I think you’re spot on about the “pink hat” phenomenon and that being what makes a team the most money. There’s only so much money you can extract from your hardcore fanbase, but if you can get a big bandwagon crowd, the sky’s the limit.

But I don’t think the Nathan signing was a marketing decision. A closer isn’t as marketable as a starting pitcher or a position player. I think it was a baseball decision, based on an assessment of our bullpen and the fact that Nathan was the only one of the three who was actually willing to negotiate with the team and sign a deal that was at least a little team-friendly.

(I’m going to cut this post “short” now, and I’m going to work a little harder not to get so heated up. Thanks for showing up, everyone!)

Okay, I guess if you’ve been brainwashed to think the Twins couldn’t “afford” Santana, then go ahead. And an additional five years isn’t absurdly long. And I didn’t say that Santana is worth $20M in jersey sales, but he is worth more overall than Nathan, in many aspects.

The fact that you agree to waste $9 million on Craig Monroe and Livan Hernandez is moronic.

And I don’t read the Strib, and especially not Reusse.

Also, I don’t think everyone in the Twins’ organization is an idiot, but there is some obvious incompetence.

Now, can we get back to the topic of the twins organizational policy on developing hitters? Not Carl Pohlad is a cheap SOB who won’t buy me good players?

I’m not going to go back and quote the dozen times I’ve said that Santana’s more valuable than Nathan. It seems pointless.

And yes, the same argument can be made about Nathan. And both contracts were market value for their skills. But there’s one major difference: The Twins could afford Nathan’s contract, and he didn’t demand an absurdly long deal that makes it extremely unlikely that it comes out well for the team in the end. Santana was out of the price range and wanted too many years.

Do you really think the difference between having Santana and not having Santana is worth $20M in jersey sales? In Minnesota? He’s worth that if you’re in a huge market with a huge fanbase. We don’t have that.

The fact that you guys are so willing to spend hundreds of millions of someone else’s dollars is pretty absurd. And that you seem to think that everyone in the Twins organization is a complete idiot is, too.

Me, I think you’ve been reading too much Reusse. He’s rubbing off on you.

Homer Simpson, though, would probably agree. “That’s why everybody does everything. Because they’re STUPID!”

That’s exactly what you said. First line of five posts up. Maybe you meant to say everyone takes Santana.

And you haven’t really been arguing that Santana is a lot more valuable than Nathan, I have. Read your previous posts. You don’t say that anywhere.

“Signing Santana would have raised the payroll pretty significantly, tying a huge percentage into one player who plays every five days and plays a position which has a huge injury risk, and it would have had exactly ZERO positive impact on the team — I say that because Santana would not have pitched better once he got the big contract. He’d be exactly the same pitcher.”

Can’t the exact same argument be made against Nathan? His salary is taking up one-fifth of the payroll this year, and a significant portion of it for the next three seasons. He’s also a guy that will pitch about a third less innings than Santana. And how can you say that Santana would have zero positive impact on the team? Zero? Think about that. He’d be the best player on the team even considering the fact that he only plays once every five days. And to say there’s absolutely no way he could pitch better just isn’t true. He doesn’t sell more jerseys than Nathan? Sell more tickets than Nathan?

The fact that the Twins chose Nathan over Santana (which is what they did), and the fact that you guys agree with it is absolutely absurd.