... and Smoltz is Not Far Behind

jacksonianmarch · January 8, 2009

You guys love to pick on Burnett, but we arent talking the same issues here.

First of all, Smoltz is a different beast altogether. The guy is one of the toughest mo fo's you are gonna find. But his once 98mph fastball was down into the 92 range prior to his arm injury. Now, after reconstructive shoulder surgery, he will not even be ready if everything goes well until mid May at the earliest. How effective will he be?

Brad Penny was a guy who had flashes of brilliance in Florida but had intermittent injuries. Got to LA where he was less brilliant but much for durable for 3 yrs (29, 33, 34 starts respectively). Then, last yr, he has a shoulder injury that saps him of all his power and allows him to get slapped around the park. Who knows if he is even healthy?

Then we get to Burnett. The only one of the trio who is not currently injured. He gained a lot of notoriety for being injury prone in Florida, but since his tommy john surgery, he has actually been pretty durable.

2005- 32 starts- 209IP

2006- 21 starts- 135IP

2007- 25 starts- 169IP

2008- 34 starts- 221IP

Compare this to your current ace (Beckett) and AJ has averaged 6 innings less per season since 2005 (183IP per season). So, while he isnt the most durable pitcher out there, he has shown a significant improvement in his durability since recovering from Tommy John surgery.

Another thing I will say about Burnett is that, when he pitches, he dominates. There are some pitchers who will take the mound and suck if they arent 100%. Burnett doesnt do that. Granted, it doesnt sound like he pitches at anything less than 90%, but you know when he takes the mound, he's gonna be solid. I'll take that. Nothing worse than a Clemens outing in the playoffs where he's 50% and is only gonna hurt the team.

rician blast · January 8, 2009

Might I be so bold to suggest that if the moves the Red Sox did make blow up and if their lack of other moves proves damaging to their results in 2009, that perhaps the outcome, i.e.not making the playoffs, was something even the FO was willing to accept?

It may not make the fans happy, but IMO it's a reality. I believe this FO considers the possibility and weighs whether its acceptable or not to miss the playoffs under the presumption that their moves/lack of moves serve the greater good of the organization in the long-term...and the owners in the short term ($$$).

rician blast · January 8, 2009

Nothing worse than a Clemens outing in the playoffs where he's 50% and is only gonna hurt the team.

Let me fix that for you:

Nothing worse than a Clemens outing in the playoffs.

BSN07 · January 9, 2009

Might I be so bold to suggest that if the moves the Red Sox did make blow up and if their lack of other moves proves damaging to their results in 2009, that perhaps the outcome, i.e.not making the playoffs, was something even the FO was willing to accept?

It may not make the fans happy, but IMO it's a reality. I believe this FO considers the possibility and weighs whether its acceptable or not to miss the playoffs under the presumption that their moves/lack of moves serve the greater good of the organization in the long-term...and the owners in the short term ($$$).

It's reasonable theory. Isn't the FO, ownership group on record saying they hope to be competitive 3 out of 4 or 4 out 5 years?

Dojji · January 9, 2009

I think they sasid 4 out of 5 but I don't imagine that that's any kind of concrete mathematical formula. More like that they intend to make the postseason most years but don't intend to go crazy if circumstances conspire against them in any given season.

jacksonianmarch · January 9, 2009

I thought it was 7 or 8 of every 10 yrs with 2-3 yrs to retool

Dojji · January 9, 2009

No, that's the Yankees.

rician blast · January 9, 2009

I thought it was 7 or 8 of every 10 yrs with 2-3 yrs to retool

This is my recollection as well. I think when they do decide not to spend they're not only setting up for future years but also lining some pockets as well.

RedSoxRooter · January 9, 2009

Might I be so bold to suggest that if the moves the Red Sox did make blow up and if their lack of other moves proves damaging to their results in 2009' date=' that perhaps the outcome, i.e.not making the playoffs, was something even the FO was willing to accept?[/quote']

I think that's the way they are anyway. I think they have options, take chances, have a budget and smart people, and how it works out is a matter of debate. But if they don't make the playoffs they will look into why they didn't and try and address the problem.

