Thinking Big: Should the Twins Target Top Closer Mason Miller?

[Matthew Taylor]

Image courtesy of Kyle Ross-Imagn Images

Trade deadline rumors are beginning to heat up, and one of the biggest names on the market could be Padres closer Mason Miller. Kevin Acee of The San Diego Union-Tribune recently reported that San Diego is open to moving the All-Star right-hander, a surprising development considering Miller has been nearly untouchable since arriving in San Diego. While adding the game's most dominant closer is an exciting idea, the Twins should look elsewhere this deadline.

Miller was arguably the biggest name dealt at last year's trade deadline when the Padres acquired the flamethrowing closer from the Athletics. San Diego paid an enormous price, headlined by consensus top-five prospect Leo De Vries along with several additional prospects. At the time, it felt like one of the rare blockbuster trades that worked out exactly as both sides hoped. The Athletics received a franchise cornerstone prospect, while the Padres acquired arguably the most dominant reliever in baseball. 

After posting a microscopic 0.77 ERA during the second half of last season, he has followed it up with a 0.91 ERA across 40 innings with San Diego while leading the majors with 25 saves. There is little debate that Miller has established himself as baseball's premier closer.

 

Despite all of that success, the Padres appear willing to deal away the right-hander. It is an understandable position for a team sitting at 48-48 in an incredibly competitive National League, particularly in a loaded NL West. With playoff odds hovering around 12 percent, the Padres may see this as an opportunity to replenish a farm system they emptied to acquire Miller in the first place.

If he truly is available, there will be no shortage of bidders. Every contender would love to shorten games by handing the ninth inning to Miller. He is the type of player who instantly raises a team's ceiling. 

Despite their back-end bullpen needs, the Twins simply are not in the position where paying that price makes sense.

Minnesota has put itself in a good spot to return to the postseason for the first time since 2023, finally back to a .500 record and with playoff odds of nearly 40 percent. That alone represents meaningful progress after the disappointment of the past two seasons. But making the playoffs and being one player away from a deep October run are two very different things.

Acquiring Miller is the type of move teams make when they believe they are one missing piece from winning a World Series. It is hard to make that argument for this Twins roster.

The asking price is almost certainly going to start with elite prospects. If San Diego paid Leo De Vries to get Miller, they are not going to flip him one year later for a package built around secondary prospects. The Twins would likely have to begin conversations with names like Walker Jenkins or Kaelen Culpepper. That is simply too steep for a relief pitcher, even one as dominant as Miller, for a team that's no sure thing to make the playoffs, nevertheless the World Series.

There is also the financial side of the equation, which should not be overlooked.

Miller is making just $4 million this season, but he has already begun the arbitration process which figures to escalate quickly for someone of his caliber. That matters because saves are one of the biggest drivers of arbitration salaries for relievers. With a league-leading save total and continued dominance, it is easy to envision Miller earning well north of $10 million next season before climbing to nearly $20 million and above in his remaining arbitration years.

Yes, the Twins could technically afford those salaries. The better question is whether that is the smartest use of (self imposed) limited payroll flexibility.

For organizations like the Dodgers, Yankees, or Mets, paying top dollar for a closer is manageable. For a mid-market club like Minnesota, every payroll decision carries more weight. Committing that kind of money to a reliever limits flexibility elsewhere on the roster, especially when the Twins have several young players who will also become more expensive over the next few seasons.

Recent reports suggest the Padres have discussed the possibility of attaching Xander Bogaerts to a Miller trade as a way to unload the remainder of the veteran shortstop's contract. Bogaerts is still owed $25 million annually over each of the next seven seasons, an enormous commitment for an underperforming 33-year-old.

On paper, absorbing that contract could reduce the prospect package needed to acquire Miller. In reality, it creates an even bigger problem for Minnesota.

The Twins are already carrying $10 million annually of dead money for Carlos Correa's contract through 2028. Taking on Bogaerts would saddle the organization with another massive long-term commitment for a declining player. Even if the prospect cost became more reasonable, the financial burden would almost certainly outweigh the benefit.

That is not how this front office should allocate its resources.

The bullpen certainly deserves attention before the deadline. There is no question the Twins could use multiple reliable late-inning arms. The mistake would be confusing that need with a reason to push all of their chips into the middle of the table.

Successful mid-market organizations rarely build bullpens through blockbuster trades. They identify undervalued relievers, develop arms internally, and spread their resources across multiple needs rather than concentrating them into one bullpen spot.

If the Twins are going to make a significant deadline splash, it should come at a position that impacts the game every day or every fifth day. A frontline starter or an impact bat would move the needle far more than even the best closer in baseball.

There is no denying that watching Mason Miller in a Twins uniform would be a lot of fun. His electric fastball and dominant stuff would immediately transform the back end of Minnesota's bullpen and make every late lead feel secure.

The problem is that acquiring him would likely require paying both a prospect price and eventually a financial price that simply do not align with where this organization is today. The Twins are trending in the right direction, but they are not one closer away from winning a championship.

Sometimes the smartest deadline move is recognizing that the biggest name on the market is not the right fit.

What do you think? Should the Twins push their chips to the middle for the best closer in baseball, or should they focus their prospect capital and payroll on addressing bigger needs before the trade deadline? Leave a comment below and start the conversation!

View full article

[Cody Christie]

Send Eduardo Tait and Mick Abel to the Padres. 😅

[LewFordLives]

5 minutes ago, Cody Christie said:

Send Eduardo Tait and Mick Abel to the Padres. 😅

You beat me to it. It cuts deep.

[Patzky]

Go cheap go Hader 

[Aggies7]

Thinking big: should aggies7 target Sydney Sweeney? 😉 

[h2oface]

1 hour ago, Cody Christie said:

Send Eduardo Tait and Mick Abel to the Padres. 😅

I was going to say that! But then, why would a team ever give up their top closer for a tiny haul like that? 

[LyleCole]

If the Twins are serious about contending then multiple moves should be made at the deadline:  a starter and a closer, and maybe even another short reliever on a lesser deal.

Everyone with the exception of Jenkins and Culpepper, and perhaps Marek Houston (a prospect I am not as high on as others but if he keeps hitting even close to his AA production he is a starting MLB player)

I would include Luke Keaschall and Brooks Lee on the available players.

 

[amjgt]

48 minutes ago, Aggies7 said:

Thinking big: should aggies7 target Sydney Sweeney? 😉 

It would probably take a big package

[Blyleven2011]

It's the fans that always want to think big ...

But Matthew you answered your own question  , they will avoid it ...

If we were a serious contender and needed just a couple of players to tweak the roster for the whole kit and kaboodle,  then yes go big  ...

[Mike Sixel]

People want a team under .500 to deal top prospects, and even current young starters? Speechless. 

[LA Vikes Fan]

I agree that everybody in the farm system should be available this year for trade except Jenkins. I frankly be OK with trading Culpepper now that Houston is showing so much promise. Still, the cost for Miller is probably too high and taking on Bogaerts deal is a non-starter hard no. I would love to get Miller if he was available for even a top five prospect like Culpepper or Emma plus someone else in the top 20 towards the back half without taking on the Bogarts millstone of a contract. I think that’s not enough so I don’t think he’s a realistic target.

[HerbieFan]

Why are we even talking about this?  Additions will be minimal and probably just a bullpen arm that is better than the Travis Adams' and Eric Orzes of the world that they've been running out there.

[thelanges5]

27 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

People want a team under .500 to deal top prospects, and even current young starters? Speechless. 

Sub .500 club with a negative run differential.
More interesting to watch than last year, hell yeah. Trade the future to miss the playoffs, no thank you. 

[Otaknam]

No to acquiring Miller. This team is a fringe playoff team with a .500 record. Do not sacrifice your future high end talent unless it is for minor league prospects who you do not value. 

[Otaknam]

1 hour ago, thelanges5 said:

Sub .500 club with a negative run differential.
More interesting to watch than last year, hell yeah. Trade the future to miss the playoffs, no thank you. 

My thoughts exactly! This is a mediocre team playing above its weight class. 

[LyleCole]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

People want a team under .500 to deal top prospects, and even current young starters? Speechless. 

I thought this team is a "contender"?  Maybe you don't think that.  But if you do and ownership is committed to increasing payroll, now is the time.  

Otherwise, be major sellers at the deadline and rebuild.

 

[Wedman13]

3 hours ago, Cody Christie said:

Send Eduardo Tait and Mick Abel to the Padres. 😅

Or as a package deal, include Joe Ryan for Nelson Cruz?

I'll admit a funny post, but cheap shots are easy.

i would absolutely take this team and prospects versus a year ago.  Some work, some don't.

oh, and no please on this Mason Miller deal

[ashbury]

3 hours ago, Cody Christie said:

Send Eduardo Tait and Mick Abel to the Padres. 😅

[mrguy]

The Padres have already said they won't move Miller despite the media acting like they will. I'd rather focus on actually possible trades like trying to get Soriano from the Angels or even a Senzatela from the Rockies. Both would be major upgrades that actually feel realistic

[wesnewy]

not after this series against the Cubs... seems like we are more in need of a quality 3/4 starter AND major BP help. Going after someone like Mason Miller would ruin the future of this franchise for a season with a very small percentage of a deep playoff run

Edited Sunday at 09:23 PM by wesnewy
spelling error

[Supfin99]

6 hours ago, LyleCole said:

If the Twins are serious about contending then multiple moves should be made at the deadline:  a starter and a closer, and maybe even another short reliever on a lesser deal.

Everyone with the exception of Jenkins and Culpepper, and perhaps Marek Houston (a prospect I am not as high on as others but if he keeps hitting even close to his AA production he is a starting MLB player)

I would include Luke Keaschall and Brooks Lee on the available players.

 

This might be the most nonsensical thing I’ve read this entire weekend. And that is saying something considering the wasteland that is Twitter. 

[tony&rodney]

The only thing I can add is perhaps very obvious - the Twins should have discussions with Preller about Mason Miller and several other players. Perhaps San Diego is a match for the Twins in more than one category and after talking things out maybe one deal gets completed ..... or more. It can't hurt to talk.

[mikelink45]

 Mason could not help in todays debacle.  Let's stop thinking about the moon and LOOK for some small tweaks. 

[HarmonK03]

7 hours ago, LyleCole said:

I would include Luke Keaschall and Brooks Lee on the available players.

Why would you trade Lee when you have no immediate replacement that would upgrade 3B.  I get Keaschall from the standpoint that we have a glut of outfielders, I would prefer he stay but could understand if he was moved.  But moving Lee at his age feels like it is a move for the sake of making a move unless we get  someone better in return.

[HarmonK03]

And no on Miller, we are not that close to contending to get a lockdown closer.  There is a reason the Athletics moved on from him.

[DocBauer]

Absolutely not. The prospect capital and almost immediate pending increases in arbitration $. One dominant closer might be a good trade a couple years from now when we have a possible/probable fine lineup of mostly 27yo and younger players, have fleshed out the pen better, and have what I believe will still be a quality rotation at that time lead by Bradley, Abel, Prielipp,  etc, etc.

They need a couple solid, dependable pen arms to finish out this season and support the lineup and starting staff that we currently have. Having someone mike Miller would aure by nice, but we're just not a closer away from being an actual contender. 

[TheLeviathan]

Can web forums be drunk?  Twinsdaily feels drunk.

[saviking]

You knew the answer to your question was a hard no before you asked it.

At least yiur article is about adding help to our relif core but hopefully the next article from any contributor is about more reasonable priced mid to back end talent. 

[LyleCole]

2 hours ago, Supfin99 said:

This might be the most nonsensical thing I’ve read this entire weekend. And that is saying something considering the wasteland that is Twitter. 

How is it "nonsensical" ?  You really cannot explain it which means your hypothesis is weak.

Basically, there are two paths.  One, go all in and prove that ownership will invest in this team that people consider to be a "contender" (I don't totally agree with this myself) and get the payroll up to closer to average MLB payroll.  Find the right deals and bring in at least one front line starter and one high end reliever.  

Or, otherwise, if the ownership is still on the we are going to be spendthrift path, dump everything that will not be a full part of the rebuild.  Ryan.  Jeffers.  Buxton.  Lewis.  Bell.  Get the best prospect deals you can.  

Then rebuild.

It is two divergent paths that only ownership can control.

[Major League Ready]

Should have just kept Valand.