Its his retention value that has gone up. His "trade value" is determined by other teams.Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:39 pm At least in the estimation of the Cardinals organization. "In another piece from Woo, Will Sammon, and Ken Rosenthal, Alec Burleson is another player the Cardinals won’t move “unless…blown away by an offer.” " Be nice if Gorman and Walker, two more highly promoted than Burleson, would come on like he has.
Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
Moderators: STLtoday Forum Moderators, Cards Talk Moderators
-
RamFan08NY
- Forum User
- Posts: 972
- Joined: 24 May 2024 12:48 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
-
JuanAgosto
- Forum User
- Posts: 6379
- Joined: 01 Jul 2021 21:30 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
All for it. Also fine with keeping Arenado for his defense, and trading Contreras, Gorman and Donovan.Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:59 pmHow about moving Arenado, Gorman and Contreras? And keeping Donovan for 3B, while installing Burleson at 1B.JuanAgosto wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:56 pm I wouldn't trade Burleson. I'd look to move Contreras and put Burleson at 1b. Hopefully they can move Arenado and Gorman in deals. Donovan if the return is high.
-
Alex Reyes Cy Young
- Forum User
- Posts: 3347
- Joined: 25 May 2024 06:20 am
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
He won’t fetch much. Defensive stiffs only have so much value especially one with a light swinging high average bat. Probably can get a prospect for him like Gray fetched you. The upside isn’t there I fully anticipate to see him regress this year while getting less PAs.
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
He’s young, cheap, and can hit….isn’t this a player they’re attempting to have in a Cards Uni??
-
sikeston bulldog2
- Forum User
- Posts: 13931
- Joined: 11 Aug 2023 16:20 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
He won an award. Chances are he won’t repeat due to much competition. So yes, there will be a measured regression. As for less PA’s, I think positioned played and injuries dictate that.Alex Reyes Cy Young wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 06:43 am He won’t fetch much. Defensive stiffs only have so much value especially one with a light swinging high average bat. Probably can get a prospect for him like Gray fetched you. The upside isn’t there I fully anticipate to see him regress this year while getting less PAs.
-
rockondlouie
- Forum User
- Posts: 13134
- Joined: 23 May 2024 12:41 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pmIt seems to me, Burleson might be able to get the much needed #2 type starting pitcher with a few seasons of control. Would the Cardinals make that move?ramfandan wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:45 pm That is normal GM speak in baseball 'that a specific good player won't be moved unless blown away by an offer '
It is just signaling to other teams that A. we are not trying to trade him and B. but he is not off limits either . That type of phraseology has been around for years. So nothing new.
Not a chance Bumbles would bring back, in a solo trade, anyone higher than a low level #3 at best.
Donovan has a higher trade value and he won't bring back that #2 starter, in a solo deal, either.
ZERO chance he'd bring back a #2 w/seasons of control.
-
sikeston bulldog2
- Forum User
- Posts: 13931
- Joined: 11 Aug 2023 16:20 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
What about this. Does the ante go up if you trade Willy instead of Burleson, and put him at first. Does that bring more than Burleson.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 amShady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pmIt seems to me, Burleson might be able to get the much needed #2 type starting pitcher with a few seasons of control. Would the Cardinals make that move?ramfandan wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:45 pm That is normal GM speak in baseball 'that a specific good player won't be moved unless blown away by an offer '
It is just signaling to other teams that A. we are not trying to trade him and B. but he is not off limits either . That type of phraseology has been around for years. So nothing new.![]()
Not a chance Bumbles would bring back, in a solo trade, anyone higher than a low level #3 at best.
Donovan has a higher trade value and he won't bring back that #2 starter, in a solo deal, either.
ZERO chance he'd bring back a #2 w/seasons of control.
-
rockondlouie
- Forum User
- Posts: 13134
- Joined: 23 May 2024 12:41 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
WillyC's age may limit the return BDog but he does have value, likely more to a win now team than Burleson.sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 amWhat about this. Does the ante go up if you trade Willy instead of Burleson, and put him at first. Does that bring more than Burleson.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 amShady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pmIt seems to me, Burleson might be able to get the much needed #2 type starting pitcher with a few seasons of control. Would the Cardinals make that move?ramfandan wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:45 pm That is normal GM speak in baseball 'that a specific good player won't be moved unless blown away by an offer '
It is just signaling to other teams that A. we are not trying to trade him and B. but he is not off limits either . That type of phraseology has been around for years. So nothing new.![]()
Not a chance Bumbles would bring back, in a solo trade, anyone higher than a low level #3 at best.
Donovan has a higher trade value and he won't bring back that #2 starter, in a solo deal, either.
ZERO chance he'd bring back a #2 w/seasons of control.
Neither would even come close to landing a #2 starter w/control.
To get that think JJW + ???? and there's not a chance in h e l l I'd make that move.
Zero chance the Cardinals deal or sign a #2, best shot will be L. Doyle but he's likely two years (2027/28) away.
-
sikeston bulldog2
- Forum User
- Posts: 13931
- Joined: 11 Aug 2023 16:20 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
Thanx. Nice write.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:44 amWillyC's age may limit the return BDog but he does have value, likely more to a win now team than Burleson.sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 amWhat about this. Does the ante go up if you trade Willy instead of Burleson, and put him at first. Does that bring more than Burleson.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 amShady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pmIt seems to me, Burleson might be able to get the much needed #2 type starting pitcher with a few seasons of control. Would the Cardinals make that move?ramfandan wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:45 pm That is normal GM speak in baseball 'that a specific good player won't be moved unless blown away by an offer '
It is just signaling to other teams that A. we are not trying to trade him and B. but he is not off limits either . That type of phraseology has been around for years. So nothing new.![]()
Not a chance Bumbles would bring back, in a solo trade, anyone higher than a low level #3 at best.
Donovan has a higher trade value and he won't bring back that #2 starter, in a solo deal, either.
ZERO chance he'd bring back a #2 w/seasons of control.
Neither would even come close to landing a #2 starter w/control.
To get that think JJW + ???? and there's not a chance in h e l l I'd make that move.
Zero chance the Cardinals deal or sign a #2, best shot will be L. Doyle but he's likely two years (2027/28) away.
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
I kind of hope Burleson gets traded just so we don’t have to read your endless posts regarding him.Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:39 pm At least in the estimation of the Cardinals organization. "In another piece from Woo, Will Sammon, and Ken Rosenthal, Alec Burleson is another player the Cardinals won’t move “unless…blown away by an offer.” " Be nice if Gorman and Walker, two more highly promoted than Burleson, would come on like he has.
-
rockondlouie
- Forum User
- Posts: 13134
- Joined: 23 May 2024 12:41 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:46 amThanx. Nice write.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:44 amWillyC's age may limit the return BDog but he does have value, likely more to a win now team than Burleson.sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 amWhat about this. Does the ante go up if you trade Willy instead of Burleson, and put him at first. Does that bring more than Burleson.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 amShady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pmIt seems to me, Burleson might be able to get the much needed #2 type starting pitcher with a few seasons of control. Would the Cardinals make that move?ramfandan wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:45 pm That is normal GM speak in baseball 'that a specific good player won't be moved unless blown away by an offer '
It is just signaling to other teams that A. we are not trying to trade him and B. but he is not off limits either . That type of phraseology has been around for years. So nothing new.![]()
Not a chance Bumbles would bring back, in a solo trade, anyone higher than a low level #3 at best.
Donovan has a higher trade value and he won't bring back that #2 starter, in a solo deal, either.
ZERO chance he'd bring back a #2 w/seasons of control.
Neither would even come close to landing a #2 starter w/control.
To get that think JJW + ???? and there's not a chance in h e l l I'd make that move.
Zero chance the Cardinals deal or sign a #2, best shot will be L. Doyle but he's likely two years (2027/28) away.
(And to be honest I don't see WillyC accepting a trade unless it's to a team he really wants to play for)
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
Or trading Nootbaar instead of Contreras. Leaving Contreras at 1B, with Burleson in LF and Donovan at 3B.zuck698 wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 17:03 pmI like that idea Shady, if you could find a dance partner. Many here won't, as they want Donnie traded for the rebuild. But I would love to see us keep Donnie, right or wrong. He plays the game the way baseball should be played, and can only set a good example to the yutes coming up the system.Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:59 pmHow about moving Arenado, Gorman and Contreras? And keeping Donovan for 3B, while installing Burleson at 1B.JuanAgosto wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:56 pm I wouldn't trade Burleson. I'd look to move Contreras and put Burleson at 1b. Hopefully they can move Arenado and Gorman in deals. Donovan if the return is high.
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
Unless Herrera has a position, he shouldn't be off limits either for the right return.billybaseball wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 20:17 pm If the Cardinals are dead set on not spending money or prospect capital in the near future then no one should be off limits. Don't give anyone away but if teams are willing to meet the asking price then make the move. Wetherholt, Winn and Herrera are probably the only ML roster guys that should be off limits.
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
If I'm interpreting what you are saying, it will result in a long, disappointing '26 season, record-wise. And attendance continuing a downward spiral.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:44 amWillyC's age may limit the return BDog but he does have value, likely more to a win now team than Burleson.sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 amWhat about this. Does the ante go up if you trade Willy instead of Burleson, and put him at first. Does that bring more than Burleson.rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 amShady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pmIt seems to me, Burleson might be able to get the much needed #2 type starting pitcher with a few seasons of control. Would the Cardinals make that move?ramfandan wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:45 pm That is normal GM speak in baseball 'that a specific good player won't be moved unless blown away by an offer '
It is just signaling to other teams that A. we are not trying to trade him and B. but he is not off limits either . That type of phraseology has been around for years. So nothing new.![]()
Not a chance Bumbles would bring back, in a solo trade, anyone higher than a low level #3 at best.
Donovan has a higher trade value and he won't bring back that #2 starter, in a solo deal, either.
ZERO chance he'd bring back a #2 w/seasons of control.
Neither would even come close to landing a #2 starter w/control.
To get that think JJW + ???? and there's not a chance in h e l l I'd make that move.
Zero chance the Cardinals deal or sign a #2, best shot will be L. Doyle but he's likely two years (2027/28) away.
Last edited by Shady on 29 Nov 2025 10:01 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
billybaseball
- Forum User
- Posts: 388
- Joined: 23 May 2024 13:22 pm
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
If it's not catcher then it'll be 1st or LF. Plenty of openings if we are breaking the team down to bare bonesShady wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 09:51 amUnless Herrera has a position, he shouldn't be off limits either for the right return.billybaseball wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 20:17 pm If the Cardinals are dead set on not spending money or prospect capital in the near future then no one should be off limits. Don't give anyone away but if teams are willing to meet the asking price then make the move. Wetherholt, Winn and Herrera are probably the only ML roster guys that should be off limits.
Re: Apparently, Burleson's trade value has really gone up
You must not like having a Cardinals' player that got national recognition.Bomber1 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:52 amI kind of hope Burleson gets traded just so we don’t have to read your endless posts regarding him.Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:39 pm At least in the estimation of the Cardinals organization. "In another piece from Woo, Will Sammon, and Ken Rosenthal, Alec Burleson is another player the Cardinals won’t move “unless…blown away by an offer.” " Be nice if Gorman and Walker, two more highly promoted than Burleson, would come on like he has.
Last edited by Shady on 29 Nov 2025 10:10 am, edited 1 time in total.