In anticipation of a league-wide email to be started in January, I would like to open up the blog to discussion of proposed changes to the Constitution. In this entry, I will put forward what is currently under discussion. If you would like to propose additional rule changes, I would ask that you make a new post, so that we can better track the comments. Here are the current proposals:
(1) Add a second IR spot.
(2) Change tiebreaker to be something else. Likely either innings pitched or total head-to-head points in scoring categories.
(3) Remove restriction that player be out of Host website system to be eligible for minor league draft.
(4) Add restriction to prevent minor league draft of players with international professional experience (i.e. players from the Japanese leagues). This could take the form of a ban on drafting players from the Japanese league or a more generalized ban on players with significant professional experience depending on how people feel.
11.25.2008
11.19.2008
Rob Neyer...WRONG?
Yes, children. I'm afraid it's true. Rob Neyer was wrong. In his attempt to criticize the selection of Dustin Pedroia as AL MVP, his arguments fail.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3710934&name=Neyer_Rob
This is the link for those that haven't seen the article.
I'll address some key points first.
"Aside from his height, there's nothing unique about Dustin Pedroia. Unusual: yes. Unique: no. Chase Utley plays the game right, and is a better hitter and a better fielder than Pedroia. Utley stole 14 bases this season, and was caught twice. Pedroia stole 20 bases, and was caught once. I'm sorry, but one steal per month just doesn't contribute much to uniqueness."
Where do I start...
Utley is a better hitter? Really?
2008: Pedroia- .326 / Utley- .292
Career: Pedroia .313 / Utley- .298
Pedroia was second in the AL in batting. Utley didn't even sniff the top 10.
Perhaps you meant to include walks...Utley does have a 6 point edge in lifetime OBP, but I'm not sure that makes him a better hitter.
Or perhaps you meant POWER HITTER. If so you should have specified, Rob. Because your current statement looks pretty stupid.
Moving on...Utley is better fielder? Really?
2008: Pedroia- .992 fld% (.987 lg avg) 4.63 range (4.51 lg range)
Utley- .984 fld% (.982 lg) 5.05 range (4.04 lg)
So Utley has a slightly better range but made more mistakes last year.
Career: Pedroia- .989 (.986) 4.54 (4.51)
Utley- .982 (.983) 5.05 (4.40)
Funny. I don't see how you conclude that Utley is the better fielder based on these numbers. I wonder- did you look at the stat prior to writing your article?
Steals
Again, your arguments in favor of Utley kind of flop. 12 net steals versus 19? And PEDROIA is the one you choose to criticize? Weird. Again.
Anyhoo, let's put all of that aside. Despite the fact that you were wrong, it wasn't the crux of your column.
_____________________________________
Pedroia versus Mauer
I don't get it, Rob. Look at their stat lines:
Pedroia: 118 R/ 17 HR/ 83 RBI/ .326 avg/ .869 OPS/ 322 TB
Mauer: 98 R/ 9 HR/ 85 RBI/ .328 avg/ .864 OPS/ 242 TB
Now I grant you that pedroia had 100+ extra ABs, and will concede that they inflate his production totals. But the flip side of that is that he MAINTAINED his avg and OPS numbers despite having the extra opportunities to fail.
Just for shits and giggles, here's Dustin's line reduced to 536 ABs (same as Mauer)
97 R/ 14 HR/ 76 RBI
Still comparable despite the fact that Mauer hit 3rd and Pedroia hit 2nd for most of the year.
1. VORP-
Pedroia wins. At least you admit it.
"Measured by Baseball Prospectus' Wins Above Replacement Player (which considers defense), Mauer finished a close second to Pedroia."
2. Clutch
"Clutch" is bullcrap, you should know better. Even so, I'll point out that in 5 games in the cleanup spot, Pedroia hit .667 with an OPS of 1.889.
CLEANUP. As a 2B. That seems pretty freaking clutch to me.
3. Runs created
Pedroia LED the Sox with 123. Mauer DID NOT lead the Twins. Morneau did.
Pedroia also led the Sox in runs, hits, total bases, doubles, average, times on base, AB/ K, and power/ speed numbers.
With the exception of runs and average, Mauer didn't lead the Twins in any of those.
I know it's hard to compare a 2B with a C, but there's no way you can say Mauer did more offensively for his team than Pedroia did for his.
