- This topic has 157 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
RBK, “apparent future success”. Maybe not to you. But to me and many others. Let’s see how it plays out in the next few seasons.
“Apparent future success”??? Really? If it’s so “apparent,” why can’t you commit in advance to a specific set of standards/metrics for what would constitute “success” for a player with Burleson’s defensive profile?
Imagine taking a victory lap over a bat-only player delivering a .729 OPS in 51 games . . .
Talk about “the soft bigotry of low expectations. . . “
RBK, you need to chill and just try to observe Burleson’s steady progress. It’s happening. Whether you see it or not. I know that will be difficult for you to do. But please try. Maybe you won’t be so uptight about him and me for my support of him.
Thanks, but I’ll decide what and how I post–no one needs or wants your unsolicited advice. But I do agree with you, as a purely mathematical matter a .729 OPS looks like “progress” compared to his .691 last year. Everything’s relative, I guess . . .
Now, back to the substantive discussion: will you commit in advance to some specific, concrete metrics/standards for what constitutes “success” for a bat-only player like Burleson? All you have to do is give us a few key metrics, and then we can hold Burleson (and you) accountable to those standards. No more shifting the goalposts with vague descriptors like “amazing,” “fabulous,” “fantastic”–let’s get down to some concrete benchmarks, especially since you’ve now declared that “future success” is “apparent.”
I’m entirely convinced that the amazing resurgence of Burleson is in direct proportion to the amount of endorsments he receives from Shady…And in light of all the recent support and activity on this thread I’m looking for a 4 for 5 night from “Alec the Man”…Haha!
For a reserve player who historically sees very limited playing time, and who has been called upon to play nearly full time, I consider .729 OPS to be entirely “successful”. I will certainly take that from a back up guy thrown into the daily lineup due to multiple injuries,implosions and demotions.
That ssid, the more I see of Burly in the outfield, the more I don’t like seeing Burly in the outfield. I would reject the idea that he will get substantially better over time. So I don’t think we will see him out there much, once there is a better alternative. Since the Cardinals show no inclination toward a dedicated DH, Burly’s play time would go down very substantially.
RBK, that’s fair. I see Burleson as a solid potential .280 BA, 20 HR type for many years to come. Is that a sufficient projection on my part. He needs to pick it up on the RBIs. I believe he will. And yes, I’d be thrilled if Saggese could match that in the future. And I feel he can. Is that a satisfactory projection for you on my part?
@blingboy wrote: “For a reserve player who historically sees very limited playing time, and who has been called upon to play nearly full time, I consider .729 OPS to be entirely “successful”. I will certainly take that from a back up guy thrown into the daily lineup due to multiple injuries,implosions and demotions.”
I agree, a 107 OPS+ in 51 games is fine for a bat-only bench player who is unexpectedly thrown into the starting lineup due to a series of unfortunate events. That’s grading on a curve that is based in reality.
blingboy, Burly’s future offensive production will be fine as a DH. He’s going to be an average corner outfielder, overall, with an above average arm. He’d be an above average defensive 1B. I believe the Cardinals would have to be blown away by a trade that includes Burleson. That’s how much the Cardinals like me as a young lefty hitter. IMO
Drewman, enough of the “ok” crap. Provide us with some substantial discussion regarding Cardinals baseball. “Earn your stripes” here. I know you got it in you. lol
blingboy, Burly’s future offensive production will be fine as a DH. He’s going to be an average corner outfielder, overall, with an above average arm. He’d be an above average defensive 1B.
Where do you come up with this stuff???
Burleson in OF (597 innings):
DRS: -3
UZR: -0.6
OAA: -11Burleson at 1B (166 innings):
DRS: 0
UZR: 0.6
OAA: -3And those numbers would be worse if the Cardinals hadn’t come to their senses and stopped putting him on the field to the maximum extent possible.
RBK, you’re way too complicated for me. I just know Oli and me really like Burleson as an MLB hitter. Evidently, you don’t. Maybe Oli should consult with you about Burleson. lol To each there own.
RBK I used to say I never wanted Burleson on the field with a glove. Unfortunately we’ve had to play him extensively in the outfield. Inversely, I never want to see Siani do anything but bunt and play defense. But again, he’s been forced into regular action. I don’t see a pathway for Siani to be a regular after our our guys get healthy. What does Burleson have to do going forward to be the everyday dh? For me his 299/429/720 isn’t good enough. I want to see 340/470/780 ish. That’s reasonable for a one tool player. For reference Contreras lifetime is 352/464/816. That puts Burly on the bench with Herrera catching against left handed pitching. So for me he has to get near Contreras numbers to justify his defense in left field. What do you think?
Hint…. Springfield is AA. AAA is Memphis.
Either way, it’s a foolish proposition. And he would have to approve that.
BOCfan, some really good MLB player for another team just went to the Rookie League to try to get things going. You are kind of fun to verbally spar with. At least, here, Brian keeps it civil.
What really good MLB player (on the par of multiple All-Star and Gold Glove winner making around $35th Million yearly went to the rookie league ? Voluntarily? Awaiting receipts.
BOCfan, “Toronto Blue Jays right-hander Alek Manoah was happy with his first minor league rehab start — despite an ugly line — because his right shoulder felt healthy.
Manoah walked his first four batters and wound up allowing seven runs over 1⅔ innings for Single-A Dunedin against Lakeland in a Florida State League game on Sunday”.- AP Manoah, likely, is not in Arenado’s pay bracket. But he was a star MLB pitcher and it proves my point.
Manoah, likely, is not in Arenado’s pay bracket. But he was a star MLB pitcher and it proves my point.
Manoah actively resisted his assignment, but the team held an option so he couldn’t stop it (see link below). And it turns out he had a real physical injury that ultimately required rehab. This is not an example that “proves your point” at all. Again, Arenado would have to agree to any assignment, and you were suggesting he be assigned for performance reasons, not injury. Try again.
Further, less than 24 hours (and one HR) after you started this thread, you were saying you really wanted him the lineup, so it’s not at all clear what your point actually was.
https://nypost.com/2023/09/12/blue-jays-alek-manoah-refused-to-report-to-triple-a-assignment/
I didn’t suggest Arenado be assigned to AA. I thought it would be prudent. If mutually agreed upon. My critics and I have a tendency to miscommunicate. lol Another Burly bomb. Enjoy RBK and BOC fan. lol
I didn’t suggest Arenado be assigned to AA. I just suggested it would be prudent. If mutually agreed upon. My critics and I have a tendency to miscommunicate. lol
So then why do you think Manoah’s involuntary assignment (and subsequent rehab from a physical injury) “proves [your] point?”
And yes, you suggested that he should go to AA to “work on things” without the “pressure” of MLB games. And let’s be honest, you didn’t even know he had to agree to an assignment until I told you.
RBK, that established MLB players can go down to lower levels in order to try to get back to an MLB level of performance. Slow down and try to enjoy what Burly is doing. lol
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.