A Rather Quick Set of Comparisons
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 11, 2009 2:30 PM EDT
94 comments
If the Rays are seriously pondering trading Carl Crawford within the next month and a half, they have two templates to work from. Two seasons ago the Rangers shipped Mark Teixeira to the Braves for an unholy package - some of those parts are the reason why the Rangers are on their way to the playoffs as of today - and last year the Pirates swapped Jason Bay around in a three-team deal. Both had a season and a half remaining on their deals, and not surprisingly, were close in value to what Crawford is.
Financially Carl is right in between the duo. If a team trades for him right at the halfway point they'll owe Carl about 4 million this season and 10 million next year. Teixeira was owed 4.5 and 12.5; Bay was owed 2.9 and 7.5 million. That's ~14 million, ~17 million, and ~10 million. That's just about the average of Bay/Teixeira.
In terms of playing performance, let's use FanGraphs WAR. Year "n" is the year of being traded to that date, n-1 is the year before, and so on.
Crawford
n-3 4.5
n-2 3.1
n-1 2.7
n 2.2
Teixeira
n-3 5.4
n-2 3.1
n-1 3.8
n 2.0
Bay
n-3 6.4
n-2 5.5
n-1 0.1
n 2.4
Of course, the metrics that some front offices use will vary, but FanGraphs WAR is the best one publicly available and close enough for our purposes. Crawford is right there with the pair.
The Rays owe it to themselves to listen. If someone hits them with a Teixeira-like package, holy crap do it.
0 recs |
94 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
What I think would be funny and viable
Would be for the Rangers to trade for CC with the same pieces they got for Teixeira. Maybe swap one piece out for Smoak.
I think they’d be a great partner especially if we do it soon given the Hamilton injury.
by matthan on Jun 11, 2009 2:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Is Crawford the same type of impact as Bay and Tex?
I just don’t see him commanding as much. He may be worth as much but I don’t think he’d command as much. Power bats always get more attention and Bay and Tex were both seen as difference makers. Would Crawford be viewed the same way?
I also don’t see Crawford as the type of guy to be taken at the deadline to bolster a team. He just doesn’t scream impact player. I see a much better market after this season.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 2:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually I'd say Bay easily had the lowest value
His star was pretty diminished due to his really poor previous year. Still very good but CC is more valuable.
Also the earlier we trade him the more we get for him.
by matthan on Jun 11, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I strongly disagree...
We’re talking about the type of player who will make a difference in the stretch run. I think power hitters will always have an advantage over all other types. CC may be more valuable over the length of the season, but I think power is at a premium come trade deadline.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, but
I don’t think the perception that the deadline is for gaining offense or bench defense is far off.
Of course, the last team that traded for a ton of defense also won the World Series that year, so maybe that helps.
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 11, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no idea what the means...
If you’re saying defensive runs = offensive runs (which I imagine you are) than that is a silly statement to make.
One issue with the rise of sabr type stats is that we often blur the difference between perception and reality. A power hitter (especially ones like Bay and Tex who are more than just HR guys) has a much higher value over a short season because their strengths are immediate and easily identified. A player that has a lot of their value tied up in defense just doesn’t have the same perceived value over the shorter period of time. Of course in reality CC may be as valuable when defense is factored, but it’s not enough to overcome the perception of what a big bat brings.
Of course that may be old fashioned, but if I was in a pennant race on July 31st and had a choice between Jason Bay or CC I would take Bay every time. Not to mention Bay had a more favorable contract.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's merely a perception.
Carl is not exactly an offensive lightweight. He has a 392 wOBA for the season, and before last year, he had two back to back 360 wOBA. Bay may have more power and have better offense, but in terms of the total package, you’re getting a better player with Carl.
by Suttree on Jun 11, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure if I doubt that...
My argument is not about the better player. It’s about the player who is perceived as the better acquisition for a playoff run. It has been and always will be the power guy.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meh.
Carl steals a fuck load of bases and is perceived to be an exciting player. That has to matter some if we’re talking about perceptions.
by Suttree on Jun 11, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is turning a different direction...
And sounding like perception > reality and thats not what I’m getting at.
In the end I don’t see Crawford netting what Bay or Tex got just because the skills that he has are not the ones that are generally valued most at the trade deadline. I’ll try and do some research on it a little later to see if I’m off base.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meh. I think we're on the same page.
You’re saying Carl’s value (which is somewhere between Tex and Bay) isn’t properly accounted for in the season.
by Suttree on Jun 11, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In years past, I think you would be correct.
But I think the defense/offense scale has shifted a bit with the recent success of the Rockies and Rays.
