• Joe Nathan

    Posted by on November 26th, 2007 · Comments (6)

    Joe Nathan has New York roots. He went to high school in New York and attended Stony Brook University as well. From 2003 to 2007, he’s been one of the best relief pitchers in the game.

    Nathan will be a free agent after next season (2008). And, by some reports, he’s not happy about what’s happening with the Twins:

    “If they’re going to get rid of two players like (Hunter and Santana), we better have some darn good players to fill their spots,” said Nathan, the veteran closer who also can elect free agency next winter. “They better get a really good package for (Santana) and get some guys ready to play now. If it goes any other way, it’s probably going to send a message to guys like Morneau and myself.”

    That message: Big-money contracts still aren’t in the Twins’ budget.

    Which would mean, Nathan said, “I only really have another year there.”

    Many think that the Twins will trade Johan Santana. If that happens, Minnesota will not be a contender next season. What good is a free agent closer, an unhappy one, on a team that’s not contending?

    If Santana goes, shouldn’t the Twins look to trade Nathan too?

    I’m still on the fence about the Yankees getting Santana. But, if the Yankees don’t get him, they should, in my opinion, make a play for Joe Nathan – who would not have the same price-tag as Santana.

    Tell Nathan that he can be part of a winning team – which he claims that he wants – as a set-up man for Mariano Rivera. If he pitches well, the money will still be there for him as a free agent after the season.

    Maybe it costs the Yankees a prospect at the Tyler Clippard level to get Joe Nathan for a year? I don’t think that would be terrible – considering Nathan’s talent level and the need for a quality arm in the Yankees pen, in front of Rivera.

    Comments on Joe Nathan

    1. MJ
      November 26th, 2007 | 10:25 am

      I assume if Nathan isn’t a free agent yet that he doesn’t have no-trade status. Is that correct?

      I sincerely doubt that Minnesota would trade their All-Star closer for Tyler Clippard. Obviously if that’s all it would take, you pull the trigger on that one immediately. One year of Nathan in front of Rivera would be pretty nice. Certainly beats Farnsworth in the 8th inning.

    2. Rich
      November 26th, 2007 | 10:46 am

      It doesn’t appear that he has a no-trade clause on Cot’s site, and he doesn’t have 10 and 5 rights.

      I agree that Clippard would not be enough to get Nathan. Any package would likely have to start with Horne, which they shouldn’t consider if they didn’t extend Nathan’s contract as a condition precedent.

      One reason that I didn’t want Rivera to get more than a two year deal is that with both F-Rod and Nathan scheduled to become FAs at the end of the 2008 season, perhaps it would be easier to persuade them to set up Rivera for one season if they knew that they would be the Yankees’ closer thereafter.

    3. Raf
      November 26th, 2007 | 12:24 pm

      Many think that the Twins will trade Johan Santana. If that happens, Minnesota will not be a contender next season.
      =================
      Depends on who the Twins receive in a trade, provided one is made. I doubt that he’d be traded, anyway, but that’s just me.

    4. JohnnyC
      November 26th, 2007 | 12:57 pm

      I still think Santana makes it to the July trade deadline next year. And if he settles for something shy of $25 million, he might end up being a Twin anyway. After all, they’re opening a new stadium…paid for by state and local tax money.

    5. November 26th, 2007 | 1:30 pm

      Twins owner Carl Pohlad is the country’s 114th-richest person – worth $3 billion. The Twins’ new stadium is partially funded by taxpayer dollars.

      Can Twins afford to pay Santana? Sure. Will they? Not Pohlad, no way, IMHO.

      He will be traded this off-season, if you ask me.

    6. JohnnyC
      November 26th, 2007 | 5:51 pm

      You know, if we had a commissioner like Bud Selig, this travesty of essentially auctioning off your team’s best player to the highest bidder and thereby making the rich even richer (which has a deleterious effect on competitive balance)would not be sanctioned. If only Bud Selig were commissioner. If only.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.