Twins/Mariners & Twins/Phillies Deadline Nuggets from Bobby Nightengale

[Matthew Taylor]

In his latest article, Bobby Nightengale reported that the Twins had talks with the Mariners at the trade deadline, but a deal never came together because Seattle was unwilling to include two of their best prospects. Minnesota’s ask? Two top-100 prospects.

Nightengale also noted that the Twins actually preferred 18-year-old catcher Eduardo Tait over Phillies shortstop prospect Aidan Miller. The hesitation with Miller, ranked #17 in baseball by MLB Pipeline, came from concerns about his ability to stick at shortstop long-term. Miller, currently in Double A, has posted a .740 OPS this season. The Twins felt Tait carried more upside and made him their request from Philadelphia instead.

You can read the rest of Bobby’s piece here.

What do you think, do you like Tait over Miller?

View full rumor

[lecroy24fan]

Catching depth was badly needed.

[Mike Sixel]

If they could have had Ford, I'd rather have him than Tait and Abel, not even close. His timeline matches Jeffers still being here and Jenkins and Culpeper arriving. Can't read the article.

[Dman]

If Miller wasn't going to stick at short then Yeah I like Tait better.  Also watching Tait more he has a pretty swing and with his exit velocities he should do some damage with the bat.  I don't know if he sticks behind the plate or not, but if he does then just getting him alone would make this a good trade for the Twins.  Getting Abel too would be a steal.  Long way to go though so won't know on Tait for a while.

I am curious as to what Seattle had to offer.  I wonder if they didn't want to include Ford?  It would seem that would have been a must for the Twins.  I would have done Ford and Sloan or Farmello even though they are further away.  Sloan would have looked good with Soto, Hill, Bohorquez and Barr coming up.  That would have been a nice wave of young arms coming up together.  If not Sloan then Farmello might be an answer for center field near the end of Buxton's contract.  He could also stick in left or right if he moved early.

I have to assume the Twins liked a near ready starter in Abel with a young bat that had elite bat speed and a strong arm for the catcher position.  If they plan on Moving one of Pablo or Ryan that might have made more sense to have a near term starter whose close to ready.

There definitely must have been some tension because it was reported that Philly backed of doing a Duran deal in favor of trying to get Jax.  Not sure if that was Seattle upping their offer or Twins playing hardball, but it didn't look easy to get their two top 100 prospects for Duran.

[bunsen82]

I have  said if the Twins wanted Tait, they have high expectations.  This shows how much they wanted him. So was Philly balking on adding Abel, adding Tait or did the Twins want more?  

[Chembry]

Wonder if the Twins could have got Harry Ford and Tyler Locklear from Seattle for Duran.  That would have solved C and 1B going forward.

Edit: I was talking to a friend of mine who lives in the pacific NW and a big Mariners fan.  He was surprised that Ford wasn't traded.  He doesn't believe Ford will ever play for the Mariners, due to Raleigh.

8 hours ago, bunsen82 said:

I have  said if the Twins wanted Tait, they have high expectations.  This shows how much they wanted him. So was Philly balking on adding Abel, adding Tait or did the Twins want more?  

Twins were trying to get Painter.  Maybe that was smoke and mirrors knowing Philly wasn’t going to let Painter go.  My guess is Philly said, instead of Painter and Tait, we can give you Abel and Tait…Pure speculation on my part.  It was widely publicized that the Twins asked for Painter though.

[twinstalker]

Last fall I was convinced Aidan Miller was a star.  I look at those same stats now and realize the K rate was never going to allow that.  It's truly a sliding scale based on the type of hitter you're looking at.

[nicksaviking]

I don't have high hopes for either Tait or Miller, so in my book it's a wash I guess.

Trades are getting asinine these days though. 80% of the time the team getting the star player wins the trade over the team getting the prospects, yet, the last several years the teams selling the prospects are tightening their grips on their "top" guys. And of course, it's usually the big market clubs buying and the teams who cry poor selling. The Twins' 'Everything must go!!!!' fire sale absolutely did not help remedy this inequality for the non-big market clubs.

[USAFChief]

12 hours ago, lecroy24fan said:

Catching depth was badly needed.

The Twins didn't add catching depth,

They added lotto tickets that might be catching depth by 2028.

[Mike Sixel]

44 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

I don't have high hopes for either Tait or Miller, so in my book it's a wash I guess.

Trades are getting asinine these days though. 80% of the time the team getting the star player wins the trade over the team getting the prospects, yet, the last several years the teams selling the prospects are tightening their grips on their "top" guys. And of course, it's usually the big market clubs buying and the teams who cry poor selling. The Twins' 'Everything must go!!!!' fire sale absolutely did not help remedy this inequality for the non-big market clubs.

All this. 

[Danchat]

2 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

I don't have high hopes for either Tait or Miller, so in my book it's a wash I guess.

Trades are getting asinine these days though. 80% of the time the team getting the star player wins the trade over the team getting the prospects, yet, the last several years the teams selling the prospects are tightening their grips on their "top" guys. And of course, it's usually the big market clubs buying and the teams who cry poor selling. The Twins' 'Everything must go!!!!' fire sale absolutely did not help remedy this inequality for the non-big market clubs.

The reluctance for teams moving their prospects juxtaposed with looking back on old prospect lists and draft classes and seeing how many of these guys fizzled out... I don't get it. Heck, if you delve back into the archives and look at the discussions involving trading for Troy Tulowitzski and Trevor Story for example, you'll notice the trade packages we discussed look bad in hindsight because of how many of the prospects ended up being duds.

[nicksaviking]

11 minutes ago, Danchat said:

The reluctance for teams moving their prospects juxtaposed with looking back on old prospect lists and draft classes and seeing how many of these guys fizzled out... I don't get it. Heck, if you delve back into the archives and look at the discussions involving trading for Troy Tulowitzski and Trevor Story for example, you'll notice the trade packages we discussed look bad in hindsight because of how many of the prospects ended up being duds.

Yeah, it's almost beyond belief how often these prospect hauls fizzle out completely. I get that prospects are fun and shiny and new and it's easy to see how fans like us can get fooled without going back and looking at the track records, but how do analytically inclined front office personnel who are getting paid to figure this stuff out continually get fleeced? I can't imagine Derek Falvey is actively thinking, 'Sure, I'll give up 2.5 years of Duran for a 20% chance that one of the players I get back will be a useful MLB player.' 

[Mike Sixel]

17 minutes ago, Danchat said:

The reluctance for teams moving their prospects juxtaposed with looking back on old prospect lists and draft classes and seeing how many of these guys fizzled out... I don't get it. Heck, if you delve back into the archives and look at the discussions involving trading for Troy Tulowitzski and Trevor Story for example, you'll notice the trade packages we discussed look bad in hindsight because of how many of the prospects ended up being duds.

Money. It is all about money. 

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, nicksaviking said:

Yeah, it's almost beyond belief how often these prospect hauls fizzle out completely. I get that prospects are fun and shiny and new and it's easy to see how fans like us can get fooled without going back and looking at the track records, but how do analytically inclined front office personnel who are getting paid to figure this stuff out continually get fleeced? I can't imagine Derek Falvey is actively thinking, 'Sure, I'll give up 2.5 years of Duran for a 20% chance that one of the players I get back will be a useful MLB player.' 

That's why he insisted on two guys, instead of just taking one higher ranked guy.....more darts. (I don't agree, btw).

[nicksaviking]

27 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

That's why he insisted on two guys, instead of just taking one higher ranked guy.....more darts. (I don't agree, btw).

I'm thinking there's also a lot of 'Well those guys failed, but I'm better at this, so this will work out' when it comes to these kind of evaluations.

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, nicksaviking said:

I'm thinking there's also a lot of 'Well those guys failed, but I'm better at this, so this will work out' when it comes to these kind of evaluations.

Truth.

[bunsen82]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

That's why he insisted on two guys, instead of just taking one higher ranked guy.....more darts. (I don't agree, btw).

The only player that was a one dart player was Painter and his value is twice that of Duran.  In this article they said they like Tait better than Miller- there was no trade with the Phillies that could have been a 1 for 1 and it appears Philly was offering more than anyone else.   We did go the 1 for 1 trade in Jax for Bradley,  and not many here are impressed with it.  I honestly think of all the trades that one is the most likely to have surplus value.   I think Jax is struggling and we took a pitcher who has more years available and is still a starter.  Its all a crap shoot though.  Who knows when you find a Duran in deal for a utility player.  Or that we had a #1 type pitcher in Ryan when we traded Cruz.   Sometimes things work out, sometimes they don't.   

[Mike Sixel]

23 minutes ago, bunsen82 said:

The only player that was a one dart player was Painter and his value is twice that of Duran.  In this article they said they like Tait better than Miller- there was no trade with the Phillies that could have been a 1 for 1 and it appears Philly was offering more than anyone else.   We did go the 1 for 1 trade in Jax for Bradley,  and not many here are impressed with it.  I honestly think of all the trades that one is the most likely to have surplus value.   I think Jax is struggling and we took a pitcher who has more years available and is still a starter.  Its all a crap shoot though.  Who knows when you find a Duran in deal for a utility player.  Or that we had a #1 type pitcher in Ryan when we traded Cruz.   Sometimes things work out, sometimes they don't.   

There were other teams that might have had one player..... We have no idea what was offered. 

And, it's not true it's all a crap shoot at all. There are some players obviously better than others. 

[bunsen82]

10 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

There were other teams that might have had one player..... We have no idea what was offered. 

And, it's not true it's all a crap shoot at all. There are some players obviously better than others. 

They took the deal.  Meaning in their minds this was the better value.  The only other team that was mentioned towards the end was the Mariners.  Its a crapshoot because we have had players like Ryan and Duran pan out while others like Martin, Gomez ect really didn't pan out for what we were expecting.   You never know when a player is going to get injured or just not perform like you expect.  I thought Lewis would be a multi year all star.  At this point I am not sure he will be in the plans in a year or two.   Right now it appears you are still salty about the deadline.   

[Elliot]

Just a thought to add to this discussion. Johan Duran, the established stud player, was a trade deadline prospect the Twins received for Eduardo Escobar in 2018. That makes the talk about prospects acquired at the deadline for an established player never working out seem a little weak. 

[bunsen82]

5 hours ago, USAFChief said:

The Twins didn't add catching depth,

They added lotto tickets that might be catching depth by 2028.

Tait as our #2 prospect on MLB should not be considered a lotto ticket.  

If you want to call Jimenez a lotto ticket, fine.   We got him for Paddack though, so not immense value going away.  To me he looks like an extremely solid defensive catcher, who all in all is doing ok at A ball.  The OBP is great is SSS (.467),  would just like to see more power.   

[DasBat]

I personally would have went with Miller.  I think Tait moves off catcher really reducing his value

[bunsen82]

2 hours ago, DasBat said:

I personally would have went with Miller.  I think Tait moves off catcher really reducing his value

2 for 4 with a Homer. From what I’ve gleaned he looks pretty good behind the plate.  So far there is nothing indicating the Twins intend to move him off the plate. Hell we put Gasper behind the dish tonight and he doesn’t know how to backhand a ball.  
 

for further follow-up, his blocking has improved a lot this year, pitch framing will not be as a big of a deal, but he has also improved on that front this year as well.  His pop and arm are pretty close to mlb ready.  

[SaberNerd]

This FO has drafted guys who could hit and worked on catching rather than the other way around. Worked with Jeffers, who most had as a 1B out of college

[jorgenswest]

On 8/11/2025 at 7:34 PM, Mike Sixel said:

If they could have had Ford, I'd rather have him than Tait and Abel, not even close. His timeline matches Jeffers still being here and Jenkins and Culpeper arriving. Can't read the article.

Ford wasn’t mentioned in the article and probably why the Twins had to turn to Philadelphia. Seattle is wise to keep Ford. They will need him to catch because Raleigh’s bat is too valuable and he is getting close to 30. I think we will see Raleigh as the secondary catcher with his bat in the line up every day when Ford is ready.

[Chembry]

19 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

Ford wasn’t mentioned in the article and probably why the Twins had to turn to Philadelphia. Seattle is wise to keep Ford. They will need him to catch because Raleigh’s bat is too valuable and he is getting close to 30. I think we will see Raleigh as the secondary catcher with his bat in the line up every day when Ford is ready.

I recently listened to a podcast on Twins daily where they mentioned Seattle offered Harry Ford and Jurrangelo Cijntje (switch pitcher who hits 97-99 with both arms). 

Ford and Tait are quite different prospects.  Ford is a guy that will hit for average over power and might steal 20-30 bases bases, while Tait has that 30-40 HR/year upside with a big arm behind the plate.  I saw he recently hit a couple balls with exit velocities at 108 and 116 mph...That pretty impressive for an 18 year old.  Let's just hope he keeps on the trajectory he is on.  

Personally I would have liked if we could have received Harry Ford and Tyler Locklear.  Locklear would lock down 1B for a while.  He went to AZ in the Eugenio Suarez trade.  in 11 games with AZ since the trade, he is hitting .220 with 2 HR.  He strikes out at a decent clip (~25%), but also has that 30-40 HR upside and draws a lot of walks (~13% walk rate).    

[jorgenswest]

44 minutes ago, Chembry said:

I recently listened to a podcast on Twins daily where they mentioned Seattle offered Harry Ford and Jurrangelo Cijntje (switch pitcher who hits 97-99 with both arms). 

Ford and Tait are quite different prospects.  Ford is a guy that will hit for average over power and might steal 20-30 bases bases, while Tait has that 30-40 HR/year upside with a big arm behind the plate.  I saw he recently hit a couple balls with exit velocities at 108 and 116 mph...That pretty impressive for an 18 year old.  Let's just hope he keeps on the trajectory he is on.  

Personally I would have liked if we could have received Harry Ford and Tyler Locklear.  Locklear would lock down 1B for a while.  He went to AZ in the Eugenio Suarez trade.  in 11 games with AZ since the trade, he is hitting .220 with 2 HR.  He strikes out at a decent clip (~25%), but also has that 30-40 HR upside and draws a lot of walks (~13% walk rate).    

Did TD give their source for the offer? There was a lot of speculation about the Mariners and Dodgers but I haven’t seen anything sourced back to a quote from the Mariners or Twins. 

[Chembry]

1 minute ago, jorgenswest said:

Did TD give their source for the offer? There was a lot of speculation about the Mariners and Dodgers but I haven’t seen anything sourced back to a quote from the Mariners or Twins. 

I don't recall

[jorgenswest]

9 minutes ago, Chembry said:

I don't recall

The Mariners have been the team building the bullpen from trades for minor leaguers and failed starters. They even traded away their closer to Arizona when in a pennant race. Sign Sewald to the minimum off of waivers. Develop him as a closer. Trade him while in a pennant race for prospects. It would be an abrupt turnabout in process to be on the other end of that deal. 

[Chembry]

6 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

The Mariners have been the team building the bullpen from trades for minor leaguers and failed starters. They even traded away their closer to Arizona when in a pennant race. Sign Sewald to the minimum off of waivers. Develop him as a closer. Trade him while in a pennant race for prospects. It would be an abrupt turnabout in process to be on the other end of that deal. 

I am trying to find the video...I just watched it last night