it's not at all. what's terrible logic is assuming that because some other hitters improved a lot, then so can cedeno. in the cases of the players discussed in this thread, they showed in their first full seasons that they had some of the skills - be it patience or the ability to pick a pitch and drive it for doubles/home runs - that are required to become a good major league player. cedeno showed none of the batting attributes needed to become an average or above-average player at the big league level. saying "hey mike schmidt sucked at 23 and he got good!" is a lazy argument. you're comparing apples to oranges. since i'm so wrong, there should be plenty of examples of guys who were God-awful hitters in their first full seasons, but became average or better. i'm surprised that you guys haven't found all these examples to put me in my place once and for all. No, this is exactly the point I'm saying. Cedeno being "God-awful" as opposed to merely below average or "showing attributes of a useful hitter" is a completely irrelevant point, especially with what he proved at the minor league level.