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 11, 2009 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus speed and basestealing are becoming rather chic
since we’ve reached the end of the “steroid era” (ugh, I feel dirty just typing that)
I could be wrong though
by staplemaniac on Jun 11, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One problem.
Teams that value defense properly aren’t going to give up the kind of cost-controlled value we were after.
by rglass44 on Jun 11, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand.
Teams that don’t know how to value defense could overpay.
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 11, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Heater would explode if we did trade CC.
That has to be thought of as a + to do this.
by nolesblogger on Jun 11, 2009 3:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Rangers do sound like an ideal partner
It’s not like we’ll trade him within the division, the Mets have a bare cupboard, the Dodgers don’t need an OF, though Kershaw and friends would be a nice starting point. The Cards could maybe use him, but it seems like their best spects are OF’s as well. The Braves just made their move, the Chisox don’t seem like a good fit, the Tigers are pretty slim in the farm. Angels have a ton of OF’s, the M’s could be a nice fit, but I don’t see them sticking around long enough for it to matter. An OF of Craw, F-Gut, and Ichiro could make most of the Seattle area cream their pants and they do have some interesting prospects.
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Brett Wallace
So long, Sweet Lime!
by PlayOnWords on Jun 11, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Put him on first for the Post-Pena years
I like it him, Joyce, Longo, Upton, Zobie, Bartlett, for a few years sounds like a pretty sick slugging corps.
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He likely be an excellent defensive 1B too.
I seriously doubt they move him, though. Could you imagine CC in front of Pujols, though? Wow.
by rglass44 on Jun 11, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts precisely.
Bonus – being able to say BRETT WALLACE, like from the Chappelle Show skit, every time he does something even marginally right.
So long, Sweet Lime!
by PlayOnWords on Jun 11, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I were him I would change my first name to Marcellus
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why's it always about race with you?
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
by kericr on Jun 11, 2009 3:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Zobrist's emergence makes Crawford very expendable
Zo moves out ot left and up to the 2 slot. We save a ton of money and collect a nice ransom. It makes too much sense unless the market is tighter than expected.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 3:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think trading away proven commodity Carl Crawford makes a ton more sense then trading away sudden star Ben Zobrist too, considering his long track record of being monster masher and all.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
by kericr on Jun 11, 2009 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you mess with Zobot he will play Christian music at full volume until your ears bleed.
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm serious about this.
I see the idea behind trading Crawford, and it’s sound enough, but there is a lot more talk about trading him then Zobrist, when personally I think the other way around.
Crawford is playing, to put it bluntly, like he has a 10.125m extention on the line that based on the way the market was last year, he’d have no chance of getting in free agency, and I think that this eludes people. And barring injury, Crawford’s going to be playing like it’s a contract year again next year. We’re going to get the absolute best out of CC for the next two years. Zobrist on the other hand, has about half a season to his credit of well above average play. Until I’ve seen enough out of him to indicate that it isn’t a fluke, he looks like Jonny Gomes in his rookie season to me.
If Josh Hamilton, one year removed from a lengthy drug-induced suspension can net Edison Volquez, I don’t see why we risk losing the ability to compete by trading the known quality that is Carl Crawford versus the still relatively unknown quality that is Ben Zobrist.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
by kericr on Jun 11, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great points man
It comes down to risk/reward valuation both on our end and on the end of another GM. Look at Ludwick. He’s been dinged this year, but he will probably never have another full season like last year. We are in a similar situation with Zobot who had 1.1 years of service time coming into this season. I think that is the big difference, we have a year of free baseball to see what is up and 3 years of arb left.
I like your points on CC and the market. 2 great years out of him and if the market is still depressed (a huge and unlikely if) then we can get him for a similar below-market deal as to what he has now. That said, who casts a bigger net when it comes to opposing teams?
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Zobrist makes the ASG, the gap will close significantly
But if you’re looking at this moment, CC brings in a king’s ransom.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
by kericr on Jun 11, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Playing devil's advocate
Do you put any stock in the idea that CC would be better off getting off our lawn and hopefully extending his speed-based skill set? I don’t see any sort of decline over the next two years, but then he goes away and we get significantly less
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not against trading him his contract year, assuming his loss does not significantly effect the Rays playoff hopes
Either what he returns dampens his loss enough and brings back prospects in a playoff race, or the Rays aren’t within striking distance when they decide to trade him, or they trade him in the offseason before next year starts.
I’m also not against trading him if the Rays are 10 games out at the ASB, in my eyes, they’d be essentially out of the playoff picture.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
by kericr on Jun 11, 2009 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zobrist's trade value won't come close to his actual value
So there is no reason to trade him.
He’s under team control for three more years and his hot streak is really too impressive to try to cash in on.
The difference between Zobrist and Gomes is positional flexibility and skill set. I don’t think Zobrist’s power > Gomes power but every other skill is.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gomes was only similar in power
Zo’s best BB:K ratio was about half of Zo’s. Zo’s OBP is currently about .050 higher. Zo is an abover average outfielder where Gomes is dreadful.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is this a messed up word problem?
Zo’s best is half of Zo’s?
by Buc Wild on Jun 11, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zo's BB:K ratio twice Gomes
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not trying to compare them statistically as players
I’m comparing them as players who are vastly overachieving their expectations. And Gomes was not a dreadful outfielder his first season up, between his speed and range, he was actually OK; he got worse at tracking balls in the dome as time went on and when he injured his shoulder his 2nd year he lost his arm in the outfield.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
by kericr on Jun 11, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zo is so selective
He swings at good pitches to hit. It makes a big difference. The better pitches you swing at, the better your chances of slugging the ball.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this...
I’m not one to agree with FreeZorilla too often, but its a mistake to compare Gomes in his rookie season to Zobrist. Zobrist is a 2-7 run defender in the outfielder with legitamate discipline to his credit. The offense he has been putting up was more than Gomes anway.
by Navi's_Navy on Jun 11, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
You disagree with me that often? As far as I remember we both agree Kapler, Gross, and Sonny are all good players. Zo vs Gross/Kapler was the only run-in I recall.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gross/Kapler is pretty much everything to me
And you’re right. It just seems that dissagreement has been more debated so it sticks out
by Navi's_Navy on Jun 11, 2009 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Edison Volquez wasn't anything special before he got traded for Hamilton
Consensus at the time was that they were trading a high risk player with a chance of being great for a mediocre player who was a known quantity.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
by Brickhaus on Jun 11, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carl Crawford is my friend that I eat lunch with everyday. Zobrist is the new cool kid that all the girls are talking about.
by BamaRama on Jun 11, 2009 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its not about dumping Carl so Zo can play
Its about saving a lot of money that can be used elsewhere, acquiring some pieces for now and later, and the fact we do have a more than servicable replacement with a low $ cost.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who will bring in a bigger reward?
CC, you also have Jennings in the system and Joyce if suddenly Zo decided he was s hwo bunt slap hitter again. The point is that there is depth. Carl is also playing like it’s a contract year. So is Zobrist and its not a contract year, He’s not just a monster masher, he has a higher OBP and much better plate discipline.
Maybe I’ wrong about Zo’s trade value and its higher than I think. But I’m pretty sure CC can bring in a nice ransom.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you really buy this Zobrist that much?
by rglass44 on Jun 11, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Enough to get the booty and cost savings that a CC trade would bring.
Do you buy this CC this much? You will never sell higher. If Rays fans are still skeptical on Zo you can imagine how the rest of the market feels. Of course, you can make the case for keeping both. Zobrist is OPSing almost .300 higher. I feel comfortable saying Zo should constently out OPS CC. It is essential for the Rays to be willing to part with talent at the right time. It seems like the right time, no?
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure I agree.
How many players MLB numbers are significantly better than their MILB numbers when they weren’t pushed along?
by rglass44 on Jun 11, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The discipline has always been there, a decent outfielder should have been expected
It comes down to whether you believe in the fact a player can change his swing dramatically and see results. It doesn’t happen often, but this is what I believe has happened. So far he has been too far a statistical outlier not to believe. How many examples of this type of success can you give me? He is the Outlier. He is also hitting every type of pitch so scouting reports shouldn’t make too big a difference.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did earlier
Ludwick 2008
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two immediate differences I notice
Plate discipline .42 BB/K for Lud vs nearly 1 for Zo. Zo is also an above average hitter on every pitch except for change up. Ludwick made a fastball killing last year, did ok with the changeup and was average or worse on the rest.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was referring more to the out of nowhere to great slugger side of it
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This probably will be Zo's best season (CC's too?)
I think he is at a minimum quality every day player. If he OPSes .800+ he is a good player. He OPSed .844 last year. His ability to hit every pitch and good sense of discipline makes it more difficult for opposing pitchers to adjust.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lud was always regarded as at least a passable power threat though, it was the plate vision that hurt him
at least that is what I recall
by Navi's_Navy on Jun 11, 2009 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outlier is the word I would use to describe this season.
by rglass44 on Jun 11, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It sucks. We'll probably be one of the four or five best teams via run differential.
But win only 88-90 games, and then win 98 next year.
by Suttree on Jun 11, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A lot...
A lot of players develop power in the majors vs. the minors.