I don't think they necessarily say "this year we're going to make a few changes with the idea of not making the playoffs" more than once every 5 years or so. And that's probably because of a bad market.

jacksonianmarch · January 9, 2009

This is my recollection as well. I think when they do decide not to spend they're not only setting up for future years but also lining some pockets as well.

and if you want to line pockets, there is nothing wrong with that. Just dont pretend like you are poor when you are doing that.

example1 · January 9, 2009

This may take a bit to format correctly, please hang with me

You guys love to pick on Burnett' date=' but we arent talking the same issues here. [/quote']

No, we love to pick on you, because you keep bringing up Burnett as someone the Sox missed out on. Burnett was out of the picture until you inflated him into something we should have coveted.

First of all, Smoltz is a different beast altogether. The guy is one of the toughest mo fo's you are gonna find. But his once 98mph fastball was down into the 92 range prior to his arm injury. Now, after reconstructive shoulder surgery, he will not even be ready if everything goes well until mid May at the earliest. How effective will he be?

We will have to find out, won't we? You're right though, he is a tough s.o.b.. I'm glad the Sox got him.

Brad Penny was a guy who had flashes of brilliance in Florida but had intermittent injuries. Got to LA where he was less brilliant but much for durable for 3 yrs (29, 33, 34 starts respectively). Then, last yr, he has a shoulder injury that saps him of all his power and allows him to get slapped around the park. Who knows if he is even healthy?

Good thing the Sox didn't spend much on him.

Then we get to Burnett. The only one of the trio who is not currently injured.

And the only one who isn't on the Sox and who nobody was comparing to Smoltz and Penny anyway. Again, you like to make these arguments with yourself, as if people are comparing Burnett and Smoltz and Penny. Nobody is. Continue anyway...

He gained a lot of notoriety for being injury prone in Florida, but since his tommy john surgery, he has actually been pretty durable.

2005- 32 starts- 209IP
2006- 21 starts- 135IP
2007- 25 starts- 169IP
2008- 34 starts- 221IP

Yeah, I think the Yankees will be pretty happy if he puts up an seasons of 135 and 169 IP at 16.5m per season. Pretty low standards if you ask me.

Compare this to your current ace (Beckett) and AJ has averaged 6 innings less per season since 2005 (183IP per season). So, while he isnt the most durable pitcher out there, he has shown a significant improvement in his durability since recovering from Tommy John surgery.

While we're comparing the innings pitched by Beckett and Burnett, let's compare Marginal Wins (wins above replacement) during that time, shall we?

Burnett (WARP)
08: 5.9
07: 5.1
06: 4
05: 5.9

Beckett (WARP)
08: 5.8
07: 8.2
06: 5.6
05: 6.7

Over the very same years that you were comparing IP Burnett has averaged 5.225 Marginal Wins. Beckett has averaged 6.575 Marginal Wins.

I'm sure Burnett has cost his team less though, right?

Cost per Marginal Win since 2005:

Burnett:
08: $2.03m
07: $2.35m
06: $1.75m
05: $.619m

Beckett:
08: $1.64m
07: $.975m
06: $.77m
05: $.358m

So, Beckett has been the better value to his team, as he wins more in roughly the same number of innings, and he cost less.

Now, let's suppose that both of these pitchers produce the average of their two best seasons from the last 4, over the next two (since Beckett is signed for 2 more). It would be unfair to assume Beckett will repeat his 2007, and I don't want to penalize Burnett for not pitching much in those years, so...

Projected WARP (avg of two best seasons from last 4):
Burnett: 5.9 (5.9 in 2008, 5.9 in 2005)
Beckett: 7.45 (8.2 in 2007 and 6.7 in 2005)

Projected Cost per-Marginal Win, 2009, 2010:

Burnett: $2.8m ($16.5m/5.9 WARP)
Beckett: $1.51m ($11.25m/7.45 WARP)

Another thing I will say about Burnett is that, when he pitches, he dominates. There are some pitchers who will take the mound and suck if they arent 100%. Burnett doesnt do that. Granted, it doesnt sound like he pitches at anything less than 90%, but you know when he takes the mound, he's gonna be solid. I'll take that. Nothing worse than a Clemens outing in the playoffs where he's 50% and is only gonna hurt the team.

I'm still waiting for an explanation of how Burnett's 1.34 WHIP last year is 'dominance'. For pitchers with more than 135 IP he ranked 58th. He had more baserunners than Dice-K, and Dice-K was like a poorly adjusted pitching machine at times last year as he couldn't put hitters away and couldn't find the strike zone. Among the same group of pitchers, Burnett's his .322 OBP against ranked him 52nd, immediately behind Dice-K. Dice-K ranked 3rd in SLG against, while Burnett ranked 31st.

Compared to 2008 Beckett ...

[table]Name | WHIP (rank) | WHIP (career) | OBP (rank) | SLG (rank)
Burnett | 1.34 (58) | 1.222 | .322 (52) | .388 (32)
Beckett | 1.19 (21) | 1.284 | .300 (21) | .400 (39) [/table]

... they are similar (Beckett allows fewer baserunner and plays in a worse home park).

Maybe I'm missing something, but Beckett and Burnett don't seem like good comparisons, certainly not for the money they make. He got some nice K #s, but he didn't keep runners off base better than everyone else, and when they hit the ball other pitchers kept it from getting hit harder.

example1 · January 9, 2009

Burnett is remarkably unaccomplished for the deal he got.

WARP totals of the top 14 salaried (AAV) pitchers in 2008, and their WARP average the 4 prior years to their big payday

Sabathia-$23m | '05 (5.3) | '06 (7.2) | '07 (9.3) | '08 (10.7) | AVG: 8.125

Santana-$22.92m | '03 (6.9) | '04 (12.3) | '05 (9.5) | '06 (10.8) | AVG: 9.875

Zambrano-$18.3m| '04 (8.9) | '05 (8) | '06 (8) | '07 (7.1) | AVG: 8

Zito-$18m | '03 (7.0) | '04 (4.6) | '05 (5.9) | '06 (6.6) | AVG: 6.025

Peavy*-$17.3m| '05 (8) | '06 (5.1) | '07 (10.1) | '08 (7.8) | AVG: 7.75

Burnett-$16.5m | '05 (5.9) | '06 (4) | '07 (5.1) | '08 (5.9) | AVG: 5.2

Pettitte-$15.6m | '04 (3) | '05 (9.2) | '06 (5.1) | '07 (5.8)| AVG: 5.775

Schmidt-$15.6m | '03 (8) | '04 (8.5) | '05 (3) | '06 (5.9) | AVG: 6.35

Hampton-$15.125m | '97 (4.4) | '98 (5.3) | '99 (11.1) | '00 (7.9) | AVG: 7.6

Oswalt0$14.6m| '03 (4.5) | '04 (8.3) | '05 (9.1) | '06 (8.6) | AVG: 7.625

Buehrle $14m| '04 (7.4) | '05 (6.8) | '06 (3.7) | '07 (7.4) | AVG: 6.325

Smoltz $14m | '04 (5.5) | '05 (7.2) | '06 (8.2) | '07 (6.8) | AVG: 6.925

Halladay $13.3m| '04 (4.2) | '05 (6.8) | '06 (7.9) | '07 (6.3) | AVG: 6.3

Pedro $13.25m| '01 (5.7) | '02 (10) | '03 (10.5) | '04 (8.2) | AVG: 8.6 [/table]

*Peavy's contract is his 08-2012 AAV, not 2010-2012 as listed on Cot's

A fairly basic look at the cost attaining this marginal win average (per-win):

[Table] Player | AVG WARP 4 yrs | best year | Cost per-marginal win ($$$/PREV. AVG WARP)

Burnett: | 5.2 | (5.9) | ($3,173,077)

Zito: | 6.025 | (7.0) | ($2,987,551)

Sabathia: | 8.125 | (10.7) | ($2,830,769)

Pettitte:| 5.775 | (9.2) | ($2,770,562)

Schmidt: | 6.35 | (8.5) | ($2,467,191)

Santana:| 9.875 | (12.3) | ($2,320,675)

Zambrano| 8 | (8.9) | ($2,287,500)

Peavy*:| 7.75 | (10.1) | ($2,236,559)

Buehrle: | 6.325 | (7.4) | ($2,213,438)

Halladay: | 6.3 | (7.9) | ($2,116,402)

Smoltz: | 6.925 | (8.2) | ($2,021,660)

Hampton: | 7.6 | (11.1) | ($1,990,131)

