Nathan, Twins Make Progress On A Contract Extension
Posted on March 20th, 2008 – 2:49 PMBy La Velle
The Twins spent Thursday locked in negotiations with Dave Pepe, the agent for Twins closer Joe Nathan, about a contract extension.
And for the first time in several weeks, there are strong signals that a deal may be close.
Nathan moments ago expressed renewed optimism that a deal could get done soon. He wouldn’t divulge contract details but indicated that the ice has been broken in a stalemate that could have led to him being traded during the regular season.
Both Nathan and Pepe indicated during camp that it would be very difficult to get a deal done once the regular season begins. That deadline, however, may no longer be a factor.
“Things are headed in a good direction right now,” Nathan said. “We feel very optimistic that something can get done.”
Check back here for more details as soon as they become available.
40 Responses to "Nathan, Twins Make Progress On A Contract Extension"
I really hope they don’t spend over $10 mil a year on him. What a waste that would be when we have all these pitching prospects.
ugh. So they pass up the ace starting pitcher and an above-average starting CF, but are going to pay over $10/year (probably more like 12) for 70 innings of relief work (no matter how excellent) for a 70 win team?
Trade him at the deadline to a desperate contending team for a blue chip 3rd or SS (even a AAA prospect who’s ready for the majors).
Please.
Sign him. He’ll be a good help for the young starters. They certainly have the payroll space available. If our young starters have to watch all their wins vanish in the late innings it wont be good for them.
Remember all that Dave Stevens did for the team? How about 2001 when Hawkins single handedly made sure we wouldn’t make the playoffs in the second half of that year. The closer position is important, and Nathan is the best closer in the game.
I think up to $12mil/yr for 2-3 yrs would be good. Nothing wrong with having Crain, Neshek, Rincon, and Nathan (all potential closers) because one could be trade bait to a needy team down the stretch. Then we get another good infield prospect in the deal. In all honesty, I could handle either Crain or Rincon being dealt mid-season.
I don’t get why they would keep him? If they figure they’re a couple years off why pay him now rather than trading him for something that doesn’t exist in there system like another everyday infielder?
My vote trade him.
It’s always interesting to see the vast differences between people on blogs and the general fan. I know all the reasons for thinking the Twins priorities are backwards, but I don’t care. Here’s the truth. We might actually keep a star player, and it won’t cost our team prospects. The only one who has to give up anything is the Pohlad family, and that doesn’t bug me at all. If they want to pay the bill, I’m more than happy to keep Joe Nathan around, even if it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to employ a top closer on a losing team.
Good. We are better off with him. Teams don’t get desperate and give up blue chip talent to rent a player anymore.
If the Twins think they will compete in 09, they should keep him. Load the contract up in 08….. they have the salary space.
Keep him. If elite closers were so easy to come by (as some commenters here think), please explain why every team doesn’t have an elite closer?
“Teams don’t get desperate and give up blue chip talent to rent a player anymore.”
Saltalamacchia in the Teixeira deal?
Teixeira wasn’t rented for just a month. He is still in Atlanta if at least for one year. Also, there isn’t another Teixeira available but it sounds like Frankie Rodriguez won’t be an Angel next year so how interested are teams in giving up prospects for Nathan with him out there. Lastly, this is an exception, the Torii situation is more the rule.
Just don’t give him a no trade clause.
This Blog sunk to a new low(and that’s hard) when C. Gomez, who may or may not even have a major league career ahead of him got compared to Manny Ramirez.
Lucky he is in the Boston clubhouse? He seemd to be alright in Cleveland too, guess he was just lucky. Hits when he wants to? Apparantly then he is the greatest hitter ever when he feels like playing.
And he is such a clubhouse cancer yet still managed to play in a 4 world series.
Thankfully the Twins will never have to worry about him spoiling their pristine Cuddyer rah rah “prove’m wrong and win 80 games” clubhouse.
Shawn, if you mean give him a signing bonus for this year and keep the salaray for 09-10-11 lower, that would be a good idea.
My point was that, even if we do sign him to a good deal, if there is an offer out there, or Smith pokes around and finds that there would be some good trade possibilities, I say we move him and build the offense.
If we were to trade for Crain or Rincon, we wouldn’t get much back. Maybe if Crain bounces back a little we could get a B prospect… Lets not forget that he is a RP. We wouldn’t get a bag of balls for Rincon. He is old, and has a realistic PED fall off since he got caught.
trade away* Crain or Rincon - not for
Players of Nathan’s age and stature never give complete control of their future to the team. He and his family want to stay in the TC so he will take less $$ in exchange for more control over what happens to him. He will almost certainly get a full no-trade clause.
I think it’s time to stop making comparison to Hunter and Santana not signing with the Twin’s, very few teams would pay the money for Hunter than the Angels did and Santana wanted out in the worst way. I agree that 12-15 million is outrageous but that’s the market right now so I believe we will just have to deal with it.
I don’t see the no-trade clause would be as harmful as it was in Santana’s case. As long as we don’t wait too long to trade him, we should be fine. Also, we would trade him if we’re not doing well, where a closer may be more open to than an SP.
a 2-3 year extension would be great. I assume that it would be close to $12-13 mil/year. 2-3 years is ok because Young & Gomez would not be hitting arbitration until then…
If the Twins sign Nathan to a three-year deal, that means we have one of the game’s best closers in 2010, when Carlos Gomez and Delmon Young will be 24, Morneau will be in the middle of his prime at 29, as will Mauer at 27.
If we still have Liriano, and a few of our pitching prospects pan out, we’ll have a phenomenal young offense with a bullpen anchored by one of the most dominant closers of the past 10 years.
Locking up Nathan through 2010 with an option for 2011 doesn’t sound terrible to me.
I’d rather see something like three years, $24-$28 million, but he’s earned the right to ask for Rivera- or Cordero-type money. Hell, he’s better than both of them at this point.
I think all closers are horribly overpaid, but I’m not going to complain about having Joe Nathan locking down games when I’m watching the Twins march to the postseason in the new stadium in a couple of years.
there have been some suggestions that the twins should sign nathan to a 2-3 year deal, with a “loaded” first year to free money for later years. the economics of this strategy doesn’t make sense, which is why you never see it in baseball.
first, the twins won’t have to deal with a “salary cap,” so they don’t need to structure contracts in a way that frees salary cap space in another year.
second, paying a larger sum of a contract in the first year costs the team more than paying that sum in the final year. if they pay the lesser amount in the first year, they can invest the difference and use the investment income to cover other costs. in addition, X dollars in year one is worth MORE in real dollars than X dollars in year 3 because of inflation. $1,000 in 2008 money buys you more than it will in 2010. it is the reason lottery winners take the lump sum payout instead of annual payments, even though the total they receive is much smaller.
Good, I’d like to see Joe signed up. He is a really good closer and solid locker room guy.
Relief pitching is a keystone for this Twins organization and it would be a shame to lose a door closer like Joe.
I’m amazed so many people are against keeping Nathan for what he’s worth. Do you people realize how important his role is to the team? He’s in the top 3 closers in all baseball. Having him closing games is invaluable for the young starting pitchers on this team.
Just having a guy like Nathan changes the game. Even if he doesn’t pitch, the opposing team is well aware of who is sitting down there in the pen. That changes their approach to the 6th, 7th and 8th innings (when trailing). A guy Like Nathan makes Crain and Neshek that much better.
Why is everyone so worried about the money? It is Carl and his son’s money. They are pretty good business people. My guess is that they are not sending in responses to these kinds of articles. They are busy watching their money grow.
This is good news. If we lock him up he will be loyal to the Twins in the future. Some closers keep their all-star form into there late 30’s. If the Twins are really going to be playoff team in future they will need him.
Besides, teams usually give up 2-3 B prospects for closers at the dead-line. If anyone can think of an example of when a team got a MLB ready player for a rent-a closer, I’d like to know when.
You would think the bloggers fighting against the signing were spending their own money.
What did the RedSox give up for Gagne last year? He wasn’t even going to close for them. Nathan would bring great value in a trade. If a guy like Jones can save 70 games over the last two years and a guy like Borowski can lead the AL in saves, then it tells you how overrated the position is. Its not about the money. If you’re going to rebuild, rebuild.
You can rebuild WITH Nathan as closer and then contend in 2010 WITH Nathan as closer.
Jones and Borowski had large save numbers, but Nathan is a much better closer. Jones and Borowski save numbers are an indication that they played for two of the best teams (Tigers and Indians)in MLB. IMO they would be failures as closers for the Twins or any other average team.
[…] La Velle E. Neal III of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune is reporting that “the Twins spent Thursday locked in negotiations with Dave Pepe, the agent for Twins closer Joe Nathan, about a contract extension.” And according to Neal, there are “strong signals” that a deal is close. The closer himself even expressed optimism himself, telling Neal, “Things are headed in a good direction right now. We feel very optimistic that something can get done.” […]
I like Nathan, but he isn’t worth keeping for over 10 (possibly 15) million dollars a year for this small market team. Plus, the prospect of trading him for some real talent is too tempting to pass up.
*trade him at the trade deadline.
TK: With Gomez, Harris, and Young coming in this year…there may not be a need for any “real talent” should they play out.
Lamb and Everett will likely be bench options or gone in 09 should Buscher and Casilla get their acts together (or Tolbert shows his stuff)
The team may not be much this year, but they have a chance to be very good in just a few years.
Do you think the Twins can raise find another Nathan-esque closer in that time?
Payroll issues will hopefully be a thing of the past after 2008. With all of their best talent still relatively young they have a chance to plan out their spending better.
Nathan will be part of that.
Also, we would trade him if we’re not doing well, where a closer may be more open to than an SP.
That’s very true. Regardless of how a team is doing an SP will likely get his 1 start every five games.
If a team isn’t competing, a closer is never going to get any “real” work, and will instead be throwing in non-saves just to get work.
And a closer’s most important stat is his saves.
I am really glad to hear that we will probably re-sign Nathan. He is one of the reasons I buy tickets to Twins games.
Also, I am old enough to remember Ron Davis as our closer. Davis blew 14 saves in 1984. Never again!
If a team isn’t competing, then nobody on the team is getting any “real” (significant) work.
The closer isn’t the only guy just playing for pride in that situation.
Ten reasons to keep him in no particular order
1. FOR ONCE we have the payroll space. We can afford to keep him.
2. He gives confidence to our YOUNG starting rotation and solidifies our bullpen. As people have said, how many games did Hawkins lose in 2001? You remember the years of Dave Stevens? Hawkins? If its so easy to close, how come all teams dont have as good of a closer as we do?
3. Lock up good players so when the new stadium opens fans have recognizable players. This will esp. be helpful should we not be competative, god forbid. At least they can go out to the park and cheer for M and M, Cuddy, and Nathan which will give them hope. Not to mention when hes in hes effective and a fan favorite who takes the pain away from losing Torii and Johan.
4. When you have a good player you recognize it and lock them up. Common sense. Closers are not a dime a dozen. He could single handedly keep us in the race. For those saying “What race-we arent gonna contend” if you think that is the case, just imagine how BAD it would be if we lost him and lost even more games.
5. He’s gonna sign for below market value. Rumors have it today 4/$11-12M per which seems a lot today but in 2-3 years wont. Also, think what he could have got. rumors had it up to 15M year
6. Chance to become teams all time saves leader. 40 saves a year in the 4 years he’s been here. 160 saves. + 40 saves X 4 more years=160 more saves so roughly 320 saves.
Not sure if this is 4 years tacked on to the 1/6M deal hes currently signed for. If so, add another 40 saves for a total of 360 saves.
7. Shows the fans we intend on competing even after losing Torii and Santana. Its not the end of the world and maybe these arent the same old Twins.
8. Everyone suggesting we trade him for talent, just what talent do you expect for a 34 year old free agent to be? Everyone will know we can’t afford him if we trade him so they dont have to offer as much up to get him. Also, for those teams that pass on him should he be traded can just sign him in the offseason.
9. Closers are historically hard for us to develop. Sure Eddie fit but how many of them do? How many did we develop? Aggie was traded for, Joe was too BUT we made him a closer. He owes us and we owe him.
10. For those not wanting the money to go to him, who do you want it to go to? None of you seem to like Harris which is a mistake. He is a good young Yankees killer who gets on base. He’ll prove you wrong, wait and see. They have no urgency to sign Young and Lirano you dont know what you are getting, M and M are locked up as is Cuddy so do you suggest we just sit on the money? Clearly they arent going to make any more trades. Gomez has and will shore up CF so no trade for Crisp.