Zobrist’s underlying skills were always there, the only thing that has changed is the power. Zobrist may be doing it a little later then others but it isn’t unprecedented…
Ryne Sandberg never had more than 11 HRs in the minors, though he was a bit younger during his stint…
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zobrist's emergence has nothing to do with trading Crawford
maybe the combination of a bunch of things (Joyce, Zobrist, Burrell, Aybar, etc), but Zobrist himself would have little effect.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So
If crawford leaves, what would happen to Justin Ruggiano, will he get called up?
We need Robots....The time is now Bud, Stern, and Goodell.
Seriously, Officiating Sucks in this Country
by Some other guy who does not care on Jun 11, 2009 3:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He's relegated to play out his days in Durham for not hustling on that pop fly he should have caught last year
serves him right
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Poor Guy
We need Robots....The time is now Bud, Stern, and Goodell.
Seriously, Officiating Sucks in this Country
by Some other guy who does not care on Jun 11, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does trading Crawford...
mean the Rays have given up on the year? I think the Rays keep him at least until the offseason. Rays are still marketing this team… and what is more markable than having a guy getting nat’l attention for his stolen bases.
Visit the Rays Revolutionary Blog at http://raysrev.blogspot.com
by Rays_Rev on Jun 11, 2009 3:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree here...
Not for the SB aspect, but with them getting a better market in the offseason…
I think trading CC before next season would be a bigger marketing hit then midseason.
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nein, IMO
BJ improvement, Burrell return, Barty return, Zo emergence offsets trading Carl. I also think the Rays would get at least one or two MLB ready – or close – prospects.
So long, Sweet Lime!
by PlayOnWords on Jun 11, 2009 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm talking about perception from the FO...
I think ownership got a good taste of winning last year and want more of it. They’ve already committed more $$$ this year than planned. I think that’s a trend that’s going to continue. Trading away CC is more like stepping backward. I would expect more of a move to bring a starter in, than get rid of one.
Visit the Rays Revolutionary Blog at http://raysrev.blogspot.com
by Rays_Rev on Jun 11, 2009 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it does.
Waiting until the off-season would be fine though, unless someone offers that “F’n A” package by August.
by R.J. Anderson on Jun 11, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do think that trading CC...
will be perceived by the general public as “same old Rays”. If the team is playing sub-500 ball trading away one of their most well known players got be disastrous to the long term perception of the franchise.
Boom. Outta Here.
by WillisDaddy on Jun 11, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If they can get an immediate C out of it
then the average fan will get immediate gratification. If its mostly prospects, you may be correct. Either way, the team is better off for the long haul.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Jun 11, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I keep thinking,"GIVE ME SALTY", but honestly, his track record isn't that great.
His big minor league seasons were under 150 ABs.
What other C’s would we target? It doesn’t sound like the Rangers are interested in giving up Teargarden.
by Suttree on Jun 11, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doumit would be nice.
Wouldn’t that kind of be a lateral move, though? CC isn’t going to help the Pirates compete this year.
by Suttree on Jun 11, 2009 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would not trade the package the Pirates got for Bay for CC.
by rglass44 on Jun 11, 2009 3:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
OT: Anybody see this from Dave Cameron
Here’s the starting OF for MIN tonight:
LF – Delmon Young, career -17.3 UZR/150 in left field.
CF – Michael Cuddyer, career -6.3 UZR/150 in right field. He’s playing center!
RF – Jason Kubel, career -15.7 UZR/150 in right field.
Rays Win!
by Sandy Kazmir on Jun 11, 2009 3:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I never realized Cuddyer was that bad defensively
I know he has a cannon and always ranks high with the arm…
by tallyray on Jun 11, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In 2008 Willie Harris was a 3.2 win player in 140 games.
Does anyone think that any team would trade anything of value for him?
by rglass44 on Jun 11, 2009 4:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Willie "Hollywood" Harris is the man
Swav or Die
For the lulz
by SRQman on Jun 11, 2009 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Problem depends on what the return pieces are for CC
If we fill a need at Catcher, bullpen and a positional player (2b?) or pull in an MLB ready player and two AAA prospects, it makes sense. If we only pull back prospects and aren’t getting the return, i doubt the FO moves CC. I have faith that they (the FO) make the right move for the current team and future team.
by Buc Wild on Jun 11, 2009 4:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I can't think of a lot of Catchers to build a trade around.
I don’t suppose SF would part with Posey for 1.5 yrs of CC, although he could fit well there. I don’t know enough of Sandoval’s fielding abilities to know if he could stick at C, but him along with Alderson would be intriguing.
by Mulva on Jun 11, 2009 7:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most teams don't value defense as much as offense
rightly or wrongly, and thus I doubt Crawford commands the kind of package that Tex was able to get. The ones that do properly value defense also tend to properly value other things as well, and thus it’s harder to get a good deal from those teams.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
by Brickhaus on Jun 11, 2009 5:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
