They are both too early in their GM careers to make an accurate judgement on them. I suspect that Stearns might be slightly better at evaluating talent and building the franchise overall, whereas Neander might be slightly better at building a contender under extreme budgetary constraints. Depending on how tight the budget gets in the next few years, Neander might be better for the Brewers than Stearns, but of course that’s irrelevant as Tampa Bay isn’t giving up Neander. It’s interesting that Matt Arnold worked with Neander with the Rays for several years. There are definitely similarities in the way the 2 franchises do things. Mark A seems to push for bigger, splashier moves, I think, than Rays ownership. Attendance is a much bigger deal in Milwaukee. I have no idea how Tampa Bay does what they do, competing in that division with generally sparse attendance. I think they have a better TV contract than the Brewers do, but it can’t be that much better.