Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:55 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 185 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 11:26 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2499
Location: Tejas
sisyphus wrote:
StarlingArcher wrote:
No. 9 wrote:
Also, why exactly is making an offer contingent upon another piece falling into place explicitly illegal? If there isn't any specific rule forbidding it in MLB's rules/by-laws, then I'd venture to opine that it is perfectly legal. In fact, it happens quite frequently in other transactions.


I have no idea why it is specifically, only that pretty much everything and everyone I've listened to on various podcasts and Houston radio shows has said it is. So I'm taking those guys at their word when they say it's not allowed and the Astros have no leg to stand on there.

Edit: Per ESPN's write-up it IS written in the rules that it's illegal. So there's some clarity I guess.

I believe what I hear from ESPN when they provide a link to the relevant paragraph in the CBA, and not before.


That's fair, No. 9's stance as well. I like Law, I think he and Callis are both excellent when it comes to not throwing stuff out unless it's corroborated (and Law has said he tries to emulate Callis' way of providing info) so I tend to believe them. He (understandably) rubs some people wrong, but I like that he gives info without a narrative, avoids sensationalism, and doesn't tolerate trolling so it's different strokes I suppose.

There are plenty of ESPN guys I don't really take seriously at all, for sure. You look at Jim Bowden with MLB or Chris Broussard with NBA and it's all really hit or miss. Law's just one of the guys I trust with info, I guess, so when it's been said across multiple platforms I kind of just accept it because I don't have half the resources these guys do to figure this stuff out.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:49 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:27 am
Posts: 1444
Location: Eastern Shore
For the statistically minded (ha!)...

What does the jersey style and color say about a team's chance of winning?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2014/07/23/can-jersey-style-and-color-predict-how-well-a-baseball-team-will-play/

Worst uniform to date: the Pirate's road uniform. Maybe the Buccos should trade block script for what the article calls baseball cursive...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:58 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 96
Interesting article today about "competitive balance draft picks." Apparently the cards are eligible for this process and won a pick. The bucs meanwhile didn't win anything. I wasn't aware of this process until today. Have the pirates gotten any compensation from this before? I agree with Theo epstein that the cards do not need this extra draft pick at all. It's hard to believe that they are in the bottom of the league in revenue. My bigger issue with the cards and competitive balance is their six games against the Royals every year. It's set up so that no one in baseball can complain, because they would basically be trashing the Royals by saying anything, yet baseball pundits seem to ignore this issue as well. The fact is the Cardinals have an easier schedule than every one else in the division every year, and that is the definition of competitive imbalance. I hope the new commissioner does away with these silly yearly rivalries Selig set up. Baseball's revenue stream is firmly established and no more gimmicks are needed to bolster yearly ticket sales.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 2245
Location: Naples, FL
psubar12 wrote:
Interesting article today about "competitive balance draft picks." Apparently the cards are eligible for this process and won a pick. The bucs meanwhile didn't win anything. I wasn't aware of this process until today. Have the pirates gotten any compensation from this before? I agree with Theo epstein that the cards do not need this extra draft pick at all. It's hard to believe that they are in the bottom of the league in revenue. My bigger issue with the cards and competitive balance is their six games against the Royals every year. It's set up so that no one in baseball can complain, because they would basically be trashing the Royals by saying anything, yet baseball pundits seem to ignore this issue as well. The fact is the Cardinals have an easier schedule than every one else in the division every year, and that is the definition of competitive imbalance. I hope the new commissioner does away with these silly yearly rivalries Selig set up. Baseball's revenue stream is firmly established and no more gimmicks are needed to bolster yearly ticket sales.



That still happens? And yes, if so, it's still BS. Imagine the outcry if say the Patriots got to play the Browns every year while NYJ draws the Steelers.

_________________
AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:11 pm
Posts: 5815
Location: 120 miles west of Iowa City
psubar12 wrote:
Interesting article today about "competitive balance draft picks." Apparently the cards are eligible for this process and won a pick. The bucs meanwhile didn't win anything. I wasn't aware of this process until today. Have the pirates gotten any compensation from this before? I agree with Theo epstein that the cards do not need this extra draft pick at all. It's hard to believe that they are in the bottom of the league in revenue. My bigger issue with the cards and competitive balance is their six games against the Royals every year. It's set up so that no one in baseball can complain, because they would basically be trashing the Royals by saying anything, yet baseball pundits seem to ignore this issue as well. The fact is the Cardinals have an easier schedule than every one else in the division every year, and that is the definition of competitive imbalance. I hope the new commissioner does away with these silly yearly rivalries Selig set up. Baseball's revenue stream is firmly established and no more gimmicks are needed to bolster yearly ticket sales.


The extra draft pick is based not only on revenue but market size. St. Louis happens to fall within the bottom 10 in market size. (I don't know how that is measured).

I'm pretty sure that the Pirates have benefitted from this recently. I can't recall the specifics but they either traded it to get someone last year (as part of a package) or to get the 2nd "prime" pick in last year's draft. Guys like Shark or SA follow it much more closely and would likely have the answer at their fingertips.

_________________
Reflexively, obsessively and tastelessly submitted,
No. 9
Obsessive proponent of situational bunting and 2 strike hitting approaches, reflexively pro-catchers calling good games and tasteless proponent of the value of a RBI.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:25 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 96
SUPERCHARGED APE wrote:
psubar12 wrote:
Interesting article today about "competitive balance draft picks." Apparently the cards are eligible for this process and won a pick. The bucs meanwhile didn't win anything. I wasn't aware of this process until today. Have the pirates gotten any compensation from this before? I agree with Theo epstein that the cards do not need this extra draft pick at all. It's hard to believe that they are in the bottom of the league in revenue. My bigger issue with the cards and competitive balance is their six games against the Royals every year. It's set up so that no one in baseball can complain, because they would basically be trashing the Royals by saying anything, yet baseball pundits seem to ignore this issue as well. The fact is the Cardinals have an easier schedule than every one else in the division every year, and that is the definition of competitive imbalance. I hope the new commissioner does away with these silly yearly rivalries Selig set up. Baseball's revenue stream is firmly established and no more gimmicks are needed to bolster yearly ticket sales.



That still happens? And yes, if so, it's still BS. Imagine the outcry if say the Patriots got to play the Browns every year while NYJ draws the Steelers.


Yes, they still do this, although the last two years they have only played four games against each other. I decided to do some more research on this topic to see if this discrepancy in fair scheduling has made a difference. So here is what I found: the series started in 1997, and since that time, the Cardinals are 46-34 against the royals, a pretty decent number of games good for a .575 winning percentage. The Cardinals overall record during that time is 1,559-1,294, a winning percentage of .546. Surprise, surprise the Cardinals are a better team when they play the royals. Ok, but has it really made a difference in a specific year. Well, most of the time, no, but there was one year when it definitely made an impact. This year (which you may guess by the time I'm done) the Cardinals were 90-72, and beat out the Braves for the final wild card spot by one game. The Cardinals played three teams from the AL east plus the Royals six times. The braves, meanwhile played three teams in the AL west plus the blue jays and o's. Now the cards opponents in the east were the jays, O's and rays. Both teams played the jays, a .500 team, the cards were 0-3, the Braves swept them. The o's stunk, the cards swept them the Braves won the series 2-1. The rays were very good that year, the AL wild card winner and the cards won that series 2-1. So the teams the cards avoiding by playing their "bitter rivals" the Royals were Boston and new york. Now new york's record was 97-65, boston's 90-72. The Royals were terrible, a 71-91 team and the cards were 4-2 against them. The braves, meanwhile (not having the "priviledge" of a regional rival) ended up playing two very good teams in the west, the angels and rangers, splitting with them 3-3. They beat on the very bad m's 3-0. So basically, the cards played one good team, a .500 team and the equivalent of three really bad teams that year, while the Braves played two very good teams, a .500 team and two bad ones. The Cardinals got 3 extra games against a bad team that year while the Braves got 3 against a good one. the cards went 2-1 and the Braves 1-2 . That year? 2011.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:11 pm
Posts: 5815
Location: 120 miles west of Iowa City
psubar12 wrote:
Yes, they still do this, although the last two years they have only played four games against each other. I decided to do some more research on this topic to see if this discrepancy in fair scheduling has made a difference. So here is what I found: the series started in 1997, and since that time, the Cardinals are 46-34 against the royals, a pretty decent number of games good for a .575 winning percentage. The Cardinals overall record during that time is 1,559-1,294, a winning percentage of .546. Surprise, surprise the Cardinals are a better team when they play the royals. Ok, but has it really made a difference in a specific year. Well, most of the time, no, but there was one year when it definitely made an impact. This year (which you may guess by the time I'm done) the Cardinals were 90-72, and beat out the Braves for the final wild card spot by one game. The Cardinals played three teams from the AL east plus the Royals six times. The braves, meanwhile played three teams in the AL west plus the blue jays and o's. Now the cards opponents in the east were the jays, O's and rays. Both teams played the jays, a .500 team, the cards were 0-3, the Braves swept them. The o's stunk, the cards swept them the Braves won the series 2-1. The rays were very good that year, the AL wild card winner and the cards won that series 2-1. So the teams the cards avoiding by playing their "bitter rivals" the Royals were Boston and new york. Now new york's record was 97-65, boston's 90-72. The Royals were terrible, a 71-91 team and the cards were 4-2 against them. The braves, meanwhile (not having the "priviledge" of a regional rival) ended up playing two very good teams in the west, the angels and rangers, splitting with them 3-3. They beat on the very bad m's 3-0. So basically, the cards played one good team, a .500 team and the equivalent of three really bad teams that year, while the Braves played two very good teams, a .500 team and two bad ones. The Cardinals got 3 extra games against a bad team that year while the Braves got 3 against a good one. the cards went 2-1 and the Braves 1-2 . That year? 2011.


Atlanta also went 1-5 against the Cardinals in 2011.

Cardinals also went 29-17 against the Pirates, Cubs and Astros who were really bad teams that year. Braves were 13-6 against those teams. Cardinals had 27 more games against the "scourge" of the NL Central that year than did the Braves.

_________________
Reflexively, obsessively and tastelessly submitted,
No. 9
Obsessive proponent of situational bunting and 2 strike hitting approaches, reflexively pro-catchers calling good games and tasteless proponent of the value of a RBI.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:59 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5632
Didn't the Bucs end up trading their 'competitive balance pick' to the Marlins for Gaby?

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 11:47 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 1:10 am
Posts: 96
No. 9 wrote:
psubar12 wrote:
Yes, they still do this, although the last two years they have only played four games against each other. I decided to do some more research on this topic to see if this discrepancy in fair scheduling has made a difference. So here is what I found: the series started in 1997, and since that time, the Cardinals are 46-34 against the royals, a pretty decent number of games good for a .575 winning percentage. The Cardinals overall record during that time is 1,559-1,294, a winning percentage of .546. Surprise, surprise the Cardinals are a better team when they play the royals. Ok, but has it really made a difference in a specific year. Well, most of the time, no, but there was one year when it definitely made an impact. This year (which you may guess by the time I'm done) the Cardinals were 90-72, and beat out the Braves for the final wild card spot by one game. The Cardinals played three teams from the AL east plus the Royals six times. The braves, meanwhile played three teams in the AL west plus the blue jays and o's. Now the cards opponents in the east were the jays, O's and rays. Both teams played the jays, a .500 team, the cards were 0-3, the Braves swept them. The o's stunk, the cards swept them the Braves won the series 2-1. The rays were very good that year, the AL wild card winner and the cards won that series 2-1. So the teams the cards avoiding by playing their "bitter rivals" the Royals were Boston and new york. Now new york's record was 97-65, boston's 90-72. The Royals were terrible, a 71-91 team and the cards were 4-2 against them. The braves, meanwhile (not having the "priviledge" of a regional rival) ended up playing two very good teams in the west, the angels and rangers, splitting with them 3-3. They beat on the very bad m's 3-0. So basically, the cards played one good team, a .500 team and the equivalent of three really bad teams that year, while the Braves played two very good teams, a .500 team and two bad ones. The Cardinals got 3 extra games against a bad team that year while the Braves got 3 against a good one. the cards went 2-1 and the Braves 1-2 . That year? 2011.


