STLtoday.com Forums
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1511230
If he can play SS/2B he could probably play 1B in a pinch. Contreras is blocking Saint Alec at 1B, I get that. But with Contreras's track record I think we should allow him runway beyond three weeks.Shady wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:02 pmAnd maybe some of the slumping Contreras' ABs. Wonder if Saggese could be OK at 1B defensively, occasionally.
Wow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
It's an insight/perspective on quality of contact that is provided by all that "sophisticated tracking equipment" that you've done a complete 180 on over the last few months . . .Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:11 pmWow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
I’ve done no 180. I’ve complimented the Cardinals for bringing in more sophisticated equipment and the younger guys who know how to teach with it. And for increasing the number of roving instructors.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:16 pmIt's an insight/perspective on quality of contact that is provided by all that "sophisticated tracking equipment" that you've done a complete 180 on over the last few months . . .Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:11 pmWow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
If you acknowledge the relevance and importance of such technology and analytics, why would you then turn around and arrogantly, cavalierly, and dismissively mock them when posters use such metrics in discussions on this forum?Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:27 pmI’ve done no 180. I’ve complimented the Cardinals for bringing in more sophisticated equipment and the younger guys who know how to teach with it. And for increasing the number of roving instructors.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:16 pmIt's an insight/perspective on quality of contact that is provided by all that "sophisticated tracking equipment" that you've done a complete 180 on over the last few months . . .Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:11 pmWow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
Plus, said that it’s overdue because of internal loyalties.
But, fortunately or unfortunately, the average fan just wants to watch a game for the enjoyment and for the recreation. And cheer for the Cardinals to win. They leave things like xwOBA to the coaches or other guys who like to display how cool and statistically sophisticated they are.
What do they have to do with Burly? Contreras is signed to big money and has a lengthy history of being able to hit very well and has a no trade clause he will play. Walker is a former top prospect with a high ceiling and improved defense he will play. Burly is a fat low on base slow DH with no power and low ceiling who other than two months last season has been meh to ugh the rest of his career. Pozo should DH until Herrera gets back then he should DH but Oli loves Burly for some reasonShady wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:42 amHow productive have Walker and Contreras been?slimjay63801 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:40 amOh wow! I didn't realize he's been that bad.. That is absolutely woeful...
Happy to, NY. But I wouldn’t exactly call it “dumbing down” the conversation. That’s a bit condescending. Let’s just say some of us see the human element being as important as the statistical element. But please carry on your xwOBA comparisons with great glee.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:35 pmIf you acknowledge the relevance and importance of such technology and analytics, why would you then turn around and arrogantly, cavalierly, and dismissively mock them when posters use such metrics in discussions on this forum?Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:27 pmI’ve done no 180. I’ve complimented the Cardinals for bringing in more sophisticated equipment and the younger guys who know how to teach with it. And for increasing the number of roving instructors.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:16 pmIt's an insight/perspective on quality of contact that is provided by all that "sophisticated tracking equipment" that you've done a complete 180 on over the last few months . . .Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:11 pmWow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
Plus, said that it’s overdue because of internal loyalties.
But, fortunately or unfortunately, the average fan just wants to watch a game for the enjoyment and for the recreation. And cheer for the Cardinals to win. They leave things like xwOBA to the coaches or other guys who like to display how cool and statistically sophisticated they are.
If you don't understand them or don't want to talk about them, you are perfectly free to keep it moving and not participate in the discussion. The rest of us aren't obligated to dumb-down the discussion to suit your preferences.
I'm curious...what "Human Element" does Burleson carry that makes him more attractive than the more career productive Contreras? Because he lags behind in EVERY single metric that baseball teams use.Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:53 pmHappy to, NY. But I wouldn’t exactly call it “dumbing down” the conversation. That’s a bit condescending. Let’s just say some of us see the human element being as important as the statistical element. But please carry on your xwOBA comparisons with great glee.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:35 pmIf you acknowledge the relevance and importance of such technology and analytics, why would you then turn around and arrogantly, cavalierly, and dismissively mock them when posters use such metrics in discussions on this forum?Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:27 pmI’ve done no 180. I’ve complimented the Cardinals for bringing in more sophisticated equipment and the younger guys who know how to teach with it. And for increasing the number of roving instructors.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:16 pmIt's an insight/perspective on quality of contact that is provided by all that "sophisticated tracking equipment" that you've done a complete 180 on over the last few months . . .Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:11 pmWow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
Plus, said that it’s overdue because of internal loyalties.
But, fortunately or unfortunately, the average fan just wants to watch a game for the enjoyment and for the recreation. And cheer for the Cardinals to win. They leave things like xwOBA to the coaches or other guys who like to display how cool and statistically sophisticated they are.
If you don't understand them or don't want to talk about them, you are perfectly free to keep it moving and not participate in the discussion. The rest of us aren't obligated to dumb-down the discussion to suit your preferences.
