Then... yawn... you already know that anything a hit or BA tells you is covered by OBP & SLG No they do not. I understand that BA is a component of BA and SLG. For example you said this: What you want to see out of a higher BA will be reflected in higher OBP & OPS. This is an erroneous statement -- because it assumes that the walk rate will remain constant, which it will most certainly not, especially for a younger player. However, you cannot tell by OBP or SLG the frequency of which a batter gets a hit -- or the BA. Now, in a more generic discussion about a player's offensive value, I certainly agree you can bypass the BA and talk about OBP -- however in this discussion, it seems like everyone agrees that for Weeks to improve he is going to have to improve his BA. I don't think anyone expects Weeks to walk any more than he already is. It is a fact that Weeks had the worst BA among the composite 2b in the NL, and one of the worst SLG. Weeks should not have the worst BA in the NL 2B. You have used BA to show a place where Weeks can and needs to improve -- therefore I feel it is fair game to show how bad Weeks was at hitting the ball. As I said before, Weeks is really good at drawing walks (probably among the best 2b) and that is probably the predominant reason (besides his price tag) he is still has a starting job. I am and have been all along talking about Weeks & Durham while they were both playing for the Brewers. This is not true.... You said this... Durham is a far inferior fielder & weaker hitter at this point I found this statement possibly incorrect regarding the 2 players defense, and certainly questionable, when you look at how Weeks and Durham did overall in 2008 at the plate. I certainly would not argue that Weeks is a better hitter at the end of 2008 than Durham was, or that Durham is a weaker hitter -- In fact I would argue Durham is a better hitter. Now, you did then say this.... Weeks was better than Ray for the entire time after he came over from SF. I think statement is probably a bit subjective. As you pointed out they probably did not face the same pitchers, and there was probably some intention to what 2b faced what pitchers. You are probably right that Weeks produced as much as Durham did (as Brewers), but if you want to say that based on that last month of the season Weeks is a better hitter overall than Durham, I'd regurgitate the standard "arbitrary small sample" argument. Clearly this is Ep. I-III jet-booster shoes R2D2, not Ep. IV-VI 0.78 mph R2D2 Yes -- I should have referred to R5-D4 whose speed remained constant through episodes I-VI. My bad. I can't honestly believe you're going to try & pretend I'm making this up. And it would be nice to not have you just mock me, for whatever that's worth. No, I don't think you are making up the existence of Weeks haters, however, I don't know why people need to give their arguments a bit of depth by somehow implying that they are part of some downtrodden minority, or that "the many" are some sort of faction of hive-minded drones. Same thing with "the casual fan", -- that one grates on me as well. However, I am certainly not trying to mock you..... at least until you start talking about Star Wars http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif -- then you better strap on The Force, because I will be bringing the mockery Death Star-style. Why does it matter what he did for another team? You seem to be out to argue points that no one is trying to make. You clearly said "Durham is a far inferior fielder & weaker hitter at this point" -- I would disagree on "far inferior" and "weaker hitter". I'd point to 2008 as evidence that Durham is a better hitter than Weeks. What I've been talking about is the assumption among many/the chosen/the forgotten that Durham was better than Weeks once he got here. I think you have made a good argument to support your POV on this.