Page 1 of 2
msn trades with links
Posted: 03 Mar 2026 19:58 pm
by greyhawk
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.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm
by Stlcardsblues
How does trading Burelson make any sense?
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 03 Mar 2026 20:43 pm
by BrockFloodMaris
Your first link is to a story from last year, when Profar received his first PED suspension, an 80 game penalty.
Your second link is an SI article reposted on MSN, which is just conjecture about what Dana Brown might do with Isaac Paredes.
Sorry, but not really much to see here.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 03 Mar 2026 21:31 pm
by Mort Gage
MSN sports articles are regurgitated clickbait trash.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 03 Mar 2026 21:46 pm
by greyhawk
BrockFloodMaris wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:43 pm
Your first link is to a story from last year, when Profar received his first PED suspension, an 80 game penalty.
Your second link is an SI article reposted on MSN, which is just conjecture about what Dana Brown might do with Isaac Paredes.
Sorry, but not really much to see here.
nope -- just pointless msn links.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm
by hugeCardfan
Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm
How does trading Burelson make any sense?
It doesn't.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 03 Mar 2026 23:54 pm
by zuck698
Mort Gage wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 21:31 pm
MSN sports articles are regurgitated clickbait trash.
Shady wouldn't be able to post here without them!
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 00:16 am
by greyhawk
zuck698 wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:54 pm
Mort Gage wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 21:31 pm
MSN sports articles are regurgitated clickbait trash.
Shady wouldn't be able to post here without them!
Bingo
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 04:48 am
by 2ninr
I think some of you are missing the lampoon job by OP.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 06:02 am
by ecleme22
hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm
Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm
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.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 08:35 am
by hugeCardfan
ecleme22 wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 06:02 am
hugeCardfan wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 23:22 pm
Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm
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?
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 08:51 am
by rockondlouie
Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm
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).
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 08:54 am
by ecleme22
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
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.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 09:18 am
by hugeCardfan
rockondlouie wrote: ↑04 Mar 2026 08:51 am
Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑03 Mar 2026 20:30 pm
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.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 09:27 am
by hugeCardfan
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
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.
Re: msn trades with links
Posted: 04 Mar 2026 09:36 am
by ecleme22
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
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.