A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I could see Theo trading Iglesias and signing Reyes this winter

    The only problem is that you can't see. No chance this happens, even if Theo is that dumb.

    As much has Theo has botched the SS position, I could see almost anything happen when involving an "offensive SS". I didn't say I thought it would happen.

    You know Iglesias' offense is troubling Theo, otherwise he'd be playing in the bigs now.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Backing it up is repeating the same drivel, ad nauseum. This thread is almost exclusively about 2 droning loops:

    Then why not be a shining example and role model for the corrupt and immoral society of today and try keeping your promise to not come to this thread?


    1. Wakefield is a quality pitcher, great value, and has earned his active roster spot and any young player is unproven and would undercut essential MLB proven solid pitching depth not to resign Wakefield every year.  

    We've tried 20 pitches this year; I think any kid who was good enough to make the top 12, would have done it already.

    2. Tek has to be resigned every year or the pitching staff will not free fall, Buch included.

    VTek is a 40% playing time catcher. Nobody here said Buch needs VTek.
    The only re-occurring drone loop around here is you and your sidekick hero worshipper.

    Not much else on this Astrology thread.

    Then, why bother?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Some more tidbits:

    Starter WHIP numbers:
    Beckett  1.012  
    Wake     1.257
    Lest       1.276
    Buch      1.313
    Dice       1.404
    Aceb      1.438
    Lack       1.647

    Starter ERA:
    Beckett   2.06
    Buch        3.59
    Lester     3.73
    Aceves   4.50
    Wake      4.89
    Dice         4.95
    Lack        7.41

    Starter Opps against:
    Beck (536), Dice (646), Aceves (703), Lester (711),
    Wake (714), Buch (723), Lack (873)

    Starter ERA: 4.08  WHIP: 1.293  OPS .696
    Relief ERA:    4.08  WHIP: 1.299  OPS .698

    Relief WHIP (8+ IP):
    Hill      0.750
    Bard   0.866
    Acev  1.120
    Wake 1.125
    Pap    1.185
    Albe   1.333
    Atch   1.425
    Oki      1.440
    Whee  1.444
    Jenks  2.351


     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    If you take Hill out of the mix, Wake is 0.005 away from having the second best WHIP as a starter and the second best WHIP as a reliever for the Sox.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    "You know, I don't like to be talked to like a 5th grader."  Boomerangsdotcom

     "5th graders are willing to learn." harness

    Wow man you really are fitting into those shoes I cut for you quite well - your entire dialogue with boom the last 3 pages is exactly why I took you to task earlier this week, on the money.

    To ad salt to the wound by suggesting boom is hanging his hat with softy/burrito is just cruel - and a complete impossibility.  

    harness I told you before your condescending and always trying to educateus like children ... and now even boomerangs gets a lesson. Oh well enough said, proof is in the pudding.  



    Chow!

    Laughing


     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Harness, I sincerely do not remember ever posting something like I wish someone would die here in this forum. I know there are nut cases in the online world as I have quite a bit of experience online. Let me just say, probably a lot more experience online dealing with customers and others than anyone here. I've owned 2 online companies for over 10 years, dealing with online customers every day, 6 days a week. Hundreds of thousands of them over 10 years. I would never state flatly that I wish someone would die. I think something is not being translated literally. I am fully aware of just how crazy some people are and would never do that. In the way you've stated. 
     
    I do remember one nut case telling me here that "I better not come near his perimeter" after he took great leangth to tell us all how much military background he had. He basically threatened me with violence and with his back ground and extreme opinions it was ceratinly possible that something could happen. Maybe you are confusing things with that guy.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from wherescreemingcomesfrom. Show wherescreemingcomesfrom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    WHIP is obviuously a better stat to judge pitchers by than era, but, moon, do you think era might be more relevant in Wake's case?

    I ask because it seems to me like Wake has a downside that many of the others don't - runners moving up against him because of the speed of the knuckler and its occassional wildness. It seems like era might capture this added wrinkle to his game better than whip (which is unusual).

    I don't ask to bash wake, I think anyone that doesn't see his value on this team is willfully blind, I just think the anomaly of how to consider him statistically is interesting.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Harness, you are effectively saying that Tek was worth 8 more wins than Martinez in 2010. Is that correct? It seems clear that you are saying that. Look at Fangraphs WAR ratings between the 2. Someone is off kilter just a bit. Is it Fangraphs or You?

    Victor MArtinez: 3.8 WAR

    Tek: 0.6 WAR

    In other words, Victor was worth over 6 times as much as Tek in terms of WINS generated per season. To calculate "wins" Fangraphs uses 10 runs per win. In other words they have Victor resulting in 32 more runs earned or saved than Tek.

    Your calculations appear to clearly indicate that you think Tek earned or saved runs at a pace which was over 80 runs more than Victor. How messed up is that. Are you onto something which completely throws the top baseball analyst opinions out the window?

    If you want to argue your case with over 1000 more posts feel free but I've given this at least 10 posts over the past year, and over 20 if I remember correctly, and I don't want to argue until I'm blue in the face over something this messed up. So many baseball analyst give CERA a lower impact that it is just extremely likely that you have overstated it's significance. Here is just another example but there are many more:

    http://bb_catchers.tripod.com/catchers/cera1.htm
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I'm NOT going to waste more time on this. WTFB.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]I could see Theo trading Iglesias and signing Reyes this winter The only problem is that you can't see. No chance this happens, even if Theo is that dumb. As much has Theo has botched the SS position, I could see almost anything happen when involving an "offensive SS". I didn't say I thought it would happen. You know Iglesias' offense is troubling Theo, otherwise he'd be playing in the bigs now.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]To be honest Moon, I don't see Epstein going anywhere near Reyes this winter because he will have other fish to fry and will have to deal will marginal budget in doing so, unless the RS are to become perennial payers of CBT.

    Inglesias' offense should be troubling. He has a .275 OBP and a .516 OPS. The kid only has 459 PAs in the minors. While his defense may be MLB ready his offense isn't, even for a light hitting SS. So it isn't a matter of anything more IMO than the RS developing a kid has played 114 games in the minors so far. The fact that they moved him to AAA after only 70 games, with only 57 of them being in AA shows they are attempting to fast track the kid.

    Reyes doesn't strike me as a player that the RS will plunk down big $$$ for with is .339 career OBP just because he is having a great start to his walk year. Not when they have big increases coming for the guys on roster and will have to deal with what to do about the closer and the DH.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Reyes is a huge risk. I wouldn't put money down on him either. Tremendous talent but risky as heck.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    UR pattern has become predictable. You bring up "CERA", then drop it like a hot potato once UR challenged. Until you read the CATCHER'S RELEVANCE THREAD, become accustomed to the data, and the reference links, there's not much point in discussing it any further. I spent too much time on it last year.

    I don't put as much faith in WAR as others do. The difference a good catcher can make over a poor one is blatantly obvious. It just depends on which area you wish to prioritize. Without acknowledging the facts that will compromise UR position, it's easy to negate or diminish statistical data covering thousands of innings over several years.

    See, I don't think it's a coincidence that Salty was thrust into a role prematurely and the team started poorly. Is it all Salty's fault? Of course not. But I also don't think it's a coincidence that the pitching staff went on an incredible run when as soon as Tito started playing Tek over Salty.

    Things then began to stabilize when Tito addressed each catcher to certain pitchers.

    Yes, I'm  familiar with your two companies and the land you own and the heights you have reached, Boom. You state it more often than anybody else would even think to on a public forum.

    And yes, you said you wanted Softy to die. I brought it to UR attention in the hopes you'd delete it. (You stood by it). If you like, I'll find the exact quote and post it. But doing so would obviously draw more attention to it and jeopardize your standing. I don't wish to see that happen, but if you want to call me out on it, I'll prove it to you.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I don't believe I did it Harness but so be it. No doubt Softlaw and I went right at it but how would you feel if someone accused you of something like that and you didn't remember doing it? It just seems like your position is so groundless you are pulling this thing out of nowhere to change the subject. Just like Softy. 

    I cited my online experience for a reason. I'm fully aware of the danger of dealing with thousands of people on the internet. There is a nut case around every corner. Even more reason to try to maintain decorum even in annonymous online forums. I've had my life threatened twice. Actual death threats. It happens if you talk to enough crazies on the internet.

    Sometimes people accuse you of outrageous things and I guess I'm not supposed to respond. Sometimes people talk down to you like a little kid and I'm supposed to put up with that also. I chose not to ignore it. As if I only paid more att4ention I would agree with you and since I do not I'm just not getting it. Matter of factly. Maybe I'm missing some arcane knowledge about CERA, but if I am, there are thousands of other baseball number crunchers who are missing the same thing. To give the credence you give to CERA is extreme. It is definitely a minority position.

    I don't need to read 1100 posts to understand plenty of the data and get the gist of CERA. And if you need that many posts to win over 2-3 converts then maybe there is something seriously flawed with that position. I think I've communicated it in a very realistic manner and it's just flat out ridiculous to say that if Tek were the primary catcher last year we would have won 8 more games, as compared to Martinez. I guess Tito and Theo are crazy. Real dumbbells for blowing 8 games.

    Consider this. Tek hasn't hit higher than .234 in 4 years now and he's worth 8 more wins than one of the best hitting catchers in the game? You are essentially saying that Tek would result in 12 more wins from defense alone because he loses at least 4 wins from his offensive deficiencies, as compared to Victor. We only have 95 wins per year at best normally but your position is stating that the defensive aspect of Tek's game is worth 12 wins more than the defensive capabilities of Martinez?

    I shouldn't have to respond more to posts like that. It is so groundless that it is absurd. It just is. Do I really need to read 1100 posts to come to that conclusion or is it easily disputed just from the scale of the descrepancy alone.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Framing is a very important skill and can have may implications beyond the simple balls and strikes. Pitchers can work corners more effectively and throw fewer pitches. It's difficult to quantify just exactly what a good pitch framer brings in terms of wins or losses or ERA. But framing is NOT one of Tek's better skills. If anything he is occasionally guilty of umpire baiting by moving the glove at the last instant into the strike zone and holding there. A good framer does not move his glove but rather subtly moves his body so he's always catching the ball in the middle of his body, giving the impression that the ball is right in the middle of the strike zone.  Tek's great track record is a sum of all his parts; great preparation, knowledge of how to set up hitters, an innate sense of what pitch will work best for that particular pitcher against a particular hitter at a particular point in the game, and a supreme knowledge of his pitcher's strengths and weaknesses. Add all that to better than normal hands, decent framing ability, and for much of his career, above average offense from the catcher position and you have a guy who's won world titles and caught four no-hitters.
    Posted by jidgef[/QUOTE]


    I meant to compliment this post yesterday, Jid. UR insight as a catcher is invaluable. As I see it, pitch framing is more a reflection on a mediocre/poor ump.
    If you check out BASEBALL REF.COM under yearly splits of a given pitcher, not only are the results readily available for each catcher, but with every single umpire.

    Clemens used to research every umpire's tendencies. I've known some umps who felt blatant framing showed them up, and they didn't take to it kindly. A good ump won't let it affect his decisions.

    I have issues with Tek's targets. I like the late movement and how he sets them (Salty doesn't set them well at the last instant, IMO), but I don't think he does his pitchers any favors by setting the targets near waist high. Especially with Buch, as he has to keep his stuff at the knees.

    I always liked a target at the knees. If a pitcher has strong lateral movement, like Josh's two-seamer, then glove placement, which serves as a pitcher's reference point, needs to be knee-high. If there's downward action, like on a splitter, then even lower. Of course, a vet like Beckett makes the adjustments.

    As for placement, setting up on either corner works well for pitchers like Colon, who have minimal movement on their heat. But when you're dealing with a nasty slider/cutter, or catching Dice, setting up in the middle of the plate allows for a greater margin for error.

    At lower levels of competition, the umpiring is not that great. They tend not to give a pitcher the outer edge. Which means the pitch has to find more of the plate.
    Speaking for myself, I had a decent slider. My fastball set it up. I wanted my catcher to set up at the knees in the middle of the plate.

    This allowed me to catch the outer edge. And if movement was predictable, I'd hit my spot in his mitt. That way, I'd get the call. Obviously, the whole idea is to limit the area of what I called the point of break. Where a catcher catches it shouldn't sway any ump. Only where it crosses the plate is it relevant.

    In his pre-juiced prime, Clemens could hit the outside corner and the ball would end up way off the plate. It was an unhittable strike, but more likely to be called as frequently at the ML level.

    The fact Tek is so successful with his pitchers throughout his tenure is evidence that the physical tangibles are clearly outweighed by the cerebral intangibles.
    That's why I feel catchers make poor hitters. Yes, it's a physically demanding position. But I believe the attention given to pitchers/hitters behind the dish
    detracts from the concentration a hitter requires in order to make adjustments at bat to at bat, game to game.

    As Teddy Ballgame would say, hitting is mental. And without the necessary prep work and attention to detail, it becomes more reactionary. When we see a hitter like AGONE, we see a beautiful swing and astounding contact. What we don't see is the hours of dedication he puts into researching video. Nor do we see the mental process which allows for such frequent contact.

    In the same manner, the reason a catcher's relevance is so hard to visually detect is because it too is more mental than physical. Thus, the results are but a by-product of that.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    OK Boom. I'll find the quote. I don't make groundless statements to "change the subject". But forgetting you ever made it is a nice convenience. I know I'd never forget making such a deranged statement like that.

    If you take an underlined word as 'being treated like a kid', I can see how you'd want to forget a death wish.
    I've been here since 2007 and I've underlined thousands of words. You are the only one to take issue with it.

    If you don't care to read 1300 posts, I don't blame you. But you won't benefit from the data. It's like saying you don't need to read War & Peace to know the story. Just the preface is fine. Just keep believing all the "experts "who write articles measuring the data incorrectly...and admitting to it. But not willing to take the time to research it properly. Researching it involves going pitcher to pitcher with each catcher on a given team, year to year. 10 - 50 years. Very time consuming, as credible examples are really hard to find. This has to be done with every single team and every single pitcher.

    You think "CERA" is a minority position on this board? Posters got involved in that memorable thread and the majority no longer turn a blind eye to it. You and Softy and a few others now constitute the "minority", because you didn't get involved in it. See nothing. Hear nothing. Know nothing.

    Tek hasn't hit in years. Didn't stop the team from reaching the points they did in 2007/8. Then Tek was benched in the 2009 PO's. VMART hit well in 2009, did he not?
    Tek saw limited action in 2010. The team still won 67% of the games he started. And he caught the lower level pitchers. This year, Salty gets Buch/Lester, yet somehow the team still plays at a .650 - .667 clip with Tek catching. Voo-doo at it's best!!!

    The team plays over .600 baseball with him starting ever since he became a FT catcher. .505 when he sits. It's a direct correlation to how much more he gets out of his pitchers. But hey, don't these facts sway you from such a "groundless position".
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    While I think Harness is capable of overstating the case for CERA--and certainly dwells on it a lot--I also think it is hard to argue against the use of Varitek this year.  He catches two out of five pitchers right now, and they are producing.  That said, Salty has improved steadily behind the plate and at the plate and seems to be a pretty good risk taken by the FO. 

    I vehemently disagree with boomerangsdotcom about the presumed value of V-Mart to this year's team.  First and foremost, he ain't a full-time catcher.  Secondly, when he isn't catching he expects to play 1B or DH and both of those positions are now filled by better hitters.   Also, had V-Mart stayed, the Sox would still have to look for their catcher of the future, whereas right now it sure looks like they have found him. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Gee Max: Why do you think I have to over-state it?
    Ya think it just might have something to do with certain posters who aren't aware - or are allergic - to the over-whelming data supporting how relevant catcher's really are?



    Tigers are deploying VMART properly. Boston never did.

    Current data (limited to offensive stats) :

    VMART as catcher: 11 H  55 AB  (.200)   0 HR  6 RBI    .258 OBP  .531 OPS

    Not catching:        48 H  132  AB  (.364)  6 HR  29 RBI  .414 OBP  1.115 OPS
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Max, it does appear that Salty is working out better now and at no point did I say the deal wasn't worth doing. My point was that it was very risky given Salty's recent performances the past several years, including hitting around .250 in over 300 minor league AB while experiencing a case of the Yips. The trend lines were not good. I would have felt better if Salty started the year in AAA.

    Martinez is hitting over .310 right now for the year. If you guys think Salty is better than that what more can I say? Victor must be a God awful defensive catcher for people to believe Salty is better. And as of this moment Salty is at his absolute peak for the year. Hopefully Salty will get even better than his current .252 BA but it took all year to reach that level. 

    Imagine this lineup with Victor still in it. Being in this lineup helps a lot of hitter's numbers. Victor in the 8th or 9th slot in the lineup like Salty is now.

