Max Ramirez = next stud catcher?

by kershaw_equals_stud on Jun 26, 2008 8:47 AM EDT Comment 14 comments

I just wanna know what everyone thinks of him. Killed the ball in the minors and in his first start at catcher for Texas he goes deep. The way Salty is playing I hope Max can take over and kick butt. Plus his full name is really cool Maximiliano Ramirez. But really... can a name like that suceed? In all seriousness is he the next stud catcher? Russell Martin came somewhat unheralded and took over with a frenzy.

I am sorry if I am wrong about Martin coming unheralded but I had not heard to much of him before he came up.

3 recs | Comment 14 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Max Ramirez

As long as Saltalamacchia can’t throw out runners and Laird is on the DL, the Rangers would be foolish not to try him at catcher. Maybe he’s better than reported a la Robinson Cano.

The bat says he is a major leaguer. Can he play enough defense to be a super utility in the mold of Tony Phillips?

Fake Teams - a proud member of the SB Nation

by faketeams on Jun 26, 2008 8:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Nope

He is a catcher. He can’t stick at 1st due to Davis. I would guess DH is in his future.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Jun 26, 2008 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If he can stick at catcher

his bat will have tremedous value there. Not sure he could be more than slightly above average if he’s at DH. Chris Davis has reportedly been called up, so 1B is out. If Bradley is out long or is traded soon, Ramirez could see significant time at DH while catching a couple days a week behind Salty.

...and curse Sir Sidney Ponson, he was such a stupid git.

by t ball on Jun 26, 2008 10:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Russel Martin?

Russel Martin came up with a lot of hype. I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Relatively speaking, Brian McCann came up unheralded for what he has done. People here were all over Martin long before he was in the majors though.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Jun 26, 2008 10:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Mac

Yeah, when Mac came up, he was completely overshadowed by Frenchy. Funny how that one has turned out. >_<

As for Ramirez, he was a solid prospect when the Braves traded him, but he was 3rd on the depth chart behind McCann and Salty, so he didn’t get a lot of notice. He fell off my radar for the year or whatever that he was with the Indians, and then he was again behind 2 or 3 guys when he got to Texas. He’s always had good tools, and his defense has always been something of a question. This year was clearly a breakout for him, but it’s not like people had never heard of him. He’s just had the misfortune to be organizations with lots of good prospects (pushing him off top 10 lists, or at least down them) and also with a lot of depth at C (meaning he was never anyone’s “Catcher of the Future”).

But the reports on his bat have always been positive. His relative anonymity is mostly the fault of prospect watchers not being willing to go deep enough in some of the deeper organizations, as well as major questions about his viability behind the plate.

by mraver on Jun 26, 2008 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What I never got

Was why only teams which already had top catchers picked up Ramirez. This isn’t something you can blame on the draft because he was traded so many times. Why were the Rangers, who already had Saltamachia and Teagarden willing to pay more for him than, say, the Royals?

www.loftylantern.com

by OldProspects on Jun 26, 2008 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rangers paid Lofton

They traded a veteran who was useless to them because they were out of a playoff race. I wouldn’t call that a lot. And I’d bet that the reason only teams with good catchers/catching prospects picked up Ramirez is because of his questionable defense. That, or they thought they could flip him for a better prospect at another position.

by demondeaconsbaseball on Jun 26, 2008 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Pretty much what I was thinking. I believe it has been a common belief the past two or three years that Max Ram wouldn’t stay at catcher. And even if he could, with the rate that catchers do fizzle out at all levels, from the low minors to the high minors to early in their MLB career, it never hurts to have plenty of catchers in the system. It’s like pitchers, just because you have some good ones in AA and AAA, doesn’t mean you don’t keep looking for other ones.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jun 26, 2008 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

about martin

I wasn’t that much into baseball at the time and couldn’t remember. sorry.

by kershaw_equals_stud on Jun 26, 2008 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

about martin

I wasn’t that much into baseball at the time and couldn’t remember. sorry.

by kershaw_equals_stud on Jun 26, 2008 10:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

should be trade bait

something like what the braves did with Salty. Except, you know, for someone they can actually sign.

by son.of.sourman on Jun 26, 2008 2:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

A friend and I were having a conversation about catchers last night, and how there is a lack of certain defensive fundamentals at the big-league level. It has a lot to do with conversions to catcher for the sake of offense. It is no coincidence that all of the division leaders at this point of the season have natural catchers behind the plate. This said, I think Texas has got to be favoring Teagarden in the long term. His bat could be problematic though, whereas Ramirez is a pure hitter. If Texas continues to be a non-competitive organization, Ramirez may be able to hit his way into a catching job.

by StickRat on Jun 26, 2008 3:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Can’t be the next stud catcher when he’ll never be able to stick at Catcher.

DH is his future…..but he could easily be the next stud DH, his bat is that good.

by adropofvenom on Jun 26, 2008 4:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

he's a better catcher than people think

His arm isn’t great but it wouldn’t be Bard either. He’s pretty good at most of the other things catchers do. I think that his deficiencies were either overblown or worked on.

by bushe on Jun 27, 2008 4:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs