RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

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

Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GhostofTedCox » Tue Jun 26, 2012 10:58 am

I have been struggling with this question for a few weeks now. :question

The argument for buying is this: We are very close to 1st place. If they can balance the lineup, and stabilize the SP, they do have a chance to contend. The one redeeming feature of this team is that the results are better than what you should expect.

However, the players they might obtain, (Quentin, Lee) would not seem to be part of the long term future. The cost would be a prospect or part that we need.

The argument for selling is this: The Indians desperately need more building blocks, and contending this season may be an illusion. The current roster is a hodge-podge. They did not target players like Damon, Kotchman, and Lopez. They were only players they had the ability to obtain, and capacity to pay. Other than ACab, Kipnis, and Santana, who else is the foundation of the team on the field?

Who to sell? I think players like Choo, Kotchman, Hannahan, a SP, and maybe even Hafner all have varying degrees of value. Ask yourself; will CPerez's value ever be higher? Teams always overpay at the deadline. (See Ubaldo).

The Indians need to obtain another building block through trade.

I think the answer to this question will be obvious by the end of this road trip.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby daingean » Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:15 am

GhostofTedCox wrote:I have been struggling with this question for a few weeks now. :question

The argument for buying is this: We are very close to 1st place. If they can balance the lineup, and stabilize the SP, they do have a chance to contend. The one redeeming feature of this team is that the results are better than what you should expect.

However, the players they might obtain, (Quentin, Lee) would not seem to be part of the long term future. The cost would be a prospect or part that we need.

The argument for selling is this: The Indians desperately need more building blocks, and contending this season may be an illusion. The current roster is a hodge-podge. They did not target players like Damon, Kotchman, and Lopez. They were only players they had the ability to obtain, and capacity to pay. Other than ACab, Kipnis, and Santana, who else is the foundation of the team on the field?

Who to sell? I think players like Choo, Kotchman, Hannahan, a SP, and maybe even Hafner all have varying degrees of value. Ask yourself; will CPerez's value ever be higher? Teams always overpay at the deadline. (See Ubaldo).

The Indians need to obtain another building block through trade.

I think the answer to this question will be obvious by the end of this road trip.


BUY BUY BUY!!! If you can't contend now (in this division) then when will you be able to? I prefer Lee to Quentin because Lee can be resigned and I do not think Quentin has a chance. Now that the season is half over, his salary is not that rich. I am a Chiz fan but Hannahan may be proving he can be a longer term fixture (especially with Lopez and Donald around). So we could flip a Chiz for Lee and Happ (give or take a prospect).
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:16 am

The problem is that we don't really have anyone that would bring back a building block.

I guess you could package Choo, Chris Perez and prospect for something good, but that's it really.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby silverbackAXP » Tue Jun 26, 2012 12:31 pm

daingean wrote:
GhostofTedCox wrote:I have been struggling with this question for a few weeks now. :question

The argument for buying is this: We are very close to 1st place. If they can balance the lineup, and stabilize the SP, they do have a chance to contend. The one redeeming feature of this team is that the results are better than what you should expect.

However, the players they might obtain, (Quentin, Lee) would not seem to be part of the long term future. The cost would be a prospect or part that we need.

The argument for selling is this: The Indians desperately need more building blocks, and contending this season may be an illusion. The current roster is a hodge-podge. They did not target players like Damon, Kotchman, and Lopez. They were only players they had the ability to obtain, and capacity to pay. Other than ACab, Kipnis, and Santana, who else is the foundation of the team on the field?

Who to sell? I think players like Choo, Kotchman, Hannahan, a SP, and maybe even Hafner all have varying degrees of value. Ask yourself; will CPerez's value ever be higher? Teams always overpay at the deadline. (See Ubaldo).

The Indians need to obtain another building block through trade.

I think the answer to this question will be obvious by the end of this road trip.


BUY BUY BUY!!! If you can't contend now (in this division) then when will you be able to? I prefer Lee to Quentin because Lee can be resigned and I do not think Quentin has a chance. Now that the season is half over, his salary is not that rich. I am a Chiz fan but Hannahan may be proving he can be a longer term fixture (especially with Lopez and Donald around). So we could flip a Chiz for Lee and Happ (give or take a prospect).


chiz for lee and happ? You are delusional. What an awful awful idea
User avatar
silverbackAXP
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:10 am

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby ClevelandBlues » Tue Jun 26, 2012 3:29 pm

A guy I wouldn't mind picking up is Jeff Francoeur. He is right handed, in his prime and plays a decent outfield. He is an average major league hitter, but after watching Damon, Duncan and Cunningham all season, I would be happy with average. With Will Myers having the season he is having in the minors, the Royals need to move someone to make room for him, and I doubt they are looking at moving Gordon or Butler. He probably wouldn't cost much in terms of prospects. He is owed 6.75 million next season, but considering our luck in free agency and the lack of any outfield prospects in the upper minors, that would not be a terrible contract to have next year.
ClevelandBlues
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:49 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Tue Jun 26, 2012 3:32 pm

Francoeur is pretty worthless. We might as well insert Duncan or Laporta in the lineup.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GoTribe028 » Tue Jun 26, 2012 3:48 pm

ClevelandBlues wrote:A guy I wouldn't mind picking up is Jeff Francoeur. He is right handed, in his prime and plays a decent outfield. He is an average major league hitter, but after watching Damon, Duncan and Cunningham all season, I would be happy with average. With Will Myers having the season he is having in the minors, the Royals need to move someone to make room for him, and I doubt they are looking at moving Gordon or Butler. He probably wouldn't cost much in terms of prospects. He is owed 6.75 million next season, but considering our luck in free agency and the lack of any outfield prospects in the upper minors, that would not be a terrible contract to have next year.


I like Francoeur as well, his arm would sort of go to waste in left field, but I like his bat enough. He'd certainly bring a little balance to the lower portion of the lineup that Duncan has failed to provide, although in Cleveland he'd probably have to bat toward the middle of the order, sadly.

With reports saying the Royals are lukewarm on moving him, plus the Royals being a division rival, I don't see him in an Indians uniform anytime soon.

Another name thats interesting to me is Cody Ross of Boston. But I doubt with Boston's OF situation of it's own he's even available, and I'm sure the cost would be too much for the Indians, both $$$ and prospects.

When you trot out Shelley Duncan and Aaron Cunningham as often as we have I just don't see any urgency to make a postive change on the FO part. Could see an OF like Reed Johnson of the Cubs before the Indians pick up anyone of real significance, but thats just me.
GoTribe028
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby ClevelandBlues » Tue Jun 26, 2012 4:11 pm

He did hit 20 homeruns and 47 doubles last season, so he has some ability with the bat. He is a career .270 hitter versus .236 for Laporta and .230 for Duncan. Im not saying he should be our new cleanup hitter, but his bat would look real nice in the seven or eight spot. I wouldn't mind give Laporta another shot in left, but if the front office had any plans on doing so, they likely would have done it by now. Cody Ross wouldn't be a bad pickup either. We really don't have the prospects to land a big name bat, so we should be focusing on finding someone who is at least dependable. Even if Damon continues to improve with the bat as he has been recently, I don't see his defense getting better anytime soon.
ClevelandBlues
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:49 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Tue Jun 26, 2012 4:26 pm

Francoeur is a free swinger, who rarely walks (at a career low this year) and his defense has been up and down as well. He does have some power and a great arm, but I don't see him as enough of an upgrade over what we have on the roster now nor what we have in the minors. Especially when you consider you'd have to pay him near $7M next year.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:10 am

At this point in the season, left field remains a dark cold miserable place for the Indians.. The Indians have trotted out Johnny Damon, Shelly Duncan and Aaron Cunningham for a total of 337 at bats while getting 67 hits ( a 0.198 BA), including 11 2B's and 7 Hr's to go along with 38 runs scored and 29 RBI's. They have combined to strike out 70 times and have walked 44 times.

Any single one of Matt Laporta, Russ Canzler, Jason Donald, Lonnie Chisenhall, Tim Fedroff, Trevor Crowe, Cord Phelps and Jared Goedert could have amassed statistics at that level of futility.. This is an ongoing problem that needs to be changed. Sooner the better..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Prosecutor » Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:33 am

I say they should be neither buyers nor sellers.

This team is not a contender. Not with Tomlin, Lowe, and Gomez/McAlister in the rotation. And we can't count on Ubaldo, even though he has been improving lately.

We also have no bench, and Kipnis, Choo, Brantley, and Cabrera are going to have a drop-off in performance the second half due to exhaustion. We saw that with Droobs last year when he had to play every day.

We also have a problem with the middle relievers; Sipp, Hagadone, Accardo. The jury is still out on Barnes and Rogers.

The Indians have been outscored by more than any team in the AL except for the Twins. They're not as good as their record indicates. The Yankees are destroying them. Oh, and they can't beat a left-handed pitcher. ANY left-handed pitcher.

They don't have the ammunition to acquire enough pieces to fix all these problems. They have a very nice core of players to build around and the last thing they need to do is trade what few quality prospects they have for a guy they'll have for half a season.

I don't see them as sellers because they no longer have a CC or Victor or Cliff Lee to sell. Chris Perez? The guy is 24-for-25 in saves. We've seen what happens when you don't have a reliable closer - the whole bullpen falls apart. Move Vinnie to closer? OK, then who nails down the 8th inning?

Choo? We have no outfielders who are close to major league ready, so we can't afford to trade Choo, who has finally brought some stability and good production to the leadoff position.

If somebody is interested in Hafner, Hannahan, or Lowe, great, make a deal. Hafner and Lowe won't be back and Chiz can take over for Hannahan. But we won't get enough for any of them to make that much of a difference.
Prosecutor
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:11 am

Prosecutor wrote:I say they should be neither buyers nor sellers.

This team is not a contender. Not with Tomlin, Lowe, and Gomez/McAlister in the rotation. And we can't count on Ubaldo, even though he has been improving lately.

We also have no bench, and Kipnis, Choo, Brantley, and Cabrera are going to have a drop-off in performance the second half due to exhaustion. We saw that with Droobs last year when he had to play every day.

