Grading the 9 Trades from the Twins’ 2025 Trade Deadline

I strongly disagree that the Varland trade was a D grade. That trade brought back more talent than any trade except the Duran deal. I would give it a solid B.

I think the trade order matters. They didn't have Roden when they traded for Outman. Still, I would give the Stewart trade an F. They traded a useful, though often injured, reliever for a 28-year-old outfielder who probably doesn't deserve a 40-man roster spot. It doesn't help them in the short or long term. That's a horrible trade.

I think they may have overplayed their hand with Coulombe. Other lefty rental relievers went for a better return earlier. By holding out for more they settled for less.

Some of the money saved in the Paddack/Dobnak deal was paid to send Correa to Houston. That deal might not happen without the other trades to free up the cash.

What is the context of your ranking? Is it player based? ? How are you rating the prospects coming back? Is it from similar trades? Is it your gut feeling?

Given the variables of the team and the unknowns, other than the Varland move (which feels like you graded based off of emotions) I can't see any move being less than a B or B-. Finances ruled the day. Teams saw that everyone was being moved so they started to lowball all the trade offers. If this started a week ago, the returns may have looked different.

The Duran trade only looks worse because of the Miller trade, otherwise everyone would be crowing about it.

Correa gets a B in a bubble, but will be an F by next spring when that money is not reinvested back into salary.

All of that being said, the common knowledge comment: We will not truly know the success or failure of these trades until 2028-2030.

5 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

They traded a useful, though often injured, reliever for a 28-year-old outfielder

That is a mostly fair trade. But like you said, doesn't really help the team much for the next two seasons. So I'm fairly confused. I don't even think he's optionable next year, so I agree, he's a strong DFA candidate if not in the offseason, within the 2026 season. Easily the worst trade of the bunch. 

7 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I think they may have overplayed their hand with Coulombe. Other lefty rental relievers went for a better return earlier. By holding out for more they settled for less.

Would have loved Blaze Jordan in return like the Cardinals got for Steven Matz. If only for that sweet name. 

But, for whatever reason, MLB doesn't value Coulombe. He only received a $3M contract, and similarly, Theilbar only got $2.75M. Soft tossing, old man southpaws just aren't coveted. Matz's sinker sits at 94, that's probably the reason for the difference in return. 

8 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I disagree with Varland getting the same grade as Stewart. While I personally dislike the Varland move more, it's mostly for non-baseball reasons. Rojas is a good get. Maybe a C grade on that one?

People here are getting too emotional over a failed starter. This was a solid baseball trade. I'd probably give it a B. I just don't think it was completely necessary, forcing your front office to completely rebuild a bullpen instead of leaving a piece or two. But the return is impressive for an arm that no one would have complained about trading away on April 1st.

3 minutes ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Correa gets a B in a bubble, but will be an F by next spring when that money is not reinvested back into salary.

Honestly, getting a team to take Correa and only paying off 1/3 of the remaining contract is a pretty great trade and something I am pretty happy about. B+ for the organization. 

They probably SHOULDN'T reinvest that payroll gap in the payroll next season. This is, at least, a minor rebuild and you don't try to keep payroll high during a year you're not building towards. 

They should look for some more Bader type contracts, which was very obviously always a great signing from Day 1. If it goes well, great you improved your team. If the season doesn't go well, you can flip them at the deadline for some low tier prospects or relievers. 

The Correa trade is either an A or F. If they spend the savings to bring in a player from outside the organization it will be an A. If they pocket the savings it is an F.

Seems like the Twins reacted to teams coming to them. Did the Twins target any players? Were they willing to pay market to acquire stronger prospects? The unknown creates doubt in my mind concerning how to evaluate the transactions. Certainly it is really difficult to understand what type of baseball player Falvey values. It does seem like he favors LH corner outfielders who may best fit as peripheral defenders or DH's and any pitching. For example, I have to wonder if Taj Bradley was all that could have been returned? Would the Cubs have sent over Kevin Alcantara? Could Jax, Castro, and a minor leaguer have  returned Harry Ford? These are all unanswerable and speculative to a large extent.

Grading the recent deals doesn't mean too much but (for me) it feels like someone didn't do their homework ahead of time and failed to maximize the potential of those players sent off. There are good players received, to be sure, but they mostly feel like alternatives to what was already within the organization.

2 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

Honestly, getting a team to take Correa and only paying off 1/3 of the remaining contract is a pretty great trade and something I am pretty happy about. B+ for the organization. 

They probably SHOULDN'T reinvest that payroll gap in the payroll next season. This is, at least, a minor rebuild and you don't try to keep payroll high during a year you're not building towards. 

They should look for some more Bader type contracts, which was very obviously always a great signing from Day 1. If it goes well, great you improved your team. If the season doesn't go well, you can flip them at the deadline for some low tier prospects or relievers. 

