Revisiting the Jake Cave for Luis Gil Trade That Still Sparks Debate

[Cody Christie]

Image courtesy of Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports

Trades involving teenage pitching prospects rarely feel significant in the moment. They exist more as footnotes than headlines, small transactions made to solve immediate roster problems. But every so often, one of those deals circles back years later and demands a second look. That is exactly what happened when the Minnesota Twins acquired Jake Cave from the New York Yankees in March of 2018 for a 19-year-old pitcher named Luis Gil.

At the time, it felt like a classic roster crunch move. New York had more big league-capable players than available spots on its 40-man roster, while Minnesota was searching for outfield depth. The cost was a teenage arm in the minors' lowest levels, a profile that represents one of the biggest wild cards any organization can trade. These players are years away from the majors, often volatile in both performance and health, and just as likely to disappear as they are to develop. For the Twins, that risk was worth taking.

Cave: A Useful Role Player in Minnesota
Cave quickly justified Minnesota’s interest by carving out a role as a capable fourth outfielder. Across parts of five seasons, he appeared in over 1,000 plate appearances and posted a .235 average with a .297 on-base percentage and a .411 slugging percentage, good for a 93 OPS+.

Early in his Twins tenure, Cave looked like more than just depth. From 2018 through 2019, he produced a 112 OPS+ while showing legitimate pop with double-digit home runs and doubles. He became a frequent fill-in when injuries sidelined Byron Buxton, offering a left-handed bat that could take advantage of right-handed pitching.

That platoon advantage defined much of his value. Cave’s OPS was significantly higher against righties, which made him a natural fit in a complementary role. Defensively, he moved around all three outfield spots. While center field often pushed his range to its limits, he provided steady play in the corners.

There were stretches where the production dipped, especially from 2020 through 2022, when his offensive numbers declined, and he shuttled between Triple-A and the majors. Still, the Twins received what they initially sought. Cave delivered multiple seasons of usable depth and finished his time in Minnesota with 2.1 rWAR. For a team seeking stability at the margins, the Twins’ evaluation of Cave proved accurate.

Gil: The High Variance Path
While Cave provided immediate value, Gil represented the long game for New York. At the time of the trade, he was a teenage arm in rookie ball who had already dealt with injuries. His profile fit the definition of volatility. Big arm, limited experience, and years away from contributing. That volatility showed up throughout his development.

Gil’s career has been shaped as much by injuries as by flashes of top-end talent. He underwent Tommy John surgery in 2022, delaying his progress and forcing the Yankees to remain patient. When he returned, the upside was still there, and in 2024, it all came together.

Gil emerged as one of the Yankees’ best starters that season, posting a 3.50 ERA with 171 strikeouts across 151 2/3 innings. He accumulated 2.9 rWAR and captured the American League Rookie of the Year Award, seemingly turning the trade into a clear win for New York. But the story did not end there.

Injuries again interrupted his momentum, as a right lat strain limited him for much of 2025. Since then, his performance has been less consistent. A declining strikeout rate and persistent control issues have raised questions about sustainability. Even at his peak, walks have been a major concern, highlighted by an MLB-leading 77 free passes in 2024.

Through 261 1/3 career innings, Gil has issued 142 walks. That lack of command has prevented him from fully stabilizing as a frontline starter. After a rough start to 2026, the Yankees demoted him to Triple-A.

There is still time for him to adjust. At 27, the raw ability remains, and his past success shows what he can be when everything clicks. But the combination of injuries, declining strikeouts, and control problems suggests that his 2024 breakout may represent his peak rather than a new baseline.

A Trade That Refuses to Settle
Looking back, this trade resists a simple winner-or-loser label. The Twins acquired exactly what they needed at the time. Cave provided multiple seasons of competent outfield depth and helped bridge gaps during injury absences. For a team trying to stay competitive, that kind of reliability has value.

The Yankees, meanwhile, captured the upside play. Gil reached heights that Cave never approached, including an award-winning season that briefly made the deal look lopsided. Yet, his inconsistency and health concerns have complicated that narrative.

This is the reality of trading teenage pitching. The outcomes stretch across years, often shifting with each season. What once looked like a decisive victory can soften over time, just as a seemingly minor move can quietly deliver steady returns.

In the end, the Cave for Gil trade stands as a reminder that player development is rarely linear and that even the smallest deals can leave a lasting imprint on both organizations.

Who won the trade between the Twins and Yankees? Leave a comment and start the discussion.

 

View full article

[jmlease1]

Part of the reason the trade gets bashed a lot is the twins also held on to Cave too long, and so we all endured seeing them trot him out in CF in 2021 past the point where he really could credibly fill in there and saw multiple seasons where the bat was unimpressive at best and rotten at worst. It would have been easier for people to look at it as a "we got what we needed and the risk on a 19 year old A-ball pitcher paid out for someone else" without those extra seasons.

Gil had one meteoric season with the Yankees and a lot of injuries and ineffectiveness. Cave was a very nice backup for a couple of seasons who fell off quickly after that.

Neither the worst trade nor the best. Some people might argue that you should never trade for need like this, but I'm not one of them. Unlike the Yankees, it's much harder for us to buy a backup off the shelf and overpay them for 1-2 seasons.

[Scott51104]

Cave was not a great player, but he always hustled, even on routine grounders to second.

[ashbury]

You can always find a team willing to trade a backup position player for your pitching prospect.

[KirbyDome89]

5 hours ago, jmlease1 said:

Unlike the Yankees, it's much harder for us to buy a backup off the shelf and overpay them for 1-2 seasons.

Not really, the Twins provide the promise of more playing time and likely a longer leash. 

[jmlease1]

2 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Not really, the Twins provide the promise of more playing time and likely a longer leash. 

We have self-imposed budget limitations that make it a lot harder to just pay a guy $5-7M to be a backup. Teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, Mets, etc don't have to worry about that and can fill holes and buy their way out of difficulty; teams like the Twins have to look at trading to fill in holes to meet their budgets. It's not that the player wouldn't sign here, it's that we'd never make them the offer, or if we do, it's 1 maybe 2 guys that can get that.

[KirbyDome89]

58 minutes ago, jmlease1 said:

We have self-imposed budget limitations that make it a lot harder to just pay a guy $5-7M to be a backup. Teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, Mets, etc don't have to worry about that and can fill holes and buy their way out of difficulty; teams like the Twins have to look at trading to fill in holes to meet their budgets. It's not that the player wouldn't sign here, it's that we'd never make them the offer, or if we do, it's 1 maybe 2 guys that can get that.

I'm not arguing that MN is going to spend with NY or LA. 

Manuel Margot was a 4th OFer in name only. In reality he received a starter's workload. Same thing for Bader the following season. They're doing it right now with Caratini. In NY or LA, he's actually a backup C making $7M. In MN he's getting starts at 1B and DH on top of catching duties. 

[Danchat]

I've said this before, but I'd gladly trade a lottery ticket (Gil was not a top 20 prospect or anything) for a couple years of a pretty good outfielder. As stated above, the issue with Cave was that the team believed so much in him when his play fell off. A 6 year gap between Cave and Gil's first big contributions to their teams is not nothing.

[Linus]

I honestly don’t remember if Gil had potential or not. He obviously was a long way from the show. Philosophically I would never trade a pitcher with potential, even in the low minors, for a backup outfielder that are readily available for $2 million, maybe even free off the waiver wire. 

[Danchat]

3 hours ago, Linus said:

I honestly don’t remember if Gil had potential or not. He obviously was a long way from the show. Philosophically I would never trade a pitcher with potential, even in the low minors, for a backup outfielder that are readily available for $2 million, maybe even free off the waiver wire. 

I had taken a look a while back and I believe Gil wasn't on any top 20/30 prospect lists of ours.

When's the last pitching prospect we traded to really burn us, though? We haven't traded many, but Falvey did trade away most of his highest drafted pitchers of the 2021 class in Petty, Hajjar, and Povich and none of them have done anything in the majors to make us regret it. Pitching prospects have such low odds of succeeding, I'd be more liberal in trading them away when possible.

The only example I can think of is Brusdar Graterol, who became a solid reliever but certainly didn't make us regret landing Maeda. 

[Linus]

57 minutes ago, Danchat said:

I had taken a look a while back and I believe Gil wasn't on any top 20/30 prospect lists of ours.

When's the last pitching prospect we traded to really burn us, though? We haven't traded many, but Falvey did trade away most of his highest drafted pitchers of the 2021 class in Petty, Hajjar, and Povich and none of them have done anything in the majors to make us regret it. Pitching prospects have such low odds of succeeding, I'd be more liberal in trading them away when possible.

The only example I can think of is Brusdar Graterol, who became a solid reliever but certainly didn't make us regret landing Maeda. 

Agree to disagree. For me, if a pitcher does contribute at the big league level, the reward is huge and not worth obtaining an asset that is readily available for cheap. 

[Trov]

I like the write up talking about how trades are more than a simple comparison of numbers by the players, but context in those trades are important too. Of course when Gil had his good year or so, fans were upset the deal was made, but the years he spent in the minors the Twins got some value out of the deal and the Yankees got none. If Gil bounces back and show he can be a good starter again, it does not mean the deal was bad for the Twins.  We have no clue if Gil would have ended up doing the same for the Twins either. 

One old deal that people bring up, that really highlights the context of the trade idea is John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander trade in 1987.  Detroit sent Smoltz to Atlanta for Alexander.  Alexander was amazing for Detroit going 9-0 with 1.53 ERA.  Smoltz went on to HOF and helped the Braves dominate the 90's in the NL.  

At the time Smoltz was not a top rated pitcher had been a 22nd round pick out of high school and really not dominating the minors when he was traded by Detroit. At the time many thought Atlanta blew the deal, but history says Detroit got fleeced.  However, Detroit got what they wanted help to win the division, only to lose to the Twins in the playoffs.  We do not know if Smoltz would have developed the same way with Detroit though than with Atlanta.