Could the Twins Have Landed a Mason Miller-Caliber Return for Jhoan Duran?

[Matthew Taylor]

Image courtesy of Bill Streicher-Imagn Images

At the 2025 trade deadline, two of the most electric arms in baseball were moved within a day of each other. The Twins traded Jhoan Duran to the Phillies. The Athletics traded Mason Miller to the Padres. Both are high-octane relievers who light up the radar gun and make hitters look overmatched. Both had multiple years of team control left. Both brought back strong returns for their clubs, but Miller’s package from San Diego reached another level entirely.

The Miller deal turned heads immediately. Oakland landed Leo De Vries, a consensus top five prospect in all of baseball and the type of player teams dream of building around. They also got Braden Nett, the Padres’ number three prospect, plus Henry Báez and Eduarniel Nuñez, ranked thirteenth and seventeenth in the system. It was an aggressive push from Padres GM AJ Preller, who has never shied away from paying premium prices when he is locked in on a player.

The Twins’ deal for Duran, made a day earlier, brought back Eduardo Tait, ranked 57th overall, and Mick Abel, ranked 92nd. Both are top 100 prospects with upside, Tait as a talented player at a premium position and Abel as a big-armed pitcher who will slot into the rotation. By any measure, that is a strong return. But there was a sense leading into the deadline that the Twins did not need to trade Duran unless the offer was exceptional. Early in talks with Philadelphia, Minnesota asked for Andrew Painter, the Phillies’ top prospect and one of the ten best in the sport. The Phillies made it clear Painter was off the table, and the Twins ultimately pivoted to a package centered around Tait and Abel.

Part of why Miller fetched more comes down to controllability and cost. Miller is still in pre-arbitration, making the league minimum, and will have four years of control after this season. Duran is already in arbitration, earning over four million this year with projected jumps to around seven and ten million in the following seasons. Then there is the raw stuff. Miller strikes out more batters per nine innings compared to Duran (13.9 vs 9.7,) throws even harder (101.2 vs 100.3), and generates more swings and misses (37.4% vs 31.0%). His FIP is stronger despite pitching in a challenging home park. There is also the possibility, however uncertain, that the Padres could try him as a starter again, which could boost his value even higher.

Timing may have played a role as well. We cannot know for sure, but we do know that the deadline itself creates leverage for selling teams, especially those holding premium arms with years of control. The A’s held Miller until the final hours, which may have forced the Padres into their most aggressive offer. The Twins moved Duran a day earlier, before the Miller package was on the board. It is natural to wonder if waiting could have shifted the conversation with Philadelphia, perhaps bringing Painter’s name back into play, or even drawing interest from another team like San Diego if they had not landed Miller.

When you put all the factors together, Miller’s profile simply carried more trade value, and the Athletics maximized it. The Twins still landed two top 100 prospects for a reliever, something many front offices would be thrilled with, and the deal may look even better in a few years depending on how Tait and Abel develop. The question is less about whether Minnesota made a good trade and more about whether there was an opportunity to push it into the “too good to refuse” category. Could the timing have made the difference? Could Painter have been part of the return? Or was this simply the right moment to act with the offer they had?

Miller’s trade will be remembered as one of the biggest bullpen blockbusters in recent years. Duran’s may quietly age into one of the Twins’ smarter plays if their new prospects hit. For now, it is a fascinating case study in market dynamics, perceived value, and the subtle decisions that shape a team’s future.

What do you think? Should the Twins have held onto Duran until the very last moment, or did they make the right call taking the Phillies’ offer when they did? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

View full article

[Cory Engelhardt]

Sears had a lot of value there too. I’d imagine if the twins had included one of their non Lopez/Ryan/Ober starters they would have gotten more back too no?

For now I’m plenty happy with the return

[old nurse]

If Painter was considered to e a top of the rotation pitcher by the Phillies it might have taken throwing in Ryan to get a deal for Painter.  Check back in 5 years to see if San Diego  made a mistake. I would bet not. 

[old nurse]

5 minutes ago, Cory Engelhardt said:

Sears had a lot of value there too. I’d imagine if the twins had included one of their non Lopez/Ryan/Ober starters they would have gotten more back too no?

