STLtoday.com

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.

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:59 pm

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.

How about moving Arenado, Gorman and Contreras? And keeping Donovan for 3B, while installing Burleson at 1B.

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.

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pm

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.

It 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?

rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 am

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pm

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.

It 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?

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 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 am

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pm

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.

It 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?

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.

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 08:44 am

sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 am

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pm

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.

It 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?

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.

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.

WillyC's age may limit the return BDog but he does have value, likely more to a win now team than Burleson.

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.

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.

sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:46 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:44 am

sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 am

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pm

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.

It 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?

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.

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.

WillyC's age may limit the return BDog but he does have value, likely more to a win now team than Burleson.

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.

Thanx. Nice write.

zuck698 wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 17:03 pm

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:59 pm

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.

How about moving Arenado, Gorman and Contreras? And keeping Donovan for 3B, while installing Burleson at 1B.

I 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.

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.

rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:44 am

sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:40 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:32 am

Shady wrote: ↑28 Nov 2025 16:48 pm

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.

It 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?

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.

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.

WillyC's age may limit the return BDog but he does have value, likely more to a win now team than Burleson.

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.

Shady wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 09:51 am

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.

Unless Herrera has a position, he shouldn't be off limits either for the right return.

Bomber1 wrote: ↑29 Nov 2025 08:52 am

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.

I kind of hope Burleson gets traded just so we don’t have to read your endless posts regarding him.