Twins release Zumaya

Today the Twins released injured reliever Joel Zumaya rather than pay him his whole 800,000 salary. Instead the Twins will only be on the hook for 400,000 of that salary. By rule this was a smart move, but I have a problem with it. First, this is not a good PR move by the Twins as a pitcher comes into your camp and gets injured and you cut him to save money. It comes off very cheap and very cold reminicient of when the Yankees cut Aaron Boone when he got hurt playing basketball. I got that as it saved them money to go after Alex Rodriguez. Here paying Zumaya the extra 400,000 was the right thing to do as on the field if he can come back keeping him would make him more apt to want to come back to the Twins if he can come back from TJ Surgery. I know there were some that were against signing him in the first place so I am sure they think this is a good move. However, for those that think of the Twins as a team that usually does the right thing then myopinion they made the wrong decision here. It is only 400,000 more and for a major league team that is nothing. Why would anyone sign an incentive contract again with the Twins because if you get hurt they are just going to cut you. This comes off as heartless and mean and I am not in favor of it. I really thought the Twins would keep him because in my mind it was the right thing to do. A player gets hurt in your camp so you take care of him. Maybe I am nieve, but that is what I expect out of my Minnesota Twins and today I am disappointed in them. Everyone let me know your thoughts if you think I am dead wrong or if you agree with me.

I think Zumaya signed that contract knowing full well that if he got hurt he wasn't going to get paid 800,000. They wanted to clear the space on the 40 man, but they can NOT move someone to the 60-day list if the 40 man isn't full (which it's not). In addition, it's possible that the whole service time thing comes into play. If he's released, he doesn' accumulate service time, but if he's on the 60 day he does. If he hasn't hit the 5 year mark for service time yet, it might make it easier for him to get teams to sign him if/when he tries to comeback.

In addition, it's possible he asked the Twins to release him. Not being bound by the contract may allow him more freedom in his rehab/surgery options and timetable.

No. Giving him the opportunity in the first place was a gift to Zumaya, as maybe no one else was going to offer him such a contract in the first place. It would just look stupid to pay an extra $400,000 for a non-existent PR reason. I don't really think that anyone else in Zumaya's precise situation (almost no one anyway) would seriously look at what the Twins did in an unfavorable light.

I don't think they look bad at all, from a baseball or fan perspective. The guy has an injury history, and everyone knew that coming in. I just don't see this as the same thing as a guy that randomly got injured. Also, this is the deal in baseball. Nothing wrong happened here, it's how baseball runs. The guy got $400K in return for nothing to the team. It would be a bad business decision to pay the money, and would net the Twins nothing (imo) in terms of baseball or fan goodwill.

I agree with the part where you think you might be naive. The fact that they were able to sign him for the minimum + 400K in incentives tells you that no one else was offering anything significantly better. So right there, they already stepped up to the plate in the "give a guy a break" world. When the incentives aren't met because of a new injury (like this one) or inability, then the Twins have every right to save themselves 400K. What's the problem? It's a contract both parties agreed to and they have no contractual or moral responsibility to do anything else.

Just because 400K looks small compared to a $100 million contract, that doesn't mean that there isn't value in saving 400K.

The guy is in camp for what, a week? He gets injured and states he's probably going to retire. Yet you feel the Twins should pay him $400,000 just to be nice? I can't imagine any Twins player thinking the Twins are treating Zumaya badly. I think all players understand the business side of baseball and harbor no ill feelings towards management.

Quote:

---

It is only 400,000 more

---

Quote:

---

Maybe I am naive

---

I'd say so.

Why would we pay for someone who we signed to a 1-year contact who is injured, more money. He has proven absolutely nothing to the Twins organization. I say gtfo and let's save 400,000.

I think most people in baseball, including Zumaya himself expected something like this to happen. The guy already got $400k to throw 13 pitches plus the Twins are paying for his TJ surgery. Like scottz, I think they have done enough in the 'give the guy a break' world.

The other option was the 60 day DL. Can someone point out the pro/con of the choices the Twins were up against?

Thats fine if they are going to run their business like that, but if I am a free agent and they want me to sign a incentive based contract I don't sign with the Twins because if I get hurt they are going to just cut me. Its fine to call this a business and if you are going to treat the players as employees then don't be surprised when they leave as free agent. If this is truly totally business then don't criticize guys like Hunter, Cuddyer, and Nathan for leaving for more money. This is a business and they left for a better deal so they shouldn't be criticized for that. I know this is a little off topic, but its either a business or its not you can't have it both ways. If you are going to treat it totally businesslike with Zumaya then don't criticize Nathan for making a business decision to go to Texas or Cuddyer making a business decision for going to Colorado. You can't have it both ways and sometimes lose sight of that. I think there is a grey area in Business and this is bigger than just Joel Zumaya it has ramifications for future free agents and the Twins made the predecent that everything is strictly business decisions and they will have to live with that going forward.

As I stated above, you can't move a guy to the 60 until your 40 is full, and they may not want to fill their 40 before opening day

I have to imagine this move is to free up space for a player that might be cut from another team, or to put a non-roster invitee on the 40-man. Maybe someone like Hollimon, Burroughs or Towles?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by travistwinstalk

Thats fine if they are going to run their business like that, but if I am a free agent and they want me to sign a incentive based contract I don't sign with the Twins because if I get hurt they are going to just cut me. Its fine to call this a business and if you are going to treat the players as employees then don't be surprised when they leave as free agent. If this is truly totally business then don't criticize guys like Hunter, Cuddyer, and Nathan for leaving for more money. This is a business and they left for a better deal so they shouldn't be criticized for that. I know this is a little off topic, but its either a business or its not you can't have it both ways. If you are going to treat it totally businesslike with Zumaya then don't criticize Nathan for making a business decision to go to Texas or Cuddyer making a business decision for going to Colorado. You can't have it both ways and sometimes lose sight of that. I think there is a grey area in Business and this is bigger than just Joel Zumaya it has ramifications for future free agents and the Twins made the predecent that everything is strictly business decisions and they will have to live with that going forward.

---

You cannot just single out the Twins here, EVERY team sees this as a business. Teams throw a ton of money at players to steal them from other teams. It's no different then Wal-Mart going into a small town and killing all the local business. There is no "nice" anymore. Agents have killed that. No team would keep a player on their payroll that they signed to a one-year deal that got hurt two days into spring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spideyo

As I stated above, you can't move a guy to the 60 until your 40 is full, and they may not want to fill their 40 before opening day

---

Thanks - I missed that.

No one should criticize Nathan or Cuddyer for leaving for more money. We DIDNT want to pay them money. Ecspecially Nathan, go ahead and let someone else over pay him. Also as previously mentioned, Zumaya was lucky to get a deal at all from us with his prev. injury prone career.

I can't imagine anyone - Zumaya, his agent, other agents - not expecting this. It's the nature of a incentive-laden deal. It's not personally, Sonny - it's business.

If the Twins wanted to be generous to Zumaya, and he didn't want to be released, they could have offered to renegotiate his deal. Drop the salary from 800k to 400k (league minimum), possibly with an option for 2013. That way, he is on the roster, gets medical care, access to trainers, accrues service time and retirement benefits, etc. And the cost is the same as releasing him, excluding those benefits. I'm not sure I would even do that if I were the Twins, but if they really liked Zumaya or wanted the good PR, they could do that. Paying the extra 400k is just silly.

I don't understand the point of the 60 day DL/40 man rosters comments above. What do they lose by putting him on the 15 day now and moving him to the 60 day whenever they need the roster spot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by travistwinstalk

If this is truly totally business then don't criticize guys like Hunter, Cuddyer, and Nathan for leaving for more money. This is a business and they left for a better deal so they shouldn't be criticized for that. I know this is a little off topic, but its either a business or its not you can't have it both ways. If you are going to treat it totally businesslike with Zumaya then don't criticize Nathan for making a business decision to go to Texas or Cuddyer making a business decision for going to Colorado.

---

I think your statements above are in search of an application in reality. In other words, who has criticized Nathan and Cuddyer for leaving for more money? Did I miss these posts?

Apparently this thread is somewhat irrelevant. Bollinger tweeted that Ryan said they have to pay Zumaya the full $850,000 because the injury happened before the season.

So the point about the 40-man makes more sense than ever.

Why are people even still talking about Zumaya, am I missing something important?

Rhett tweeted a few hours ago that the Twins are going to pay Zumaya the entire $850,000.