For now I’m plenty happy with the return

JP is already in El Paso. I would say he is a talent that 3 organizations failed to unlock

[Cory Engelhardt]

1 minute ago, old nurse said:

JP is already in El Paso. I would say he is a talent that 3 organizations failed to unlock

How much more or less valuable do you think he is, league wide, compared to say SWR? Just curious

[chpettit19]

This article appears to have JP Sears going the wrong direction in the trade.

"Oakland landed Leo De Vries, a consensus top five prospect in all of baseball and the type of player teams dream of building around. They also got big league starter JP Sears, who can give a club innings in the rotation, along with Braden Nett, the Padres’ number three prospect, plus Henry Báez and Eduarniel Nuñez, ranked thirteenth and seventeenth in the system."

(Formerly) Oakland didn't get JP Sears, they traded away JP Sears. It's part of why they got more in return than the Twins did. That's a pretty big mistake in an article about why the A's got more in return for Miller than the Twins got for Duran. They got more because Miller has twice the team control left that Duran does, and the A's included a Paddack level starter.

So, one of those prospects can be tied directly to Sears and the rest of the difference is easily accounted for by San Diego getting 2 more years of control on Miller. The return for Miller suggests the Twins got everything they could for Duran.

[Ryan_K]

It was a mistake to not package Bader and Duran, they both went to Philly. Once again the FO chose quantity over quality.

 

They have a "catcher" who doesn't grade well defensively, and a SP who lacks control. Premium RP for half season should get back end top 100 like marlins got for Tanner Scott last year. Each year of control another top 100. They should have added Crawford as the Buxton successor,and the Phillies SS prospect advanced up the middle talent. Those two should have headlined with one more back end top 100.

 

Would also have done Painter and Crawford. They need RP because they and the Mets neither wants to risk a payroll that high getting out in the wild card round.

 

Don't get me started on the other trades.

[Major League Ready]

40 minutes ago, Ryan_K said:

It was a mistake to not package Bader and Duran, they both went to Philly. Once again the FO chose quantity over quality.

They have a "catcher" who doesn't grade well defensively, and a SP who lacks control. Premium RP for half season should get back end top 100 like marlins got for Tanner Scott last year. Each year of control another top 100. They should have added Crawford as the Buxton successor,and the Phillies SS prospect advanced up the middle talent. Those two should have headlined with one more back end top 100.

Would also have done Painter and Crawford. They need RP because they and the Mets neither wants to risk a payroll that high getting out in the wild card round.

Don't get me started on the other trades.

The Twins didn't just overlook packaging Duran and Bader.  Philly or any other team trading prospects is going to do everything they can to avoid trading their very best prospects.  They are not going to combine two deals for the benefit the other team.  They have options like trading for Duran and getting an outfielder from another team.  It makes no sense from Philly's perspective to combine the deals and give away their best prospect.  In other words, it's very likely they did not choose what they got over getting painter.  It's far more likely Painter was never an option. 

[TopGunn#22]

I don't dislike what we got for Duran, yet I also questioned whether it should have been more.  Supposedly, the Twins were the guys that had the leverage in any deal.  Teams wanted OUR players for a playoff and possible World Series run.  

Mason IS worth more than Duran.  The strikeout rate is the primary indicator.  Duran was having the better year, but despite all his velocity and "stuff" Duran just doesn't generate eye popping strikeout rates.  At least he hasn't this season and last season.  

Closers with stuff like Duran and Miller always return higher value, especially at the deadline.  They are probably at least 25% more valuable at the deadline as the pennant races come into sharper focus.  BBTV rated Duran's value alone slightly higher than Tait & Abel.  While not a perfect comparison it does convincingly illustrate that the Twins SHOULD have gotten more for Duran.

After the trade, I was the poster who suggested the Twins should have included Bader in the original deal for Crawford.  Once again, THIS Twins FO gets bedazzled with quantity over quality.  I've railed about that in past posts over signing multiple "Shoemaker" type pitchers instead of just signing one SP who can actually pitch.  The constant dart throwing of this FO is frustrating.  Ryan_K also makes this point effectively. 

Were the Twins ever in conversation with the Padres regarding Duran?  The A's may have included JP Sears, but what if the Twins had included SWR with Duran?  Could we have landed the #3 overall prospect in baseball (DeVries)??  And the A's got several MORE players from the Padres in ADDITION to the #3 overall prospect.  There is no question the Twins sold low on Duran.

Sending Brock Stewart to the Dodgers and only getting James Outman in return was returning negative value for a bullpen arm that is solid in high leverage situations.   

I will also acknowledge that I have pointed out the absurd level of LH hitting corner outfielders the Twins have stockpiled, and yet I wanted to add Bader to the deal to get Crawford...another LH hitting OF.  The difference in Crawford is that he's a pure CF and with questions whether Jenkins or E-Rod remaining in CF and Kiersey no longer having a future with the Twins, Crawford made sense to me in that equation.  

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, TopGunn#22 said:

I don't dislike what we got for Duran, yet I also questioned whether it should have been more.  Supposedly, the Twins were the guys that had the leverage in any deal.  Teams wanted OUR players for a playoff and possible World Series run.  

Mason IS worth more than Duran.  The strikeout rate is the primary indicator.  Duran was having the better year, but despite all his velocity and "stuff" Duran just doesn't generate eye popping strikeout rates.  At least he hasn't this season and last season.  

Closers with stuff like Duran and Miller always return higher value, especially at the deadline.  They are probably at least 25% more valuable at the deadline as the pennant races come into sharper focus.  BBTV rated Duran's value alone slightly higher than Tait & Abel.  While not a perfect comparison it does convincingly illustrate that the Twins SHOULD have gotten more for Duran.

After the trade, I was the poster who suggested the Twins should have included Bader in the original deal for Crawford.  Once again, THIS Twins FO gets bedazzled with quantity over quality.  I've railed about that in past posts over signing multiple "Shoemaker" type pitchers instead of just signing one SP who can actually pitch.  The constant dart throwing of this FO is frustrating.  Ryan_K also makes this point effectively. 

Were the Twins ever in conversation with the Padres regarding Duran?  The A's may have included JP Sears, but what if the Twins had included SWR with Duran?  Could we have landed the #3 overall prospect in baseball (DeVries)??  And the A's got several MORE players from the Padres in ADDITION to the #3 overall prospect.  There is no question the Twins sold low on Duran.

Sending Brock Stewart to the Dodgers and only getting James Outman in return was returning negative value for a bullpen arm that is solid in high leverage situations.   

I will also acknowledge that I have pointed out the absurd level of LH hitting corner outfielders the Twins have stockpiled, and yet I wanted to add Bader to the deal to get Crawford...another LH hitting OF.  The difference in Crawford is that he's a pure CF and with questions whether Jenkins or E-Rod remaining in CF and Kiersey no longer having a future with the Twins, Crawford made sense to me in that equation.  

This is a perfect example of the problem with BBTV. It isn't real life. The other team has a say in things, too. Dave Dombrowski is a pretty smart dude. He doesn't look at player value in binary terms like BBTV and just add up "value points," He wasn't going to go from Hendry Mendez and a 16-year-old complete lottery ticket to a top 100 prospect because they combined the trades. That isn't realistic. And just switching out Tait or Abel for Crawford and saying its a big win is assuming Crawford is a significantly better prospect than either of those other 2. I don't see any reason to believe that. Which is a great example of the problem with top 100 rankings. The Difference between the #25 prospect and the #100 prospect is miniscule. Especially because if you look at a different list most of the prospects are all over the place on the different lists. It's a matter of taste and what each person prefers when ranking the players. But they're all the same type of prospects in terms of future outlook, unless you're talking about the top 10 overall type guys.

You also fail to address the fact that Miller had 2 more years of control than Duran. Miller had more value than Duran. If the Twins wanted De Vries they were going to have to give up more than SWR and Duran. Is that really what you wanted them to do? For 1 prospect? Man, that kid better not miss.