I hope they don’t go this direction. They need to build a bullpen for next year. That can be done. They need to get a middle of the line up bat. That can be done. They need to make the most of the next two years with Ryan and Lopez. I know I have a bias here. I need them to fight for 2026. Reinvest.

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

It's entirely valid to look at trades beyond the impact they have on the baseball diamond. Varland is from St Paul and he grew up a Twins fan. Trading him away when he has so many years of control left sucks.

I think it's fine to look at that, and I think it's also accurate to state that it isn't worth anything at all to the organization and that people here are being extremely irrational over this trivial fact. 

1 hour ago, jorgenswest said:

They need to build a bullpen for next year.

I can see them giving multiple budget contracts to some decent relievers, in that $2-$6M range. Those are then easily traded at the deadline if things aren't breaking right, and may even bring something real back. 

1 hour ago, jorgenswest said:

They need to get a middle of the line up bat.

This is almost certainly not happening. Veteran bats in the $7-$12M range could be an option, but those likely aren't hitting middle of the order. I think a REAL free agent commitment won't happen until the crop of AA prospects prove they're ready to make up the next core, which I expect to be late 2026, meaning a signing for 2027. 

I wish you the best in your fight. 

1 hour ago, Rod Carews Birthday said:

Try as you .  

For me, I was opposed to the general fire sale of the bullpen and remain adamantly opposed to trading Ryan, but it’s also something I can’t control. I was against trading Rod Carew also, but Calvin Griffith didn’t call me for my opinion.  I remain a fan because I root for the Twins, not a single player, regardless of his hometown.  I just hope they don’t screw it up. 

Damn.  He never called me about trading Rod.  For the record, I hold a Grudge and still do over this one.😠

Standing in place would have been the worst non-move. This team offense was going nowhere near the World Series. As for Buxton, I expect he'd like a World Series win and that offense won't do it. Now, in about one to two years we'll have more players like Keaschall and less players like 0-11 with bases loaded Correa. Regardless of the talent level you need clutch players. Clemens has modest offensive talent, but unlike Correa he is clutch.

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

Honestly, getting a team to take Correa and only paying off 1/3 of the remaining contract is a pretty great trade and something I am pretty happy about. B+ for the organization. 

They probably SHOULDN'T reinvest that payroll gap in the payroll next season. This is, at least, a minor rebuild and you don't try to keep payroll high during a year you're not building towards. 

They should look for some more Bader type contracts, which was very obviously always a great signing from Day 1. If it goes well, great you improved your team. If the season doesn't go well, you can flip them at the deadline for some low tier prospects or relievers. 

Not arguing with your view. The remainder of the offseason should tell the story. If Ryan/Lopez get moved, then I am in complete agreement with you. If not, then we are back to the same discussion about "how many pieces away are they from competing for a playoff spot?"

I'm comfortable downgrading the overall Varland trade because it seems so unnecessary (and while Rojas is a legit prospect, Roden is...not) but ranking it the worst of the deals with such a low grade gets caught up a little too much in the emotion of it and weights the "hometown boy" aspect too heavily for my tastes. I wouldn't have dealt Varland because he could be anchoring your bullpen not just next season but for 3-4 seasons at an affordable rate and hopefully we're not stuck in the basement for that full time with the supposed talent we have on this team and in the system. But the return isn't awful...just risky.

I think we fans have been overrating Castro a bit as a player; his ability to play everywhere is probably no longer realistic (would you really want him at SS or CF?) and he's only putting up an OPS+ of 103 this season. Following seasons where he had an OPS+ of 101 and 105. He's not a bad player (and by all accounts is a great guy) but the all-star appearance was a fluke. He's a nice fit for a contender as a bench player, but he's become less impactful and that was reflected in his rental value.

Stewart is complicated. I think his value is low because he simply can't be relied on to be healthy. The upside is great, but who would want to pencil him in as their closer or primary set-up man going forward? I probably wouldn't have traded him, and certainly not for Outman, so I'd rank this one much lower just because what did it do for us? But at the same time, I wouldn't be able to count on Stewart as a key bullpen guy for next season, even if he finishes the season healthy.

I think the worst trade of the bunch was Stewart. The rest of them feel like a setup to compete in 2027 and beyond and Outman does nothing to help with that timeline. I’d rather have seen them take a flyer on someone a few years away if Stewart’s market was tepid due to injury concerns. While I hated the Varland trade for sentimental reasons I think it was a solid B on the return. Time will tell.

Nuggats. :)  not Nuggets.  IYKYK lol

No particular order because my brain doesn't function in order...

C4 = Bad trade because you should have gotten even a lottery ticket prospect back for taking on 1/3 of his salary.

Duran/Jax/Varland:  Duran happened, good return at the moment.  It could be great or a bust.  But has potential.  Jax requested a trade, so I understand it from that aspect, and it is good at the moment it is like Duran, could go either way.  Varland, although the return was good but I do NOT understand trading all 3 top relievers away especially since they were ALL under team control.

Brock Stewart: F  Not so much I valued Brock that much but Outland coming back is worth about a bucket of baseballs.  Like the Houston trade, they should have gotten a better player in return, at least one that has a more likely upside.

The free agents to be, I think they were all good because you are handicapped on rentals.

Fun Fact: Paddack has pitched in 3 Twins/Tigers games this year and is 0-3.  So it gets a bump because this time we got the W. 😄

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

They probably SHOULDN'T reinvest that payroll gap in the payroll next season. This is, at least, a minor rebuild and you don't try to keep payroll high during a year you're not building towards. 

I would have no problem if they invested that payroll in extensions for Ryan Jeffers and possibly Keaschall. They should fill in the gaps with some veteran free agents at positions that don't block young players (1B, C, RP) with the possibility of flipping them at the deadline.

The Stewart trade was bad - but how much has he helped the Twins in his career here? Not much. He's spent more time on the IL than logging IPs. 

The reason the trade was bad isn't because of Stewart's value, it's the fact the Twins got Outman in the deal. A 28 year-old AAA player who is out of options? As others have said this guy's a DFA candidate...it's almost like the Twins did the Dodgers a favor on this one. Would have preferred a 20 year-old lottery ticket, frankly. 

Roden hit a dinger yesterday. Maybe give the kid a chance before we grade the Varland deal. Rojas is a legit prospect too. 

8 minutes ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Not arguing with your view. The remainder of the offseason should tell the story. If Ryan/Lopez get moved, then I am in complete agreement with you. If not, then we are back to the same discussion about "how many pieces away are they from competing for a playoff spot?"

They could feasibly just fill their bullpen with some FA arms and still try to go for it. And if things break right, they can try to add a bat at the deadline. 

I just think it'd be pretty unwise for them to sign Pete Alonso or Kyle Schwarber to a 4yr/$120M contract this offseason, for example. 

Still, the question lingers: was Duran worth even more?

Yes.

Whether the deal pays off fully depends on how (or if) that freed-up money gets reinvested.

Not going to happen with current ownership.

Two takeaways:

1. The Twins are once again a farm club for the major leagues
2. These transactions did nothing to address the issue that sank the team last year and again this season - poor offensive production

12 minutes ago, BrokenCompass said:

The Stewart trade was bad - but how much has he helped the Twins in his career here? Not much. He's spent more time on the IL than logging IPs.

Are we talking about the same person? As of last week he was in the upper third of the roster by WAR (1.4), and put up enviable numbers, Time on the IL does not erase that. 

The bottom line is, in the short term the Twins became even more minor league than usual after this massacre.  So in 2026 they should embrace who they are - a development team for larger markets.  Bring up the AA ball players.  Keaschall and Jenkins in the outfield flanking Buxton, ditch Wallner and Larnach, Culpepper to 2B. Hope Lewis and Lee learn how to hit.  As for 1B, they haven't developed a single alternative in the entire organization, so probably Clemens, and noodle armed Jeffers at catcher because they also have no better alternatives there.   I would bring back Vazquez because he's good with pitchers - and because they need to bring up every young guy they can to get rocked by ML hitters all year and learn their craft. 

I forgot DH - Baldelli 's already got this figured out - it's Gasper.

10 minutes ago, The Great Hambino said:

All those things are also true about Varland, except he'd be cheaper and with more long-term control.

If the Twins had received a Varland clone in one of these trades, we'd be stoked that they at least had a young pre-arb guy with closer potential to build the future bullpen around.

My biggest issue with this trade is they acted seemingly out of an urgency that they didn't need to have.  This trade just wasn't necessary.  It's the kind you make only if you're getting a Godfather offer.  Since I see Roden as a low-ceiling redundancy, this value has to come pretty much entirely from Rojas.  I'm not going to pretend to know anything about him other than what I've read, but is his median outcome better than what Varland is now?  It better be well past that for this to make sense.

 

The fact that you can replace Varland for relatively cheap is another reason the trade happened. Phil Maton only got a $2M contract this last offseason. Ryne Stanek $4.5M. Kyle Finnegan $6M. You can find valuable arms on the FA market for fairly cheap. Not to mention the failed starters in your own system. 

So, while it's nice to have Varland on a league min contract for multiple years, it's simply not as valuable as having a SP or a LF at that same price. 

Honestly, I can see the Twins "winning" this trade in terms of excess value on Roden alone. I wouldn't bet on it, but I can see a 20% chance of that. Add in Rojas and this was a very good baseball trade.