Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 14:22 pm
Claimed by Twins on waivers...guy is on a merry go round.
STLtoday.com
STLtoday.com Forums
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/
Zak Kent Again and Again
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1520703
Page 1 of 2
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 14:57 pm
So they gave up Ramos to have Kent on the team for a couple of days? I mean if they like him that much how about not DFA'n him every time you get him.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 15:15 pm
What an embarrassing fiasco.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 15:57 pm
How so? Just roster churn of spare parts that will serve zero meaningful purpose.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 16:10 pm
A lot of teams do this people are just used to Mo who once they’re on the roster they’re there so it seems strange when the cardinals do things like this that a lot of other teams do. The orioles picked up Ramos twice this off season several teams had Kent. It’s not hard to figure out they pick up a guy on waivers that they like then they see another guy they like more on waivers dump the first guy then sign someone they like more dump the second guySouthern Illinois wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 15:57 pmHow so? Just roster churn of spare parts that will serve zero meaningful purpose.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 16:37 pm
Because, with Ramos, you had an Elite fielding 3b, who has shown "some" pop from the RH side at the ML level. Was he a guarantee? No, but he was a zero risk player to give a shot to for a team lacking RH hitting.Southern Illinois wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 15:57 pmHow so? Just roster churn of spare parts that will serve zero meaningful purpose.
I'd rather that, than claiming a pitcher, and immediately designating him and exposing him to other teams
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 17:04 pm
RamFan08NY wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 16:37 pmBecause, with Ramos, you had an Elite fielding 3b, who has shown "some" pop from the RH side at the ML level. Was he a guarantee? No, but he was a zero risk player to give a shot to for a team lacking RH hitting.Southern Illinois wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 15:57 pmHow so? Just roster churn of spare parts that will serve zero meaningful purpose.
I'd rather that, than claiming a pitcher, and immediately designating him and exposing him to other teams
Was Ramos a good fielder as well? I know he showed flashes of power. Makes the move even worse, he was only 23/24 too
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 18:37 pm
Kent vs Roycroft vs Ramos for last roster spots
There was room for 2 until we signed Urias.
Roycroft survived. He will be 29 in June and spent 2025 struggling in AAA.
I would have kept Ramos and let Roycroft go but I have little information about why they think differently.
There was room for 2 until we signed Urias.
Roycroft survived. He will be 29 in June and spent 2025 struggling in AAA.
I would have kept Ramos and let Roycroft go but I have little information about why they think differently.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 19:00 pm
When they got Urias Ramos was no longer needed they were going to have to send him down and lose him on waivers anyway. Urias is a gold glove infielder who can play multiple positions and is a veteran who by all reports is a great influence on younger players. Ramos is a career .198 hitter in 119 career plate appearances and hit an awe inspiring .216 at AAA last season it was a fairly easy call. Oh he’s also 0-1 in spring training which if he did that for the cardinals some posters would be having a meltdown because he’s hitlesscardstatman wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 18:37 pm Kent vs Roycroft vs Ramos for last roster spots
There was room for 2 until we signed Urias.
Roycroft survived. He will be 29 in June and spent 2025 struggling in AAA.
I would have kept Ramos and let Roycroft go but I have little information about why they think differently.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 19:21 pm
They dropped Ramos before picking up Urias. And stating Ramos' career is disingenuous since he has only had a cup of coffee in the bigs and is only 23. Urias didnt even get to the bigs until he was 25/26 years oldOzziesfan41 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 19:00 pmWhen they got Urias Ramos was no longer needed they were going to have to send him down and lose him on waivers anyway. Urias is a gold glove infielder who can play multiple positions and is a veteran who by all reports is a great influence on younger players. Ramos is a career .198 hitter in 119 career plate appearances and hit an awe inspiring .216 at AAA last season it was a fairly easy call. Oh he’s also 0-1 in spring training which if he did that for the cardinals some posters would be having a meltdown because he’s hitlesscardstatman wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 18:37 pm Kent vs Roycroft vs Ramos for last roster spots
There was room for 2 until we signed Urias.
Roycroft survived. He will be 29 in June and spent 2025 struggling in AAA.
I would have kept Ramos and let Roycroft go but I have little information about why they think differently.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 19:35 pm
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 20:01 pm
^^This.RamFan08NY wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 16:37 pmBecause, with Ramos, you had an Elite fielding 3b, who has shown "some" pop from the RH side at the ML level. Was he a guarantee? No, but he was a zero risk player to give a shot to for a team lacking RH hitting.Southern Illinois wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 15:57 pmHow so? Just roster churn of spare parts that will serve zero meaningful purpose.
I'd rather that, than claiming a pitcher, and immediately designating him and exposing him to other teams
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 20:12 pm
They were probably already negotiating with urias at the time they picked up ramos. Ramos sucks hes not going to make the orioles they will try to sneak him back through waivers and the cardinals and any other team will have another chance to pick him up. Ramos sucks so bad the whitesox didnt even think he worth keeping around. And so what if he’s young a young player who sucks still sucksJobu's Rum wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 19:21 pmThey dropped Ramos before picking up Urias. And stating Ramos' career is disingenuous since he has only had a cup of coffee in the bigs and is only 23. Urias didnt even get to the bigs until he was 25/26 years oldOzziesfan41 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 19:00 pmWhen they got Urias Ramos was no longer needed they were going to have to send him down and lose him on waivers anyway. Urias is a gold glove infielder who can play multiple positions and is a veteran who by all reports is a great influence on younger players. Ramos is a career .198 hitter in 119 career plate appearances and hit an awe inspiring .216 at AAA last season it was a fairly easy call. Oh he’s also 0-1 in spring training which if he did that for the cardinals some posters would be having a meltdown because he’s hitlesscardstatman wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 18:37 pm Kent vs Roycroft vs Ramos for last roster spots
There was room for 2 until we signed Urias.
Roycroft survived. He will be 29 in June and spent 2025 struggling in AAA.
I would have kept Ramos and let Roycroft go but I have little information about why they think differently.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 21:35 pm
quite the couple of weeks for Kent, to say the least !
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 22:11 pm
Maybe Bloom and Mo made a bet. Chaim said he could make Johnny boy look smart. Winner gets to keep Girsch.
Re: Zak Kent Again and Again
Posted: 26 Feb 2026 22:19 pm
I think he was the number 3 prospect for the white sox at one time...I could be wrong but I thought I read that somewhereJobu's Rum wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 17:04 pmRamFan08NY wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 16:37 pmBecause, with Ramos, you had an Elite fielding 3b, who has shown "some" pop from the RH side at the ML level. Was he a guarantee? No, but he was a zero risk player to give a shot to for a team lacking RH hitting.Southern Illinois wrote: ↑26 Feb 2026 15:57 pmHow so? Just roster churn of spare parts that will serve zero meaningful purpose.
I'd rather that, than claiming a pitcher, and immediately designating him and exposing him to other teams
Was Ramos a good fielder as well? I know he showed flashes of power. Makes the move even worse, he was only 23/24 too