 

[old nurse]

1 hour ago, Cory Engelhardt said:

How much more or less valuable do you think he is, league wide, compared to say SWR? Just curious

League average ERA for pitchers is 4.12.  Of the pitchers who have 80 IP, there are only 66 pitchers who have above average ERAs. League wide there is a dearth of pitching. Nobody is going to beat down the door for either of them. Somebody though will need one of them. Service time wise, they are about the same. Sears is 4 or 5 years older. He gives up more runs per game. At 24, teams could still think SWR can improve enough to league average. I doubt the same would be thought of Sears

[Trov]

There was no rumors of Duran to San Diego that I recall.  So to say we could have got a similar return is flawed right there.  The phillies said no way on Painter off the bat.  So if he was a no from the start hard to say we could have got more.  Now, if we held strong and Miller went to Phillies and painter was included then we can compare.  Yes, league says Padres gave up a top 5 talent, but possible Padres do not value him as highly as the league did.  Also, Miller have 4 years of control is huge, because if he maintains his value, Padres could even look to flip him on a deadline deal or off season in a couple of years and recoup some prospect value.  Duran that will be unlikely. 

I also feel viable catchers are very hard to fill so if Tait can do it, then he may hold higher value then the SS. 

[Doctor Gast]

5 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

This is a perfect example of the problem with BBTV. It isn't real life. The other team has a say in things, too. 

BBTV is like most any other stat, you take it with a grain of salt, it's not be all, end all. Most stats are not real life. Most stats don't include human intangibles, underlying conditions & IMO, biased.

BBTV is only used to gauge players' trade value.  Yet on the website, I deny maybe 95% of all Twins trade offers (that are not mine). Just because the sum of both sides are equal doesn't mean it's a good trade. IMO, there are some hype (positive or negative) linked to players who are involved in trades that needs to be sifted through. Needs should also be involved in trades that control leverage.

[chpettit19]

3 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

BBTV is like most any other stat, you take it with a grain of salt, it's not be all, end all. Most stats are not real life. Most stats don't include human intangibles, underlying conditions & IMO, biased.

BBTV is only used to gauge players' trade value.  Yet on the website, I deny maybe 95% of all Twins trade offers (that are not mine). Just because the sum of both sides are equal doesn't mean it's a good trade. IMO, there are some hype (positive or negative) linked to players who are involved in trades that needs to be sifted through. Needs should also be involved in trades that control leverage.

BBTV isn't a stat. Just like prospect rankings aren't a stat. And the BBTV value of prospects is based on things like prospect rankings. Fans treating it like an actual stat is part of the problem. It's a projection. A prediction. Preseason projections of stats aren't stats either, they are projections. Predictions. Not stats. You are not describing a stat. A stat, by nature, is unbiased. It is a number that is dictated by mathematics and data. Statistic: noun, a fact or piece of data from a study of a large quantity of numerical data. A player's OPS, BA, HR total, etc. isn't biased (many of the defensive numbers are biased as they are based on human judgements so should be looked at differently). At all. It's based on hard data. That is "real life." Attempting to judge intangibles and underlying conditions is where bias comes in because that isn't based on hard data, it's based on human judgement. And humans are, by nature, biased. Your eye test is biased. Your judgement is biased. All of ours are. The argument that stats can't measure everything is a good argument. The argument that stats are biased is not. But BBTV isn't really a stat.

BBTV is one group of people's projection of players future production compared to their future cost. That's it. It is nothing but bias because it is all human subjectivity. They tweak the numbers based on their own personal estimations of things because, for example, there is no statistical way to project the MLB production of a 16-year-old DSL pitcher, but yet here we are with people saying the Twins could've done better than the separate Bader and Duran trades that included exactly that because BBTV will give them a trade value for such a kid. There's no way to objectively evaluate the trade value of any player for all 30 teams. Because, as you point out, "needs should also be involved." Willi Castro was worth more to the Cubs than he was to the White Sox at the trade deadline. There is no binary trade value number for any player. BBTV is not real life and it is not an overly useful site, because there is no way for it to take into consideration the needs, budgets, and goals of all 30 teams and adjust accordingly. Beyond the very basic fact that it's simply a guess by the people who run the site.

[bunsen82]

I feel like people have just gone to a website like the mlb trade calculator and said why did the A's seem to get so much value for Miller and Sears.  As mentioned Miller had 2 more years of control.  Its like if Varland had been an elite closer and we traded him now.  The second is you are getting multiple years of a controllable solid pitcher in Sears.  Almost all the value is tied to De Vries.  

