Close
Page 2 of 31 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 23 to 44 of 682
  1. #23
    CCS Donator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8,390
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Here's the thing... I think Almora can lead off vs LHP. He destroys LHP and walks a lot more than vs RHP. So, in that sense you're covered in about 25% of your games. The question then is who leads off vs RHP. That I'm not 100% sure myself. Bryant is their best hitter vs RHP but you don't want him leading off. Rizzo is #2 but again don't want him leading off. La Stella is #3 but probably not starter worthy. #4 is Happ who hit .243/.334/.529 vs RHP. #5 is Contreras .274/.339/.489. I think you could probably live with either Happ or Contreras leading off though it's not really ideal. I think the bigger problem is that Heyward just doesn't offer a ton as of right now and because of that you're really limited positionally. You have to get a lead off hitter out of 2B, LF or CF. What's weird is Heyward used to crush RHP. If he could ever get back to where he was in 2014 you could feasibly put him there.
    Fowler was a lead-off hitter because he was full-time as a SH. Platooning lead-off is doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It's a position of leadership.
    Last edited by Parade_Rain; 10-16-2017 at 01:00 PM. Reason: redundant

  2. A message from our sponsors.


    Please Register(it's free!) and Login to get rid of this advertisement.


  3. #24
    1-888-NEED-HIM brett05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Plainfield, IL
    Posts
    23,484
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    I think the Cubs either make a solid trade somewhere to get that leadoff type or you allow Almora to grow into that role against RH and LH pitching
    Hidden Content
    Follow Me on Twitter: @sportsdream - Sports Tweets, Life, God, etc.

  4. #25
    Senior Member anotheridiot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,300

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If they sign Davis they don't need Robertson. They need a decent set up guy. They will have Strop and Edwards back who while not exactly lock down 100% of the time are both good pitchers. Hopefully they get enough starting pitching that Monty stays in the bullpen full time. If that happens you're really only talking about needing one guy in the pen and not necessarily even a closer. Maples should be a decent option though given his walk rate issues in the past I don't want to count on him 100%.

    Overall people are overreacting based on a handful of games. If the cubs sweep the nats rather than blowing up game 2 their bullpen is rested and many of the issues they have had the past 2 games go away. The fact that lackey is having to pitch immediately shows the issue. And let's not forget the starting pitching they've faced. They haven't had a weak arm in the bunch which I mean I guess is expected given the playoffs but all the guys they have faced have arguably been as good or better than any starter the cubs have thrown.
    Roberson IS a decent set up guy.
    109 years since the last back to back world titles

  5. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parade_Rain View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Fowler was a lead-off hitter because he was full-time as a SH. Platooning lead-off is doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It's a position of leadership.
    I'm not sure I buy into the leadership aspect. I do see your point about it not being ideal but you're just not going to have 30 actual lead off hitters in baseball. They just don't make many guys who are that prototypical lead off hitter guy anymore and even those who are are position dependent for certain teams. Most teams if that guy is a CF can easily slot him in. But if he only plays LF? Can be harder.

    And honestly the platoon strat is effective. Cubs leadoff hitter hit .246/.324/.422 this year. And that's with Schwarber driving it down hitting .190/.312/.381 over 173 PAs. Jay hit .267/.325/.350. Zobrist hit .253/.330/.438. Happ hit .242/.333/.606. Rizzo hit .300/.373/.680. That's not quite the .276/.393/.447 Fowler hit in 2016 but Fowler only hit .264/.363/.488 this year. So you're talking about 30 points of on base comparable to one of the best lead off hitters in baseball. Not that bad really.

    If the assumption is Zobrist gets scaled back I would presume they got a Happ/Almora split at lead off.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anotheridiot View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Roberson IS a decent set up guy.
    Robertson is a good closer. He's just on a team with a better closer. My point was you don't need to spend $10+ mil on a set up guy.

  8. #28
    CCS Donator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8,390
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm not sure I buy into the leadership aspect. I do see your point about it not being ideal but you're just not going to have 30 actual lead off hitters in baseball. They just don't make many guys who are that prototypical lead off hitter guy anymore and even those who are are position dependent for certain teams. Most teams if that guy is a CF can easily slot him in. But if he only plays LF? Can be harder.

    And honestly the platoon strat is effective. Cubs leadoff hitter hit .246/.324/.422 this year. And that's with Schwarber driving it down hitting .190/.312/.381 over 173 PAs. Jay hit .267/.325/.350. Zobrist hit .253/.330/.438. Happ hit .242/.333/.606. Rizzo hit .300/.373/.680. That's not quite the .276/.393/.447 Fowler hit in 2016 but Fowler only hit .264/.363/.488 this year. So you're talking about 30 points of on base comparable to one of the best lead off hitters in baseball. Not that bad really.

    If the assumption is Zobrist gets scaled back I would presume they got a Happ/Almora split at lead off.
    That's why you don't play games on paper. Numbers are nice. They don't take into account intangibles of human beings.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parade_Rain View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That's why you don't play games on paper. Numbers are nice. They don't take into account intangibles of human beings.
    Which means what exactly? The cubs scored 822 runs this year which was 4th behind Houston(896), NYY(858) and Col(824). Getting outscored by 2 DH teams and a team playing half their games in coors isn't a negative. If your point is they could be better there then sure. But unless you have 5 clayton kershaws and 9 mike trout's everyone can be better. It's about where you devote your resources. The current cubs line up isn't what is causing them to struggle in the playoffs. It's their bullpen. So if you're going to spend resources to fix anything it should be there or starting pitching to lessen the load on relievers. Well that and the fact Rizzo and Bryant aren't playing like MVP candidates. That's a big blow to the team too.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  11. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Which means what exactly? The cubs scored 822 runs this year which was 4th behind Houston(896), NYY(858) and Col(824). Getting outscored by 2 DH teams and a team playing half their games in coors isn't a negative. If your point is they could be better there then sure. But unless you have 5 clayton kershaws and 9 mike trout's everyone can be better. It's about where you devote your resources. The current cubs line up isn't what is causing them to struggle in the playoffs. It's their bullpen. So if you're going to spend resources to fix anything it should be there or starting pitching to lessen the load on relievers. Well that and the fact Rizzo and Bryant aren't playing like MVP candidates. That's a big blow to the team too.
    The bullpen has been a problem, no question about that, but they're not winning because they aren't hitting. Period. Having a "you go, we go" type at the top of the order could ease some of that stress when the sphincters get tight.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TC in Mississippi For This Useful Post:


  13. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TC in Mississippi View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The bullpen has been a problem, no question about that, but they're not winning because they aren't hitting. Period. Having a "you go, we go" type at the top of the order could ease some of that stress when the sphincters get tight.
    They aren't hitting because they have faced the #3 pitcher in terms of fwar, the #5 pitchers(2x), the #9 pitcher(kershaw would be higher but injury), the #20 pitcher(2x) and rich hill who would be higher if he pitched 200 innings. Good pitching just shuts down good hitting. Sorry to say but I don't think Fowler would have made 1 bit of difference in these games. I mean look at what two MVP caliber bats in Bryant and Rizzo have done. It's not that they are demoralized because they don't have a better lead of hitter. It's that they've faced 4 top 10 matchups out of 7 games and the other 3 match ups were still all-star caliber pitchers.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  15. #32
    CCS Donator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8,390
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    They aren't hitting because they have faced the #3 pitcher in terms of fwar, the #5 pitchers(2x), the #9 pitcher(kershaw would be higher but injury), the #20 pitcher(2x) and rich hill who would be higher if he pitched 200 innings. Good pitching just shuts down good hitting. Sorry to say but I don't think Fowler would have made 1 bit of difference in these games. I mean look at what two MVP caliber bats in Bryant and Rizzo have done. It's not that they are demoralized because they don't have a better lead of hitter. It's that they've faced 4 top 10 matchups out of 7 games and the other 3 match ups were still all-star caliber pitchers.
    Keep making excuses.

