Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
caulfield12

Dave Wilder saga takes another interesting turn

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Texsox @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 09:56 AM)
What I'm wondering is this; Is all the attention because they treat the Scouts like royalty and line their pockets? Seems like Scouts are mining for gold in more than one way, and if this gets cleaned up, we may just see a more normal distribution.

 

Remember, the edge is these players are not under the restrictions of the amateur draft, baseball could clean this up with one rule change.

And if they would slot the draft, it would take the agents out of it, and take the draft back to what it was intended for. It also would free up a little cash for major league players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 10:01 AM)
And if they would slot the draft, it would take the agents out of it, and take the draft back to what it was intended for. It also would free up a little cash for major league players.

 

Add to that a world wide draft, and I am sold. Take the monetary advantages of being a big market team away from some teams, and you have a chance at seeing a revival in some of the small franchises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 10:12 AM)
Add to that a world wide draft, and I am sold. Take the monetary advantages of being a big market team away from some teams, and you have a chance at seeing a revival in some of the small franchises.

A worldwide draft is more fair, but I don't think it would work out all that well. Would Daisuke Matsuzaka leave baseball in Japan to go play for the Pirates, because the posting system would be gone? And not only that, but it hurts teams like us with our Cuban connections, Seattle with their Japanese connections, New York with their Dominican connections, etc.

 

I kind of like the international FA system as it is simply because it's a free market, and I think it would be a great balance to a rigid slotting system in the draft.

 

If you slot the draft, then the best talent is still going to get overpaid, it's just that now the s***ty teams are going to get all those guys and they won't fall lower. I personally don't feel you should punish teams like the Yanks and Red Sox for doing the scouting, spending lots but spending wisely, and winning, while rewarding teams like Pittsburgh who run their organizations like utter s*** with the best players in the draft. Keeping international FA like it is would still allow the big market, bottom-first round teams to get high level first round talent elsewhere.

 

Of course there's the argument that such-and-such team is winning, and such-and-such spends more money, so they can live without that type of talent falling to them, but realistically, teams like the Yankees and Red Sox need that talent, because they need to win, because half of baseball depends on them through revenue sharing. Make no mistake, if the Yankees don't win and draw, then the Pirates contract, simple as that. Players are out of jobs and parity in baseball is gone. Also, you have to consider that teams that frequent the top of the draft usually suck because they suck as an organization. Why have the Twins and A's specifically done so well over the years despite smaller payrolls? Why do the Cubs spend like the Cubs and still end up the Cubs, meanwhile St. Louis will spend just as much or less and come away the better team? The Cubs won their divisions the last two years, but it hasn't always been like that. And look at Tampa. They had the best picks for a long time but the only reason any of it is paying off now is because as an organization they are run much better. Sure BJ Upton is a stud, but it was the JP Howell, Edwin Jackson, Andy Sonnanstine, Akinori Iwamura, Grant Balfour, Dioner Navarro, Gabe Gross, take-a-chance-on-Carlos Pena, dump-Elijah Dukes-for-nothing, type of complimentary/unheralded picks and moves that made them AL Champions last year.

 

Also, if you slot the first round in such a way that 20-30 overall picks are getting something like $2-3M in bonuses - because you know the MLBPA would want large bonuses all the way through the first round in exchange for doing away with the later round, high-bonus picks - then you end up hurting teams like the Twins, who rely on their scouting and generally spend cheaply on the draft. And of course the late round, high-bonus players couldn't work anymore.

 

I think if the draft were to be slotted, you'd have to keep international FA the way it is, plus bring back the draft-and-follow system, plus allow for the trading of draft picks (so the #1 team doesn't have to spend $7M on a draft pick if they can't afford it, and can opt to trade down for say a #20, a #27, and a #50 instead). On top of that, you also have to come up with rules about MLB contracts, like either eliminate MLB contracts entirely or make it a rule for the first five or so picks. Because otherwise, if say you wanted to take a high school player within the first few picks but didn't want to give him an MLB contract because you're unsure if he'd be ready in four years, then either you'd be forced to trade down and take him after the MLB contract slots were gone, or select another player. I'd rather eliminate the MLB contracts because it would ensure almost every single top-5 or so pick is a college player, but this would be an issue for the MLBPA as well.

 

And furthermore, you couldn't slot the draft without coming up with a legit FA compensation system. You'd have to know what pick and therefore what amount of money your compensation-eligible player is worth so you could then decide what he's worth to you. For this, I think the Elias system is a great start, but what I would do it take the 30 best FA's according to Elias, put each of their names into a plastic ball, and then hold a lottery. Eliminate the supplemental first round, then have a slotted second round with equal bonuses throughout (say $750K) work solely as a compensation round. You do your lottery, and however it lines up, each departing player nets his former team that pick. You don't charge the signing team with a draft pick and you don't deal in Type A/Type B designations. You make a list of all players, and the top 30 that are offered and deny arbitration and sign with new MLB teams are the ones worth picks. Teams may have several picks in this round or none. I think a system like that would work well also because it would help facilitate more deadline deals as Type A players would be worth a lot less on the open market, being worth only one pick instead of two.

 

That was a long post. But I hope some of it made sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 12:04 PM)
A worldwide draft is more fair, but I don't think it would work out all that well. Would Daisuke Matsuzaka leave baseball in Japan to go play for the Pirates, because the posting system would be gone? And not only that, but it hurts teams like us with our Cuban connections, Seattle with their Japanese connections, New York with their Dominican connections, etc.

 

I kind of like the international FA system as it is simply because it's a free market, and I think it would be a great balance to a rigid slotting system in the draft.

 

If you slot the draft, then the best talent is still going to get overpaid, it's just that now the s***ty teams are going to get all those guys and they won't fall lower. I personally don't feel you should punish teams like the Yanks and Red Sox for doing the scouting, spending lots but spending wisely, and winning, while rewarding teams like Pittsburgh who run their organizations like utter s*** with the best players in the draft. Keeping international FA like it is would still allow the big market, bottom-first round teams to get high level first round talent elsewhere.

 

Of course there's the argument that such-and-such team is winning, and such-and-such spends more money, so they can live without that type of talent falling to them, but realistically, teams like the Yankees and Red Sox need that talent, because they need to win, because half of baseball depends on them through revenue sharing. Make no mistake, if the Yankees don't win and draw, then the Pirates contract, simple as that. Players are out of jobs and parity in baseball is gone. Also, you have to consider that teams that frequent the top of the draft usually suck because they suck as an organization. Why have the Twins and A's specifically done so well over the years despite smaller payrolls? Why do the Cubs spend like the Cubs and still end up the Cubs, meanwhile St. Louis will spend just as much or less and come away the better team? The Cubs won their divisions the last two years, but it hasn't always been like that. And look at Tampa. They had the best picks for a long time but the only reason any of it is paying off now is because as an organization they are run much better. Sure BJ Upton is a stud, but it was the JP Howell, Edwin Jackson, Andy Sonnanstine, Akinori Iwamura, Grant Balfour, Dioner Navarro, Gabe Gross, take-a-chance-on-Carlos Pena, dump-Elijah Dukes-for-nothing, type of complimentary/unheralded picks and moves that made them AL Champions last year.

 

Also, if you slot the first round in such a way that 20-30 overall picks are getting something like $2-3M in bonuses - because you know the MLBPA would want large bonuses all the way through the first round in exchange for doing away with the later round, high-bonus picks - then you end up hurting teams like the Twins, who rely on their scouting and generally spend cheaply on the draft. And of course the late round, high-bonus players couldn't work anymore.

 

I think if the draft were to be slotted, you'd have to keep international FA the way it is, plus bring back the draft-and-follow system, plus allow for the trading of draft picks (so the #1 team doesn't have to spend $7M on a draft pick if they can't afford it, and can opt to trade down for say a #20, a #27, and a #50 instead). On top of that, you also have to come up with rules about MLB contracts, like either eliminate MLB contracts entirely or make it a rule for the first five or so picks. Because otherwise, if say you wanted to take a high school player within the first few picks but didn't want to give him an MLB contract because you're unsure if he'd be ready in four years, then either you'd be forced to trade down and take him after the MLB contract slots were gone, or select another player. I'd rather eliminate the MLB contracts because it would ensure almost every single top-5 or so pick is a college player, but this would be an issue for the MLBPA as well.

 

And furthermore, you couldn't slot the draft without coming up with a legit FA compensation system. You'd have to know what pick and therefore what amount of money your compensation-eligible player is worth so you could then decide what he's worth to you. For this, I think the Elias system is a great start, but what I would do it take the 30 best FA's according to Elias, put each of their names into a plastic ball, and then hold a lottery. Eliminate the supplemental first round, then have a slotted second round with equal bonuses throughout (say $750K) work solely as a compensation round. You do your lottery, and however it lines up, each departing player nets his former team that pick. You don't charge the signing team with a draft pick and you don't deal in Type A/Type B designations. You make a list of all players, and the top 30 that are offered and deny arbitration and sign with new MLB teams are the ones worth picks. Teams may have several picks in this round or none. I think a system like that would work well also because it would help facilitate more deadline deals as Type A players would be worth a lot less on the open market, being worth only one pick instead of two.

 

That was a long post. But I hope some of it made sense.

I think teams like the Red Sox and Yankees can get away with spending less on scouting and have weaker scouts because of the system now. Its pretty common knowledge who are the top players in the draft. You can determine them fairly cheaply. The Yankees can just wait for them to fall because they won't sign for X amount of $. Another thing I would like to see is the ability to trade draft picks. No matter what, the system now sucks. There is no way signability should be an issue in a draft in the first round, unless its a kid who is deciding between college and starting his pro career. Maybe even make players declare for the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and no, the Yankees/Mets/Red Sox can compensate for a lack of scouting talent (but I don't think that's the case) by the money everyone knows they can throw at a player.

 

However, if you look over the last 2-3 years, the number of organizations signing international players to $500+ signing bonuses has really diversified.

 

With the Internet and video scouting, the playing field has been evened a bit, because the majority of teams are in bidding wars for players instead of being the first one in on the ground floor and hiding that player and signing him b4 anyone else finds out about him. That's just getting more and more difficult in this day and time. Heck, there are blogs out there and video on the Cuban players now, imagine something like that 10-15 years ago...things have changed so dramatically.

 

I agree with the point about those marquee franchise (Mets, Dodgers, Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox, maybe the Angels to a lesser extent now) needing to do well in order to "subsidize" the bottom 10 teams in the league.

 

Then there's the case studies of the A's, Twins and Rays....and even Milwaukee was able to put together a very competitive club, spend money on Sabathia...and make him legit offer to come back. We know it can be done, which should offer some encouragement to fans of smaller market teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having spent time in the Domincan Republic, baseball IS the pasttime of the DR, not just lip service like we see here. Those kids play it all the time with whatever they can get their hands on (broomsticks, rocks, and some trash for bases). Here, we just slap on the playstation and go play.

 

These kids play and play - and then in the secondary schools, they are "discovered" and "taught" how to play, then the circus begins, so to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 12:31 PM)
I think teams like the Red Sox and Yankees can get away with spending less on scouting and have weaker scouts because of the system now. Its pretty common knowledge who are the top players in the draft. You can determine them fairly cheaply. The Yankees can just wait for them to fall because they won't sign for X amount of $. Another thing I would like to see is the ability to trade draft picks. No matter what, the system now sucks. There is no way signability should be an issue in a draft in the first round, unless its a kid who is deciding between college and starting his pro career. Maybe even make players declare for the draft.

I agree with you on determining the best of the international free agents fairly cheaply, but there is still a max amount your middle and small-market teams can spend, and while the same holds true for teams like the Yankees, they - at the expense of a slotted draft that takes away large, late-round and late-draft bonuses - would be able to afford to spend much more internationally than they already do, which is already more than most teams.

 

Agree 100% on trading draft picks. I wish they'd do that already.

 

Making players declare for the draft would be a great change as well.

 

If you slot the draft, make players declare, and come up with set rules for MLB contracts determined by draft position or eliminate MLB contracts altogether, then you will see drafts where teams generally take the best players available throughout the first five rounds plus.

 

And BTW, I really, really love the idea of trading draft picks. Imagine what a team like the Braves for example could do if they were able to trade their late 1st for 2-3 2nds and a 3rd, especially with slot rules. They could end up spending the same on those players as they would spend on one first rounder, but because of their ability identifying players, they could come up with more 1st round talent. I think in such a situation you end up rewarding the teams that do their homework, and they also make MLB trades easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 24, 2009 -> 06:16 PM)
Yes and no, the Yankees/Mets/Red Sox can compensate for a lack of scouting talent (but I don't think that's the case) by the money everyone knows they can throw at a player.

 

However, if you look over the last 2-3 years, the number of organizations signing international players to $500+ signing bonuses has really diversified.

 

With the Internet and video scouting, the playing field has been evened a bit, because the majority of teams are in bidding wars for players instead of being the first one in on the ground floor and hiding that player and signing him b4 anyone else finds out about him. That's just getting more and more difficult in this day and time. Heck, there are blogs out there and video on the Cuban players now, imagine something like that 10-15 years ago...things have changed so dramatically.

 

I agree with the point about those marquee franchise (Mets, Dodgers, Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox, maybe the Angels to a lesser extent now) needing to do well in order to "subsidize" the bottom 10 teams in the league.

 

Then there's the case studies of the A's, Twins and Rays....and even Milwaukee was able to put together a very competitive club, spend money on Sabathia...and make him legit offer to come back. We know it can be done, which should offer some encouragement to fans of smaller market teams.

I agree with all this, but I still don't think the international playing field has really evened out or will even out so long as certain teams have higher budgets. The large market teams can always afford to spend more in any given area, and as we've seen so often in baseball unlike other sports, it is often quantity over quality. For example, we gave Dayan something like $10M I believe. That's great, and I hope he becomes the next Miguel Cabrera, but I'd feel much more confident in our ability to produce at least one superstar had we taken that $10M and signed 30 of the top 60 international prospects for $333K a piece.

 

Obviously that is unrealistic, but the point I'm making is that even though the field has leveled to the extent of large and small market teams both becoming aware of certain players, and even though both types of teams may have the funds to offer large enough bonuses to sign a particular player, the large market teams always have the advantage. The large market teams can afford to spend, spend, spend in multiple areas regardless of whether or not they get their most desired player, whereas small market teams, should they splurge, are forced to make a decision between splurging on one top player or spreading the money around to many of the more under-the-radar players.

 

But anyway, I think the large-market teams always need some advantage as well in order to keep them and baseball itself successful. A slotted draft would be a nice thing to see overall, but it would hurt the large market teams considerably, and you'd have to in return protect their interests through international free agency.

 

I also agree with you about the teams that have had success with lesser budgets. These are the types of small- and middle-market teams baseball should be looking to reward through a slotted draft, not garbage like the Pirates. Because through a slotted draft, teams have the ability to manage the finances of their drafts knowing that they'll be able to get the best player available at any given slot, and they'll know how much the bonus amount would be. Look at the Twins taking Ben Revere when lots of people thought that was a bad or at least strange pick. Imagine what the Twins could have done had they been able to trade down, take Revere later, then pick up a second or third rounder in the process. Even though all teams have knowledge of all the best players, not all scouts are the same, and not all GM's are the same, and a team may easily view a guy projected to go 40-50 as a better bet to be a better player than some of the guys projected to go in the 21-30 range where they pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 01:12 AM)
I agree with all this, but I still don't think the international playing field has really evened out or will even out so long as certain teams have higher budgets. The large market teams can always afford to spend more in any given area, and as we've seen so often in baseball unlike other sports, it is often quantity over quality. For example, we gave Dayan something like $10M I believe. That's great, and I hope he becomes the next Miguel Cabrera, but I'd feel much more confident in our ability to produce at least one superstar had we taken that $10M and signed 30 of the top 60 international prospects for $333K a piece.

 

Obviously that is unrealistic, but the point I'm making is that even though the field has leveled to the extent of large and small market teams both becoming aware of certain players, and even though both types of teams may have the funds to offer large enough bonuses to sign a particular player, the large market teams always have the advantage. The large market teams can afford to spend, spend, spend in multiple areas regardless of whether or not they get their most desired player, whereas small market teams, should they splurge, are forced to make a decision between splurging on one top player or spreading the money around to many of the more under-the-radar players.

 

But anyway, I think the large-market teams always need some advantage as well in order to keep them and baseball itself successful. A slotted draft would be a nice thing to see overall, but it would hurt the large market teams considerably, and you'd have to in return protect their interests through international free agency.

 

I also agree with you about the teams that have had success with lesser budgets. These are the types of small- and middle-market teams baseball should be looking to reward through a slotted draft, not garbage like the Pirates. Because through a slotted draft, teams have the ability to manage the finances of their drafts knowing that they'll be able to get the best player available at any given slot, and they'll know how much the bonus amount would be. Look at the Twins taking Ben Revere when lots of people thought that was a bad or at least strange pick. Imagine what the Twins could have done had they been able to trade down, take Revere later, then pick up a second or third rounder in the process. Even though all teams have knowledge of all the best players, not all scouts are the same, and not all GM's are the same, and a team may easily view a guy projected to go 40-50 as a better bet to be a better player than some of the guys projected to go in the 21-30 range where they pick.

Teams like the Yankees and the Red Sox can continue to throw money at players even if they make several mistakes. Don't think for a minute after Joe Borchard got the highest signing bonus in history for a while, and he didn't pan out, it didn't weigh heavily on the White Sox scouting department. There are probably 20-25 other teams who would be in the same boat. Its probably why guys like Broadway and McCullough were drafted. Ironic how Shaeffer went ultra conservative probably in an effort to save his job, and that thought pattern actually cost him his job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 02:19 PM)
Teams like the Yankees and the Red Sox can continue to throw money at players even if they make several mistakes. Don't think for a minute after Joe Borchard got the highest signing bonus in history for a while, and he didn't pan out, it didn't weigh heavily on the White Sox scouting department. There are probably 20-25 other teams who would be in the same boat. Its probably why guys like Broadway and McCullough were drafted. Ironic how Shaeffer went ultra conservative probably in an effort to save his job, and that thought pattern actually cost him his job.

Exactly.

 

And it definitely shows that Aaron Poreda is the best pitching prospect the Sox have had for quite a while. I wouldn't even consider McCullough a prospect anymore FWIW also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 25, 2009 -> 01:19 PM)
Teams like the Yankees and the Red Sox can continue to throw money at players even if they make several mistakes. Don't think for a minute after Joe Borchard got the highest signing bonus in history for a while, and he didn't pan out, it didn't weigh heavily on the White Sox scouting department. There are probably 20-25 other teams who would be in the same boat. Its probably why guys like Broadway and McCullough were drafted. Ironic how Shaeffer went ultra conservative probably in an effort to save his job, and that thought pattern actually cost him his job.

Yep, and also historically it seems that those teams don't get quite as burned by prospects failing as others simply because those teams use many of their prospects as trade bait. The small and middle-market clubs need to have their guys pan out, which is why you generally don't see those types of teams take Borchard-type players, i.e. extremely raw athletes with lots of potential but need tons of work mechanically to the point where they basically have to re-learn large parts of the game. Usually you see more of the types that still have high ceilings but also higher floors.

 

BTW I've always defended the Borchard pick and I still think it was a great pick. The problem was we didn't trade him and instead decided to bank on him even though we really didn't have to since at the time we had Maggs, CLee, Frank, Paulie, etc. Borchard could have easily been another Jeremy Reed for us who netted us a prime Freddy Garcia.

 

Then again, if you take Matt Thornton's production and current contract, and you add Borchard's $5M signing bonus to it, because of how cheaply Thornton is signed I think we did pretty well overall. Even though it didn't seem like it at the time, Borchard did net us very good value. I'd just have rather gotten a bigtime slugger or a top-end starter with him.

 

Also, I love having some minor league depth, but depending on how we do this year and what is out there on the trading block, I wouldn't mind cashing in some of these riskier prospects we've got like Flowers, Poreda, Shelby, and Allen if a LEGIT superstar becomes available. I'd definitely hold on to Danks and Beckham, but if Roy Halladay or Brandon Webb become available for real, especially if Fields is doing well and Dayan is ready, then let's make a deal because we've got the goods to offer a very competitive package. We don't need to bank on all these guys like we did with Borchard. The issue is just that we have got to sustain depth organizationally - and I'm confident after the last two drafts that we will continue to build in the right direction - and we need to make sure that the "safe" guys we're taking high in the draft are a lot more like Jordan Danks (even though he was taken a bit later) and Aaron Poreda than Lance Broadway and Kyle McCulloch. No team should ever draft a future #4/#5 starter that high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MelissaSeguraSI Melissa Segura

It's official: former White Sox scout Jorge Oquendo pleads guilty in int'l bonus-skimming scheme. He's scheduled for sentencing in March.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-18/w...kback-case.html

 

White Sox Latin America Scout Pleads Guilty in Signing-Bonus Kickback Case

 

By Andrew Harris - Nov 18, 2011 12:33 PM CT

 

A former Chicago White Sox scout has pleaded guilty to mail-fraud, admitting his role in a three-man scheme to take kickbacks from signing bonuses the Major League Baseball team paid to Latin American prospects.

 

Jorge Oquendo Rivera entered his plea today before U.S. District Judge Charles R. Norgle in Chicago. He and the other men, including onetime White Sox player personnel director David Wilder, were indicted a year ago on charges they extracted about $400,000 from the bonuses and from Mexican player contract buyouts.

 

“What is it that you have decided to do?” Norgle asked Oquendo after Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Veatch recited facts the government would attempt to prove if the case went to trial.

 

“Plead guilty, sir,” the Brooklyn-born Oquendo replied.

 

The plot ensnared 23 players December 2004 to February 2008, according to the government. The players’ names haven’t been made public. The White Sox won the World Series in 2005.

 

Wilder in February also pleaded guilty to a mail fraud count, admitting he received a kickback of more than $20,000 from the signing of a player in Brazil. Former scout Victor Mateo pleaded guilty to mail fraud a month later.

 

The crime carries a maximum sentence of up to 20 years imprisonment. Oquendo will be sentenced on March 7. He is free on bail.

 

Oquendo’s lawyer, Luis Rafael Rivera, declined to comment after the sentencing. Asked by Norgle, the attorney said he is not related to his client, with whom he shares part of a surname.

 

Scott Reifert, a spokesman for the White Sox, didn’t immediately reply to a voice-mail message seeking comment.

 

The case is U.S. v. Wilder, 10cr948, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).

 

To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew Harris in Chicago at aharris16@bloomberg.net.

 

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 02:37 PM)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-18/w...kback-case.html

 

The plot ensnared 23 players December 2004 to February 2008, according to the government. The players’ names haven’t been made public. The White Sox won the World Series in 2005.

 

The above is bad writing, in my opinion. It certainly suggests that the plot had something to do with players that helped the White Sox win the World Series in 2005.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Disco72 @ Nov 18, 2011 -> 04:10 PM)
The above is bad writing, in my opinion. It certainly suggests that the plot had something to do with players that helped the White Sox win the World Series in 2005.

 

And it may have in a very round about way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×