Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Daily Southtown: Dr. Marshall is no fan of Prior’s motion

HowStaffsWork…with the real Marshall Brain.

Dr. Mike Marshall, on Tom House and Cubs pitching coach Larry Rothschild…..Ask either one of them what the four muscles are that comprise the rotator cuff, and he wouldn’t have a clue. How the heck can you teach anything when you don’t know the muscles that are involved? They sure as heck don’t know how to apply Newton’s first, second and third laws to the pitching motion. They don’t know Isaac Newton from the Fig Newton.

On Jim Hendry…..I don’t know why the general manager isn’t investigating this. If I were him and had two huge talents like Prior and Kerry Wood, I would search high and low for answers. I would go to Tibet. I would go anywhere in the world to make sure that two talented young men didn’t destroy their careers.

If you track what Prior did the last three years, his career will continue to head down with a slightly accelerated slope.

 

Repoz Posted: December 27, 2005 at 02:51 PM | 56 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: cubs

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. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 27, 2005 at 03:07 PM (#1795568)
Interesting, if true. I was surprised to hear this take on his motion, because Prior was always touted in college as having picture-perfect mechanics.
   2. Andere Richtingen Posted: December 27, 2005 at 03:12 PM (#1795570)
If Marshall has a problem, then it's that he knows too much, if you ask me.

Yeah, well, who asked you?
   3. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 27, 2005 at 03:19 PM (#1795575)
That was a great read actually.
   4. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: December 27, 2005 at 03:46 PM (#1795598)
What's Marshall's plan to keep guys from hitting line drives off Prior's elbow?
   5. VG Posted: December 27, 2005 at 04:00 PM (#1795612)
This isn't the first time that Marshall has criticized Prior's mechanics. The Daily Herald had a story that was well-illustrated with pictures of Prior and Marshall's explanations/critiques of his mechanics. They had it online for much of the 2005 season, but I can't find it now.
   6. Artie Ziff Posted: December 27, 2005 at 04:49 PM (#1795679)
I doubt "picture perfect" has ever been used to describe Prior's windup. His mechanics have always been questionable at best.
   7. Kid Charlemagne Posted: December 27, 2005 at 04:57 PM (#1795689)
Has Marshall ever given an example of what he considers a good motion? Most of what I hear about him is criticism of other pitchers mechanics, but it would be good to know what he thinks is "good" so we can see if it makes a difference.
   8. CFiJ Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:07 PM (#1795703)
I doubt "picture perfect" has ever been used to describe Prior's windup. His mechanics have always been questionable at best.

Google "Mark Prior" and "perfect mechanics". People aren't saying it now, but before and after he was drafted and all during 2003 the words "Mark Prior" couldn't be mentioned without "perfect mechanics".
   9. CFiJ Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:10 PM (#1795705)
In fact, an April 3rd, 2003 "Ask BA" on Baseball America had Jim Callis say,

"I'd take Prior first because a dominant pitcher is harder to find than a dominant hitter. With his stuff, command and picture-perfect mechanics, he's going to be the best pitcher in baseball over the next 15 years."
   10. paytonrules Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:11 PM (#1795707)
Maybe not picture perfect but a few quotes from a cursory google search:

http://usctrojans.collegesports.com/genrel/garrett-colm52.html
"He's extremely bright, extremely mature, extremely poised and extremely composed. His physical skills--thanks to the God-given gift of a great arm--are combined with great mechanics and great conditioning"


Donut boy
http://www.suntimes.com/output/mariotti/cst-spt-jay23.html
Not when we've seen him dominate in stretches with flawless mechanics


I thought I'd find more - but a lot must be archived. Will Carrolls book does a comparison side-by-side of Wood and Prior, using Prior as the baseline for great.
   11. RP Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:16 PM (#1795715)
I doubt "picture perfect" has ever been used to describe Prior's windup.

This comment is almost the platonic ideal of wrongness.
   12. Spahn Insane Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:26 PM (#1795737)
What's Marshall's plan to keep guys from hitting line drives off Prior's elbow?

Sending large aid packages to rebuilding European nations?
   13. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:29 PM (#1795742)
Has Marshall ever given an example of what he considers a good motion?


It's possible I'm imagining this, but I think at one point he said Clemens was one of the closest in terms of active pitchers.
   14. greenback used to say live and let live Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:33 PM (#1795749)
Has Marshall ever given an example of what he considers a good motion?

Semi-regular poster (and professional pitcher) Chad Bradford Wannabe said he saw a Marshall disciple pitch a while back. The way CBW described that pitcher's motion -- well, Marshall must have some radically different ideas about how pitchers should throw the ball. Apparently every pitcher in the majors has poor mechanics.
   15. PreservedFish Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:34 PM (#1795752)
I very specifically remember hearing that Prior had "the best mechanics of any pitcher since Tom Seaver."

In fact, I remember watching a Cubs playoff game with my girlfriend, and for some reason trying to impress her by telling her how good Mark Prior's mechanics were, even though I actually had no idea and was just regurgitating what I had read, and even though there is no chance on earth that she would ever care about a thing like that or find my knowledge of it impressive.
   16. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:38 PM (#1795760)
Has he commented on Dontrelle's? So far he hasn't run into any problems (*knocking on wood*), and it's nice to see success in the face of Emanski-like conformity.
   17. Backlasher Posted: December 27, 2005 at 05:55 PM (#1795788)
Has Marshall ever given an example of what he considers a good motion?

If you read his book end to end, you can find a lot of information on what he considers to be a good motion. This chapter has most of his recommendations consolidated.
   18. Squash Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:06 PM (#1795803)
Even when I first saw him throw in 2002-3, I've always thought Prior's motion was particularly "arm-y" and have never really considered his mechanics all that great. I doubt very much that most of the pundits/writers/sportscasters who throw around the picture-perfect thing have any idea what constitutes good mechanics regardless.
   19. 1k5v3L Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:10 PM (#1795807)
Prior thread, sort of -- from mlbtraderumors.com

Cubs Tejada Trade On The Table

An emailer reports that the Cubs are awaiting word from the Orioles on this offer:

Cubs get:

Miguel Tejada, Erik Bedard

Orioles get:

Mark Prior, Rich Hill, Corey Patterson

This proposal is on the table. The report comes from Bruce Levine on ESPN Radio 1000. Levine will be back on at 11am central time with an update, so I'll keep you posted.


If true, you'd think the O's would have to ask for Cedeno as well...
   20. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:15 PM (#1795812)
I doubt very much that most of the pundits/writers/sportscasters who throw around the picture-perfect thing have any idea what constitutes good mechanics regardless.

The first quote in #10 is from USC's baseball coach.
   21. Cabbage Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:22 PM (#1795816)
I doubt "picture perfect" has ever been used to describe Prior's windup.

This comment is almost the platonic ideal of wrongness.


Does that mean Artie Ziff gets thrown into the BTF cave? Will he only be allowed to view baseball news by watching Meatwad make shadow puppets?
   22. RP Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:26 PM (#1795821)
Cubs get:

Miguel Tejada, Erik Bedard

Orioles get:

Mark Prior, Rich Hill, Corey Patterson


Ugh...why on earth would the Orioles make that trade?
   23. 1k5v3L Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:29 PM (#1795824)
RP, they don't have to; that's what the Cubbies have offered, supposedly.
   24. RP Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:32 PM (#1795832)
I know...my point is that it's a ridiculous offer (if true). Even the idiots in the Orioles FO would laugh at that.
   25. 1k5v3L Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:34 PM (#1795834)
It's not TOTALLY ridiculous. Just not overwhelming.
   26. Hang down your head, Tom Foley Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:35 PM (#1795835)
I doubt "picture perfect" has ever been used to describe Prior's windup.

This comment is almost the platonic ideal of wrongness.


The comment is correct in that he did doubt that "picture perfect" had been used. The doubt is what is incorrect.
   27. RP Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:37 PM (#1795837)
The comment is correct in that he did doubt that "picture perfect" had been used. The doubt is what is incorrect.

Hmmmm...fair enough.
   28. Klobedanz Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:38 PM (#1795839)
Dr. Mike does think most pitchers in the major leagues today have poor mechanics. He espouses a whole different philosophy towards pitching and if you read his site, it sounds pretty credible. But it is so completely different then what is taught today that he will have a hard time gaining much traction, unless one of his rubber-armed proteges had the stuff to make it to the big leagues and dominate. Much like Bill James in the 70's , Marshall is the Don Quixote of pitching coaches right now, time will tell if his theories will ever get a chance or if he is even correct at all.
   29. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: December 27, 2005 at 06:56 PM (#1795864)
The problem with Marshall's theories is that he has no diagrams on his site, so his description of "proper" mechanics sounds insane, to me at least.

As far as I can tell, imagine Kevin Gregg with no leg kick instead of a tiny leg kick, but with this like pendulum thing beforehand, and ... hell, never mind, I can't make any sense of it.

Marshall on Prior, as well as CBW's account of seeing a Marshall disciple, can be found at that link ...
   30. KB JBAR (trhn) Posted: December 27, 2005 at 07:02 PM (#1795877)
For right now, Marshall's work is just speculation. Highly pleasing speculation, but without any evidence except Marshall's pedigree and the theory upon which his work is based. To me, Marshall's work sounds too good to be true.
   31. scareduck Posted: December 27, 2005 at 07:39 PM (#1795950)
Marshall is a bitter old guy who's mad nobody's listening to him. Maybe he's right; but how does his personal record without injury enter into the equasion of deciding that?

Stylistically, he reminds me of Dick Mills, the self-proclaimed "pitching rebel" who managed to get his son, Ryan Mills, a big dollar contract and a first-round draft pick with the Twins, only to have him turn into a pumpkin once he actually started pitching at higher levels. Judging by his innings pitched in 2001, 2003, and 2004, I would also hazard a guess that he had injury problems, something Mills claims capable of preventing. Everybody else is a moron, contravailing received wisdom is not "credible", and at the end of every post, an offer to send a 30-page free report. Blecch.
   32. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: December 27, 2005 at 08:13 PM (#1796008)
I can't find the stats or box scores, but Ryan Mills was overworked during Arizona State's College World Series run in 1998.
   33. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: December 27, 2005 at 08:38 PM (#1796047)
In partial defense of Marshall, he does claim that he never really figured out the whole pitching thing until after he retired. He broke a rib in 1975 from bad mechanics throwing the curve (or so he says), and he says he figured out how to really throw a curve much later.
   34. J. Cross Posted: December 27, 2005 at 08:46 PM (#1796065)
I'm a little torn on Marshall's credibility. He loses a little credibility in my mind by implying that a pitching coach would be helped by knowing Newton's laws. I'm pretty sure everyone has an intuitive understanding of those laws even if they're not aware of it. Simple physics isn't going to tell you whether you can throw a fastball harder by moving it in a straight line or in an arch. It depends on the details of how the body is designed. On the other hand, I would agree that a pitching coach should know about the rotator cuff muscles and that Hendry should be putting serious effort into how best to protect his pitcher's arms (if he isn't already). I also think Marshall might well be right about too much rest leading to atrophy.

If I had to guess, I'd bet that Peterson's approach of filming pitchers when they're pitching well and when their not as well as comparing pitchers to an ideal sucessful form (I think that Peterson is the one who said that Clemens is close to the ideal) is more fruitful than Marshall's plan of inventing new techniques based on first principles.
   35. Mike Emeigh Posted: December 27, 2005 at 08:53 PM (#1796078)
I can't find the stats or box scores, but Ryan Mills was overworked during Arizona State's College World Series run in 1998.


Mills started 2 games in the CWS, including the championship game in which he was shelled (6 runs in 1+ inning). He'd pitched 108 1/3 innings prior to the CWS.

Mills had severe control problems during his early minor league career, and then he got hurt in '01. The Twins finally gave up on him in '04.

-- MWE
   36. Zach Posted: December 27, 2005 at 09:23 PM (#1796150)
Newton's Laws as they're commonly taught don't seem like they'd be intuitively applicable to pitching, anyway. I noticed in the earlier thread that Marshall never talks about torque or moments of inertia.

It's not at all clear to me (and I _do_ understand Newton's Laws very well, thank you) that Marshall's mechanics are anything close to ideal. If you want a better physical model, I'd suggest reading _Lefty's Legacy_, the biography of Koufax, where he compares pitching to a multi-armed catapult.
   37. JPWF13 Posted: December 27, 2005 at 09:31 PM (#1796168)
Has he commented on Dontrelle's? So far he hasn't run into any problems (*knocking on wood*), and it's nice to see success in the face of Emanski-like conformity.

The real oddity of Willis' motion is his windup and how he twists his body- I don't actually see how he puts more stress on his arm (or part thereof) than he would with a more conventional windup.

The 69-76 Mets had several pitchers, Seaver, Koosman, Matlack who had been taught to use their bodies as levers- when they threw their back knees would brush the ground... After a few innings they would always have a dirt spot there- I don't see pitchers doing that anymore...
   38. Flynn Posted: December 27, 2005 at 09:33 PM (#1796175)
Everybody else is a moron, contravailing received wisdom is not "credible", and at the end of every post, an offer to send a 30-page free report. Blecch.

OTOH, Marshall is one of the only pitching coaches with a doctorate in physiology, which makes me want to listen to him more than a so-called pitching rebel.
   39. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: December 27, 2005 at 11:04 PM (#1796322)
I noticed in the earlier thread that Marshall never talks about torque or moments of inertia.

I have less than zero understanding of Newton's Laws, but he does prescribe a pitch called a "Torque Fastball." I'm not sure if that relates to what you're discussing or not, just tossing that out there ...
   40. John Manuel Posted: December 27, 2005 at 11:43 PM (#1796354)
Mills was overworked, if only once: He threw 149 pitches in the Midwest Regional championship game to beat Georgia Tech 3-1. That victory got ASU to Omaha.
http://thesundevils.collegesports.com/sports/m-basebl/recaps/052598aab.html
   41. Backlasher Posted: December 27, 2005 at 11:58 PM (#1796362)
Newton's Laws as they're commonly taught don't seem like they'd be intuitively applicable to pitching, anyway.


<a href="http://www.drmikemarshall.com/ChapterTwenty-Nine.html">Here</a? is where Marshall does most of his jabbering about the laws of physics. Check out 29(d)(1) - 29(d)(2) where he argues against flaws in the traditional system and improvements in the Marshall method.
   42. Shalimar Posted: December 28, 2005 at 12:57 AM (#1796394)
In partial defense of Marshall, he does claim that he never really figured out the whole pitching thing until after he retired. He broke a rib in 1975 from bad mechanics throwing the curve (or so he says), and he says he figured out how to really throw a curve much later.

In partial criticism of Marshall, this conveniently means that he didn't prove this radical theory when he had a major league pitcher willing and able to be a guinea pig. Marshall (probably undeservedly) reminds me of L. Ron Hubbard: If your theory of the mind really leads to perfection, how are you so batshit insane?
   43. scareduck Posted: December 28, 2005 at 01:14 AM (#1796402)
Marshall knows Mills, and predictably hates him. (Warning: the above two links are HUGE HTML files and take quite a while to download.)
   44. Squash Posted: December 28, 2005 at 01:26 AM (#1796408)
I doubt very much that most of the pundits/writers/sportscasters who throw around the picture-perfect thing have any idea what constitutes good mechanics regardless.

The first quote in #10 is from USC's baseball coach.


True. But anecdotally, having pitched in college, I can tell you that most college pitching coaches have no clue what constitutes good mechanics. They get their job b/c they're buddies with the manager, who gets his job from the boosters.

But it's beside the point, anyway. You can hardly see Prior on TV without some lunkhead announcer going on about how great his mechanics are. The announcer can't actually tell you what's great about Prior's mechanics - he's just repeating what he's heard from everyone else. Prior's mechanics may in fact be "perfect" and I may wrong. Or it could be an often-repeated anecdote that traces back to, perhaps, someone like Prior's college pitching coach.

It's all a conspiracy, I tell you!
   45. Zonk Opposes Trial by Combat Posted: December 28, 2005 at 03:11 AM (#1796455)
I'd have no problem having Marshall on my staff as a consultant, if nothing else because anyone that's spent so much time singularly focused on pitching and pitching mechanics must have SOMETHING to offer. I doubt he'd last very long, though, because he seems to have a bit of an absolutist quality.

In the end, I don't think there's any such thing as a perfect motion for any overhand pitcher (submariners and true side-wheelers are another matter). The human shoulder just isn't well built to do the things required of a top flight pitcher.

That doesn't mean ignoring the debate - just accepting that there's a tradeoff point between health and effectiveness. Like all things, you minimize the risk to the greatest extent possible with as little lost effectiveness as possible.

I'm neither a doctor nor a pitching coach, but it seems that the best motion is one that minimizes the oft-injured and vital shoulder and elbow muscles and ligaments. It seems pretty logical that the best way to minimize this is a fluid, balanced motion that doesn't put these areas through a rapid succession of jerky contortions -- presumably the balanced 'plane' that Prior does seem to have in spades, unlike Kerry Wood, whose motion doesn't seem to take in a straight line to the plate.

The other oft-cited key is to use the legs - and here, I agree with a poster above. Despite having the perfect set of thighs and calves for a power pitcher, Prior doesn't always seem to get the most leverage out of his lower body.

I think it would be intersting to see comparisons between his motion now and in 2003. I'm wondering if the achilles issues of 2004 didn't subtly alter his motion to be slightly less legs and slightly more arm and shoulder.

Either way, I still wouldn't trade him for Miguel Tejeda.
   46. John Northey Posted: December 28, 2005 at 03:13 AM (#1796460)
If I was given a shot at running a team (I can dream) I'd certainly be looking closely at Dr Marshall's ideas. Take a team has had long term problems (ala Detroit) and take a risk. Heck, how much worse could it get after over 10 years of sub-500 ball?
   47. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 28, 2005 at 04:30 AM (#1796499)
Marshall sounds like a crank in the links in 43, but a lot of people thought that Johnny Sain was just a crabby old man, and Mazzone sure did OK by following his lead.

I go back and forth on it.
   48. PerroX Posted: December 28, 2005 at 04:43 AM (#1796505)
Knowing Newton is irrelevant, but extensive knowledge in kinesiology and exercise physiology would almost certainly be valuable in studying why pitchers break down and possible ways to prevent it from happening. Would be interested in reading further on his ideas about the proper ratio of rest and work for pitchers.

Kudos to the person above who admitted he was full of crap trying to impress a girl. Too bad most folks can't admit they're often full of crap regurgitating what they little understand, but it's certainly more embarrassing to admit you're interested in impressing your fellow geeks on the internet.

Course, the net's pretty much about one thing in one way or another.

Strokin it.
   49. PerroX Posted: December 28, 2005 at 04:43 AM (#1796506)
Knowing Newton is irrelevant, but extensive knowledge in kinesiology and exercise physiology would almost certainly be valuable in studying why pitchers break down and possible ways to prevent it from happening. Would be interested in reading further on his ideas about the proper ratio of rest and work for pitchers.

Kudos to the person above who admitted he was full of crap trying to impress a girl. Too bad most folks can't admit they're often full of crap regurgitating what they little understand, but it's certainly more embarrassing to admit you're interested in impressing your fellow geeks on the internet.

Course, the net's pretty much about one thing in one way or another.

Strokin it.
   50. PerroX Posted: December 28, 2005 at 04:45 AM (#1796508)
Sorry, new web browser.
   51. Zach Posted: December 28, 2005 at 05:43 PM (#1796944)
The torque fastball refers to torque placed on the fastball, as in a cut fastball. I'm talking about torque, angular momentum, and moment of inertia of the arm itself.

Chapter 29 is exactly what I'm talking about. He doesn't work through the pitching motion as a physics problem (If he did, he'd almost cerainly need to use a more convenient coordinate system.) He just states the three laws of motion, works one or two oversimplified problems, and then says everybody needs to pitch the way he did, or else. I certainly don't see any evidence that he actually worked out the forces felt by the various tendons and ligaments in different motions, and decided on his mechanics after working out the answers.
   52. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: December 28, 2005 at 06:26 PM (#1797037)
I don't know where else to put this, but Chicago sports radio is apparently reporting that Jon Garland has signed a three-year contract with the White Sox worth $29 Million.

Kind of a shocker, if true - I thought sure he'd test the market.
   53. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: December 28, 2005 at 06:29 PM (#1797045)
   54. 1k5v3L Posted: December 28, 2005 at 06:34 PM (#1797058)
So, what now, KW? Trade Contreras? Or give him a three year extension too, and then peddle McCarthy, Uribe and a spare part or two for Miguel Tejada?

The payroll would go up quite a bit, but that would be a stroke of genius. It'd be even better, of course, if he traded Contreras, Uribe, + for Miggy
   55. Boots Day Posted: December 28, 2005 at 06:59 PM (#1797102)
I go back and forth on it.

So does Mazzone.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dr.-Elect JE
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogNationals, Jon Lester agree to one-year deal, per report
(20 - 9:59am, Jan 19)
Last: Dillon Gee Escape Plan

NewsblogNBA 2020 Season kick-off thread
(863 - 9:58am, Jan 19)
Last: ramifications of an exciting 57i66135

NewsblogReport: Jays, P Tyler Chatwood agree to deal
(3 - 9:55am, Jan 19)
Last: Paul d mobile

NewsblogNY Mets GM acknowledges sending unsolicited, explicit images while working for Cubs
(37 - 9:54am, Jan 19)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

NewsblogReds wanted Gleyber Torres from Yankees in rumored Luis Castillo deal
(20 - 9:42am, Jan 19)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogMickey Mantle baseball card shatters record, sells for $5.2 million
(43 - 9:12am, Jan 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogMLB rule changes: League still discussing universal DH and expanded playoffs for 2021 season
(28 - 9:02am, Jan 19)
Last: Rally

Hall of MeritPeavy, Nathan, Papelbon, Lincecum, Kazmir and Danks
(4 - 8:16am, Jan 19)
Last: Dillon Gee Escape Plan

NewsblogFormer Oakland Athletics pitcher Dave Stewart bids $115 million on share of Oakland Coliseum
(13 - 7:57am, Jan 19)
Last: Adam Starblind

NewsblogYankees sign pitcher Corey Kluber, two-time Cy Young Award winner
(36 - 1:56am, Jan 19)
Last: dolce

NewsblogSan Diego Padres to acquire Pittsburgh Pirates right-hander Joe Musgrove, sources say
(10 - 12:24am, Jan 19)
Last: CFBF's Results are Certified

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(11805 - 11:37pm, Jan 18)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1934 Discussion
(11 - 10:15pm, Jan 18)
Last: DL from MN

Hall of MeritDavid Ortiz
(40 - 10:04pm, Jan 18)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Newsblog2021 BBHOF Tracker Summary and Leaderboard – Baseball Hall of Fame Vote Tracker
(542 - 8:30pm, Jan 18)
Last: Adam Starblind

Page rendered in 0.4544 seconds
48 querie(s) executed