real bat potential.  a Catcher with a sky high ceiling but is very far away.  and 2 pitching prospects.   Honestly that is quite a bit of return not only to help the current team or the 2026 team.  The ultimately value of trading the entire bullpen will be highly dependent on Bradley, Abel and Tait.   Maybe Roden flashes and becomes our Rooker.  I think its hard to say much about Rojas or Horn.  

Its hard to say what these players should have been valued at. Relievers tend to blow up just looking at them.  If we had talked at the beginning of this year and I told you we would get a good return on Varland and Coloumbe you likely would have taken it in a heartbeat.  RP are so volatile,  I think Jax and Duran are both good,  I will also say full heartedly,  I full expect 1 of them to struggle and not be what they have been in the next 2 years.  Varland has been very up and down,  doing great this year.  I truly think he figured something out,  I also wouldn't be surprised if teams start hitting him again.  The value is what we got for them,  I really don't think there was any better deals out there.  

We can always rebuild a bullpen.  The one we had was very good but it did take us 2-3 years to build.  Of all things in baseball,  a bullpen is the cheapest and easiest thing to rebuild.  

 

 

[bunsen82]

26 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I think this is a fair take.......but some of the returns make little sense, IMO. 

3 OFers? Do they believe in ERod, Jenkins, Gonzalez (or Larnach/Wallner/Buxton staying) at all? If so, what were they doing?

I kind of like Horn, IF they move him to RP and are aggressive. If this FO is in charge, he'll struggle as a starter for 3-4 years before they move him.....

The Duran trade may or may not be fair, but the Twins gave up the best player in the trade, and took all the risk. Not a fan. I'd want one more prospect back to even out that risk/reward ratio more.

Trading Stewart for a 28 year old makes no sense. They got too many guys back that are already on the 40 man. Trading Varland? They must really love what they got back, because there is no good reason to deal him at all.

I'm guessing that they just ran out of time to deal Ryan, and didn't deal Jeffers because they need two catchers. 

Roden could be 1st baseman.  Mendez is a bit redundant but has a really good hit tool.  It increases the odds we will have OF actually succeed.  Or they thought the value was above average and its all going to be flipped again.  Trading Stewart for Buxton insurance starts to make a lot more sense.  We have traded minor assets each year or spent $3 to $4 million every year.  You traded Stewart for about $9 to $12 million worth - the cost it would take to sign a defensive CF.  

As to Ryan,  no one was willing to overpay.  Please don't take his value the remainder of this season with the team you will be running out there.  

[Danchat]

37 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

3 OFers? Do they believe in ERod, Jenkins, Gonzalez (or Larnach/Wallner/Buxton staying) at all? If so, what were they doing?

I assume they definitely believe in Jenkins and Buxton isn't going anywhere yet... so I think Larnach is toast, Wallner will get chances but maybe he starts getting more DH reps. Outman gets auditioned for the 4th OF/Bader role. I have to think one of these guys - Roden comes to mind first, then Gonzalez - ends up playing 1B because they still have nobody to play that unless Julien/Miranda turn their careers around.

I dunno about Rodriguez, just seems like he can't stay healthy. They probably believe in him to a degree but far less than Jenkins. On Austin Martin, I'm guessing they're close to waiving the white flag on him. He has to show he can be able to handle playing the outfield first.

[Otto von Ballpark]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

They got too many guys back that are already on the 40 man

Is there a looming Rule 5 protection crunch? They now have 5 open spots on the 40-man, will be 4 after Keaschall is activated (then 3 when López is activated), but there is still some filler there that can easily be cut as needed too.

[Craig Arko]

I’m withholding any grades until the new kids at least play a little (for this organization) to show us who they are. Snap judgments are often faulty.

[Mike Sixel]

1 hour ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Is there a looming Rule 5 protection crunch? They now have 5 open spots on the 40-man, will be 4 after Keaschall is activated (then 3 when López is activated), but there is still some filler there that can easily be cut as needed too.

Well, they don't think this is a rebuild, so they disagree with me. But, if you are in rebuild mode, then you don't deal for almost anyone on the 40 man.