DavidGee24 wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 7:45 pm
Donn Beach wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 8:01 am
DavidGee24 wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 5:46 am
No, he actually hasn't. He has one double and a home run off of a position player. He only gets the occasional single in non-clutch situations. But you just can't help yourself.
Actually it's you that can't seem to help yourself. .282/ .462 /.385/ .846. That's what Garver has been hitting the last 30 days. The last 15 days it's .318/ .483/ .500 /.983, so the trajectory is improvement. I don't know how many position players it took pitching to him for him to accomplish it, but for me I see the possibility his bat could be coming around. At the very least, it doesn't scream, cut the guy.
And aside from that, if you did cut him you're giving up a decent backup catcher who's hitting .231/ .394/ .308 /.702 on the season, I'd take that from a backup catcher, so not only are you stuck continuing to pay Garver, his salary, now you have to find another catcher and pay them too. Sorry bro, i really don't see cutting Garver as making a lot of sense
Those numbers don't mean squat, they're inflated by 1) singles he's hit with two outs and nobody on in games that had been already decided; 2) an inordinate number of walks including two that came on pitches that were clearly strike three; and 3) a home run that he hit off of a position player that really inflated those numbers.
Whenever he does come up in a clutch situation he fails, like in his last AB in the Ranger series when he got a meatball right down the middle and grounded into a routine DP.
What...did you actually think that I wouldn't be ready for that?
Only singles, okay, lots of walks, thats a good thing, that's what you want to see if a bat is coming around. You know OBP is considered more valuable than slugging. So let's say you have a player that possibly is hitting singles, getting on base at a good rate, and fills the need for a backup catcher, that player is providing value. I am just curious the reason for cutting him, what's gained exactly?