Oswalt: | 7.625 | (9.1) | ($1,914,754)

Pedro:| 8.6 | (10.5) | ($1,540,697) [/Table]

Same group ranked by previous success:

[table] player | AVG WARP (4 yrs) | High (4yrs) | Cost per-marginal win

Santana:| 9.875 | (12.3) | $2,320,675

Pedro:| 8.6 | (10.5) | $1,540,697

Sabathia: | 8.125 | (10.7) | $2,830,769

Zambrano: | 8 | (8.9) | $2,287,500

Peavy:| 7.75 | (10.1) | $2,236,559

Oswalt: | 7.625 | (9.1) | $1,914,754

Hampton: | 7.6 | (11.1) | $1,990,131

Smoltz: | 6.925 | (8.2) | $2,021,660

Schmidt: | 6.35 | (8.5) | $2,467,191

Buehrle: | 6.325 | (7.4) | $2,213,438

Halladay: | 6.3 | (7.9) | $2,116,402

Zito: | 6.025 | (7.0) | $2,987,551

Pettitte:| 5.775 | (9.2) | $2,770,562

Burnett: | 5.2 | (5.9) | $3,173,077[/table]

What does this mean? Well, there's obviously some anomolies there. Guys like Pedro are being paid partly on fan-appeal and partly on remaining talent. Some guys are absolute busts (Zito, Schmidt) and their cost per marginal win after their contracts is horrible. I think it is clear that if Burnett doesn't get his stuff together and become a pitcher that he hasn't been before, he will be the most expensive pitcher per-marginal win in baseball. I think it also means that of current the pitchers who have signed the largest contracts by AAV (not looking at contract length), none has made more money with lower previous success than Burnett. Not only does he have the lowest average WARP the previous 4 years, but he also has the lowest BEST SEASON of any of these players the previous four years.

It's not a selective list, and I had no idea how it would turn out when I started working on it.

The only pitcher that I can think of (and find) whose $/W potential was worse seems to be record-breaking Roger Clemens in 2007, and his prorated$28,000,000 contract. Clemens had had better recent success than Burnett has, and he was in his 40s.

[table] 2006 (HOU) Clemens: | 7.97 | 10.3| $2,760,391 |

2007 (NY) Clemens: | 8 | (10.3) | $3,500,000 [/table]

riverside sluggers · January 9, 2009

He's been pegged as a health risk for a reason. Living up to his contract will be difficult. Albeit not impossible.

And unlike his days in Florida & Toronto, he cant hide from the media now when the injury woes pop up again

BSN07 · January 9, 2009

Burnett is remarkably unaccomplished for the deal he got.

WARP totals of the top 14 salaried (AAV) pitchers in 2008, and their WARP average the 4 prior years to their big payday

[table] Player-AAV salary| 4-years prior (WARP) | 3-years prior (WARP) | 2-years prior (WARP) | contract year (WARP) | 4 yr. AVG
Sabathia-$23m | '05 (5.3) | '06 (7.2) | '07 (9.3) | '08 (10.7) | AVG: 8.125
Santana-$22.92m | '03 (6.9) | '04 (12.3) | '05 (9.5) | '06 (10.8) | AVG: 9.875
Zambrano-$18.3m| '04 (8.9) | '05 (8) | '06 (8) | '07 (7.1) | AVG: 8
Zito-$18m | '03 (7.0) | '04 (4.6) | '05 (5.9) | '06 (6.6) | AVG: 6.025
Peavy*-$17.3m| '05 (8) | '06 (5.1) | '07 (10.1) | '08 (7.8) | AVG: 7.75
Burnett-$16.5m | '05 (5.9) | '06 (4) | '07 (5.1) | '08 (5.9) | AVG: 5.2
Pettitte-$15.6m | '04 (3) | '05 (9.2) | '06 (5.1) | '07 (5.8)| AVG: 5.775
Schmidt-$15.6m | '03 (8) | '04 (8.5) | '05 (3) | '06 (5.9) | AVG: 6.35
Hampton-$15.125m | '97 (4.4) | '98 (5.3) | '99 (11.1) | '00 (7.9) | AVG: 7.6
Oswalt0$14.6m| '03 (4.5) | '04 (8.3) | '05 (9.1) | '06 (8.6) | AVG: 7.625
Buehrle $14m| '04 (7.4) | '05 (6.8) | '06 (3.7) | '07 (7.4) | AVG: 6.325
Smoltz $14m | '04 (5.5) | '05 (7.2) | '06 (8.2) | '07 (6.8) | AVG: 6.925
Halladay $13.3m| '04 (4.2) | '05 (6.8) | '06 (7.9) | '07 (6.3) | AVG: 6.3
Pedro $13.25m| '01 (5.7) | '02 (10) | '03 (10.5) | '04 (8.2) | AVG: 8.6 [/table]
*Peavy's contract is his 08-2012 AAV, not 2010-2012 as listed on Cot's

A fairly basic look at the cost attaining this marginal win average (per-win):

[Table] Player | AVG WARP 4 yrs | best year | Cost per-marginal win ($$$/PREV. AVG WARP)
Burnett: | 5.2 | (5.9) | ($3,173,077)
Zito: | 6.025 | (7.0) | ($2,987,551)
Sabathia: | 8.125 | (10.7) | ($2,830,769)
Pettitte:| 5.775 | (9.2) | ($2,770,562)
Schmidt: | 6.35 | (8.5) | ($2,467,191)
Santana:| 9.875 | (12.3) | ($2,320,675)
Zambrano| 8 | (8.9) | ($2,287,500)
Peavy*:| 7.75 | (10.1) | ($2,236,559)
Buehrle: | 6.325 | (7.4) | ($2,213,438)
Halladay: | 6.3 | (7.9) | ($2,116,402)
Smoltz: | 6.925 | (8.2) | ($2,021,660)
Hampton: | 7.6 | (11.1) | ($1,990,131)
Oswalt: | 7.625 | (9.1) | ($1,914,754)
Pedro:| 8.6 | (10.5) | ($1,540,697) [/Table]

Same group ranked by previous success:

[table] player | AVG WARP (4 yrs) | High (4yrs) | Cost per-marginal win
Santana:| 9.875 | (12.3) | $2,320,675
Pedro:| 8.6 | (10.5) | $1,540,697
Sabathia: | 8.125 | (10.7) | $2,830,769
Zambrano: | 8 | (8.9) | $2,287,500
Peavy:| 7.75 | (10.1) | $2,236,559
Oswalt: | 7.625 | (9.1) | $1,914,754
Hampton: | 7.6 | (11.1) | $1,990,131
Smoltz: | 6.925 | (8.2) | $2,021,660
Schmidt: | 6.35 | (8.5) | $2,467,191
Buehrle: | 6.325 | (7.4) | $2,213,438
Halladay: | 6.3 | (7.9) | $2,116,402
Zito: | 6.025 | (7.0) | $2,987,551
Pettitte:| 5.775 | (9.2) | $2,770,562
Burnett: | 5.2 | (5.9) | $3,173,077[/table]

What does this mean? Well, there's obviously some anomolies there. Guys like Pedro are being paid partly on fan-appeal and partly on remaining talent. Some guys are absolute busts (Zito, Schmidt) and their cost per marginal win after their contracts is horrible. I think it is clear that if Burnett doesn't get his stuff together and become a pitcher that he hasn't been before, he will be the most expensive pitcher per-marginal win in baseball. I think it also means that of current the pitchers who have signed the largest contracts by AAV (not looking at contract length), none has made more money with lower previous success than Burnett. Not only does he have the lowest average WARP the previous 4 years, but he also has the lowest BEST SEASON of any of these players the previous four years.

It's not a selective list, and I had no idea how it would turn out when I started working on it.

The only pitcher that I can think of (and find) whose $/W potential was worse seems to be record-breaking Roger Clemens in 2007, and his prorated$28,000,000 contract. Clemens had had better recent success than Burnett has, and he was in his 40s.

[table] 2006 (HOU) Clemens: | 7.97 | 10.3| $2,760,391 |
2007 (NY) Clemens: | 8 | (10.3) | $3,500,000 [/table]

Brilliant last couple post's Ex.

I'm sure Jacko will try an retaliate, but after that he really doesn't have much to stand on outside of Hope and Personal opinion LOL

BoSox21 · January 9, 2009

2005- 32 starts- 209IP
2006- 21 starts- 135IP
2007- 25 starts- 169IP
2008- 34 starts- 221IP

I'm just gonna go ahead and add an asterisk to denote contract years.....

