Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
There was a sound bite on TV last night in which Pat Hentgen was asked if he was "quietly" rooting for Roy Halladay's continued success. "No, I'm openly rooting for him," replied the first Jay to win a Cy Young award.

In his column today, celebrating their similarities, Richard Griffin called a pre-game meeting between the two righties "a nice torch-passing moment," and obviously respects both men.

Of all the Blue Jays' aces over the past decade, Hentgen and Halladay resemble each other the most — the kind of people you would want your sons to grow up to be like.

The Orioles, rumoured to be shopping for high-ticket items like Vladimir Guerrero this winter, might not exercise their $4 million option for 2004 on Hentgen, who Griffin suggests would like to finish his career in his hometown of Detroit. I'd be very happy if he returned to Toronto; he's 5-2 with a 2.85 ERA in his last 11 starts, fully recovered at last from the Tommy John surgery he required in 2001, and would be a wonderful mentor for Doc and the other young hurlers.


The riddle wrapped in the enigma that is Kelvim Escobar is on the bump for the Jays, the only team in the majors with a winning record on the road and a losing mark at home. Kelvim, 3-7 with a 6.21 ERA in 12 starts and eight relief appearances at the Dome, is one of the primary reasons for that oddity. He did pitch OK against the Yankees here ten days ago (6.2 IP, 3 ER, no decision) but has just one win in his last 10 home starts.

It could be a very good pitching matchup, though I hope not -- my fantasy teams are really counting heavily on Carlos Delgado. The Walrus is tied 6-6 with Billie's Bashers entering play today, trailing by .020 in OBP and a mere .001 in SLG. The Jays, now 3 games over .500 and 8-3 for the month, look to win their fourth straight. This is being posted early (it's a 4:05 start) because I'm on a lunch break at work. No idea what the lineup will be, but I'm expecting to see Crash and Cat. I'll be going straight from here to the game, where I look forward to meeting some of the Box regulars.
Game 148: A Class Act | 40 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
_Grimlock - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 02:50 PM EDT (#92041) #
Me Grimlock overheard the following, about 20 rows behind third base, at last night's game:
"Tim Raines, Jr. Is that Tim Raines' son?"
"I don't know. Who's Tim Raines?"

Man. Even if you didn't know who Tim Raines is, you gotta figure that his son would be named, Tim Raines, Jr. It's just common sense!
_A - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 02:51 PM EDT (#92042) #
Neat little feature I found over at ESPN.com that lists off the Jays' (or any team's) batting order over the past five games. What I found interesting is that not once in the past 5 have we had the same line-up twice. I remember back in the early 90's you didn't even have to think about where any player would play and in which spot they'd bat (of course that's all subject to the occasional injury).
Craig B - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 04:34 PM EDT (#92043) #
I'll second that opinion on Hentgen coming back to Toronto. At the right price - and it seems to me that $2 million would be that price - Hentgen has been a very competent #3-4 starter for the past six years, except when he was pitching hurt.

Escobar's control isn't on today; thankfully these are the Orioles so it won't matter much.
_A - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 05:33 PM EDT (#92044) #
What looked to be a poor showing of execution against a subpar opponent turned into a 2-run shot for Crash. I think I was going to blow a gasket if the Jays failed *twice* with men on third and less than two out to score a run...I could also just be frustrated because the Fan isn't carrying the game online.

Now it's 4-1 good guys, after four complete. The last two were driven in by Bordick and O-Dawg. All four runs came with two down.
_EddieZosky - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 05:36 PM EDT (#92045) #
I'm in line at the mini donuts stand now. Sorry coach, didn't think you'd want to spend a game listening to me explain the finer points of the game to my girfriend. It's her first game, so far so good. Only one "tight pants" comment.

How about the inside the parker from Myers!!!
Dave Till - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 05:39 PM EDT (#92046) #
I'd be thrilled to see Hentgen back in Toronto. It would be a great PR move, and he'd probably be useful.

Myers' inside-the-park home run isn't quite the last thing I expected would happen today, but it's close.

Even if Angelos opens his wallet in the offseason, I'd say the O's don't have much chance of contending.
Mike D - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 05:39 PM EDT (#92047) #
Myers' home run was the most exciting half-hour in sports.

On the subsequent bloop to Cust, the replacement left fielder did everything wrong: wrong approach, wrong positioning, wrong technique, wrong throw. If Baseball Prospectus keeps asking why Jack Cust gets traded, here's your answer: He defines the term "one-tool player."
_Nigel - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 06:05 PM EDT (#92048) #
From what I've witnessed over the last 12 months both in Baltimore and Colorado, I'm not even sure he qualifies for one tool. Looking like a tool with the bat sure.
_TUCKER FREDRICK - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 06:11 PM EDT (#92049) #
Baseball prospectus keeps wondering why, Jack Cust gets traded?? Well my 1st question is, who's on board there?? Cust needs people with cell phones close by when he's in the field with 911 dialed in, he maybe one of the worst athletes to ever put a uniform on. Next of all he has major holes in his swing, that alot of hitting coaches would run away from and strikes out way way to much. Another words is that he would be a horrible pickup for anyone and especially the Blue Jays!!! Ladies and Gentlemen we play on astroturf almost 95 games a yr (including Minnesota and Tampa Bay), it makes the game much quicker and the whole story changes. All teams that won the world series that played on astroturf were athletic or caught the ball very well, there's a reason why we are only near 500 at home !!!
_EddieZosky - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 06:47 PM EDT (#92050) #
Bobby's in right now. My girlfriend thinks he's hot.

I guess she's into plate discipline and a good eye. I never would have known.
_Ryan - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 07:01 PM EDT (#92051) #
With today's win, the Jays would have to completely fall apart to finish below .500 this year. They're currently 76-72 with 14 games to go. They only need 5 wins to lock up a .500 finish, and going 9-5 to hit the 85-win mark certainly looks possible.
_Nigel - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 07:07 PM EDT (#92052) #
As Craig said, Kelvim's wildness didn't matter given the competition (repeat after me "It's Baltimore in September"). Lord only knows how many runs he would have given up against a real line up. Another good day for Myers. I would think that he's going to generate some pretty fair interest from other teams in the offseason. He's not likely to duplicate this again next season but he should still be a fair contributor on offense next season. With Cash clearly going to be a fairly limited contributor offensively (if at all) I think resigning Myers ranks near the top of the list for offseason priorities.
Named For Hank - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 08:12 PM EDT (#92053) #
It was fun to meet some of the BB crew, swap stories and watch an exciting game.

My voice is currently recovering with the aid of tea and honey; tomorrow some friends are up from California and are coming to the game with me, so I need to be ready for a repeat performance. ;)

The more I think about a cheer club, the more I become convinced that it'd be a brilliant idea if we could pull one off here in T.O. Maybe next season a bunch of us should pool our resources and buy group rate tickets to a bunch of weekend games and really cause a ruckus in the OxiCleanDome.

Can you imagine some serious organized chanting in there? A group of 20 people singing "Money Money Money" whenever A-Rod approaches the plate?
Coach - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 08:50 PM EDT (#92054) #
Myers' home run was the most exciting half-hour in sports.

Crash runs well, for an old catcher. He was chugging at the very end and looked relieved when the throw was off line. That was the highlight of a very entertaining game. Kelvim tried a few times to shoot himself in the foot, then dodged the bullets.

It was fun to meet some of the BB crew

I enjoyed the company, too. If you have been to the Dome this year, chances are you have encountered a fan who answers every canned bugle call by hollering "charge!" with considerable gusto. That's Named For Hank. There is no better candidate to lead cheers, and he also makes great signs.
Craig B - Saturday, September 13 2003 @ 10:30 PM EDT (#92055) #
Lord only knows how many runs he would have given up against a real line up