    I haven't been disparaging Tek this much this year I don't think. He is the sub. He's a good defender. I just didn't like relying on Salty to come through given his performance over the past several years. Texas gave up on him.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]OK Boom . I'll find the quote. I don't make groundless statements to "change the subject". But forgetting you ever made it is a nice convenience. I know I'd never forget making such a deranged statement like that. If you take an underlined word as 'being treated like a kid', I can see how you'd want to forget a death wish. I've been here since 2007 and I've underlined thousands of words. You are the only one to take issue with it. If you don't care to read 1300 posts, I don't blame you. But you won't benefit from the data. It's like saying you don't need to read War & Peace to know the story. Just the preface is fine. Just keep believing all the "experts "who write articles measuring the data incorrectly...and admitting to it. But not willing to take the time to research it properly. Researching it involves going pitcher to pitcher with each catcher on a given team, year to year. 10 - 50 years. Very time consuming, as credible examples are really hard to find. This has to be done with every single team and every single pitcher. You think "CERA" is a minority position on this board? Posters got involved in that memorable thread and the majority no longer turn a blind eye to it. You and Softy and a few others now constitute the "minority", because you didn't get involved in it. See nothing . Hear nothing. Know nothing. Tek hasn't hit in years. Didn't stop the team from reaching the points they did in 2007/8. Then Tek was benched in the 2009 PO's. VMART hit well in 2009, did he not? Tek saw limited action in 2010. The team still won 67% of the games he started. And he caught the lower level pitchers. This year, Salty gets Buch/Lester, yet somehow the team still plays at a .650 - .667 clip with Tek catching. Voo-doo at it's best!!! The team plays over .600 baseball with him starting ever since he became a FT catcher. .505 when he sits. It's a direct correlation to how much more he gets out of his pitchers.  But hey, don't these facts sway you from such a " groundless position".
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Go ahead Harness, go through 8000 of my posts for what you think I said. I'm sure it was EXACTLY as you have positioned it. Right? That ought to be pleasant reading, me and Softy going at it for hours at a time.

    I really don't need to read through 1100 or 1300 posts or whatever it was to know that Tek and his last year's .232 average wasn't worth 8 MORE WINS than the .301 hitting Victor Martinez last year. Go ahead and change the subject. Go ahead and distort and obscure. It is flat out ridiculous. Nothing shot of ridiculous. If you think I'm not wanting to talk about this subject because the facts are in your favor dream on.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    boom you could sift through the last 8000 posts by harness and it will only go as far back as May 1st, 2011.... very time consuming.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]boom you could sift through the last 8000 posts by harness and it will only go as far back as May 1st, 2011.... very time consuming.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    NWIH I would spend time doing it. BTW, I don't want your help.

    Harness is extreme on this issue but he is a great poster nonetheless.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from betterredthandead. Show betterredthandead's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    VMart is only slugging at .500. Spending the money on Crawford and his .280's OBP and saving the money at catcher was really smart. Why would the Red Sox want VMart to catch about 100 games, DH about 20 games, and play first about 10 games, a solid defensive catcher to catch about 62 games and come in for some close games in late innings? VMart catching the first 2 years of the contract and then moving to DH and backup catching in the last 2 years, why on earth would they do something like that?


    Salty and Tek have been difference makers, and Tek is ready to go 3 more years and continue his magic.   
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II : NWIH I would spend time doing it. BTW, I don't want your help. Harness is extreme on this issue but he is a great poster nonetheless.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    If I was trying to help you I would be hurt by your remark... as I said earlier you probably took it as an insult when it was suggested you might be hanging "your hat" on my side of the isle.... 

    Actually moonslav59 is a great poster, as is fivekatz.  Great posters don't go at it like you two are right now.


     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    My God, Softy actually agrees with me on something. I'll have to reconsider!

    Ortiz becoming superman again obviates my position. I never expected what Ortiz is currently doing. If I had to make that decision again given the information available to us today I wouldn't do it. I would have let Martinez go if I knew Ortiz was going to be superman again.

    But who would have projected that last winter?

    Martinez would have been of some value as a catcher and done well as a DH. He's currently hitting .316 with above a .800 OPS. Even if he was primarily our DH he would have been a safer bet last winter than Ortiz, at about the same money, and he would have freed up a roster spot. My whole projection factored in a decline for Ortiz. We all know what happened though don't we. How were we to project that? Maybe the management team were smart to pick up his option, forcing a one year deal. If they did a multiple year deal would he be the same player right now?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    You are right Burrito on one thing. It should be fun here and it isn't right now. Sometimes we can't agree to disagree. That is very unfortunate.

    I'm taking a hiatus for a while. I'd rather just watch the games and have some fun. I'm very sick right now and I'm no fun for anyone. I'll be back eventually I'm sure.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share