Final Score: A's 7, Royals 2
It was nice to see Jason Giambi get a hit, but let's face it: 0 for 20 or 15 for 20, it doesn't much matter - Giambi is just getting ready for the season and by May 1st his Spring Training performance will just be a distant shade of irrelevent.
For Josh Outman, though, much was riding on this appearance and Outman came up big, firing 4 shutout innings before hitting a blip in the 5th, and settling for a solid line of 5.2 IP, 5 hits, 2 ER, 1BB, 6K. Santiago Casilla, whose role will be more important for as long as Joey Devine is shelved, continued his near-perfect Spring by lowering his ERA to 0.96 with 2 IP of shutout ball.
Offensively, the A's made Sidney Ponson look like...Sidney Ponson, beating him silly as if he were a judge in Aruba. Ryan Sweeney (2-2 today, .361 for the Spring) got the A's off to a fast start, leading off the 1st with a single that was followed by singles from Cabrera and Giambi. That plated one run and a Matt Holliday DP scored another, as Oakland gave Outman an early 2-0 lead. Then the A's piled on in the 5th with 5 runs off Ponson, highlighted by Travis Buck's bases-clearing triple.
Outman's strong start, combined with Devine's setback, likely guarantees Josh a spot on the big league roster. At the moment, it appears he could be ticketed for long relief, a role that figures to be anything but a spectator sport given the A's young rotation. Or there could still be late surprises, as no one - including Sean Gallagher and Dana Eveland - has been told that a starting spot is theirs.
The bottom line is that the pitching is going to be extremely fluid, based on health (Duchscherer, Gio, Devine), performance (Gallagher, Eveland, Braden, Cahill, Anderson, Outman, Blevins), and progress (Mazzaro, Simmons), and the difference between a starter and a long reliever is going to be little.
In other words, if you're healthy and pitching well, you're going to be pitching a lot in important situations. If I were Josh Outman, I wouldn't worry for a minute about the seemingly huge difference between being named a starter and being named a "Yabu" - I'd worry about pitching well and figure that if there's a role you want, pitching well will get you there sooner rather than later.
0 recs | 117 comments
Great thread Nico!!!!!
Go A’s…
MMunoz33 - March 31, 2009
Thanks - for these Tuesday afternoon specials,
my main goal is to obfuscate the fact that I haven’t been able to follow the game at all and may barely know what the heck I’m talking about. Hey – that makes me a journalist!
Nico - March 31, 2009
hey, that makes you an American
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
You know if you're just going to insult me...
Nico - March 31, 2009
i meant it in the best possible way
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
So then you're insulting me...
Nico - March 31, 2009
(gives Nico US passport and press credential)
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
sigh
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
A press credential to the US!!!!
{lines up interview with Arkansas}
Nico - March 31, 2009
It basically comes down to economics.
Starting Cahill over Outman is a bad economic bargain and would be a kin to hitting on 18 in blackjack. The expected payout for starting Cahill is $800,000 than starting Outman.
I really think Outman can have an 2008 Eveland type year though with slightly less ks (prob about 6K/9) and a slightly higher HR rate (closer to point .8 HR/9) and producing something like 2.3 WAR.
designatedforassignment - March 31, 2009
It sounds like the "unofficial official" word is that
Braden (game #1) Cahill (game #2) and Anderson (game #4) have made the rotation. No such proclamations have been made about Eveland or Gallagher, though, which is interesting.
Nico - March 31, 2009
would they really go with 4 lefties??
Outman over Gallagher would mean that.
If Outman throws a simulated game Sunday he’s be on track to be the #5 starter and throw the home opener.
jasonthea - March 31, 2009
Do I have to do a economic analysis of why Cahill over Gallagher is dumb?
Its way way worse than the idea of starting Cahill over Anderson. Gallagher projects to be a good pitcher in 2009 Cahill projects to not be.
designatedforassignment - March 31, 2009
exactly
I honestly can’t understand why anyone close to the team even thinks its a possibility.
nevermoor - March 31, 2009
My take? And mind you this is ALL conjecture
based on an outside view of what I’ve seen:
Maybe Gallagher has come into camp complacent, not in great shape, not working that hard, coming across as “I have a spot won,” while guys like Cahill and Anderson, Outman and Braden, are taking nothing for granted and working 3x harder than Gallagher.
Beane decides it’s in Gallagher’s and the A’s best interest to “light a fire” under Gallagher by telling him “what you’re doing isn’t enough – it’s not ‘major league’ – and until you get your act together you’re about 6th on the depth chart, buddy.”
Now that may all be hogwash, but is any of it contradicted by what we’ve seen and heard?
Nico - March 31, 2009
it's as good a conjecture as any I've read
OaklandSi - March 31, 2009
Thanks - and just to be clear,
since occasionally I have some inside info on stuff, on this I have none. This is all purely speculation as a fan.
Nico - March 31, 2009
It certainly makes sense
But if they actually do it I’ll be pretty surprised.
nevermoor - March 31, 2009
Why?
Gallagher’s hardly an established veteran. His biggest accomplishment to date is getting traded for Harden.
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
Because he has as much experience, and more upside,
than Braden/Eveland, and more experience than Cahill/Anderson. But I still think the A’s would do it, because as you point out he may be “relatively established” but he’s hardly a grizzled veteran who has earned anything.
Nico - March 31, 2009
Right, if your scenario is true and he's been "major leaguing" it like
Buck supposedly did last year, I can see demoting him for a while either to long relief or the minors.
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
You just wonder, after Billy took him aside,
Gallagher talking about Billy “lighting a fire under him,” and then two guys who haven’t ever pitched in the major leagues have essentially been named to the rotation while Gallagher hasn’t. What it adds up to me is Billy making a statement – and I’m not at all opposed to that. Better now than later or never.
Nico - March 31, 2009
So basically, you think Billy wants Gallagher to say, "I'm mad as hell!!"
Nick - March 31, 2009
Or maybe get people out
Or both.
Nico - March 31, 2009
I think you're right, but the problem becomes you're sixth starter/long relief guy
Keze - March 31, 2009
Duchscherer: nothing major, could be back in May
Dr. Lewis Yocum did a “little clean up” of Justin Duchscherer’s right elbow in an arthroscopic procedure in Los Angeles today. With no significant structural damage found, the A’s top starter could be be throwing again within a month and back on the mound for Oakland in roughly six weeks or so.
Whether he’ll be in the rotation or in the bullpen remains to be seen. There’s a strain of thought in the organization that Duchscherer might stay healthier working in relief, but Duchscherer has argued the reverse the past year and a half. The deciding factor might be which spot the A’s need more help when Duchscherer returns in May.
Link:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/athletics/detail?&entry_id=37799
Syphon - March 31, 2009
Okay, seriously.
how is it that there’s never anything WRONG with him, but he’s always fucking hurt?
mikev - March 31, 2009
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MMunoz33 - March 31, 2009
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that.
baseballgirl - March 31, 2009
Either way you end up on the 15-day DL
Nico - March 31, 2009
sigh and a half.
ak_A - March 31, 2009
that's a long sigh.
Leopold Bloom - March 31, 2009
It's actually just the sigh you're legally entitled to on holidays
Nico - March 31, 2009
sigh? si
como esta
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
Slusser also says Outman may have the edge over Gallagher for the 5th spot.
Gallagher pitches Saturday.
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
Personally, I'd rather have Gags in the starting rotation
and Outman in the pen for long relief. But, that’s just me.
As far as the Cahill argument goes, if he’s a better option than Outman performance wise, then if the A’s are alreday planning on putting Anderson in the rotation, then you might as well put Cahill there, too. Obviously, this could affect his price tag in the future, but this is a unique year with unique circumstances….so money might not be the biggest factor this year. Again, I’m resding between the lines a bit here.
mrod - March 31, 2009
Just putting it out there - having seen
Cahill, Anderson, and Mazzaro pitch once each, Anderson and Mazzaro look like they have really fluid mechanics, while Cahill’s delivery looks to me as if it puts a lot of strain on his arm. I wouldn’t bank on Cahill going more than 6 years injury-free compared to the others, based on what I saw. Meaning if I were going to say, “Heck, pitch him now in case he breaks later” about any of the three, it would be Cahill.
Nico - March 31, 2009
ow
he’s actually the one I’m nervous about being in the bigs now…and if something’s iffy about his mechanics I would much rather they work with him, rather than use him up…
OaklandSi - March 31, 2009
I don't know - it just looked like he was
throwing across his body in a way that would put most of the stress on his arm; kind of stepping towards 3B and then slinging the ball, with mostly arm creating the force.
That being said, I’m not really a “mechanics” guy, so maybe some input from Kyle Roddy would be helpful here.
Nico - March 31, 2009
Speaking of which...
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com/2008/12/12/690925/pitching-mechanics-trevor
Nico - March 31, 2009
Wow, just re-read the piece
Talk about “inconclusive” – Cahill is obviously one of the more enigmatic pitchers to analyze mechanically.
Nico - March 31, 2009
interesting
by the way, I recently watched Dr. Mike Marshall on MLB channel. Earlier i’d watched some of his more detailed videos. His pitching motion looks so entirely different from anything I’ve seen…does anyone in MLB now pitch this way?
OaklandSi - March 31, 2009
Not as far as I know
I’ve been on a bit of a “send him to Mike Marshall!!” kick since last year, mainly WRT Harden. I almost made a comment about Marshall on the Dontrelle fanpost thread, too. The DRays had a 30-y.o. rookie a while ago (Sparks, maybe?) who used a Marshall motion, but he had some control problems when he got to the bigs and they dumped him.
FWIW, I find Marshall pretty persuasive, and I think if Beane really wanted to roll the dice this wouldn’t be a bad way to do it. If Marshall is right, the A’s would have an unbelievable advantage over every other team in baseball — effective, healthy pitchers.
Nick - March 31, 2009
Mechanics
Those are from Cahill’s High School days, correct? I’m sure his delivery is a more refined now, and with how you state that he’s stepping towards 3rd base might actually help Cahill get on-top of his deadly sinker.
Colorado Fan - March 31, 2009
Soon as he gets back
He’ll break again.
ElQuesoCapitan - March 31, 2009
nice to get some good news for a change (Duke)
I was just thinking as I read Nico’s wrap that there is a significant difference between a starter and a long reliever, even in a season with so many young starters: namely, if you are a long reliever and you’re called upon to pitch it’s likely because your team is down by several runs, maybe even many runs. A starter at least begins all even. that is significant when you think about the number of wins this team will end up with this season.
OaklandSi - March 31, 2009
weird thing by the way
I was too busy at work to tune in at all about the game, and got home just as it was ending. So I figured, at least I can listen to the postgame wrap. Well I log into mlb.com and what do I get? The pregame show, and the game itself. First time that’s happened.
OaklandSi - March 31, 2009
This is true, OaklandSi - point well taken
They may be more similar than usual (this year) in terms of ultimate work load, but they are night and day in terms of context, from your warm up routine to the situation you encounter.
Nico - March 31, 2009
Ya but you're right in the sense that which role you start the season in is less important than how
well you do in that role. A AAA guy or long reliever now could be the ace by August if he pitches well enough. Look at Ziegler last year.
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
Too many triples.
Head exploding.
nevermoor - March 31, 2009
Those must be some large glasses...Don't drive!
tresselfan - March 31, 2009
Great recap, Nico. You're on the money.
It will be an interesting guessing game to see who is the starting 25 and the starting 5. We should do that GoG.
baseballgirl - March 31, 2009
GfrG!
Guess the fricking roster Game.
Nico - March 31, 2009
I guess there are two definitions of "bridled"
When I saw Rotoworld say, “There’s some thought that he could stay healthier in relief, though Duchscherer has bridled at the suggestion,” I thought, “Hmm…” since “A bridle is a piece of equipment used to control a horse. The bridle fits over a horse’s head, and has the purpose of controlling the horse…”
Nico - March 31, 2009
So he's not champing at the bit?
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
the pitching staff looks a lot like our everyday players did the last couple of years.
Lots of really good players. No great ones. Lots of potential. Mostly not realized except in spurts.
I hope I am wrong!!
Bigtoe - March 31, 2009
The Farm is loaded with Arms
So if only 3-4 pan out of Cahill, Anderson, Outman, Gallagher, Eveland, Braden, Simmons, Mazzaro, De Los Santos, Ynoa, and darkhorses like Webb, Madsen, Figueroa… you get the point. Pitching won’t be an issue moving forward. I’d be more concerned with Barton, Buck, Sweeney, Suzuki, Cunningham, Carter, Cardenas, Doolittle, Donaldson, etc…. not a lot of “Star Power” in that group, IMO.
Colorado Fan - March 31, 2009
im not too concerned losing devine
he’s always had health issues, even last yr. get it fixed and comeback later. i expect duke back to the bullpen in may and A’s are deep in righty relievers. ziegler/cassila/wuertz/springer etc can get by and theres more reinforcements in AAA . wildcard:andrew carignan. struggled in spring, but the closer type stuff is there.
Asfan4ever723 - March 31, 2009
I wasn't overwhelmed with the Carignan's stuff in the one game I saw him.
He didn’t look like he throws any harder than Jeff Gray for example.
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
The one time I saw him, he reminded me of Angel Hernandez
I wasn’t even sure he was facing the right way.
Nico - March 31, 2009
Ok... this is a problem...
I’ve held my tongue the entire pre-season. Not that i’m an expert… far from it. But, here’s an observation from someone who just loves the A’s.
When someone (especially someone not part of the inner circle) says that X player is good or X player is bad it doesn’t take a couple hours before comments pop up all over AN about sample size.
Yet… this ENTIRE spring training season has been about small sample sizes. If Cahill has 5 bad starts and 1 great start that doesn’t mean much. If Cahill has 5 great starts and 1 bad start that doesn’t mean much. This website is supposed to be the bastion of objectivity… but when it comes to pitchers and this spring training… it’s been all about “oh my… Anderson had a bad outing!!!” “Oh my… Anderson had a great outing.”
If we’re supposed to believe that the size of the sample means something… then shouldn’t spring training be deemed irrelevant?
Either Outman is ready… or he’s not. Either Anderson is ready… or he’s not. Either Cahill is ready… or he’s not.
Please, quit telling us that everything hinges on ONE start.
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
So I shouldn't say that Gallagher's start on Saturday may determine whether he or Outman makes
the rotation?
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
I don't see a contradiction, brenarlo -
In general, large samples are needed to evaluate someone’s true level of ability/performance, but spring training is precisely about determining roster spots (for some), and so the difference between 5 good and 1 bad outing, or 5 bad and 1 good outing, can be key. Not for Giambi and not for Wuertz, but for Outman, Cahill, and Mazzaro, sure.
When the presenting situation is “3 spots for 6 pitchers, 5 outings each, go get ’em” it’s a lot different than when the presenting situation is “Wuertz has a track record; get ready and don’t worry about the numbers.”
Nico - March 31, 2009
My point is that small sample sizes should NOT determine spots.
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
i think his spot will be important
not so much in determining his stuff, per se, which the A’s should have been able to evaluate by now, but rather, his supposed attitude to the whole thing. that’s what i’d be looking at, if i suspected someone had been phoning it in a little..
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
in the above example, the word spot should have been "start"
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
Again... if we're supposed to be objective...
how can ONE start mean much?
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
well, if it's a final chance to show you've the 'right attitude'
then yeah, it can mean something, I’d say. I really don’t think his ‘ability to pitch’ is being questioned by the A’s management
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
If he has the "right attitude" for...
33 starts per year but the “wrong attitude” for a couple spring training starts… isn’t the front office making a dumb decision to base their decision about him on ONE start?
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
No - things change over time. See below
Nico - March 31, 2009
i think what they'd be looking for is something like
the ability for him to pull his socks up, when under pressure.
I mean, i think we’re arguing a very fine point, here. No-one is suggesting that it’s a trial by fire elimination, but I also don’t think you can say that this start isn’t important
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
Or that it means he's being judged on one start
It’s the culmination of a bigger body of work, all but one start of which is now in the past. The A’s haven’t liked what they’ve seen and Gallagher has only one start left to show something different.
Nico - March 31, 2009
Here's how:
1. Are you throwing 94MPH or are you throwing 90MPH?
2. Did the message the boss just gave you sink in or is it “same old, same old” after the boss said “change this, now”?
And so on. It’s not that one start determines everything; it’s that as the clock winds down, the team has just one start left to make the overall assessment of whether a given player is picking up where he left off, picking up ahead of where he left off, or picking up behind where he left off.
Nico - March 31, 2009
Or, as in the case of Esteban,
are you throwing 85mph and are you drunk?
Leopold Bloom - March 31, 2009
or both? Tecate Lite, anyone?
mrod - March 31, 2009
don't mind if i do
just don’t call it beer
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
"Si' mijo'!"
mrod - March 31, 2009
jejeje
me reé
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
Tecate Lite throws 85 mph?
…can we sign him?
Leopold Bloom - March 31, 2009
Stay away from Tadano Lite, though
Nico - March 31, 2009
after about 85 Tecate Lites
I doubt I could throw anything……except up.
mrod - March 31, 2009
soft toss
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
I'll bet you a dollar that there is very little riding on ANY start...
from Beane’s point of view. That’s just not logical. Even if it’s after the boss told someone off.
Are you throwing 94 or 90? That’s been known by the organization for some time. Either the pitcher has it or he doesn’t.
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
No! Sometimes pitchers who throw 94 MPH
are 4 MPH down on their velocity (maybe due to new injury or mechanics) is my point. I’m talking about why the 5-start sample of ST could be meaningful.
Nico - April 1, 2009
Except that sometimes, the sample is the only measure a team has
for a young pitcher’s/hitter’s progress. Instead of going by someone’s stats, performance, maturity, etc. as a 21 year old in AAA, you can look at their stuff, their poise, their maturity, etc. as a 22 year old, and see what does or doesn’t look different from where they left off. And in these cases, a 5-year sample just isn’t available, but a 5-start sample is.
Nico - March 31, 2009
right, i don't disagree with that
but i’d say that in Gallagher’s case, they’d pretty much given the impression he was going to be a lock for the lineup – hence, they’d made what they considered to be a decent evaluation of his pitching ability.
hence the consternation that he’s not pitching up to his potential – it seems to be considered an ‘attitude’ thing, as opposed to a ‘still learning to pitch’ thing
alea iacta est - March 31, 2009
That's my hunch
Nico - March 31, 2009
But then isn't the team making an irrational decision?
Why should ANYTHING be concluded after ONE start?
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
Why do you assume that the "attitude track record"
of the past two years is a better measure of current attitude than the “attitude track record” of March, 2009? It happens all the time that a player comes back after a long off-season having gained weight (Jerome Williams), or with a lousy work ethic – maybe a newly formed drinking habit or party lifestyle.
Nico - March 31, 2009
sounds like my routine every spring....
mrod - March 31, 2009
Perhaps a boxscore is a small sample size, but...
To a scout, for instance, 5-6 outings for a pitcher, and bullpen sessions etc is a shit-ton of pitches to evaluate and plenty large enough of a sample to determine how much a pitcher is/has developed.
So I agree with you that one outing is a small sample, but at the same time it is a loose indicator of how good each individual pitch/batter faced appears in the eyes of the A’s management, which means a lot right now when, without major league track records, it is the only thing to go on for any of our SPs.
ChadGod - April 1, 2009
Curt Young
I gotta believe that Curt Young has a lot of say in these matters, and I trust his judgment. Stats don’t tell even half the story. Poise, Mound Presence, Confidence to throw any pitch/any time, Velocity/Movement, Throwing “Good” Strikes, Mechanics, etc… and how these factors relate to results (Squibbers/jam shots vs. Barrel of the Bat) should make up the majority of how these decisions are made. If I had to guess, the starting rotation would be…
1. Braden
2. Cahill
3. Eveland
4. Anderson
5. Gallagher
LR: Outman (Long Relief)
AAA: Mazzaro, Simmons, Webb, Jer. Williams, Edg. Gonzalez
Colorado Fan - April 1, 2009
That's exactly what I'm expecting
With Blevins in the major league pen.
Nico - April 1, 2009
And Gio on the DL?
Or AAA long relief?
WaddellCanseco - April 1, 2009
Gio
there is nothing for Gio in AAA, no?
Future Ed - April 1, 2009
I put almost no stock into spring stats
And maybe that’s part of the reason I remained unconvinced that giving A+C rotation spots is a good idea. It’s far too small a sample to be representative of a player’s true abilities.
Practically speaking, though,I can see that it would be problematic for an organization to adopt that mentality. It’s probably a good thing that the young players prepare for ST as if they’re position on the organizational depth chart depends on it.
CapgrasDelusion - March 31, 2009
Also there's no one else standing....at least one of the two had to make it.
We already know about Williams’s and Edgar’s true abilities. They’re not good.
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
Exactly, in fact it seems to me that both Anderson and Cahill have to make the rotation out of spring.
The A’s are going to need a solid long relief pitcher, so really there are six spots that have to go to the best six potential starters. If you don’t want to bring up Cahill then that means you slide Outman into the rotation and then who is the long relief guy? The difference between Cahill and the next group of available pitchers (Williams and E. Gon) is pretty huge IMO.
The argument is not that Outman is better than Cahill (although that may or may not be true), it’s that after those two the A’s don’t have realistic alternative ready to go this season. So, if there are six spots for pitchers capable of throwing 5+ innings (five starters and long relief) and we have six pitchers who are clearly a level above everyone else then it comes down to whether the A’s want to field the best team possible, or sacrifice that for financial considerations.
One might claim that the long relief role isn’t that important because the games in which he appears will likely be blowouts, and we can just throw Edgar out there for mop-up/garbage time. This argument held a lot more water last year when being behind 5-0 in the third meant that the game was essentially over, this year (and a semi-potent offense) I won’t be so quick to give up on that sort of game and would prefer Outman (or if it was up to me, Braden) over Edgar.
Keze - April 1, 2009
Say whatever you want...
and the decision may be made based on this start…. but if we’re to believe that small samples sizes don’t mean much, then this that start should mean very little.
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
Sorry... that was a response to WaddellCanseco
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
See above, where I say whatever I want... :-)
Nico - March 31, 2009
Got it!! :)
brenarlo - March 31, 2009
i like this "irrelevent" word
surely it means: loud and lengthy letting out of all the things that don’t matter. perfect for this time of year. please season, please start!
AV - March 31, 2009
Did you just describe
“irrelevant” or “fart”?
Nico - March 31, 2009
To the man with no nose
It could be both.
DMOAS - March 31, 2009
See y'all over at the farting range I presume....
Gasss up bitches!!!
mrod - March 31, 2009
Speaking of which.
I’ll be doing a fANpost for the AN opening day tailgate later this week. I’ve not forgotten.
lynnzgal - March 31, 2009
Dammit, I knew there was a reason people have calenders!
(Gets back in car, drives away from the Coliseum parking lot…)
mrod - March 31, 2009
Lol!
Btw, saint and I are in touch. So this will be a joint effort.
lynnzgal - March 31, 2009
Music to my ears....
mrod - March 31, 2009
I SO saw that coming!
lynnzgal - March 31, 2009
I don't think that guy did....
;0
mrod - March 31, 2009
I'll believe it when I see it...
Outman in the rotation over Gallagher, that is.
FoolshGame22 - March 31, 2009
Gallagher isn't starting any more this spring.
Urban’s article quotes Geren that Cahill, Eveland and Anderson are the starters in the Bay Bridge Series, and that Braden starts Wednesday and Opening Day.
Whatever decision will be made on Gallagher he’s got to influence it in relief only.
WaddellCanseco - March 31, 2009
This makes me a sad panda.
Also from Urban’s article:
ZigFan31 - March 31, 2009
Why?
Gallagher, Outman and Bailey are all better pitchers. Doesn’t make me sad. Makes me happy.
FoolshGame22 - April 1, 2009
Shouldn't they just start Gio on the DL?
They’re not gonna pull Anderson/Cahill before 3 starts anyway, so they might as well give him time to stretch out into game form.
rebus - April 1, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.