4. Win shares
You cite Mauer's edge here, but assessing players using win share s needs to be done very carefully and in the context of other statistics. Given Pedroia's edge in the stat line, I'm not sure how Mauer overcomes him here. Still, for argument's sake I'll give you this one.
____________________________________________
Looking at the overall picture though, I just fail to see how you arrive at Mauer being the better choice. And you compound your folly with this line:
"And for as long as I've been doing this, every time the MVP voters have a choice between the guy with the power stats and the guy who does the little things, they pick the guy with the big numbers."
Dude. Seriously? Is Pedroia supposed to be the "guy with the power stats" in this equation? Because you spent the first half of your column ripping him for his LACK of uniqueness when it comes to stats.
Here's my conclusion: Pedroia did more for the Sox than Mauer did for the Twins. He did things that very few second basemen have done. He batted in 4 different spots in the lineup. He carried that team through injuries to nearly every other contributor.
Mauer's batting title is great. But given that he wasn't even the most valuable TWIN, he did not deserve the MVP.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3710934&name=Neyer_Rob
This is the link for those that haven't seen the article.
I'll address some key points first.
"Aside from his height, there's nothing unique about Dustin Pedroia. Unusual: yes. Unique: no. Chase Utley plays the game right, and is a better hitter and a better fielder than Pedroia. Utley stole 14 bases this season, and was caught twice. Pedroia stole 20 bases, and was caught once. I'm sorry, but one steal per month just doesn't contribute much to uniqueness."
Where do I start...
Utley is a better hitter? Really?
2008: Pedroia- .326 / Utley- .292
Career: Pedroia .313 / Utley- .298
Pedroia was second in the AL in batting. Utley didn't even sniff the top 10.
Perhaps you meant to include walks...Utley does have a 6 point edge in lifetime OBP, but I'm not sure that makes him a better hitter.
Or perhaps you meant POWER HITTER. If so you should have specified, Rob. Because your current statement looks pretty stupid.
Moving on...Utley is better fielder? Really?
2008: Pedroia- .992 fld% (.987 lg avg) 4.63 range (4.51 lg range)
Utley- .984 fld% (.982 lg) 5.05 range (4.04 lg)
So Utley has a slightly better range but made more mistakes last year.
Career: Pedroia- .989 (.986) 4.54 (4.51)
Utley- .982 (.983) 5.05 (4.40)
Funny. I don't see how you conclude that Utley is the better fielder based on these numbers. I wonder- did you look at the stat prior to writing your article?
Steals
Again, your arguments in favor of Utley kind of flop. 12 net steals versus 19? And PEDROIA is the one you choose to criticize? Weird. Again.
Anyhoo, let's put all of that aside. Despite the fact that you were wrong, it wasn't the crux of your column.
_____________________________________
Pedroia versus Mauer
I don't get it, Rob. Look at their stat lines:
Pedroia: 118 R/ 17 HR/ 83 RBI/ .326 avg/ .869 OPS/ 322 TB
Mauer: 98 R/ 9 HR/ 85 RBI/ .328 avg/ .864 OPS/ 242 TB
Now I grant you that pedroia had 100+ extra ABs, and will concede that they inflate his production totals. But the flip side of that is that he MAINTAINED his avg and OPS numbers despite having the extra opportunities to fail.
Just for shits and giggles, here's Dustin's line reduced to 536 ABs (same as Mauer)
97 R/ 14 HR/ 76 RBI
Still comparable despite the fact that Mauer hit 3rd and Pedroia hit 2nd for most of the year.
1. VORP-
Pedroia wins. At least you admit it.
"Measured by Baseball Prospectus' Wins Above Replacement Player (which considers defense), Mauer finished a close second to Pedroia."
2. Clutch
"Clutch" is bullcrap, you should know better. Even so, I'll point out that in 5 games in the cleanup spot, Pedroia hit .667 with an OPS of 1.889.
CLEANUP. As a 2B. That seems pretty freaking clutch to me.
3. Runs created
Pedroia LED the Sox with 123. Mauer DID NOT lead the Twins. Morneau did.
Pedroia also led the Sox in runs, hits, total bases, doubles, average, times on base, AB/ K, and power/ speed numbers.
With the exception of runs and average, Mauer didn't lead the Twins in any of those.
I know it's hard to compare a 2B with a C, but there's no way you can say Mauer did more offensively for his team than Pedroia did for his.
4. Win shares
You cite Mauer's edge here, but assessing players using win share s needs to be done very carefully and in the context of other statistics. Given Pedroia's edge in the stat line, I'm not sure how Mauer overcomes him here. Still, for argument's sake I'll give you this one.
____________________________________________
Looking at the overall picture though, I just fail to see how you arrive at Mauer being the better choice. And you compound your folly with this line:
"And for as long as I've been doing this, every time the MVP voters have a choice between the guy with the power stats and the guy who does the little things, they pick the guy with the big numbers."
Dude. Seriously? Is Pedroia supposed to be the "guy with the power stats" in this equation? Because you spent the first half of your column ripping him for his LACK of uniqueness when it comes to stats.
Here's my conclusion: Pedroia did more for the Sox than Mauer did for the Twins. He did things that very few second basemen have done. He batted in 4 different spots in the lineup. He carried that team through injuries to nearly every other contributor.
Mauer's batting title is great. But given that he wasn't even the most valuable TWIN, he did not deserve the MVP.
11.12.2008
Refresh
In the interest of keeping from going stir crazy, I am thinking about writing some posts about the fantasy baseball impact of select off-season moves. If you are checking this website, you can look forward that. Alternatively, if you want to write about anything fantasy baseball related, I would also welcome that. I am very tempted to write about video game news as well, but, seeing as how that is not included in the mission statement above, I will resist that temptation for now.
Dear Mysterious Hyperlinker
Thank you for linking my championship photo to an appropriately topical YouTube clip. I am at work now and will assume that the clip's sound matches up with its title and is in no way's ironic.
Hey Chris De Luca- I'm Calling You Out!
This post is a response to an article in the San Fransisco Chronicle. You can read it here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/11/SPHO142DD9.DTL
Recently, the National League Cy Young award was presented to Giants' pitcher Tim Lincecum. Of the 32 voters to weigh in on the award, 23 of them saw fit to put him in first place. Others who mertied serious consideration included Brandon Webb and Johan Santana, each of whom garnered 4 first place votes.
Voting for the award involves selecting three pitchers for the ballot. Based on personal opinion, the voter then puts those three in order, with the guy at the top being the most deserving of the award.
Only ONE of the 32 voters left Lincecum off of his ballot entirely. Chris De Luca, a writer for the Chicago Sun-Times. De Luca selected Webb, Brad Lidge, and Santana as his top 3.
Now I'll admit that each of those pitchers had a great season. And I'm not arguing that Lincecum should or should not have won the award. I won't even criticize his inclusion of a closer. But I will call him out for his atrocious logic.
"It's funny because toward the end of the season, in early September, I was thinking Lincecum would be in my top two," De Luca said. "I thought Webb's victories (22) stood out to me more than anything, and Lincecum didn't have the victories. Twenty victories was a big deal. We had a stretch there where no one was hitting 20."
I'm sorry, didn't we just determine that you, Mr. De Luca, are a national writer for a major metropolitan newspaper? A national sports writer? Maybe I misunderstood then, because based on that quote, you have no business being anywhere near sports.
Do you watch baseball? Do you understand the game, and the roles of the various players? Perhaps you should take some time off to familiarize yourself with how pitching works. A pitcher's win/loss record is perhaps the WORST way to assess his level of talent, and yet that is the stat you seemed to focus on in submitting your vote.
Luckily your idiocy didn't cost Lincecum the award. If it had, I suspect you'd be on the run from a mob of Giants fans who would do their level best to leave you floating in McCovey Cove. But just because your terrible decision didn't have consequences on the game doesn't mean you should get away with it.
Lincecum had:
- a better ERA (2.62 to 3.30)
- a better WHIP (1.17 to 1.20)
- more strikeouts (265 to 183)
- a better K:BB ratio (3.15 to 2.82)
- more innings (227 to 226.2)
- fewer hits allowed (182 to 206)
- fewer total bases allowed (260 to 284)
- more quality starts (26 to 24)
- and a better QS % (.79 to .71)
Opposing hitters batted only .221 against him (.242 versus Webb) and slugged at a .316 clip (.334 versus Webb).
And Lincecum did it all while getting less run support than Webb.
So tell me...when you looked at those statistics, those facts that describe the 2008 season, did you:
A) not understand them, or
B) merely choose to ignore them?
Oh yes, the victories. I keep forgetting. Webb crossed the magical threshold of 20 wins. IT'S 20. A ROUND NUMBER.
Let's go back to what I posted above- see that pesky quality start thingy? That actually means something. It means that Lincecum put his team in a position to win MORE OFTEN than did Webb. It means that if victories were actually based on pitching performance, Lincecum would have outdueled Webb. It means that despite playing for the black hole that it the San Fransisco Giants, Lincecum did more to help his team than Webb did for his.
By using victories as your deciding factor, you're rewarding Webb for playing on a better team. THAT'S your determinant? REALLY? And you write about sports for a living??
Consider yourself called out. I sure as hell hope you have more to back up your choice than victories. If so, come find me and we can debate your reasoning skills. But if not, the league should be tripping all over itself in its rush to strip you of your vote.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/11/SPHO142DD9.DTL
Recently, the National League Cy Young award was presented to Giants' pitcher Tim Lincecum. Of the 32 voters to weigh in on the award, 23 of them saw fit to put him in first place. Others who mertied serious consideration included Brandon Webb and Johan Santana, each of whom garnered 4 first place votes.
Voting for the award involves selecting three pitchers for the ballot. Based on personal opinion, the voter then puts those three in order, with the guy at the top being the most deserving of the award.
Only ONE of the 32 voters left Lincecum off of his ballot entirely. Chris De Luca, a writer for the Chicago Sun-Times. De Luca selected Webb, Brad Lidge, and Santana as his top 3.
Now I'll admit that each of those pitchers had a great season. And I'm not arguing that Lincecum should or should not have won the award. I won't even criticize his inclusion of a closer. But I will call him out for his atrocious logic.
"It's funny because toward the end of the season, in early September, I was thinking Lincecum would be in my top two," De Luca said. "I thought Webb's victories (22) stood out to me more than anything, and Lincecum didn't have the victories. Twenty victories was a big deal. We had a stretch there where no one was hitting 20."
I'm sorry, didn't we just determine that you, Mr. De Luca, are a national writer for a major metropolitan newspaper? A national sports writer? Maybe I misunderstood then, because based on that quote, you have no business being anywhere near sports.
Do you watch baseball? Do you understand the game, and the roles of the various players? Perhaps you should take some time off to familiarize yourself with how pitching works. A pitcher's win/loss record is perhaps the WORST way to assess his level of talent, and yet that is the stat you seemed to focus on in submitting your vote.
Luckily your idiocy didn't cost Lincecum the award. If it had, I suspect you'd be on the run from a mob of Giants fans who would do their level best to leave you floating in McCovey Cove. But just because your terrible decision didn't have consequences on the game doesn't mean you should get away with it.
Lincecum had:
- a better ERA (2.62 to 3.30)
- a better WHIP (1.17 to 1.20)
- more strikeouts (265 to 183)
- a better K:BB ratio (3.15 to 2.82)
- more innings (227 to 226.2)
- fewer hits allowed (182 to 206)
- fewer total bases allowed (260 to 284)
- more quality starts (26 to 24)
- and a better QS % (.79 to .71)
Opposing hitters batted only .221 against him (.242 versus Webb) and slugged at a .316 clip (.334 versus Webb).
And Lincecum did it all while getting less run support than Webb.
So tell me...when you looked at those statistics, those facts that describe the 2008 season, did you:
A) not understand them, or
B) merely choose to ignore them?
Oh yes, the victories. I keep forgetting. Webb crossed the magical threshold of 20 wins. IT'S 20. A ROUND NUMBER.
Let's go back to what I posted above- see that pesky quality start thingy? That actually means something. It means that Lincecum put his team in a position to win MORE OFTEN than did Webb. It means that if victories were actually based on pitching performance, Lincecum would have outdueled Webb. It means that despite playing for the black hole that it the San Fransisco Giants, Lincecum did more to help his team than Webb did for his.
By using victories as your deciding factor, you're rewarding Webb for playing on a better team. THAT'S your determinant? REALLY? And you write about sports for a living??
Consider yourself called out. I sure as hell hope you have more to back up your choice than victories. If so, come find me and we can debate your reasoning skills. But if not, the league should be tripping all over itself in its rush to strip you of your vote.
10.16.2008
Dissecting Our Beloved Forecaster: TINSTAAP's Dissapointment
I am posting this in draft form first. I may tighten it up later, depending on my mood.
TINSTAAP was predicted by PECOTA through Justin to finish in first place, yet finished the year in sixth place. As has been noted previously, PECOTA is a propietary tool of BP that I (and other players) use extensively in our pre-draft fantasy baseball rankings. I am interested in figuring out what might have gone wrong with its predictions or Matt's use of those predictions. In this venture, I am going to limit myself to the facts of the auction draft. Also, I am not going to look at PECOTA's actually predictions for the players. In most cases, I am going to assume that Matt's value is an adequate reflection of what PECOTA predicted. In this regard, I present you with my analysis.
WINS
Dustin Pedroia $8.00
Pedroia had a surprisingly good year and Matt made up a lot of value here. A young player with good peripherals that may have made him projectable by PECOTA.
Jhonny Peralta $1.00
Peralta had an average to above average year, and, at the cost of $1, is about all you can hope for. He is young and has been relatively consistent, which may have made him projectable by PECOTA.
J.J. Hardy $1.00
Peralta clone. Similarly, great value pick.
Adrian Gonzalez $14.00
Gonzalez is an underrated youngish player who improved on his performance from last year to become a superstar. He has a solid, consistently improving periphals. This may have been the best money Matt spent all year.
Ryan Church $1.00
Matt was the first on the Church bandwagon and was rewarded with spectacular performance early on, with decreasing returns as the season progressed. This was a good value pick, but I know that holding on to Church through all his dramas this season ended up hurting more than helping my team in another league.
LOSSES
Derrek Lee $24.00
I thought Lee had a much better year than he actually did. 20 HR and 8 SB for a first baseman that you bought for $24 is very disappointing. Lee sunk many a fantasy seasons last year. PECOTA probably predicted a bounce-back to his preceding level of production that was not to be. However, Lee is an older player on the decline, and PECOTA was too optimistic.
Hideki Matsui $9.00
Projectors may have expected Matsui to bounce back from his injuries to his career above average to good performance, but he didn't get there because of those darn injuries. Similar to Lee, he is an older player on the decline.
Jeremy Hermida $7.00
I remember Hermida being up and down all season. PECOTA saw a potential for greatness, but he just wasn't consistent enough to meet the price paid for this year.
Adam Jones $12.00
Younger and sexier than Hermida, what PECOTA didn't know that he wasn't ready either, ergo the disconnect between price paid and projected value. Because he was new and desired, he turned out to be an even bigger disappointment than last year's fad, Hermida.
Scott Kazmir $24.00
Kazmir had an uneven season and was always at the highest a 50-50 shot to earn $24 draft day money. Pitchers are unpredictable. 'Nuff said.
Brett Myers $14.00
Myers may have had $14 of value over the course of the season, but I doubt it was for Matt's team.
Yovani Galladro $13.00
Season (almost) ending injury to a pitcher. Predictable? Possibly. That may have been taken into account in his auction day price already.
WASHES
Kurt Suzuki $1.00
Suzuki had a mediocre to average year for the catcher position, but Matt did not spend much on him.
Felix Hernandez $19.00
At a lower price range than Kazmir, he may have done well enough to earn his value at least.
Tom Gorzelanny $4.00
Upside pick that didn't pay off.
Daric Barton $4.00
Upside pick that didn't pay off.
Travis Buck $1.00
Upside pick that didn't pay off.
Joel Zumaya $2.00
Francisco Rodriguez $5.00
Relievers don't count for much.
Jonathan Broxton $5.00
Relievers don't count for much.
Joba Chamberlain $10.00
Price seems a little high for a reliever, but he did put in a lot of excellent innings as a hybrid pitcher and reliever.
I do see some patterns here with Matt and/or PECOTA from this small sample size, but nothing earth shattering. They do a good job of forecasting young players who have some major league experience. They do a bad job of forecasting declining middle-aging players who have a relatively recent history of success, but a more recent history of suckitude. They don't do well at picking when young players will actually first experience success in the major leagues. And, as I know all too well (and Matt too, see his team's name), they have no idea what pitchers are going to do well and what pitchers are going to suck.
TINSTAAP was predicted by PECOTA through Justin to finish in first place, yet finished the year in sixth place. As has been noted previously, PECOTA is a propietary tool of BP that I (and other players) use extensively in our pre-draft fantasy baseball rankings. I am interested in figuring out what might have gone wrong with its predictions or Matt's use of those predictions. In this venture, I am going to limit myself to the facts of the auction draft. Also, I am not going to look at PECOTA's actually predictions for the players. In most cases, I am going to assume that Matt's value is an adequate reflection of what PECOTA predicted. In this regard, I present you with my analysis.
WINS
Dustin Pedroia $8.00
Pedroia had a surprisingly good year and Matt made up a lot of value here. A young player with good peripherals that may have made him projectable by PECOTA.
Jhonny Peralta $1.00
Peralta had an average to above average year, and, at the cost of $1, is about all you can hope for. He is young and has been relatively consistent, which may have made him projectable by PECOTA.
J.J. Hardy $1.00
Peralta clone. Similarly, great value pick.
Adrian Gonzalez $14.00
Gonzalez is an underrated youngish player who improved on his performance from last year to become a superstar. He has a solid, consistently improving periphals. This may have been the best money Matt spent all year.
Ryan Church $1.00
Matt was the first on the Church bandwagon and was rewarded with spectacular performance early on, with decreasing returns as the season progressed. This was a good value pick, but I know that holding on to Church through all his dramas this season ended up hurting more than helping my team in another league.
LOSSES
Derrek Lee $24.00
I thought Lee had a much better year than he actually did. 20 HR and 8 SB for a first baseman that you bought for $24 is very disappointing. Lee sunk many a fantasy seasons last year. PECOTA probably predicted a bounce-back to his preceding level of production that was not to be. However, Lee is an older player on the decline, and PECOTA was too optimistic.
Hideki Matsui $9.00
Projectors may have expected Matsui to bounce back from his injuries to his career above average to good performance, but he didn't get there because of those darn injuries. Similar to Lee, he is an older player on the decline.
Jeremy Hermida $7.00
I remember Hermida being up and down all season. PECOTA saw a potential for greatness, but he just wasn't consistent enough to meet the price paid for this year.
Adam Jones $12.00
Younger and sexier than Hermida, what PECOTA didn't know that he wasn't ready either, ergo the disconnect between price paid and projected value. Because he was new and desired, he turned out to be an even bigger disappointment than last year's fad, Hermida.
Scott Kazmir $24.00
Kazmir had an uneven season and was always at the highest a 50-50 shot to earn $24 draft day money. Pitchers are unpredictable. 'Nuff said.
Brett Myers $14.00
Myers may have had $14 of value over the course of the season, but I doubt it was for Matt's team.
Yovani Galladro $13.00
Season (almost) ending injury to a pitcher. Predictable? Possibly. That may have been taken into account in his auction day price already.
WASHES
Kurt Suzuki $1.00
Suzuki had a mediocre to average year for the catcher position, but Matt did not spend much on him.
Felix Hernandez $19.00
At a lower price range than Kazmir, he may have done well enough to earn his value at least.
Tom Gorzelanny $4.00
Upside pick that didn't pay off.
Daric Barton $4.00
Upside pick that didn't pay off.
Travis Buck $1.00
Upside pick that didn't pay off.
Joel Zumaya $2.00
Francisco Rodriguez $5.00
Relievers don't count for much.
Jonathan Broxton $5.00
Relievers don't count for much.
Joba Chamberlain $10.00
Price seems a little high for a reliever, but he did put in a lot of excellent innings as a hybrid pitcher and reliever.
I do see some patterns here with Matt and/or PECOTA from this small sample size, but nothing earth shattering. They do a good job of forecasting young players who have some major league experience. They do a bad job of forecasting declining middle-aging players who have a relatively recent history of success, but a more recent history of suckitude. They don't do well at picking when young players will actually first experience success in the major leagues. And, as I know all too well (and Matt too, see his team's name), they have no idea what pitchers are going to do well and what pitchers are going to suck.
10.09.2008
Our Dearly Beloved Porkins
I've added some functionality to Porkins in our Pantheon of Champions. Namely, this video will now come up forevermore when clicking on his image (or at least until whoever put the video up on youtube removes it).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