Atlanta also went 1-5 against the Cardinals in 2011.

Cardinals also went 29-17 against the Pirates, Cubs and Astros who were really bad teams that year. Braves were 13-6 against those teams. Cardinals had 27 more games against the "scourge" of the NL Central that year than did the Braves.



You are correct to point out that both teams played disproportionate intra league schedules with the Cardinals benefiting from three bad teams within their division that year. That being said, the good and bad teams from year to year within a division seem to fluctuate in a more random pattern than the consistent failures of the royals. For example, this year our division happens to have four very good teams and one poor one, whereas last year the division had three good teams and two poor ones, that is pretty typical from year to year within a division. But when you give a team a unique bad team to play every year whereas everyone else is subjected to the scheduling randomness that is not competitive balance. I would have felt Cleveland was getting an unfair advantage had they been guaranteed 6 games against us from 97 to 2012. To me, it's just wrong to give any team a unique schedule from everyone else in that division. The example of 2011 just illustrates how big one game can be (we all learned that last year) let alone six whole games. Most world series are decided in six games or fewer. There should be no controversy as to why a team does better than another, as your example of the Braves 1-5 record against the cards points out. That should be the definitive answer from that year, yet there's this other, totally controversial thing that can be pointed out from that year, and that should never happen.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 1:03 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2499
Location: Tejas
NSMaster56 wrote:
Didn't the Bucs end up trading their 'competitive balance pick' to the Marlins for Gaby?



2 years ago, yes. Then this year they used it on Supak. And also acquired the Marlins' pick in the Bryan Morris trade.

I'm just happy that a poor, deprived team like the Cardinals got a pick ahead of us. It's not like we have what's regarded as the worst TV deal and 2nd worst ticket market in all of the majors.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:01 pm
Posts: 7275
.183 avg, .294 on base %, .252 slug %, .546 OPS...
I wonder how Washington feels about that 2 year $10 million deal with Nate McLouth right now?

_________________
I say keep the $50 and ban him anyway...

For those jumping ship, we'll keep the bandwagon warm for you...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:23 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:27 am
Posts: 1444
Location: Eastern Shore
Rina Takeda, a martial arts movie star of dubious quality films in Japan gets to throw out the first pitch:

http://thesportsdaily.net/watch-video-japanese-actress-smashes-stone-blocks-with-her-head-before-throwing-out-first-pitch/


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:34 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:07 pm
Posts: 2574
Somebody tell me why this guy is a bad idea...

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.js ... pid=519421

I know, the walk rate doesn't bode real well, but this guy is on an absolute tear. He is also totally blocked by the army of first basemen the Pale Hose have. He looks like he has just been a slow, steady developer who will be 26 in 6 weeks. Would it be totally stupid to drop this kid into a pennant race in the middle of the lineup?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 3138
doug frobel wrote:
Somebody tell me why this guy is a bad idea...

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.js ... pid=519421


He's basically Andrew Lambo. Same age and position outlook, both playing in the IL. Lambo has actually been a better hitter this year, granted in a smaller sample size (though he was also a better hitter in AAA last year than Wilkins currently is). K rates are both on the high side and both are mashing AAA pitching after repeating it at an advanced age. Wilkins looks to be having the same kind of eye-opening power surge Lambo had last year. His OBP however is a very modest .324 (and was .312 in AAA last year, w/ an average 103 wRC+).

I get the appeal with him being blocked, but I wouldn't give up much to add another Lambo to the mix.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Pittsburgh
doug frobel wrote:
Somebody tell me why this guy is a bad idea...

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.js ... pid=519421

I know, the walk rate doesn't bode real well, but this guy is on an absolute tear. He is also totally blocked by the army of first basemen the Pale Hose have. He looks like he has just been a slow, steady developer who will be 26 in 6 weeks. Would it be totally stupid to drop this kid into a pennant race in the middle of the lineup?

Looks like a borderline prospect who probably won't ever be good enough to play every day to me.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Sat Aug 09, 2014 1:18 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm
Posts: 2499
Location: Tejas
Diamondbacks just stole home on Fort. Ouch.

_________________
Moneyball Saves.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 4:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:34 pm
Posts: 920
Location: Rochester, New York
Tulo is having season ending hip surgery, which is good news for the reigning MVP's chances of repeating if he can come back without missing too much time.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 8:28 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5632
JollyRoger wrote:
Tulo is having season ending hip surgery, which is good news for the reigning MVP's chances of repeating if he can come back without missing too much time.


Yep.

Sucks for Tulo, but he's injured every year and the Rox are out of it anyways.

Stanton will get some votes for being so good, as will Goldy, but the Brew Crew's big bats have cooled off of late. They were probably going to cannibalize votes anyways.

Cutch/Kershaw/Wainwright seem like the best MVP candidates right now.

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Mon Aug 18, 2014 3:30 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:27 am
Posts: 1444
Location: Eastern Shore
NSMaster56 wrote:
Yep.

Sucks for Tulo, but he's injured every year and the Rox are out of it anyways.

Stanton will get some votes for being so good, as will Goldy, but the Brew Crew's big bats have cooled off of late. They were probably going to cannibalize votes anyways.

Cutch/Kershaw/Wainwright seem like the best MVP candidates right now.

I think the MVP is Kershaw's to lose, unfortunately, because of deep seated bias against pitchers getting the MVP.

Interesting take on both Kershaw's and King Felix' chances of winning:
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mvp-cy-young-clayton-kershaw-felix-hernandez/

I have always been pro-pitchers winning the MVP, but this typical tidbit gives me even greater reason for pitchers:

Quote:
Aside from the existence of the Cy Young Award, one of the biggest arguments against pitchers winning MVP is the idea that a staff ace plays only once every five days, whereas the best position players are on the field daily. This seems like a reasonable point of view, until you consider how many batters a top pitcher faces over the course of a season. Adam Wainwright led the majors last season with 956 batters faced. Meanwhile, the leader in plate appearances was Joey Votto, with 726.


Pitchers matter more. They ought to win the MVP when they're the best player.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The 2014 Other Teams/Players Thread
PostPosted: Mon Aug 18, 2014 5:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Pittsburgh
val wrote:
NSMaster56 wrote:
Yep.

Sucks for Tulo, but he's injured every year and the Rox are out of it anyways.

Stanton will get some votes for being so good, as will Goldy, but the Brew Crew's big bats have cooled off of late. They were probably going to cannibalize votes anyways.

Cutch/Kershaw/Wainwright seem like the best MVP candidates right now.

I think the MVP is Kershaw's to lose, unfortunately, because of deep seated bias against pitchers getting the MVP.

Interesting take on both Kershaw's and King Felix' chances of winning:
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mvp-cy-young-clayton-kershaw-felix-hernandez/

I have always been pro-pitchers winning the MVP, but this typical tidbit gives me even greater reason for pitchers:

Quote:
Aside from the existence of the Cy Young Award, one of the biggest arguments against pitchers winning MVP is the idea that a staff ace plays only once every five days, whereas the best position players are on the field daily. This seems like a reasonable point of view, until you consider how many batters a top pitcher faces over the course of a season. Adam Wainwright led the majors last season with 956 batters faced. Meanwhile, the leader in plate appearances was Joey Votto, with 726.


Pitchers matter more. They ought to win the MVP when they're the best player.

Pitchers have their own trophy. Take it away, or give one to hitters, and I'm all for pitchers winning the MVP. But when you come right down to it, it's very difficult to provide as much value in 30 odd games as a hitter does in 155.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 185 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits