Can we please move on from Chris Gimenez already?

[ahart10]

Can we all agree that Gimenez just isn't cutting it?

[kellyvance]

Bad inning, is an understatement. He is supposed to be a ML catcher. But 3 passed balls and a wild pitch?  That is little league stuff. . Ervin had to hate it. It was hard to watch. 

[bird]

 

Twins can do whatever they want with Garver-they're paying the salaries. But then no BS by the front office or TD posters saying they're trying to win this year!

 

So, by not calling Garver up before September and then introducing him into catching rotation in place of Giminez, you're telling me the FO is trying to lose? I'd say THAT'S the BS.

[h2oface]

 

Agree, Turners defense is unreal. I thought Twins screwed up not keeping both Garver and Turner and wasn't surprised when Reds selected Turner in Rule 5. They know the Twins would take him back in a heartbeat. He's far superior to Gimenez. He calls a great game and you wouldn't have had 3 passed balls. Saw him play no. of times at Chatt and was the field general, always in charge and man can he gun down a runner.

 

I always liked Garver the best. He isn't runner up to Turner for the Johnny Bench award for college catching that year by being a slouch devensively. Stohs and co. always promoted Turner and rated Turner over Garver, but I disagree(d). You have to hit too. Have too. Still, I never expected the Reds to use a roster spot on Turner the whole year. I was betting he was coming back for sure. The DL time helped. He still is barely playing for the Reds. Hard to develop that way. He will be back in AAA to start next year I bet. Garver is ready now. And so is his bat!

[Brandon Warne]

...and do what? Outside of that inning, he's been good defensively, and you aren't bringing Garver up to barely play.

 

Next year when Garver and Castro platoon will be fine. Garver will get some run in Sept. too.

[Mr. Brooks]

...and do what? Outside of that inning, he's been good defensively, and you aren't bringing Garver up to barely play.

 

Next year when Garver and Castro platoon will be fine. Garver will get some run in Sept. too.

I have a couple questions for you, Brandon.

 

1) Can you point to a metric or two that says that Gimenez has been good defensively? I'm not necessarily saying he hasn't been, I've just always viewed him as average or so defensively.

 

2) If Garver is good enough to platoon with Castro next year, then why not now?

Do you expect Garver to improve a bunch over the off-season, it Gimenez to get worse over the off-season?

[Brandon Warne]

 

I have a couple questions for you, Brandon.

1) Can you point to a metric or two that says that Gimenez has been good defensively? I'm not necessarily saying he hasn't been, I've just always viewed him as average or so defensively.

2) If Garver is good enough to platoon with Castro next year, then why not now?
Do you expect Garver to improve a bunch over the off-season, it Gimenez to get worse over the off-season?

 

I think for better or worse they're married to Gimenez through the season. I'm not saying I completely condone it. I'm just kind of conditioned to it. 

 

Fangraphs has him as 3.4 runs above average this season. He's a little over average by runners thrown out percentage. Baseball Prospectus has him pretty much even.

[Mr. Brooks]

I think for better or worse they're married to Gimenez through the season. I'm not saying I completely condone it. I'm just kind of conditioned to it.

 

Fangraphs has him as 3.4 runs above average this season. He's a little over average by runners thrown out percentage. Baseball Prospectus has him pretty much even.

Ok, thanks for that.

I hope this new FO isn't marrying itself to guys without having a reason for it though. I'm going to be pretty disappointed if that's the case.

[Brandon Warne]

 

Ok, thanks for that.
I hope this new FO isn't marrying itself to guys without having a reason for it though. I'm going to be pretty disappointed if that's the case.

 

I think it's because they don't view backup catcher as much of a difference maker. I don't know for sure though. 

[Mr. Brooks]

I think it's because they don't view backup catcher as much of a difference maker. I don't know for sure though.

And I would have a big problem if that's the case.

That would be right up there with DSP's "25th man" comment a few years ago.

The margins in pro sports are razor thin. You constantly try to improve every single 25 man spot.

You don't sit back and say, "yeah, we could improve that spot, but its only backup catcher so we won't."

The difference in pro sports is made on the margins. The Angels have the biggest difference maker, perhaps, to ever play the game. I guess they are lucky that they don't have to try to improve the rest of the roster spots.

 

Just to clarify, if you don't think Garver is an upgrade, then that's fine. But if he's an upgrade, but not worth the effort, that's what I'd have a problem with.

