Sure, unless he spends his spare time as Stretch Armstrong. Knees don't that bend that way and Walker was not out of position when he rec'd the feed at 2B. Plus, I vividly remember Grudzielanek having two injury plagued seasons with the Cubs in similar flukish type manners. Doesn't equate to the fact he's injury prone or what not, just bad luck that can reverse as Mark was healthy last year. Well, I think we can agree that Grudz is better built than Walker, but perhaps you're right. However, I still stand by the Cubs being better off w/ Grudz. Grudz is one inch taller and five pounds heavier, according to their ESPN profiles, and it's not like either is completely out of shape. Lee would have hurt either of them. Never trust listed weights from ESPN or the team website. I've seen players grow and shrink visibly and their listed weights stay the same for years. Sammy's listed weight never reflected his post-roid shrinkage, and Randall Simon's didn't reflect the roughly 30 lbs. he gained before 2004. Anyone believe Ray King only weighs 242? Unnatural shrinkage and obesity are embarrassing and teams aren't going to be in any hurry to share that info. Yep, but they are also only five pounds apart on baseball-reference.com. Bottom line is that there isn't a huge difference in their builds. It's not like one is built like David Eckstein, while the other is build like Cecil Fielder. but would walker have suffered the same injury as grudz in 2004? injuries vary as well from year to year, grudz is just as "injury prone" as walker. it's ludicrous to look at the season after the fact and say that grudz is better than walker because he's more durable--especially considering 2004. walker is a better hitter, period. no amount of conventional sac. bunts, slap hits, or gutty, sparkplug-like builds will ever change that. the only thing that could change this is if grudz decided to work on becoming a better hitter, which he won't--at this stage of his career anyway.