Text Size

Cleveland Indians & MLB

Futures Game : Ramirez and Lofgren

Talk Tribe, talk baseball in this forum.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau

Futures Game : Ramirez and Lofgren

Unread postby Tribefan24 » Sun Jul 08, 2007 5:20 pm

Max Ramirez : I really like his approach at the plate, hw has a nice swing, very good hitting mechanics and he has a lot of pop in his bat.... i think he will be a very good major league hitter... i cant judge his defense because he is the DH

Chuck Lofgren : looked good in his 1 inning of work... Gave up 1 hit and struck out 1 .... he can throw all his pitches for strikes and his fastball has great velocity and good late movement
Tribefan24
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:08 pm

Unread postby consigliere » Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:23 pm

Didn't catch much of the game, but the had the game on in the press box here at Mahoning Valley. I caught Ramirez's nice double off the wall in left-center. That stroke is beautiful. I have a feeling he may be playing more at 1B and 3B next year. Not sure how long the catcher thing will last if they envision him ever getting to Cleveland with Victor here.
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby pup » Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:27 pm

Not sure how long the catcher thing will last if they envision him ever getting to Cleveland with Victor here.


3 more years.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12020
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Unread postby neoleo » Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:09 am

In his one inning, Lofgren had a nice looking curveball. He also had very good mechanics (a compact, smooth delivery that kept him behind and on top of the ball, not falling off to the third base side as a lefty, and it was repeatable). When I first look at a pitcher, the first two things I look for are; Is he able to throw his off speed stuff for strikes, and does he have a solid, repeatable motion. Lofgren answered yes to both. Obviously it was a very limited sample, but it was a good first impression.
User avatar
neoleo
CSU Beat Guy
 
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:02 am
Location: Cleveland, OH
Favorite Player: Norris Cole
Least Favorite Player: number 6

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:12 am

Consigliere wrote: I have a feeling he may be playing more at 1B and 3B next year. Not sure how long the catcher thing will last if they envision him ever getting to Cleveland with Victor here.


The 1st question will be if he even stays with the Cleveland organization.
Max will be eligible to be taken in Rule 5 this December. Time will tell if he is still with the organization come 12/10/07.
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am

Unread postby The Math God » Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:50 am

so does the nice showing by Max make the Wickman trade better?
The Math God
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:43 pm

Unread postby pup » Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:57 am

so does the nice showing by Max make the Wickman trade better?


Depends.

If Max becomes an Indians, then yes, kind of.

If he gets Brandon Phillipsed, or lost in Rule 5, or never makes the jump from minor league all star to productive major leaguer, no.

With the state of today's bullpen, I don't really see how a catcher in the minors makes for a good trade. Would you rather have Wickman or Max today? In 3 years, maybe we can be excited, but for the 2007 Indians it is still a bad move.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12020
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Unread postby paulcousineau » Mon Jul 09, 2007 12:41 pm

The 1st question will be if he even stays with the Cleveland organization.
Max will be eligible to be taken in Rule 5 this December. Time will tell if he is still with the organization come 12/10/07.


This is going to be another tough off-season with 40-man decisions, but there is also a lot of dead weight on the current 40-man that can become flotsam or jetsam at any point as far as I'm concerned.

Whether they be no-longer-prospects or are simply filling a spot, I have these 8 guys as thoroughly removable from the 40-man:
Mike Koplove
J.D. Martin
Jason Stanford (probably via trade)
Michael Aubrey
Joe Inglett
Hector Luna
Mike Rouse
Brad Snyder

That doesn't include the open spot as the 40-man currently stands at 39.

Lots of decisions to make, but they did pretty well with it last year, having both Rule 5 picks (Warden and Goleski) returned to the organization.
Indians Fever...Be a Believer!
User avatar
paulcousineau
Celebrity
 
Posts: 604
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:21 am
Location: West Park

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:24 pm

The DiaTriber wrote: Whether they be no-longer-prospects or are simply filling a spot, I have these 8 guys as thoroughly removable from the 40-man:
Mike Koplove
J.D. Martin
Jason Stanford (probably via trade)
Michael Aubrey
Joe Inglett
Hector Luna
Mike Rouse
Brad Snyder

That doesn't include the open spot as the 40-man currently stands at 39.


We have some similar thoughts on how to open space. Don't forget that with Nixon being a free agent after the season, that opens a 40 man spot as well.

I think that Juan Lara and Brian Slocum are on the chopping block ahead of Martin and Stanford (if he isn't dealt).

It will also be interesting if they decide to exercise the options of Paul Byrd and Aaron Fultz. The way Perez has pitched and the fact there are a number of lefty pitchers that need protection (Sipp, Santos, Laffey, Lewis and Nottingham), Fultz's spot might be sacrificed.

IMHO a decision will need to be made between Choo and Snyder. IF Choo has to have Tommy John surgery (a possibility that was alluded to a couple of weeks back), I would more willing to expose Choo and protect Snyder.
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am

Unread postby paulcousineau » Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:33 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:
The DiaTriber wrote: Whether they be no-longer-prospects or are simply filling a spot, I have these 8 guys as thoroughly removable from the 40-man:
Mike Koplove
J.D. Martin
Jason Stanford (probably via trade)
Michael Aubrey
Joe Inglett
Hector Luna
Mike Rouse
Brad Snyder

That doesn't include the open spot as the 40-man currently stands at 39.


We have some similar thoughts on how to open space. Don't forget that with Nixon being a free agent after the season, that opens a 40 man spot as well.

I think that Juan Lara and Brian Slocum are on the chopping block ahead of Martin and Stanford (if he isn't dealt).

It will also be interesting if they decide to exercise the options of Paul Byrd and Aaron Fultz. The way Perez has pitched and the fact there are a number of lefty pitchers that need protection (Sipp, Santos, Laffey, Lewis and Nottingham), Fultz's spot might be sacrificed.

IMHO a decision will need to be made between Choo and Snyder. IF Choo has to have Tommy John surgery (a possibility that was alluded to a couple of weeks back), I would more willing to expose Choo and protect Snyder.


You're probably right on the Lara/Slocum vs. Martin/Stanford thing as well as the Choo/Snyder.

For some reason, I see these names being included in any deals that get done (a la Andrew Brown in the Kouzmanoff deal) to clear up space on the 40 so the decisions won't be nearly as difficult as they seem today.

If Choo does have TJ surgery, and is removed from the 40-man, can another team take him and stash him on the DL?
Indians Fever...Be a Believer!
User avatar
paulcousineau
Celebrity
 
Posts: 604
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:21 am
Location: West Park

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:37 pm

I believe in order for a player to not be offered back, they need to spend at least 60 days on the active big league roster.

I'll try to find the actual rule on this and then post the link. :-) :smile: :)
Last edited by MadThinker88 on Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:47 pm

Found the answer:

http://www.answers.com/topic/rule-5-draft

And just to make it easier...

The exemption periods were extended by one year in October, 2006, as part of a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. The change took effect immediately, exempting many players from the 2006 Rule 5 draft even though they had been signed in some cases more than four years before the new agreement came into effect. Prior to the rule change, players were exempt for three or four years after the year they were signed (regardless of the year they were drafted), rather than four or five years.

If chosen in the Rule 5 draft, a player must be kept on the selecting team's 25-man major league roster for the entire season after the draft--he may not be optioned or designated to the minors. The selecting team may, at any time, waive the Rule 5 draftee. If a Rule 5 draftee clears waivers by not signing with a new MLB team, he must be offered back to the original team, effectively canceling the Rule 5 draft choice. Once a Rule 5 draftee spends an entire season on his new team's 25-man roster, his status reverts to normal and he may be optioned or designated for assignment.

To prevent the abuse of the Rule 5 draft, the rule also states that the draftee must be active for at least 90 days. This keeps teams from drafting players, then placing them on the disabled list for the majority of the season. For example, if a Rule 5 draftee was only active for 67 days in his first season with his new club, he must be active for an additional 23 games in his second season to satisfy the Rule 5 requirements.

Any player chosen in the Rule 5 draft may be traded to any team while under the Rule 5 restrictions, but the restrictions transfer to the new team. If the new team does not want to keep the player on its 25-man roster for the season, he must be offered back to the team he was on when he was chosen in the draft.
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am

Unread postby Dozen » Mon Jul 09, 2007 3:03 pm

Pup wrote:
so does the nice showing by Max make the Wickman trade better?


Depends.

If Max becomes an Indians, then yes, kind of.

If he gets Brandon Phillipsed, or lost in Rule 5, or never makes the jump from minor league all star to productive major leaguer, no.

With the state of today's bullpen, I don't really see how a catcher in the minors makes for a good trade. Would you rather have Wickman or Max today? In 3 years, maybe we can be excited, but for the 2007 Indians it is still a bad move.


Not if they honestly thought he was retiring after that season..............
http://www.thesportshole.com

http://www.youtube.com/TheSportsHole


I have never seen so many kok heads all lumped together like that ~ Yhimmie
User avatar
Dozen
TheSportsHole.com
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:08 pm
Location: Willoughby, Ohio
Favorite Player: my son
Least Favorite Player: venomous/bipolar

Unread postby paulcousineau » Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:04 pm

Thanks MT88.
So if Choo does have TJ, he can be taken off the 40-man with the rehab time being what it is.
Indians Fever...Be a Believer!
User avatar
paulcousineau
Celebrity
 
Posts: 604
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:21 am
Location: West Park

Unread postby pup » Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:13 pm

Dozen wrote:
Pup wrote:
so does the nice showing by Max make the Wickman trade better?


Depends.

If Max becomes an Indians, then yes, kind of.

If he gets Brandon Phillipsed, or lost in Rule 5, or never makes the jump from minor league all star to productive major leaguer, no.

With the state of today's bullpen, I don't really see how a catcher in the minors makes for a good trade. Would you rather have Wickman or Max today? In 3 years, maybe we can be excited, but for the 2007 Indians it is still a bad move.


Not if they honestly thought he was retiring after that season..............


No free pass for the front office being wrong, again.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12020
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Unread postby swerb » Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:30 pm

I gotta give the Indians FO a pass on the Wickie deal. Not only was Ramirez a better prospect than I thought they could get, but everyone felt Wickie was going to retire at seasons end.

IIRC, he even went to the Indians FO and told them "Listen, I'm retiring at seasons end. If you want to get something for me, go ahead."

There's certainly some things to blame the Tribe FO for, but the Wickie deal is not one of them IMO.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:33 pm

The DiaTriber wrote: So if Choo does have TJ, he can be taken off the 40-man with the rehab time being what it is.


When coming off the 40 man roster, a player will be exposed waivers then. Should no one put in a claim for Choo at that point, I would have to assume that Choo would slide through the Rule 5 draft as well.

One other thing we need to be careful of regarding TJ surgery and outfielders: recovery time length.
I have to assume the recovery process if different for a position player then it is for a pitcher be it relief or starting.
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am


Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests