The W
Views: 100231193
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
30.10.14 1028
The W - Baseball - MVP discussion time.... (Page 2)
This thread has 20 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.98
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
(940 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (65 total)
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 105 days
Last activity: 1 day
#21 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87
    Originally posted by Corajudo
    So, since the AL MVP should be from a playoff team and the AL MVP should be a Yankee, then the Yankees will be the only AL playoff team? That is what I gathered from your post. Heaven forbid that the MVP put up massive numbers down the stretch to carry his team on his back to a playoff berth.
    Originally posted by skorpio17
    They should give the AL award to a guy from a playoff team this year. Since the Yankees are the only sure bet playoff team as of now, it should be one of them.
(note underlined part, for I think the jist of the thread is as of now)

I think that its tougher for a Yankee to win the MVP award because
a) there have been so many guys contributing to carrying the team over the season
b) the team has had a healthy lead in the division for awhile now
c) the "for $200 million, there should be 9 MVP candidates in the game at all times with 5 more on the bench, so give it to someone else" arguement

If you had to argue Matsui vs Sheffield, its tough. Matsui has been very consistant, and totally filled the void of "the left-handed presence" in the lineup since Giambi blew away in the wind (key word: blew). Sheffield though, is a threat to take the ball out at any time. I would take Matsui with the game on the line in the 9th, but over the course of the season, Shef has had tons of great at-bats in the later innings, and can get around on any pitcher at any time. Plus, the pain this guy is playing in every day has to be a factor.

The troika of Quantrill, Gordon, and Rivera have been immeasurably valuable this year, but with the mediocre pitching and inconsistant offense of Jeter, Bernie, Posada, et al, Matsui and Sheffield have pretty much carried the team for most of the season. Same with Ortiz and Ramirez with the Boston soap opera, Vlad with the injuries in Anaheim, and Haffner leading the Indians from outta nowhere.



"Richard Grieco, you see right through me."
SC
Potato korv








Since: 11.12.01
From: Valparaiso, IN

Since last post: 1334 days
Last activity: 668 days
AIM:  
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.34
    Originally posted by skorpio17
    They should give the AL award to a guy from a playoff team this year. Since the Yankees are the only sure bet playoff team as of now, it should be one of them.

    While Matsui and A-Rod are great at compiling numbers, the MVP of this team is Sheffield. He has carried them this year. He has been great in the clutch with 15 GWRBIs while playing with a bad shoulder.


Grimis is right - we do go through this every year. And every year, the Baseball Writers of America tend to not read the description of the award, and have for whatever reason conjured up their own, somewhat false, idea of what the award is. "Valuable" is defined by the award as meaning something to the effect of "best offense and defense". It sounds to me like that means best player in the league. It IS a best player award; that was the intent of it. It wasn't meant to single out players from good teams and eliminate those who have bad teammates/managers/GMs.

And the obvious question comes, "Would you call X more valuable than Y?" If he's a better player, yes. You can't tell me if you switched their teams that Barry Bonds wouldn't be in first place with the Cardinals and Albert Pujols wouldn't be battling for the wild card - at best - with the rest of that Giants team, which is largely useless outside of Jason Schmidt.

A-Rod isn't even in contention, IMO. This has been the worst season of his career, which is not to say he's been bad, but, well, for him, he's been bad. Sheffield has been the Yankees' best player, but the bum shoulder should be the reason he doesn't win, not the reason he does. I think it's plenty swell that he's playing tough and showing character and leadership, especially with Giambi out of the lineup and them needing Sheff's bat, but he hasn't been the best player in the league, and not even the best player on a contending team - which, luckily, is where most of the real contenders are at. Manny Ramirez (who will not win because he's not nice to writers), Vlad Guerrero and David Ortiz are all having better seasons. Maybe if Sheffield was fully healthy. Actually, I picked Sheffield to win preseason because I thought he was going to have a monster year. It appears he would have because he's having a hell of a year injured.



dotcom // cubs.org // let's go hero
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2837 days
Last activity: 2679 days
AIM:  
#23 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
    Originally posted by Corajudo
      Originally posted by skorpio17
      They should give the AL award to a guy from a playoff team this year. Since the Yankees are the only sure bet playoff team as of now, it should be one of them.

