Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Twins News & Analysis

    Why the Twins Might Need to Trade Carlos Correa


    Cody Christie

    The Twins need to find a way to make payroll space for 2025 and beyond. Is trading the team’s best player a way to extend the team’s winning window?

     

    Image courtesy of © Kamil Krzaczynski-USA TODAY Sports

    Twins Video

    Major decisions are looming over the franchise as the Twins head into the offseason. After a year that ended in bitter disappointment, ownership and the front office face the dilemma of maintaining a competitive roster while dealing with budgetary constraints. One option that could shift the team’s trajectory is trading their star shortstop, Carlos Correa. It’s not an easy decision, but given the organization’s current financial outlook and Correa’s recent injury history, it could be forced upon them.

    This past winter, Twins ownership boldly (Is bold the right word? Well, let's see if it pays off for them.) decided to lower the team’s payroll by $30 million. The writing on the wall seems even more ominous after a formal move to league-produced and -disseminated broadcasts that will bring in less revenue than their old TV deals, and after a drop in attendance in 2024. Heading into 2025, reports indicate that the payroll will remain around the same level as last year, well into the bottom half of the league’s spending rankings.

    For a mid-market team like Minnesota, a stagnant payroll poses significant challenges. The Twins don’t have the luxury of stockpiling marquee free agents every offseason, meaning the front office must get creative with how they allocate resources. With Correa slated to earn $36 million next season, he represents a sizable portion of that budget. The question the Twins must ask themselves is whether that investment makes sense for a team that might be considering a soft rebuild--or, even framing their situation as focused on winning in the short term, whether a player who is unlikely to take more than about 500 plate appearances next year can justifiably take up so much of the payroll.

    Ignoring Correa’s importance is impossible when he’s on the field. After an impressive All-Star season in 2024, he showed why he remains one of the elite shortstops in the game. His glove is still one of the league’s best up-the-middle options, when he has his feet under him, and his bat flashed the form that made him a key cog in Houston’s World Series runs. He cobbled together a 152 OPS+, his highest mark since 2017. Defensively, his OAA ranked in the 87th percentile.

    Yet, it’s also hard to overlook the fact that injuries have impacted Correa in each of his two years since re-signing with the Twins on a long-term basis. He even missed a couple of weeks back in 2022.

    In 2023, he played through painful, nagging plantar fasciitis, which hampered his production down the stretch. In 2024, he missed significant time again, with plantar fasciitis impacting his other foot, and it caused him to miss most of the season's final two months. Though his early-season numbers were All-Star caliber, the durability concerns are hard to ignore when projecting his future value.

    The Twins could be looking at a scenario where they’re paying top dollar for a player who might not be available often enough to return value commensurate with the share of their resources allocated to him. For a team aiming to contend every year, that’s a risk you take. But for a team looking to make a major transition? That’s a luxury they might not be able to afford.

    Correa’s contract includes a full no-trade clause, a significant hurdle for any potential deal. However, there are a few scenarios in which Correa might be willing to waive it. The most obvious one involves the Twins being honest with him about the state of the franchise. If the front office communicates that the club is unlikely to be able to build a winner around him due to their new financial reality, Correa could recognize that his remaining prime years would be better spent elsewhere. He may also be frustrated about how the team has collapsed in two of his three seasons with the club. If the Twins are going in a new direction, Correa may be willing to go to a team with a better chance of winning in the short term. 

    Correa signed with the Twins, in part, because he believed the team was on the verge of sustained success. If that vision no longer aligns with reality, he could opt for a chance to win another championship. Teams like the Dodgers or Yankees, with their financial flexibility and championship aspirations, would undoubtedly be interested in adding him, on what ended up being a fairly team-friendly contract--assuming a Dodgers- or Yankees-like payroll. Given the size of his contract and injury concerns, the Twins might not get a king’s ransom for him, but they could net some valuable prospects to jumpstart a rebuild or help extend their winning window. Most importantly, they'd get at least a majority of the money tied up in Correa back, to spend broadly on their current core or in free agency.

    The decision to trade Correa won’t be easy, but it may be necessary. Perhaps this is the move that could get the organization moving affirmatively in the right direction again, even if it means saying goodbye to their franchise player. If the Twins truly intend to reset, parting ways with their star shortstop may be the cost of doing business in a league that rewards flexibility and future planning over sentimentality.


    Is Correa untradeable? Are the Twins forced to be creative this winter? Leave a comment and start the discussion.

    Follow Twins Daily For Minnesota Twins News & Analysis

    Recent Twins Articles

    Recent Twins Videos

    Twins Top Prospects

    Eduardo Tait

    Cedar Rapids Kernels - A+, C
    On Saturday, Tait went 2-for-4 with a walk and his 17th double. The 19-year-old is hitting .219 with 17 doubles and 15 home runs at High-A Cedar Rapids.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    I would expect Carlos would at least consider waiving his no-trade clause.... based on who buys the team (I expect he'd wait and see for that first).  I got the impression the FO would respect and consider his input on decisions, but that didn't seem to happen much once they decided to not spend any money.  He even gave them a list of possible pitching trade targets at the deadline - think Richards was on it?  I bet not.

    He's in the middle of his career, and the current owners probably wish they never would have signed him.  I'm still hopeful a new owner will inject money into the team, and he'll want to be here.

    3 hours ago, whosafraidofluigirussolo said:

    Gotta say, this comment aged quite well.

     

    18 hours ago, h2oface said:

    If the Pohlads were smart, they would sell the team and take the money and use it to make more of their precious fortune in a different "business".

    And sell it to a guy that has even more money, and wants to have fun and doesn't need it to be a "business" of this sort, and makes it a hobby to have fun with until he dies....... and spends for enjoyment, and to win.

    I hope the second paragraph does as well! The most important. MLB teams are not a regular business. 

    9 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

    Always remember... The reason we got Correa in the first place was because we were the team willing to pay more than others were willing to pay.

    Not entirely true. The Giants and Mets were willing to pay more.  The Twins evidently were third in line.

    5 hours ago, bean5302 said:

    2. The Twins have no proven depth at SS, and the only guy on the current roster with the physical tools to play SS is Royce Lewis, who the Twins thought was so error prone they needed to move him to 2B or something?

    Lewis, Lee, Castro, Farmer. All provided depth or could have at SS. It was probably one of the positions of more depth than any other position on the roster. If we are going to compare talent of that depth to the starter then which position is or was better equiped than SS. None. There isn't any that has proven depth. Not in the outfield or any of the infield spots. If you are going to base NOT trading a player based on depth then the Twins shouldn't trade anyone because they have no "proven" depth anywhere.

    57 minutes ago, rv78 said:

    Not entirely true. The Giants and Mets were willing to pay more.  The Twins evidently were third in line.

    Are you saying that Correa decided not to play for the Giants and Mets? 

    Are you saying that the Twins could trade the entire Correa contract to the Giants and Mets because they we're willing to pay more? 

     

    On 10/9/2024 at 7:19 PM, rv78 said:

    Should have never signed him in the first place. Over-rated and over-paid.

    Agreed. I've been saying a small market team can't pay that much for a single player unless they can hit over 50 homeruns and knock in 120 runs a year, AND needs to be able to stay reasonably healthy. We've had a few great streaks from Correa but two long horrible starts to 2 seasons and missed a boatload of games. Signing him was a risk and resigning him was worse. 

    20 hours ago, tarheeltwinsfan said:

    Richie, Thanks for providing the fascinating Harvard article, which says that MLB teams on a lower budget, should allocate their budget more evenly among the players and not sign an individual player who has to be paid 27 per cent of the annual salary allocation. However, I sure do like watching Correa play short stop.

    Agreed, they signed Correa, I love watching him play, he’s fantastic.

    offloading Correa only for the sake of cash preservation and satisfying a statistical metric would be the worst. Lee would be a significant downgrade in 2025.


    Next offseason, if Lee is knocking down the door and Correa had a healthy ‘25 where he is tradeable as an asset and brings back a good return, it’s a different calculus.

    11 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

    Are you saying that Correa decided not to play for the Giants and Mets? 

    Are you saying that the Twins could trade the entire Correa contract to the Giants and Mets because they we're willing to pay more? 

     

    Seriously? You don't know that the Giants and Mets offered more to Correa than the Twins did and the ONLY reason why the Twins got him was because they both backed out. It wasn't because "Always remember... The reason we got Correa in the first place was because we were the team willing to pay more than others were willing to pay."

    41 minutes ago, rv78 said:

    Seriously? You don't know that the Giants and Mets offered more to Correa than the Twins did and the ONLY reason why the Twins got him was because they both backed out. It wasn't because "Always remember... The reason we got Correa in the first place was because we were the team willing to pay more than others were willing to pay."

    I know that the Giants and Mets offered more to Correa than the Twins did and I also know that Correa agreed to both offers. 

    You typed "Backed Out" in your post. Do you not know what "Backed out" means? 

    I don't know that trading your most marketable player (or one of) is a great way to maximize the value of the sale of the team. A future owner will either view Correa as a marketable player to build around or a potential trade piece, but both of those require him to be on the roster when he/she/they buy.

    12 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

    I know that the Giants and Mets offered more to Correa than the Twins did and I also know that Correa agreed to both offers. 

    You typed "Backed Out" in your post. Do you not know what "Backed out" means? 

    Sure do. They backed out because of his health, not because of the amount of money they offered him. 

     

    7 hours ago, rv78 said:

    Sure do. They backed out because of his health, not because of the amount of money they offered him. 

     

    Follow it through in your head. 

    The Twins were willing to pay Correa more money than other teams were.

    If the Giants and Mets were willing to pay more money than the Twins. Correa would be playing for the Giants or Mets. If the Giants and Mets backed out... they were not willing to pay more. 

    Doesn't matter if it was health or body odor. They were not willing to pay more. Correa had a pen in hand... the Giants and Mets did not provide a piece of paper with words on it.

    The Twins had the best offer that he could affix a signature to.

    If you want to repeat your point that the Giants and Mets originally offered more. Please don't. 

    On 10/10/2024 at 8:09 AM, Cory Engelhardt said:

    KAT would not have been the wolves best player this year: Arguably he wouldn’t even have been 2nd most important behind Gobert and Ant. But I digress. They hopefully won’t trade Correa

    The best player in the  deal.

    This simply isn’t happening. First there is no surplus value in the contract so you would likely have to throw in a prospect to make something happen. Second players only waive their no trade if they get something out of the deal (ie $$$$ guarantees contract extension). Who is ponying up for that?  Third the Twins have no above average SS to take Correas place. Lee could be below average there but we don’t know if he will hit. Lewis is not a MLB SS. 

    8 hours ago, Linus said:

    This simply isn’t happening. First there is no surplus value in the contract so you would likely have to throw in a prospect to make something happen. Second players only waive their no trade if they get something out of the deal (ie $$$$ guarantees contract extension). Who is ponying up for that?  Third the Twins have no above average SS to take Correas place. Lee could be below average there but we don’t know if he will hit. Lewis is not a MLB SS. 

    Dude you're completely ignoring Farmer

    On 10/12/2024 at 4:55 AM, Riverbrian said:

    Follow it through in your head. 

    The Twins were willing to pay Correa more money than other teams were.

    If the Giants and Mets were willing to pay more money than the Twins. Correa would be playing for the Giants or Mets. If the Giants and Mets backed out... they were not willing to pay more. 

    Doesn't matter if it was health or body odor. They were not willing to pay more. Correa had a pen in hand... the Giants and Mets did not provide a piece of paper with words on it.

    The Twins had the best offer that he could affix a signature to.

    If you want to repeat your point that the Giants and Mets originally offered more. Please don't. 

    Ok, you win. the reason we got Correa was because we were willing to pay more, it wasn't because the Giants and Mets backed out. LOL! (If they wouldn't have backed out, he wouldn't be playing for the Twins, but you go ahead and believe in what you want). Drink some more kool-aid.

    It is a bummer Correa has been injured so much since signing with the Twins, but unlike Buxton with his hot and mostly cold streaks Correa is solid on the field and in the batter's box. He seems to be respected in the locker room too. 

     

    When he is interviewed regarding his injuries, he is pretty devastated by it. You can clearly see how much this guy loves baseball. You don't trade a guy like this nor would any team sign a player with his history. All you would do by shopping him is piss him off. 

    5 hours ago, akmanak said:

    It is a bummer Correa has been injured so much since signing with the Twins, but unlike Buxton with his hot and mostly cold streaks Correa is solid on the field and in the batter's box. He seems to be respected in the locker room too. 

     

    When he is interviewed regarding his injuries, he is pretty devastated by it. You can clearly see how much this guy loves baseball. You don't trade a guy like this nor would any team sign a player with his history. All you would do by shopping him is piss him off. 

    Evidently the Astros didn't think he was worth keeping. 

    19 hours ago, rv78 said:

    Ok, you win. the reason we got Correa was because we were willing to pay more, it wasn't because the Giants and Mets backed out. LOL! (If they wouldn't have backed out, he wouldn't be playing for the Twins, but you go ahead and believe in what you want). Drink some more kool-aid.

    My point was that they would have difficulty moving that contract because they paid more than other teams were willing to pay.

    However... I see the point that you so doggedly make. The Giants and Mets backed out. 

    Thank you for pointing this out. This was clearly beyond my understanding. 

     

     




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...