What the Jorge Polanco Trade Can Teach Us About the Minnesota Twins’ Upcoming Offseason

[old nurse]

16 hours ago, Sjoski said:

Isn't Seattle considering it a huge trade win? Guess it comes down to what you consider a win? 

Winning ball games = Seattle's POV

Saving $$$ = Twins POV

So is it a trade win when Seattle declined the option on his contract. No other team outbid Seattles ow offer of 7 million so Seattle resigned him.

[old nurse]

10 hours ago, mluebker said:

Of course he is. A salary dump has the same result as, “Oops, he’s due for a raise. Get him on the ejection seat!” Maybe they do him a favor by giving him an extension, but as soon as they do, the countdown clock starts ticking. He’s gone.

So what does that make Seattle who declined Polanco’s option, then resigned him when no other team outbid their paltry offer?

[old nurse]

13 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

How do you expect any team to build a roster other than prospects? I'm truly baffled by the prospect hate on this site. 

The tone here over the years has shifted.  Hate on everything is in.  You are just going to have to change your ways, Sorry your adopted town is now a hellhole of a burning  inferno.  

[rv78]

13 hours ago, RpR said:

Ah, Wallner, Joey Gallo with Julien's glove! 😆

;BUT, what about Keirsey Jr.and McCusker, they were some of your wonder boys.

Wallner career = .231BA .349OBP cost:league minimum

Gallo career = ,194BA .319OBP cost:$11Million

Not even close. 

Only an idiot would spend $11m on a player like Gallo when the younger Wallner forced him out of the lineup when given the chance. Keep defending those worthless veterans that Falvey brings in. 

[Sjoski]

26 minutes ago, old nurse said:

So is it a trade win when Seattle declined the option on his contract. No other team outbid Seattles ow offer of 7 million so Seattle resigned him

Actually sounds like the exact opposite of what the Twins do. They trade players NOT to play for them.

Whose paying Carlos Correa over 10 million a years to play somewhere other than Minnesota?

[Major League Ready]

What was the cost of trading Polanco? That's easy.  1 season at .3 WAR.  He was then non-tendered and Seattle’s contractual control terminated.  Any team could have then signed Polanco so the cost was 1 year at .3 WAR.  We can say the Twins should have signed him as a free agent but anything that happened after Seattle non-tendered him is the result of a different decision.  Who here thinks Cleveland, Tampa or Milwaukee would have opted for a good prospect over what Polanco produced if they had a crystal ball and knew exactly what was going to happen?  

[Riverbrian]

If the Twins can develop GG into a major league ball player. The Twins will win the trade. 

Until GG is a major league ball player or if they fail to develop him. The trade will just go into history as an organizational pivot point. 

At the time of the trade... I was asking the question. Is it better to have one real good player or 3 lesser players?

At the time of the trade... I didn't know the answer to that question that I was asking... I was just wondering out loud.

I'm not wondering anymore. I stopped pondering that question even after a rather horrific 2024 season in Seattle for Polanco. There is no doubt in my mind... One real good player shouldn't be broken up to fill multiple holes with multiple lesser pieces. 

I don't care what Polanco hit in 2024. There was no question he was a hitter at the time of the trade and the best player involved in that deal. 

Lesson for the upcoming offseason? Here's the big lesson.

Players Ping Pong from year to year. You think a player is dead in 2024. It means nothing in regards to 2025.

Jorge Polanco didn't lose opportunity despite the down year. As we declare who is dead based on 2025... we prepare for 2026 and who gets opportunity. 

 

[Doctor Wu]

I liked Polanco as a Twin and am totally thrilled with how he is playing for Seattle in the post-season. But I don't shed any tears over that trade at all. Polanco had an injury history, and we had players to replace him, and I think the Twins did well to get as much as they did for him in that trade. DeScalfani MIGHT have been a good piece for the rotation, but injuries quickly nixed that idea, as they did for Topa in the bullpen for the most part. But then again, Polanco struggled last season and didn't look like his old self. Not much for either team to cheer about. This year is different, obviously, but you also have to factor in that Seattle had to re-sign Polanco in order for him to have his bounce-back season. And then the Twins are suddenly looking like they have a possibly MLB starter with Gonzalez. You make trades, you take risks. All in all, not a bad deal for the Twins. Let's check back a year from now and see how these players are doing. 