We also have a problem with the middle relievers; Sipp, Hagadone, Accardo. The jury is still out on Barnes and Rogers.

The Indians have been outscored by more than any team in the AL except for the Twins. They're not as good as their record indicates. The Yankees are destroying them. Oh, and they can't beat a left-handed pitcher. ANY left-handed pitcher.

They don't have the ammunition to acquire enough pieces to fix all these problems. They have a very nice core of players to build around and the last thing they need to do is trade what few quality prospects they have for a guy they'll have for half a season.

I don't see them as sellers because they no longer have a CC or Victor or Cliff Lee to sell. Chris Perez? The guy is 24-for-25 in saves. We've seen what happens when you don't have a reliable closer - the whole bullpen falls apart. Move Vinnie to closer? OK, then who nails down the 8th inning?

Choo? We have no outfielders who are close to major league ready, so we can't afford to trade Choo, who has finally brought some stability and good production to the leadoff position.

If somebody is interested in Hafner, Hannahan, or Lowe, great, make a deal. Hafner and Lowe won't be back and Chiz can take over for Hannahan. But we won't get enough for any of them to make that much of a difference.



For the most part I agree with you, though I would definately listen to offers on Chris Perez. His value is at an all time high and relievers are so volatile. Move Pestano to the 9th and bring up Cody Allen, or one of the other many arms we have in the minors.

The reason you possibly move Choo is his contract status. He likely won't sign a long term deal, so perhaps it's time to see what he can bring back.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GoTribe028 » Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:51 pm

JP_Frost wrote:For the most part I agree with you, though I would definately listen to offers on Chris Perez. His value is at an all time high and relievers are so volatile. Move Pestano to the 9th and bring up Cody Allen, or one of the other many arms we have in the minors.


I'm not against getting a good look at Cody Allen, even this season, but I do not see enough positives happening by trading Perez and calling up Allen as well as moving Pestano to the closers roll.

CC Lee is out for the year, Zack Putnam is in Colorado, Nick Hagadone is struggling badly, Tony Sipp is bad, Scotty Barnes has a short sample size and who knows what he will do over the long haul.

Esmil Rogers and Jeremy Accardo have been good finds so far in limited pressure situations, but I don't see Chris Ray or Cody Allen being able to replicate what Smith/Pestano bring behind Chris Perez.

Sometimes I do feel people are a little too eager to trade Perez and far too eager to bring up the next arm from the farm. Plus I'm not against dealing Perez necessarily, but I'm very hesitant.
GoTribe028
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Edible14 » Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:54 am

I'm only for moving Perez if the piece we get back is really compelling. A few years ago, I argued for moving Raffy, Jensen Lewis and Joe Smith for anything, because I felt the farm system could easily replace them. But having seen what we've actually trotted out, I'm less convinced. Relievers seem like such an easy commodity to come by because they're arguably the easiest to come by in the majors. But there's still plenty of teams with bad bullpens, and the Indians aren't so stocked that they can afford to deal away established pieces for anything of slight value. Even if relievers are the easiest to come by, it doesn't mean they're easy to come by. Solid major league players are hard to come by at all positions.

Perez would be difficult to replace. Maybe Vinnie could easily handle the closers role, but then you'd have to have someone taking his role. And I'm not comfortable with that. Besides, I like Pestano there for two reasons. 1) Arguably his position in the bullpen is actually more important (he often is asked to come in with runners on the bag, where Perez almost always enters at the beginning of the inning). 2) It keeps his price down when he eventually gets to arbitration. If we hang on to Pure Rage until he's a free agent, we'll have been through Pestano's first arbitration year already, and his second will still get the non-closer discount. While it's tempting to think that Perez is overpaid and the money could be spent elsewhere, you have to remember that closers make that kind of money these days, sooner or later.

I'd move Perez for something that clearly improves the team. If the Twins wanted to trade Willingham for him, I'd do that in a heartbeat. But I highly doubt he'll command something in the trade market that's better than what he's already giving us.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:35 am

....I'd move Perez for something that clearly improves the team. If the Twins wanted to trade Willingham for him, I'd do that in a heartbeat. But I highly doubt he'll command something in the trade market that's better than what he's already giving us....


smh... Chris Perez is one of the best closers in the American League. If a team wanted to trade for CP.. then provide a player who is the best in the American League at that position, and then a trade may be made..

And.. it may not happen, anyway...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:03 am

GeronimoSon wrote:
....I'd move Perez for something that clearly improves the team. If the Twins wanted to trade Willingham for him, I'd do that in a heartbeat. But I highly doubt he'll command something in the trade market that's better than what he's already giving us....


smh... Chris Perez is one of the best closers in the American League. If a team wanted to trade for CP.. then provide a player who is the best in the American League at that position, and then a trade may be made..

And.. it may not happen, anyway...


That's not how it works.

A very good reliever, or even the best, is worth about 3 WAR.

You know how many position players posted a WAR of 3 or higher? 73.

You know how many starters? 45.

Relievers, and especially closers are so overvalued (mostly by the fanbase and baseball dinosaurs) it's ridiculous. That's probably why you don't see a whole lot of teams involving high profile players in reliever deals, but every now and then a GM will panick and figure that they lack grit and steel nerves in the 9th inning.

