I agree. Wouldn't it be great if we had the same reputation for batters that the Braves had with pitching in the 90's. The Braves always seemed to keep their best pitching prospects and trade the ones who weren't very good. They were so successful it actually started to impact the view of the prospect if they were willing to trade them. I understand the need at times to trade prospects to add complementary players to the organization/ML team, but not at the expense of the players that actually develop into above average major league talent. We should be trading the prospects we don't see a future when they have value. I know much of this occurred on the Melvin watch, so we may see a completely different result with Stearns. yes it is impossible to tell how his trajectory changed due to the trade to Cleveland. My main concern is that we were taking on a rental for several months with Sabbathia and even with a legendary performance by him we only just made the playoffs, yet we gave up a prospect who developed into an above average OF, while the prospects we held onto fizzled (or as you state we traded - Cain) and we had zero other OF prospects develop and contribute since then (except of course trading Hanigar as part of the Parra trade that ended with ZD). Man if I ever meet Doug Melvin I'm gonna punch him in the face.... If Sheets doesn't get hurt to end that year who knows what happens. With two aces like that anything is possible. And where was Brantley gonna play with Hart and Braun in his way. I don't recall if when young he was capable of playing CF, I think he could've but you also had Cain in the farm too. Trade from a place of depth/strength to fill weakness is kind of common sense. BRantley didn't become a full time contributor until 2012 when MKE's window was basically coming to an end. Even still by then you'd filled out your OF with Gomez and Aoki too. They never really had issues with filling out the OF