 |
Photo by Mark Zuckerman / NATS INSIDER Ryan Zimmerman took out a corner of this scoreboard with his third-inning homer. |
For those who missed it, here's all you need to know about the Nats' 9-3 thumping of the Marlins...
THE PLAYING CONDITIONS
They were, in a word, sloppy. After a three-hour deluge, nearly the entire outfield was under water. When players started trickling out of the clubhouse around 9:30 p.m. to get a look at the field, most figured there was no way they'd be able to play.
But the Marlins set a starting time of 10 p.m., and crew chief Darryl Cousins believed the field was safe by then to get the game underway.
"I knew the outfield wasn't in good shape, but very seldom I've seen a ballgame called because the outfield was not playable," Jim Riggleman said. "Fortunately, nobody got hurt. The conditions were sloppy for the outfielders, but everything else was fine."
As he trotted out to right field for the bottom of the first, Michael Morse had one thought: "I was thinking about how much water's going to be in my shoes," he said.
For the first three or four innings, it was an adventure out there. Outfielders splish-splashed their way through the muck to track down fly balls. The Marlins' Logan Morrison slid about 30 feet on the grass and warning track before slamming into the bullpen wall trying to catch a first-inning foul-pop. Ryan Zimmerman smoked a line drive up the middle in the second, but as soon as the ball hit the ground, it stuck there until Cameron Maybin could come charging in to retrieve it.
"Terrible," Adam Dunn said. "It's not safe. I'm glad we did [get the game in], but still it's really not safe. I mean, when Zim crushes a ball and it doesn't even get to the center fielder, that's ridiculous. I'm just glad nobody got hurt, seriously."
The conditions gradually got better as the night wore on, with the water draining through the field. Still, it made for an interesting adventure out there.
"I've never seen a field like that," Morse said. "But you know, we played through it, and the biggest thing is we got the win."
MARQUIS' FIRST WIN
It took eight starts, five months and a long DL stint, but Jason Marquis finally earned his first win as a National. The club certainly hopes for more than that after handing the right-hander $15 million guaranteed, but this was the latest in a series of positives steps for him.
Marquis (three runs in 5 2/3 innings) wasn't as sharp as he was last week in holding the Cubs to one run over 7 1/3 innings, but he battled his way through a couple of jams and was rewarded at long last for his efforts.
"It's nice. I got the monkey off my back a little bit," said Marquis, who had been 0-7 through his first seven starts. "I signed here to help this team win. I feel like I've thrown the ball well since I came off the DL. It was a battle early on with my elbow, but we got that fixed. Now I'm starting to feel more comfortable with where I'm at. Even a day like today where I wasn't at my best, I still felt strong enough and still was able to make some pitches when I needed to."
Marquis' overall numbers (1-7, 8.13 ERA) still look gaudy, but he's progressively gotten better. In his last three starts, his ERA is 2.50. Slowly but surely, he's putting his disastrous early season performances and elbow injury behind him.
"When you look at the overall numbers, it's not pleasing to look at. Sometimes that can wear on your mind a little bit," he said. "But ultimately, I've got to just throw out those first three games and judge myself on where I'm at after the surgery. And I feel like I've been getting better time after time with that."
THE ZIMMERMAN-DUNN COMBO
Though the Nationals' lineup as a whole has struggled at times, Riggleman can still take comfort knowing he's got one of the best 1-2 power punches in baseball in Ryan Zimmerman and Adam Dunn. And when both guys connect like they did tonight, they're tough to beat.
Zimmerman absolutely crushed a third-inning changeup from Alex Sanabia to left field, striking a scoreboard on the facade of the upper deck and knocking out a panel. (The rest of the game was played at "Sun Life Stadiu.")
So, Ryan, have you ever taken a chunk out of a scoreboard before?
"I don't think so," he said. "Not that I can remember."
Not to be outdone, Dunn blasted a three-run shot to center field in the seventh, his second homer in three days after a prolonged slump.
So if you're keeping a running tally, that's now 33 homers for Dunn and 25 homers for Zimmerman. That puts them in elite company. Only one other National League tandem has combined to hit 58 home runs this season: the Cardinals' Albert Pujols and Matt Holliday.
"That's huge, if you've got a couple of guys," Riggleman said. "Hopefully they're both going at the same time. But if one of them is, maybe the other one is. They're selective hitters. They know the strike zone. They're really professional hitters. But they're not just making contact. They're doing damage when they put it in play."
48 comments:
So, Mark... since you said Dunn loses money with every out he makes, I guess he earned some money by picking up a HR and a 2B tonight, huh?
Loved the Postgame when Debbi Taylor asked Ryan if he was going to pay to fix the Sun Life Stadium sign!
Mark said...So if you're keeping a running tally, that's now 33 homers for Dunn and 25 homers for Zimmerman. That puts them in elite company. Only one other National League tandem has combined to hit 58 home runs this season: the Cardinals' Albert Pujols and Matt Holliday.
That is a lot of Home Runs for the tandems and in elite company as they are ahead of Braun/Fielder and any other duos. Hard to imagine that Rizzo will allow Dunn to head to Free Agency when you see those type of numbers.
Three straight wins !!! Break up the Nats !!!
Rizzo, sign Dunn! Mark, thanks for staying up to watch for us!
Here's the question : How long would they have waited for the rain to stop? 4 hours? Five? Give me a break...cancel the frickin game and play 2 the next day. But nooooooooooo, the owners wouldn't get their money
Once again, this game illustrates how important Adam Dunn is to this team. Rizzo needs to sign him. As frustrating as this season has been at times, the Nats are only two games away from their entire win total of last season, and if they end up with 70 wins (which is still possible), that's an 11 game swing from one season to the next. Big picture is, its getting better. Letting your power hitting first baseman walk is going to send it all spiralling downhill again.
We need to sign Dunn. Posters here who think we can do better aren't looking at the numbers. Especially in a Strasburg-less year, we need to have some pop to the game. Rizzo did the right thing by all of us re-signing Livo. We need Adam.
That yelp you heard came from the dog the Marquis-haters kicked on their way to work. Nothing to complain about today.
What JaneB said.
I think Rizzo knows he needs to sign Dunn. I'm "cautiously optimistic" -- as Rizzo has racked up a pretty good record for signing the guys he needs to sign (most notably: Boras' clients Strasburg and Harper; also Ryan Z, etc.), and letting guys walk whose demands are unreasonable (Aaron Crowe, anyone?). If Dunn's agent is anywhere reasonable, I think it'll get done.
Mark -- great pic!!
Anyone else notice that the Nats seem to do really well in "sloppy" conditions like these? The 14-run game in Colorado springs to mind. Maybe the Nats should invest in a rain machine at home, and the home-road splits could get even more ridiculous :(
Also, Marquis was far from sharp in this last start, and was lucky to get the win. Consider his peripherals tonight: 12 groundballs, 9 flyballs (including two home runs), and 2 line drives, a 1/4 K/BB ratio along with an HBP (compare that to 5.4/1 for Strasburg--or actually, don't, because it's depressing). Of his 92 pitches, only 52 were thrown for strikes, which has been an average performance for him in his time here and is pretty much unacceptable from any pitcher, let alone one who relies on his command.
For those of you who don't like numbers, he got into several jams in the first few innings that he got out of with lucky double-plays, along with that inning where he got a lucky popup or two. I call them lucky because he is a sinkerballer and his sinker wasn't inducing groundballs at a very high rate (as the stat line tells you, only 52% of the balls put in play against him tonight were groundballs), so he can't be like Tim Hudson and expect a double play every time out, nor can he be like Cliff Lee and rely on flyouts and solo home runs because he doesn't put people on base with walks and strikes people out.
HIs stuff looked pretty weak, his velocity was low, his command was iffy, his sinker wasn't really sinking, and he gave up a home run to a player who had previously hit just two in his career... he pretty much looked terrible from every angle but ERA, just as he has in every start in August bar his solitary quality start, and even that doesn't look great. I would optimistically predict a 5.00ish ERA for him going forward (yes, optimistically). Let's forget about a winning ballclub and talk about a .500 one: Marquis doesn't even really belong on that, except as a number five starter. Right now, we have about ten pitchers competing for that position. Surely at least one of them is going to do better than that.
Way to hang in there Mark. Amazing there weren't more errors---and none for the Nats!
If a "sinkerballer" induces a batter to ground into a double play how is that considered to be luck? Isn't that just what a sinkerballer is suppose to do?
For the record, I did not say don't sign AD, what i said was don't sign him for 15M, cuz nobody else in the NL will.
Wow, the Marquis-haters can do their thing even in the absence of facts. It just looked like he pitched pretty well and won the game. Bottom line: 3 earned runs and a win. Continuing to improve following recovery from surgery.
And he was doing ok until that 2 run homer in the 6th - but it was clear at that point that he was hangin em in the zone. i was waiting for someone to crush one at that point.
by the way, Carpenter actually made a funny joke last night, saying the Fish now "needed to buy a consonant" (to fix the scoreboard).
Re-sign Dunn!!!!
Just imagine the complaining about the conditions if we had lost this game! It was a good effort, but let's face it, the game should not have been played. The field was a danger to the players. That's not right.
Morse is a force. As the dearly departed Dibble said, "the guy can flat out hit."
Knoxville Nat: It isn't luck if a sinkerballer has a really high groundball to flyball ratio, like Tim Hudson. But Marquis this year hasn't really had that, making double plays a lot more lucky. There's an excellent article at Baseball Prospectus that goes into this in more depth, but basically if you are a groundball pitcher and you want to be good, you have to be an EXTREME groundball pitcher so most of your groundball singles turn into double-plays in the next at-bat. To be an effective and great groundball pitcher you also have to have elite-level controls (hardly walk anybody) on the level of a Tim Hudson or a Strasburg or, at worst, a Livan Hernandez (who has had great control this year). That's why strikeout to walk ratio is so important: you can get away with not striking a lot of people out as long as you walk even less. Unfortunately, both before and after his return, Marquis has walked a ton of batters, has induced groundball outs at a rate of below 50%, and has struck out batters at rates significantly lower than Lannan's. Under those circumstances, which are a recipe for disaster most of the time, you really do have to consider a series of inning-ending double plays lucky. Popups are nearly always lucky because inducing popups isn't a repeatable skill for most pitchers: it's just that a certain percentage of flyballs turn into popups. Again, to have a sequence like Marquis did last night is all luck, simply put.
Anonymous @ 9:38 is the reason that advanced stats need to become more popular IMO. You can't just say "oh, he gave up 3 ER in 5.2 IP and has a 2.50 ERA in his last three starts so he must be improving" because it is such a small sample size. That's why it's important to look at peripherals like I did above, since peripherals tend to be more consistent over time and therefore more revealing, and also have been shown to be directly correlated with ERA. His start tonight could easily have been disastrous if one or two more of those groundballs found gaps in the infield, or that first HR wasn't solo (which it wasn't likely to be considering how many men he put on base). And even ignoring advanced stats, it didn't really seem like he was commanding his pitches all that well, did you see how many of them got away from Pudge? Plus a hit batter and four walks... that's not a good day for anyone.
what's the point of all this Marquis-bashing? given his contract, he's going to be here - so all i want is for him to win his games, and not give up too many runs. he did that last night, so chill dude.
Mark - You wrote "Marquis' overall numbers (1-7, 8.13 ERA) still look gaudy" - I think you meant "gawdawful."
As to others arguing about Marquis' performance - as Mark points out, Marquis' last start was better than this one in terms of ER and IP--3ER in 5.1 IP is not a quality start even by the generous definitions of that standard. This game is a reminder that, while W-L is a # that gets a lot of attention, it doesn't really tell you much in isolation about the pitcher's performance.
Pointing this out isn't "Marquis bashing," as some commenters seem to think. It's just the truth, and there's no point in kidding ourselves about where he is and where we can expect him to go. His career ERA is ~4.5; he's never been a big SO pitcher, but his #s this year, inc. since his return, are pretty awful even by his career standards. I hope we'll see improvement in that dept. this year.
As for next year: since he's on the payroll anyway, the most we can realistically hope for is that he revert to what he's been over his career--someone who'd be a middle to bottom of the rotation starter on a decent staff. The problem for the Nats--and this isn't Marquis' fault--is that they look to have a lot of such guys next year, and no likely aces (we can dream on JZimm, but that's all it is at this point).
Game should have never been played, they should be playing a doubleheader today, we are lucky no one got seriously injured last night...shame on the umps!
He said: "His start tonight could easily have been disastrous if one or two more of those groundballs found gaps in the infield, or that first HR wasn't solo..."
If a frog had wings, he wouldn't kick his a** every time he took off. Stats are descriptive, not prescriptive. That's why they play the games. You never know what might happen. And BTW, how about some compassion for a guy who is recovering from elbow surgery? "Win his games, and not give up too many runs..." Yep.
I realize that he's going to be here, I just wish he wouldn't, as should anyone who wants this to be a .500 club next year. A lot of potential lineups have him as the number two or number three starter in 2012, and I have a hard time believing that that would be a good thing. I've been pretty down on Lannan but I'd take him any day over this iteration of Marquis. And I don't see any point in being optimistic about a 3 ER, 5.2 IP outing unless it's backed up by great peripherals. Am I happy that the Nationals have won three straight and are scoring a lot of runs? Of course. Am I happy that Zimmerman has the second-most wins above replacement in all of major league baseball and Dunn appears to be out of his slump? Absolutely. But every outing like this makes it more likely that Marquis gets a high spot in the Nats rotation next year, and I'm certainly not happy about that.
markfd said...
"Game should have never been played, they should be playing a doubleheader today, we are lucky no one got seriously injured last night...shame on the umps!"
A little misdirected there. Sure the umps could have called the game after it started, but the shame (if any) goes on the Marlins. The home team decides if a game is to start (or have they changed that rule sometime in the last 20 years and I missed it?).
Impressed with Marquis' recovery. If he had been healthy the entire year, this season could have been a different story. If he holds up, next year should be interesting. Next step, check out Maya as a major league pitcher and get him comfortable with the majors.
JamesFan said...
"Impressed with Marquis' recovery. If he had been healthy the entire year, this season could have been a different story."
Just curious. What would be different.
Well, we can't know, can we? That is the beauty of baseball and playing the games. But if Marquis had duplicated his career stats, we would have more wins and fewer losses. And unless you're into style over substance, that is the deal. And I don't even get being happy for Dunn and Zimmerman but not for Marquis. That is the picture of personal.
The lack of information on Dibble is driving me crazy! Is he on hiatus for the "comment", has he been fired from MASN, has he been "disappeared" by the Nats FO? Can anyone dig up an explanation?
If Dibbs is gone for good, I nominate Mark Zuckerman to replace him!
JamesFan/N. Cognito - I partially agree with James. The Nats were playing .500 baseball for a while at the beginning of the season when Marquis was stinking up the joint. If he was healthy and pitching like we saw the last 3 outings, the Nats could have racked up a few more wins. Hard to say how big of a difference in the + wins.
Clearly we are seeing a healthy Marquis now, who is a #3 or #4 starter on a .500 team who could have contributed as the team was shuffling the deck of pitchers.
Here is my apprehension, Marquis has never been able to pitch a full season effectively the last 5 seasons. He is strong to the All Star break and then gets blown out in September. I assume his problem is a tired arm since he generally the last few years has been in the bullpen for the post-season.
So assuming we are seeing the Jason Marquis now that the Nats will have in the 2011 rotation, how is Rizzo going to prepare for a Marquis that just turned 32 last week and will start running out of arm capacity in August 2011? That question has never been answered by Rizzo at the point when they signed him out of Free Agency.
Anon @11:26
Are you saying you're surprised Nats fans are more attached to Dunn and Zimm than to Marquis? Because if not, I don't understand your point.
On a personal level, of course I'm happy for Marquis--or at least, as happy as I would be for anyone I don't really know who suffers an illness or injury and recovers from it. But let's face it--Nats fans haven't spent years rooting for him and cheering him as a stand-out on an otherwise lackluster team.
As far as the team is concerned--yes, it's nice that he's improved from terrible to mediocre. I don't see that long-term as making more than a marginal difference to this team, but of course I'll root for him when he starts, just as I would for Martin or Atilano or Stammen. But I'm not going to kid myself about how good any of them really are.
HHover - I look for consistency in all players and especially pitchers. Outside of Strasburg and Livan, there has been no consistency with the starting rotation until Lannan and Marquis stepped it up.
Olsen and Atlilano had been up and down all year as was Stammen and JD Martin, and Detwiler never seemed healthy.
I think the Won/Loss records are not totally indicative of what the performance has been especially as bad as the defense was for the first 3 months of the season. The ERA is a better indication as to keeping the team in the games.
I am happy for Marquis as he really is a competitor and took this to heart. He has said all the right things and is showing that he can help this team win. He has shown consistently that he can be a upper 3's in ERA through July of each season and not to beat the point, he just can't do it down the stretch effectively and his September ERA has taken a beating in past seasons.
Anonymous 10:01 AM: You haven't pointed out that on a very short scale (or even long scale) you CAN influence BABIP. If, during one game, you throw very well located pitches, jamming batters inside (which Marquis did), and inducing a bunch of groundouts (which he also did, though not at a very high rate), it is not all luck. Obviously, one cannot judge a player by one game. But to say that it is all luck is pretentious.
Sam: I'm not denying that. But I wasn't even talking about BABIP (where did I mention it?), only stats that are generally agreed to be repeatable: walk, strikeout, and groundball rates. Even in the course of this single game, Marquis was abysmal in the first two departments and mediocre in the third. Statistically, that doesn't suggest to me that he had extremely good location or movement or anything. Moreover, as I watched the game, I thought he was missing his spots a fair amount; a few of his pitches would have been WPs if there had been runners on base. Later in the game, he hit a batter and what he did get in the zone showed a tendency to hang there. Obviously he was (mostly) successful at critical times in jamming batters and inducing groundballs, but unless you think Marquis is Greg Maddux you cannot convince me that his inconsistent performance from batter to batter was deliberate. And even if it were pitching to the situation and going for the double play with runners on base (which would be easier to buy if he were like Strasburg and only used his two-seamer with RISP, rather than all the time), how can you explain that inning where he got the lucky popouts? After already giving up a home run to Hanley Ramirez did he really feel like testing his luck with a high fly ball? Sorry, I don't buy it in this case. I think tonight was a solid win by the Nats (who would have won with practically any pitcher on the mound on a night when they scored nine runs) and an extremely lucky one by Marquis.
Rob Dibble, If you're embarrassed about putting your foot in your mouth re Strasburg, get over it and get back in the booth. I miss the fire and the way you root for my home team.
Jeesh, Josh offered an opinion based on facts. He suddenly, according to some, became a Marquis hater, a Marquis basher. It's a wonder anonymous couldn't work in a reverse man crush, as he uses that expression ad nauseum.
Steve M - Sounds like we don't agree that much on the overall picture.
I'd be happy with Marquis as a #3-#4 starter next year, if he can get back to his career #s. Whether he can do that remains to be seen, but he should get another 5-6 starts in Sept., so we should get some idea by season's end.
One concern for me is that the Nats will probably have a glut of #3-4 starters next year, which means 1 or more of then will be slotted in above that and thus almost inevitably disappoint. But I don't see that situation changing, so they'll have to roll with it.
Oops - don't *dis*agree much on the overall picture.
HHover - Yep, glad you corrected your last post to "don't disagree".
Marquis should have good numbers through the 2011 All Star break if he is consistent with his career numbers and my crystal ball is broken at the moment, but no way will he carry that into late August and September. When I commented to Rizzo about this after they signed him they were hoping JZim would be back in August 2010 to bolster the rotation, but what is the 2011 plan when there is no clear ace just like going into this year. John Lannan? Yah, that was the flaw.
In 2011, you probably project Marquis will be this team's #2 pitcher although he should be a #3 or #4 and JZim will be the #1 projected at this point and the poor kid is coming back from Tommy John. Not sure where Maya will fit in.
So the team really needs to get a 1 year deal done for a pitcher that can carry the title of #1 and perform that way until Strasburg is deemed ready to come back.
"Clearly we are seeing a healthy Marquis now, who is a #3 or #4 starter on a .500 team who could have contributed as the team was shuffling the deck of pitchers."
What are you smoking??? Where is your rationale? A good showing against a lousy Cub team or a below average showing against a lousy Marlins team?
As for you people who think one or two starts (like one or two at bats) is a justification for how awesome a player is, my question is what is wrong with you? Is it the ESPN 24 hour news-cycle that ignores all history?
Here is a prudent example: Pitchers sometimes get RBI's. Does that mean that on that night that they got an RBI, you would want the pitcher up there to drive the runner in? The answer is NO, because historically he has sucked. Who cares if he got ONE RBI that night. Most people would want their clutch guy up there instead of the pitcher because they have PROVEN they can CONSISTENTLY get it done. Marquis pitched a substandard game but at the end of the night got a win. Whoop-de-damn doo. History says he is a 4.50 ERA pitcher. Marquis is exactly what everyone thinks he is. He has NOT been vindicated because he got lucky.
Based on the current roster, Marquis will be in the mix for one of the SP jobs in the spring, as will JZimm, Lannan, Maya, Detwiler, Livo, Olsen, Mock, Atilano, JD Martin, Wang, & Stammen. This doesn't take into account any trades / releases / signings.
The last month of the season, and Spring Training will bring a little clarity to the situation. Yes, the team will most likely be undermanned at the top of the staff, but should have a far more stable situation at #3-5 than they have ever had in DC, imo.
Anon @ 1:19. I see the cup as 1/2 full on this one, so yes, I am taking his last 3 starts as a positive sign including that Phillies game which you failed to mention and a good job against the Cubs and a decent job last night.
I have seen this guys career as he is an effective #3 or #4 starter until his arm gets tired. With Marquis, he is what he is, and given the frail state of the starting rotation this is a welcome sign.
For your PRUDENT example, whatever, take your sample size and twist it to your liking. I can take any stat and twist it.
Check my history on this site including calling Strasburg's injury last Monday after his initial MRI while many doubted my sources I also called it with Dr. Yocum in California not Dr. Andrews as others were speculating. Every journalist and blogger was calling it a forearm strain and I said it was in his elbow.
I have been around this game for a long time and its not a perfect science but stats usually are a trend and my statistical hope is that Marquis will continue some decent outings but expect a bad outing here and there as all pitchers have a bad outing eventually, its how they bounce back!
Anon: http://natsinsider.blogspot.com/2010/08/whats-next-for-zimmermann-maya.html
Look at my comments at 2:46 and thereafter. "Bad News" I had the story first as Ladson was still calling it a forearm strain for days (what a joke). I am also sure Dr. Douoguih read the initial MRI and knew the severity. It was bad, it was damage in the elbow. The news could have been worse if he had a forearm tendon rupture or more structural elbow damage.
The team can exercise their right to slowly put out the bad news as Public Relations is a big part of the game behind the scenes as it is on the field. I can't say with certainty when the team conclusively knew what the prognosis was or even if the arthrogram was necessary. I am fairly certain a lot of this was for the Public Relations and announcing it after Bryce Harper's Thursday introduction held back a greater panic in my opinion.
http://natsinsider.blogspot.com/2010/08/whats-next-for-zimmermann-maya.html
Steve M.
I don't know about any one else but when I heard about a second MRI I instinctively knew that this was very bad; by the time the news came down I had herd myriads of analysts including Orel Hershiser discussing Tommy john. He had explained that the forearm strain was caused by overcompensation for a weakens in the elbow tendon.
I don't buy the assertion that this was caused by one pitch as the Nats have put out; I thinks is more likely stress over a period of time based on tremendous force exerted by a young arm.
Steve M., I'm not sure what your point is. Josh seems to have the numbers to back up what he is saying (and, Josh, I commend you on your patience).
Here are some more numbers: In the last five years (2006-2010) Marquis has had exactly one season where his ERA was under 4.50
Last night, he allowed 3 ER in 5.2 innings. That's not great. Allowing 7 hits and 3 walks in 5.2 innings is awful, and, that alone, tells you he must have been somewhat lucky last night. If I figure right, that means the Marlins batted .292 against him last night, and had an OBP of .423 (!!). His WHIP was an astronomical 1.94 -- which, believe it or not, is approximately the same WHIP he has for the entire season (including the bad blow-outs).
That's not impressive at all (he says, gently).
I didn't see the game last night, but looking at all the numbers, it sure seems that Marquis got lucky last night.
Am I bashing him? Like Josh, my answer is "no." I'm just looking at the numbers, and trying to decide in my mind whether he's good enough to be #4 or #5 next year.
DC Wonk, you are taking up for Josh and Steve M. doesn't mention Josh at all, he mentions Anon @1:19.
Where's your beef?
Steve went into detail saying the guy is a #3 or #4 on a .500 team if he plays like he has in the past seasons and questions his durability for a whole season.
He also says that his ERA is lower before the All Star game as his arm tires.
So, I read Josh's comments about BAPIP and missing spots. It was a decent start but wasn't ace stuff.
So where does Steve M. address Josh? Why start trouble. Both have made points as have others.
sorry -- I meant to address Anonymous - who started his quote with addressing Steve M.
Sorry, Steve M!
Post a Comment