[Whitey333]

What a waste of time debating the relevance and who won the Polanco trade.  First does it even matter?  Second what about the 3 stiffs we got in return?  4 when you add in another can't miss prospects that will in all likelihood miss. The Twins have a slew of those can't miss prospects.  My biggest contention has been with Falvey.  Yes the ownership sucks but IMO Falvey sucks worse.  The Twins consistently have the highest or near highest payroll in a very weak central division.  Last year they were 17th overall out of 30 teams in payroll before the trades.  I think Falvey has done a terrible job of spending payroll dollars and player selection and development.  There are teams in our division with significantly less payroll than the Twins.  Falvey is a failure and im not sure why he gets a pass from all this.  Yes ownership needs to go. Falvey should have been fired with Baldelli.  He is the biggest problem after the Pohlads

[Trov]

16 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Polanco was bad last year, and they didn't win many games. He was a FA, and got less money this year than last......Anyone could have signed him for what he made the previous year, and no one did. Gonzalez tore up the minors this year, and is what, 22? This trade wasn't about the short term at all. I fail to see how we can say MN got nothing but money at this point?

Overall I agree with this statement, but one thing to consider is Seattle may not have signed him as a FA had they not already had him.  Yes, he was bad last year, and resigned for cheaper, but possible if he did not spend time with them last year they would have passed on him knowing nothing about him, but that he was on a downswing.  Reports were, just as normal for last few years for him, was he was injured much of last year, but healthy this year.  Seattle may have known more about what he was going through and hoped he was healthy this year, but if he was just a regular FA they pass on him, or because they would have went with a different 2nd baseman last year then they not have room for him this year.

[Riverbrian]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

If the Twins can develop GG into a major league ball player. The Twins will win the trade. 

Until GG is a major league ball player or if they fail to develop him. The trade will just go into history as an organizational pivot point. 

At the time of the trade... I was asking the question. Is it better to have one real good player or 3 lesser players?

At the time of the trade... I didn't know the answer to that question that I was asking... I was just wondering out loud.

I'm not wondering anymore. I stopped pondering that question even after a rather horrific 2024 season in Seattle for Polanco. There is no doubt in my mind... One real good player shouldn't be broken up to fill multiple holes with multiple lesser pieces. 

I don't care what Polanco hit in 2024. There was no question he was a hitter at the time of the trade and the best player involved in that deal. 

Lesson for the upcoming offseason? Here's the big lesson.

Players Ping Pong from year to year. You think a player is dead in 2024. It means nothing in regards to 2025.

Jorge Polanco didn't lose opportunity despite the down year. As we declare who is dead based on 2025... we prepare for 2026 and who gets opportunity. 

 

Just an add on. To hopefully show that I'm not a hypocrite. 

It's important to note. Whatever way I felt at the time of the trade.  

If Polanco would have performed in Minnesota in 2024 like he did in Seattle 2024.

I'm pretty sure that I would have been complaining about his performance and his expiring contract around June and would have been asking for anyone else to compete with him for playing time.  

Regardless... On October 14th, 2025. With the 2024 and 2025 seasons in the rear view mirror. I stand here believing that the Twins shouldn't have made the deal based on a reasonable expectation of what Polanco should have produced in 2024 (but did not) for a team coming off a playoff series win. 

I believe that the loss of Polonco was a payroll pivot point but yet a smaller issue compared to a larger issue of the reallocation of his money which was spread amongst Desclafini, Margot and Santana. 3 players who like Polanco most likely wouldn't have been back the following year and only 1 of those players had a decent year. 

So... I'm still back to the original question at the time of the trade. Is it better to have one good player or divide that player into multiple lesser players at the same price.

I'll take the one good player with pre-arb players filling the roster space instead. 

And I'll repeat. If GG becomes a good major league player. We will win this trade.  

[BillyBallLives]

15 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Nothing wrong with both teams finding success with these two players.

Very nice read but Seattle already HAS was the Twins are still hoping for...huge difference.
Great to hear GG is improving in the field from an eye witness like yourself, but it doesn't surprise me Falvey bit on a player who couldn't field, and GG was suppose to be the gem in the trade for the Twins.

I hope GG's future is as bright as your comments suggest.

 

[Otaknam]

17 hours ago, LA VIkes Fan said:

While I wouldn't discount this kind of a trade of someone like Ober or even Jeffers or Lewis, let's not get too snide in our comments on the Polanco trade. When Polanco was traded, he was a broken down 29 year old making $10.5M, He physically could not even play 2B any more, much less a taxing position. He had very little value despite our fond memories of him when he could actually move. He then went to Seattle and became a DH with a .651 OPS in 2024. Posters here would have wanted him run out of town and Seattle only kept him because they couldn't get anyone else. He did rebound this year at age 31 and hit well for Seattle while still not being able to run or field a lick (89 games as DH, 38 at 2B, 5 at SS, 1 at 1B), -3 OAA, 37th percentile sprint speed. In return we got a competent/average reliever in Topa and the best hitting prospect in the Twins organization in Gabriel Gonzalez. GG is 21 and hit .329/.395/.513(.909) over 3 MiLB levels in 2025, including .316/.358/.504(.862) in 150 AAA PAs. He's likely our RF/DH by mid-season 2026 and out performed Emma AND Walker Jenkins at both AAA AND AAA last year. I know folks don't like to let the facts get in the way of a good "the FA is incompetent" rant but this isn't the hill to die on for that. It actually looks like a win/win trade so far if Gonzalez is even an average MLB player. Looks like he could be more. I love me some Jorge Polanco and I hope he is the World Series MVP but this was a smart trade. 

I could get behind a trade of a guy like Ober for a decent reliever and a high upside AA ball SS, or a solid AAA 1B prospect blocked in an organization. Ober might not be worth that much, but it's exactly the kind of trade we should be thinking about. I think the Polanco trade as a blueprint - fading MLB player for a reliever and high upside MiLB guy a year or two away - makes a whole bunch of sense for dealing with a replaceable guys like Ober. 

I doubt Ober is a trade candidate. He was injured during the latter part of the season, which will makes other teams hesitant.. And he wasn’t as effective and lost some velocity, likely because of his injuries. He wouldn’t bring much in a trade because of this, and he is still under team control. So, it is unlikely that Ober gets traded.

[David Maro]

Polanco to Falvey,thank you so much for trading to the Mariners. As you probably have seen I'm 2 wins from playing in the WS. I'm not sure that this opportunity would be possible if I was still with the Twins. So again thank you so much!!

[Riverbrian]

MLR makes great points about Milwaukee, Cleveland, Tampa and how they handle service time to restock their farm systems before they lose players for nothing. I strongly believe Minnesota needs that sort of thing in their repertoire. Trading Polanco for a future GG can be viewed as similar. 

Those 3 teams do a great job at that and I think it's an important to pay attention to what they are doing. 

However... those three teams will also buy when the opportunity is right. Cleveland has acquired some great prospects and they have also traded great prospects. I think they would love to have kept Yandy and Yanier Diaz. It's hard to say what they were thinking when they traded Junior Caminero for Tobias Myers. The Brewers went and got Yelich because they felt the timing was right. 

The Twins timing at the time of the Polanco deal? That is worthy of debate. I think it was time to strike and they didn't.   

[old nurse]

1 hour ago, Sjoski said:

Actually sounds like the exact opposite of what the Twins do. They trade players NOT to play for them.

Whose paying Carlos Correa over 10 million a years to play somewhere other than Minnesota?

Equating the Polanco trade with the Twins and Correa  is a real stretch. Not the most preposterous thing posted, but close 

[Otaknam]

45 minutes ago, Whitey333 said:

What a waste of time debating the relevance and who won the Polanco trade.  First does it even matter?  Second what about the 3 stiffs we got in return?  4 when you add in another can't miss prospects that will in all likelihood miss. The Twins have a slew of those can't miss prospects.  My biggest contention has been with Falvey.  Yes the ownership sucks but IMO Falvey sucks worse.  The Twins consistently have the highest or near highest payroll in a very weak central division.  Last year they were 17th overall out of 30 teams in payroll before the trades.  I think Falvey has done a terrible job of spending payroll dollars and player selection and development.  There are teams in our division with significantly less payroll than the Twins.  Falvey is a failure and im not sure why he gets a pass from all this.  Yes ownership needs to go. Falvey should have been fired with Baldelli.  He is the biggest problem after the Pohlads

I’m not as negative as others about the Polanco trade. We have to remember that Polanco struggled with injuries and defense when he was traded. He made $10.5 million, and they thought Lee could play second, though he seems to be an average big leaguer with a little home run pop. Also, Gonzalez raked in 2025 and has a chance to save this trade, which we will find out this year. 

[NYCTK]

17 hours ago, USAFChief said:

The Polanco trade was, and remains, one of the worst in team history.

Instantly made the team weaker, with zero short term and only minor, if any, long term help. DeSclafani. LOL. 

Just a horrible idea.

 

 

I commend you for your commitment to the bit. You never let being wrong get in the way, and that's brave. 

 

[TwinsDr2021]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

What was the cost of trading Polanco? That's easy.  1 season at .3 WAR.  He was then non-tendered and Seattle’s contractual control terminated.  Any team could have then signed Polanco so the cost was 1 year at .3 WAR.  We can say the Twins should have signed him as a free agent but anything that happened after Seattle non-tendered him is the result of a different decision.  Who here thinks Cleveland, Tampa or Milwaukee would have opted for a good prospect over what Polanco produced if they had a crystal ball and knew exactly what was going to happen?  

The Twins didn't have to pick up his 10.5 million (could have brought him out for 750k) let him walk. Out 750K or instead they picked it up, traded him for 4 million of DeSclafani, 2.5 for 2 years of Topa (so far), and GG. 

So the question isn't really how Polanco did, the question is was it worth the 10.5 to pick up his contract and trade him? Obviously it is still too early to tell and all depends on what happens with GG. It could still go down as one of the best Twin trades ever, or just another move by this FO that pissed away money (like picking up Farmer's 6.25 contract, instead of the 250K buyout) 

[NYCTK]

Two things are true: 

1. Falvey is not very good at his job. 

2. Anyone still complaining about the Polanco trade is both weird and wrong. 

[Major League Ready]

5 minutes ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

The Twins didn't have to pick up his 10.5 million (could have brought him out for 750k) let him walk. Out 750K or instead they picked it up, traded him for 4 million of DeSclafani, 2.5 for 2 years of Topa (so far), and GG. 

So the question isn't really how Polanco did, the question is was it worth the 10.5 to pick up his contract and trade him? Obviously it is still too early to tell and all depends on what happens with GG. It could still go down as one of the best Twin trades ever, or just another move by this FO that pissed away money (like picking up Farmer's 6.25 contract, instead of the 250K buyout) 

I see where you are going with this but you are assuming that the Twins assumed Descalfani would be injured and took him on knowing the money was sunk.  This is a substantial reach. He was healthy to start spring training.  I think the more reasonable take was they spent $4M for someone that would have cost more but was discounted given the inquiry risk and they took that risk.  Topa delivered 1.0 WAR for $2.5M.  It's not much but it was also partially the product of injury and it's 3X the average production per free agent dollar spent so you can't say the Twins got nothing.  You can say the deal for Topa had the potential to produce more but you can't say 1 WAR for 2.5M is a negative.

If we go with the premise the Twins assumed DeScalafani was sunk, we can say GG cost $4M given Topa was a reasonable value.  That's the cost of the 22nd overall pick this year without actually giving up a draft choice.  Not bad.  If he becomes an average MLB player, the Twins win this trade.  If he does nothing they blew $4M which is modest in the context of how many draft bonus dollars produce nothing.  

[Vanimal46]

I'm thrilled that Polanco looks healthy this year and producing BIG time in the playoffs. What is there to be learned for the Twins from this trade? Absolutely nothing. Keeping Polanco wasn't going to stop this organization from swirling down the drain. 

[KirbyDome89]

18 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

How do you expect any team to build a roster other than prospects? I'm truly baffled by the prospect hate on this site. 

Not counting your eggs before they hatch is hate? When the Twins traded Polanco fans were convinced Julien was a long term starter at 2B and the club would have to find a way to squeeze soon to be superstar Brooks Lee into the IF. 

[KirbyDome89]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

I see where you are going with this but you are assuming that the Twins assumed Descalfani would be injured and took him on knowing the money was sunk.  This is a substantial reach. He was healthy to start spring training.  I think the more reasonable take was they spent $4M for someone that would have cost more but was discounted given the inquiry risk and they took that risk.  Topa delivered 1.0 WAR for $2.5M.  It's not much but it was also partially the product of injury and it's 3X the average production per free agent dollar spent so you can't say the Twins got nothing.  You can say the deal for Topa had the potential to produce more but you can't say 1 WAR for 2.5M is a negative.

If we go with the premise the Twins assumed DeScalafani was sunk, we can say GG cost $4M given Topa was a reasonable value.  That's the cost of the 22nd overall pick this year without actually giving up a draft choice.  Not bad.  If he becomes an average MLB player, the Twins win this trade.  If he does nothing they blew $4M which is modest in the context of how many draft bonus dollars produce nothing.  

Agreed, they rolled the dice on DeSclafani staying healthy and they lost. They had to know that was a distinct possibility after he was shut down with an elbow injury the previous season. Topa put up -2 WPA while pitching the bulk of his innings in low leverage, and he missed an entire season. FWIW his bWAR was .4, which tied him with......Erasmo Ramirez......for the season. WAR is missing the mark here. 

You're not accounting for the damage done by the swap. The Twins were counting on DeSclafani being their 5th starter, instead, Varland imploded. Julien flopped at 2B. Topa was a negative contributor, or at best a nothing-burger. 

[USAFChief]

4 hours ago, NYCTK said:

I commend you for your commitment to the bit. You never let being wrong get in the way, and that's brave. 

 

Hey, you are entitled to your opinion that depending on Desclafani to solidify the rotation of a supposed contender was a good gamble. To each his own. You 'n Falvey can take that to the grave.

Find me one single solitary person associated with the Seattle Mariners-owner, front office, field staff, player, reporter, or fan) who wouldn't do that trade again without a moment's hesitation. 

Just one.

Idiotic trade by Falvey.

 

[NYCTK]

17 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Hey, you are entitled to your opinion that depending on Desclafani to solidify the rotation of a supposed contender was a good gamble. To each his own. You 'n Falvey can take that to the grave.

Find me one single solitary person associated with the Seattle Mariners-owner, front office, field staff, player, reporter, or fan) who wouldn't do that trade again without a moment's hesitation. 

Just one.

Idiotic trade by Falvey.

 

You are entitled to the opinion that a trade of an expiring contract of a player that proceeded to hit a .650 OPS was one of the the worst trades in Twins history. But that just makes it look like you don't know anything about the history of the Twins or anything about baseball in general.

It's very obviously wrong, but everyone has the right to be wrong. 

Like I said, stick to the bit. It's funny for everyone else.

[NYCTK]

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

 

You're not accounting for the damage done by the swap. The Twins were counting on DeSclafani being their 5th starter, instead, Varland imploded. Julien flopped at 2B. Topa was a negative contributor, or at best a nothing-burger. 

And yet you're still only accounting for HALF of the trade, while wanting everyone to believe you're viewing the trade objectively. 

It didn't work out as well as one would have hoped at the time. But this idea that it was a terrible trade is just revisionist history entirely fabricated out of pure frustration. 

[USAFChief]

11 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

You are entitled to the opinion that a trade of an expiring contract of a player that proceeded to hit a .650 OPS was one of the the worst trades in Twins history. But that just makes it look like you don't know anything about the history of the Twins or anything about baseball in general.

It's very obviously wrong, but everyone has the right to be wrong. 

Like I said, stick to the bit. It's funny for everyone else.

So you cant find one person then.

I accept your surrender.

[KirbyDome89]

4 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

And yet you're still only accounting for HALF of the trade, while wanting everyone to believe you're viewing the trade objectively. 

It didn't work out as well as one would have hoped at the time. But this idea that it was a terrible trade is just revisionist history entirely fabricated out of pure frustration. 

Feel free to show me where I said it was a terrible trade. Actually though, point that part out or chill on the strawman...

GG can "save," the swap. Sure. 

The Twins parted out an asset, and the only remaining piece of value is GG. A suddenly cash strapped org pissed away valuable dollars on non-contributors, i.e. actively harmed the major league team during what were supposed to be contention years. Sorry, but trying to hand waive away the spending error as "buying a prospect," or pretending like the move was some future 4D chess swap that hinged on the Twins getting GG is a bridge too far. 

[old nurse]

3 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Not counting your eggs before they hatch is hate? When the Twins traded Polanco fans were convinced Julien was a long term starter at 2B and the club would have to find a way to squeeze soon to be superstar Brooks Lee into the IF. 

In 2 years in Seattle Polanco has played at 2b 150 times. Only 119 were complete games there. There was a possibility of 324 games. Playing that way for the Twins they still would have needed a 2b