Revisionist History: Would 2026 Twins Be Better with Carlos Correa?

[Cody Christie]

Image courtesy of © Troy Taormina-Imagn Images

One of the most shocking moves at last year’s trade deadline was sending Carlos Correa back to the Houston Astros in a deal that felt less like a pivot and more like a surrender. The Twins moved on from the highest-paid player in franchise history and paid another team $10 million per season to take him off their hands. That detail still lands like a punchline with no joke attached.

 

Correa’s time in Minnesota never fit neatly into a single narrative. He was the steady hand that helped guide the franchise to its first playoff series win in two decades. He was also the player battling plantar fasciitis, looking like a different version of himself for stretches that mattered. At his peak, he was everything the Twins hoped for when they signed him, including a 5.3 rWAR season in 2022 and a dominant first half in 2024 that led to his only All-Star appearance with the organization. At his worst, he embodied the risk that comes with tying so much payroll to one player with durability questions.

 

So now that the dust has settled, the question is unavoidable. Would the 2026 Twins actually be better if they had just kept him?

 

Payroll Implications

Moving on from Correa was supposed to create flexibility. Instead, it created an absence. The payroll dropped from $136 million in 2025 to $107 million in 2026, and those savings weren’t meaningfully reinvested.

 

Keeping Correa at over $30 million annually would have forced a different kind of decision-making. If ownership still wanted to land near the current payroll level, subtraction would have been required elsewhere. Names like Pablo López, Joe Ryan, and Ryan Jeffers immediately come to mind as logical trade candidates.

 

There is also a harsher reality. Trading López before his season-ending elbow injury might have been the most pragmatic move in that alternate timeline. It is the kind of cold calculation teams convince themselves is necessary when a superstar contract sits on the books.
 

Instead, the Twins chose financial relief without roster optimization. The result is a leaner payroll that does not necessarily translate to a more competitive team.

 

Roster Implications

The ripple effects go beyond dollars. Without Correa’s contract, the Twins still operated like a team tightening its belt. Free agent additions such as Josh Bell and Victor Caratini came at a modest combined cost, but even those moves feel unlikely in a world where Correa remains on the roster.

 

Instead of Caratini, the backup catching job likely falls to Alex Jackson. Instead of a rotating first base situation, Kody Clemens probably sees a heavier workload by necessity rather than design.

 

The infield alignment becomes even more interesting. Keeping Correa at shortstop likely pushes Brooks Lee into a different role, potentially second base. That shift could open opportunities for Luke Keaschall to find regular at-bats in a corner outfield spot or even factor into the first base mix.

 

In other words, the roster would not just look different. It would feel different. Less flexible in some ways, more top-heavy in others, and heavily dependent on Correa anchoring everything.

 

Correa’s 2026 Performance

Back in Houston, Correa has quietly begun writing a new chapter. The Astros shifted him to third base, a move that may prove to be as important as the trade itself. Through the first 11 games, he is hitting .262/.354/.381 with a .735 OPS and a 116 OPS+, while providing above-average defense at the hot corner.

 

It is fair to wonder how much of that success is tied to context. Playing third base reduces the physical toll. Playing in a more familiar environment may also help. And perhaps most importantly, he is not dealing with early-season games in Minnesota weather while handling the demands of shortstop every day.

 

Would he be producing the same numbers with the Twins right now? Maybe. But it feels just as likely that the conversation would once again center on health management and workload.

 

Revisionist history rarely offers clean answers, and this case is no different. Keeping Correa would have given the Twins a higher ceiling on paper. A healthy version of Correa still raises the floor and the expectations of the entire roster.

 

But that version comes with trade-offs. The pitching depth might look thinner. The lineup might feel less balanced. And the financial pressure would force difficult decisions that could reshape the roster in ways that are just as uncomfortable as the reality fans are watching now.

 

In the end, the more frustrating truth is not that the Twins traded Correa. It is that they never fully capitalized on the freedom it offered. The question is not just whether they would be better with him. It is whether they did enough to justify living without him.

 

Would the Twins have been better with Correa in 2026? Leave a comment and start the discussion.

View full article

[tony&rodney]

That ship sailed away. Correa was done with the Twins.

All of the speculations within the article could be enhanced greatly by including a half dozen or more "should haves" that might have been easily accomplished last October and November but weren't due to front office paralysis. In December Brother Tom came along and now here we are with what we have. The Twins are moving forward. 

[NYCTK]

Irrelevant question. The appropriate question is does it help the Twins in 2027 or 2028.

It's very fun to have seen them sweep the Tigers, but no one should be thinking this is team is now in contention. 

[DKrz56]

The roster would be more balanced. Brooks would be the utility with no Gray on the roster. If they were serious about adding valdez then we certainly could've afforded Correa added to the current payroll. I disagree with the above posts as it is worth asking... we'd have a shot at competitiveness with a healthy Correa, even with a poor bullpen. It is an interesting question, and personally, I think the Correa trade was the worst one.  

[Dman]

In a world where the only ripple effect would be swapping Correa for Lee then I would say Yes the Twins would be better off.  In the reality of the Twins limiting payroll I think it's tougher to say.

Correa was a notoriously slow starter in April with the bat.  His skills were declining at short.  The Twins are in position to get younger so I think they made the right decision trading a very good player away for more roster and financial flexibility.  

We'll never know now as things are what they are. In a world where the Twins can spend like the Dodgers I would be more upset about it.

[jorgenswest]

I look forward to seeing Culpepper in 2026

[Doctor Gast]

Correa brought a lot of great chemistry when he 1st came here, plus he played a pretty good SS, which brought us our 1st playoff series win for a very long time. But management's inability to improve the team under a restricted payroll & he was ready to move off SS while we had no one to take over for him, soured Correa. Correa is still an impact player who'll help HOU in the postseason. Paying HOU $10M to take him IMO was a very bad deal w/o getting anything in return. Twins desperately need a leader like  Correa; they're hard to come by. 

[weitz41]

This is one of those if they had or had not senecios. Would they have won as many games those seasons? Would they have been better off putting the payroll elsewhere?  What about who was drafted during that time? 30 mil a season isn't just about want that player does

[bunsen82]

Well if we kept Correa - that would mean you would have to give up $20 million of salary,  so no Caratini, Bell, Larnach not tendered and Rogers not offered a contract.   I think not.  

[arby58]

Correa, to date, has a .716 OPS. He's not exactly setting the MLB world on fire.

[bunsen82]

14 minutes ago, arby58 said:

Correa, to date, has a .716 OPS. He's not exactly setting the MLB world on fire.

And as a 3rd baseman.  

[ashbury]

8 hours ago, NYCTK said:

Irrelevant question. The appropriate question is does it help the Twins in 2027 or 2028.

It's very fun to have seen them sweep the Tigers, but no one should be thinking this is team is now in contention. 

If the playoffs started tomorrow they'd be in as a Wild Card.  I call that Now In Contention.  😁

They may fall out of contention shortly, of course.  Smart money might even be on that side of the bet.  Me, I'm slightly nervous about my dire prediction of 61 wins this season, but they may well come through in the course of time.

[Whitey333]

The Twins had to dump Correa.  Too expensive and surely didn't play to a superstar level.  I blame Falvey for mis using the $35 million per year that they were allowed to pay Correa by the Ownership.  Poor job of payroll management.  Could have gotten 3 or 4 decent players for that amount.  

[Old Twins Hat]

I didn't care for Correa, or his attitudes about wealth and how much he deserved to be lavished with money -- despite having been "in" on that cheating scandal.  What was that quote about him comparing himself to Christian Dior jewelry?  Yuck.

I don't think he was good for the Twins clubhouse, with all the young players coming up having to listen to his bossy chatter about every little thing.

I'm not saying he's a bad person; maybe especially now that he has found more religious purpose in this life.  But, having someone like Correa over the top of a team was not, in my opinion, good for morale or infused with the scrappy, underdog aesthetic that I appreciate in a small-market team.

[bean5302]

21 hours ago, Dman said:

In a world where the only ripple effect would be swapping Correa for Lee then I would say Yes the Twins would be better off.  In the reality of the Twins limiting payroll I think it's tougher to say.

Correa was a notoriously slow starter in April with the bat.  His skills were declining at short.  The Twins are in position to get younger so I think they made the right decision trading a very good player away for more roster and financial flexibility.  

We'll never know now as things are what they are. In a world where the Twins can spend like the Dodgers I would be more upset about it.

You put this exactly how I was trying to type it out the other day.

[GopherMike]

1) It was a bad trade and I wish they could have gotten literally anything of value and/or not held so much salary

2) That doesn't necessarily mean we should have kept him....or that we'd be a better team with him than without him. It's impossible to know. 

But yeah...it was a salary dump. That's well understood by everyone. 

[MGX]

Certainly the 2026 Twins would be better with Correa. I don't know if that means we should have kept him. A trade for some value instead of a straight up salary dump would have been better, but maybe that wasn't possible.

[jjswol]

A Falvey mistake that keeps on haunting us. Correa wanted to be gone and it was best for all concerned but Correa should be paying Houston the $10 million a year versus the Twins.

[Vanimal46]

It was smart to get out from Correa’s future contract when we did. We know his history with 2 failed physicals in SF and NYM. That’s not going to get any better and he’s already off of playing SS. 

It’s especially smart when the organization was in full fire sale mode.