Can someone please explain to me the whole Gerrit Cole - Anthony Rendon debate. I know that the front office constantly says that they are looking to select the best player of the draft available, however in this scenario i just dont get it. Lets assume for a moment that the core 4 all end up playing to their potential. Do we really need a lot more offense on this team (excluding Cedenio who is a negative)? As long as the rest of the lineup is made up of average hitters and average-above average (preferably) defenders, why do we need an Anthony Rendon, or an equivalent bat for that matter? We cant afford to be the yankees, where every position has a slugger. So we'll have the core 4 and the rest and we'll be fine. Look at San Francisco - defense and pitching wins, the offense just cant be a weakness, doesnt need to be a strength. That being said, wouldnt it make a lot of sense to take Cole and hopefully get 1 or 2 ace like pitchers up here in the next few years between Heredia, Taillon, Allie, and Cole? If we end up with 2 stars out of that group (or other sleepers), we will have solid 3rd 4th and fifth starters between all the guys here now and in the future. The pitching will be above average and the team will have a solid chance. Essentially im suggesting that we try to enable ourselves to keep an enlarged core ( the 4 plus -__ pitchers) of players and piece around them solid players who will come and go if they out-price the team. We know firsthand how hard it is to draft pitchers who live up to their expectations, why not take another solid one in an effort to ensure that we have some pitching pieces later. Taking Rendon (assuming he reaches his potential) will inevitably lead to the weakest link of the "core 5 (Rendon added)" getting chucked. So we should take more pitchers, assuming they all wont work out anyway. What do you think?