Not to try and offend you or anything, but this is not a good mindset. You should always be willing to consider an argument. Objective analysis certainly has its merits, and to completely dismiss it based upon subjective observation is willful ignorance.I'm not basing it on subjective observation. I'm basing it on the fact that he led the league in errors before being platooned. That evidence is supplemented by visual evidence which stats can't completely capture. Example: Weeks defensive stats look deceptively good because failing to turn double plays isn't reflected. However those that watched the games last year understood it was a weakness (no pun intended). Perhaps "you'll never convince me" was a poor choice of words on my part but I find it hard to watch long stretches of poor play only to have it described as above average. If you read back you'll see Ennder clarified that he was describing "above replacement level" and not "above the major league average". I can stretch enough to buy that.