STLtoday.com

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:54 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:35 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

It doesn't.

As a hypothetical, if a Burleson trade got you a return similar to Donovan, it would make a lot of sense.

Sure, if you want to keep kicking the can down the road. Donovan's trade kind of made sense because we were ostansibly making room for JJ. There is no compelling bat to immediately replace an .800 + OPS who has 3 years left in the system. We already have the get from the Donovan trade. Isn't it time to see where we are pitching wise and focus more on offensive support?

Donovan landed, among others, a highly ranked starting pitcher prospect projected for possibly a 2026 callup. That is hardly kicking the can.

Burleson has three years left of control, all arb years. We can assume 2026 is a bit of a wash with the rebuild. What will 2027 look like? Will we start spending money again? If so, that leaves AB with only TWO years left of control.

Also, in 2027, we would be to really see the fruits of the hypothetical Burleson trade. And, we would have his arbitration money to spend. Also, if Herrera is at 1B that's probably an upgrade in offense over Burleson.

3 years is a long time for a proven veteran hitter under contract control. Kicking the can down the road relates to sending another of our sparse hitters down the road. We've done a pretty good job of addressing pitching and will no doubt continue to do so. Sending an .800 + hitter away doesn't necessarily work for me. Sure, Herrera may be as good or even better hitter, but, what's wrong with having both while we find positions that work for Herrera. A 5'11" 1B is a stretch (pun intended) for me.

I like the option of extending Burleson if he continues to improve his hitting.

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:36 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:54 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:35 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

It doesn't.

As a hypothetical, if a Burleson trade got you a return similar to Donovan, it would make a lot of sense.

Sure, if you want to keep kicking the can down the road. Donovan's trade kind of made sense because we were ostansibly making room for JJ. There is no compelling bat to immediately replace an .800 + OPS who has 3 years left in the system. We already have the get from the Donovan trade. Isn't it time to see where we are pitching wise and focus more on offensive support?

Donovan landed, among others, a highly ranked starting pitcher prospect projected for possibly a 2026 callup. That is hardly kicking the can.

Burleson has three years left of control, all arb years. We can assume 2026 is a bit of a wash with the rebuild. What will 2027 look like? Will we start spending money again? If so, that leaves AB with only TWO years left of control.

Also, in 2027, we would be to really see the fruits of the hypothetical Burleson trade. And, we would have his arbitration money to spend. Also, if Herrera is at 1B that's probably an upgrade in offense over Burleson.

3 years is a long time for a proven veteran hitter under contract control. Kicking the can down the road relates to sending another of our sparse hitters down the road. We've done a pretty good job of addressing pitching and will no doubt continue to do so. Sending an .800 + hitter away doesn't necessarily work for me. Sure, Herrera may be as good or even better hitter, but, what's wrong with having both while we find positions that work for Herrera. A 5'11" 1B is a stretch (pun intended) for me.

I like the option of extending Burleson if he continues to improve his hitting.

Three years is not a long time when year one is a wash because of the rebuild.

Also, I think you look at the hypothetical AB trade as these 3 prospects for Burleson, and it's done...

Say if the AB trade is similar to the BD trade, you have a highly touted starter ready to start in 2027 at a time when the org is ready to spend money.

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:18 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:51 am

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

Opens up 1st base for I. Hererra (where he'll likely end up if he plays in the field since we all know he's not a catcher and seemed out of his element in LF too).

I dunno rock. We aren't even 1 deep offensively and you're giving 1B to a guy only 5'11"..... I like the RH hitter idea but that makes Burleson and Herrera a good tandem both at 1B and DH.

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:55 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:36 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:54 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:35 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

It doesn't.

As a hypothetical, if a Burleson trade got you a return similar to Donovan, it would make a lot of sense.

Sure, if you want to keep kicking the can down the road. Donovan's trade kind of made sense because we were ostansibly making room for JJ. There is no compelling bat to immediately replace an .800 + OPS who has 3 years left in the system. We already have the get from the Donovan trade. Isn't it time to see where we are pitching wise and focus more on offensive support?

Donovan landed, among others, a highly ranked starting pitcher prospect projected for possibly a 2026 callup. That is hardly kicking the can.

Burleson has three years left of control, all arb years. We can assume 2026 is a bit of a wash with the rebuild. What will 2027 look like? Will we start spending money again? If so, that leaves AB with only TWO years left of control.

Also, in 2027, we would be to really see the fruits of the hypothetical Burleson trade. And, we would have his arbitration money to spend. Also, if Herrera is at 1B that's probably an upgrade in offense over Burleson.

3 years is a long time for a proven veteran hitter under contract control. Kicking the can down the road relates to sending another of our sparse hitters down the road. We've done a pretty good job of addressing pitching and will no doubt continue to do so. Sending an .800 + hitter away doesn't necessarily work for me. Sure, Herrera may be as good or even better hitter, but, what's wrong with having both while we find positions that work for Herrera. A 5'11" 1B is a stretch (pun intended) for me.

