RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

Kerry Wood

Talk about the Cleveland Indians, Major League Baseball, and other sports.

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:36 pm

jellis wrote:For all of Dennis comments there seems to be 4 teams in the CL market, Texas, Cleveland, Mil, COL. I think its pretty obvious the Indians have the ebst chance of winning anything in that group. The Indians made a mvoe when they did, because lets face it after CC signs Mil was going to join the market and targeting wood asn all star closer from there rival would be a very nice target.

The trade options seemed to fall out as Putz and Valverde were both pulled from the market more or less, unless you wanted to over pay. Fuentes has been good btu got to be scared by any player who has failed as a CL and wants a lot of money, sure his demands would have come down from 12 mil a year but I bet he still would want more than 10 mil a year.

Yes Wood is a risk, but he could be the best closer from this FA period. I mean better than Krod, who to me has some big red flags. Yes Wood has been a closer for one year, but everyone has to start somewhere and its hard to argue with what he did in that one year


Yeah, sounds like Putz may still be on the market....but not sure he's any better an option than Wood. He was hurt and ineffective last year. No gurnatee he goes back to his 2006-2007 form.

Wood was the best option out there with Hoffman......not gonna fault the Tribe for the solid move.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby dnosco » Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:23 pm

jellis wrote:For all of Dennis comments there seems to be 4 teams in the CL market, Texas, Cleveland, Mil, COL. I think its pretty obvious the Indians have the ebst chance of winning anything in that group. The Indians made a mvoe when they did, because lets face it after CC signs Mil was going to join the market and targeting wood asn all star closer from there rival would be a very nice target.

The trade options seemed to fall out as Putz and Valverde were both pulled from the market more or less, unless you wanted to over pay. Fuentes has been good btu got to be scared by any player who has failed as a CL and wants a lot of money, sure his demands would have come down from 12 mil a year but I bet he still would want more than 10 mil a year.

Yes Wood is a risk, but he could be the best closer from this FA period. I mean better than Krod, who to me has some big red flags. Yes Wood has been a closer for one year, but everyone has to start somewhere and its hard to argue with what he did in that one year



I haven't done an exhaustive search but I am pretty sure the Cardinals are looking for a closer. Or did they sign one?
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:10 pm

Wood certainly comes with some risk. But to me, the two year deal helps negate that. Had we signed him to a 3-4 year gauranteed deal, I would not be nearly as elated as I am right now.

K-Rod was really the only sure thing, and after that everyone has a question mark or two. Wood may have only been a closer for one year, but he was downright dominating for most of the year last year in the role for a team that made the playoffs and many considered favorites to win the WS. He showed he can handle the closer duties in that kind of environment, so to me one year on the job or four doesn't matter. He has more than proved himself, and I think this is the perfect role for him. He was also healthy all year with the only hiccup being a blister in August which sidelined him a little bit.

This is a logical signing in every sense of the word. It makes sense in so many ways for both the team and player, and Wood has no ties to the Cubs nor anywhere else. As mentioned, he does not live in Texas. He lives in Scottsdale, AZ which is about 30-40 mins from Goodyear....so put down the first big score for the new training complex.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby jellis » Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:34 pm

dnosco wrote:
jellis wrote:For all of Dennis comments there seems to be 4 teams in the CL market, Texas, Cleveland, Mil, COL. I think its pretty obvious the Indians have the ebst chance of winning anything in that group. The Indians made a mvoe when they did, because lets face it after CC signs Mil was going to join the market and targeting wood asn all star closer from there rival would be a very nice target.

The trade options seemed to fall out as Putz and Valverde were both pulled from the market more or less, unless you wanted to over pay. Fuentes has been good btu got to be scared by any player who has failed as a CL and wants a lot of money, sure his demands would have come down from 12 mil a year but I bet he still would want more than 10 mil a year.

Yes Wood is a risk, but he could be the best closer from this FA period. I mean better than Krod, who to me has some big red flags. Yes Wood has been a closer for one year, but everyone has to start somewhere and its hard to argue with what he did in that one year



I haven't done an exhaustive search but I am pretty sure the Cardinals are looking for a closer. Or did they sign one?


They seem to be looking more internally(STL) but I did forget Det
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby jellis » Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:37 pm

Consigliere wrote:Wood certainly comes with some risk. But to me, the two year deal helps negate that. Had we signed him to a 3-4 year gauranteed deal, I would not be nearly as elated as I am right now.

K-Rod was really the only sure thing, and after that everyone has a question mark or two. Wood may have only been a closer for one year, but he was downright dominating for most of the year last year in the role for a team that made the playoffs and many considered favorites to win the WS. He showed he can handle the closer duties in that kind of environment, so to me one year on the job or four doesn't matter. He has more than proved himself, and I think this is the perfect role for him. He was also healthy all year with the only hiccup being a blister in August which sidelined him a little bit.

This is a logical signing in every sense of the word. It makes sense in so many ways for both the team and player, and Wood has no ties to the Cubs nor anywhere else. As mentioned, he does not live in Texas. He lives in Scottsdale, AZ which is about 30-40 mins from Goodyear....so put down the first big score for the new training complex.



excellent points, and I think the ST complex did have a huge impact according to a few reports and 2 years seems perfect by then one of the young guys should have emerged
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby JP_Frost » Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:03 pm

Per CastroTurf:

Kerry Wood is en route to Cleveland, with a planned arrival on Wednesday night and a planned physical on Thursday.

Should Wood pass the physical, it is expected that he will sign a two-year contract with the Indians worth just under $20 million. It is believed the contract will include an option for a third year, though it was not clear whether that option would be a club option, player option or vesting option.

The Indians are cautiously optimistic that the deal will get done, but they also know these things can fall apart in a hurry. Passing their physical is no easy task, and it's no secret Wood has had more than his share of injury woes over the years.

Knowing that a deal is never done until it's done, the Indians continue to show an interest in Mariners closer J.J. Putz, who is available on the trade front.


sounds very good to me.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby GhostofTedCox » Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:03 pm

I hope this becomes a done deal fast. Nobody knows about health issues, but even if he holds the closer job for one season, we may have some in-house replacements in Lewis and Miller. Anyway, who was the last Indians closer that could really bring the heat? (and don't say Jose Mesa). :s_yes

By the way, did anybody notice the O's traded their catcher to open up playing time for Matt Weiters? He doesn't have much experience, and word is the O's might be looking for a vet C to share the position. Can you smell a Shoppach for Brian Roberts deal? (Shop could DH when Weiters catches). Keep an eye on this if the O's don't sign Texiera.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby carnegie44115 » Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:18 pm

GhostofTedCox wrote:I hope this becomes a done deal fast. Nobody knows about health issues, but even if he holds the closer job for one season, we may have some in-house replacements in Lewis and Miller. Anyway, who was the last Indians closer that could really bring the heat? (and don't say Jose Mesa). :s_yes

By the way, did anybody notice the O's traded their catcher to open up playing time for Matt Weiters? He doesn't have much experience, and word is the O's might be looking for a vet C to share the position. Can you smell a Shoppach for Brian Roberts deal? (Shop could DH when Weiters catches). Keep an eye on this if the O's don't sign Texiera.



Mike Jackson could throw it, and we did have Rocker for a bit even though he sucked horribily, I remember when that deal went down and I thought the Indians were just stupid.

Well they want to get a Vet C that can easily slip into a backup role once Wieters is ready to come up from AAA, that is more like a Gregg Zaun, who was playing for the Os when he was in the early part of his career. Huff is going to be their DH next year as he has some injury liabilities kinda like Pronk.
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Duane Kuiper » Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:39 pm

Wood is a very good pitcher when healthy. But I have to believe that the Indians would have been a better team if they signed 2-3 top setup men for the same money rather than a closer. They have plenty of internal choices to fill the closer roll.

I prefer vets for the setup job. Coming in with ROB and the game on the line is better handled by vets. Lewis could have handled coming in with nobody on base.
Duane Kuiper
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:51 am

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby GhostofTedCox » Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:28 am

It's official. Wood passed his physical. Two years with a club option for a third.

I'm down with this. As I mentioned before. even if he only lasts one season, we should have capable in-house replacements by then. The pen looks to be a strong point of the team this year. That could lead to them looking for an aging veteran SP that would be happy with the "5 and fly". (I would still try to entice the Big Unit to consider us)
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby carnegie44115 » Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:31 pm

GhostofTedCox wrote:It's official. Wood passed his physical. Two years with a club option for a third.

I'm down with this. As I mentioned before. even if he only lasts one season, we should have capable in-house replacements by then. The pen looks to be a strong point of the team this year. That could lead to them looking for an aging veteran SP that would be happy with the "5 and fly". (I would still try to entice the Big Unit to consider us)



I believe the story on Indians.com stated the third option year was of the vested kind, but did not go into particulars.
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby JP_Frost » Sat Dec 13, 2008 2:40 pm

that option kicks in if Wood is able to finish 55 games in either of his first 2 years
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby dnosco » Sun Dec 14, 2008 12:39 pm

The money for Wood is too much. The option for the 3rd year should have been structured so he had to finish 55 games in the SECOND year for it to kick in. Right now if he burns out his arm at the end of the first year we owe him $21.5 million while he is rehabbing...again.

The joke of this whole thing is that a guy who has closed for exactly one year and who has a history of injuries and, as I understand it, wore down at the end of 2008 due to his increased workload, is being hailed as the second best closer on the market by some.

Hey, it's Ok to overpay for talent. Overpay in the draft. Overpay in international free agency. Overpay to keep your homegrown talent in town. Don't just overpay in one instance that doesn't make a lot of sense.

BTW, in reading these so-called experts they seem to treat off-season moves like a cheap fantasy league, based on how it improves a team, not if the move is fiscally responsible.

So, we are much better off than we were without Wood. However, the amount stinks, the fact that people are hailing him as a proven closer after one year is crazy and the structure of the contract is wrong. I think that puts it in a nutshell.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby JP_Frost » Sun Dec 14, 2008 1:05 pm

I think most of us are hailing him as a very talented pitcher. He missed some time last year due a blister on his finger -- nothing arm related. Obviously there is an injury risk involved, but you have to take a chance every now and then. There's no way we can predict that Wood will stay healthy, but you pay for talent and everyone knows that he's got maybe the best pure stuff of any pitcher.

Besides, I guess you think K-Rod is the best closer on the market, but who do you think is #2? It's certainly not Fuentes or Hoffman.

This holier than thou attitude you have Nosco is very annoying. You're just assuming that most of forget about the finances involved, which really isn't true. The Indians had some money to spend this offseason and did so on a closer (whether you think a closer was our biggest need is not the point). They got a very talented one, limited the guaranteed years of the contract and pay him market value. That's not overspending at all. Let's say they didn't sign Kerry Wood, but used the money to get someone else ... which player out there is without question marks? I guess Derek Lowe would've been the safest bet, but he'll cost alot more than 10MM a year. Orlando Hudson would cost about the same, however he's also very injury prone and would certainly demand a contract longer than 3 years.

For all of your complaints Nosco, you really don't bring up any good alternatives. Besides, I'm sure you would've been unhappy about the contract if it were structured differently. If you could just admit that you're bitching just for heck of it, we'd all be able to just ignore your posts.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby TheWord » Sun Dec 14, 2008 2:54 pm

Frankie Rodriguez got paid more, struck out less, walked more, and had a higher WHIP.

Tell me again who overpayed?

Wood is lights out as a closer, and the injuries really only occurred from the build up innings under Dusty Baker. His arm problems are in the past, the guy is healthy, and we got a GREAT deal.
TheWord
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:06 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby gorman8621 » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:29 pm

JP_Frost wrote:If you could just admit that you're bitching just for heck of it, we'd all be able to just ignore your posts.



I think most of us do at this point...it makes for a much nicer day.
gorman8621
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby stoike » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:39 pm

Hey, Tony, or anyone in the know, we lose a draft pick or two for signing (Type A) Kerry Wood, don't we?? How does this work, again? Thanks!
stoike
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby carnegie44115 » Sun Dec 14, 2008 9:00 pm

stoike wrote:Hey, Tony, or anyone in the know, we lose a draft pick or two for signing (Type A) Kerry Wood, don't we?? How does this work, again? Thanks!



We won't because the cubs didn't offer him arbitration. If the Cubs would have, our first round pick would have been safe because we were in the bottom 15 record-wise, the Cubs would have gotten the compensation pick after the 1st round and before the 2nd round and they would have gotten our 2nd round pick.
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby TonyIBI » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:55 am

Hey, as Carn said, we don't lose any draft picks for signing Wood. Denny should love that...oh, and those stupid Cubs for not offering Wood arbitration.....but I digress. :s_devil

In all seriousness, I like the signing a lot. Did the Indians overpay? Yes. Was it anywhere near what I thought it would take to sign a pitcher like Wood in FA, where ALL players are overpriced? Nope.

Even if he bombs, I like that the Indians are gambling a little here. 'Bout time they step out of that conservative shell for once. Good PR for a FO and owner who get raked over the coals for being cheap....
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:44 am

eh, it was projected that Wood would get a 2yr/$20M so we really didn't get a bargain at all.


He has proven he's a lot healthier than in the past (blister kept him out last year, not an elbow or shoulder issue). This does make our bullpen sooo much better.....now we just have to wait for a starter/infielder and we'll be set.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby dnosco » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:31 pm

JP_Frost wrote:I think most of us are hailing him as a very talented pitcher. He missed some time last year due a blister on his finger -- nothing arm related. Obviously there is an injury risk involved, but you have to take a chance every now and then. There's no way we can predict that Wood will stay healthy, but you pay for talent and everyone knows that he's got maybe the best pure stuff of any pitcher.

Besides, I guess you think K-Rod is the best closer on the market, but who do you think is #2? It's certainly not Fuentes or Hoffman.

This holier than thou attitude you have Nosco is very annoying. You're just assuming that most of forget about the finances involved, which really isn't true. The Indians had some money to spend this offseason and did so on a closer (whether you think a closer was our biggest need is not the point). They got a very talented one, limited the guaranteed years of the contract and pay him market value. That's not overspending at all. Let's say they didn't sign Kerry Wood, but used the money to get someone else ... which player out there is without question marks? I guess Derek Lowe would've been the safest bet, but he'll cost alot more than 10MM a year. Orlando Hudson would cost about the same, however he's also very injury prone and would certainly demand a contract longer than 3 years.

For all of your complaints Nosco, you really don't bring up any good alternatives. Besides, I'm sure you would've been unhappy about the contract if it were structured differently. If you could just admit that you're bitching just for heck of it, we'd all be able to just ignore your posts.


First, I am not "bitching just for the heck of it". More people than just me don't like this signing for the money. In terms of alternatives, with Wood I actually presented one revolving around the structure of his deal and have with Gutierrez, as well (i.e., package him with others for a MOR starter or a second baseman).

Second, you bring up an interesting point: Is Wood the second best closer or not? I think it is questionable but let's say he is and let's disregard the injury issues because, as you said, all pitchers come with the risk of serious arm injury. I like Wood better than Hoffman and, although I don't see it, I'll acknowledge what others think about Fuentes. The big question that defines what Wood is worth is: IS he REALLY a close second or just a distant second? My problem is that people are saying 'it is time we got a proven closer like Wood'. I don't know what to make of people who say that about a guy who has closed for exactly one year of his career. I don't call that proven, do you? So my point is that he is a distant second but we are paying him, IMO, like he is a close second. This is how free agency goes. The best guy gets X dollars and, no matter how good the next guy is he gets X-Y dollars. In the end the team that signs the second and third tier guys probably are disappointed (see Carlos Silva and maybe AJ Burnett) whereas the team that signs the top guy (e.g. CC) is usually, though not always, OK with it. We signed the second best guy and a distant second at that for not much less per year (or over the term of the contract, for that matter, i.e. 3 years at $31.5 vs 3 years at $37) than the best guy. Plus we structure the deal wrong, possibly giving the guy over $21 million if he blows his arm out at the end of the first year. This is a basic business thing here. With the dollars we were giving him we should have gotten that second year thing by throwing a 3rd year buyout of a couple million on him. Instead, we overpay the 2nd tier guy and then layer on added and unnecesssary risk.

If you think I have a holier than thou attitude then you are wrong, that's all I have to say about that. However, when I see discussions and opinions that don't make sense to me I do question them. Such is the case with Wood as a proven closer, Smith as a needed part of our pen, Santana being that good despite the logic that would say he wasn't, etc.

As far as my "bitching" it is really just pointing out other ways to look at things and, in many cases, just pointing out another POV. Hey, I have never said I am infallible, not close to it. But just because I don't agree with other Tribe fans doesn't mean I don't want Kerry Wood on the team, that Santana is not a good prospect or that I would never have traded Gutierrez. It just means that I would have tried to minimize the risk with Wood and targeted Gutierrez for a more focused return on things we actually DO need and that I consider the circumstances of the Blake trade in evaluating Santana. All are perfectly reasonable dissenting positions as is my position on the draft which is drafting guys early who don't fit the mold of what one might consider high round picks and doing so under the guidance of a guy who, with extra picks and above average draft budgets, has gotten us almost nothing out of the early rounds of our draft for almost 10 years. Still, people are willing to find reasons why these are all good moves and all I am doing is presenting that dissenting opinion.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby JP_Frost » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:18 pm

dnosco wrote:
JP_Frost wrote:I think most of us are hailing him as a very talented pitcher. He missed some time last year due a blister on his finger -- nothing arm related. Obviously there is an injury risk involved, but you have to take a chance every now and then. There's no way we can predict that Wood will stay healthy, but you pay for talent and everyone knows that he's got maybe the best pure stuff of any pitcher.

Besides, I guess you think K-Rod is the best closer on the market, but who do you think is #2? It's certainly not Fuentes or Hoffman.

This holier than thou attitude you have Nosco is very annoying. You're just assuming that most of forget about the finances involved, which really isn't true. The Indians had some money to spend this offseason and did so on a closer (whether you think a closer was our biggest need is not the point). They got a very talented one, limited the guaranteed years of the contract and pay him market value. That's not overspending at all. Let's say they didn't sign Kerry Wood, but used the money to get someone else ... which player out there is without question marks? I guess Derek Lowe would've been the safest bet, but he'll cost alot more than 10MM a year. Orlando Hudson would cost about the same, however he's also very injury prone and would certainly demand a contract longer than 3 years.

For all of your complaints Nosco, you really don't bring up any good alternatives. Besides, I'm sure you would've been unhappy about the contract if it were structured differently. If you could just admit that you're bitching just for heck of it, we'd all be able to just ignore your posts.


First, I am not "bitching just for the heck of it". More people than just me don't like this signing for the money. In terms of alternatives, with Wood I actually presented one revolving around the structure of his deal and have with Gutierrez, as well (i.e., package him with others for a MOR starter or a second baseman).

Second, you bring up an interesting point: Is Wood the second best closer or not? I think it is questionable but let's say he is and let's disregard the injury issues because, as you said, all pitchers come with the risk of serious arm injury. I like Wood better than Hoffman and, although I don't see it, I'll acknowledge what others think about Fuentes. The big question that defines what Wood is worth is: IS he REALLY a close second or just a distant second? My problem is that people are saying 'it is time we got a proven closer like Wood'. I don't know what to make of people who say that about a guy who has closed for exactly one year of his career. I don't call that proven, do you? So my point is that he is a distant second but we are paying him, IMO, like he is a close second. This is how free agency goes. The best guy gets X dollars and, no matter how good the next guy is he gets X-Y dollars. In the end the team that signs the second and third tier guys probably are disappointed (see Carlos Silva and maybe AJ Burnett) whereas the team that signs the top guy (e.g. CC) is usually, though not always, OK with it. We signed the second best guy and a distant second at that for not much less per year (or over the term of the contract, for that matter, i.e. 3 years at $31.5 vs 3 years at $37) than the best guy. Plus we structure the deal wrong, possibly giving the guy over $21 million if he blows his arm out at the end of the first year. This is a basic business thing here. With the dollars we were giving him we should have gotten that second year thing by throwing a 3rd year buyout of a couple million on him. Instead, we overpay the 2nd tier guy and then layer on added and unnecesssary risk.

If you think I have a holier than thou attitude then you are wrong, that's all I have to say about that. However, when I see discussions and opinions that don't make sense to me I do question them. Such is the case with Wood as a proven closer, Smith as a needed part of our pen, Santana being that good despite the logic that would say he wasn't, etc.

As far as my "bitching" it is really just pointing out other ways to look at things and, in many cases, just pointing out another POV. Hey, I have never said I am infallible, not close to it. But just because I don't agree with other Tribe fans doesn't mean I don't want Kerry Wood on the team, that Santana is not a good prospect or that I would never have traded Gutierrez. It just means that I would have tried to minimize the risk with Wood and targeted Gutierrez for a more focused return on things we actually DO need and that I consider the circumstances of the Blake trade in evaluating Santana. All are perfectly reasonable dissenting positions as is my position on the draft which is drafting guys early who don't fit the mold of what one might consider high round picks and doing so under the guidance of a guy who, with extra picks and above average draft budgets, has gotten us almost nothing out of the early rounds of our draft for almost 10 years. Still, people are willing to find reasons why these are all good moves and all I am doing is presenting that dissenting opinion.


I don't agree with your reasoning about Wood being a distant second. It all depends on what defines a top closer for you -- do you want a guy with lots of experience, then Hoffman would've been the most suitable. Kerry Wood, in my opinion, was actually closer 1B on the free agent market. That's not based on one year of closing, but the stuff he brings in the 9th, which is superior to K-Rod's. You also forget that K-Rod's contract has 3 guaranteed years. Given his age, that's not a terrible thing, but there have been some red flags concerning his performance and stuff, so I don't see that as that much less risk than Wood's contract.

You also bring up the fact that the contract wasn't structured correctly. First of all, we don't know which clauses are exactly in that contract, but you have to understand that it's a give-and-take thing. If we had it our way, Wood would've been signed way under market value with team options and whatnot. Shapiro felt his main priority was getting a closer and he got himself the 2nd best, if not the best closer on the market ... and he paid him the going rate for a minimal amount of guaranteed years. If K-Rod blows out his elbow on opening day, the Mets pay 37MM for an injured reliever, so that's a risk you have to take.

As far as the Gutz trade is concerned, I think you're overrating him. First of all, the return on that deal did fill holes -- bullpen and middle infield. Smith, ROOGY or not, is a solid, young and cost controlled reliever who gives Wedge another reliable arm to go to. We can nitpick all day about how he's a luxury or how he should be used, but his value remains the same. Valbuena is instantly our best 2nd base option for the future, which isn't too far away (possibly 2009, definately 2010). How can you say that it doesn't fit a need? Sure, he's no Roberts, but offering the O's a package built around Gutz wouldn't net us one of the top 2nd basemen. Unless that package contains Santana/LaPorta/Weglarz, which would mean you'd build a package around of them and Gutz would be part of it instead of the centerpiece. Secondly, you keep saying that we only got fair value for Gutz if he doesn't develop into a better player than he is now. That doesn't even matter, because you have to look at what the indians gave up -- a 4th outfielder. So, if he becomes an above-average CF'er for the M's that doesn't make our return less valuable, because what we got back is the return for a bench player. That's the same thing that provided the backbone of your reasoning for Carlos Santana not being that good ... we only gave up Blake to get him. The return we got for Blake was perfectly acceptable for an everyday 3rd baseman. The Dodgers had a big hole there, and didn't have much use for Santana because of Martin. It's not rocket science.

The thing that irritates me the most is that you twist the facts and turn optimisim into blinding fandom. YOU keep combining the words proven closer+Wood, or need+Joe Smith. Most of us have recognized both offseason deals as fair value and good moves for the team. That's not trying to justify every move that Shapiro makes as being brilliant even if we know it isn't, it's just how we analyze these acquisitions. I don't have a problem with you giving us another POV, and certainly not when you back it with good arguments, but from the first time I've ever read any of of your comments, it's been nothing but critique ... and more often than not it's been unsubstantiated or overexaggerated. That gives me the feeling you're bitching just for the hell of it. Conflicting opinions are part of life and definately part of beings sports fans, but it's mostly you're reasoning that rubs me the wrong way.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby TheWord » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:40 pm

I'd like to see an argument for why Kerry Wood isn't THE BEST option for this team given the short contract and his superior numbers when compared to other closers available.

People keep talking about Gutierrez like he was some sought after prospect who was a key trade piece are just overvaluing him plain and simple. This team could replace him with Crowe or Brantley and I don't think any team would bat an eyelash. Gutierrez had the worst plate discipline of anyone on this team which was full of it. I love what he brings versatility wise and "potential" wise, but potential only lasts a bit longer when we see your THIRD year of making the same awful mistakes at the big league level (chasing terrible pitches, et al).

Gutierrez got us two pieces to make a run this season, Joe Smith is a very valuable guy to have and Valbuena could be our everyday 2nd baseman, quite frankly that is a good deal for a 4th outfielder.

To say that we can't make a trade now for a MOR starter is preposterous, there are NUMEROUS other prospects this team can include to get a deal done, and no LaPorta/Santana will not be one of them.
TheWord
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:06 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:43 pm

You can easily make the arguement that Wood was the BEST closer on the market this winter (Keith Law thought so as well).

K-Rod was great in 2006 but the last 2 years he's had a WHIP up over 1.2. He's also seen a decline in his fastball velocity, which isn't good for a guy as young as he is.

Wood had a better WHIP and K/BB ratio than Rodriguez last year. He's only been doing the closing thing for 1 year....but was better (the 62 saves were very overrated for K-Rod).


So we got a guy that's for less years and less money than what K-Rod cost....a good move.....I just don't really believe any reliever is worth $10M.....but that's just me....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby dnosco » Mon Dec 15, 2008 5:55 pm

Reading the above two posts was interesting. Clearly the Indians put a reasonable standard on Wood. As near as I can figure any team in ML baseball in 2008 who had one closer for the entire year had at least 48 games finished. Thus, to have 55 games finished he has to make it through the entire year. Clearly anyone who has ever negotiated, even haggling over the price of a car, understands give and take. I just thought that putting that in the second year guarantees that you probably got two good years out of the guy because, if he suffered a serious injury in the first year there is very little way he reaches that mark in the second year.

Regarding the contracts of Wood and K-Rod, they become identical in years and not that much different in dollars if Wood is healthy and the Indians are a deceint team. The only way they aren't equivalent is if Wood gets hurt either of the first two years. That being said, the 55 games finished standard sort of levels things out IF Wood is hurt early and often.

Regarding K-Rod's regression and Law's opinion you may have a good point. Still, you have one year of Wood at closer to give him a 2 year, $20 million contract. If Carmona had been as successful as Wood in his first attempt at closing would you have given him the same contract? I wouldn't. Thus my opinion on Wood. I think, with guys like Law, they look at stuff and give more value to it than performance. I am the other way. If K-Rod morphs gradually from where he was in 2008 to Borowski by the end of 2011 then the Mets probably made a good move. If he starts 2009 as Borowski circa 2006 and ends as Borowski 2008 then the Mets have a bad deal. You have to go pretty far out on a limb to assume the latter and, more likely, you have the former. Thus I am saying that K-Rod is a safer bet to have 3 years worth of good production.

"The thing that irritates me the most is that you twist the facts and turn optimisim into blinding fandom. YOU keep combining the words proven closer+Wood, or need+Joe Smith. Most of us have recognized both offseason deals as fair value and good moves for the team."

Actually I think most that support the Wood signing and Gutierrez trade have either used or implied those terms in connection with the players involved. I guess how you define good moves for the team is where I have my issue. A good move for the team is one that helps a team now or in the future. We own Peralta/Cabrera through 2011 and moving Peralta to third is a question mark. Where does his 2008 production put him in terms of AL shortstops and AL thirdbasemen? Where does his SS production and Blake-like third base production rank in combined AL SS-3B rankings and where would a Peralta-Cabrera 3B-SS combo have ranked, offensievely. I don't know the answers to any of these things but when we talk about Valbuena we have to consider if he was needed by this team now or in the forseeable future.

Regarding Smith, I would have rather given Meloan, Stevens or Miller that role. More cost-controlled in terms of service time, more versatile. Now, that speaks to whether you want to constantly diss our prospects for guys with ML experience. If we had done that, Jensen Lewis would not be a mainstay in our bullpen now.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:16 pm

dnosco wrote:Reading the above two posts was interesting. Clearly the Indians put a reasonable standard on Wood. As near as I can figure any team in ML baseball in 2008 who had one closer for the entire year had at least 48 games finished. Thus, to have 55 games finished he has to make it through the entire year. Clearly anyone who has ever negotiated, even haggling over the price of a car, understands give and take. I just thought that putting that in the second year guarantees that you probably got two good years out of the guy because, if he suffered a serious injury in the first year there is very little way he reaches that mark in the second year.


If he suffers a serious injury in the first year then there is very little way he reaches that mark in the first year too!

I agree with you though Denny, when I first heard about the vesting part of the option I was shocked that it wasn't a case of the criteria having to be hit in the 2nd year, or at least as an accumulation of the two years (like a lot of starting pitcher options when they have to hit say 200IP in the final year of a deal or say 350IP over the final two years).

However, thinking about it some more, if he hits the vesting criteria in year 1 essentially the Indians will find themselves in an identical risk scenario this time next year - in terms of having 2 guaranteed years with Wood. I guess they figure a 2 year gamble is worth taking - even if they take that two year gamble twice (to a degree).
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:27 pm

Just for reference I thought I'd look up the number of pitchers that finished 55 or more games in a season since 2000.

2000 - 2
2001 - 3
2002 - 3
2003 - 3
2004 - 5
2005 - 8
2006 - 9
2007 - 9
2008 - 9

Not sure what that means other than even if Wood stays healthy for the two seasons I wouldn't say he was a lock to hit the 55.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby JP_Frost » Mon Dec 15, 2008 7:57 pm

dnosco wrote:Reading the above two posts was interesting. Clearly the Indians put a reasonable standard on Wood. As near as I can figure any team in ML baseball in 2008 who had one closer for the entire year had at least 48 games finished. Thus, to have 55 games finished he has to make it through the entire year. Clearly anyone who has ever negotiated, even haggling over the price of a car, understands give and take. I just thought that putting that in the second year guarantees that you probably got two good years out of the guy because, if he suffered a serious injury in the first year there is very little way he reaches that mark in the second year.

Regarding the contracts of Wood and K-Rod, they become identical in years and not that much different in dollars if Wood is healthy and the Indians are a deceint team. The only way they aren't equivalent is if Wood gets hurt either of the first two years. That being said, the 55 games finished standard sort of levels things out IF Wood is hurt early and often.

Regarding K-Rod's regression and Law's opinion you may have a good point. Still, you have one year of Wood at closer to give him a 2 year, $20 million contract. If Carmona had been as successful as Wood in his first attempt at closing would you have given him the same contract? I wouldn't. Thus my opinion on Wood. I think, with guys like Law, they look at stuff and give more value to it than performance. I am the other way. If K-Rod morphs gradually from where he was in 2008 to Borowski by the end of 2011 then the Mets probably made a good move. If he starts 2009 as Borowski circa 2006 and ends as Borowski 2008 then the Mets have a bad deal. You have to go pretty far out on a limb to assume the latter and, more likely, you have the former. Thus I am saying that K-Rod is a safer bet to have 3 years worth of good production.

"The thing that irritates me the most is that you twist the facts and turn optimisim into blinding fandom. YOU keep combining the words proven closer+Wood, or need+Joe Smith. Most of us have recognized both offseason deals as fair value and good moves for the team."

Actually I think most that support the Wood signing and Gutierrez trade have either used or implied those terms in connection with the players involved. I guess how you define good moves for the team is where I have my issue. A good move for the team is one that helps a team now or in the future. We own Peralta/Cabrera through 2011 and moving Peralta to third is a question mark. Where does his 2008 production put him in terms of AL shortstops and AL thirdbasemen? Where does his SS production and Blake-like third base production rank in combined AL SS-3B rankings and where would a Peralta-Cabrera 3B-SS combo have ranked, offensievely. I don't know the answers to any of these things but when we talk about Valbuena we have to consider if he was needed by this team now or in the forseeable future.

Regarding Smith, I would have rather given Meloan, Stevens or Miller that role. More cost-controlled in terms of service time, more versatile. Now, that speaks to whether you want to constantly diss our prospects for guys with ML experience. If we had done that, Jensen Lewis would not be a mainstay in our bullpen now.


We still have a spot open in the bullpen for one of those guys. The addition of Smith doesn't take them out of the equation, especially if Shapiro makes a move that would involve Betancourt.

"A good move for the team is one that helps a team now or in the future."

That's why the Gutz trade is a good move -- it both helps the team now (Smith) and in the future (Valbuena). You could even argue that the move is more focused on the now part than the future considering Valbuena is basically big league ready. I agree that Valbuena has question marks, but that goes every young unestablished player you acquire. The fact that he did reasonably well in his short stint with the M's and made big strides last season in the minors, shows us that his stock is still on the rise and there's a legit chance he'll become a solid 2nd baseman.

Another thing I saw mentioned was the proposed deal last year to get Bay. We had to give up Gutz, Shoppach and Lee to get Bay. I'm not sure which party eventually called it off, but even if we assume that Shapiro was the one, I think he had a right to do so. Maybe he felt that both Lee and Shoppach would become more valuable in time (which they did) and our RF was more of a question mark in 08 than it is in 09 because of Choo. Also, there were serious concerns about Bay's ability to bounce back and at that cost the move might've been too risky. I don't think Gutierrez' involvement in that deal says more about his value than it does in the trade with the M's.

As far as the Peralta/Cabrera situation goes, we can't project how that will play it out. I think including Valbuena in the Gutz trade is a clear signal that Peralta will move to 3rd and Cabrera to short. It's anyone's guess how good Peralta will be as a 3rd baseman. The most optimistic view is that Peralta will be better defensively at the hot corner and would be able to focus on his hitting more, therefore putting up better numbers. However, the most pessimistic view is that Peralta's production, both with the glove and bat, will stay the same. That wouldn't even be a bad thing, especially when you consider that Cabrera's defense will save more runs from the SS position and he's still figuring things out at the plate. If his second half is any indication of what he can do offensively then you'd get better production from that position than we did with Peralta. Like I said, it's hard to predict how that would rank among other teams, because we don't know exactly who will move where, but in the long run it would certainly help us, and if everything goes as planned, it should also help us next season.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:49 am

Well there is a big difference between a rookie (Carmona) and Wood a 30+ year old veteran that's been in the league for 10 years. Obviously you wouldn't give Carmona $10M even if he'd have turned into the greatest closer ever in 2006.


I do agree a bit about giving Meloan, Stevens, and Miller chances in the pen (Meloan mostly)....but don't forget, that both Betancourt and Kobayashi could be gone after this year. Both have options for 2010 and Raffy's is for $5.4M. No way we pick that up. Masa has a $3.25M option as well.....with how he pitched last year, I'd decline that as well. Having Smith around will really help out then. Obviously we could try and re-sign Betancourt if we declined his option....but it never hurts to have extra options in the pen.....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby indianinkslinger » Tue Dec 16, 2008 4:56 pm

Kudos to Denny and Hermie for well stated arguments on the whole issue. Perhaps I am reading too much in the deals but I am just not sure the whole bullpen thing is finished. Smith is in the pen and I happen to like a young vet who has been through two seasons in tough divisional races regardless of his current shortcoming against LH batters. Meloan is not a lock but looks like he will go north with the team unless he shoots himself in the foot. Stevens and Miller may depend upon future moves. I have speculated before that Betancourt may be of more use as a trade chip than he does as the veteran bullpen presence with the additions of Wood and Smith. I am just a little reluctant to turn our entire bullpen over to rookies, no matter how talented. Now that Smith has been added to our other young veterans, Perez and Lewis, I am more comfortable with working in some young talent to replace our most veteran reliever. FWIW, that's my two cents worth.
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:01 pm

I think Meloan's opening day destination also will depend a lot on Jackson and Mujica who are out of options

Tribe may stick to their trend of keeping those guys and starting the ones with options in AAA......but we'll see. If Meloan has a great spring I really hope he gets the bump, though some time in AAA could do him some good. Don't want him wasting away on in the pen if he's not getting innings.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby indianinkslinger » Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:07 pm

Hermie13 wrote:I think Meloan's opening day destination also will depend a lot on Jackson and Mujica who are out of options

Tribe may stick to their trend of keeping those guys and starting the ones with options in AAA......but we'll see. If Meloan has a great spring I really hope he gets the bump, though some time in AAA could do him some good. Don't want him wasting away on in the pen if he's not getting innings.

+ 1
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby MickS » Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:39 pm

Hermie13 wrote:I think Meloan's opening day destination also will depend a lot on Jackson and Mujica who are out of options

Tribe may stick to their trend of keeping those guys and starting the ones with options in AAA......but we'll see. If Meloan has a great spring I really hope he gets the bump, though some time in AAA could do him some good. Don't want him wasting away on in the pen if he's not getting innings.


Jackson might very well be the perfect long relief guy and a lefty to boot. Mujica, I've all but given up on. I think Eddie has to have a spectacular spring to survive.

Having multiple bullpen guys who have had starting experience and could again see opportunities in the rotation, depending on health and how things break, makes things very interesting: Wood, Miller, Jackson, Meloan, Perez.
MickS
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:18 am

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby dnosco » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:12 pm

A couple of points:

(1) Meloan, Miller and Stevens, aren't some of them out of options after this year? If so, then seeing them this year for a long stint is almost mandatory.

(2) You can always make the case for a young vet, old vet, etc. instead of a rookie. I really don't think you can make the distinction, especially when we know Smith is a ROOGY and the other three are not, i.e., they are more versatile. Again, I use the Jensen Lewis example. What if it was Lewis instead of Stevens we were talking about. Knowing what we know now about Lewis we would have picked him over Smith, probably. However, if we would have looked at Lewis the minor leaguer vs Smith the 2-year veteran some of us might have picked Smith...or another veteran. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Veterans over rookies, the known vs the unknown, Roberto Hernandez over Jensen Lewis. It never ends.

(3) Regarding Betancourt: When he was good after 2007 no one would have thought to trade him when his value was high. If we trade him now when his value is significantly lower we should expect a significantly lower return. Given how up and down relievers (and, therefore, bullpens) can be, especially Betancourt (http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/betanra01.shtml) unless Betancourt is hurt I expect him to rebound this year. I think it is a HUGE, HUGE mistake to trade Betancourt now. How many here would be OK with trading Betancourt for what his 2008 stats warranted? How many of you think we can get 2007 Betancourt value for him now? I would be vehemently against trading him for 2008 value but I would definitely consider trading him for 2007 value. Again, trading him for what his 2007 value would warrant is a self-fulfilling prophecy. He stinks and therefore we can't get much for him and should be happy with whatever we get. How many of you watched the last couple of pre-season games in 2008. Betancourt was freaking dominating. I especially remember the Braves announcers just laughing. Well, something happened that tore his season apart after that. Maybe he never got over the early season frigid Cleveland weather (Rick Sutcliffe made that comment when he pitched here). I don't know. I just know that Betancourt is better than 2008 and will be a huge asset to this team in 2009.

Now, you could argue that I always want to clear spots for young guys so why am I against making spots for rookies. The difference is that Betancourt is sunk costs. If you take a loss on him by trading him for scraps now you have weakened your organization. My issue is when they bring in NEW veterans when they have young in-house options they diss. THAT is unwise spending, IMHO.

If you get a great deal for Betancourt, trade him. Otherwise, keep him. It is Smith you should be considering trading. He is less versatile and may be at his highest value ever.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:28 pm

Stevens and Miller definately still have options after this year (Miller only has used 1, this year....and may even get it back since he was hurt for nearly the whole year, and Stevens was just rostered a few weeks ago). Meloan may be out of options after this year.....he'll likely be the first one called up and get a bunch of looks throughout the year.


Betancourt never should have been put in the closers role last year. He was bad there a few years ago. He's a good setup guy, never should have messed with a good thing. Not the only cause for his struggles, but a contributing factor. I think he'll improve some....but with only really one year left on his deal, I wouldn't be opposed to moving him. Don't see it happening as it really wouldn't improve the team all that much. Kobayashi I'd trade....but not really the best idea for future relations with Japanese players to trade our first pro-signing after one year......

It took Smith AND Valbuena to get Gutierrez.....his value isn't high at all. You'd get basically nothing for him.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:23 pm

Options info (lower section in contract details):

http://www.theclevelandfan.com/teamCont ... eason=2009

Meloan has two options, Miller has three, and Stevens has three.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:25 pm

Did Miller already get a 4th option then or are you just assuming he does? Because wouldn't last year have counted since he was on the 40-man?
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby jellis » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:25 pm

Betancourt for whatever reason has struggled every time he enters the closer role last year wasnt the first attempt for him, I a admanatly against trading him. Last year looks like a mirage for him and not like we could get much because his year was bad. We all complained last year I am sure about the lack of depth and now you complaining about too much depth. Come on some one will fail this year it happens and its greta we have some many options that can step up, the bullpen is set up to help this team even if some one struggles or some one gets hurt.

Knock smith all you want the guy is proven, he kills righties. SO in a worst case situation he can be used for 1 or 2 hitters, but they stand little chance against him, as the 6th or 7th guy in the pen thats a much better use of that spot then a Mujica, rincon, donely. In stead of what he cant do I think you miss on what he does do, he can nuetralize the best hitter on a few teams and is more worthwhile then a retread
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:27 pm

4th option year won't be awarded until needed, but he will get it if the Indians need it during the 2011 season. So Miller technically has only two, but has three if needed.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Kerry Wood

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:33 pm

Yeah, Smith will come in VERY handy when facing the Tigers heart of the order with Ordonez, Cabrera, and Sheffield (all righties). Other than the Twins, most teams in the AL central are stronger from the right side with power. Smith was a great pickup.

I'd still even like to see another guy added to the pen because I agree, someone will falter or get hurt (heck, even Lewis could revert again). I'd love a guy like Shouse. Jackson would be an ok lefty and long reliever to have....but Shouse is proven at getting lefties out. Would be a great guy to bring in to face Thome late in a game or Morneau/Mauer. We do have Perez....but having another proven lefty to take the pressure off him would be nice. Rundles could step up I suppose, so the need isn't as great as other areas.....but filling this one will prove much cheaper and easier.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Previous

Return to Beyond The Minors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron