Nathan is a guy worth keeping

FORT MYERS, FLA. - If you're Twins management and have accepted losing the likes of Johan Santana and Torii Hunter, it seemingly makes little sense to consider signing Joe Nathan to a huge contract.

What's interesting is that, in a clubhouse where many of the veterans thought Santana, Hunter and especially Carlos Silva forced their departures with unrealistic contract demands, there is enthusiastic support for spending big on Nathan.

In fact, there is no division of opinion at any level of the organization about Nathan. I've talked to people in the front office, on the coaching staff, in the manager's office and in the clubhouse who all believe that Nathan is vital to the current and long-term health of the bullpen, pitching staff and even franchise.

I've even had people in the organization tell me that in some ways Nathan is more important to the structure of the team than Santana or Hunter.

Nathan is a few weeks away from entering the season without an extension and with a pretty strong assurance that he would be dealt at the trading deadline.

This is a tough call for the Twins. Here are arguments for and against signing him:

Why keep him?

Those are lofty figures for a limited-payroll team to spend on a guy who pitches about 70 innings a year.

• Nathan might bring more value at the trading deadline, when big-market teams compete to bolster their bullpens for the stretch and the postseason, than Santana did over the winter. And the Twins will always need to bulk up on affordable young players.

• Nathan is 33, and while he's been healthy as a Twin, he had arm problems early in his career, and nothing damages a limited-payroll franchise like an injured player with a big contract.

Why sign him?

• As the Twins found with Hunter, the value of All-Star-caliber players can increase exponentially at any time. And as the Twins are finding out with the departure of Hunter, replacing players of that caliber isn't as easy as you would think.

• If you don't give him a no-trade clause, you could trade Nathan at any point if it looks as if the team is not competitive enough to justify having a highly paid closer. Nathan is exactly the kind of pitcher big-market teams seek in July.

• The Twins are about $15 million under payroll this year. (Although they'd argue that signing bonuses to Michael Cuddyer and Justin Morneau have counteracted that.) Still, there is a little wiggle room in the payroll, and would you rather see the team sign a mediocre free agent who won't dramatically alter the team's fortunes, or spend the money on Nathan, who might be the best closer in Twins history? (He's 19-8 with 160 saves and a 1.94 ERA in four seasons as a Twin.)

• The argument you hear most from Twins people throughout the organization is that the Twins have no true candidates to replace Nathan anywhere in the organization. And that without a closer, the Twins' deep, strong bullpen would be shredded with everyone taking on roles they are not equipped to handle. And that a faltering bullpen would stress a young rotation, and that we'd see baseball armageddon in the Metrodome the next two summers.

• Sometimes you have to spend what you think is crazy money, and virtually every other team in baseball does on occasion. If Silva is worth $12 million a year to Seattle, Cordero is worth $11.5 million to Cincinnati and Gil Meche is worth $11 million to Kansas City, Nathan should be worth $12 million to the Twins.

• The team needs all the good publicity it can get heading into what could be a tough season, and signing Nathan would give them three big contracts of which to boast -- Morneau's, Cuddyer's and Nathan's.

It's a risk, but so is assuming you'll be able to replace the best closer in Twins history.

One more reason the Twins should sign him:

It's not our money.