1. Yes. We had no real viable options that were better than Ozzie because our bench was terrible. Even with a .757 OPS, he was still almost a 4 win player. He's good, but if he continues the horrific struggles vs righties, I don't think Snitker would have a problem siphoning off 1-2 starts per week from him. Especially if it came directly from AA.
2. If Culberson goes nuts like he did last year, perhaps not. But in all likelihood Culberson is looking down the barrel of significant regression and when that happens, yes Camargo would be the logical choice to take 1-2 starts per week from Dansby if it would benefit the lineup.
3. What the hell does Markakis have to do with this? I'm not expecting him back. But yes, even if he comes back it would be perfectly reasonable to give Camargo a start over Ender against a LHP. Maybe Duvall is your primary option if he gets back going, but if he doesn't: Camargo. And if we get a guy like Joc or Brantley or Peralta rather than Markakis, then both would have a role.
4. This is just a terrible point. You don't have to predict when Camargo gets hot and when a player gets cold to know that Camargo could serve as insurance against a cold streak. This might seriously be the weirdest point I've seen since arriving here.
My point is that every single baseball season is filled with dozens of variables and you have to have contingencies for every single one of those variables if you're gonna contend. Camargo buys insurance for a large portion of those variables, he provides direct impact by his platoon/pinch hit opportunities, and he does it making league minimum. Any club with half a brain can find a way to get Camargo 400+ plate appearances while serving a utility role. Look at the Dodger's starters last year. It was one of the best lineups in baseball. Probably better than we will roll out next year (although maybe not). Chris Taylor was their Camargo and he ended up getting over 500 at bats while playing almost every position on the field.