I'm not saying that Perez isn't having a good season, or that you don't need a good bullpen, but I'd definately dangle him out there and see who's willing to bite. He's also arbitration eligible the next two years, so Perez ain't cheap anymore.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby daingean » Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:07 am

JP_Frost wrote:
Relievers, and especially closers are so overvalued (mostly by the fanbase and baseball dinosaurs) it's ridiculous. That's probably why you don't see a whole lot of teams involving high profile players in reliever deals, but every now and then a GM will panick and figure that they lack grit and steel nerves in the 9th inning.


I have to disagree here. I think that the game has changed and is continuing to change making pitching in the 7->9 inning very important. If you can shorten the game, it makes you a better team. This is one reason that I think the Indians are still in it (same with last year). Let's face it, our starting 8 is middle of the pack or worse. These are critical game situations.

Maybe closers are overvalued (some) but 7th and 8th inning guys tend to come in with the tying run on base or in the batters box. Closers tend to enter the game just for the 9th with nobody out and nobody on so there is some overvalue there.
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:04 pm

I'm not saying a bullpen isn't important, I'm just saying that a lot of closers are (or were if you will) overvalued because they got the "save".

A guy like Perez has likely reached his top in term of perceived worth, so why not get something back for him now that he has that value and before he becomes too expensive. Maybe I'm a little too Moneyball on this subject, but I think relievers are easily replaced in general and if you can find a GM who's willing to overpay for one, you should always make that trade.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Edible14 » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:04 pm

JP_Frost wrote:I'm not saying a bullpen isn't important, I'm just saying that a lot of closers are (or were if you will) overvalued because they got the "save".

A guy like Perez has likely reached his top in term of perceived worth, so why not get something back for him now that he has that value and before he becomes too expensive. Maybe I'm a little too Moneyball on this subject, but I think relievers are easily replaced in general and if you can find a GM who's willing to overpay for one, you should always make that trade


Right, he's worth a lot right now to the Indians. But I doubt that he's worth that much to other teams, especially the kind of teams that the Indians would want to trade with. Perez leaving would significantly impact the bullpen. It wouldn't be a crippling blow, but it would certainly make that part of the team less effective. So can you get back a player that adds more than what you'd lose with Perez?

Fangraphs has him at 1.1 WAR this season over 30 appearances. Let's look at position players around that level:

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?p ... &players=0

Guys at that level include Carlos Santana, Nelson Cruz and Curtis Granderson. Now tell me, what team would give up that caliber of a player for a closer? In the modern MLB, I'd say probably about zero. Yes, sometimes teams will go overboard and overpay for a guy, but those are usually contending teams that aren't going to be looking to pawn off a solid major league bat. They'll be looking to deal prospects, which wouldn't be what the Indians need if they're in "buyer" mode. I mean, even if the Yankees would like to have Chris Perez, they're not dealing Curtis Granderson or Nick Swisher for him.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby A.Zajac » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:26 pm

I personally don't see the Indians really buying OR selling. I tend to think they'll stand pat with what they have. They might make a few minor moves... but for the most part, I think the team you see is what you're going to be looking at.
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:32 pm

And Neil Walker is in that group as well.

It just shows you how overrated in most people's mind a closer can be. Even Travis Hafner is at 0.6 WAR with no defensive value at all and just a .820 OPS. Now, WAR isn't a tell-all stat, but it kind of puts things perspective.

I'm not saying we should dump Perez no matter what, I'm just saying that he shouldn't off limits and if you want to try and present a viable trade package to teams, Perez is a good candidate to be included.

On one hand we have people here saying we can't get similar value in return because clubs now understand they don't have to overpay for closers, but on the other hand some act as if losing Perez would absolutely destroy this team. I'm just trying to show you that he's replaceable.

Btw, those players you mentioned, it doesn't have to guys of that caliber. There are a number of positive returns possible in a Chris Perez trade. I haven't really thought of any specific scenario's yet, but I'm sure you can get good value in return.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GoTribe028 » Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:30 pm

A.Zajac wrote:I personally don't see the Indians really buying OR selling. I tend to think they'll stand pat with what they have. They might make a few minor moves... but for the most part, I think the team you see is what you're going to be looking at.


I'm really leaning this way as well. One constant statement CA keeps going to is, in one form or another, the guys we have now need to play better period. And they need to stay healthy. If Hafner wasn't coming back I'd advocate the Indians pickup Jim Thome again, if only to keep the Tigers from getting him, which I have a bad feeling about.

I think LaPorta, for as little value he may/may not have is available and nor do I believe he is in the works for the Indians after this long of Shelly Duncan being simply awful.

Maybe a minor pickup similar to the Fukudome pickup last season to improve the bench, although I wouldn't be opposed to letting Cunningham go in favor of Trevor Crowe as the 4th OF. I'd even consider Tim Fedroff if he weren't a lefty.

I don't forsee a big shakeup ala Ubaldo Jimenez 2011. Happy to be wrong, but I don't see it. Trading Chris Perez this season, no matter your stance on how he's valued to other teams, makes zero sense. Maybe less than zero if that were possible. Could be something that will be considered in the offseason.

I beleive the Indians will go to internal options ala 2007. Scott Barnes is one arm I feel will be back, and Cody Allen should be up eventually IMO, the kid deserves a look. Any outside additions will be like the 2007 team, where Kenny Lofton was brought in.

Any moves made might also depend on Grady Sizemore. You get the feeling that they are simply biding their time for him, no matter how far away he seems to be.
GoTribe028
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby MadThinker88 » Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:31 pm

As bad as this sounds, it comes down to the timetables for all 3 guys: Hafner, Grady & BOB (Fausto).
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby daingean » Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:58 pm

GoTribe028 wrote:I don't forsee a big shakeup ala Ubaldo Jimenez 2011. Happy to be wrong, but I don't see it. Trading Chris Perez this season, no matter your stance on how he's valued to other teams, makes zero sense. Maybe less than zero if that were possible. Could be something that will be considered in the offseason.


No big shake up but maybe a Carlos Lee. My problem is that I just do not that we have the ammo to pull something off unless we give up a key piece so it would be a wash. I'm all in favor of getting a key piece especially a LF that hits righty.
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby MadThinker88 » Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:57 pm

Chisenhall's injury just shock up the available assets. The question is now how long the broken forearm will keep Lonnie down.

Oh well, it happens.

Get Hafner back up here so the bench is not shirt-handed come Saturday afternoon.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Jul 02, 2012 7:55 am

MadThinker88 wrote:Chisenhall's injury just shock up the available assets. The question is now how long the broken forearm will keep Lonnie down.

Oh well, it happens.

Get Hafner back up here so the bench is not shirt-handed come Saturday afternoon.


Even though the comments are "Lonnie expects to play again this season".. are coming out of his mouth and is parroted, to some extent by the FO, using screws and plates to stabilize a fractured ulna near the wrist usually takes a solid three months to heal properly.. That puts Chisenhall's availability somewhere around the first week in October... hopefully, the wonderful Wahoos will be playing then in spite of not scoring the 935 runs absolutely needed to be elite.. whatever that means..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Prosecutor » Mon Jul 02, 2012 8:12 am

Beating three lefties in Baltimore and averaging 8 runs per game in the series might alleviate the urge to overpay for a right-handed bat. Lopez and Duncan are starting to hit, and Choo is doing a nice job against lefties. And Hafner and Santana are due back today or later this week.

The main problem IMO is Lowe and Tomlin. Neither are pitching well. I don't see any upgrades that are available for a reasonable price, though. However, I never saw the Jimenez trade coming last year, so maybe the Indians are working on another shocker.
Prosecutor
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Jul 02, 2012 9:04 am

When you look at the title to this thread.. buyers or sellers?..

Isn't it imperative to have something to 'sell' to be a seller?. and isn't there a need to have something you need/want/don't have required to be a buyer?.

There are four weeks (including the All Star Break) until the trading deadline. There has been one trade that might be considered significant (Kevin Youkilis to the CWSox) and one that fell flat on its face: Carlos Lee told the LA Dodgers.. "...no thanks, being in a pennant race in LA in the summer is way too stressful, I'll stay here in Houston where I can ride my horsey..." Other than a few waaaaaaaaaay overpaid / under performing types (Vernon Wells), the availability of players is being squeezed due to the large number of teams that are still in the hunt for October baseball. As of this writing, it looks like the number of sellers is down to four clubs in the AL: KC, Minn, A's and M's.. and four clubs in the NL: SD, Rox, Stros & Cubs.

Here's a "Wild Hair" Idea: The Indians and the A's appear to be somewhat suited for a trade as the Indians have depth where the A's have current and future needs (Lower Minors middle infielders) while the A's have what the Indians lack: Yoenis Cespedes. Would the Indians consider a deal that has Francisco Lindor as the centerpiece going to the A's?..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Jul 02, 2012 9:10 am

Prosecutor wrote:Beating three lefties in Baltimore and averaging 8 runs per game in the series might alleviate the urge to overpay for a right-handed bat. Lopez and Duncan are starting to hit, and Choo is doing a nice job against lefties. And Hafner and Santana are due back today or later this week.

The main problem IMO is Lowe and Tomlin. Neither are pitching well. I don't see any upgrades that are available for a reasonable price, though. However, I never saw the Jimenez trade coming last year, so maybe the Indians are working on another shocker.


While not defining what a "reasonable price" is for a ML starting pitcher (could be anything from two or four MiLB top prospects to a player that just tickles a GM's fancy), wouldn't Brandon McCarthy from the A's satisfy this very real concern? He's certainly no "Cole Hamels" (and his very hot wife).. he could be someone the Indians kick the tires on...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Prosecutor » Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:10 pm

Chief, I really doubt that we could pry either Cespedes or McCarthy away from Oakland. I know they're not contending now, but these guys appear to be centerpieces for the future. Why would they trade them for an 18-year-old shortstop?

Cespedes hit .343 in June. He's hitting .353 with RISP and .364 with RISP and two out. He's 26 years old and plays centerfield. Why would they even consider trading him? You build your franchise around guys like this. You don't trade them for teenagers in their first season of low A ball who are years away from the bigs.

