Further Wickman thoughts
The Indians have conceded the season, which is a relief. The team is 10 games under .500, and has no chance of catching Detroit or Chicago.
Getting rid of Bob Wickman makes sense. The closer is doubtless at the end of his career, and leaving him on the roster would have served no purpose.
But my first thought when I saw the Indians aquired A catcher Max Ramirez was "that's it?" For a guy who saved 45 games last season, in a bullpen-starved market?
I know Wickman had 10-5 rights, but getting this little for him is a tad perplexing.
And I'd like it if just once, Indians General Manager would describe a baseball move in baseball terms, instead of using the term "market" every five seconds.
I know the Indians are a small market team. Believe me Mark, the last four seasons have made that reality quite clear. I also know Shapiro is sharp, and his hands are often tied.
But it'd be nice if we could hear about baseball and baseball only in baseball decisions. Continually suggesting otherwise sounds like an excuse.
We all know selecting prospects in a trade is like throwing darts. But receiving a single A player, and only a single A player, for a 2005 All-Star makes the deal seem money-oriented. Trading for prospects is playing darts. Trading for single A players is like playing blindfolded.