Brewers reach deal with Suppan - 4 year, 42 mil

Mark_R · December 25, 2006

Ohka is a free agent. Their fifth starter is Claudio Vargas, I think.

It's a nice rotation, though.

Could it be the best rotation in the NL Central?

Almost certainly... unless Mark Prior is ressurected, Zambrano's arm stays on, Hill pitches like he did the last few starts of last season, and Marquis and Lilly regain their 2004 forms.

Ben Sheets has to be healthy, and that is not at all a certainty.

Soul · December 25, 2006

This is the pitching market. If you want even a mediocre starter, it's 10 large per year and that's the starting point.

Suppan is mediocre, maybe slightly less. BOOM! 10 mil/yr. It's automatic.

Marquis got 7mil/yr because he's below average. So we know what the SP market is. It's insane, but it is what it is.

Rob · December 26, 2006

This is the pitching market. If you want even a mediocre starter, it's 10 large per year and that's the starting point.

Suppan is mediocre, maybe slightly less. BOOM! 10 mil/yr. It's automatic.

Marquis got 7mil/yr because he's below average. So we know what the SP market is. It's insane, but it is what it is.

Just because that's the average market price doesn't make it a good idea.

The idea is to go cheap at certain spots by using young guys so that you can spend the extra cash on real difference makers. Suppan is not likely to be one of those.

Soul · December 26, 2006

This is the pitching market. If you want even a mediocre starter, it's 10 large per year and that's the starting point.

Suppan is mediocre, maybe slightly less. BOOM! 10 mil/yr. It's automatic.

Marquis got 7mil/yr because he's below average. So we know what the SP market is. It's insane, but it is what it is.

Just because that's the average market price doesn't make it a good idea.

The idea is to go cheap at certain spots by using young guys so that you can spend the extra cash on real difference makers. Suppan is not likely to be one of those.

Yep, and I never said it was a good idea.

Handlebar McSkullet · December 26, 2006

This is the pitching market. If you want even a mediocre starter, it's 10 large per year and that's the starting point.

Suppan is mediocre, maybe slightly less. BOOM! 10 mil/yr. It's automatic.

Marquis got 7mil/yr because he's below average. So we know what the SP market is. It's insane, but it is what it is.

Just because that's the average market price doesn't make it a good idea.

The idea is to go cheap at certain spots by using young guys so that you can spend the extra cash on real difference makers. Suppan is not likely to be one of those.

Yep, and I never said it was a good idea.

you cant think this is a bad signing for the brewers, statistically he cannot be that much better/worse than the other pitchers signed in this price range this season. I know we all love statistical analysis, but when pitching is so thin, you cant argue with a guy who consistently pitches around 200 innings and wins more than he loses

CheeseHead Cubs Fan · December 26, 2006

This is the pitching market. If you want even a mediocre starter, it's 10 large per year and that's the starting point.

Suppan is mediocre, maybe slightly less. BOOM! 10 mil/yr. It's automatic.

Marquis got 7mil/yr because he's below average. So we know what the SP market is. It's insane, but it is what it is.

Just because that's the average market price doesn't make it a good idea.

The idea is to go cheap at certain spots by using young guys so that you can spend the extra cash on real difference makers. Suppan is not likely to be one of those.

Yep, and I never said it was a good idea.

you cant think this is a bad signing for the brewers, statistically he cannot be that much better/worse than the other pitchers signed in this price range this season. I know we all love statistical analysis, but when pitching is so thin, you cant argue with a guy who consistently pitches around 200 innings and wins more than he loses

This pretty much sums it up....

A contract that was impossible to envision when Suppan's ERA was over 5.00 for the majority of last season. Suppan is durable, but he still fell short of 200 innings in each of his three seasons in St. Louis. Last year, he gave up 100 runs and struck out 104 batters in 190 innings. The Brewers are committing an awfully big chunk of their payroll to a guy who might not be anything more than a fourth starter.

TheDude · December 26, 2006

Ohka is a free agent. Their fifth starter is Claudio Vargas, I think.

It's a nice rotation, though.

Could it be the best rotation in the NL Central?

I don't think so, but it depends on the health of the players involved. I'd place the Cubs rotation slightly in front of the Brewers, or at least equal, based on health history. The Brewers are still counting on Sheets the way the Cubs counted on Prior and Wood for the last two seasons, and that is the main problem with their rotation.

You have to figure Zambrano over Sheets simply based on durability alone. I'd equate Suppan, Capuano, and Bush as about equal value to Lilly, Prior/Miller, and Marquis. Both Vargas and Hill are mostly unknowns with lots of potential.

Now, if you assume full health for Sheets and full health for Prior, I think the Cubs still have the edge. If you assume full health for Sheets, but not for Prior, then the Brewers probably have a slight edge based on Marquis/Bush #4 comparison.

NorthsideAvenger · December 26, 2006

Ohka is a free agent. Their fifth starter is Claudio Vargas, I think.

It's a nice rotation, though.

Could it be the best rotation in the NL Central?

I don't think so, but it depends on the health of the players involved. I'd place the Cubs rotation slightly in front of the Brewers, or at least equal, based on health history. The Brewers are still counting on Sheets the way the Cubs counted on Prior and Wood for the last two seasons, and that is the main problem with their rotation.

You have to figure Zambrano over Sheets simply based on durability alone. I'd equate Suppan, Capuano, and Bush as about equal value to Lilly, Prior/Miller, and Marquis. Both Vargas and Hill are mostly unknowns with lots of potential.

Now, if you assume full health for Sheets and full health for Prior, I think the Cubs still have the edge. If you assume full health for Sheets, but not for Prior, then the Brewers probably have a slight edge based on Marquis/Bush #4 comparison.

Pretty good though process, "TheDude", and I agree with it. Both Sheets and Prior will continue to be keys to their teams. If Prior is healthy, the Cubs 1A and 1B aces in Z and Prior, something no other NLCentral can boost. But as of right now, I believe the Cubs/Brewers starting rotations are about equal footing. The bullpen......that is a debate for after the new yr.

nilodnayr · December 26, 2006

Pretty good though process, "TheDude", and I agree with it. Both Sheets and Prior will continue to be keys to their teams. If Prior is healthy, the Cubs 1A and 1B aces in Z and Prior, something no other NLCentral can boost. But as of right now, I believe the Cubs/Brewers starting rotations are about equal footing. The bullpen......that is a debate for after the new yr.

Except of course that according to the Brewers, Sheets should be ready for opening day and according to the cubs, Prior isn't counted on to be in their top 5 starters. While absolutely, the success of both rotations (and teams) depends heavily on the health of both pitchers, the optimism/pessimism currently shown by their respective teams should give you a good guage as to how much each will be able to contribute. The Brewers expectations definitely don't mean Sheets will be healthy, but they are a hell of a lot more ringing of an endorsement than what the cubs have given Prior.

Soul · December 27, 2006

This is the pitching market. If you want even a mediocre starter, it's 10 large per year and that's the starting point.

Suppan is mediocre, maybe slightly less. BOOM! 10 mil/yr. It's automatic.

Marquis got 7mil/yr because he's below average. So we know what the SP market is. It's insane, but it is what it is.

Just because that's the average market price doesn't make it a good idea.

The idea is to go cheap at certain spots by using young guys so that you can spend the extra cash on real difference makers. Suppan is not likely to be one of those.

Yep, and I never said it was a good idea.

you cant think this is a bad signing for the brewers, statistically he cannot be that much better/worse than the other pitchers signed in this price range this season. I know we all love statistical analysis, but when pitching is so thin, you cant argue with a guy who consistently pitches around 200 innings and wins more than he loses

Unless the Brewers are planning on spending money with the Cubs or some of the other big spenders, then I don't see why I can't think this wasn't a real good signing. If it won't hamper additional moves that the club will make, then I suppose it's alright.

All along, the reason the Cubs could pick up mediocre pitching is because there's theoretically no hindrance on future moves (the Trib has no budget---despite what they try to say). I don't think the same holds true for the Brewers, but I will admit to not knowing for sure. Same probably holds true for the Royals, who just picked up a mid-line guy for massive dollars and now will likely have few options to improve themselves further.

Ender · December 30, 2006

Sheets > Zambrano assuming health which considering he's had 1 injury that bridged 2 years is pretty safe.

Capuano > any other pitcher the cubs have

Bush > any other pitcher the cubs have

Suppan = Lilly

Vargas = Marquis most likely

I dunno, I'm not seeing the cubs being as good as the Brewers unless Prior is healthy to take that #2 slot, Hill explodes onto the scene or Sheets goes down.

TruffleShuffle · December 30, 2006

Sheets > Zambrano assuming health which considering he's had 1 injury that bridged 2 years is pretty safe.

How many years has Sheets had a better ERA+ than Zambrano? Here's a hint... it's a number between -1 and 1.

Capuano > any other pitcher the cubs have

Maybe, maybe not. Hill's ERA+ was equal to Capuano's last year, and if one guy is likely to have a better year, it's probably Hill.

Bush > any other pitcher the cubs have

He's average; Miller/Prior could easily be as good as Bush in 2007.

Ender · December 30, 2006

FIP - last 3 years

Sheets - 2.53, 3.26, 2.47

Zambrano - 3.13, 3.55, 3.83

ERA is a horrible stat to judge pitchers by.

You are highly underrating Bush as well, he had an outstanding last year other than the one week that Yost decided to use him out of the bullpen between starts. Here is a nice article on him.

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/09/bushs_league.php

I do agree that Hill and Prior are huge wildcards in the rotation. If Hill hits his potential this year rather than down the road which is probably more likely it makes the Cubs rotation look a ton better. If Prior is healthy that again makes it much stronger. But if I had to take pitchers based on this season alone ignoring the future I'd take Capuano and Bush over anyone on the cubs rotation not named Zambrano.

TruffleShuffle · December 30, 2006

FIP - last 3 years

Sheets - 2.53, 3.26, 2.47
Zambrano - 3.13, 3.55, 3.83

ERA is a horrible stat to judge pitchers by.

Yeah it's really stupid to judge pitchers based on how many runs they give up. Pretty meaningless stat.

ERA+ might not tell all, but I'm not enamored with FIP. Sheets was not nearly a run and a half better than Zambrano last year, nor was he more than half a run better than Z in 2004.

CheeseHead Cubs Fan · December 30, 2006

Suppan is the right hand version of Doug Davis without the walks.

Ender · December 30, 2006

FIP - last 3 years

Sheets - 2.53, 3.26, 2.47
Zambrano - 3.13, 3.55, 3.83

ERA is a horrible stat to judge pitchers by.

Yeah it's really stupid to judge pitchers based on how many runs they give up. Pretty meaningless stat.

ERA+ might not tell all, but I'm not enamored with FIP. Sheets was not nearly a run and a half better than Zambrano last year, nor was he more than half a run better than Z in 2004.

ERA is a team stat, plain and simple. Its like judging pitchers by W's. FIP isn't the be all end all of course but some sort of component stat that looks at something other than just ER's is a much better system. Last year other than the game sheets left while injured he was one of the best pitchers in the NL and yes he's around a half run better than Zambrano as a pitcher in reality.

103.1 IP, 96 H, 38 ER, 11 BB, 113 K, 1.03 WHIP, 3.31 ERA taking out the start he left while hurt.

What you see in his ERA is one bad game which makes a huge impact on ERA and not on other stats. Sheets is Zambrano but with a few more HR's and about 1/3 as many walks.

vance_the_cubs_fan · December 30, 2006

I don't know who will be the better staff between the Brewers and Cubs. What I do know is ranking the Brewers with Sheets and then not given the Cubs credit for Prior isn't really intellectually honest.

Sheets pitched 106 innings last year. Prior pitched 43.

In 2005, Sheets pitched 156; Prior pitched 166.

Zambrano gets the edge over Sheets simply because he's shown he's healthy and can handle a 200 IP load. Sheets hasn't done that in two years.

By negating Prior and Hill in your comparisons, Ender, you make the Brewers look better.

Sheets > Zambrano assuming health which considering he's had 1 injury that bridged 2 years is pretty safe.

Capuano > any other pitcher the cubs have

Bush > any other pitcher the cubs have

Suppan = Lilly

Vargas = Marquis most likely

A few adjustments, I could make...

A healthy Prior = healthy Sheets. (We can debate which one is more likely, but this is probably true.)

Zambrano > Capuano

Hill = Bush (Assuming the second half Hill is for real.)

Lilly > Suppan

Vargas = Marquis

Now we can argue over the liklihood of the scenarios needed to flip the rotations like I have, but it's all plausible.

Sheets pitching 200 innings is just as likely as Prior pitching 185 innings. Zambrano's durability gives him the edge over Ben. Hill is definitely a wild card for the Cubs and Prior there are questions of health and performance, but his ceiling is higher than any pitcher on either staff.

Ender · December 30, 2006

I'm highly dubious of saying Lilly>Suppan at best they are equal and I could envision a world where Suppan is better for durability reasons.

I guess I fail to lump Sheets into the same category as Prior. Prior has had exactly 1 fully healthy season in his 4 full season career. Sheets has had exactly 1 injury in the past 6 years, it just happened to bridge the end of 2005 and the beginning of 2006.

Sheets came back and displayed health and posted some of the best stats in the majors in the 2nd half of last season after recovering from his injury. He went 85 IP, 78 H, 88 K, 10 BB, 3.15 ERA, 1.03 WHIP and was completely dominant.

Prior came back and posted a 6.75 ERA and never looked fully healthy and was finally shut down for the season again in August.

I'm just not sure how you classify these two as the same type of injury risk. Sheets is a pitcher who got hurt, took a little under a year to get healthy and displayed a half of season of completely healthy pitching. Prior is someone you can't count on at all and just pray you get something out of.

Rich Hill posted a very nice 2.93 ERA, 1.05 WHIP post all star break in a 12 start sample, 80 IP, 24 BB, 79 K

Bush ended the season on a 74 IP, 6 BB, 51 K, 0.90 WHIP note in his last 11 starts drawing comparisons from many to a Chris Carpenter. If his K rate spikes with age and experiencehe is going to become a very good pitcher with that control of his.

Again given Bush having a stronger overall track record and more experience I simply would have to give the edge to Bush in that case.

The last thing I'll mention with the Brewers is they were the worst team in the NL last year at strand rate, the teams ERA was way worse than it should have been and the bullpen was a disaster blowing the majority of high leverage situations. I'd expect even if the two starting rotations pitched exactly the same for the Brewers to have a higher ERA as I'm going to guess the Cubs have a better bullpen and probably better fielding as well.

So I guess a lot depends on how you are going to judge the pitchers, a component ERA stat is going to make the Brewers look better than actual ERA will most likely and that has nothing to do with the starters themselves.

XZero771679666304 · December 31, 2006

I'm highly dubious of saying Lilly>Suppan at best they are equal and I could envision a world where Suppan is better for durability reasons.

I guess I fail to lump Sheets into the same category as Prior. Prior has had exactly 1 fully healthy season in his 4 full season career. Sheets has had exactly 1 injury in the past 6 years, it just happened to bridge the end of 2005 and the beginning of 2006.

Sheets came back and displayed health and posted some of the best stats in the majors in the 2nd half of last season after recovering from his injury. He went 85 IP, 78 H, 88 K, 10 BB, 3.15 ERA, 1.03 WHIP and was completely dominant.

Prior came back and posted a 6.75 ERA and never looked fully healthy and was finally shut down for the season again in August.

I'm just not sure how you classify these two as the same type of injury risk. Sheets is a pitcher who got hurt, took a little under a year to get healthy and displayed a half of season of completely healthy pitching. Prior is someone you can't count on at all and just pray you get something out of.

Rich Hill posted a very nice 2.93 ERA, 1.05 WHIP post all star break in a 12 start sample, 80 IP, 24 BB, 79 K

Bush ended the season on a 74 IP, 6 BB, 51 K, 0.90 WHIP note in his last 11 starts drawing comparisons from many to a Chris Carpenter. If his K rate spikes with age and experiencehe is going to become a very good pitcher with that control of his.

Again given Bush having a stronger overall track record and more experience I simply would have to give the edge to Bush in that case.

The last thing I'll mention with the Brewers is they were the worst team in the NL last year at strand rate, the teams ERA was way worse than it should have been and the bullpen was a disaster blowing the majority of high leverage situations. I'd expect even if the two starting rotations pitched exactly the same for the Brewers to have a higher ERA as I'm going to guess the Cubs have a better bullpen and probably better fielding as well.

So I guess a lot depends on how you are going to judge the pitchers, a component ERA stat is going to make the Brewers look better than actual ERA will most likely and that has nothing to do with the starters themselves.

Comparing Sheets to Prior is a much more valid comparison than Sheets to Zambrano. And it's not like Ben's missed time was a straight shot. He missed starts in May of 05', in addition to his September. He missed starts in April, May, June and July of 2006, but he also made starts in April and May. It's not at all like a guy who has a straight 6 months of rehab and comes back. It's spotty, and reeks of a nagging injury.

vance_the_cubs_fan · December 31, 2006

Suppan has been more consistent than Lilly, but I'm not sure he's been any better. He definitely has been healthier.

With Lilly in the AL, ERA+ is likely the best metric for comparison.

Suppan's last three ERA+: 104, 114, 110.

Lilly's last three ERA+: 109, 80, 120.

Lilly has a higher ceiling, Suppan is more durable. It's a wash as to which one will be better.

You're right that it's not really fair to compare Sheets injury to Prior's history. On the other hand, if taking injuries into account, Zambrano easily gets the nod over Sheets.

So, Zambrano > Sheets.

Suppan and Lilly are a wash.

The rest of the Brewers rotation of Vargas, Capuano and Bush could be better than the Cubs rotation of Hill, Marquis, and Prior. On the other hand, if Prior returns to his 2005 form, then the Cubs easily take the edge.

In 2005, Prior posted an ERA+ of 116 over 166 IP. In Capuano's best ceiling he only posted an ERA+ of 112. The question then becomes is 2006 indicative of Capuano's performance or a spike season for him. Considering Prior doesn't even need to return to his peak season of 2003 to beat Capuano's peak season.

Cap's ERA+ for the past four seasons: 112, 106, 83, 101.

Prior's ERA+ the past four seasons: 64, 116, 113, 175.

What that shows me is that Capuano is a pitcher who is likely to perform 5-15% above league average.

Prior, if healthy, can be expected to perform 16 or more above average. Now the question for Prior isn't ability, it's health. It's a big concern, for certain. But to say Capuano is better than any non-Zambrano pitcher is being dishonest. It's just not true.

Now on to Bush and Hill. Bush posted an ERA+ of 102 over 200+ IP last season. Hill posted a 111 ERA+ in 99 IP. Bush has a longer track record for certain as he posted that over a full season, while Hill pitched only 100 major league innings in the majors. Given Hill's minor league success, it's not a stretch, however, to believe he can keep it up.

Both pitchers look to be pretty good, but I'd actually give the nod to Rich Hill.

Marquis is likely to outperform Vargas as well. While Marquis had an atrocious ERA+ of 73 last season, his full three year line of ERA+ is 73, 103, 113. Given that, I'd expect Marquis to be anywhere from 10% above average to 20% below average.

On the other hand, Vargas has been below average in each of his last three seasons. His best ERA+ was 99. Even assuming he might have some improvement left in his game, it's a stretch to think he'll be anywhere above 1-2% above average. He also has a floor about as low as Marquis.

When looking at the two staffs, it's really hard to guess which one will be better. If both get best case scenarios, the Cubs are likely better because Prior is just that good if completely healthy.

The Brewers have fewer question marks, but if Sheets goes down again, they have less to cover the loss.

CP_414 · December 31, 2006

Suppan has been more consistent than Lilly, but I'm not sure he's been any better. He definitely has been healthier.

With Lilly in the AL, ERA+ is likely the best metric for comparison.

Suppan's last three ERA+: 104, 114, 110.
Lilly's last three ERA+: 109, 80, 120.

Lilly has a higher ceiling, Suppan is more durable. It's a wash as to which one will be better.

You're right that it's not really fair to compare Sheets injury to Prior's history. On the other hand, if taking injuries into account, Zambrano easily gets the nod over Sheets.

So, Zambrano > Sheets.

Suppan and Lilly are a wash.

The rest of the Brewers rotation of Vargas, Capuano and Bush could be better than the Cubs rotation of Hill, Marquis, and Prior. On the other hand, if Prior returns to his 2005 form, then the Cubs easily take the edge.

In 2005, Prior posted an ERA+ of 116 over 166 IP. In Capuano's best ceiling he only posted an ERA+ of 112. The question then becomes is 2006 indicative of Capuano's performance or a spike season for him. Considering Prior doesn't even need to return to his peak season of 2003 to beat Capuano's peak season.

Cap's ERA+ for the past four seasons: 112, 106, 83, 101.
Prior's ERA+ the past four seasons: 64, 116, 113, 175.

What that shows me is that Capuano is a pitcher who is likely to perform 5-15% above league average.

Prior, if healthy, can be expected to perform 16 or more above average. Now the question for Prior isn't ability, it's health. It's a big concern, for certain. But to say Capuano is better than any non-Zambrano pitcher is being dishonest. It's just not true.

Now on to Bush and Hill. Bush posted an ERA+ of 102 over 200+ IP last season. Hill posted a 111 ERA+ in 99 IP. Bush has a longer track record for certain as he posted that over a full season, while Hill pitched only 100 major league innings in the majors. Given Hill's minor league success, it's not a stretch, however, to believe he can keep it up.

Both pitchers look to be pretty good, but I'd actually give the nod to Rich Hill.

Marquis is likely to outperform Vargas as well. While Marquis had an atrocious ERA+ of 73 last season, his full three year line of ERA+ is 73, 103, 113. Given that, I'd expect Marquis to be anywhere from 10% above average to 20% below average.

On the other hand, Vargas has been below average in each of his last three seasons. His best ERA+ was 99. Even assuming he might have some improvement left in his game, it's a stretch to think he'll be anywhere above 1-2% above average. He also has a floor about as low as Marquis.

When looking at the two staffs, it's really hard to guess which one will be better. If both get best case scenarios, the Cubs are likely better because Prior is just that good if completely healthy.

The Brewers have fewer question marks, but if Sheets goes down again, they have less to cover the loss.

Why do you assume Vargas is in the Brewers rotation? I would be surprised to see him beat out Carlos Villenueva for the 5th spot. Either way Gallardo should be in that rotation by August.

I also think Sheets is more likley to be healthy than Prior, especially since Sheets is healthy right now. The Brewers might have the best rotation in the NL (without reviewing numbers, the Dodgers are probably better), and they also have some depth in case of injuries this year with Vargas/Villenueva, Jackson, and eventually Gallardo.

TruffleShuffle · December 31, 2006

ERA is a team stat, plain and simple. Its like judging pitchers by W's. FIP isn't the be all end all of course but some sort of component stat that looks at something other than just ER's is a much better system.

Zambrano has had a better ERA+ each of the last 3 years (5 years actually), yet Sheets has had a better FIP each of the last 3 years. Does this mean that the Cubs' defense has been great while the Brewers' defense has been atrocious, and Zambrano has been really lucky while Sheets has been really unlucky? Seems like a lot to assume there.

Ender · December 31, 2006

ERA is a team stat, plain and simple. Its like judging pitchers by W's. FIP isn't the be all end all of course but some sort of component stat that looks at something other than just ER's is a much better system.

Zambrano has had a better ERA+ each of the last 3 years (5 years actually), yet Sheets has had a better FIP each of the last 3 years. Does this mean that the Cubs' defense has been great while the Brewers' defense has been atrocious, and Zambrano has been really lucky while Sheets has been really unlucky? Seems like a lot to assume there.

Sheets had a better ERA+ in 2004, but 2004 and 2005 were really close and 2006 I already addressed, one bad start that Sheets left hurt increased his ERA by 0.50 on the season while leaving his component ERA largely intact. I think if there is a flaw in this comparison its that ERA+ is not a very good stat, its still basically flawed in the exact same ways ERA are except it pulls out park effects somewhat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_independent_pitching_statistics

Check out that link for a bunch of math and links to other places that show that a component ERA is just a better measure of a pitchers ability than ERA in general. Its more predictive of future success for sure. You can pick whichever one you like the best to compare, I just used FIP because its the one that thehardballtimes used which is the site I visited.

Mephistopheles · December 31, 2006

Everyone should know that Sheets is a top five starter when he's healthy and is better than Zambrano. I believe he became the first pitcher in history with 100 IP, a K/IP greater than 1 and a BB/9 less than 1 last season.

nilodnayr · December 31, 2006

Please Lord, the use of "intellectually honest" needs to stop.

Foolish or not, the Brewers have Sheets in the rotation, the cubs do not have Prior in the rotation. That has to count for something.

And I agree, in comparing the projections of the 10 pitchers, using peripherals are much better than ERA or ERA+

Brewers reach deal with Suppan - 4 year, 42 mil

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs