I'm not really arguing with any of these, as they are very valid. I don't know if Hammer would have gotten much, but Perk certainly would have. My point was more in the context of now. As the kids get ready, by all means, you have to get younger and play them, and we are in a situation where getting younger does make sense to an extent, and getting younger and getting better aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. I would argue though that whether Ryan would publicly use the term rebuild or not, we were rebuilding.. that was obvious the moment Span and Revere were traded. My big issue is that we have a number of young starting pitchers who were likely to outperform Milone (who had value and could be traded) and while this would have been another bumpy year, it would have been able to get someone solidified. I also took issue that we didn't hedge our bets with Buxton. As well, we needed a lot of help in the pen, and while help is on the way, it won't be up right away, and adding a really good vet in the pen both helps now and should be of use down the road, especially when you consider the fact that there are 6 or 7 slots for pen use. I figured the record would be around the same this year, but that the kids would really take hold. Instead, we valued depth to the point that some of these kids aren't playing or playing out of position. Can't say I'm a fan of that.