Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Saturday, February 26, 2005

2005 ZiPS Projections and disk for DMB 9.0, Build 6

- 2005 Schedule has now been programmed into the DMB Disk.  Thanks goes to Chris Long who suggested using a text file to make schedule input easier - I had never noticed the import text file option and this reduced my 10 hours of inputting games last year into a 45-minute task this year.

- New projections and DMB players:  Russ Johnson, Noah Hall, Mike Kinkade, Eddy Garabito, Emil Brown, Jason Tyner, Daric Barton, Brian Snyder, Shawn Garrett, John Castellano, Adam Stern, Joaquin Arias, Keith Osik, Ryan Garko, Kevin Tolar, Denny Tomori, Paul Shuey, Mike Matthews, Danny Borrell, Mark Valdes, Eric Junge, David Cortes, Doug Creek, Nelson Cruz, Brian Moehler, Rodrigo Rosario, Santiago Ramirez, Trey Hodges, Blake McGinley, Yusmiero Petit, Evan Fahrner, Brad Sullivan, Nate Bland, Rett Johnson, Dan Smith, Pete Walker.

- The projections spreadsheet is now considered complete.  I’ll do saves next year, but I’ll hate it and put a massive disclaimer.

- The DMB disk will probably have another update or two as rosters and lineups are tinkered with.

Dan Szymborski Posted: February 26, 2005 at 05:21 PM | 72 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 05:40 PM (#1167220)
I'm not getting a working link to the file.
   2. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 26, 2005 at 05:42 PM (#1167222)
Its not working for me either.
   3. SG Posted: February 26, 2005 at 05:45 PM (#1167228)
It's on Dan's page, just go here.
   4. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 05:49 PM (#1167230)
Excellent. Thanks.
   5. Dan Szymborski Posted: February 26, 2005 at 05:50 PM (#1167231)
Link should work now.
   6. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 05:59 PM (#1167235)
It seems to like the Met offense:

7/25/05: NYN 37, COL 9
2005 Mets    0  0  0 11  1  5  7  0 13   37 31  0
2005 Rockies 0  0  0  1  4  2  2  0  0    9 14  0

There's a game it would have been fun to attend.
   7. Dan Szymborski Posted: February 26, 2005 at 06:01 PM (#1167237)
Wow! What a game! I don't think I've ever had a team score more than 22 or 23 in DMB.
   8. Joshemy Posted: February 26, 2005 at 06:02 PM (#1167238)
Wow, UCCF, that would be the most awesome thing ever...
   9. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 06:05 PM (#1167242)

There's a game it would have been fun to attend.


But not to score
   10. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 06:09 PM (#1167245)
Wow! What a game! I don't think I've ever had a team score more than 22 or 23 in DMB.

Yeah, I was sitting there sort of halfheartedly watching the scores flash by when I saw that. I thought, "37?!"

I felt like Dante.
   11. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 26, 2005 at 06:16 PM (#1167247)
Can you post the complete boxscore of that game?
   12. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 06:28 PM (#1167254)
It's already gone to the ether. I should have saved it. I can tell you that no one on the Mets offense had anything spectacular (no one more than 5 hits or 6 RBIs).

The Rockies left Chacon in to give up all 13 runs in the 9th. Trachsel started for the Mets but didn't get the win -- he was knocked out of the box in the 5th after having given up 6 runs.
   13. bibigon Posted: February 26, 2005 at 06:46 PM (#1167265)
Hey, how does one do the run of X simulated seasons in DMB? Please tell me there is some mode in DMB where I just set it to run itself over and over again, right and then give me the results.

Please tell me I don't have to reset, and total everything by hand, do I?
   14. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:07 PM (#1167326)
Please tell me I don't have to reset, and total everything by hand, do I?

I can tell you that I'm resetting it after each season, so if there's a way to make it run a bunch of seasons for you at once I don't know what it is.
   15. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:09 PM (#1167328)
Please tell me I don't have to reset, and total everything by hand, do I?

Yeah, you do. But SG in ATL made a spreadsheet which makes this easy to do. Hopefully he'll stop by and link to it, I don't have the link handy.
   16. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:17 PM (#1167335)
Running these things is just making me #### ache for baseball right now.

In the last sim I ran, the Nats were one up on the Braves going in to the last game of the season. With an Atlanta victory already in the books, the Nats pulled one out over the Phillies 3-2 on a David Bell error in the bottom of the 17th inning.

Goosebumps.
   17. SG Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:28 PM (#1167339)
Spreadheet link is here. I've been swamped at work, but I want to play around with macros that would automate the rerunning of seasons when I get a chance.
   18. bibigon Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:33 PM (#1167343)
SG, do you think you'll actually get a chance to do that?

Having now purchased DMB and found that feature lacking, I was about to start writing the macros myself.

Quite simply though, while I can do this, I don't know when I'll have the time to do it, so if you're close to finishing by then, it doesn't make sense to duplicat the work.
   19. scotto Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:35 PM (#1167345)
How does one install the Zips data again? Maybe that ought to be on the Wiki...
   20. SG Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:36 PM (#1167346)
bibigon, I haven't even started. I usually do that stuff when I'm at work, and my new project doesn't give me much time. I'm hoping that things will settle down and give me the time to do it, but if you've got the chance, I say go for it.

It might be a good idea to submit that feature as an enhancement request for future versions of Diamond Mind, over on their web site. I'll go do that right now, but if a bunch of people do it it will make it more likely to appear.
   21. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:37 PM (#1167348)
How does one install the Zips data again? Maybe that ought to be on the Wiki...

Create an empty database, then click Restore and point to the zipped folder.
   22. scotto Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:38 PM (#1167349)
Thanks Greg.
   23. SG Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:44 PM (#1167353)
How does one install the Zips data again? Maybe that ought to be on the Wiki...

Good idea scotto, I've added it.
   24. scotto Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:49 PM (#1167358)
Ach, beat me to it. Thanks SG.
   25. CoastalFan Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:50 PM (#1167363)
Oh, man this makes me crave peanuts and hot dogs.... is this disk any kinder to the Astros?
   26. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:53 PM (#1167370)
Not yet. The Astros have yet to make the playoffs or even post a .500 record.

It also hates the AL Central, and there have been several season where the division winner was below .500. That's balanced by the NL East, where there were (so far) two seasons where every team finished above .500.
   27. The Answer to the TWolves (GMoney) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 08:58 PM (#1167376)
I don't have the DMB disk but I'd be very interested in seeing what the Twins project with Mauer getting 400-450 ABs at catcher or Mike Redmond getting the bulk of the ABs if Mauer's knee can't hold up.
   28. bibigon Posted: February 26, 2005 at 09:26 PM (#1167415)
Alright, this is going faster than I expected. I should finish this within the hour.

Automated simulation will make me not want to shoot myself.

Thanks for the spreadsheet SG, it's saving me a bunch of time.
   29. Riki Tiki Javy Lopez Posted: February 26, 2005 at 09:48 PM (#1167428)
SG, that spreadsheet is simply phenomenal.

And the Nationals are winning a lot more than I anticipated. DMB loves their pitching.
   30. The Answer to the TWolves (GMoney) Posted: February 26, 2005 at 09:52 PM (#1167430)
Did anyone run these last year? And if so how did they compare to the actual standings?
   31. Riki Tiki Javy Lopez Posted: February 26, 2005 at 10:11 PM (#1167450)
Diamond Mind actually does 100 sims each March, with the expected hits and misses: yearly pre-season sims.

I ran about 20 sims last year before the season started (with their projection disks), and they consistently had the Cards running away with the NLC, which impressed me, and ran contrary to most predictions. There will always be surprises (Braves always predicted worse than they are, Marlins in 2003, Angels in 2002), but they do a pretty good job. The link above has a comparison of their pre-season predictions and many other experts' and they do pretty well.
   32. bibigon Posted: February 26, 2005 at 11:03 PM (#1167516)
Alright, I lied, this is going to take me longer than an hour.

But I'll have a macro written to automate the process sooner rather than later. Then we can run this for 1000 seasons if we'd like. The standard deviation here is high enough that would make sense.

Each season takes my computer about 5 minutes to run. 1000 seasons would only take a couple days to do once I get the process automated.
   33. Damon Rutherford Posted: February 26, 2005 at 11:46 PM (#1167567)
bibigon -- will this be a macro that any computer-literate fella will be able to run? It would be very beneficial (to most likely all DMB fantasy league owners), and I would be very grateful if I could get my hands on it.

Also, with regards to simming projected 2005 seasons, have the manager profiles been set accordingly? I haven't had the chance yet to install Szym's zip file yet. Thanks, BTW, Szym!
   34. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 26, 2005 at 11:48 PM (#1167571)
I'd also be very interested in getting that macro if you can get it up and running. TIA.
   35. bibigon Posted: February 26, 2005 at 11:56 PM (#1167578)
Yeah, this should be pretty simple to use, but writing it has become significantly more complex than I anticipated at first.

When I finish it, I'll post it in a public place, but it might be a couple days before I get that far. There's just too much actual school work and stuff I also need to do.
   36. Damon Rutherford Posted: February 27, 2005 at 12:12 AM (#1167599)
DMB v10 better have multi-season simming capability, among other features that are much needed, such as being able to create a home/road splits report for players/teams. Or being able to set a limit of playing time (based on PA, AB, GP, whatever) for all players, and if a player reaches that limit, is never used again for that season.
   37. bibigon Posted: February 27, 2005 at 12:44 AM (#1167641)
Any idea when V.10 is due out?
   38. Damon Rutherford Posted: February 27, 2005 at 12:51 AM (#1167643)
Any idea when V.10 is due out?

No clue. It's not even mentioned on the DMB website, so probably not for at least a year, most likely two. Perhaps a v9 patch/upgrade could be released.
   39. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: February 27, 2005 at 12:56 AM (#1167647)
Each season takes my computer about 5 minutes to run. 1000 seasons would only take a couple days to do once I get the process automated.

Unless my math fails me (and it rarely does), it would take 3 days, 11 hours, and 20 minutes.
   40. SG Posted: February 27, 2005 at 01:45 AM (#1167735)
Did anyone run these last year? And if so how did they compare to the actual standings?


I found a partial spreadsheet from last year, this was for 60 runs. I've bolded the division and wild card winners that it pegged.

Team                  Proj                         Actual         Win difference
American League          W    L      DIV     WC      W       L    Proj - Actual
<u>East</u>                                                    
Baltimore Orioles       75   87      0       0       78      84     -3
Boston Red Sox          98   64      25      26      98      64      0
New York Yankees       100   62      35      21      101     61     -1
Tampa Bay Devil Rays    63   99      0       0       70      91     -7
Toronto Blue Jays       84   78      0       2       67      94     17
<u>
Central</u>
Chicago White Sox       75   87      6       0       83      79     -8
Cleveland Indians       79   83      17      0       80      82     -1
Detroit Tigers          70   92      5       0       72      90     -2
Kansas City Royals      79   83      18      0       58      104    21
Minnesota Twins         78   84      14      0       92      70    -14
<u>
West</u>                                                    
Anaheim Angels          88   74      11      10      92      70     -4
Oakland Athletics       95   67      46      2       91      71      4
Seattle Mariners        84   78      3       0       63      99     21
Texas Rangers           71   91      0       0       89      73    -18
                                                        
National League<u>
East</u>
Atlanta Braves          84   78      7       11      96      66    -12
Florida Marlins         79   83      1       0       83      79     -4
Montreal Expos          81   81      4       3       67      95     14
New York Mets           75   87      0       0       71      91      4
Philadelphia Phillies   94   68      48      1       86      76      8
<u>
Central</u>                                                 
Chicago Cubs            86   76      8       12      89      73     -3
Cincinnati Reds         73   89      0       1       76      86     -3
Houston Astros          87   75      9       17      92      70     -5
Milwaukee Brewers       71   91      0       1       67      94      4
Pittsburgh Pirates      72   90      0       0       72      90      0
St. Louis Cardinals     96   66      43      8       105     57     -9
<u>
West</u>                                                   
Arizona Diamondbacks    85   77      30      0       51      111    34
Colorado Rockies        74   88      3       0       68      94      6
Los Angeles Dodgers     80   82      9       1       93      69     -13
San Diego Padres        82   80      17      4       87      75     -5
San Francisco Giants    75   87      1       0       91      71     -16


Not so great, apparently. That Arizona projection in particular was a doozy.
   41. The Answer to the TWolves (GMoney) Posted: February 27, 2005 at 01:49 AM (#1167748)
The Kansas City one wasn't real great either, considering they were projected as the winner of the AL Central and the Twins as the 3rd place team.
   42. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 27, 2005 at 02:32 AM (#1167840)
No clue. It's not even mentioned on the DMB website, so probably not for at least a year, most likely two. Perhaps a v9 patch/upgrade could be released.

Actually, they mentioned it for the first time last week in their 2/24/05 newsletter. Its just a paragraph saying that its in the works but that they can't detail features or a timetable for release.

Also, the same newsletter says that there is a patch being worked on, probably to be released in April, IIRC.
   43. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 27, 2005 at 02:37 AM (#1167849)
One last thought... IIRC, they were talking up v9 on their site a good 2 years before it shipped. If they do what they did with v9, about six or eight months before its released they'll promise a free upgrade for anyone who buys the old from the time of the pledge.

But yeah, based on what they did with v8 and 9, we're probably at least a year and a half away. Its a very small company with very limited resources, so they're R&D is very... deliberate (although the end products are good, albeit a tad expensive for a text-based game).
   44. SG Posted: February 27, 2005 at 05:16 PM (#1168493)
I've tweaked my spreadsheet to automate the process of importing the results into Excel with a macro. Here's the link to the new version. Instructions are in the zip file.
   45. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: February 27, 2005 at 06:58 PM (#1168537)
I haven't tested it yet, but I assume it'll work, so I'll give a premature "SG rocks!"
   46. Damon Rutherford Posted: February 27, 2005 at 07:23 PM (#1168560)
Atta boy, SG!
   47. SG Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:16 PM (#1168645)
One more tweak, I've added another macro to calculate the division winners and wild cards. It looks like it works ok, but if you see any errors let me know. The link's the same, I've just uploaded the latest version.
   48. SG Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:35 PM (#1168682)
Incidentally, I ran another 100 with the new build while testing my macros.

Team                   W     L       RF      RA      DIV     WC
American League                                         
East                                            
Baltimore Orioles     82    80      831     823     1.0     13.8
Boston Red Sox        97    65      941     765     77.5    18.0
New York Yankees      89    73      859     784     20.5    34.0
Tampa Bay Devil Rays  70    92      705     813     0.0     2.0
Toronto Blue Jays     80    82      784     785     1.0     7.3
                                                
Central                                                
Chicago White Sox     80    82      792     811     29.0    0.0
Cleveland Indians     81    81      815     810     28.0    0.0
Detroit Tigers        74    88      783     839     6.5     0.0
Kansas City Royals    68    94      754     895     0.0     0.0
Minnesota Twins       82    80      788     791     36.5    0.5
                                                
West                                                
Anaheim Angels        87    75      826     775     45.5    9.0
Oakland Athletics     88    74      831     750     44.5    9.8
Seattle Mariners      81    81      802     801     7.0     5.0
Texas Rangers         76    86      829     894     3.0     0.5
                                                
National League                                         
East                                                                                            
Atlanta Braves        83    79      756     746     15.0    10.0
Florida Marlins       81    81      714     700     7.5     6.8
New York Mets         89    73      769     701     35.0    17.3
Philadelphia Phillies 90    72      765     688     38.5    20.7
Washington Nationals  79    83      692     695     4.0     7.0
                                                
Central                                                                                        
Chicago Cubs          84    78      747     704     3.0     19.8
Cincinnati Reds       71    91      745     823     0.0     0.8
Houston Astros        74    88      707     786     0.0     2.0
Milwaukee Brewers     78    84      703     740     1.5     3.3
Pittsburgh Pirates    67    95      668     794     0.0     0.0
St. Louis Cardinals   98    64      779     622     95.5    1.0
                                                
West                                           
Arizona Diamondbacks  74    88      725     806     0.0     0.0
Colorado Rockies      76    86      815     864     2.0     0.0
Los Angeles Dodgers   94    68      762     652     87.0    2.3
San Diego Padres      82    80      738     715     11.0    8.5
San Francisco Giants  76    86      747     803     0.0     0.3
   49. Damon Rutherford Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:40 PM (#1168689)
Cincinnati Reds 71 91 745 823 0.0 0.8

As expected, their offense is competitive, but their pitching is still atrocious and now more expensive. Brilliant!
   50. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:41 PM (#1168690)
That's odd. Your other sims didn't have the Red Sox as so overwhelming a favorite (though mine did).
   51. SG Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:44 PM (#1168693)
I think it's because I ran these with the 25 man rosters. With the Yankees carrying 12 pitchers, their bench is putrid. I was a bit surprised at the difference though.
   52. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:48 PM (#1168697)
I've done about 50, and your results look very similar to mine. One thing I've noticed that shocks me -- look at the Cardinals' projected runs allowed. They're projecting at 1/2 a run per game better than the Cubs, which shocks me.
   53. Damon Rutherford Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:50 PM (#1168698)
# They're projecting at 1/2 a run per game better than the Cubs, which shocks me.

I believe that's the Rick Ankiel factor.
   54. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:55 PM (#1168701)
I believe that's the Rick Ankiel factor.

Really? I haven't examined their pitching stats all that much yet (trying to get through 100 to contribute to the total here), but I'll take some looks.

I guess if Ankiel does come back and perform up to his 2000 level, that's a big boost for them. But he's also out of options, so if he starts stinking up the joint again or isn't successful, they're going to be in a pickle deciding what to do with him.
   55. Urban Faber Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:58 PM (#1168704)
But he's also out of options, so if he starts stinking up the joint again or isn't successful, they're going to be in a pickle deciding what to do with him.

Tendinitis or a muscle strain.
   56. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:59 PM (#1168708)
Are you suggesting that a team might fabricate or exaggerate an injury to a player to avoid exposing him to waivers?

I'm shocked -- *shocked* -- at such a proposition.
   57. Mikαεl Posted: February 27, 2005 at 08:59 PM (#1168710)
I ran my sims with 31-33 players per roster. I'm pretty convinced it'll give somewhat more realistic results, but that's speculative. (It's definitely important, I'd say, to have similar roster sizes for all teams - ie., not have some teams with 25 and others with 40.)

UCCF - much of the difference between the Cubs and Cards in run prevention is defense, not pitching. The Cardinals project to be the best defensive team in the majors again next year. The Cubs look mediocre, at best.
   58. Andere Richtingen Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:00 PM (#1168711)
I believe that's the Rick Ankiel factor.

I'm confused. Ankiel projects to be terrible.
   59. Damon Rutherford Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:01 PM (#1168713)
Really?

No. I meant to say it was the Dusty Baker factor. Also, losing Sosa in RF doesn't help with regards to their defense.
   60. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:04 PM (#1168715)
No. I meant to say it was the Dusty Baker factor. Also, losing Sosa in RF doesn't help with regards to their defense.

Well, I'm being bamboozled left and right in threads today.

One thing I've noticed (which is kind of funny) in running these sims is that the Cubs underperform their pythag almost every season. I ran one year in which they ended up 71-91 but scored more runs than they allowed. The manager profile is eerily accurate. :-)
   61. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:06 PM (#1168716)
UCCF - much of the difference between the Cubs and Cards in run prevention is defense, not pitching. The Cardinals project to be the best defensive team in the majors again next year. The Cubs look mediocre, at best.

Hadn't thought of that. That's a big difference and kind of worrisome. The Cubs need to work this spring on training their pitchers to induce fly balls to CF and grounders to 1B.
   62. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:06 PM (#1168717)
I think it's because I ran these with the 25 man rosters. With the Yankees carrying 12 pitchers, their bench is putrid. I was a bit surprised at the difference though.

That would explain it, since I was using 25-man for my sims.
   63. Dr. Vaux Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:30 PM (#1168728)
The Dodgers are not going to win... between Penny and now Odalis Perez, they're just not going to stay healthy enough.
   64. The Answer to the TWolves (GMoney) Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:35 PM (#1168732)
I don't really see the Giants staying healthy all year. The Rockies and DBacks aren't anything special. So I'd give the Padres, Dodgers and Giants about an equal shot.
   65. Шĥy Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:40 PM (#1168737)
In this projection, the Mets are as good as the Yankees. I love it.
   66. Шĥy Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:42 PM (#1168739)
And wasn't it just a month ago, that I said that the Yankees are an 88-90 win team and got laughed at and called a troll by SG in ATL and RB in UK?
   67. Andere Richtingen Posted: February 27, 2005 at 09:55 PM (#1168748)
One thing I've noticed (which is kind of funny) in running these sims is that the Cubs underperform their pythag almost every season. I ran one year in which they ended up 71-91 but scored more runs than they allowed. The manager profile is eerily accurate. :-)

How bad is the bullpen? Otherwise, that would suggest there is something wrong with the model.
   68. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: February 28, 2005 at 01:00 AM (#1168938)
How bad is the bullpen? Otherwise, that would suggest there is something wrong with the model.

The bullpen is so-so, about like the Cub bullpen would be expected to be. The usage is kind of crazy. Dempster will end a season with 28 saves, but you'll also look and see that he made 6 starts. I don't think DMB does the best job handling these pitchers with dual starting/relieving capabilities. I ran into the same problems with my ppl league team when the computer managed -- it kept putting my starters in as relievers even though they were part of the rotation and not designated to relieve.
   69. greenback Posted: February 28, 2005 at 04:53 AM (#1169543)
They're projecting at 1/2 a run per game better than the Cubs, which shocks me.

Bullpen's probably better, defense is probably better, but Busch is also a lot friendlier to pitchers.
   70. SG Posted: March 04, 2005 at 04:31 AM (#1179188)
OK, I think I've got the macros set up to automate running these sims now. I set it up to run the last couple of nights on my computer and it seems to be working ok, so anyone that wants to try it out can grab the file from here. All feedback is appreciated, I'm sure there may be bugs or problems that I didn't catch.
   71. Quinton McCracken's BFF Posted: March 06, 2005 at 01:02 AM (#1183068)
I didn't see Luis Polonia's name in that list, he was signed by Washington. Seriously, look it up.
   72. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: March 06, 2005 at 01:07 AM (#1183076)
SG, thanks a bunch. I'll run this tonight on my machine and let you know how it works out.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Sponsor

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Randy Jones
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets.

For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out!

Baseball Autograph Signings
Baseball Card Supplies
Baseball Memorabilia
Baseball Collectibles
Baseball Equipment
Baseball Protective Gear

Page rendered in 0.4469 seconds
67 querie(s) executed