Hamilton has a shot to stick at short, which already gives him a leg up on Campana. He also doesn't pound the ball into the ground as much as Campana (who has had GB% numbers in the high 50's/low 60's whereas Hamilton is around the 50% mark). I'm not sure if Hamilton has that much more "real" power over Campana, but he's probably more of an offensive threat than Campana, and Campana's speed, which is plus, is not close to Hamilton's speed, which is plus-plus ... and hell, you can probably throw another plus in there for emphasis. Am I the only one who is reading that Hamilton/Campana comment as more of a knock against those Cubs fans who think so highly of Campana rather than an actual comparison of the players? I just kind of saw it as an accurate comparison between the two. The difference between one being a potential longterm starter versus the other, who's a backup, unless something really changes.