Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:





Building A Bullpen - Part II

I'll start off with a friendly two-part request. 1) Hot stove chatter for the day has it's own dedicated diary found here. 2) If you still want to discuss the Mitchell Report, let's keep it confined to this thread. Thanks in advance on both accounts.

Now last week we looked at who had constructed the best bullpen over the course of the last two years. I used DIPS, which is a stat that looks like a pitcher's ERA but takes into effect the quality of the defense behind them. We know that once a ball is put into play, a pitcher has no tangible effect over what happens to it. If they have a good defense behind them, more BIP will be converted to outs but that's a credit to the defense not the pitcher. Obviously, we want to find the best pitchers for a bullpen so isolating what is actually a contribution on their part is important. I also adjusted for park effects since places like PETCO can make mediocre relievers look awfully good.

One suggestion was that I look at the issue with a stat like Baseball Prospectus' WXRL. That statistic, which seems unpronounceable, is a measure of expected wins above replacement level added by relievers with an adjustment for the quality of the opposing lineup. In English, if each reliever were to face the same caliber of hitters, how many wins over a baseline would a reliever add. I looked into that statistic and here's why this is the last you'll hear of it. First, it's a counting stat. Reliever A who gets more opportunities than reliever B can have a higher WXRL while being a "worse" pitcher. We could turn it into a rate stat using the number of innings pitched but I'm not sure that's an accurate denominator. I'd prefer something like total batter's faced but I don't really know if that's a good denominator either since that's a proprietary stat. Second, it doesn't appear to be park adjusted. An flyball out recorded in PETCO is not necessarily the same as one recorded at Coors.  The articles that give the technical explanations are in the BP 2005 and Baseball Between the Numbers -- neither of which I own.  I'd be shocked if it wasn't park adjusted since that seems like such an obvious adjustment but BP's glossary doesn't list it. The last and most important issue for me is that it uses leveraging. I'm not a fan of leveraging the value of the ninth inning greater than that of the first inning. It's something that has never made intuitive sense to me and I try to avoid it when I can.

There's another statistic that I looked at called adjusted runs prevented (ARP) which takes care of park effects, doesn't use leveraging and is based on the run expectancy matrix. Unfortunately, it doesn't have any adjustment for defense so it's not something I'm really pleased with either. Some kind of ARP adjusted for defense or a de-leveraged WXRL adjusted for defense would be worthwhile looking at. That's not to say that either of those statistics are particularly bad but I'll take my park adjusted DIPS data over both of them.

Whew, got all that. For those of you with a glazed-over look, I've come to the conclusion that the data I started out with last week is what I want to use going forward. One quick note, I don't make any adjustments for league or division and in a perfect world I would.  I do not, however, know the impact that the AL vs. NL issue has on relievers much less what adjustments would look on a division level.  It's likely that the AL teams in places 4-6 would vault ahead of the Cubs but I'm going to stick with what I've got unless I find some reliever specific translations.

So, as promised, let's take a glance at the top three teams from my list last week: the Dodgers, Twins and Cubs.   I'm going to confine my look at the bullpen to relievers who threw 30 innings.  That's the core of the pen.  Everyone has some circulating marginal talent in the back but that doesn't really speak to why teams succeed.  It's the 30+ inning guys that are taking the brunt. The raw data I'm working with can be downloaded here.

The 2006 Dodgers had 5 relievers throw more than 30 innings: Takashi Saito, Jonathan Broxton, Joe Beimel, Danys Baez, Tim Hamulack. Saito is a Japanese import and the lone free agent in this group.  Hamulack and Beimel are both lefties -- Beimel, if you remember, was a critical part of the Dodgers success that year before he sliced his hand up on some broken glass in a bar just before the post-season.  Broxton is the youngest of the group at 22 and Saito is the only one over 30. Despite being somewhat elderly by baseball standards, Saito threw 78 innings that season with a FIP under 2. The 2007 Dodgers had holdovers of Saito, Brocton and Beimel and additions of Rudy Seanez and Scott Proctor.  Proctor came over in a trade from the Yankees and Seanez proved to be a nice free agent signing.