2005- 32 starts- 209IP*

2006- 21 starts- 135IP

2007- 25 starts- 169IP

2008- 34 starts- 221IP*

ok, done

BSN07 · January 9, 2009

I'm just gonna go ahead and add an asterisk to denote contract years.....

2005- 32 starts- 209IP*
2006- 21 starts- 135IP
2007- 25 starts- 169IP
2008- 34 starts- 221IP*

ok, done

:lol:

Dojji · January 9, 2009

Seriously. They locked that guy down to a long-term guaranteed deal deep into his late 30's? And outbid themselves for the privellege?

jacksonianmarch · January 9, 2009

they outbid the braves who came in 2 mil below what the yanks offered. So once again, you are wrong.

diony · January 9, 2009

Seriously. They locked that guy down to a long-term guaranteed deal deep into his late 30's? And outbid themselves for the privellege?

Burnett? He's 31

example1 · January 9, 2009

Burnett? He's 31

Now, why would you not fact check these things before you make a claim. I mean, even if you're in the right ballpark, isn't it worth hitting [CTRL + N] and typing [AJ Burnett] into your browser?

10 key-strokes, a mouse click and a scroll.

AJ Burnett: Born January 3rd, 1977.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/burnea.01.shtml

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4153

Sounds like 32 to me.

diony · January 9, 2009

Now' date=' why would you not fact check these things before you make a claim. I mean, even if you're in the right ballpark, isn't it worth hitting [CTRL + N'] and typing [AJ Burnett] into your browser?

10 key-strokes, a mouse click and a scroll.

AJ Burnett: Born January 3rd, 1977.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/burnea.01.shtml

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4153

Sounds like 32 to me.

Oh god, my bad. His birthday was LAST WEEK!!! You're an *******.

Dipre · January 9, 2009

Now' date=' why would you not fact check these things before you make a claim. I mean, even if you're in the right ballpark, isn't it worth hitting [CTRL + N'] and typing [AJ Burnett] into your browser?

10 key-strokes, a mouse click and a scroll.

AJ Burnett: Born January 3rd, 1977.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/burnea.01.shtml

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4153

Sounds like 32 to me.

http://laser2.legs-world.co.uk/images/owned-tank.jpg

And still, it might be a good idea to check if his contract does not actually END past his mid-30s, which are, by definition, his late-30s, even if he was 31 right now?

Jacoby_Ellsbury · January 9, 2009

So he's locked up till he's 37. I'd say that qualifies as his late thirties.

His birthday was LAST WEEK!!! You're an *******.

Way to stay with the times.

example1 · January 10, 2009

Oh god' date=' my bad. His birthday was LAST WEEK!!! You're an *******.[/quote']

Sorry, I couldn't let it go. I'm not sure what even encourged me to check his age, maybe I just figured you might not get your facts straight.

SchillingIsTheNatural · January 10, 2009

they outbid the braves who came in 2 mil below what the yanks offered. So once again' date=' you are wrong.[/quote']

We have no idea what the Braves really offered. If this offseason has taught us anything it's that nobody seems to have concrete information. For all we know Scott Boras claimed the Braves bid that high simply to push the Yankees knowing they would be there in the end.

WhiskeyBreath · January 11, 2009

Smoltz is a great pitcher and I'm glad the Sox have added him for 09. Can't wait until he's ready to pitch.

riverside sluggers · January 13, 2009

http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/images/2009/01/13/K2m6DTCI.jpghttp://boston.redsox.mlb.com/images/2009/01/13/oFRVb7SF.jpg

Cocos Disciples · January 13, 2009

I didn't realize the Sox were his 2nd MLB team, I thought he spent time with the Tigers' big league team.

BSN07 · January 13, 2009

I didn't realize the Sox were his 2nd MLB team' date=' I thought he spent time with the Tigers' big league team.[/quote']

Only in the minors.

riverside sluggers · January 15, 2009

http://www.670thescore.com/pages/3577965.php

The Yankees were also in on Smoltz

Sign In

... and Smoltz is Not Far Behind

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blog Entries

Recent Status Updates