STLtoday.com

Cranny wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 08:58 am

Youboughtit wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 08:28 am Matthews is hurt a lot and struggled at AAA. Roby was also hurt but projects as a low end starter. I am talking about 3 TOR SP. that’s what’s needed in the playoffs

Many posters thought Roby was a TOR type starter when he came here in a trade. Let’s not talk about his injuries. Let’s talk about his ceiling.

The only reason the Cardinals were able to get Roby (a 45-50 grade prospect at the time) along with Saggese in exchange for the limited value of Montgomery's expiring contract was BECAUSE of his injury history. Saying "let's not talk about his injuries" is like saying let's ignore the elephant in the room.

And who, specifically, "thought Roby was a TOR type starter when he came here," other than you?

But here we go again: hope for perfection and for every single player to achieve his maximum potential, and then when the turbulence and bumps in the road inevitably occur, call it a "perfect storm" and chalk up the failure to "bad luck."

better question -- if Burly is the #3 hitter slashing .285 with 15hr's and 75 rbi's --- how many losses will this team have? 85? 90? more?

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 13:55 pm better question -- if Burly is the #3 hitter slashing .285 with 15hr's and 75 rbi's --- how many losses will this team have? 85? 90? more?

we might explore the light hitting Burleson batting lead off or 9th...both are better suited for a Singles Hitter

craviduce wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:00 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 13:55 pm better question -- if Burly is the #3 hitter slashing .285 with 15hr's and 75 rbi's --- how many losses will this team have? 85? 90? more?

we might explore the light hitting Burleson batting lead off or 9th...both are better suited for a Singles Hitter

correct -- if he is the 6th or 7th hitter with those numbers he helps your offense..... the problem then becomes where can he play defensively that isn't likely being played by the better hitters in the lineup?

craviduce wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 13:44 pm no way Burleson ever hits 30 HR, he's headed into a "made up Prime", and he's regressing in counting stats. 18 HR over a full season, 3 short of last year. Decline in runs scored and RBI... I don't believe counting stats are a true barometer of a player, but the OP started millions of threads based off Burleson's 2024 counting stats. So, if we follow the same parameters, then Burleson is declining and fading...as he heads into his "made up Prime". A Sliver of a Slugger. How on earth can the Sliver of a Slugger make up 12 HR over the season, especially if he's in a Decline heading into his "made up Prime"???

^^^THIS^^^

The Bison isn't going to hit close to 30 HR's in a season.

He's a contact hitter (94% square up rate) w/a low whiff% & K% rate, not a power hitter (49% hard hit rate).

His power (HR's) has also faded in the 2nd halves each the past three seasons, likely due to not being in the best condition.

He might hit 23-25 HR's in a career year, no chance he hits 30 HR's.

You Burleson bashers that criticize Burleson's lack of home runs. Do you realize Contreras has never had a 25 HR MLB season? His tops was 24 in 2019. And Contreras has never had as high as a .290 BA for a season like Burleson just had. Also, Burleson might well end up with more RBIs per season than Contreras when their careers end.

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:31 pm You Burleson bashers that criticize Burleson's lack of home runs. Do you realize Contreras has never had a 25 HR MLB season? His tops was 24 in 2019. And Contreras has never had as high as a .290 BA for a season like Burleson just had. Also, Burleson might well end up with more RBIs per season than Contreras when their careers end.

contreras should also be a #5 or #6 hitter and he was paid for catcher production --- another Moronzelak mistake. Contreras is not who you should be comparing burly too, that/those player or players aren't on the team yet hopefully.

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:54 pm

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:31 pm You Burleson bashers that criticize Burleson's lack of home runs. Do you realize Contreras has never had a 25 HR MLB season? His tops was 24 in 2019. And Contreras has never had as high as a .290 BA for a season like Burleson just had. Also, Burleson might well end up with more RBIs per season than Contreras when their careers end.

contreras should also be a #5 or #6 hitter and he was paid for catcher production --- another Moronzelak mistake. Contreras is not who you should be comparing burly too, that/those player or players aren't on the team yet hopefully.

Why not compare Burleson and Contreras? They both play first base. Burleson compares, favorably, to Contreras as a hitter and, defensively, at 1B. And Burleson is much younger and cheaper, right now. I like having Contreras on the team. I just can't understand the constant Burleson criticism.And hardly any criticism of Contreras. And their production is about the same, overall. And Burleson seems more durable.

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:31 pm You Burleson bashers that criticize Burleson's lack of home runs. Do you realize Contreras has never had a 25 HR MLB season? His tops was 24 in 2019. And Contreras has never had as high as a .290 BA for a season like Burleson just had. Also, Burleson might well end up with more RBIs per season than Contreras when their careers end.

So you're comparing select historical hitting statistics of Burleson--an entirely one-dimensional, bat-only defensive liability who is a traffic cone on the bases and in the field--to those of someone who has been a catcher for the vast majority of his career? Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations . . .

And to be clear, pretty much everyone here acknowledges that all else equal, Contreras (and his offensive production) is far more valuable at catcher than at 1B. But you are the one comparing career numbers of the two players, which is not--as you falsely and misleadingly assert--a comparison of 1B to 1B.

Anyway, here are a few numbers that I'm sure you'll willfully ignore:

Contreras (Catcher): 122 wRC+, 118 OPS+
Burleson (Traffic Cone): 107 wRC+, 106 OPS+

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:03 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:00 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 13:55 pm better question -- if Burly is the #3 hitter slashing .285 with 15hr's and 75 rbi's --- how many losses will this team have? 85? 90? more?

we might explore the light hitting Burleson batting lead off or 9th...both are better suited for a Singles Hitter

correct -- if he is the 6th or 7th hitter with those numbers he helps your offense..... the problem then becomes where can he play defensively that isn't likely being played by the better hitters in the lineup?

you don't want him in the OF...his defensive metrics there are brutal. And Contreras is a better 1B, with better range....maybe if Burleson can improve on his defense at DH, we'd feel more comfortable with him there. The rest of the league was tied for 1st in defensive DH, I don't understand how Burleson finished 2nd?

So whom is the better production/salary value, right now, for the Cardinals organization? Contreras or Burleson. Looking forward to some twisting and turning on this. Some here just can't give up trying to rationalize how wrong they have been on Burleson for a long time.

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 15:02 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:54 pm

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:31 pm You Burleson bashers that criticize Burleson's lack of home runs. Do you realize Contreras has never had a 25 HR MLB season? His tops was 24 in 2019. And Contreras has never had as high as a .290 BA for a season like Burleson just had. Also, Burleson might well end up with more RBIs per season than Contreras when their careers end.

contreras should also be a #5 or #6 hitter and he was paid for catcher production --- another Moronzelak mistake. Contreras is not who you should be comparing burly too, that/those player or players aren't on the team yet hopefully.

Why not compare Burleson and Contreras? They both play first base. Burleson compares, favorably, to Contreras as a hitter and, defensively, at 1B. And Burleson is much younger and cheaper, right now. I like having Contreras on the team. I just can't understand the constant Burleson criticism.And hardly any criticism of Contreras. And their production is about the same, overall. And Burleson seems more durable.

no..."overall" Willson's production wasn't "about the same, overall"....20 HR > 18 HR ; 70 Runs > 54 Runs ; 80 RBI > 69 RBI..... Contreras did all this while playing 5 less games?

Regression of Burleson heading into your "Made up Prime"

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 15:11 pm So whom is the better production/salary value, right now, for the Cardinals organization? Contreras or Burleson. Looking forward to some twisting and turnibg on this.

And it's "who," not "whom," genius.

craviduce wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 15:14 pm

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 15:02 pm

greyhawk wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:54 pm

Shady wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 14:31 pm You Burleson bashers that criticize Burleson's lack of home runs. Do you realize Contreras has never had a 25 HR MLB season? His tops was 24 in 2019. And Contreras has never had as high as a .290 BA for a season like Burleson just had. Also, Burleson might well end up with more RBIs per season than Contreras when their careers end.

contreras should also be a #5 or #6 hitter and he was paid for catcher production --- another Moronzelak mistake. Contreras is not who you should be comparing burly too, that/those player or players aren't on the team yet hopefully.

Why not compare Burleson and Contreras? They both play first base. Burleson compares, favorably, to Contreras as a hitter and, defensively, at 1B. And Burleson is much younger and cheaper, right now. I like having Contreras on the team. I just can't understand the constant Burleson criticism.And hardly any criticism of Contreras. And their production is about the same, overall. And Burleson seems more durable.

no..."overall" Willson's production wasn't "about the same, overall"....20 HR > 18 HR ; 70 Runs > 54 Runs ; 80 RBI > 69 RBI..... Contreras did all this while playing 5 less games?

Regression of Burleson heading into your "Made up Prime"

I repeat. Some here just can't give up trying to rationalize how wrong they have been on Burleson for a long time. Funny how they can't equate the production/salary factor when comparing Burleson and Contreras.

batting 3rd, it "seems', Burleson can't drive in the runs like he should be doing.

Regression heading into your "Made up Prime"

craviduce wrote: ↑04 Oct 2025 15:16 pm batting 3rd, it "seems', Burleson can't drive in the runs like he should be doing.

Regression heading into your "Made up Prime"

That's bogus. If you want to play that game. Contreras had had his share of regression seasons. Time on the DL should also be factored in. As he's done the last two seasons. Burleson will, quite likely, make you foolish again.