STLtoday.com

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

Barking Lion wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:01 pm

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

I know this is an old thread, but I want to respond to this-

Yes, we have a lapsed catcher playing DH (and hitting fine, thank you). It is more evidence that this team is not built for long-term success the way it is currently constituted. Gorman, Walker and Burly should all be DH. The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling. He is a complimentary piece, high floor, mediocre ceiling. Gorman and Walker, on the other hand are high ceiling, low floor guys who have not reached potential. If they develop, they will be star players to build around. That is a big "If" right now. So you hang on to your safe bet (Burly) unless someone offers a Gorman-Walkerish player who is meeting potential.

Shady wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:09 pm

Barking Lion wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:01 pm

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

I know this is an old thread, but I want to respond to this-

Yes, we have a lapsed catcher playing DH (and hitting fine, thank you). It is more evidence that this team is not built for long-term success the way it is currently constituted. Gorman, Walker and Burly should all be DH. The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling. He is a complimentary piece, high floor, mediocre ceiling. Gorman and Walker, on the other hand are high ceiling, low floor guys who have not reached potential. If they develop, they will be star players to build around. That is a big "If" right now. So you hang on to your safe bet (Burly) unless someone offers a Gorman-Walkerish player who is meeting potential.

"The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling" How can you be sure of that?.

Honky Tonk Man wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 03:15 am I will tell you where, they are down the end of a lonely street at Heartbreak Hotel

Mort Gage wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:13 pm

Shady wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:09 pm

Barking Lion wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:01 pm

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

I know this is an old thread, but I want to respond to this-

Yes, we have a lapsed catcher playing DH (and hitting fine, thank you). It is more evidence that this team is not built for long-term success the way it is currently constituted. Gorman, Walker and Burly should all be DH. The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling. He is a complimentary piece, high floor, mediocre ceiling. Gorman and Walker, on the other hand are high ceiling, low floor guys who have not reached potential. If they develop, they will be star players to build around. That is a big "If" right now. So you hang on to your safe bet (Burly) unless someone offers a Gorman-Walkerish player who is meeting potential.

"The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling" How can you be sure of that?.

I believe you and HTM (most definitely NOT your sock) are right. I see his ceiling as a .325/.450/.550 35 HR/140 RBI hitter who plays a GG 1B. It's time to buy out Burleson's arb years. I wonder if 8/400 would get it done. 10/450 maybe?

thetank2 wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:18 pm Anyone eaten at Heavy Smoke. It is better than Salt+Smoke for brisket?

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:19 pm

Mort Gage wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:13 pm

Shady wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:09 pm

Barking Lion wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:01 pm

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

I know this is an old thread, but I want to respond to this-

Yes, we have a lapsed catcher playing DH (and hitting fine, thank you). It is more evidence that this team is not built for long-term success the way it is currently constituted. Gorman, Walker and Burly should all be DH. The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling. He is a complimentary piece, high floor, mediocre ceiling. Gorman and Walker, on the other hand are high ceiling, low floor guys who have not reached potential. If they develop, they will be star players to build around. That is a big "If" right now. So you hang on to your safe bet (Burly) unless someone offers a Gorman-Walkerish player who is meeting potential.

"The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling" How can you be sure of that?.

I believe you and HTM (most definitely NOT your sock) are right. I see his ceiling as a .325/.450/.550 35 HR/140 RBI hitter who plays a GG 1B. It's time to buy out Burleson's arb years. I wonder if 8/400 would get it done. 10/450 maybe?

That’s not even Ohtani money. Burly deserves twice as much.

Honky Tonk Man wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 03:15 am I will tell you where, they are down the end of a lonely street at Heartbreak Hotel

Shady wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:09 pm

Barking Lion wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:01 pm

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

I know this is an old thread, but I want to respond to this-

Yes, we have a lapsed catcher playing DH (and hitting fine, thank you). It is more evidence that this team is not built for long-term success the way it is currently constituted. Gorman, Walker and Burly should all be DH. The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling. He is a complimentary piece, high floor, mediocre ceiling. Gorman and Walker, on the other hand are high ceiling, low floor guys who have not reached potential. If they develop, they will be star players to build around. That is a big "If" right now. So you hang on to your safe bet (Burly) unless someone offers a Gorman-Walkerish player who is meeting potential.

"The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling" How can you be sure of that?.

Shady wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:09 pm

Barking Lion wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 19:01 pm

Lightning Rod wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 11:13 am

Barking Lion wrote: ↑22 Jun 2025 07:52 am Good hitter, mediocre glove. Like his spirit and effort. Whether I would keep him all depends on what is offered back in a trade or the price of a contract. If you can keep him for under $8M, he fits on the team. If you are offered a young player with high ceiling or a 1-2 round draft pick you trade him.

Burly is a nice complimentary piece for a set team, but not a franchise builder. In the OF, he blocks a potential big bat. Same at 1b. He just isn't what the Cards need to build around.

He is an excellent first baseman and a decent outfielder, unfortunately we have a catcher playing first base.

If he is a complimentary piece what do you call Gormon and Walker?

I know this is an old thread, but I want to respond to this-

Yes, we have a lapsed catcher playing DH (and hitting fine, thank you). It is more evidence that this team is not built for long-term success the way it is currently constituted. Gorman, Walker and Burly should all be DH. The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling. He is a complimentary piece, high floor, mediocre ceiling. Gorman and Walker, on the other hand are high ceiling, low floor guys who have not reached potential. If they develop, they will be star players to build around. That is a big "If" right now. So you hang on to your safe bet (Burly) unless someone offers a Gorman-Walkerish player who is meeting potential.

"The difference between Burly and those two is that Burly is pretty much near his ceiling" How can you be sure of that?.

Cusecards wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 21:52 pm Ok....Burly is no gazelle but he is not poor in the OF.
He has very good hands and a decent arm.
Slightly below average but not poor.
And normally he plays a solid 1B.