Lowell to Texas, Max Ramirez to Boston

Former Tribe prospect Max Ramirez, who was shipped out for Kenny Lofton in 2007, is possibly on his way to the Northeast in exchange for Mike Lowell.

about 2 years ago johnf34 30 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

And cue Max Ramirez beginning to rake.

by afh4 on Dec 10, 2009 9:38 AM EST reply actions

Another catcher that couldn’t catch that gets turned into a DH for Boston.

by lenred on Dec 10, 2009 10:53 AM EST reply actions

Well, they could use one if Papi continues to decline.

by Toxicadam on Dec 10, 2009 11:03 AM EST up reply actions

Too bad Ramirez hasn’t hit in two years.

by afh4 on Dec 10, 2009 11:10 AM EST up reply actions

Ouch!

No, not you. Your helmet!

by PatBordersHelmet on Dec 10, 2009 11:54 AM EST up reply actions

What’s wrong with his ’08?

by JulioBernazard on Dec 10, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions

Only his AAA and major-league numbers.

86 career games in AAA — 667 OPS
69 career games in AA — 1096 OPS

Already 25 years old. You tell me.

by Jay on Dec 10, 2009 1:26 PM EST up reply actions

Pretty much everything that matters.

by afh4 on Dec 10, 2009 1:55 PM EST up reply actions

Why on earth would anyone give anything up for Mike Lowell?

by NickFantana on Dec 10, 2009 11:53 AM EST reply actions

At $3M? I’d do it.

by dgcambridge on Dec 10, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions

Which leads to the conclusion …

by Jay on Dec 10, 2009 12:47 PM EST up reply actions

… max ramirez isn’t anything.

by Brick. on Dec 10, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions

and, to a lesser degree…

by cleveland teamer on Dec 10, 2009 3:58 PM EST up reply actions

Nothing Max Ramirez does can make me regret the brief return of Lofton to Cleveland

by APV on Dec 10, 2009 1:34 PM EST reply actions

Me neither. That was awesome.

Or, would have been had we won the whole frickin’ thing.

by JulioBernazard on Dec 10, 2009 3:25 PM EST up reply actions

I know – we should have won the whole darn thing, or at the very least, should have made it to the WS, and against a Rockies team that was off for 7 days (10-11 days – not even sure now), I would have liked our chances. Argh!

Chances are, 9/10 times, a team up 3-1 would have won that series – just happened to be the 1 time you lose in that scenario that we didn’t beat Boston. Even worse than that, with the way baseball is structured, a team like ours get far fewer chances over an extended period of time than rich teams like Boston and New York, being that virtually everything has to go right for us to be in position to win a championship. That’s what makes that loss hurt even worse. :-(

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Dec 10, 2009 11:50 PM EST up reply actions

So Max has now been traded straight up for Bob Wickman, Kenny Lofton, and Mike Lowell.

by Ryan on Dec 10, 2009 2:57 PM EST reply actions 4 recs

That’s…odd.

by afh4 on Dec 10, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions

that is kind of crazy.

by Brick. on Dec 10, 2009 3:59 PM EST up reply actions

Two things:

Max Ramirez has played in 17 major league games. The guys he was traded straight-up for have played in 4,466. That may be some sort of record.
Mike Lowell better start making retirement plans. Wick appeared in 750 games before being traded for Ramirez, but only 85 after the trade. Lofton appeared in 2,103 before the trade, but only 52 thereafter.

by FredOx on Dec 10, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions

they should trade him for gio gonzales.

by emil minty on Dec 10, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions

Curious.

by APV on Dec 10, 2009 10:52 PM EST up reply actions

Another example of a big market team spending over its mistake. The Red Sox win this battle in the last decade.

by xrickx on Dec 10, 2009 3:27 PM EST reply actions

If I’m the Rangers, I ask for $51 million before I even TALK to Boston about Max Ramirez.

by fleerdon on Dec 10, 2009 7:06 PM EST reply actions

Uh … wut?

by Jay on Dec 10, 2009 10:48 PM EST up reply actions

I tend to think of the Dice-K posting fee arrangement as like the greatest forgotten baseball outrage of the decade. They just fish under the couch cushions and dig up 51 mill. Absurd.

If you’re asking why that irritated me at 7:06 pm tonight, I haven’t the slightest.

by fleerdon on Dec 10, 2009 11:13 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t really see it that way. I see it as their deducing that they could get him to agree to a six-year deal for 50M, and deciding they would spend 100M for six years of the guy.

by Jay on Dec 11, 2009 9:36 AM EST up reply actions