It's funny. Against someone like Hendrickson, whose stuff isn't all that great and who depends on throwing strikes, the Orioles would have racked up a bunch of hits and runs. Against Escobar, who couldn't hit the broad side of a barn today, the O's managed all of one run. Escobar was throwing 94-95 today, with good movement, but a lineup with the discipline to take five pitches every at-bat would have murdered him.
Craig B - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 01:25 AM EDT (#92056) #
You wouldn't have thought a guy who was hitting .170 could head into a severe tailspin, but Kevin Cash is 1-for-22 over the last 7 days.
_A - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 02:00 AM EDT (#92057) #
Where would the defining moment of a "tailspin" be when you're under the Mendoza line?
_Kris - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 03:28 AM EDT (#92058) #
Jack Cust was at one point the apple of both Billy and JP's eye. Sometimes numbers and plate disclipine are overrated, see Alfonso Soriano. Jack Cust would fit in great with Josh Phelps,Eric Hinske and soon to be JFG as they are all Dh's. No offence but Hinske is not a third basemen. Defence and pitching wins title but the Jays have neither nor do the prospects for 2004 look good either.
_benum - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 04:17 AM EDT (#92059) #
Defence and pitching wins title but the Jays have neither nor do the prospects for 2004 look good either.

Whoa...Kris...these blanket statements are...well...silly.

If pitching and defense wins titles, the Braves would have won more than one in the 90's. What 'wins title' are teams that score more runs than they allow. It really is that simple. Obviously, there are different ways of accomplishing this (see: Blue Jays 1992 v.s. 1993).

There are enough 'Old School' baseball truisms in this world without parroting them here. If you have evidence that pitching and defense wins titles, let's see it.
_TUCKER FREDRICK - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 10:58 AM EDT (#92060) #
Yes Benum you bring up an interesting comparison Blue Jays of 92 vs 93 and we know that the pitching was the constant in 92 and the offense was the constant in 93 but the main thing you lose sight of is that the defense not just in fielding pct but range factor was the best in baseball!! It still gets back to defense and range is huge especially in close ball games and despite the good pitching, range defensively will always enhance good pitching and lack of makes the pitching just ordinary and shows up in very close ball games, which is what you get in playoff and world series type of ball. Just check Oakland out and the classic example is last yr vs Minnesota , the difference between the two defenses was the difference and the ability of Minnesota to play small ball when it counted, because Oakland definitely had better starting pitchers. You cant measure range by stats!!
robertdudek - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 11:05 AM EDT (#92061) #
"Defence and pitching wins title but the Jays have neither nor do the prospects for 2004 look good either."

Well, no they don't. Try winning a title with the Tigers' offence. The Yankees defence has been below average since 1999 and yet they've done fairly well. The Red Sox defence is average at the moment. They're winning with a great offence.
Craig B - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 11:39 AM EDT (#92062) #
Well, the "tailspin" point was that Cash was hitting .170. He's now hitting much worse. (.125 to be exact).

You cant measure range by stats!!

You have to measure it by stats. There is no other way to "measure" anything. If you're not using stats, then you're not measuring it; you're guessing. It might be a good guess or a bad guess, an educated guess or a wild-ass guess. But it would be a guess, an estimate, an opinion.

"Range Factor" isn't a particularly good measure of range (except at the extremes)... once adjusted for the available variables (like Bill James does in Win Shares) it's better. Best of all is analysis of play-by-play data... which we have now. The good defensive measures that we have now (led my Mitchel Lichtman's UZR) include very good (if far from perfect) measures of defensive range.
robertdudek - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 12:28 PM EDT (#92063) #
Tucker,

I think you're wrong. UZR does a good job with measuring range and Zone Rating does a decent job.

Choosing the Oakland-Minnesota example is nothing more than selective sampling. Okay, I'll pick the Yankees (below average defensive team) over the Mariners (one of the best defensive clubs in recent history) in the 2001 ALCS. Have I proven that defence is irrelevant? I hope nobody thinks so.

The current Jays actually have pretty good range. Wells-Cat-Johnson is an outfield with excellent range; Hudson has as much range as any 2B in the game right now. They're below average at SS when Woodward plays and Hinske has the tools to be an average defensive 3B, but has problems throwing the ball. Maybe he can correct that, maybe he can't - time will tell.