[Linus]

This team needs a legit right handed bat off the bench. Garver is nearly a perfect solution in that he can catch, play first and the outfield in a pinch. If Giminez is being kept for "intagibles" then Falvine are suspect.

[old nurse]

 

I think my sarcasm meter is broken. How 'off the charts' do they have to be to make up 70 points in batting average we can probably gain with Garver? 

Garver has a .341 babip  As Garver is not known for his speed that number will drop like a rock. A .230-.240 average is far more likely.  Net difference over 50AB would be 2-3 hits more, maybe one for extra bases.

[jorgenswest]

I think the front office believes Gimenez gives them the best chance to win games. I question that assessment but I also realize that I have very limited understanding of the many difficult to measure components that a catcher brings to the game.

 

I expect to see Garver soon. As long a chance remains for the post season, I hope that is by August 31. From listening to the interview of the recent baseball prospectus/Gleeman interview, I think they see Garver having a significant role in the organization.

[Brock Beauchamp]

While I think Garver should be promoted, some people here are making some crazy-large assumptions that he'd have a positive impact with the stick in 2017.

 

You'd think we'd have learned by now that MiLB stats often don't translate to MLB with any kind of reliability.

 

I want Garver up because it could help him be better in 2018, not because I'm convinced he will be better than Gimenez or that it'd even matter if he was.

[ThejacKmp]

If this were mid-July I would understand. But we're two weeks from September call-ups. No reason not to keep Gimenez around and make him the 3rd catcher when Garver comes up.

[Kwak]

 

 

 

If it wasn't for Twins Daily I would have never heard of Garver. Not a lot of chatter about him in the other baseball stuff I read. Maybe this time it's not about the FO loving 'their' guy.

 

But I'd sure like to see for myself in MLB.

Agree--with both statements!  TD posters love to promote MiLers in hopes of finding a diamond in the rough who miraculously turns everything around.  But, (as posted by others in this thread) there are more important issues!  The choice of back-up catcher would have a small effect--they don't play enough!  If Garver was projected to play 3/4 of the games (or more) then a meaningful change in the team could be projected.  

[Danchat]

 

While I think Garver should be promoted, some people here are making some crazy-large assumptions that he'd have a positive impact with the stick in 2017.

You'd think we'd have learned by now that MiLB stats often don't translate to MLB with any kind of reliability.

I want Garver up because it could help him be better in 2018, not because I'm convinced he will be better than Gimenez or that it'd even matter if he was.

I don't expect Garver to usurp Castro for the starting job, but I think he could be a fine backup catcher for 2018 and possibly going forward. I am not expecting Garver to be a guy who will hit .900 OPS in the majors, but I think he can have an above average bat and be an average defender. I am well aware AAA stats do not correlate with MLB success but it's worth a shot to try Garver out.

[curt1965]

So, by not calling Garver up before September and then introducing him into catching rotation in place of Giminez, you're telling me the FO is trying to lose? I'd say THAT'S the BS.

How many games are left in August? You're saying Garver's presence couldn't possibly win the Twins a game or two this month?

Nobody said the Twins were trying to lose! (Please reread!)

I'm sure there are plenty of factors that determine when players are brought up, most of which I'm sure most of us are not aware of. My entire point is that if the Twins are actually making a concerted run this year, why not have your best players available? I'm willing to bet when the final standings are in, at least one club will miss making the playoffs by a game or two!!

[Jham]

I doubt Garver is a longtime solution at catcher.  I'd be happy with giving him a chance... next season.  Giminez was literally the only Twin still saying we were good when we had our first 4 game losing streak.  We came right back and swept the Tribe.  Despite run differential's and paper mismatches, he told everyone we were good.  Low and behold, the team believed him.  They kept fighting.  They're still in it.  His experience is pretty valuable in my mind.  Probably more so down the stretch.  Garver will be up soon enough, but I'm happy Giminez is leading the team instead of one of the guys who lost 103 games last year.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

How many games are left in August? You're saying Garver's presence couldn't possibly win the Twins a game or two this month?

Is it possible that Garver could help the Twins win a game this month? Sure.

 

Is it likely that Garver would help the Twins win a game this month? No.

 

It's also possible Garver would help the Twins lose a game this month.

 

Some people are assuming Garver's shiny Rochester OPS will translate to Minnesota. See Hicks and Buxton for the reason why that assumption is flawed.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I expect to see Garver soon. As long a chance remains for the post season, I hope that is by August 31.

If you are referring to postseason rosters, August 31st doesn't really matter anymore since Garver is already on the 40-man roster.

 

http://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3549

[drjim]

Twins aren't going to get rid of one of their top 3 catchers for a minimal upgrade (maybe) in 3-4 games. Garver will be up September 1.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Twins aren't going to get rid of one of their top 3 catchers for a minimal upgrade (maybe) in 3-4 games. Garver will be up September 1.

Agreed. I wanted to see Garver get his shot in mid to late July.

 

Now it doesn't make much sense. Keep Gimenez for roster security because if you call up Garver and he pulls a Murphy or gets injured, you're kinda screwed for the rest of the season.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Twins aren't going to get rid of one of their top 3 catchers for a minimal upgrade (maybe) in 3-4 games. Garver will be up September 1.

In theory, they could go back down to 12 pitchers to roster Garver.  But yeah, if they haven't done it by now, they aren't going to do it until September.

[Mike Sixel]

Uh, isn't Gimenez "pulling a Murphy"?

 

And, calling up Garver DOES NOT MEAN you cut Gimenez. You don't need 13 pitchers.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Also, the Rochester season goes through September 4th, they are currently tied for the wild card, and there aren't many/any catching replacements in the org right now (keep in mind Chattanooga will need to keep its catchers for their playoffs too).  Even though MLB rosters expand on September 1st, I suspect Garver will stay in AAA until they are eliminated, if not until their season/postseason is complete.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Uh, isn't Gimenez "pulling a Murphy"?

 

And, calling up Garver DOES NOT MEAN you cut Gimenez. You don't need 13 pitchers.

Their last turn through the rotation, Twins starters pitched 22.1 innings... and that's including Colin's 7 IP gem. Unfortunately, the Twins still need every pitcher they can roster.

 

And Gimenez has a .652 OPS on the season. If you think that's pulling a Murphy, you should go look at JR Murphy's Twins stats again.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Their last turn through the rotation, Twins starters pitched 22.1 innings... and that's including Colin's 7 IP gem. Unfortunately, the Twins still need every pitcher they can roster.

And Gimenez has a .652 OPS on the season. If you think that's pulling a Murphy, you should go look at JR Murphy's Twins stats again.

 

we don't agree. I am cool with that.

 

And no, don't post the straw man (like keeps happening in this thread, when not one person has said that) that I think he's a super star. But, Garver has a shot to be a decent player. IMO, not taking that shot is a mistake, no matter how many games it is for. If he plays in 3, that will be more than Buesnitz likely sees. It also doesn't matter that they have bigger problems. That's awful logic. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

we don't agree. I am cool with that.

 

And no, don't post the straw man (like keeps happening in this thread, when not one person has said that) that I think he's a super star. But, Garver has a shot to be a decent player. IMO, not taking that shot is a mistake, no matter how many games it is for. If he plays in 3, that will be more than Buesnitz likely sees. It also doesn't matter that they have bigger problems. That's awful logic.

What straw man? That Gimenez's .652 OPS for a backup catcher isn't that bad?

 

Maybe Garver will be better. It's entirely possible. It's also very possible he's worse.

 

And if he's disastrously worse, you've probably lost Gimenez in the process, making September problematic for the team.

 

I was in favor of this move 3-4 weeks ago when the Twins were fading and a good Garver might help them win a game over the six weeks leading into September (and get him important MLB experience in the process).

 

But now, it just doesn't make much sense because the rotation has been terrible over the past week and the Twins need those arms because literally any of the Twins starters could have back-to-back 3.0 IP games.

[bird]

 

While I think Garver should be promoted, some people here are making some crazy-large assumptions that he'd have a positive impact with the stick in 2017.

You'd think we'd have learned by now that MiLB stats often don't translate to MLB with any kind of reliability.

I want Garver up because it could help him be better in 2018, not because I'm convinced he will be better than Gimenez or that it'd even matter if he was.

 

Yeah, I'm wondering why people have so much faith in Garver's chances of making an impact. Jonathan Mayo and gang at MLB think the Twins have 22 prospects more promising than Garver (and Granite). 

 

I hope he gets brought up in September, and I hope he turns out to be a solid backup catcher. That'll get me more excited about all those more highly-regarded prospects.