Had I told you before the season that Peter Bourjos and Vernon Wells would be locked in a battle for playing time by the beginning of May, you probably would've had yourself a good ol' belly laugh and then had me committed to a mental institution on a 5150 hold. Sure enough though, that is exactly where we are today, with the exception of me being in a loony bin. That didn't happen. Thanks for that; I appreciate it.
The good news is that this unlikely playing time battle arose for a smart reason, clearing a full-time starting job for Mike Trout. This whole situation would be even more absurd if it was Trout battling for playing time with one or both of Vernon and Peter. That doesn't make it a "good problem" though. No, a "good problem" would be that Bourjos and Wells were both playing so well that Scioscia couldn't decide which one to play more often. Instead, he is trying to pick between two players that have been highly disappointing. Lame.
So who should he choose?
Should it be the guy who isn't totally allergic to drawing a walk? That would be Bourjos and his 5.7% walk rate, compared to Wells at a pitiful 2.4%.
Or should it be the guy who hits the ball hard in the rare even that he hits the ball? That would be Wells and his .193 ISO, compared to Bourjos at .083.