The problem this year is that the Jays have made too many errors and their catchers haven't thrown out nearly enough baserunners (Cash may change that, but do you really want a bat as bad as his in the mineup just for the odd CS?). They have good range, they turn the DP reasonably well.
_TUCKER FREDRICK - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 12:51 PM EDT (#92064) #
I'll go with you on your assesment of range or defensive ability of Johnson and Wells, but Frankie C is below avg defender and at least below avg range. SS is what you stated but Hinske is below avg , not only in range and reactions, but hands also, plus he plays a very shallow 3b which makes his range even worse and can't be played that way on astroturf especially!! I dont know about Hudson having as much range, but I would say its at least avg and he does run down some fly balls that he seems to read better than most. 1b is well below avg and will agree completely with you about Cash and you can see the recent results in the way the pitching is responding to him which makes a big difference. To respond to the 2001 playoffs, I would say at that time, Ventura was avg to slightly abv, jeter was well abv, soriano hands can be a question mark but his range is well abv avg and martinez hands are abv avg and maybe range could be a question, posada is no cash on defense but is well rounded as catchers go, bernie williams was abv to well abv avg and you can have the corners, but to say it was random picking wasn't the case. I would say 90% of the clubs that have won the world series has either had a combo of avg to abv fielders or avg to abv range defensive wise.
robertdudek - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 01:05 PM EDT (#92065) #
Virtually ever defensive method around pegs Jeter as below average range for shortstop. The evidence that the 2001 Yankees were below average defensively is very strong: if you park adjust their bip average against it comes out to among the worst in the AL.

Most clubs that win the World Series have above average offenses too. What is your point, exactly ?
_TUCKER FREDRICK - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 06:43 PM EDT (#92066) #
Who's the defensive measurement crew?? I hope Helen Keller isn't a part of that crew, because it would take a blind person to see that Derek Jeter has abv avg range and reads and has had it for quite sometime. Yes you have to have abv avg offenses but you better have a defense that can catch it , run it down, because the games get very close in the playoffs and that's the difference between those clubs 90% of the time and THATS MY POINT!!
robertdudek - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 09:34 PM EDT (#92067) #
Tucker,

"I hope Helen Keller isn't a part of that crew, because it would take a blind person to see that Derek Jeter has abv avg range and reads and has had it for quite sometime."

I'm confused - it seems that you are saying that Derek Jeter indeed has below average range and only a blind person would think otherwise.

If the above quote is not what you intended to say, then my answer is this:

The available data does not support your contention that Derek Jeter has above average range. There have been plenty of observers who have commented on Jeter's slow first step.

You know that saying - "I don't believe my eyes"? Well, when it comes to evaluating defence, that saying is well worth remembering.
_TUCKER FREDRICK - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 10:00 PM EDT (#92068) #
dear confused, what part of abv avg didnt you understand. What observers, I want verbal quotes, not just flippant comments. So your arguement holds nothing until you come up with quotes that Derek Jeter has below avg range and defensive abilities. ps i dont want to here from bill james either, baseball people will do!!
Pepper Moffatt - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 11:21 PM EDT (#92069) #
http://economics.about.com
Well, for one thing, Derek Jeter a couple off-seasons ago (2000 maybe?) said that his defence the year before "sucked" and he was going to spend the off-season getting better.

I'm actually a bit of a Jeter fan so I don't think he's nearly as bad as statheads make him out to be. That being said, he seems to get a lot of really late jumps which is only partially masked by his pretty good lateral movement. Jeter admits that he's not a great defensive shortstop, even if his fans won't admit it.

Mike
robertdudek - Sunday, September 14 2003 @ 11:44 PM EDT (#92070) #
Tucker,

If you reread the quoted passage...it would take a blind person to see that DJ has abv avg range ... you should see that you are saying that it would take a blind person, meaning that if a person isn't blind he/she wouldn't take this view (that DJ has abv avg range). Those are your words.

For example, if I say it would take a strong person to lift 200 KG above his/her head it means that if someone isn't a strong person he/she wouldn't be able to lift 200 KG above his/her head.

Back to baseball...