  16. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    For reference here let's compare who they played last year. Vs the Giants they went Cueto, Shark, Bumgarner(who didn't pitch well but the cubs blew the game), and Strickland into Matt Moore after 5 pitches. In the NLCS they got Maeda, Kershaw, Hill, Urias, Maeda, Kershaw. Cueto is good but he's more comparable to Gio IMO. Shark is a #3. Bumgarner on top of his game is Stras/Kershaw level but clearly he wasn't. Maeda is worse than Gio IMO. Kershaw and hill are the same obviously. Long story short I don't think that run is any where near comparable to the way Stras pitched in game 1/4 and Scherzer/Gio in games 3/2. Gio obviously didn't have it game 5 and neither did Scherzer which is why the runs came.

    Either way, my point here is the cubs did score on these pitchers. Game 1 vs Stras they obviously won 3-0 scoring twice on Stras and once on Madson. They scored three times on Gio in game 2 and were up 3-1 headed into the 8th where the BP blew a save giving up 5. Vs Scherzer they dinged him for 1 run and he left in a tie game which the cubs eventually won. Game 4 Stras just shut everyone down. Game 5 they obviously put up 7 on Gio/Scherzer. In game 1 vs Kershaw the cubs were up 2-0 early. Dodgers came back and tied it 2-2 when Kershaw left. Last night Russell gave them a 1-0 lead. Dodgers tied in the 5th and the bullpen blew it in the 9th.

    So only in 1 of those game were the cubs behind when the opposing starter left vs 6 fantastic outings by starters. If you want to argue the cubs need to do more against the opposing bullpen that's fine to debate. But clearly their own bullpen has lost them more than their offense has. The idea in the playoffs is to hold serve as best as you can til you can score. The cubs bullpen is often given up numerous crooked innings which seals the game away.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  18. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parade_Rain View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Keep making excuses.
    How is saying they faced great pitching a "excuse?" It's just reality. The cubs have lost 4 games this post season. In one the bullpen gave up 5 in the 8th. In the next Strasburg just dominated. In the third their bullpen gave up 3 runs in a 5-2 game. And in the 4th their bullpen gave up 3 runs in the 9th. Could/should they score more runs? Maybe but that's ignoring the elephant in the room which is their bullpen has given up 11 runs in 3 of their 4 losses.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  20. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    They aren't hitting because they have faced the #3 pitcher in terms of fwar, the #5 pitchers(2x), the #9 pitcher(kershaw would be higher but injury), the #20 pitcher(2x) and rich hill who would be higher if he pitched 200 innings. Good pitching just shuts down good hitting. Sorry to say but I don't think Fowler would have made 1 bit of difference in these games. I mean look at what two MVP caliber bats in Bryant and Rizzo have done. It's not that they are demoralized because they don't have a better lead of hitter. It's that they've faced 4 top 10 matchups out of 7 games and the other 3 match ups were still all-star caliber pitchers.
    That's only a small part of it. Don't let the hitters off the hook like that. You have to face good pitching so you have to fine tune your approach against guys like that and if anything our guys, particularly Bryant and Baez, have seen their approach get worse. You know the scouting, you know the data even if you can't identify the pitch coming you have idea when a guy is going to throw it. They need take more pitches and be more disciplined. The reason I say a "you go we go" type at the top can help is that when you have a guy getting on base consistently, especially to start the game, everyone loosens up and stop s pressing particularly in big moments. It's a serious mistake to just say "oh they're facing great pitchers". There is an issue with hitting on this club and some of it can be solved by a more balanced lineup and their options are limited. A solid leadoff hitter is slump protection in some ways.

  21. #36
    CCS Donator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8,390
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    How is saying they faced great pitching a "excuse?" It's just reality. The cubs have lost 4 games this post season. In one the bullpen gave up 5 in the 8th. In the next Strasburg just dominated. In the third their bullpen gave up 3 runs in a 5-2 game. And in the 4th their bullpen gave up 3 runs in the 9th. Could/should they score more runs? Maybe but that's ignoring the elephant in the room which is their bullpen has given up 11 runs in 3 of their 4 losses.
    The conversation went from discussing a lead-off hitter to a fallacy of an entire team being unable to hit good pitching. Rizzo donut hole for 14 since his "respect me" comment after hitting a monster bloop into short CF. Bryant is baffled by pitches up in the zone. His hands are getting below the ball. Too stiff of an uppercut. Needs high tee work and thinking about getting on top of the ball right now.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Parade_Rain For This Useful Post:


  23. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TC in Mississippi View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That's only a small part of it. Don't let the hitters off the hook like that. You have to face good pitching so you have to fine tune your approach against guys like that and if anything our guys, particularly Bryant and Baez, have seen their approach get worse. You know the scouting, you know the data even if you can't identify the pitch coming you have idea when a guy is going to throw it. They need take more pitches and be more disciplined. The reason I say a "you go we go" type at the top can help is that when you have a guy getting on base consistently, especially to start the game, everyone loosens up and stop s pressing particularly in big moments. It's a serious mistake to just say "oh they're facing great pitchers". There is an issue with hitting on this club and some of it can be solved by a more balanced lineup and their options are limited. A solid leadoff hitter is slump protection in some ways.
    But the problem with this is you're assuming this lead off hitter gets on base. Like I think it's fair to say Bryant isn't living up to his potential and they may be issues there. But Rizzo has had good at bats. The pitcher has just beat him more often than not. And for what it's worth, I think Jay had lead off the game getting on base at least 3 of the 7 games they have played. Just think this a is a bullshit reason trying to explain way the problem as being something the cubs could have solved. Sometimes you just get beat by better pitchers. I don't care who was hitting game 4 Stras wins that game. And frankly it's pretty miraculous they won game 1 and 3 vs Stras/Scherzer the way they pitched. Gio did enough to win game 2. And clearly Kershaw and Hill did enough to win game 1/2.

    What bothers me about this sort of comment is they got Clayton Kershaw out in the 5th inning. You realistically can't hope for much more than that against a rested Kershaw. Likewise Hill was pulled in the 5th inning. So sure they didn't score a god awful amount of runs but they made those pitchers work and got into the opposing bullpen which is what you ask your hitters to do. Obviously the idea there being you then take advantage of their bullpen which didn't happen. But it's not like some magical lead off hitter changes that. It's a team effort.

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  25. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parade_Rain View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The conversation went from discussing a lead-off hitter to a fallacy of an entire team being unable to hit good pitching. Rizzo donut hole for 14 since his "respect me" comment after hitting a monster bloop into short CF. Bryant is baffled by pitches up in the zone. His hands are getting below the ball. Too stiff of an uppercut. Needs high tee work and thinking about getting on top of the ball right now.
    It went there because you're seemingly suggesting that some how a lead off hitter changes the way Bryant/Rizzo have hit. Dexter Fowler being on the cubs wouldn't have changed the 4 losses they have. That's my point. If you want to argue having a better lead off hitter makes the team better fine. But my point is that's not where they are fully deficient. If Rizzo/Bryant play like they can and the cubs have a competent bullpen they probably don't lose game 2 vs the nats and had a good shot at winning games 1/2 vs the dodgers.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  27. #39
    CCS Donator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8,390
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It went there because you're seemingly suggesting that some how a lead off hitter changes the way Bryant/Rizzo have hit. Dexter Fowler being on the cubs wouldn't have changed the 4 losses they have. That's my point. If you want to argue having a better lead off hitter makes the team better fine. But my point is that's not where they are fully deficient. If Rizzo/Bryant play like they can and the cubs have a competent bullpen they probably don't lose game 2 vs the nats and had a good shot at winning games 1/2 vs the dodgers.
    Good exaggeration. What I've implied is numbers don't play the game and you keep using numbers anyway. A platoon lead off hitter is not a leader. Jay has been a very nice surprise and a value contract. He isn't Fowler. The pitching was obviously going to be short this season. Pitching is off and team doesn't appear to have enough leadership amongst the position players.

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to Parade_Rain For This Useful Post:


  29. #40
    Senior Member chibears55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    9,859
    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    It pretty simple on what they need..

    Lester Quintana Hendricks are definate in rotation..
    They need a TOR type starter and another starter at bottom...
    My guess is they trade for that TOR type and have a ST competition for the 5th spot amongst inhouse players..

    They need big time bullpen help...
    I can see Strop Edwards Montgomery Wilson as definate returns..
    I can also see them trying to bring Wade Davis back..

    So that leaves adding up to 3 new bullpen arms..
    Id look for them to go after guys who can pitch multiple innings as it looks lately as those are needed big time in post season..

    I see at least one of Schwarber Baez Heyward being main piece traded for that TOR pitcher..
    Heyward would be a tough move and probably stays but they might find a taker looking more for defense and a vet leader..

    I think they need to stabalize a lineup next year over swapping guys in and out all season which is why i think Schwarber has an over 50% chance of being moved..

    Id hope they will go with having a bench with a couple guys being able to play multiple position but not be used as starters more then once or twice a week..
    Like Zobrist


    So..
    2 SP
    2-3 relievers
    Closer
    Stabalize OF
    Bench player or 2

    Is what they need to do over offseason to contend for another WS title


    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

  30. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6,948

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parade_Rain View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Good exaggeration. What I've implied is numbers don't play the game and you keep using numbers anyway. A platoon lead off hitter is not a leader. Jay has been a very nice surprise and a value contract. He isn't Fowler. The pitching was obviously going to be short this season. Pitching is off and team doesn't appear to have enough leadership amongst the position players.
    This is merely a slightly more eloquent version of "da fire and da passion," or "TWTW" or "killer instinct" or "clutch."

    Bad baseball thoughts are bad.

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to fatbeard For This Useful Post:


  32. #42
    CCS Donator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8,390
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fatbeard View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is merely a slightly more eloquent version of "da fire and da passion," or "TWTW" or "killer instinct" or "clutch."

    Bad baseball thoughts are bad.
    False. The team needed a rain delay and a good speech from a team member in Cleveland to get focused and win. Focus matters. Leadership matters. Enjoy your participation trophy.

  33. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Parade_Rain For This Useful Post:


  34. #43
    CCS Donator Omeletpants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    14,155

    Default

    Cubs have one of the worst farm systems in baseball and have little trade bait
    A welfare state like America can't survive with open borders.

  35. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parade_Rain View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Good exaggeration. What I've implied is numbers don't play the game and you keep using numbers anyway. A platoon lead off hitter is not a leader. Jay has been a very nice surprise and a value contract. He isn't Fowler. The pitching was obviously going to be short this season. Pitching is off and team doesn't appear to have enough leadership amongst the position players.
    How exactly do you quantify "leadership?" My issue with your argument is you're implying they aren't scoring runs because they lack leadership. That's fine if it's your opinion but it's not something you can measure or have a discussion about. For example, how do we know Jay isn't more of a "leader" than Fowler? And secondly, how do you know the leadership they have within the club isn't "enough?" Rizzo is still there off last years team. Heyward is also a club house leader. It's just a pointless argument to me because even if there is a real impact there and i'm dubious on that but even if it exists the public doesn't know it. Only those in the club house will. I also find the "numbers don't play the game" argument weak. Numbers show what happened in a game. That may or may not be predictive going forward but you can draw conclusions about what went wrong based on numbers. That's why I use them. They are something objective as opposed to gut feelings people have.

    The fact of the matter is that the cubs were 5th in wRC+ behind the astros, dodgers, yanks, and nats this year. And as of right now you have 3 players on the cubs postseason roster with more than 10 PAs and a wRC+ at 80 or greater. That's Almora(14 PAs 91 wRC+), Jay(23 PAs 83 wRC+) and Contreras(28 PAs 80 wRC+). In other words, the CF platoon of Jay/Almora have been the best hitters on the team and I use the term "best" pretty loosely there as a 80 wRC+ is fairly crummy. You got 7-8 other guys who just aren't hitting. I don't see how "leadership" changes that.

  36. A message from our sponsors.
    Please Register(it's free!) and Login to get rid of this advertisement.



    Do you want to advertise with ChiCitySports?
    Ranked #1 Chicagoland sports news and message board online.
    A great opportunity for advertising and exposure, with an active base of fresh consumers always looking for sports-related items and miscellaneous "guy stuff".
    Please go here if you are interested in a multitude of placements on this site.
  37. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 31 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •