There are 10 pitchers in the history of baseball that pitched regularly from ages 26-31 with an ERA+ below 90. Ricky's ERA+ in that time frame is 87. Yes. I know his FIP is better. FIP is a better predictor when using a single season of data. This is 6 seasons of data and 1100 innings. The actual performance has more meaning. Back to the 10. Five of them were pitching 100 or more years ago. They probably aren't relevant. The other 5 are Ricky, Andy Hawkins, Dennis Martinez, Shawn Estes and Jaime Navarro. The Twins are paying Nolasco through age 34. The others age 32-34 Hawkins pitched poorly at 31 (as did Nolasco) and did not pitch again. Two had there last full season as a starter at 32 with a few starts bouncing around after 32 Navarro 193 IP, 8-19 6.85 ERA 72 ERA+ Estes 130 IP, 4-9, 4.79 ERA 92 ERA+ Dennis Martinez suddenly turned his career around with a trade to Montreal. He was 29-23 with a 3.32 ERA in 484 innings from age 32-34 and better after 34. Extend the list to an ERA+ of 95 and you don't find anyone else other than Martinez who became a better than league average pitcher after going through their prime well below league average. Nolasco's comp group of pitcher is small. Pitchers who pitch at an ERA+ of 87 through their prime are not given contracts in their decline. It is unreasonable to expect that Nolasco will pitch better from age 32-34 than he did from 26-31? I wouldn't think so. Even if he is able to maintain his 87 ERA+ for the next three years, that isn't going to help the Twins. How much risk is there in releasing him and going with the 28 year old Milone (career ERA+ of 97) until Santana returns or Meyer is ready?