Article: On Slowey, Twins Sold Too Low Once Again

[Nick Nelson]

You can view the page at http://www.twinsdaily.com/content.php?155-On-Slowey-Twins-Sold-Too-Low-Once-Again

[Parker Hageman]

I agree that the Twins should have held on to Slowey to see if the market developed more for a pitcher -- as it proved it did when the Indians became in need of an additional starter -- however I do question whether moving forward Slowey will ever live up to his "dominant minor league" track record, specifically because of his wrist injury. Since he had a screw inserted into his wrist, his secondary offerings have declined. His fastball control might be able to guide him to some extent but without a viable secondary pitch, he's not likely to live up to expectations that many statistically inclined individuals believe he is capable of. Now, its possible that he adapts to the foriegn body in his pitching wrist, but I would tend to think otherwise. The shame is that the Twins hurried him out the door and got less value in return regardless of what his future holds.

[Seth Stohs]

It was a personality issue that the Twins rushed to remove, fair or not. I also don't think that the Twins would have dealt Slowey directly to Cleveland or the Cleveland would have given up Putnam for him. Cleveland's farm system is weak. Had Putnam been in the Twins system, I likely would have ranked him somewhere in the low-20s. (Then again, I wouldn't have Turpen in my Top 50 either).

[Parker Hageman]

It was a personality issue that the Twins rushed to remove, fair or not. I also don't think that the Twins would have dealt Slowey directly to Cleveland or the Cleveland would have given up Putnam for him. Cleveland's farm system is weak. Had Putnam been in the Twins system, I likely would have ranked him somewhere in the low-20s. (Then again, I wouldn't have Turpen in my Top 50 either).

I'm not sure that the Twins/Cleveland trade couldn't have happened. After all, they did deal for Pavano from Cleveland in the division. The reality is, the opportunity did not exist when they traded him to Colorado.

[John Bonnes]

The Rockies also threw in $1.25M million dollars to cover Slowey's salary. That's the difference in the prospects.

[Nick Nelson]

Sure seems like it'd be worth that price to get a legitimate prospect rather than a wash-out.

[Seth Stohs]

The Pavano for Pino deal was in August, and Pino wasn't a prospect, even though I liked him.

 

And yes, the $1.25M was a huge variable, for sure.

[Seth Stohs]

true, but remember that the Rockies wanted money at that time so they could spend it on Cuddyer, and the Twins likely didn't want to contribute to that.

[Parker Hageman]

The Pavano for Pino deal was in August, and Pino wasn't a prospect, even though I liked him.

Sure, but in both cases (Rockies/Indians, Twins/Indians) those trades were made out of desperation. Indians wanted to unload Pavano and had nowhere else to turn since it was post non-waiver. With Carmona's situation, the Indians were in need of a fairly inexpensive starter and likely would have made a trade for Slowey. I think you are correct in assuming that the Twins wouldn't have landed a Putnam in December but given the circumstances, the Indians would have definitely given up Putnam in January. Bottom line is that circumstances would dictate whether or not the Twins would be able to make a trade with Cleveland.