Can we please move on from Chris Gimenez already?

[bird]

 

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!!

 

 

You're entitled to think Garver will produce a win or two were he to be called up. My guess is the Twins, maybe including Molitor, his pitching coach, and the pitchers themselves, believe that Giminez's presence in pre-series meetings, and in the clubhouse, etc., is valuable to them and to the team. Maybe they don't think Garver would qualify as you describe him. But you might be right, I don't know.

 

You were clear in saying that if the FO didn't promote Garver, that they couldn't pretend they were trying to win. I'm sorry, but I guess I assumed that, if they aren't trying to win, the only other available option is losing. There's no tying in baseball. (Please rewrite!) 

[drjim]

Wait, people want 3 catchers on the roster now?

[spanman2]

 

I'd bet money Garver will be up Sept. 1st.  He could surprise, or he could show everyone he's a fringe MLBer like Granite did. 

 

Giminez does remind me how I miss the .191 fan club though.

What a fan club it was...if memory serves me correctly Randy Bush had a crew out in the RF upper deck also.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

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.

To me, it's just not clear cut enough to really get upset about it. Several weeks ago when the Twins were fading hard, I wanted to see the team just call up the youngsters (mainly Garver and Gonsalves) and just let it fly. Instead, they picked up Enns and are giving him a shot. That's not enough of a difference to get me upset.

 

And in the meantime, the Twins managed to climb back into this thing, which changes the situation a bit. Any potential failure by Garver (coupled with the probable loss of Gimenez) makes the move considerably riskier for two weeks, which I find unnecessary.

 

But either way, it's nothing I'd get too upset about. If the front office had confidence to roll the dice on Garver, so be it. If they don't have that confidence and don't roll the dice, so be it.

 

(finally had enough time away from baby to type a real response on a computer instead of phone)

[Mike Sixel]

 

Wait, people want 3 catchers on the roster now?

 

Other than some of us have posted over and over that he can play 1B or pinch hit or DH or in an emergency the OF or he can catch........so, no, it isn't about three catchers. And, we've had this discussion, so I'm surprised you'd  bring it up.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Other than some of us have posted over and over that he can play 1B or pinch hit or DH or in an emergency the OF or he can catch........so, no, it isn't about three catchers. And, we've had this discussion, so I'm surprised you'd  bring it up.

That's fair but in response, why call up Garver when Vargas is available?

 

If you're looking for immediate performance off the bench, I have way more faith in Vargas going on an .850 OPS tear for a month than I do Garver. He's actually done it before.

[Squirrel]

 

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

 

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

I agree that it doesn't and that we don't need 13 pitchers, but that isn't what the OP is saying or asking and if it's to replace Gimenez, than no; but if it's in addition instead of a pitcher, then yes, by all means would be my vote.

[Mike Sixel]

 

That's fair but in response, why call up Garver when Vargas is available?

 

If you're looking for immediate performance off the bench, I have way more faith in Vargas going on an .850 OPS tear for a month than I do Garver. He's actually done it before.

 

to me? positional flexibility. Vargas can't catch. He can barely play 1B. And, it appears the FO does not believe in Vargas, so move on.

 

As you say, at this point, it is fairly moot. It should, imo, have been done weeks ago. Now? Now it is unlikely to make much difference. 

 

But, any positive move is still a positive move. It's clear they will stick with 13 pitchers, which I don't understand......so at this point, I am tilting at windmills.

[nicksaviking]

 

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.

 

Fangraphs has him at 9.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/updated-top-10-prospect-lists-al-central/

 

I'd guess he'd see a bigger jump after a full season of a breakout campaign instead of only half a season. But his age is going to work against him also.

[Mr. Brooks]

That's fair but in response, why call up Garver when Vargas is available?

 

If you're looking for immediate performance off the bench, I have way more faith in Vargas going on an .850 OPS tear for a month than I do Garver. He's actually done it before.

Garver instead of Vargas allows Molitor to more liberally pinch hit for his catcher.

[Rosterman]

I, too, can't believe that Stu Turner managed to stay on the Reds roster all season. Good for him, except it will be back to the minors next year for more seasoning and see what happens from there. The joys and ills of the Rule 5. But at least you get 40-man roster money while in the minors.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Rosters expand in two weeks, might as well hold on to Giminez as the check valve. In September, bring up Garver, let Giminez rot on the bench, and give Garver all the at-bats that Giminez got, plus rotate hi around DH, First and maybe a spot start or two in RF. If he continues to hit like a maniac, get him 4-5 games per week. If he struggles, just back up catcher to see what you got for 2018.

 

I don't get the certainty that he'll do anything, but I do get the sentiment that he should get a chance. I also don't think that the FO should put them selves at risk to only have one catcher, were they to make the Wild card and one of the two gets injured. Cant go into the wild card with Escobar as your only backup option.

[yarnivek1972]

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.

Of those 22 prospects, how many have been at AAA all season and are right handed bats?

 

I wouldn't put much stock into prospect rankings when evaluating Garver. His advanced age severely impacts his status. Doesn't mean he can't help. Castro and Giminez are both knocking on the door of career highs in games caught. Having Garver could help freshen them up. He could also potentially get some at bats at first, dh or left field vs LHP. The reason Garver is likely to have a positive impact if he were brought up IMO is that the playing time he would most likely get would come at the expense of the two catchers, who are wearing down, and Mauer or Kepler vs LHP.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Garver instead of Vargas allows Molitor to more liberally pinch hit for his catcher.

right now there's 3 bench players and two of them are short stops. If you wait a couple weeks I'll bet there's at least one more bench bat plus Garver and still have the Giminez check valve.

[howieramone2]

 

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

No. I hope they bring him back next season. Our problems are not being caused by our catchers. 

[howieramone2]

 

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.

No you don't. That's called chasing your tail.

[The Wise One]

 

They probably feel he's too old to be considered a prospect. They aren't wrong. Doesn't mean he can't be a contributor at the MLB level. The Twins won't know until they let him play.

Age does not prevent Jose DeLeon from being ranked. A decent bat, average catching ability, throws out base runners, somebody is not loving something. 

[Doomtints]

Not sure what you all are talking about.  When I Google "Mitch Garver prospect ranking" I find him ranked 15th-17th. That's where AJ Pierzynski was ranked, by the way.

[howieramone2]

 

Other than some of us have posted over and over that he can play 1B or pinch hit or DH or in an emergency the OF or he can catch........so, no, it isn't about three catchers. And, we've had this discussion, so I'm surprised you'd  bring it up.

Sano can play RF also.