No, what's more than a bit condescending was your gratuitous reply: "Wow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter."Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:53 pmHappy to, NY. But I wouldn’t exactly call it “dumbing down” the conversation. That’s a bit condescending. Let’s just say some of us see the human element being as important as the statistical element. But please carry on your xwOBA comparisons with great glee.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:35 pmIf you acknowledge the relevance and importance of such technology and analytics, why would you then turn around and arrogantly, cavalierly, and dismissively mock them when posters use such metrics in discussions on this forum?Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:27 pmI’ve done no 180. I’ve complimented the Cardinals for bringing in more sophisticated equipment and the younger guys who know how to teach with it. And for increasing the number of roving instructors.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:16 pmIt's an insight/perspective on quality of contact that is provided by all that "sophisticated tracking equipment" that you've done a complete 180 on over the last few months . . .Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:11 pmWow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
Plus, said that it’s overdue because of internal loyalties.
But, fortunately or unfortunately, the average fan just wants to watch a game for the enjoyment and for the recreation. And cheer for the Cardinals to win. They leave things like xwOBA to the coaches or other guys who like to display how cool and statistically sophisticated they are.
If you don't understand them or don't want to talk about them, you are perfectly free to keep it moving and not participate in the discussion. The rest of us aren't obligated to dumb-down the discussion to suit your preferences.
Besides being 'woeful ' , it's pretty bad too !slimjay63801 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:40 amOh wow! I didn't realize he's been that bad.. That is absolutely woeful...
True. Sorry about that.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:59 pmNo, what's more than a bit condescending was your gratuitous reply: "Wow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter."Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:53 pmHappy to, NY. But I wouldn’t exactly call it “dumbing down” the conversation. That’s a bit condescending. Let’s just say some of us see the human element being as important as the statistical element. But please carry on your xwOBA comparisons with great glee.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:35 pmIf you acknowledge the relevance and importance of such technology and analytics, why would you then turn around and arrogantly, cavalierly, and dismissively mock them when posters use such metrics in discussions on this forum?Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:27 pmI’ve done no 180. I’ve complimented the Cardinals for bringing in more sophisticated equipment and the younger guys who know how to teach with it. And for increasing the number of roving instructors.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:16 pmIt's an insight/perspective on quality of contact that is provided by all that "sophisticated tracking equipment" that you've done a complete 180 on over the last few months . . .Cranny wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 12:11 pmWow. That xwOBA finally gets to the core of the matter.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 11:53 amSetting aside the inanity of comparing batting averages (or pretty much anything else) over such small samples, last year you (erroneously) claimed that Burleson's batting average was suppressed by bad luck because he allegedly was hitting "rockets" right at people. Well, let's take a look at the statcast xBAs so far this season (obligatory SSS warning):
Player/PAs/BA/xBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.455/.382/+.073
Contreras: 78/.139/.212/-.073
Burleson: 61/.263/.208/+.055
Walker: 73/.239/.201/+.038
Why aren't you similarly talking about all the low EV, low xBA hits Burleson has gotten so far this season with his 0.0% barrel rate?
Furthermore,
Player/PAs/wOBA/xwOBA/Difference
Saggese: 23/.457/.426/+.031
Contreras: 78/.192/.290/-.098
Burleson: 61/.277/.236/+.041
Walker: 73/.291/.258/+.033
Plus, said that it’s overdue because of internal loyalties.
But, fortunately or unfortunately, the average fan just wants to watch a game for the enjoyment and for the recreation. And cheer for the Cardinals to win. They leave things like xwOBA to the coaches or other guys who like to display how cool and statistically sophisticated they are.
If you don't understand them or don't want to talk about them, you are perfectly free to keep it moving and not participate in the discussion. The rest of us aren't obligated to dumb-down the discussion to suit your preferences.
+1000
Some good analysis on Burleson. I do believe the Cardinals would have some other teams very interested in acquiring him. Would the Cardinals trade Burly to the Cubs? Burleson and Wrigley field would be a good combo. Out of curiosity, I wouldn't mind seeing that.ICCFIM2 wrote: ↑18 Apr 2025 13:53 pm+1000
The Cards have said they like Burleson's bat to ball skills and how hard he hits the ball. The eye test indicates he hits the ball hard in an area from the first base line to about 30 feet into fair territory and mostly on the ground. That leads to a high percentage of his hard hits leading to outs. He then hits a lot of soft stuff to CF and LF which almost always leads to an out. Absent him starting to hit HRs again, that makes him virtually worthless. He is slightly negative WAR this year and only +.3bWAR for his career.
Given his lack of defensive ability, the Cards crowded infield and OF, he is really a prime candidate to be traded. I am not certain what the return might be, but probably at best a mid level relief pitching prospect. Saggesse is earning ABs and when Wynn returns, the Cards have a roster decision to make. The easiest is to send Saggesse back down or maybe even Gorman. Given Max Muncy's abysmal play, perhaps they would consider acquiring Arenado. No matter what, they need to clear a roster spot. They also have Wetherholdt coming likely next year the way he started this year. I don't see where Burleson fits into this puzzle.
Is there a more meaningless stat than an April Batting Average? I'm astonished in 2025 that any reasonably intelligent baseball fan would use BA as a performance barometer? Let alone an April BA?