It's the eyes of baseball people I don't trust, but if YOU have quotes from them saying that Jeter is an above average defensive shortstop, I'd like to read them. Presumably, defensive numbers don't mean anything to you, so I'm not going to bring actual data into play (though you could read Mike Emeigh's series on analysing defence or look at UZR ratings for recent years, both of which can be found on Baseball Primer).

Because of my background, I tend not to take arguments from authority at face value - I'm always willing to examine what any so-called expert says. Especially, baseball people.

Mike, I agree with you that Jeter isn't as bad as some measures have him - I'd generally go with Emeigh/UZR/ZR in that order in assessing range.

For anyone reading this, I'll present what I think is the null hypothesis:

The team with the best combination of (a) offence and (b) pitching/defence has the best chance to (i) make the playoffs and (ii) win a short series.

If anyone has any evidence that contradicts this, please bring it to bear on this discussion.
_TUCKER FREDRICK - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 09:06 AM EDT (#92071) #
How about playing well when it counts, and also running down fly balls in the shallow parts of the outfield and oh by the way, thee amazing play he made vs the Athletics in the playoffs to nail the non athlete, Jeremy Giambi because of his non ability to slide at the last second. Two parts of one play that cant be rated by stats and thats why Oakland couldnt make it to the World Series again. Instincts and intangibles. Im sure the money arguement will come out now!!

ps: I'm sure Derek Jeter goes around saying he sucks!!
Craig B - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 09:38 AM EDT (#92072) #
running down fly balls in the shallow parts of the outfield

Jeter is, in my opinion, very good at this, but it can't possibly be a sufficient factor to outweigh the number of ground ball outs he turns into singles. If it's more than 15 plays a year that Jeter makes over an average shortstop, I would be surprised.

oh by the way, the amazing play he made vs the Athletics in the playoffs to nail the non athlete, Jeremy Giambi because of his non ability to slide at the last second.

A nice play, made necessary by the fact that Jeter was late in getting back to back up at home.

thats why Oakland couldnt make it to the World Series again. Instincts and intangibles.

In a word, no. Oakland were undone by poor pitching by Hudson, Lilly and Koch in 2002 (when the opposition keeps pounding doubles into the gap, that's not an "intangible"); and by weak bats in 2001 (Chavez, Tejada, Hernandez... the Yankees would have been swept by the A's but they won Game 3 on two hits because the A's couldn't solve Mike Mussina).

Now in 2000, sure, the Yankees won tight game in Games 3 and 5. But if Gil Heredia hadn't had to go in Game 1 (the schedule and the close race meant that Heredia had to start Game 1 instead of Appier or Hudson) I think the A's would have won. He scuffled through in Game 1, but got torched in the first inning of Game 5... the 6-0 lead let the Yankees hang on by a fingernail.
Pepper Moffatt - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 10:27 AM EDT (#92073) #
http://economics.about.com
ps: I'm sure Derek Jeter goes around saying he sucks!!

He did. Some kid asked him why he was working so hard in the off season in his D since he was so good at it last year.

His quote was, "What were you watching? I sucked!"

If someone has access to Lexis-Nexus, I'm sure they could find it. I don't think it's really worth the search, tho.

Mike
_benum - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 12:48 PM EDT (#92074) #
He did. Some kid asked him why he was working so hard in the off season in his D since he was so good at it last year.

His quote was, "What were you watching? I sucked!"


Then he looked back and saw a look of disapointment on the kids face.
All was silent for a few seconds. Derek said "Hey Kid" and, as the youngster looked up with hope in his eyes, Derek said "Here..." and threw him his towel. The kid clutched that towel like it was a sacred relic. The locker room lit up with his smile but Derek was already gone. Walking to his car, he also smiled but then steeled himself. "Man, I gotta work on my D" he said to himself quitely, his head shaking from side to side. "Jeter!" a voice bellowed from the shadowed hallway between the locker room and the parking lot. "Shave those sideburns!"
Mike D - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 01:45 PM EDT (#92075) #
A nice play, made necessary by the fact that Jeter was late in getting back to back up at home.

I'm personally inclined toward Craig's argument in general, but this isn't a fair point.

It's never the shortstop's responsibility to back up the plate on a ball hit into the corner, runner on first. As a matter of fact, I can't ever think of a time when a shortstop should be backing up the plate, rather than covering the bag second or serving as a cutoff man.

Say what you will about Jeter, but that was truly a breathtaking display of heads-up instinct. From second, he saw that the throw wouldn't have enough juice to nail the runner, so he acted quickly and intervened. He wasn't "late" to do anything.

I don't agree with Tucker's point that it was "instinct and intangibles" that won the 2001 ALDS for New York. But I also don't agree with the most hardline Beaneophiles that insist it was "luck and more luck" that did in the A's.

I say it's more like talent and depth. For the A's final inning in that series, Mariano Rivera's opponents were Crash Myers, Olmedo Saenz and Eric Byrnes. Not horrible, but not championship-worthy, either.

Now having said that, I will agree that to whatever extent "instinct" and/or "intangibles" can influence the outcome of a game, I wouldn't want Little G on my team.
_Rusty Priske - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 02:58 PM EDT (#92076) #
Derek Jeter's Defensive Win Shares for this season thus far are 1.10. This is not good by any stretch of the imagination.

1. Valentin - 7.44
2. Tejada - 7.35
3. Rodriguez - 6.02
4. Garciaparra - 5.92
5. Guzman - 5.88
6. Berroa - 4.93
7. Cruz - 4.73
8. Eckstein - 4.70
9. Woodward - 4.50
10. Lugo - 4.22
11. Guillen - 3.98
12. Bordick - 3.76
13. Santiago - 3.57
14. Vizquel - 3.10
15. McLemore - 3.06
16. Graffanino - 2.94
17. Infante - 2.57
18. Peralta - 2.30
19. Sanchez - 1.78
20. Ordonez - 1.66
21. Jeter - 1.10
22. Wilson - 1.06

That is Enrique Wilson at 22. Jeter has given the Yanks only slightly more defensive value than Enrique Wilson so far this year.
Craig B - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 03:04 PM EDT (#92077) #
It's never the shortstop's responsibility to back up the plate on a ball hit into the corner, runner on first. As a matter of fact, I can't ever think of a time when a shortstop should be backing up the plate, rather than covering the bag second or serving as a cutoff man.

My mistake, actually. Thinking about the play, Jeter is the backup *cutoff man* on such a play and he is supposed to do exactly what he did...react to the throw and relay it where necessary. He's not backing up the plate, he's the second cutoff guy.

As the play unfolded, it was a fine play, there's no disputing that.
Mike D - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 03:46 PM EDT (#92078) #
That great play in 2001 notwithstanding, Jeter is error-prone and has poor range up the middle (although his range in the hole is good). I'm not surprised that he's near the bottom of the defensive Win Shares chart.

But it's odd that Jose Valentin and his erratic arm checks in at #1. Can anyone verify my anecdotal observation that Chicago has a groundball staff? That might be what's enhancing his defensive win shares. He might also be exceptionally well-positioned, since I've always viewed him as a stiff (rather than rangy) fielder.
_Spicol - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 04:44 PM EDT (#92079) #
http://www.baseballgraphs.com/winshares/alwinfield.html#ss
Regarding the fielding Win Shares for SS list...it's influenced by playing time. If you look at the list of WS/1000inn (COMN), and consider every player who played more than 10 innings, you'll see that at 1.23 WS/1000inn, Jeter is the absolute worst rated SS in the majors.

Good glove-no hit shortstops used to be rather prevelant. Then came a general acceptance that no glove-good hit guys were ok too. It's remarkable to see how many shortstops today are no glove-no hit or at least mediocre glove-no hit.
Mike D - Monday, September 15 2003 @ 06:58 PM EDT (#92080) #
After looking at Spicol's link, out of all shortstops with more than 200 innings played, Jose Valentin is second in win shares/1000 innings only to...Tony Graffanino, also of the White Sox.

With all due respect, those two aren't Honus and Ozzie. It's got to be a groundball-coaxing staff.
Game 148: A Class Act | 40 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.