The only concern I have is he's hitting .342 at home and only .238 on the road, but it's a tiny sample size of 177 at-bats. If Oakland would do it, I'd trade Lindor for Cespedes in a heartbeat. But they'd be insane to consider it.

McCarthy is 28 years old and is 6-3 with a 2.54 ERA in 12 starts. Who in their right mind gives up a quality starting pitcher with numbers like that in the prime of his career?
Prosecutor
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Jul 02, 2012 6:29 pm

Prosecutor wrote:Chief, I really doubt that we could pry either Cespedes or McCarthy away from Oakland. I know they're not contending now, but these guys appear to be centerpieces for the future. Why would they trade them for an 18-year-old shortstop?

Cespedes hit .343 in June. He's hitting .353 with RISP and .364 with RISP and two out. He's 26 years old and plays centerfield. Why would they even consider trading him? You build your franchise around guys like this. You don't trade them for teenagers in their first season of low A ball who are years away from the bigs.

The only concern I have is he's hitting .342 at home and only .238 on the road, but it's a tiny sample size of 177 at-bats. If Oakland would do it, I'd trade Lindor for Cespedes in a heartbeat. But they'd be insane to consider it.

that has Francisco Lindor as the centerpiece going to the A's?. Insane?.. maybe.. but the A's are always all about maximizing the return.. and that may be what allows consideration for this kind of deal..

McCarthy is 28 years old and is 6-3 with a 2.54 ERA in 12 starts. Who in their right mind gives up a quality starting pitcher with numbers like that in the prime of his career?


Brandon McCarthy is a lifetime (7 years) .500 ML pitcher who hasn't been able to stay on the field for a single complete season in his entire career. He's having a good very year in a pitchers park. It's very much like the A's to deal a guy when his value is perceived to be at a high point.. Well, based on McCarthy's history.. this is as good as it gets..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Prosecutor » Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:24 am

I see what you're saying about McCarthy. This year his ERA at home is 1.57, on the road it's 3.94. Last year was similar; 2.65 in Oakland, 3.99 on the road.

So with the Indians we could expect his ERA to be around 4.00, maybe a little higher since Progressive is considered a decent hitter's park.

How much of an upgrade is McCarthy over McAlister, and would he be worth "two or four MiLB top prospects"?
Prosecutor
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Jul 03, 2012 10:12 am

Prosecutor wrote:I see what you're saying about McCarthy. This year his ERA at home is 1.57, on the road it's 3.94. Last year was similar; 2.65 in Oakland, 3.99 on the road.

So with the Indians we could expect his ERA to be around 4.00, maybe a little higher since Progressive is considered a decent hitter's park.

How much of an upgrade is McCarthy over McAlister, and would he be worth "two or four MiLB top prospects"?


Over Z-mac.. quite a bit, I'd guess.. McCarthy is a solid veteran with loads of experience.. Z-mac has less than a dozen starts at the ML level for his career. In ten or twenty regular season starts, that experience factor becomes less important. The ability to throw quality strikes along with good late movement will surpass the experience factor..BTW.. in the playoffs, start over with experience being the critical element. As far as the cost involved in terms of MiLB talent..in a market with cole hamels, zach greinke, matt garza, ryan dempster, mark buehrle, wandy rodriguez, brett myers, etc etc.. McCarthy would be less than most of these guys..

As far as his ERA.. 3.50 +/- 0.5 would be a guess.. new environs can upset the apple cart, but, if I recall correctly, McCarthy always seemed to pitch well against the Indians at the corner of Ontario and Carnegie...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby daingean » Tue Jul 03, 2012 10:16 am

[quote="GeronimoSon"
Over Z-mac.. quite a bit, I'd guess.. McCarthy is a solid veteran with loads of experience.. Z-mac has less than a dozen starts at the ML level for his career. In ten or twenty regular season starts, that experience factor becomes less important. The ability to throw quality strikes along with good late movement will surpass the experience factor..BTW.. in the playoffs, start over with experience being the critical element. As far as the cost involved in terms of MiLB talent..in a market with cole hamels, zach greinke, matt garza, ryan dempster, mark buehrle, wandy rodriguez, brett myers, etc etc.. McCarthy would be less than most of these guys..

As far as his ERA.. 3.50 +/- 0.5 would be a guess.. new environs can upset the apple cart, but, if I recall correctly, McCarthy always seemed to pitch well against the Indians at the corner of Ontario and Carnegie...[/quote]

What would scare me off of McCarthy is your statement that he "can't stay on the field" which to me means that he's ready to have a physical breakdown.
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:09 pm

Seems like now is an even better time to trade for Gaby Sanchez. With Carlos Lee in Miami, Sanchez won't get many at bats or will be sent down.

Do it Antonetti!
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby homerawayfromhome » Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:19 pm

I'd rather pay the price and get Chase Headley from San Diego...but Sanchez could be a buy low bat.
homerawayfromhome
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2413
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GoTribe028 » Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:30 pm

homerawayfromhome wrote:I'd rather pay the price and get Chase Headley from San Diego...but Sanchez could be a buy low bat.


