Did the Twins Win or Lose the 2025 Trade Deadline? Looking Back with Fresh Eyes

[Senior Softball Guy]

20 hours ago, bunsen82 said:

You have to look at it more than just the prospects received. Its partially the money saved, but the real "wild card" here is the improved draft capital.   At the all star break we had the 13th or 14th best record.   We now have high odds of getting a top 5 pick and 60% odds of a top 3 pick.   I still stand by trading all the relievers was to tank for better draft picks in a really good draft.  This has to be part of the equation. 

Pitching -  Abel, Bradley, Rojas, Gallagher (assets received currently in top 30 prospects)

Hitters - Tait, Mendez, Jimenez, Roden 

We win on the Castro,  Bader, Paddack and Coloumbe trades.  We traded less than 1/2 a season of control for Horn, Gallagher, Armstrong, Jimenez and Mendez.   I have high expectations for both Mendez and Jimenez.  

Stewart for Outman.  Trading an injured pitcher for an outfielder than can't hit.  Likely not a needle mover in either direction just looks really bad.   

Jax for Bradley.   I do this trade everyday of the week.  Trade 2 1/2 years of a volatile reliever for 3 1/2 of a younger highly volatile SP.  Both with question marks on attitude and willing to work in a team environment.   Bradley say what you will showed he was willing to be a professional with the Twins and try new things and his last start he looked really really good.  

Varland for Roden and Rojas -  I just don't know.    Varland ERA was high - but he was the Blue Jays most used arm out of the bullpen in the playoffs.  On paper Roden and Rojas is an overpay for Varland,  to me even taking the emotional arguments out of it,  I think we lose this trade.  I think Varland is either the setup man or closer for the Blue Jays for a long time.  Roden either needs to become an above average outfielder or Rojas needs to become a closer or high end pitcher.  

Duran for Abel and Tait.  I do this trade every day.   I think Abel will be a very very good pitcher for us.  His last start he had complete command of his arsenal.  I think he was tipping pitches unintentionally.   If you can control that he should be good in my opinion.  Of the pitchers I think he is the best one of the group and will be a solid #2 for us down the road.  Tait is full of potential but is still potential at this point.  

Trading Correa was just a salary dump.  Honestly I think that trade is just fine.   

Unless you think we could win the WS this year or next year - that is the only real valuation where we lose on these trade deals.  We appeared to be a broken team at the end of the season and the only 2 players who really performed for their teams were Duran and Varland.   

 

Excellent point about the chance for a high draft pick. At a crucial point you have to make tough decisions. I, for one, will not miss Correa's GIDPs.

[Trov]

To me the worst trade of them all was including Varland, although long term it could work out.  The rest were guys that were unlikely to return next year, or at minimum give little value the rest of the year to a bad team.  Duran would have been back for sure, but at what price?  Also, how valuable is a closer on a bad team?  Think about it, if you hardly have leads late to save, how much value do they have?  Sure, if we make a huge turn around this season he will be missed, but that is not likely, and even if we do, closers across a season are way overvalued. 

Varland had years of control that is where he was surprising and felt was worst of the trades.  CC was not earning his contract, and rumors were he may have been bad for the young guys in the club house development, cannot speak to that, but if true getting rid of him is a plus. 

[srlarson]

putting them together...trading both Jax and Varland was a huge loss......needed one to be the backend not only this year....but next year....Varland was the cheap answer...to keep budget low....turn him into a closer and get a better package for him...

 

[KirbyDome89]

2 hours ago, Trov said:

Duran would have been back for sure, but at what price?  Also, how valuable is a closer on a bad team?  Think about it, if you hardly have leads late to save, how much value do they have? 

Estimated $8M, which is a bargain. He wouldn't have to be a closer, he could pitch the 6th, 7th, 8th ect and get the highest leverage outs thereby giving you a chance to hold or take the lead. Having a good pitcher makes your team better. There's a self fulfilling prophecy element here. Varland, Duran, and Jax weren't rentals right? The rationale for moving Duran can't be "we're gonna suck regardless," if you've chosen to take steps to ensure that you're going to suck. 

