66-84
by Scott McKinney on Sep 15, 2008 10:53 PM EDT
Email
Print
A few thoughts on the Royals 66th win:
1. Guillen looks pretty healthy to me now. He appears to be running the bases and in the field with significantly more speed. I think his hip is feeling much better. And does this have anything to do the fact that he's on a hot streak again? Before tonight's game:
Last 14 days - .389/.411/.611/1.022
Last 28 days - .310/.333/.500/.833
2. Yeah, I think Mark Teahen can play LF just fine. He made two really good out of zone catches, showing great range. I have no idea why he was in LF though, with Guillen in RF.
3. So how does a trade of a two-month rental of Dotel for Kyle Davies look right now? No, Davies won't be throwing eight shutout innings very often, but he sure does look like a decent #5 starter or a good long reliever right now. Looks like a good pick up to me. Wladimir Balentien update: .203/.254/.349 (212 AB's)
87 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Tonight was a very good game. All the wannabe castoffs are outperforming their in season games
and Davies looked like a total stud. The only bad thing was the Royals absolutely terrible baserunning.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Anyone think GMDM's comments and appearance on the roadtrip
put a few extra peps in everyones step
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Wow, Dotel threw eight shutout innings?
Why didn’t the Royals ever try him in the rotation?
Sorry.
I’m guessing that Teahen and Guillen flipped for the similar reasons to Olivo being the #1 catcher now.
Anyone know a free site (or how I can use a site) to get double splits (left/righty splits by month, for example)?
STREAKY HITTER IS STREAKY
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
I'd love to find splits like that
I’d also like to find FIP by month and things like that. But I can’t find that or splits of splits.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 15, 2008 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Here's a fangraphs daily RC/27 w/ splits
I wish they did just a plain old OPS graph…
Do their “daily” graphs show the change of the overall line day-to-day?
Here’s Hoagy before tonight:
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 15, 2008 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions
You don't really need to look at it
KC has played against a high number of LHP lately
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
ya i forgot he did hit 2 HR's off Lee the only real quality pitcher KC has faced in awhile
but also a lefty
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Pujols vs. lefties, TPJ 207 vs. righties
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 15, 2008 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions
nevermind 12 game hitting streak
which had 6 hits against twins
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
someone needs to post the graph of the mnf game
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Its just a lack of walks
if you would’ve layed all his stats out preseason we probably would’ve been fine with it. Who cares about the tantrums, his walks are way down but he could be pressing a bit even for a free swinger he is at near career lows. He was 19/20 yo last time he did this bad.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Wow
was he 20 years old in 2006 when he busted out the 75 OPS+?
Yeah, I know, he got hurt. that the reason this year, too. Which makes him seem injury prone.
He was better in 2007, but the line isn’t as impressive as it looks, even if you accont for the tough hitting environment in Seattle. His BABIP was about 40-50 points higher than it should have been. And the inability to hit righties had already begun. He hasn’t hit righties hard since 2005.
Hmmm, I wonder what happened after 2005?
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 15, 2008 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions
if you would’ve layed all his stats out preseason we probably would’ve been fine with it.
I’m not a Guillen hater and never have been. I liked the signing. But I can’t agree with the above sentence. Guillen is currently at about a .750 OPS, and that is a very low OBP .750. And that isn’t nearly enough for $12M. He needed to hit at least .800 per year to justify his contract (and considering that he’s aging, that means more than .800 this year, because he’ll almost certainly be below that in the later seasons of the contract). And it isn’t just his walks. His contact hitting (batting average) and power hitting (SLG) are down as well.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 15, 2008 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I know you guys don't believe in help in the lineup but
I think with the lack of hitters around him a .750-.760 OPS is a real line that should’ve been somewhat expected. His lack of 20 walks gets him in that range.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Plus I think he was injured some of the year which could have hurt his stats as well.
I know I sound like I am making excuses for Guillen but it seems about on par with what we should’ve expected. Less walks and maybe a lower BA but that can be attributed to luck probably with a lower BABIP than in past seasons.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
His luck has been a bit bad this season
but nothing compared to how lucky he was last year.
On another topic, when Laura Prepon had red hair she was unbelievably hot. Was it her stupid Scientology boyfriend who told her to bleach it? That’s like sitting JoGui against lefties.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 15, 2008 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Amen
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Sep 16, 2008 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Dear fairly attractive young women:
red hair increases your desirability significantly — into the “holy sh*t!” range. You will fall back to the back if you change it.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 16, 2008 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
She's still attractive
but not anywhere what she was the first couple seasons of that 70Scientology Show.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 16, 2008 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions
mmmmm
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Sep 16, 2008 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
The massive decrease in walks, along with the decrease in getting hits
…isn’t just about injuries or luck. And some of it is injuries, but that is the risk you run with unathletic corner OFers in their 30’s. No, this is definitely not what we should’ve expected. Or, if this is what you expected, then you expected him to greatly underperform the amount of money he’s making. Because (even with neutral BABIP luck), he’s not coming close to earning his $12M this year. When you add the number of runs he’s giving up with his really poor defense (abysmal range this year as with last year when he was healthy), it looks like an awful contract which he will never live up to. Even if he manages a .800 OPS next year, the Royals will still be deep in the hole and looking at likely the worst year of his contract in 2010.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 15, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Huh, I never thought of Guillen as "unathletic"
He always seemed like a physical stud to me, just a free swinger. then again, the injuries and age may have taken their toll.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 15, 2008 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
His only "athletic" attribute is strength
I think “athletic” also includes some speed and quickness. And it doesn’t include a fairly round body shape. He’s soft in the middle and moves like it.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 15, 2008 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
ya 29 career SB kind of says unathletic
never had the wheels. has good bat speed and a good arm.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
They overpaid him we all know that.
But to look at last years numbers and add an increase in age, an injury, bad luck you get what you get this season. The walks being down were unexpected but Guillen is a headcase and his bad start combined with his pressing the low walk total isn’t all that shocking. Its a bad contract but it is not crippling. Hopefully he comes back next year in shape and ready to play from day 1 because he likely isn’t going anywhere.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Its a bad contract but it is not crippling.
It’s not crippling because when you have a $70-80M payroll (which the Royals will soon have), $12M per year for two more years doesn’t kill you. But a low-OBP .750 OPS with bad defense from a corner OFer might not even be worth $5M. So yeah it is a really, really bad contract. I’d trade him for anything, or even nothing, if some team will take on the remainder of his ugly contract.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 15, 2008 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That doesn't make sense
unless they can replace him with a .800+OPS guy in the corner of spot who are you gonna have play there? Nobody is gonna eat the whole 12m. So say you eat half of it then you turn around and pay Rivera 6-8m or whatever he commands what are you really getting? With the exceptions of Burrell/Dunn there isn’t much out there to get to replace him. Unless you can somehow convince Colorado or Florida to eat half of it in a trade there really isn’t much you can do. Ned Colletti’s OF is full so Guillen isn’t going anywhere.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
I guess I am not as shocked as you are at his numbers.
He might close a .750 OPS after having some injuries and a bad temper I think we are stuck. Hopefully he bounces back and if he is a distraction KC can get out from under the deal at the deadline next year.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
The issue really isn't whether one should be surprised by his 2008 season
The issue is how acceptable it is for $12M. If it isn’t acceptable and you don’t expect him to be a lot better in the next two years, then the thing to do is try to trade him. If no one will take him unless the Royals eat half of the contract, then forget it. But it is worth a look. And neither you nor I know what the interest in him might be. I’ve read some people saying that no one will take him. I’ve read some people saying that he’s still valued and the Royals probably wouldn’t have to eat much money. So who knows. I’d certainly shop him.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions
From Moores perspective he gave him 12M
based on last years numbers and the past and when you toss in the bad luck, injury and lineup surrounding him he didn’t underperform by all that much. The only real reason one can really say that Guillen needs to go is his lockerroom actions. Something tells me GMDM is really all that upset with it and that is why Hillman hasn’t done much about it.
If I was the GMDM and I paid a guy 12M who was 32 and he ended up getting injured midway thru the season I just couldn’t justify to myself I screwed up that much. That is like saying I am an idiot.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
We're at an impasse
he gave him 12M based on last years numbers and the past and when you toss in the bad luck, injury and lineup surrounding him he didn’t underperform by all that much.
I think he has underperformed by a huge amount. And the bad luck, injury and lineup can only excuse some of it. Not much.
only real reason one can really say that Guillen needs to go is his lockerroom actions.
Hitting barely above replacement level for the season, and giving up a hell of a lot of runs with his poor defense. That combination is reason enough to get rid of him, even if he were Mike Sweeney in the locker room.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:23 AM EDT up reply actions
12M is alot of money but it was alot of money at the start of the year
and how can GMDM justify to Glass it is a bad contract now but wasn’t at the start of the year. Glass comments on kcroyals.com kind of says to me he isn’t going anywhere. He might be trying to be pc so he doesn’t hurt his trade value but IMO I doubt it.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
What are we talking about?
You seem to be doing that thing again where at first you are talking about whether it would be a good idea to trade Guillen, then you switch to whether or not it is likely that Moore will do it. I’m not predicting that Moore will trade him. I’m saying he could and should. I don’t know what he’ll do. I know that his positive comments about Guillen tell us nothing. If he wanted to trade him, he’d say positive things about him, wouldn’t he? That is, unless he’s a complete moron.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Our opinions don't mean anything
I’ve been talking about his numbers not being all that far off from what GMDM probably expected when he signed him. Do you really suspect GMDM thinks that the Guillen deal was a bad signing the way we do? I doubt that, do you think he expected him to be a boyscout all year? Again I doubt that. Just going from what GMDM has said and from what Glass has said I just don’t think they think he is that big of weight on the team. His numbers compared to last year can easily be accounted for by injury, luck and lack of support. As far as defense goes GMDM knew what he was getting defensively when he signed him.
IMO I think it is highly unlikely GMDM views it the way you do currently.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
I have no idea how Moore views it
We were discussing what should be done. Then you switched to what is likely to be done. I’m not making predictions about what Moore will do. I’m talking about what makes sense and what would be the best move for the Royals.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
I addressed that at the start with this comment
They overpaid him we all know that. I was addressing the reality of what was gonna happen more than what I hope would happen.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Clearly from now on, I’m going to have to check with you from the beginning whether you’re talking about what would be best or predicting what will happen. More than ninety percent of the time on this site we’re talking about the former and it seems like you random jump to the latter. I’ll ask from now on.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I was never talking about what should be done
I was talking about what we as fans should’ve realistically expected once the deal was signed given all the factors we know now. My opening comment makes that pretty clear. I was just trying to talk from what I believe to be GMDM/Glass point of view.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Oy vey
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, I've talked about this for a while
but if you can save 8 million of the contract, then maybe you could get a corner guy, and be close enough to sign, say, Furcal, for not much more money.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 16, 2008 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Nobody is gonna eat the whole 12m
Maybe, maybe not. What I said was that I’d trade him for anything or nothing if someone would take his contract. If the Royals would have to kick in more money, we’d have to get some kind of mediocre prospect in return.
So say you eat half of it then you turn around …
I wouldn’t eat half of it. I didn’t say, I’d trade him under any and all circumstances. If the Royals only get out from under half of his contract, I wouldn’t trade him, unless the Royals get something good back in return (and they would not). I also don’t think the Royals would have to pay $12M to trade Guillen.
IF the Royals have an additional $10M per year over the next two years, they can get something better than Guillen. That gives them more money for guys like Furcal, Rivera, Hudson, Hinske, Abreu or Ibanez.
Guillen “isn’t going anywhere” if Moore isn’t interested in trading him.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions
I guess there's no choice then
The Royals must reunite him and Ibanez so that he can return to that one lucky season in Seattle (where, incidentally, his defensive metrics were just as bad as Raul’s…). That would be awesome. The Royals would pretty much have to have a team psychiatrist along to treat Zack with JoGui and Raul manning the K. DDJ would probably wreck his hamstrings in the first month of the season…
Wow, were JoGui and Ibanez really the best two hitters in Seattle last year? And they really thought they were an 88 win team?
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 15, 2008 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions
The Battle for Grass Creek is the Battle for Raul's Soul
They got Raul, the Royals got Gil and Guillen.
It was even until the Royals got Guillen… but he looks to have been a mole. Those tricky bastards
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 16, 2008 1:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Projections
according to the projections by (James, CHONE, Marcel, MINER, ZiPS) Guillen is about inline with all or most of their opinions. In fact he has outplayed at 2b’s/HR’s his BB totals are down as we already said. Seems to me that those groups were projecting about a .317 OBP and a .440 SLG for a total of .757 OPS. I think our expectations overshot the reality of the situation.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
Yikes
I wasn’t a fan of the signing, but those are all worse than I thought he’d do… Shoulda looked, I guess.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 16, 2008 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Regardless of expectations, it is now time to cut bait
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Davies did every thing right tonight
but he was facing what might be the worst lineup any team will send to the plate this year in the AL.
The Dotel trade seems as lackluster today as yesterday. To put it into context, Robinson Tejada has pitched as well if not better than Davies, and he was a waiver claim.
by Gopherballs on Sep 15, 2008 11:39 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
This should be fun
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 15, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Lackluster
Getting a useful piece to add to your major league team for the long-term for a two-month rental of a usually injured closer is a nice move. Is it breathtakingly wonderful? No. But turning expiring contracts into talented pitchers (who can be a pretty good 5th SP or a good reliever) is a good thing.
To put it into context, Robinson Tejada has pitched as well if not better than Davies, and he was a waiver claim.
To put that in context, Tejeda has been pitching out of the pen and Davies has been pitching in the rotation. Apples, oranges.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 15, 2008 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions
You can get semi-useful parts off the waiver wire too
Tejeda has been about a run better than Davies, and the conversion between starting and relieving is less than that. Sure, filling a roster spot with a below aveage but above replacement level pitcher is better than a replacement level (or worse) pitcher, but it is nothing to write home about.
by Gopherballs on Sep 16, 2008 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions
He looks better than semi-useful to me
Particularly if you take his stuff and age into account, not just his statistics. I don’t know if this trade is something to write home about, but I think it was good. Davies has a good future as a reliever and spot starter in front of him, and more upside than a reclamation project like Tejeda.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions
davies has impressed me...
obviously, everything is rose-colored tonight, but I never really believed he could post a sub 5.00 ERA as a starter
maybe i was wrong
When his HR/FB rate returns to normal
his ERA will creep back toward 5.00.
by Gopherballs on Sep 16, 2008 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I think they are both good signings
both worthy of the deals they have received and both worthy of being on KC next year. If KC could just somehow get them to find the plate they have alot to lood forward to.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
It is not the worst lineup
Have you forgotten Oaklands lineup? Its worse.
Go Royals!
You need to understand, though
Davies threw 8 shutout innings last night.
Dotel threw 7.7 innings for Atlanta last year.
This year, Davies has been worth half a win more than Dotel, which basically cancels out last season’s suckitude.
We weren’t going to resign him anyway, so just last night Davies won that trade.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
The Royals should vote Dotel a share of their last-place bonus
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 16, 2008 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Any deal that nets you Hiram Davies is a winner.
He was voted the #1 pitching prospect in America twice when he was a teenager.
insert Colt Griffin reference here...
The concept of progress acts as a protective mechanism to shield us from the terrors of the future. - Collected sayings of Muad'Dib
Griffin was never even on the radar until his senior year
Davies though…yep he was voted #1 when he was 14 and 15 (I think).
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
quality of opponent...
someone should check this tomorrow morning, when BP’s stats are updated, but since Gopher brought it up, i decided to look up the royals’ pitchers quality of opponents faced:
-among pitchers who have thrown 25 IP or more, Davies has actually faced the toughest hitters of anybody, an OPS of .770
1. Davies- .770
2. Peralta – .767
3. Meche- .765
4. Hochevar- .764
5. Gobble- .761 (good work Trey)
6. Mahay- .761
7. Banister- .757
8. Ram Ram- .756
9. Greinke- .756
10. Soria- .753
11. Nunez- .752
12. Tejeda- .748
13. Yabuta- .744
14. Tomko- .739
Soria dropped to 11th (.750)
Davies dropped to 4th (.762, now tied with Gobble)
by Gopherballs on Sep 16, 2008 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, that is going to change after tonight
Davies v. the 3 major league hitters in the lineup (Ibanez, Ichiro, Lopez): 3 for 9, 1 K.
Davies v. the Tacoma fringe prospects: 1 for 17, 7 Ks.
The immortal Tug Hulett and Luis Valbuena combined to go 0 for 5 against him with 5 Ks.
by Gopherballs on Sep 16, 2008 1:07 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
We must tremble in fear at the feet of Luis Valbuena!
I doubt that anyone can seriously take anything out of this game from Davies….at least you can’t take more from this game than you could from his minor league starts/numbers. That Seattle lineup was brutal.
by Fernando Vina School of Linguistics on Sep 16, 2008 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Luis Valbuena = player generated in franchise mode
Well, except is would be Chaim Valbuena or something along those lines.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 16, 2008 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions
well, he didn't suck
which is saying something for the bottom part of our pitching staff. I was encouraged.
The concept of progress acts as a protective mechanism to shield us from the terrors of the future. - Collected sayings of Muad'Dib
by buddyball on Sep 16, 2008 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Did It Really
Take all that to say that?
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Sep 16, 2008 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
That was directed at me, I suppose
3. So how does a trade of a two-month rental of Dotel for Kyle Davies look right now? No, Davies won’t be throwing eight shutout innings very often, but he sure does look like a decent #5 starter or a good long reliever right now. Looks like a good pick up to me. Wladimir Balentien update: .203/.254/.349 (212 AB’s)
Ok, I get it. Let’s lay Balentien for Dotel to rest.
Waiting for a 90+ win season
by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on Sep 16, 2008 3:52 PM EDT reply actions
Not really directed at you
At the time of the Davies-Dotel trade, there was a lot of Balentien talk, fueled by the uncorroborated report by one reporter that the Mariners offered Balientien for Dotel. He was a justifiable cause celebre around here. My point was that there weren’t many good options for the Royals and it appears they took the best one they had.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree, now....
And while I have been down on Davies in the past, it really looks like he is righting the ship in a lot of his starts. Are there any comparable players who put it together later down the line?
Waiting for a 90+ win season
by RoyalsFanInMarinerTown on Sep 16, 2008 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Putting it together...
First, I don’t think it is odd for a pitcher to put it together at age 25. But second, I think the degree to which he’s put it together is only moderate. He’s gone from bad results to merely ok results. Right now (and I think going forward), he’d make a pretty good #5 starter, or a good long reliever. I think that’s about it. There is some upside potential for something better than that. But the most likely result is a useful back of the rotation starter or reliever.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 16, 2008 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions
bringing back memories of Mike Wood
by Fernando Vina School of Linguistics on Sep 17, 2008 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions
He does seem Mike Woodish, or Mike Woody, if you will
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 17, 2008 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions
i like Woodish...has a better ring to it
Hiram Woodish it is from now on!!!!!!
by Fernando Vina School of Linguistics on Sep 17, 2008 2:02 AM EDT up reply actions
But with better stuff
And that’s important because Wood’s stuff was pretty mediocre
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 17, 2008 12:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
