Securing Sauce: Should the Twins Extend Mitch Garver?

Multiple year contracts to aging players (middle to late 30's) are almost always regrettable. In 2 years I would much rather have a Polanco or Buxton taking more DH at bats than Garver.

Hell, no

I’d be reluctant to extend him past the two years he’s under contract. That gives the FO time to see if Jeffers is progressing and is the catcher of the future. 

I think it depends on if you see him as a catcher or DH in the future.  The Twins are pretty risk averse and Mitch hasn't been overly consistent (streaky) at the plate other than 2019.  I think they take the wait and see approach.  If he continues to perform I think they might be willing to do an extension.  If not I think they try and work out a trade.

Most indubitably.  Though 2022 is his age 31 season I think he has more than just a few good innings ahead of him behind the plate and provides excellent but streaky offense for a catcher. A 3-year deal with a 4th year option would be good for both sides.

What would TB do, they would trade him, so I am against extending him. ?

Golly no. You have him for two more years and catchers age like fruit in the sun. Incrementally, you would be tying him down for age 33 and beyond. With resources seemingly so precious for this club, that seems ill-advised, especially given our abundance (Sano, Rooker, Arraez) of no-defense bats.  

I would be shopping him more actively than any other player on the roster. Nothing against Garver -- I really like him, in fact -- but he's already on the wrong side of 30 and plays perhaps the worst position for guys his age. I don't expect him to both available and productive past his current team control.

Maybe he has lots of gas left in the tank and will prove me wrong, but I'd rather think like Tampa with him and cash in while we know the value is still there.

The points against extension are 

1. Age
2. Injury history
3. DH already has a number of options and Catcher is where he has value

Points for extension are

1. Lack of belief in Jeffers
2. It makes a stronger trade case and gets us a better return.

Be lucky to catch half the games in 2022. Can he play first? Of course, Sano is there right now and Kirilloff is a better longtertm choice. Sano is always the guy messing things up. Do you keep (and extend) Sano as your DH of the future?

Donaldson is also a roster problem. How many games does he play at third base. Is he your part-time DH. Suddenly, where does Garver play if he is a part-time aging catcher.

If anyone is looking for a catcher, especially coming out of spring training, he could be a prize trade chip. I would not fear to make a trade.

Garver is a late bloomer so I think he still has a few good years in him. He's a student of the game and he'll adjust to any situation. Yet I think we don't have to be in a hurry to extend him

4 hours ago, DJL44 said:

Hell, no

I'll add a little to this. He's estimated to get $3M in arbitration this season and probably $6M in 2023. Why would you want to turn a 2 year $9M non-guaranteed contract into a 4 year $40M guaranteed contract? That's a 2 year $31M extension for 2024-25  (ages 33-34) which would make him one of the top 5 highest paid catchers in baseball. Assuming he is still productive two seasons from now they shouldn't have any problem to signing him to a 2 year $31M extension (or more likely 2 years - $20M) in October 2024. Your proposed extension would turn Garver from a trade asset to a liability.

I'm not even convinced Garver will outproduce Jeffers this season. You can't be spending $15M on your backup catcher.

If his cost is likely $29M over the next 4 years if you go year-to-year then the Twins should get a discount on the extension. Garver has yet to make much - 9th round pick with one arbitration season. I think they could get a 4 year deal done for $22M. Even then I would hesitate if I were running the Twins.

The only way you sign him is to just wrap up the arbitration years, but do not buy out any FA years.  I would not even buy out the arbitration years though. He is on the wrong side of 30 and will drop off production really fast, like most players but catchers generally drop off faster. 

Name me any catcher in the majors with as good of stats for what he is paid. Would we do like we did with the pitching and get a bunch of hapless players. Sorry for the play on words. But we need to spend the money trading up for quality not quantity. And who would we get to catch?

One more point. They say garver would have value as a dh. In two years who will we have as dh. Sano? Donaldson? They will both be gone. And we pay our backup catchers next to nothing. So add up the totals. Sano due for 14 million, Donaldson due 21 million. That obligation being gone then you can pay garver 10 plus million a year. Baseball in my mind is like anything else just crunch the number and becomes easier to figure out what to do. You still may not get your dream team. But that's life.

Only if they have no faith in Jeffers. And even then I'd make him prove he's healthy and can hit this year.

Say what you will about "late bloomers" but they're the perfect deal for a budget conscious team: get his prime years on a rookie contract, them let him walk in his early 30s.

Would be interesting to approach on a 3 or 4 yr deal, if it was to pay a little more now to pay less later.  

Like people have said he hasnt made much $ yet in his MLB career and isnt set to make a significant amount the next 2 yrs in arbitration and at 31 already catchers dont age well.  

What would you think of a 8 million AAV for 3 or 4 yrs. paying a little more now for a little less later and cost certainty. 

Garver, is more than a 1 tool player, as he can play c, 1b &dh. How about signing him to a 3-4 year contract @ $9m-$10m per year. He will most likely have his injuries. That,s the risk of playing baseball as a catcher.

On 1/20/2022 at 8:49 AM, AceWrigley said:

Most indubitably.  Though 2022 is his age 31 season I think he has more than just a few good innings ahead of him behind the plate and provides excellent but streaky offense for a catcher. A 3-year deal with a 4th year option would be good for both sides.

I don't necessarily agree nor disagree with your take.  But I love the word indubitably!

I'd rather wait and see how '22 plays out. Will Jeffers be able to step in? If they're horrible again in 22 he could be a trade piece. 

It's really a moot conversation at this point. The question as presented and the responses suggested are dependent on the past CBA. When we know the rules going forward, we can respond with meaningful answers.