1) I don't why people keep bringing up weight. It means nothing really, in the case of Sano or Santana. I wouldn't think there is any less risk if he was 230, instead of 280. 2). Sure, there is always risk at any position, including DH. The risk of injury when playing outfield, however, is not the same as DHing. That's clear. Schwarber wouldn't have torn his ACL, and would still be playing, if he could be DH'd. Assigning the same level of risk across the board is kind of preposterous. Why not minimize risk as much as possible? 3). It's different if Sano is a gold glover out there. But, he's not. He's bad. He's arguable cost the team a game already. I keep hearing "right field defense doesn't matter" from all of these people whose opinions are typically spot on. That's just not true. Right field defense was the lone difference between the Twins losing in the bottom of the ninth, and getting a chance to retake the lead in extra innings. Sure, a game here or there typically doesn't matter over the course of an MLB season....but there is also that rare time when a team loses a game 163, or finishes the season a couple of games out of the wildcard. Why not do everything you can to maximize your victories? Is DHing Park everyday really doing that, and putting Sano in RF really doing that (I don't care about sunk costs)? So many think it's a cut-and-dried yes. But, I think that's debatable. 4). There's also that pesky little thing called the future. Why teach your best player a new position? Especially when it's not realistic for him to be there long term. Let Sano be Sano, and have assets of significantly less value make a career altering change.