How players are ranked or valued is subjective.  I would say a bit of the shine has come off De Vries and he is not the player that is worth a 50 value in the trade calculator.  Just for an apples to apples comparison, since the trade De Vries has a .200/.286/.286 slash line in 3 game.   Tait,  who many are concerned with the risk we are taking with Tait who is also at A+ ball,  has .242/.265/.364 slash lines.  Both are very good prospects,  and extremely young for their levels.   So would we rather have given up a lot more value,  likely 2 different players to San Diego with all the value tied to Devries.  Or are we better off with the trades of Duran and Varland (pretty similar value to Miller and Sears) - that netted us mlb player Rodan, AAA Pitcher Abel,  AAA Pitcher Rojas, and A+ player Tait.  We still have a high risk young prospect in Tait that is a very similar prospect to De Vries.  That is a much better trade haul in retrospect than just De Vries and the risk is much more spread out.   

So in reality I feel like we got the value for Duran.  Its just the Miller trade is not an apples to apples comparison.   

[bunsen82]

16 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

 

BBTV is one group of people's projection of players future production compared to their future cost. That's it. It is nothing but bias because it is all human subjectivity. They tweak the numbers based on their own personal estimations of things because, for example, there is no statistical way to project the MLB production of a 16-year-old DSL pitcher, but yet here we are with people saying the Twins could've done better than the separate Bader and Duran trades that included exactly that because BBTV will give them a trade value for such a kid. There's no way to objectively evaluate the trade value of any player for all 30 teams. 

I think the values especially for the minor league teams is very subjective and they are not updated frequently.  So you end up with a situation of Marek Houston, Kaelen Culpepper, Alen Roden, Brandon Winokur all being valued fairly similarly between 8 and 15 points.  Gabriel Gonzalez is valued at 3.8. Then you have Taj Bradley at 31.9.   It is all extremely subjective.  Of those players on how I expect them to bring value to the twins this is my rankings.  Culpepper, Winokur, Gonzalez (severely underrated), Abel, Bradley, Houston Roden.   I would leave Roden where he is and I would likely have Culpepper at a value of around 20 then gradually step down to the rest of the prospects.   It is extremely subjective and changes drastically with year to year performance.  Last year Gonzalez struggled,  this year he looks like he could be a legit MLB star.   The variability is extreme with these prospects.  

[bunsen82]

On 8/10/2025 at 12:01 PM, TopGunn#22 said:

 

After the trade, I was the poster who suggested the Twins should have included Bader in the original deal for Crawford.  Once again, THIS Twins FO gets bedazzled with quantity over quality.  I've railed about that in past posts over signing multiple "Shoemaker" type pitchers instead of just signing one SP who can actually pitch.  The constant dart throwing of this FO is frustrating.  Ryan_K also makes this point effectively. 

Were the Twins ever in conversation with the Padres regarding Duran?  The A's may have included JP Sears, but what if the Twins had included SWR with Duran?  Could we have landed the #3 overall prospect in baseball (DeVries)??  And the A's got several MORE players from the Padres in ADDITION to the #3 overall prospect.  There is no question the Twins sold low on Duran.

 

No offense this is the year that the Twins did exactly what you asked for Quality over Quantity.  Bradley for Jax straight up.  2 top 100 prospects for Duran.  2 quality prospects for Varland even if post hype.  Heck Bader for Mendez,  with just a Villoria flyer,  is pretty close to a 1 to 1.    Other than De Vries, we got the #2, #3, and #6 best prospects traded at the deadline - and that doesn't take into consideration Roden or Bradley.     

Honestly I wouldn't want all are value tied into De Vries.  I think he has a ton of risk, and hasn't shown the numbers that tell me he is a top 5 prospect,  that will be a multi year all star and possible hall of famer value. 

[USAFChief]

We're using 3 game slash lines now to compare values?

 

[twinstalker]

Miller's "value" was more about his perceived ability to start.

[Jacksson]

Twins DID NOT get enough back for Duran, a premier, controllable closer.  Tait may have potential, but he is at least 3 - 4 years away.  Got a lottery ticket player and a redundant LH hitting OF for a premier defensive CF who is having a very strong year with the bat (Bader)= not enough back there either.  Check what SF got from NYY for Doval and he does not compare to Duran.  Should have gotten more for Jax.  Getting Outman for Stewart is a just plain JOKE (on us).  Why didn't we get the blocked 1B, Long back from the Cubbies in the Castro trade?  Why all the LH hitting OF when the MLB Manager is Platoon Happy?