Fire Gardy

Mismanaging games since 2002

Nathan tears his UCL

Well, it looks like Nathan’s injury is much worse than we’d hoped. FunBobby was out of town this weekend, and so he didn’t hear about the injury when it happened; he asked me for an update, which looked like this:

He came in in the 3rd inning, struck out the first batter, then walked the next two and was taken out with right elbow soreness. He’s gone back to MN to get an MRI.

One theory is that this is just a normal setback after his offseason surgery to break up scar tissue in that elbow. Another is that it’s a more severe injury. There’s no real information about it, but it’s definitely a reason to worry.

My optimism was invalid, though, now that we’ve learned that Nathan actually has a torn UCL, which is the very same ligament that needs to be repaired in Tommy John surgery.

They’re not certain if it’s a full tear or a partial tear — Gardenhire called it “significant” — and Gardenhire says it’s the sort of thing you can’t tell until you get in and do surgery. Tommy John surgery.

Apparently, they’re saying it’s “totally Nathan’s decision” as to whether to have surgery or not. The plan, for now, is to try to avoid surgery:

While surgery certainly looks to be imminent, Nathan will take two weeks to let the swelling in the area subside. He’ll work with the trainers to strengthen the muscles around the elbow. And then he will try to pitch. He’s prepared to pitch in pain – given the huge expectations placed on the 2010 Twins – and is prepared to tests the limits of his tolerance level.

Personally, I’d be shocked if he’s able to pitch with a torn UCL … and perhaps more shocked if the Twins even let him. The Twins famously prefer to let pitchers do several months rest & rehab prior to doing the surgery that was obviously necessary from the start (see Crain, Neshek, Liriano, Bonser) … and that looks like what’s going to happen here. I kind of expect them to string us along until June, when they finally have the surgery they should be having now, delaying Nathan’s eventual return to the second half of 2011, at which point he still won’t even be full strength. Nathan should have the surgery now, and Nathan won’t be part of it.

Or at least, that’s my opinion. I know the Twins don’t share it. But that raises the question about what the Twins should do for a closer this year. Here are the options, as I see them:

  • Blindly hope Nathan is okay
  • Neshek
  • Rauch
  • Crain
  • Mijares
  • Slama or Delaney
  • Someone else from the minors
  • A new acquisition
  • Closer by committee

Alright … so I’m guessing most teams who lose an elite closer like Nathan don’t have so many internal options to choose from,* so the Twins probably aren’t totally screwed here.

* It’s worth noting that there aren’t very many teams with an elite closer like Nathan, and that they are probably really deep. The Yankees and Red Sox probably do have similar bullpen depth … only the Royals have a closer of Nathan’s caliber without a bunch of bullpen arms behind him. Maybe the Mets. So maybe I’m wrong to make that statement.

I think Mijares is out, given that Gardy doesn’t trust him and he’s a lefty, which will be more useful in a non-closer role. I don’t think much of Crain at the moment, and I don’t think Gardy does either.

If it were me, I’d go with the committee. La Velle disagrees:

I don’t think the Twins will go with a closer-by-committee. They had all kinds of trouble in 2008 when they tried a set-up man by committee, and Gardenhire regretted doing that. We’ll be on the watch for any signals that point to whomever fills that role.

And that’s a good point, though it explains more why the Twins won’t than why they shouldn’t.

So I don’t know what the Twins are going to do. We’ll keep you posted on the news as we know more. But I don’t believe this sinks the Twins’ playoff hopes; regardless of how great Nathan is, the Twins have a deep bullpen, some good arms, and even the best relievers don’t make a huge difference. Given the same innings and leverage, Nathan isn’t much more valuable than a healthy Neshek, for example.

5 comments

5 Comments so far

  1. FunBobby March 9th, 2010 12:56 pm

    How about this. Our lineup scores enough runs, and our starting pitching is good enough that we don’t have many save situations. Thats probably wishful thinking.

    In other news, the sportsbook at our hotel last weekend didn’t have any over/unders for MLB wins, so I was unable to place any money on that.

  2. rghrbek March 9th, 2010 12:59 pm

    sirsean,

    I am glad you point out the Twins tendencies to let a pitcher “work thru” or rehab for a month or two before moving forward with what most people know is necessary surgery. I think the Twins Dr.’s are not very astute.

    Remember Joe Joe was pissed off at them last year for misdiagnosing his back problems and making him go thru surgery, when all that was necessary was medication (as they later found out).

    It’s funny, I listed the same pitchers as you (before seeing your post), in an email to my brother about how the twins will move forward with this, and how their past does not bode well with these issues.

    Nathan has 2 more years on his contract including this year right? If that is the case, then he may never pitch again for the Twins.

    Knowing Gardy it will probably be Rauch who is the guy he uses, but I think it’s the wrong move.

    If one of our young guns can’t be projected to be a closer than, at least for this year, we should look outside of the organization, which they won’t do. The current bullpen, although deep, does not have anyone who has that mentality (outside of Rauch possibly).

  3. sirsean March 9th, 2010 1:03 pm

    I don’t agree that none of the internal options have the “mentality” of a closer. Neshek, Slama, and Delaney were all closers in the minors, and were successful at it.

    Adding payroll wasn’t really an option before this happened, so I wouldn’t expect it to become an option now.

    And Nathan will probably pitch again for the Twins, but his days of being effective may well be done. We’ll have to wait a while to learn that.

  4. FunBobby March 9th, 2010 1:23 pm

    Guerrier also closed in the minors, but i don’t like him as an option at this point.

  5. sirsean March 9th, 2010 1:27 pm

    I like Guerrier’s current role of multi-inning setup man … and I think Gardy does too.

Leave a reply