I like the option of extending Burleson if he continues to improve his hitting.

Three years is not a long time when year one is a wash because of the rebuild.

Also, I think you look at the hypothetical AB trade as these 3 prospects for Burleson, and it's done...

Say if the AB trade is similar to the BD trade, you have a highly touted starter ready to start in 2027 at a time when the org is ready to spend money.

You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:55 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:36 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:54 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:35 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

It doesn't.

As a hypothetical, if a Burleson trade got you a return similar to Donovan, it would make a lot of sense.

Sure, if you want to keep kicking the can down the road. Donovan's trade kind of made sense because we were ostansibly making room for JJ. There is no compelling bat to immediately replace an .800 + OPS who has 3 years left in the system. We already have the get from the Donovan trade. Isn't it time to see where we are pitching wise and focus more on offensive support?

Donovan landed, among others, a highly ranked starting pitcher prospect projected for possibly a 2026 callup. That is hardly kicking the can.

Burleson has three years left of control, all arb years. We can assume 2026 is a bit of a wash with the rebuild. What will 2027 look like? Will we start spending money again? If so, that leaves AB with only TWO years left of control.

Also, in 2027, we would be to really see the fruits of the hypothetical Burleson trade. And, we would have his arbitration money to spend. Also, if Herrera is at 1B that's probably an upgrade in offense over Burleson.

3 years is a long time for a proven veteran hitter under contract control. Kicking the can down the road relates to sending another of our sparse hitters down the road. We've done a pretty good job of addressing pitching and will no doubt continue to do so. Sending an .800 + hitter away doesn't necessarily work for me. Sure, Herrera may be as good or even better hitter, but, what's wrong with having both while we find positions that work for Herrera. A 5'11" 1B is a stretch (pun intended) for me.

I like the option of extending Burleson if he continues to improve his hitting.

Three years is not a long time when year one is a wash because of the rebuild.

Also, I think you look at the hypothetical AB trade as these 3 prospects for Burleson, and it's done...

Say if the AB trade is similar to the BD trade, you have a highly touted starter ready to start in 2027 at a time when the org is ready to spend money.

You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:55 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:36 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:54 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:35 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

It doesn't.

As a hypothetical, if a Burleson trade got you a return similar to Donovan, it would make a lot of sense.

Sure, if you want to keep kicking the can down the road. Donovan's trade kind of made sense because we were ostansibly making room for JJ. There is no compelling bat to immediately replace an .800 + OPS who has 3 years left in the system. We already have the get from the Donovan trade. Isn't it time to see where we are pitching wise and focus more on offensive support?

Donovan landed, among others, a highly ranked starting pitcher prospect projected for possibly a 2026 callup. That is hardly kicking the can.

Burleson has three years left of control, all arb years. We can assume 2026 is a bit of a wash with the rebuild. What will 2027 look like? Will we start spending money again? If so, that leaves AB with only TWO years left of control.

Also, in 2027, we would be to really see the fruits of the hypothetical Burleson trade. And, we would have his arbitration money to spend. Also, if Herrera is at 1B that's probably an upgrade in offense over Burleson.

3 years is a long time for a proven veteran hitter under contract control. Kicking the can down the road relates to sending another of our sparse hitters down the road. We've done a pretty good job of addressing pitching and will no doubt continue to do so. Sending an .800 + hitter away doesn't necessarily work for me. Sure, Herrera may be as good or even better hitter, but, what's wrong with having both while we find positions that work for Herrera. A 5'11" 1B is a stretch (pun intended) for me.

I like the option of extending Burleson if he continues to improve his hitting.

Three years is not a long time when year one is a wash because of the rebuild.

Also, I think you look at the hypothetical AB trade as these 3 prospects for Burleson, and it's done...

Say if the AB trade is similar to the BD trade, you have a highly touted starter ready to start in 2027 at a time when the org is ready to spend money.

You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:55 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:36 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:54 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:35 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

My take on moving Burleson now is that there is no reason to do it unless Bloom gets overwhelmed by an offer, which probably won't happen. If it does happen, IMO, it will be because of an injury to a player on a contending team flush with money and prospects. It's always hard not to pull the trigger on a prospect overpay, so I would never say never. But, it's unlikely.

It doesn't.

As a hypothetical, if a Burleson trade got you a return similar to Donovan, it would make a lot of sense.

Sure, if you want to keep kicking the can down the road. Donovan's trade kind of made sense because we were ostansibly making room for JJ. There is no compelling bat to immediately replace an .800 + OPS who has 3 years left in the system. We already have the get from the Donovan trade. Isn't it time to see where we are pitching wise and focus more on offensive support?

Donovan landed, among others, a highly ranked starting pitcher prospect projected for possibly a 2026 callup. That is hardly kicking the can.

Burleson has three years left of control, all arb years. We can assume 2026 is a bit of a wash with the rebuild. What will 2027 look like? Will we start spending money again? If so, that leaves AB with only TWO years left of control.

Also, in 2027, we would be to really see the fruits of the hypothetical Burleson trade. And, we would have his arbitration money to spend. Also, if Herrera is at 1B that's probably an upgrade in offense over Burleson.

3 years is a long time for a proven veteran hitter under contract control. Kicking the can down the road relates to sending another of our sparse hitters down the road. We've done a pretty good job of addressing pitching and will no doubt continue to do so. Sending an .800 + hitter away doesn't necessarily work for me. Sure, Herrera may be as good or even better hitter, but, what's wrong with having both while we find positions that work for Herrera. A 5'11" 1B is a stretch (pun intended) for me.

I like the option of extending Burleson if he continues to improve his hitting.

Three years is not a long time when year one is a wash because of the rebuild.

Also, I think you look at the hypothetical AB trade as these 3 prospects for Burleson, and it's done...

Say if the AB trade is similar to the BD trade, you have a highly touted starter ready to start in 2027 at a time when the org is ready to spend money.

You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

DewittDaman11 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 11:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:55 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:36 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:54 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:35 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

My take on moving Burleson now is that there is no reason to do it unless Bloom gets overwhelmed by an offer, which probably won't happen. If it does happen, IMO, it will be because of an injury to a player on a contending team flush with money and prospects. It's always hard not to pull the trigger on a prospect overpay, so I would never say never. But, it's unlikely.

It doesn't.

As a hypothetical, if a Burleson trade got you a return similar to Donovan, it would make a lot of sense.

Sure, if you want to keep kicking the can down the road. Donovan's trade kind of made sense because we were ostansibly making room for JJ. There is no compelling bat to immediately replace an .800 + OPS who has 3 years left in the system. We already have the get from the Donovan trade. Isn't it time to see where we are pitching wise and focus more on offensive support?

Donovan landed, among others, a highly ranked starting pitcher prospect projected for possibly a 2026 callup. That is hardly kicking the can.

Burleson has three years left of control, all arb years. We can assume 2026 is a bit of a wash with the rebuild. What will 2027 look like? Will we start spending money again? If so, that leaves AB with only TWO years left of control.

Also, in 2027, we would be to really see the fruits of the hypothetical Burleson trade. And, we would have his arbitration money to spend. Also, if Herrera is at 1B that's probably an upgrade in offense over Burleson.

3 years is a long time for a proven veteran hitter under contract control. Kicking the can down the road relates to sending another of our sparse hitters down the road. We've done a pretty good job of addressing pitching and will no doubt continue to do so. Sending an .800 + hitter away doesn't necessarily work for me. Sure, Herrera may be as good or even better hitter, but, what's wrong with having both while we find positions that work for Herrera. A 5'11" 1B is a stretch (pun intended) for me.

I like the option of extending Burleson if he continues to improve his hitting.

Three years is not a long time when year one is a wash because of the rebuild.

Also, I think you look at the hypothetical AB trade as these 3 prospects for Burleson, and it's done...

Say if the AB trade is similar to the BD trade, you have a highly touted starter ready to start in 2027 at a time when the org is ready to spend money.

You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm i am amazed a certain poster hasn't already posted both ---

the braves after losing profar are deemed to be very interested in nootbaar

https://homerunnation.com/news/braves-e ... s-starter/

the astros want to jetison paredes and need a third team to help , the astros appear to want burleson or nootbaar as well

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/as ... ngNewsSerp

Bloom may slip into some end of spring opportunities for certain, it will be interesting to see what his intentions are if any.
[/quote]

How does trading Burelson make any sense?

It doesn't. Lunacy.

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:40 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am
You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

renostl wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:27 pm

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:40 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am
You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

You: We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Okay, so you're talking about 2027 and beyond?

Let's assume so. 2027 is actually a long way away.

Rodriguez is project debut 2027-2028
Baez is projected 2026-2027
Tai Peete 2027-2028
Ledbetter 2026
Maturation of JJ...

Not to mention Bloom's FA signings, additional trades, etc.

So the roster could look completely different, so you have no idea how 'in need' the team will be offensively.

Not sure if keeping an .805 OPS first basemen with two years left is essential...

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:34 pm

renostl wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:27 pm

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:40 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am
You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

You: We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Okay, so you're talking about 2027 and beyond?

Let's assume so. 2027 is actually a long way away.

Rodriguez is project debut 2027-2028
Baez is projected 2026-2027
Tai Peete 2027-2028
Ledbetter 2026
Maturation of JJ...

Not to mention Bloom's FA signings, additional trades, etc.

So the roster could look completely different, so you have no idea how 'in need' the team will be offensively.

Not sure if keeping an .805 OPS first basemen with two years left is essential...

It certainly may not be essential but also doesn't have to be made this season.

There are similar reasons for trading Burleson as there were for Donovan with exceptions.

It is possible that Burleson could be a 25 HR guy, possible. Donnie won't and has average
at best speed with some injuries and a top prospect behind him. That's a rather strong need for the home
team. Considering that Walker and/or Gorman or iffy, there is not a need to hurry.

The Cardinals might need in the near future to open up that 1B/DH spot for Gorman or one of
the displaced catchers, or may need at least part-time RF'er, this could be true, but today it is
in the unknown category. I think you can wait for a player to take the position from him.
Of course, everyone is tradable and the reasons to keep him can be flipped to the are
4 or 5 players who could replace AB and he'll never be a 25-30 HR guy.

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:34 pm

renostl wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:27 pm

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:40 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am
You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

You: We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Okay, so you're talking about 2027 and beyond?

Let's assume so. 2027 is actually a long way away.

Rodriguez is project debut 2027-2028
Baez is projected 2026-2027
Tai Peete 2027-2028
Ledbetter 2026
Maturation of JJ...

Not to mention Bloom's FA signings, additional trades, etc.

So the roster could look completely different, so you have no idea how 'in need' the team will be offensively.

Not sure if keeping an .805 OPS first basemen with two years left is essential...

It certainly may not be essential but also doesn't have to be made this season.

There are similar reasons for trading Burleson as there were for Donovan with exceptions.

It is possible that Burleson could be a 25 HR guy, possible. Donnie won't and has average
at best speed with some injuries and a top prospect behind him. That's a rather strong need for the home
team. Considering that Walker and/or Gorman or iffy, there is not a need to hurry.

The Cardinals might need in the near future to open up that 1B/DH spot for Gorman or one of
the displaced catchers, or may need at least part-time RF'er, this could be true, but today it is
in the unknown category. I think you can wait for a player to take the position from him.
Of course, everyone is tradable and the reasons to keep him can be flipped to the are
4 or 5 players who could replace AB and he'll never be a 25-30 HR guy.

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:37 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:34 pm

renostl wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 12:27 pm

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:40 am

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 10:18 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 09:59 am
You keep hypothetically suggesting that Burleson could generate a trade equivalent to Donovan. I don't buy that. Donovan filled a niche that teams coveted. I only got on board with trading Donovan because of the rebuild, the 2 year window and JJ's need for a position...not to mention the loot we could get from that trade. I'm not buying the "trading power" Burleson gives us.

We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Burleson probably could generate a talented starting pitcher or position player ready by early 2027. As far as the draft picks we got for Donovan, probably not.

And actually, we don't need to figure out where the offense is coming from this team in 2026. If any of your desire to keep Burleson has to do with the offense in 2026, your priorities are too short term.

Did you just "straw man" me? I never said anything about 2026.

I think, at some point, we need to get out of the mind set of what prospects can we get for our successful veterans. That is a perennial Pittsburg mentality which we know doesn't work.

You: We have yet to figure out where the offense will be coming from with this team and trading away those who can produce doesn't sit well with me.

Okay, so you're talking about 2027 and beyond?

Let's assume so. 2027 is actually a long way away.

Rodriguez is project debut 2027-2028
Baez is projected 2026-2027
Tai Peete 2027-2028
Ledbetter 2026
Maturation of JJ...

Not to mention Bloom's FA signings, additional trades, etc.

So the roster could look completely different, so you have no idea how 'in need' the team will be offensively.

Not sure if keeping an .805 OPS first basemen with two years left is essential...

It certainly may not be essential but also doesn't have to be made this season.

There are similar reasons for trading Burleson as there were for Donovan with exceptions.

It is possible that Burleson could be a 25 HR guy, possible. Donnie won't and has average
at best speed with some injuries and a top prospect behind him. That's a rather strong need for the home
team. Considering that Walker and/or Gorman or iffy, there is not a need to hurry.

The Cardinals might need in the near future to open up that 1B/DH spot for Gorman or one of
the displaced catchers, or may need at least part-time RF'er, this could be true, but today it is
in the unknown category. I think you can wait for a player to take the position from him.
Of course, everyone is tradable and the reasons to keep him can be flipped to the are
4 or 5 players who could replace AB and he'll never be a 25-30 HR guy.

this is the only risk in trading him --- he is avg to below avg as a defender and is extremely limited in the positions he can play, and unfortunately he doesn't produce well enough to really be put at any of those positions on a team that wants to contend. He also is currently their best option for a couple of these positions but does that make him untradeable or just expose how far this team needs to go? And yes this thread was definitely a shot across the bow of a certain poster whom i don't want to name or single out for fear of getting spanked.