      While Matsui and A-Rod are great at compiling numbers, the MVP of this team is Sheffield. He has carried them this year. He has been great in the clutch with 15 GWRBIs while playing with a bad shoulder.

      I'm also not a fan of players from one team cancelling each other out. Since it looks like Pujols and Rolen are the top two, they should finish 1-2.


    So, since the AL MVP should be from a playoff team and the AL MVP should be a Yankee, then the Yankees will be the only AL playoff team? That is what I gathered from your post. Heaven forbid that the MVP put up massive numbers down the stretch to carry his team on his back to a playoff berth.

    Also, it doesn't suprise me to see an argument for clutch hitting in a post like this. I think that my brain just fell asleep in a fit of self-preservation...


I want to know what dark tomb of MLB stats he found GWRBI in.



In Theo We Trust
skorpio17
Morcilla








Since: 11.7.02
From: New Jersey

Since last post: 2416 days
Last activity: 2416 days
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.81
The YES network likes to show Sheffield's GWRBI numbers to promote his MVP standing. His 15 are especially impressive because the next highest Yankee is Sierra with 8. A-Rod and Matsui each have 5. To compare with Boston, Ortiz has 13 and Manny has 9. Sheffield is also 1st in Runs and 6th in OBP.

Sidenote: Victor Martinez in leading the Indians more than Travis Haffner.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1276 days
Last activity: 1073 days
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
GWRBI is an absolutely useless state though. All it means is that somebody drove in the run that was determined at some point to be the one to win the game. You can get a GWRBI for hitting a leadoff homerun in a game your team wins 24-0. That's why it is not recognized as an official state anymore...



spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 17 days
Last activity: 11 hours
AIM:  
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.95
    Originally posted by skorpio17
    Sidenote: Victor Martinez in leading the Indians more than Travis Haffner.


Hafner has a higher Avg. (.315 to .297), Higher OBP (.412 to .369), Higher Slugging (.587 to .528), More HR (23 to 20) Equal RBI (91 each), More runs scored (76 to 66)...how do you explain this statement exactly?




HELP IS ON THE WAY!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush 8/5/04

skorpio17
Morcilla








Since: 11.7.02
From: New Jersey

Since last post: 2416 days
Last activity: 2416 days
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.81
    Originally posted by Grimis
    GWRBI is an absolutely useless state though. All it means is that somebody drove in the run that was determined at some point to be the one to win the game. You can get a GWRBI for hitting a leadoff homerun in a game your team wins 24-0. That's why it is not recognized as an official state anymore...


Just because Bill James says it's useless doesn't make it so. It's not useless at all if you know how to use it.

For example in this week Orlando Cabrera is hitting .250 with 0 HRs and 4 RBIs. If this is all you looked at, you'd think he is having a bad week. However if you take notice of his 2 GWRBIs, you'd change your tune.

MVPs are usually among the top 5 league leaders in GWRBIs. There is a strong correlation. It is more relevant than a stat like Batting Average, unless you think Ichiro and Mora are better than Sheffield and Ortiz.

Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1276 days
Last activity: 1073 days
#28 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
I'm not a sabremetric geek, so James doesn't do much for me. But even so, I find it difficult to believe that GWRBI is an indicator of anything more than situational factors.

    Originally posted by skorpio17
    For example in this week Orlando Cabrera is hitting .250 with 0 HRs and 4 RBIs. If this is all you looked at, you'd think he is having a bad week. However if you take notice of his 2 GWRBIs, you'd change your tune.
Not really, because, like my earlier example, it does not change the sitautational context of those RBI. If each of those 2 GWRBI are on grounders to short, in the first inning, with a runner on third and less than two outs, and the Sox win 7-0, what does that really prove? Not much.

Besides, who would you rather have: a guy who has half his RBI as GWRBI, but hitting .260, or a guy who is hitting .275, but is hitting .450 with runners in scoring position?

    Originally posted by skorpio17
    MVPs are usually among the top 5 league leaders in GWRBIs. There is a strong correlation.
Just because there is a correlation doesn't make the correlation meaningful. Look at Mark McGwire's 1998 season for example. He drove in 147 runs, but only had 77 teammates driven in because 70 of those RBI were himself. Does the fact that he had 147 RBI make that stat more meaningful when, in the same year, when Vinny Castilla had 98 TDI and Jeff Kent had 97? Not really.

Just because you can keep a stat doesn't make it mean something.

    Originally posted by skorpio17
    It is more relevant than a stat like Batting Average, unless you think Ichiro and Mora are better than Sheffield and Ortiz.
Ichiro is certainly better than Ortiz, and probably Mora too, because they actually play the field.

(edited by Grimis on 19.8.04 1300)


PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2837 days
Last activity: 2679 days
AIM:  
#29 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
Orlando Cabrera IS having a bad week (season).

Orlando Cabrera had two good at-bats at convenient times.

There's a difference.



In Theo We Trust
Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 341 days
Last activity: 335 days
#30 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.85

Sorry folks, but there really shouldn't be any doubt as to the MVP: of the NL, it should be Scott Rolen.

His addition to the Cardinals this year has taken the pressure off of Pujols to be the top producer on the team, and took a so-so overall offense to near awesome status. His being in the lineup improves the Cardinals top to bottom.

It's not entirely fair to Bonds, because NL managers do not allow him to play. BUT! The Giants could've gotten someone like Rolen to help him a LITTLE bit. They didn't. The addition of Rolen changed the Cardinals so much that they have run away with the Central.

Bonds may be the best offensive player in baseball, but the only award he gets this season should be the MAP...Most Avoided Player.





"In the sky. Lord, in the sky..."
SC
Potato korv








Since: 11.12.01
From: Valparaiso, IN

Since last post: 1334 days
Last activity: 668 days
AIM:  
#31 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.33
    Originally posted by Eddie Famous
    His addition to the Cardinals this year has taken the pressure off of Pujols to be the top producer on the team, and took a so-so overall offense to near awesome status. His being in the lineup improves the Cardinals top to bottom.


Take Barry Bonds out of the San Francisco lineup and show me what you've got. AJ Pierzynski and Marquis Grissom, come on. Rolen benefits from playing with Pujols as much as Pujols benefits from playing with Rolen.


    It's not entirely fair to Bonds, because NL managers do not allow him to play. BUT! The Giants could've gotten someone like Rolen to help him a LITTLE bit. They didn't.


Like you said, it's not entirely fair. It's also pretty silly. It's not Bonds' fault the Giants didn't sign a good player to back him up in the order.


    The addition of Rolen changed the Cardinals so much that they have run away with the Central.


There's other reasons. This is also no less than Scott Rolen's third season playing in St. Louis, so it isn't like he hasn't been there before. He's just having his career year. The Astros suck and have been hurt, the Cubs have been hurt for most of the year. I'm not saying even if the Cubs were healthy they'd be in first, but they would most likely be a little better and MAYBE pushing St. Louis more than they are. I'm not trying to take away from the Cardinals, but they're not a one-man effort. The Giants pretty much are.


    Bonds may be the best offensive player in baseball, but the only award he gets this season should be the MAP...Most Avoided Player.


I agree with the notion that opposing managers make Barry Bonds an even better player than he already is. Obviously, if they pitch to him, he's not on base sixty percent of the time. But, they don't. And he is. No single player in baseball means more to their team (a team in the hunt for the wild card with all of two good players, mind you) than Barry Bonds. Bonds' power stats blow Rolen and Pujols out of the water, too.



dotcom // cubs.org // let's go hero
Whitebacon
Boudin blanc








Since: 12.1.02
From: Fresno, CA

Since last post: 74 days
Last activity: 11 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
#32 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.93
The Giants really should have made a better push for Vlad in the offseason, or at least someone with talent. Tejada maybe, or Guillen, who would have come a lot cheaper than Vlad and offers a solid amount of production.



Joseph Ryder
Head cheese








Since: 19.3.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 1206 days
Last activity: 738 days
#33 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.55
    Originally posted by Eddie Famous
    Sorry folks, but there really shouldn't be any doubt as to the MVP: of the NL, it should be Scott Rolen.

    His addition to the Cardinals this year has taken the pressure off of Pujols to be the top producer on the team, and took a so-so overall offense to near awesome status. His being in the lineup improves the Cardinals top to bottom.


Fun fact: The Giants and the Cards, as of Saturday's games, have both scored 658 runs. If the Cards are "near awesome" at offense, so are the Giants. Difference is, after Bonds, the Giants have...? Pedro Feliz? Edgardo Alfonzo? JT Snow? Hitting in the snug spot between Pujols and (oh yeah), JIM EDMONDS is going to produce those numbers with an adequate bat. I'd say between the three Cards though, Edmonds arguably has a slight edge simply because he's got no one hitting behind him. Yet magically enough, his OPS is better than Rolen's and is only .001 lower than Pujols'.

    Originally posted by Eddie Famous
    It's not entirely fair to Bonds, because NL managers do not allow him to play. BUT! The Giants could've gotten someone like Rolen to help him a LITTLE bit. They didn't.


And yet he's STILL dominating every player in the league in all percentage stats. With nobody in his lineup helping him at all. Go figure...the guy's the MVP.

Another way you can look at it, since we're gonna consider off-season GM moves to help decide who the MVP is...hypothetical questions:

If the Cards lost Rolen in the 03-04 offseason, could they still contend for the playoffs?
If the Giants lost Bonds in the 03-04 offseason, how many games below .500 would they finish?

Bonds is more valuable, and I'm surprised I'm arguing this with anyone but a hardcore Cards fan.
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 11 hours
#34 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.21
    Originally posted by Joseph Ryder
    Fun fact: The Giants and the Cards, as of Saturday's games, have both scored 658 runs. If the Cards are "near awesome" at offense, so are the Giants. Difference is, after Bonds, the Giants have...? Pedro Feliz? Edgardo Alfonzo? JT Snow? Hitting in the snug spot between Pujols and (oh yeah), JIM EDMONDS is going to produce those numbers with an adequate bat. I'd say between the three Cards though, Edmonds arguably has a slight edge simply because he's got no one hitting behind him. Yet magically enough, his OPS is better than Rolen's and is only .001 lower than Pujols'.


So, you are saying that the Giants HAVE other quality players? I mean, I dont get the argument. Both have the same amount of runs, yet you are putting down the rest of the Giants team, except Bonds. I am confused as to your point.



Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, So, La, TITO SANTANA!
Doc_whiskey
Frankfurter








Since: 6.8.02
From: St. Louis

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 14 days
AIM:  
#35 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.18
Just to point out that the MVP should not be just based on offesnive numbers. I may be a little biased, but not only does Rolen have impressive offensive numbers, but he is more than likely winning a gold glove as well.



Lisa: Poor predicatble Bart, always picks rock
Bart: Good ole rock, nothing beats that
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 11 hours
#36 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.23
What was the stat they said the other day? When Mike Matheney is catching, the team has 22 gold gloves on the field, or some ungodly number like that.



Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, So, La, TITO SANTANA!
BigSteve
Pepperoni








Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2848 days
Last activity: 2576 days
#37 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.00
    Originally posted by skorpio17
      Originally posted by Grimis
      GWRBI is an absolutely useless state though. All it means is that somebody drove in the run that was determined at some point to be the one to win the game. You can get a GWRBI for hitting a leadoff homerun in a game your team wins 24-0. That's why it is not recognized as an official state anymore...


    Just because Bill James says it's useless doesn't make it so. It's not useless at all if you know how to use it.

    For example in this week Orlando Cabrera is hitting .250 with 0 HRs and 4 RBIs. If this is all you looked at, you'd think he is having a bad week. However if you take notice of his 2 GWRBIs, you'd change your tune.

    MVPs are usually among the top 5 league leaders in GWRBIs. There is a strong correlation. It is more relevant than a stat like Batting Average, unless you think Ichiro and Mora are better than Sheffield and Ortiz.




I don't see how you can possibly say that GWRBI are more important than Batting Average. The most fundamental thing that you can do in baseball is to get on base, which is ordinarily done by getting a hit. GWRBI is one of those contrived stats that factors in the outcome of the play but is also highly dependent on the game situation. And yes, Mora is having a season comparable to Sheffield especially when you consider the difference of over 50 at bats.
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 3 sec.
AIM:  
#38 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.81
Imagine a team with 5 amazing pitchers, 8 amazing defensive players, and one guy (Larry) who hits .100 but it's always a home run.

The pitchers all throw complete games every night, and never give up a run. Not one all season. The defensive guys really suck at hitting. None of them ever get a hit. Not one all season. Every game continues until Larry finally hits a home run.

Larry ends up with 162 GWRBI.

This is a very stupid extreme scenario, but it sorta makes a point. GWRBI taken without any reference to pitching is a bogus stat. First of all, it discredits pitching, because most of your pitchers won't have many GWRBI. If someone won 30 games in a season, but had no GWRBI, I'd hope they were eligible for the MVP. Secondly, someone always has to get a GWRBI for each game. This overly rewards teams with winning records.

(OK, granted, in this example, Larry ends the season with 162 HR at a minimum, and should be the MVP, but you get where I'm going with this I hope).

I have the same problem with "clutch" GWRBI. In the example above, the hitter always has a 1 / 10 shot of hitting the home run. Why is it clutch if it happens in innings 9-100 but just average if it is in innings 1-8?

GWRBI and I don't get along.

(edited by Guru Zim on 23.8.04 1431)


Willful ignorance of science is not commendable. Refusing to learn the difference between a credible source and a shill is criminally stupid.
Joseph Ryder
Head cheese








Since: 19.3.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 1206 days
Last activity: 738 days
#39 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.55
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by Joseph Ryder
      Fun fact: The Giants and the Cards, as of Saturday's games, have both scored 658 runs. If the Cards are "near awesome" at offense, so are the Giants. Difference is, after Bonds, the Giants have...? Pedro Feliz? Edgardo Alfonzo? JT Snow? Hitting in the snug spot between Pujols and (oh yeah), JIM EDMONDS is going to produce those numbers with an adequate bat. I'd say between the three Cards though, Edmonds arguably has a slight edge simply because he's got no one hitting behind him. Yet magically enough, his OPS is better than Rolen's and is only .001 lower than Pujols'.


    So, you are saying that the Giants HAVE other quality players? I mean, I dont get the argument. Both have the same amount of runs, yet you are putting down the rest of the Giants team, except Bonds. I am confused as to your point.


It's in response to Eddie Famous' remark that the Cards are an offensive juggernaut (thanks to the addition of Scottie Rolen). I think you even mentioned something about the Cards being a historic offensive team. I disagree, citing that any team that's struggling to score more runs than the SF Giants should in no way be considered a juggernaut. Seeing as how the primary objective of a team's offense is to score runs, the Cards are only barely better than the Giants. Are the Giants then also a juggernaut? If so...

...then it ties into my hypothetical (not rhetorical, people) questions at the end. If you take Rolen away from the Cards, and Bonds away from the Giants, which team suffers more relative to its original state? Most people with a pulse would say the Giants. Why? Because after Bonds, it's mediocre city. Then why is the team scoring as many runs as the juggernaut Cards? Look at the offensive leaders for each team, sorted by OPS, greater than 200 ABs, and please note the bold text:



AB R HR RBI BB OB SLG BA OPS
Edmonds 395 82 31 85 80 .421 .630 .304 1.052
Pujols 464 105 38 106 66 .405 .642 .321 1.047
Rolen 432 93 31 110 57 .415 .623 .329 1.038




AB R HR RBI BB OB SLG BA OPS
Bonds 286 100 35 79 174 .612 .822 .371 1.434
Snow 262 46 9 39 45 .427 .527 .321 .953
Tucker 375 68 12 52 57 .370 .453 .275 .823

I know he's black, he's a real meanie, and it's fun to imagine having a different MVP once in awhile ('specially a nice boy like Rolen), but these are special times, and I think we're just going to have to wait until Bonds retires to fulfill that fantasy. Some of us more patiently than others it seems.

(edited by Joseph Ryder on 23.8.04 1659)
skorpio17
Morcilla








Since: 11.7.02
From: New Jersey

Since last post: 2416 days
Last activity: 2416 days
#40 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.81
    Originally posted by Guru Zim
    Imagine a team with 5 amazing pitchers, 8 amazing defensive players, and one guy (Larry) who hits .100 but it's always a home run.

    The pitchers all throw complete games every night, and never give up a run. Not one all season. The defensive guys really suck at hitting. None of them ever get a hit. Not one all season. Every game continues until Larry finally hits a home run.

    Larry ends up with 162 GWRBI.

    This is a very stupid extreme scenario, but it sorta makes a point. GWRBI taken without any reference to pitching is a bogus stat. First of all, it discredits pitching, because most of your pitchers won't have many GWRBI. If someone won 30 games in a season, but had no GWRBI, I'd hope they were eligible for the MVP. Secondly, someone always has to get a GWRBI for each game. This overly rewards teams with winning records.

    (OK, granted, in this example, Larry ends the season with 162 HR at a minimum, and should be the MVP, but you get where I'm going with this I hope).

    I have the same problem with "clutch" GWRBI. In the example above, the hitter always has a 1 / 10 shot of hitting the home run. Why is it clutch if it happens in innings 9-100 but just average if it is in innings 1-8?

    GWRBI and I don't get along.

    (edited by Guru Zim on 23.8.04 1431)


You can't really compare pitching stats with hitting stats either. I'd only give the MVP to a hitter because pitchers already have their own award in the Cy Young. It doesn't seem right to me for a pitcher to get both awards.

That same pitcher with 30 wins could have an ERA of 7.50 and a team that scores 20 runs a game behind him. I'd hope he wouldn't get the MVP. Also in that 24-0 game that he doesn't want the leadoff hitter getting the GWRBI, he has no problem giving a save to the reliver for pitcher 3 innings on the winning side.

There can be games without a GWRBI if the winning runs scores on an error. And for clutch hitting they use the 7th inning or later.

In an example of a good GWRBI situation, check out the 4/30/3 Giants vs. Marlins game. In the fifth inning of a tie game Bonds was up with the bases loaded. Florida intentionally walked him to give up the winning Run. Bonds finished 0-2 with a GWRBI... Or just look what Sheffield did again last night for the Yankees.

To continue with the hypotheticals, if Bonds was walked every single atbat in a season his year end stats would be something like 0 AB, 0 HR, 170 Runs, 10 RBIs. Would it still be possible for him to win an MVP?
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
Thread rated: 4.98
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
Thread ahead: Clubhouse wall 1, Kevin Brown's left hand 0
Next thread: Yankees Get Killed
Previous thread: Countdown to 700 cont.
(940 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Now if they could just dump Jason Schmidt, they could pretend those god-awful signings never happened.
- It's False, Andruw Jones Released (2009)
The W - Baseball - MVP discussion time.... (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.136 seconds.