[darin617]

On 12/2/2025 at 9:07 PM, tony&rodney said:

Received plenty of heat for my original reply. I was merely suggesting that teams cannot verbalize "working" / aka "tanking" to gain a higher draft choice. That's not very controversial. Plenty of teams have gone through rebuilds and given their reasons. They can't say we want a better draft choice. Or are people trying to tell me that teams can announce or state they are tanking to get a better draft choice? 

There's also a draft lottery for MLB and the worst record doesn't guarantee anything. Without looking into a team can't get a top 5 pick or something because the White Sox weren't able to win last years lottery.

[JD-TWINS]

On 12/2/2025 at 7:06 PM, KirbyDome89 said:

Money saved? How does that positively affect the team and/or this fan base? Money not spent now doesn't become available at a later date, no matter how hard fans try to delude themselves into believing otherwise. 

Before the deadline purge the Twins were neck and neck with Baltimore and a few games up on Sacramento, with Chicago already a virtual lock to "win," the best odds of securing the number 1 pick. If what you're suggesting is true, that Falvey intentionally gave up his best bullpen arms, all with multiple years of control, because he wanted to race Baltimore and Sacramento for the 2nd best odds, he should've been gone yesterday. That's insane...

We're declaring the rental swaps a W for the Twins despite none of the returns having seen any MLB action whatsoever. Ok....

Bradley had a 6.61 ERA in 6 starts with MN last year. This was after being demoted in TB. Go ahead and dog on Jax if it makes you feel better about the swap, but he was a pretty damn dependable (if not borderline elite) RP the previous 3 seasons. His FIP during the 1sh half with MN was half of what his ERA was, so do with that what you will. Hell, even though his TB tenure got off to a rough start he still posted solid numbers. 

If you ignore how bad Abel was for the rest of 2025 I'm sure that single start in Philly is encouraging haha. Expecting him to be a front of the rotation guy is a lot. They gave up 2.5 years of an elite bullpen arm so Abel might have to at least be a solid middle-ish guy, especially if Tait's defense won't keep him at C. 

They're paying Correa to not be here. The Twins are essentially paying $10M to play Brooks Lee at SS. That trade sucks. 

WS or bust is massively flawed logic if we're talking about purging controlled talent. 

Bradley is the only “non-prospect” they got back. (why would others be in MLB last 2 months of ‘25?) He wasn’t good but if he were good in Tampa in ‘25 they wouldn’t have traded him. He’s a relatively young guy with good upside. He has as much chance of contributing to wins going forward as Jax would have had in his role. Didn’t love the trade either but 6 starts are just that, SIX.

Thinking getting rid of $23M per year for a guy that’s hurt A LOT, and is obviously declining, makes perfect sense. The trade didn’t suck, Brooks Lee, that’s a different story.

[LA Vikes Fan]

On 12/2/2025 at 12:56 PM, bunsen82 said:

Ok Bader LOL.   Yes he was solid.  

Varland is really questionable how Toronto wants to use him.  Will they move him back to a starter.  Or will they use him as a high leverage reliever.   My concern on the varland trade is right now I don't think Rojas or Roden will pay off.   Maybe they prove me wrong,  but based on the way Varland was used in the playoffs - he can be a high leverage, high use arm.   That has a lot of value in my book especially when you have 5 years of control.  Lets say its 5 years of being a closer, what do we need from Roden or Rojas to equal that.  

Given that Toronto picked up Dylan Cease and Cody Ponce already this off season, I think it's very unlikely Varland will back into the rotation. At this point Toronto doesn't have room for Barrios in the rotation any more, much less a failed starter like Varland. Louie is a late inning non-closer reliever in MLB. That's what he is. It's a valuable role, less valuable than a starter or closer, but still valuable and in his case, it's even more valuable because it's likely he can fill that role for 5-6 years. If you want to evaluate the trade, that's what we gave up. If Roden and Rojas are both average or better MLB players for several years, we win. If one is a very good or better player and one washes out, we win. If one is a back end of the 26 man roster guy and the other washes out or if both wash out, we lose. If they are both averagish guys for 2-3 years, it's a wash.  Way too early to know the answer.    

[bunsen82]

1 hour ago, LA Vikes Fan said:

Given that Toronto picked up Dylan Cease and Cody Ponce already this off season, I think it's very unlikely Varland will back into the rotation. At this point Toronto doesn't have room for Barrios in the rotation any more, much less a failed starter like Varland. Louie is a late inning non-closer reliever in MLB. That's what he is. It's a valuable role, less valuable than a starter or closer, but still valuable and in his case, it's even more valuable because it's likely he can fill that role for 5-6 years. If you want to evaluate the trade, that's what we gave up. If Roden and Rojas are both average or better MLB players for several years, we win. If one is a very good or better player and one washes out, we win. If one is a back end of the 26 man roster guy and the other washes out or if both wash out, we lose. If they are both averagish guys for 2-3 years, it's a wash.  Way too early to know the answer.    

There was rumors at the deadline when Varland was traded,  they possibly considered him as a SP.  I think they really found him valuable in the bullpen.   

 

[Riverbrian]

1 hour ago, LA Vikes Fan said:

Given that Toronto picked up Dylan Cease and Cody Ponce already this off season, I think it's very unlikely Varland will back into the rotation. At this point Toronto doesn't have room for Barrios in the rotation any more,

I think a new paradigm has hit the MLB Front Offices.

Everybody just watched the Dodgers overload on starters like no one has ever done before. Then get through the season without rotation congestion and then follow that with a World Series title with almost insignificant bullpen use as those starters ate nearly every single inning. 

I think the Blue Jays are attempting the same thing.

They may not be done shopping for starters.

Varland on the other hand. He probably stays in the bullpen. He seems to be doing quite well there. 

[KirbyDome89]

3 hours ago, JD-TWINS said:

Bradley is the only “non-prospect” they got back. (why would others be in MLB last 2 months of ‘25?) He wasn’t good but if he were good in Tampa in ‘25 they wouldn’t have traded him. He’s a relatively young guy with good upside. He has as much chance of contributing to wins going forward as Jax would have had in his role. Didn’t love the trade either but 6 starts are just that, SIX.

Thinking getting rid of $23M per year for a guy that’s hurt A LOT, and is obviously declining, makes perfect sense. The trade didn’t suck, Brooks Lee, that’s a different story.

Abel and Roden shouldn't have gotten any MLB run? Idk what you're arguing here. 

Ok, 6 starts with the Twins and nearly 400 innings of pedestrian at best production in total. Is that not a fairly significant sample size? Jax has been far more valuable the last few seasons. If Bradley is going to match that level of contribution drastic changes need to occur. 

If that money is reinvested maybe (and there's zero indication that will happen) otherwise like I said you're just spending $10M to downgrade at SS. 

[JD-TWINS]

18 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Abel and Roden shouldn't have gotten any MLB run? Idk what you're arguing here. 

Ok, 6 starts with the Twins and nearly 400 innings of pedestrian at best production in total. Is that not a fairly significant sample size? Jax has been far more valuable the last few seasons. If Bradley is going to match that level of contribution drastic changes need to occur. 

If that money is reinvested maybe (and there's zero indication that will happen) otherwise like I said you're just spending $10M to downgrade at SS. 

Or you could spend $33M to have a similar defensive shortstop (declining) and a guy who doesn’t hit at his previous level nor stay healthy………so Lee plays a third of the games anyway, covering for Correa’s back, feet, need for rest, etc.

Abel gave up half dozen runs in an inning plus and was sent down then pitched at MlB level again.

Roden was playing in the Show and got hurt.

Idk what you’re arguing here.