I'm really partial to how the Twins have built their bullpen the last few years.  They've got some shutdown relievers in that pen.  In 2006 they logged quite a few relief innings and had 7 relievers pitch over 30 innings.  Joe Nathan and Pat Neshek are (or should be) well known names at this point as they're both excellent relievers.  Juan Rincon, Matt Guerrier, Jesse Crain and Willie Eyre rounded out the right hand side of the pen and Dennys Reyes was the lone lefty. In 2007 there wasn't a single lefty that qualified but Nathan, Neshek, Rincon and Guerrier all appeared again.  Only Reyes in 2006 could be considered a free agent and he signed an extension to remain a Twin.

The Cubs have a bit of a different look from the other two clubs.  They got a majority of their innings from a troika of free agents in Ryan Dempster (signed an extension), Bobby Howry and Scott Eyre.  In 2006 flamethrowers David Aardsma and Roberto Novoa qualified along with Michael Wuertz and lefty Will Ohman.  In 2007, the emergence of Carlos Marmol (who qualifies for the 5th best single season FIP between all three teams) saved the Cubs pen with a spectacular year.

Are there any conclusions that we can draw at this point? Well, I don't see anything that I'd be willing to etch in stone but most of the pitchers that are making this list aren't free agents but cost-controlled players who have under 6 years of service time.  Of the 34 seasons, only six are players with a K/9 under 7 including 2 lefty seasons.  Walk rates in this group aren't awe-inspiring with a full third walking over 4 per 9 innings -- maybe that can help allay some of my concerns about Chris Perez and his walk rates.  Lastly, you'll note that only a third are from players over 30 and just 5 that are 35 or older.  Those strike me as sensible qualities to look for in your pitchers but nothing particularly surprising.

Next week, I'll look at the Cardinal pens in depth from the last few years.

0 recs | Comment 43 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

This bullpen research makes me both
happy and sad.  Happy that we've had a pretty solid bullpen the last few years in comparision to the rest of the league and sad that it is unlikely that the starters will give them a 7th inning lead in 2008 for that to matter very much.
I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Dec 14, 2007 2:28 AM EST   0 recs

Makes me mostly happy
Nice work.  It supports what, intuitively, I always thought to be true.  In 08' we are going with a more veteran centered approach, but for years beyond I think the bullpen is an excellent plce to begin with the stated player development movement.  

This is an area where the system looks to be able to support the big club in the short term (Perez & Motte, & maybe McClellan) and there are guys like Maiques that you can look to with some hope from a longer horizon.  Additionally, I've liked the returns when we've debuted starter prospects in a relief role with the big club (Wainright & even Thompson).  I'd like to see us use that as a method of introducing the Boggs of the world to the bigs, and probably others also. Gives them some limited exposure and allows us to make an early appraisal of their potential in a less damaging role.

There appears to be great inflation in FA relief pitching.  I'd like to see us take a different tact than what we're seeing from inside our division with the Reds and Brewers, and follow the lessons learned from the 3 examples listed in this diary.  

by Merry CRasmus on Dec 14, 2007 1:15 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Seanez and Reyes (Dennys)
He was someone I had my eye on last offseason until we picked up Russ Springer. Springer was the better of the two in all ways. Seanez didn't even get a guaranteed offer for last season—was in Dodgers' camp as an NRI on a minor league contract.

Reyes looked like a crappy pitcher until he went to the Twins and started being used as a situational lefty. That he was made to face roughly 249 right-handed batters (128 AB + 24 BB + 1  HBP) in 2005 with the Padres makes one question Bruce Bochy's competence.

Surprisingly, no. I'm free, I'm unfettered.

by liam on Dec 14, 2007 2:44 AM EST   0 recs

Ugh, get back to work, man
That first paragraph was about Rudy Seanez.

Reyes faced roughly 149 RH batters in 2005, to (roughly) 61 lefties.

Surprisingly, no. I'm free, I'm unfettered.

by liam on Dec 14, 2007 2:48 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

A Record?
Does az's main entry qualify as one of the earliest "early morning" posts?  Sleepless readers want to know.
"Requiescat In Pace - 2007 Zombie Cardinals"

by AustinBOB on Dec 14, 2007 2:59 AM EST   0 recs

Not even midnight PDT
Well, of course, it is now. But I'm a bit slow...

By the time I'm able to cognizantly read what he wrote tomorrow, there will be 150 comments and I'll have been at work for 3+ hours.  Sigh...  

Christmas lights are an extremely efficient method for converting Christmas Spirit into heat. -anon

by SleepyCA on Dec 14, 2007 3:08 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

read on Sundays
I get mine in (usually) around 12:30 - 12:45.

by houstoncardinal on Dec 14, 2007 10:04 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

shenanigans
first time i have ever commented.  no offense, but you look at the cardinals with too much of an objective bias.  numbers arent everything, its like counting rebounds in basketball, one player is meant to perform a certain task (rebounding) while the other performs another (breaking out for the potential easy score on a fastbreak).  sure you can praise billy beane for his sabremetric approach but look at all of his failures (losing jermaine dye before an mvp caliber year, many others, while only considering the cardinals mishaps).  thinking only of the statistics only takes out the human element of the game, the thinking part of the potential error.  while i respect your analysis i do not necessarily agree with your observations.  you (in the collective sense) are too critical of mistakes as i would imagine anyone wanting to create a debate would be, and are also too apprehensive about anything someone with a greater understanding of the inner workings of a comprehensive system suggests. while i may not understand or necessarily agree with any of your solely statistically based observations i do think they are entertaining.  thank you

by mizzou on Dec 14, 2007 5:47 AM EST   0 recs

Well Mizzou
My question for you would be if not looking at the numbers, what way do you suggest we as fans evaluate players, potential acquisitions, etc?  I like to think of myself as a pretty faithful Cards fan, but I certainly am unable to view every game, so I can't go purely off what my eyes tell me.  Moreover there are guys (think Juan Pierre) whose numbers and play looks pretty good in the field (good average, lots of steals,) but when it comes to the greater picture (OBP, SLG, CS%) is not a very good player.  Also, how do you propose to evaluate our minor league talent?  Even if we watch every single game, these guys could be September call ups who don't have the opportunity for these situations that prove they perform, as you suggest.  How should we then go about projecting minor leaguers, and how do we know which ones to slot in as major contributers and which ones as bums?

by El Schweenador on Dec 14, 2007 7:59 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

welcome aboard
we're glad to have you here.  BTW, you may become frustrated w/ a lot of the daily threads -- just thought I'd warn you.

by houstoncardinal on Dec 14, 2007 10:07 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

No one expected Dye to do that
A lot of people though he might be done.

by sdrone on Dec 14, 2007 10:13 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I did
I've thought Jermaine Dye was an underappreciated player for a long time.
I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Dec 14, 2007 11:33 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

me too,
I was surprised when the Braves got rid of him.

by ridgesee on Dec 14, 2007 11:47 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I, like mizzou
don't put a whole lot of stock in trying to examine a player's potential or value by gathering all the stats that can be garnered on him. I still lean more to the old BA, RBI, SLG etc. and I like to daily study the box scores of all the Cards minor league teams.  I go to milb.com every morning during season and examine every box score and write up of every minor league affiliate. That way you can keep a daily tab on what each player is doing, like is he streaky, or consistant. Does he hit for extra power, doubles, HR's etc. Is he versatile (moves around, playing different positions etc.) Then the ones that catch my attention I click on and keep up with their compiled stats and study them further. Then at the AAA level, on cardinals day's off and sometimes otherwise I try to catch  the Memphis team when their game is being televised on milb.com. Then I get a look see.  This is how I make judgements on players at major league level. I do have respect for people that are deep into stats though, because they do bring to my attention players (and facts) I have not given close attention too. I love "future redbirds" and I  give him authority over my observations usually because I know he uses my method and also digs into the more advanced stats and gathers additional information on players from other sources I don't have privy to. Me I just don't have the patience at my age and I just rely on what's fun. But I do wonder sometimes if a lot of  people that make comments about players on this blog and present a bunch of advanced stats to show why he he would be of great value to the Cardinals and we should give up so and to get him, even have seen that player perform and have any idea how he approaches the game. If that is the case, the stats presented are just "much ado about nothing."

by ridgesee on Dec 14, 2007 11:12 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Stats versus Watching
Stats are something I have full access too where I can't watch every player.  This forms the basis of my opinion on most players and watching them is the added bonus.  I used to think that certain players were great just based on one game or series I caught on TV.  Imagine only catching the Cubs series in 06 and thinking that Bennett was a HR threat.  Stats give me the foundation for my observations.  Since I know certain pitchers are ground ball machines I like to watch their sinker more then their fastball, if I know the guy hits pretty poor then I look at his swing to see what might be wrong with it.  There are two sides to every thing and that is why we stat geeks need to not completely disregard intangibles and others can't completely hate stats.  Eckstein in particular is full of intangibles, same with Miles.  And some players have negative intangibles (drinker, poor clubhouse guy, etc.) that we just can't see or are hidden from us as fans.  Those are all things a GM has to take into account that we as fans don't have enough information on.

by StLHugo on Dec 14, 2007 11:23 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

You are a wise observer, hugo
that's why I respect for a lot of "stat heads"....oh excuse me, that don't sound good..."stat gentlemen."

by ridgesee on Dec 14, 2007 11:32 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

While I agree
with my fellow Mizzou alum that "numbers aren't everything," objective statistical analysis (such as this series) presents another consideration for building a team.

The question, "Which teams have had the best bullpens in recent years?" can be answered with objective statistical analysis. Today's entry attempts to answer the question, "What do these bullpens have in common?"

Now, if I'm trying to construct a bullpen for a future season, I'd most likely follow the more traditional thinking of building the 'pen from the "back end"... get me a closer I can rely upon. That guy becomes the lead dog; allowing the rest of the 'penners to do their jobs. Today's post suggests that I look for young "power" arms rather than rely on more-expensive veterans.

This is exactly what LaDuncan did late in 2006! After Izzy was forced to shut it down, they took their best remaining bullpen guy (Wainwright) and made him the closer; they also relied on "youngsters" Kinney and Johnson in "high-leverage" situations in the playoffs because they were pitching better than the veterans!

As far as the personal equations go, Jason Isringhausen acted as a mentor to Wainwright and the rest of the 'pen... he was still a leader, even though he couldn't physically pitch!

While I can't quite follow all the statistical analysis in this series, I still find it informative and useful for my fan's speculations... and speculating is what we fans do best!

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on Dec 14, 2007 12:03 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Common bullpen theme...
Looks like we need to get a reliever with the last name "Eyre"

by eglasier on Dec 14, 2007 8:31 AM EST   0 recs

The Cubs version of Eyre is
pretty streaky.  There was a length of time last year when he was practically unused except in mop-up.   He finally worked his way back into the later innings, but often worked an inning earlier than usual due to the emergence of Marmol.

by sdrone on Dec 14, 2007 10:14 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Nothing to do with baseball, but with the internet

Charter Communication blows goats.
I was without internet all day yesterday and didn't get the scoop on the Mitchell Report.

So, in the best Bukowski tradition:

Damn you straight to hell Charter communications, with your call centers in the Phillipines that don't know where Missouri is, with your missed appointments, and your varying degrees of knowledge among your service techs.  May you rot in hell as AT&T lashes you with CAT-5 cable while forced to listen to recorded customer service calls berating you.  And I hope that the federal government never sees the need to bail out your overly debt ridden ass.

Thanks.  Now I feel better.

"Dude, we're running out of stadium" - said on the way to our seats in Section 428.

by bukowski on Dec 14, 2007 11:59 AM EST   0 recs

Excellent Rant
I have similar feelings about DirectTv and may borrow some of your well written, emotionally on track prose the next time I have to deal with them...
When cheese gets its picture taken, what does it say?

by RosevilleRedbird on Dec 14, 2007 12:49 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

They Cant
be as bad as Dish Network

by That's a Winner on Dec 16, 2007 11:21 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Amen
Well said, amigo.

by madridbend on Dec 14, 2007 2:35 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

way to go, bukowski
Sometimes it helps to really get it out, don't it.

by ridgesee on Dec 14, 2007 3:01 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Is a bullpen really that important?
Apologies, as this relates more to last week's post, but the main thing I'm taking away from this analysis is that a strong bullpen is not particularly important.  Playoff teams from the last two years are scattered throughout the top and bottom of the list, and the top 3 bullpens are good, but not great teams.

Isn't a bullpen the last piece of a team to be assembled, and then made up primarily of rotation flunkies, young pups and journeymen?  I guess I'm not surprised that there's not a huge correlation between the best pens, given that bullpens are such a motley crew to begin with.

by bgodar on Dec 14, 2007 12:02 PM EST   0 recs

A good 'pen is vital...
...if you're contending for a playoff spot. If you're an also-ran, not so much. In the playoffs, the 'pen's use is magnified.

Since there are no 100-win teams in the NL Central, everybody's a "contender".

Troy Percival signed with Tampa Bay... good for him, but the Rays still have miles to go to catch the Twin Evil Empires.

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on Dec 14, 2007 12:09 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re: the 'pen
i think the 'pen is a really, really important part of the team - speaking from my fan point of view.  i expend more calories watching our relief corps than the rest of the team combined.  for example, if pujols fails to get on base, no matter how good he's going, that's still the most likely outcome.  so, if he grounds out with a man on, oh well, that's understandable.  but if a reliever gives up a critical base hit or walk ... well, that's NOT what i expected, or should expect, and therefore, it's all the more aggravating and gut-wrenching.

so, what i'm trying to say is that this series of posts by az is really supplementing that sort of gut reaction, grounding it into some concrete analysis, and that's a good thing.

by brentonjay on Dec 14, 2007 1:08 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

HOF
Since I saw people talking about the HOF yesterday and how it relates to current and recent players I decided to look at the HOF Monitor on Baseball Reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/hof_monitor.shtml)
This is a completely stat based analysis that looks at trends.  For every season you accomplish some feat you get points, for milestones you get points, MVP, GG, etc. also get points.  In the end if you have over 100 points you have a good shot and they say those over 130 are an almost certainty.

Active/not eligble Batters over 160:
Bonds 352
ARod 316
Griffey 225
Jeter 221
Pudge 217
Piazza 205
Sosa 201
Thomas 194
Alomar 193
Manny Ramirez 187
Rickey Henderson 186
Palmeiro 178
Vlad 174
Biggio 172
Ichiro 170
Pujols 166
Helton 162

Pujols has a way to go to catch the top, but isn't it funny that he already has a HOF caliber career after just 7 seasons?

Not in HOF over 140pts:
Pete Rose 313
Big Mac 169
Jim Rice 146

Puts a whole new light on Mac not being in when you look at some that have lower rankings.

I didn't look at pitchers too much but some that might interest you Percy is at 85, Izzy 56, Carp 37(tied with Peavy).

Top position player is Stan Musial with 454 and top Pitcher is Walter Johnson with 365 (top 5 are Cobb, Aaron, Ruth, Mays and Clemens, Young, Johnson, Mathewson).

by StLHugo on Dec 14, 2007 2:49 PM EST   0 recs

Jeff Gordon...
... is a freaking moron. I know that a lot of people have mention this in the past but MAN. His article today actually argues that we should have KEPT Miles and hailed him as "...a tenacious hitter, solid second baseman and decent back-up shortstop" WHAT?

Since when are singles hitters w a hollow BA tenacious? Of his 120 hits last year 101 of them were singles and he drew only 25 walks in over 400 ABs. How in the world is this tenacious? Not to mention that fact that Miles in a defensive liability and (correct me if im wrong) had three errors in a game TWICE this past year. I think everyone with half a baseball brain can see that letting Miles go and not paying him 1+ mil a year to sit on the bench was a good move. Clearly Gordo doesn't have half a brain.

by BigMac545 on Dec 14, 2007 3:20 PM EST   0 recs

wow...
thought I was on a NASCAR board there for a minute.  Not used to seeing him called anything but Gordo.
"Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." --Churchill

by lordsummer on Dec 14, 2007 3:40 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

The Bukowski Report
pg. 209:
"Jeff Gordon smokes dope...how else can one explain comments he made regarding Aaron Miles"
"Dude, we're running out of stadium" - said on the way to our seats in Section 428.

by bukowski on Dec 14, 2007 4:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Expect a defamation lawsuit...
...filed by the Dopesmokers Union.  The Bukowski Report has done a disservice to dopesmokers everywhere.  

The anti-Rolen article he wrote last week was shameless.  His work is so bad it aspires to be crap.  

youneverknow

by meat on Dec 14, 2007 5:10 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Another winning quote from that article
"We all know that Miles has little power and not much speed. He isn't a great on-base guy, either. The stats-crunching crowd considers him deficient, but Miles CAN hit."

Little Power - .348 SLG, .058 ISO
Not Much Speed - 2 SB, 1 CS
"isn't a great on-base guy" - .323 OBP
"CAN hit"  - uh...what?

What planet is Gordon on?  Guess his "corner of cyberspace" is in another galaxy.

Or has Gordo fallen for the wily charms of another hustling, white ballplayer?

by lightbulb on Dec 14, 2007 5:03 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Gordon is a hockey guy, mostly...
Indeed, that's what his PD blog is called.

That said, Miles does hit for average. Which is something. Not much of something. But when you compare his stats (career OPS+ of 73) to the new starting SS, Izturis (career OPS+ of 67), he starts looking good, almost.

by DiscoJer on Dec 14, 2007 6:04 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

What makes you think...
Izturis is going to be the starting shortstop?

Goaler's WAP: (Wild-A** Prediction) Brendan Ryan starts the year platooning with Izturis, but takes the position on an "everyday" basis by the All-Star Break.

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on Dec 14, 2007 6:31 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Aaron Miles
is a rich man's Stubby Clapp. And that's still not enough to buy a box of donuts.

by The Butcher on Dec 14, 2007 6:00 PM EST   0 recs

I'm sorry
if your Stubby has the Clapp.
"Dude, we're running out of stadium" - said on the way to our seats in Section 428.

by bukowski on Dec 14, 2007 9:25 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

That's what
you use the doughnuts for. you toss 'em down and try to make a ringer on your stubby...course that don't cure your clapp, but it helps you indure.

by ridgesee on Dec 14, 2007 10:58 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

D-Backs
If Randy Johnson comes back, the snakes are looking like an extremely difficult matchup in a short series (not that I expect the Birds to be around come playoff time). I can never read the name "Dan Haren" w/o a tinge of regret fluttering across my pea brain...

by Pokey Joe on Dec 14, 2007 7:11 PM EST   0 recs

Randy Johnson?
And if Johnson DOESN'T return to Arizona, the Diamondbacks are even MORE dangerous!  ;-)
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

by Mr Clean on Dec 14, 2007 7:27 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

and I thought
I was the only one that suffered from this affliction.

by ridgesee on Dec 14, 2007 11:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

DBacks...
Man...Webb and Haren in the same rotation? That's filthy.
Miller sucks.

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Dec 14, 2007 9:09 PM EST   0 recs

Agreed, but
who will close for them since they just traded Valverde?

by LuBrock20 on Dec 15, 2007 2:21 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Ad-medium-smq

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Pcb_sunset_web_small
Yadi's Defensive Prowess
Dad_south_park_small
Overuse + Age = 2008 Izzy
Ankielx_small
Duncan, By the Numbers
Small
A youth movement is great, but money is power.
Picture_2_small
The Truth Behind the Jim Edmonds Signing
Cimg0489_small
Possible trade???
Liam_st_2008_small
VEB Day at the Ballpark: Saturday
Rolen_small
welcome back... to a blast from the past
Small
Why not Jaime [hi-me] Garcia?
Small
acceptable or just weird

Post New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Ad-banner-faketeams

Managers

Birdos_avatar_small lboros

Editors

Az_small azruavatar

Lewishine_newsiespic-close_small the red baron

Adam1_small houstoncardinal

ad

Site Meter