Linebrick hasn't worked out the best, but asking why we needed him is a rather silly question. No -- It's a reasonable question, not silly at all for a couple of reasons. 1.) 12/13th pitcher. Linebrink was in essence an upgrade of our 12th pitcher, Chris Spurling. As we all know in MLB, there are a non-trivial number of games in a season where you either blow someone out, or you get blown out. This is what your #12 pitcher is for -- If you are losing 10-2 in the 3rd -- you can have a pitcher go 5IP and give up 4ER -- I think we all agree that the Brewers did not need to get Linebrink to do mop-up duty that Spurling should have been doing. Now, if you want to counter my argument, with the claim that Ned cannot manage a 13 man or 12 man bullpen correctly, and that Yost needs to have 8 prototypical setup men to be successful, I would concede that point. 2.) SP -- Even if Linebrink was pitching well, our starting pitching still remains our biggest problem. It may have been better to get another starter, or perhaps a LR pitcher like the one we gave up in Dessens (who is actually pitching well in COL). I am not advocating or claiming that Dessens is better than Linebrink, but rather, if you have big holes in your rotation, it doesn't make much sense to patch up your BP, unless it is long-relief. 3.) Joe Thatcher -- You have to wonder why a team like SD, in a pennant and WC race would be willing to trade a great set-up man and replace him with Joe Thatcher. The answer of course is that they didn't trade a great set-up man, they traded Scott Linebrink, who has seen better days. I am guess that DM over-valued Linebrink just a tad. It seems to me that the Pads could care less about Inman, and are thrilled to have replaced Linebrink with Thatcher. If you look at Linebrink's gamelog -- you can see right about around the end of June he really has not performed well. 4.) Draft Pick(s) -- I understand that the draft picks are a nice little bonus -- If Linebrink keeps pitching like he has in July and August -- we will probably get 1 pick instead of 2. However, if DM made this trade (I dont think he did) strictly to gather up draftpicks it shows you where his head is at, and it isn't 2007. Thatcher has been better than Linebrink so far (Linebrink has given up runs in 4 out of his last 5 appearances, and has gotten 3 losses). Are those losses+Thatcher/Inman worth the draft pick(s)? That is a question one needs to ponder. Now a guy has a couple of bad games and we call it the worst deal ever. 77 -- He has given up runs in 4 of his last 5 appearances and has gotten 3 losses -- I wouldn't say that it is the worst deal ever, but it is hardly paying us dividends. Linebrink has cost us games (in a short amount of time) in a pennant race. Certainly there have been other factors in our losses, but Linebrink has not had an overall positive impact, and at the end of the day -- I don't think that draft pick will be worth the losses in 2007 (as well as losing Thatcher/Inman)