Jax, in ‘25, 4.23 ERA …. 1-7 record ……. .5 WAR. He’s got tremendous stuff!! Like many guys on the mound, I wonder about his pitch mix and what’s going on between his ears? He’s got a 4.03 ERA for his stellar career.

I like Jax - independent of that, Bradley has thrown 140 innings in the SHOW for 2 consecutive seasons - if he can’t work as a starter, I do think he has an opportunity to match Jax like numbers throwing to 3-5 guys per outing. ……. Jax too washed out as a starter…….same with Varland……..lack of durability was the root, but same for Duran.

[KirbyDome89]

5 hours ago, JD-TWINS said:

Or you could spend $33M to have a similar defensive shortstop (declining) and a guy who doesn’t hit at his previous level nor stay healthy………so Lee plays a third of the games anyway, covering for Correa’s back, feet, need for rest, etc.

Abel gave up half dozen runs in an inning plus and was sent down then pitched at MlB level again.

Roden was playing in the Show and got hurt.

Idk what you’re arguing here.

Jax, in ‘25, 4.23 ERA …. 1-7 record ……. .5 WAR. He’s got tremendous stuff!! Like many guys on the mound, I wonder about his pitch mix and what’s going on between his ears? He’s got a 4.03 ERA for his stellar career.

I like Jax - independent of that, Bradley has thrown 140 innings in the SHOW for 2 consecutive seasons - if he can’t work as a starter, I do think he has an opportunity to match Jax like numbers throwing to 3-5 guys per outing. ……. Jax too washed out as a starter…….same with Varland……..lack of durability was the root, but same for Duran.

A declining Correa posted more WAR in 50 games with Houston last year than Brooks Lee could must the last 2 seasons. Was Correa worth his salary? No. Was he a much better option than what the Twins are going to roll out at SS on Opening Day this season? Undoubtedly, yes. If the Twins take that $20M+ and opt to actually reinvest it in the on field product I'm happy to reassess, but that seems like a pipe dream at this point. The Twins downgraded (rather significantly) at SS, and one of the highest individual salaries (what a joke) on the team is the person they're paying to not play that position. 

You asked why anybody other than Bradley would've been up last season? They were each pretty terrible in limited action but neither the players nor the team would've been better served keeping those guys in AAA. 

No clue why you're using Jax's career ERA, which includes his rough stint as a SP. His career ERA as a RP drops into the low 3s. I'll point it out again, he had a 4.50 ERA and a 2.05 FIP during the 1st half with MN last season. Some guys can/will skew to one side or the other, but that gap is enormous. 

You think Varland and Jax didn't make it as SPs because they lacked durability? Hard disagree. Well, viable SP and SP for the 2026 Minnesota Twins probably aren't the same thing. Bradley will get every opportunity to prove he's the former, but as it stands he's a fringe guy. Assuming he can just step into the bullpen and match Jax feels like a stretch. 

[tony&rodney]

I'm always a little flummoxed by attempts to identify a winner/loser in trades. The purpose, ostensibly, is that a trade improves the organization. As such, most trades cannot be reasonably evaluated for quite some time. In fact the conversation on this thread is largely speculative in nature about the players involved suggesting if this guy does that and so on.

Are the Twins better now? Will they be better a year from now? The first question is a short term answer which seems pretty cut and dried. The second question cannot be answered at this time. If transactions are completed for a positive outcome in mind, both teams can accomplish their goals and thus are both winners. I'm not sure how one keeps score on trades.

[Elliot]

On 12/2/2025 at 12:26 PM, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

It's too early for these win/loss predictions.  We needed to wait until the end of next season for this article.

Isn’t that the point of evaluating trades? The FO doesn’t get to have some look into the future, like maybe the end of next year. They need to make trades in real time. If neither Tait or Abel work out, it doesn’t make it a bad trade. It was based on perceived value at the time.
The real value in this article is not in updating the evaluation with a SSS of prospect performance in a time of chaos, but in re-evaluating after being able to get beyond the emotions of the immediate trade. From what I observed that was badly needed in this situation. 

[David HK]

B.