Screw it and go for both...the more the merrier.
GoTribe028
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby homerawayfromhome » Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:52 pm

Good thought, the tribe could certainly use help.
homerawayfromhome
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2413
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby danh8 » Thu Jul 05, 2012 9:41 pm

I have no expectations that the Dolan's will be buyers. Any assistance no matter how much we need help is coming from anywhere but the minor league system.
danh8
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 12:49 am

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GhostofTedCox » Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:48 am

I think the Indians will bring in somebody. But they will probably miss the mark of what they really need. Headly could offer RH help in LF, but not much more than what Russ Canzler would bring.

They needed offensive help last year but would up with Fukodome.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby GeronimoSon » Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:26 am

GhostofTedCox wrote:I think the Indians will bring in somebody. But they will probably miss the mark of what they really need. Headly could offer RH help in LF, but not much more than what Russ Canzler would bring.

They needed offensive help last year but would up with Fukodome.


Even though Chase Headley has played some in LF, he's clearly not a LF'er. That said, he'd be waaaaaaaaay better defensively than any one of the current LF'ers on the roster.. which isn't saying much.. Headley's a bona-fide 3B.. has some but limited power and is a very good/well above average defensive 3B. Being a switch hitter helps. His splits are pretty uniform. He steals a few bases, he takes a lot of walks.. he does everything pretty much 'okay'. The Padres have a kid in the minors that they're going to use to replace him and are in need of a SS that can take over in the next couple years..

Ronnie Rodriguez and Francisco Lindor would appear to be the Padres targets.. but they're both a bit too far away to be considered for this transaction. Also, it should be noted that including lindor would amount to a severe overpay. A pair of prospects such as Tony Wolters and a pitcher (Rob Bryson / Brian Price type/level) could bring Chase Headley to the north coast.

We'll see how crazy the 'prices' become as the trading deadline approaches. If the Carlos Lee trade is any indication, then the sooner a move is made the better.. The Carlos Lee for Matt Dominguez & Rob Rasmussen may be considered a bargain. Matt Dominguez has been a highly thought of Marlins prospect that can't hit and Rob Rasmussen is a tiny/little lefty that doesn't throw particularly hard, doesn't have particularly good command and doesn't possess particularly impressive stuff.. In short.. call this what it is..a salary dump for a former good prospect..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3919
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:15 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:In short.. call this what it is..a salary dump for a former good prospect..


I'm pretty sure the Astros paid all of Lee's remaining salary less the pro-rated minimum (say $160k), so don't think you can call it a salary dump.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Tondo » Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:16 pm

If the Pads need a SS as close to the MLB as possible then the next closest thing the Tribe has to offer is Diaz, who didn't embarrass himself in his short stint in Cleveland...with Wolters and above all Lindor in the pipeline, he shouldn't be high on Asdrubal's successor list

I would make a deal for Headley around or including any of R.Rodriguez, Diaz, Donald, Phelps, J.Ramirez or Wolters...throw in an arm or 2 and maybe sweeten the pot with reclamation project LaPorta...Headley is in his prime and is hitting a robust .800 OPS outside of PETCO in his last 3 years

I'd really try to do a blockbuster including Quentin too....how about 1 of R.Rodriguez/Wolters + 1 of McAllister/Gomez/McFarland + 1 of L.Rodriguez/J.Smith/Myles + 1 of Weglarz/Laporta + 1 of Bryson/Langwell/Stowell/Sturdevant....too much?

Wolters, McAllister, L.Rodriguez, Laporta, Bryson for (2.5 years of) Headley and (half a season of, but I'd throw the Hafner money at him as a FA in the offseason) Quentin....we're talking 2 corner bats here in their prime with projected OPS .800 return, so I don't think that would be too much to give up...opinions?
Tondo
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby daingean » Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:47 pm

Tondo wrote:If the Pads need a SS as close to the MLB as possible then the next closest thing the Tribe has to offer is Diaz, who didn't embarrass himself in his short stint in Cleveland...with Wolters and above all Lindor in the pipeline, he shouldn't be high on Asdrubal's successor list

I would make a deal for Headley around or including any of R.Rodriguez, Diaz, Donald, Phelps, J.Ramirez or Wolters...throw in an arm or 2 and maybe sweeten the pot with reclamation project LaPorta...Headley is in his prime and is hitting a robust .800 OPS outside of PETCO in his last 3 years

I'd really try to do a blockbuster including Quentin too....how about 1 of R.Rodriguez/Wolters + 1 of McAllister/Gomez/McFarland + 1 of L.Rodriguez/J.Smith/Myles + 1 of Weglarz/Laporta + 1 of Bryson/Langwell/Stowell/Sturdevant....too much?

Wolters, McAllister, L.Rodriguez, Laporta, Bryson for (2.5 years of) Headley and (half a season of, but I'd throw the Hafner money at him as a FA in the offseason) Quentin....we're talking 2 corner bats here in their prime with projected OPS .800 return, so I don't think that would be too much to give up...opinions?


I'd be tempted but w/o compensation when Quentin leaves (I think he's a west coast guy), I'd eliminate this group: 1 of L.Rodriguez/J.Smith/Myles
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby homerawayfromhome » Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:01 pm

Maybe the Tribe could pull a Chase Headley deal off by sending the Padres Jeanmar Gomez, Juan Diaz, and Brett Brach. Brach is a thrown in, doesn't his brother pitch for the Padres?

Headley is the kind of bat the Tribe likes, affordable, controllable, versatile and a switch hitter too.
homerawayfromhome
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2413
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby JP_Frost » Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:16 pm

I'm sorry, but why would the Padres settle for a bunch of crap to trade away one of their most valuable assets?

Also, where would we play Headley? I get that we have need for a 3rd baseman now, but are we going to give up on Chiz that soon?

I like Headley, but I don't think he should replace Chisenhall, nor do I think he can be had for what is suggested in this thread. A lot of teams will go after him and I don't think we have the pieces to make a deal.
User avatar
JP_Frost
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby ironmike » Fri Jul 06, 2012 5:44 pm

Tony, regarding the starting pitchers currently on the market or who could be on the market, which players could the Indians trade for and control for 2-3 years? Trying to find out those pitchers who would be in the same kind of contract situation Jimenez was when we traded with Colorado.
User avatar
ironmike
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:28 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Tondo » Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:27 pm

JP_Frost wrote:I'm sorry, but why would the Padres settle for a bunch of crap to trade away one of their most valuable assets?.


Well, didn'we trade 2 Cy Young winners for that kind of "crap"....remember? We got all those Top 20 guys from the Phillies farm system....and Wolters, McAllister, L.Rodriguez ARE all Top 15 guys, 2 probably Top 10, 1 Top 5

JP_Frost wrote:Also, where would we play Headley? I get that we have need for a 3rd baseman now, but are we going to give up on Chiz that soon? .


Chiz is pretty much done for the year at the MLB level anyway and I'm not ready to hand Chiz 3B for 2013 yet...he has to earn it...hell, he can't even beat out Hannahan..then again, I never got the Chiz hype to begin with...sure, a very nice spec but never saw him as elite as Kipnis...I remember that I got laughed at for comparing Kips to Kinsler btw...and I always had him over Chiz in my rankings :cool

Anyway, remember that Marte guy who we handed 3B to with no backup plan? No spec is a sure thing (LaPorta anyone?) and I'll always take a PROVEN commodity like Headley over a spec that has more "promise" just because he's 4 years younger...Chiz will be lucky to ever become a .800 OPS guy at the MLB level (he barely was in the minors), Headley IS outside of PETCO

For me it would not be a problem having both Headley and Chiz on the roster for the next 2 seasons...let Chiz earn it, you can move Headley to OF a bit to create enough ABs for both...maybe throw in some 1B for both or 1 of them...and if both do good, you can always trade one of them away...either way, that's a good problem to have and I don't see much "blocking" in that scenario
Tondo
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:17 pm

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Edible14 » Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:00 pm

Tondo wrote:Well, didn'we trade 2 Cy Young winners for that kind of "crap"....remember? We got all those Top 20 guys from the Phillies farm system....and Wolters, McAllister, L.Rodriguez ARE all Top 15 guys, 2 probably Top 10, 1 Top 5


Right, but that was a slightly different situation. The Indians were needing to dump salary to not be bleeding money (reportedly) for the Cliff Lee trade, and were going to lose CC anyway before that trade. So there was a lot more motivation to pull the trigger there. Why would San Diego need to trade Chase Headley in a similar fashion? Where's their motivation to do so?

The Indians need to be smart and not overpay here, I think. It's not the end of the world if the Indians don't make the playoffs this year. It is a worst-case scenario, however, if they empty the farm system and still have an only slightly above average major league team that will be bleeding assets over the next two off-seasons.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Should the Indians be buyers or sellers ?

Postby Pork Chop Pough » Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:06 pm

Tondo wrote:
JP_Frost wrote:I'm sorry, but why would the Padres settle for a bunch of crap to trade away one of their most valuable assets?.


Well, didn'we trade 2 Cy Young winners for that kind of "crap"....remember? We got all those Top 20 guys from the Phillies farm system....and Wolters, McAllister, L.Rodriguez ARE all Top 15 guys, 2 probably Top 10, 1 Top 5

Revisionist history... the Indians received 4 of the Phillies Top 10 prospects in the Lee deal and were still criticized by many at the time of the trade for taking quantity over quality. So why again would the Padres take a couple of the Indians top 10 prospects and a couple throw-ins from a weak system for 2½ years of Headley?

For the record, heading into the 2009 season, these were their Baseball America rankings in the Phillies system: Carrasco (2), Marson (3), Donald (4), Knapp (10). By the time of the trade, Donald's poor season moved his stock down, but Knapp was considered the real prize and everyone was saying he'd have been ranked one of their top 3 prospects at mid-season.

Matt LaPorta was the #23 BA prospect in all of baseball when acquired. Which of those Tribe prospects we're offering up for an .800 OPS third baseman is a Top 25? Top 50? Top 100?
User avatar
Pork Chop Pough
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 2:54 pm

Next

Return to Beyond The Minors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest