Sunday Night Open Thread


Saturday: Hope you enjoyed your Saturday, everyone. Here’s the nightly open thread. The Cardinals and Red Sox play Game Three of the World Series at 8pm ET on FOX (Joe Kelly vs. Jake Peavy) plus all three hockey locals are in action. I’m sure there’s college football on somewhere as well. Talk about anything here. Go nuts.

Sunday: I’m going to take the easy way out a repurpose last night’s thread tonight. The Cardinals and Red Sox are playing Game Three at 8pm ET of FOX (Lance Lynn vs. Clay Buchholz) and the late NFL fame is the Packers and Vikings. That’s pretty much it. Enjoy the evening.

Categories : Open Thread


  1. Joe R says:

    Don Wakamatsu has joined the Royals coaching staff.

  2. Tyler says:

    Anyone every notice that Posada ranks 14th all time in WAR by a catcher? His WAR/G ranks even higher. The Yankees do well on the top-30 list, for catcher-WAR, placing 4 in there, with Howard falling just outside.

    Pretty cool.

    • Lukaszek says:

      He also had four seasons when he got on base at a 40% rate or higher. Pretty good for a catcher. My favorite memory of him is when he thought he struck out, then started walking back to the dugout when someone told him that he only had two strikes. He then proceeded to hit a homerun later in the at-bat

  3. lightSABR says:

    Anybody else ready for the offseason to be over? It’d be one thing if I liked either of the teams in the World Series, but as is… man. I’m bored.

  4. Bob Buttons says:

    I’m really bored so… here’s a continuation of

    Why I see no team that will sign Trout for 12~15 years.

    TB: Can’t afford. Need to spread that 20 mil around, or they’d be like 2001 Texas.
    Bal: Can’t afford. Need to extend some arms, Wieters, Machado, etc.
    NYY: Got crapload of contracts already, and giving 20 mil to a single guy ain’t helpful for the supposed plan 189. Too many holes that needs to be filled.
    Bos: Cherington ain’t a guy I consider willing to hand out 300 mil contracts, not so (relatively) soon after he got rid of a bunch. This is probably the most likely in my opinion.
    Tor: They seem too high on Rasmus and Bautista and their kids. Plus I think they reached their fiscal ceiling already.

    KC: Too many kids waiting to be extended; need to spread money around
    Cle: Bourn and Swisher. They’re kind at their fiscal ceiling too.
    Det: Prince and Miguel, plus Verlander. Don’t they have Hunter too? Either way they got too much contracts for a guy like Dombrowski to go spend 25 mil a year.
    Min: They are bloody cheap. Mauer is going no where and they really need to spread the money around to keep even remotely close to competing.
    CWS: They have a few kids in the OF plus they really need upgrades at other positions first. Maybe if Dunn wasn’t there…

    Houston: I don’t think Trout wants to go there just yet.
    Tex: I think they are plugging a few holes first. Daniels seems like a guy who would say NO when it goes too high.
    Oak: Billy Beane spending 20 mil on one guy?
    Sea: Again, don’t think Trout wants to go there.
    Angels: Total mess thanks to Hamilton and Pujols and Wilson and Weaver. I understand Moreno has big pockets, but I really think they would not commit 100 + mil to a quarter of their 25-man.

    NYM: It’s the Mets.
    Phi: Too many contracts; Still praying that someone will take Howard off them.
    ATL: Uptons and Heyward.
    Mia: Trout must be nuts. Plus, they’d rather extend Giancarlo (if he’s willing) and Jose Fernandez.
    Was: Werth, two Zs, Strasburg, Harper.

    Chicago: Don’t think Theo would sign a guy to 12~15 years so soon after what happened in Boston. Plus they probably need to spread money around if they want the Cubs stop being a laughingstock.
    Pit: Poor team. Next.
    STL: Oscar Taveras, Allen Craig, etc. Basically 25 mil for not so big upgrade. Don’t see them saying yes this time when they said no to Pujols.
    Cin: Extension money can’t be spent. Plus I don’t see them as a big-spending team.
    Mil: Don’t think they got the money.

    Arz: Not enough money, too many OFs. Though Towers do love to stockpile OFs.
    Lad: Crawford, Kemp, Ethier. They are human too ya know.
    Col: Gonzalez and Tulowitzki. Plus they need to attract pitchers that won’t die at Coors Field.
    SDP: Poor team. Next.
    SFG: Not exactly rich team. Need other stuff besides bats.

    • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

      Yankees absolutely could.
      He’d probably even make more sense than signing Cano (especially assuming the 12@$25M mentioned in the previous thread.
      The Cubs would probably jump on that as well.
      I could see the Rangers as well.
      Trout’s only 22. A 12 year deal may not even contain any decline years (or very few).

      Every time a big time free agent hits the market, people give reasons why no team would give them a monster deal.
      Yet every time, that player still gets a mega-deal.

      • Commenter From the Future says:

        Easy for you to say. You weren’t driving that double-decker tour bus.

        What could have been

      • Bob Buttons says:

        I’m working under the assumption that the Yankees stay within logic; and stick to plan 189 (boy that sounds weird in the same sentence). I wouldn’t be surprised that the Yankees sign him in the imagined scenario but my money is on no.
        Cubs, I see them valuing guys like Castro, Cubs’ cuban guy (soler) and Javier Baez more.
        Rangers are a bit of on the fence for me, and as I say, gun to my head I say no.

        Bourn and Lohse are instances where teams have stood pat to their ideas. This newer system have seen rather stern stances from teams.

        • Need Pitching & Hitting says:

          Bourn and Lohse are nowhere near the same caliber as Trout.
          I’m talking about superstars, not just good players on the wrong side of 30.
          Trout at 25M AAV, or even 30M AAV, makes more sense than what they’ll likely give Cano even with the $189M plan.
          Castro and Soler are already signed long-term and likely would have no effect at all on a decision to sign Trout.

          10 WAR players barely exist, much less come on the market at age 22. Teams would scramble to try to find a way to take advantage of that (not that it would ever happen). I’d bet more than just the 3 teams I mentioned would try to find a way to make a 12 year megadeal work if it meant getting the best player in baseball at age 22.

          • RetroRob says:


            Trout is a generational talent. If he became available at age 22 the offers would break all previous contracts. Yet no way do I see a 15-year deal. As noted, I think Trout and his agent would limit it at ten years, but it would be a $300M deal. $30M AAV, and I would want the Yankees to pay it.

          • forensic says:

            I agree. Teams would line up to throw money his way.

            I do think his agent would possibly try to limit the years somewhat (i.e. shorter than 12-15 years) or add-in an opt-out to try to get another enormous contract while still in his prime though.

    • Ethan says:

      Since I started this conversation I figured I’d add in to the discussion.

      I think Trout would want to take a 9 or 10 year contract over a 12 year one. If at the end he’s right around 30-31 and presumably just at the peak of his career. If so, he could be in line for ANOTHER 8-10 year contract. Of course, it’s a little riskier but really what’s the difference between 250 million and 300 million? Isn’t that’s why Arod’s contract was set up like that by Boras back when he signed with Texas?

      Also, I definitely think there are a number of teams that could afford 10 year, 300MM. Yankees, Boston, Toronto,Cubs, White Sox?, Dodgers, Giants, Mets.

      I’m not saying all of those teams would be in on Trout, but I think all could afford to take on a contract like that one.

    • JGYank says:

      15 wouldn’t happen but 12 years for Trout isn’t as crazy as it sounds. He would be entering his mid thirties by the end of the deal so you would have him through his prime. I would give him ten years, but wouldn’t be too comfortable going over that incase he faces chronic injuries (his style of play could cost him later on and take a toll on his body) or if he somehow falls off a cliff production wise or declines early and quickly. Just to be safe. But I’m sure someone else would give him that especially in the midst of a bidding war with a lot of money available and nothing else good to spend it on. More players like Trout are getting locked up so less talent is going to hit the market and you have to capitalize when they do. More teams are getting huge TV deals as well.
      In terms of AAV, I simply don’t think players should be getting $30M a year but Trout might be a very rare exception. I would sign him to a $290M/10 year deal and maybe throw in another year if there were still other teams in the mix for him. But going above that is a huge risk and a ton of pressure to live up to. The more years I give him the less the AAV to compensate. I would be more flexible with the amount of years than the AAV with a young player like him.

      I’m sure any team would make a run at him unless they are unable to afford it (TB, Oak) or their ownership wasn’t comfortable handing out that type of contract. Good chance they would make an exception for him though. The bidding war would be crazy for a player like that with most teams going after him.

      • Ethan says:

        I think Trout would probably want a 10 year contract because he’d be coming out of the contract at 31 and in line potentially for another massive contract. Coming out of a contract at 33 (after having probably been declining for 2 years) he would probably get a 4 year contract.

        • JGYank says:

          I think he would get more than 4 years if he was still a similar player. With less money because of his age but probably more than 4 years for a 33 year old superstar.
          But teams would go 10 and maybe even more years for him. If he wants less years even better for them. I would want two huge contracts instead of one as well. I could see him limiting the number to 10 years or even slightly lower. Also players might be making more money in ten years than they do now so that’s another reason to limit the amount of years.

    • Gonzo says:

      This is kinda funny, but teams will break the rules to sign a generational talent at age 22. Seems silly that you have to go through mental gymnastics – that contains plenty of assumptions – to come up with reasons why a team wouldn’t offer a 12 year deal. It’s as if teams would balk at overpaying for his age 32 & 33 seasons after grossly overpaying for other players’ age 35+ seasons.

      Whether he would accept it is something else altogether. Think of it this way, would you be OK with a 10 year contract at age 24 for Trout? That depends on what you think the odds of him lowering his value tremendously over the next 2 years. Considering he’s a generational talent, I bet there is at least one GM willing to make that bet and probably more than one.

      Maybe you undervalue Trout in which case you are letting your biases interfere with a logical assessment. If you think I’m letting my biases color my judgement, I’m simply reading what every baseball writer has written about what FO’s say about Trout. He’s a generational talent and the best player in baseball for two years in a row at his age 21 and 22 seasons. the rules fly out the window for that talent. You’re treating him like he’s Cano. He’s better and much younger than Cano. You’ve got to go back to players like Mickey Mantle to compare to Trout.

    • I'm a looser baby so why don't you kill me? says:

      Boston won’t bc he’s not old enough to grow a beard.

  5. nycsportzfan says:

    Wow, Peavy getting smashed yet again. Dude sucks..lol

  6. RetroRob says:

    I jumped into that, but earlier today. I can totally see a team signing him to a ten-year deal if he was a free agent now at 21. 15 years? No.

    And most importantly, as I noted below, Trout and his agent would limit the length of the deal to around a decade.


  7. nycsportzfan says:

    The only out Peavy has recorded was on a sacrifice bunt by Beltran. Don’t ask me why u would bunt against peavy. The guys total garbage. I love watching him get lambasted!!!lol

    • RetroRob says:

      Hopefully he continues to pitch horribly the next inning. I have no problem rooting for any team playing the Red Sox. Go Cardinals.

  8. Ethan says:

    Here’s a couple of other interesting questions to ask:

    If all players were free agents this year, who are the 5 players would you most want to sign? I assume most would want Trout, so suppose he’s the only one not available.

    I think my top 5 would be: Machado, Kershaw, Posey, McCutchen, King Felix.

    Of course, I’m sure i’m forgetting someone obvious.

    • forensic says:

      Even at his comparably advanced age, I’d absolutely have to take Miguel Cabrera in that group over Machado.

      • Pinkie Pie says:

        Miguel Cabrera is actually younger than Robinson Cano.

      • Ethan says:

        I was thinking you’d have to sign them to what you’d expect to the player to get (not just for next year). I’m not sure I’d take Cabrera over Machado if you have to sign him for 8-10 years whereas a Machado contract would probably be 4-6 years.

      • JGYank says:

        Agree. Machado just hasn’t broken out offensively yet. Cabrera can mash and is in his prime. In a couple years things might different though.

    • RetroRob says:

      I’d want Harper based on his age and ability. If we’re removing Trout from the equation, the other four after Harper are Machado, Posey, McCutchen and Kershaw. King Felix’s velo is dropping and has a lot of wear and tear, so my concern is he’ll drop from elite soon. I’d want him, but if I had to drop someone he’d be it.

      • Nuke Guy (Knoxvillain) says:

        I was a huge Harper fan and still am, but I just couldn’t take him. He just gives me that feeling that he is going to be the type of player who is always going to be running into walls and will only play 110 games a year sadly.

    • JGYank says:

      Kershaw, Cabrera, McCutchen, Jose Fernandez, Posey.
      Would also consider Puig, Davis, Buccholz, Machado, Molina, Darvish, Scherzer, Votto, Stanton, Cano, Goldschmidt, Strasburg, Felix Hernandez, Tulowitski, Cargo, and Harper. Harvey as well if he never got injured. Those guys would be picked the most I think.

    • Nuke Guy (Knoxvillain) says:

      I think mine would be:

      1. Mike Trout
      2. Miguel Cabrera
      3. Clayton Kershaw
      4. Felix Hernandez
      5. Craig Kimbrel

      Gotta have a good closer.

      • nycsportzfan says:

        1). Mike Trout
        2). Clayton Kershaw- Best pitcher in baseball
        3). Miguel Cabrera
        4). Andrew McCuthen- Speed, power, hitting,defense. Does it all
        5). Max Scherzer

  9. Mick taylor says:

    Sick of umpires saving red sox asses kotma called out on pitch a foot off the plate.

    • Reuben Sierra's Chains says:

      Saved them huh?? God you’re an IDIOT

    • Reuben Sierra's Chains says:

      Hopefully you can STOP with your damn umpire conspiracy bullshit now.

      • Mick taylor says:

        Sorry to burst your bubble do knead red sox fan reuby Tuesday , but umps had no choice but to call interference. Do not worry sweetie, umps will help out the sox the rest of series .

        • Reuben Sierra's Chains says:

          What the Fuck are you talking about? Take your tin foil hat off, your brain is obviously fried. I’m done wasting my time with someone who can’t even create an actual sentence.

          Oh and that thing in your backyard is just the neighbor kid’s Frisbee and not actually a UFO you weirdo. Get a damn grip!

          • Mick taylor says:

            Sweetie umpires had tomake that call ,you dickhead red sucks fan. how is that spelling. The series is young kitten . umps will still screw cards if they can particularly after last nite.

  10. nycsportzfan says:

    Please don’t come to NY Stephen Drew! That guy can’t for snot! Why would you want that guy Mike? The guys is automatic out!

  11. The Thumb says:

    This is really random question but does any one know the name of the awesome, action movie-esque song that sometimes plays when innings transition on Fox?

  12. Wheels says:

    Big chance here for the Cards.

  13. nycsportzfan says:

    First Buckner, now Breslow..lol Well known redsox baby!!!lol

  14. Steinbrenner's Ghost says:

    McCarver is insufferable

  15. nycsportzfan says:

    I love it! Sox going down 2games to 1 baby!!! 2013 is the yr of the Cardnials!

  16. Steinbrenner's Ghost says:

    Anyone notice how Buck and McCarver have gone silent after running their mouths all game.

  17. TheRealGreg says:

    Cards are asking for it

  18. TheRealGreg says:

    So Boegarts has played a big role in this postseason. All about the farm system

  19. Ethan says:

    The BABIP of this red sox team in the playoffs must be some ridiculous number

  20. Pete says:

    Get it done here, Cards. All the dangerous pests coming up for Boston again in the 10th.

  21. Need Pitching & Hitting says:

    Wow. Just wow.

  22. forensic says:

    Wow, that sounded that a pretty crazy ending on the radio.

  23. Need Pitching & Hitting says:

    Correct call.

  24. Mickey Scheister says:

    LOLsox. The right call was made, I’m sure ESPN will castrate the umps for ending the game on such a call on their Red Sox.

    • forensic says:

      Well, for the ESPN Radio guys, Hershiser seems to be kind of on the fence about the call but Shulman is definitely in the camp of it being the correct call and even went through reading the entire rulebook definition to prove it was.

  25. Wheels says:

    good call.

  26. nycsportzfan says:

    Sox bumbling away the world series. I love it! Middlebrooks is terrible. Also, why would u make that throw to 3rd anyways??lol The redsox lost 2games by errant throws to 3rd base basically. I would never of made that throw after seeing what happened just a game before.

  27. Steinbrenner's Ghost says:

    Move over Buckner, here comes Middlebrooks.

  28. forensic says:

    They just interviewed Holliday and he said he didn’t see much of the last play and couldn’t comment on it because he was down below in the clubhouse because he was ‘too nervous’.

    Geez, suck it up and get in the damn dugout with your teammates. I just lost some respect for him.

  29. Tom says:

    Farrell letting Workman hit in the 9th… WTF?
    Farrell bringing in Uehara the next inning…. confirms the WTF?
    Farrell pitching to Jay with hard hitting Pete Kozma on deck… wait is Ron Washington managing the Red Sox? (and it somehow could have worked)

    Workman getting the loss… fitting.

    Red Sox losing on yet another bad throw from the homeplate area to 3rd base… nice symmetry

    Tim M and Buck asking about whether they should have pinchrun for Craig, when the only run that mattered was Molina on 3rd… that’s the tremendous Fox coverage.

  30. The Thumb says:

    If anyone is in the mood for a late night laugh, check out overthemonster right now. Butthurt Red Sox fans everywhere, such a delight to see.

    • Pat D says:

      A few people were actually aware it was correct, but, yea, after about 50 of the same comments, I had to tear myself away.

  31. Get Phelps Up says:

    All those butthurt ESPN and MLBN analysts saying that wasn’t obstruction.

    • forensic says:

      The guys on Sportscenter on the radio, including Schilling and Boone, are saying they got the call right. Not sure if they’re on ESPN TV too or what the MLBN guys are saying.

      • Get Phelps Up says:

        Several MLBN guys kept saying it shouldn’t be called because it was unintentional. ESPN actually just had an interview with Torre who said it was the right call so for once, good for them.

        • Gonzo says:

          Of all the people I follow on twitter that weighed in on it, Keith Law is the only one that said it wasn’t obstruction. I don’t follow many ESPN guys though. Even Tom Tango is defending the obstruction call.

  32. TheRealGreg says:

    And boston fans have another reason to hate rule books this week along with the push rule

    • Steinbrenner's Ghost says:

      Thing is they wouldn’t have won their first Super Bowl without the tuck rule. they’ve got no right to complain.

    • AndrewYF says:

      It’s always like this with Sox fans. Their team never actually does anything wrong, if only the universe was built properly, the Sox would never lose. It’s hilarious that since that play was called 100% correctly, clearly the game ITSELF is at fault for causing the Sox to lose. If only baseball were different, the beloved Red Sox would have won.

      Well congratulations, Sox fans. Your team wins the imaginary World Series every year. We’ll just continue along in what is commonly known as reality.

  33. TheRealGreg says:

    The key to this whole thing is that intent does not matter

  34. forensic says:

    Farrell sort of questioning the call by saying he’s not sure Middlebrooks moved his leg, thereby intentionally interfering with him.

    Too bad it doesn’t matter if it’s intentional or not. Maybe he should re-read that rulebook.

    • Tom says:

      Farrell should just be glad that this craziness (which shouldn’t be craziness at all – it was an easy and obvious call) will cover up some really piss poor managing in both the top and bottom of the 9th inning.

  35. Ethan says:

    That was such an awesome way for the game to end. Red sox finally get a taste of their own medicine. Not lucky for once this postseason.

  36. WhittakerWalt says:

    Why isn’t anyone killing Salty for making such a stupid throw in the first place?

  37. Steinbrenner's Ghost says:

    MLBN guys say Bucholtz looked terrible today, and they’ll have to rely on Dempster to come in early tomorrow.

  38. Gonzo says:

    Jen Royle tweeted that Napoli was in the shower with a bat in his hands.

  39. Steinbrenner's Ghost says:

    Ortiz and Peavy are both complaining that they got a bad deal.

    Strange, not like Boston to cry about the umpiring.

  40. Improbable Island's Dirty Midget Whores (formerly RRR) says:

    Oh man, this is fantastic. Reading OTM was a blast, highly recommended.

    • forensic says:

      Just decided to skim through the recap thread at this point. I like the closing by the author:

      But at least for my two cents, if Will Middlebrooks isn’t sprawled on the ground, then Craig scores easily, so we’re kind of fishing for undeserved gifts here if we go complaining about the call. And if Jarrod Saltalamacchia doesn’t make that same damn throw that just lost Game 2, then we’re never in the situation to lose on that call in the first place.

      Good to see he knows what really happened.

      Skimmed through the comments and came across this one, which also happened to be from the same author of the post:

      I’m completely done with Salty now.

      Give me a defensive catcher who barely clears the Mendoza line and can bunt. I’ll live with it.

      Time to tender Chris Stewart a contract, I think we just found a trade partner!

      • forensic says:

        After reading some more, I can now say I’m an unabashed Ben Buchanan fan, despite knowing nothing more about him other than that his name is Ben Buchanan and I assume he’s a Red Sox fan. He, and a few others, was doing his damnedest to explain this whole thing to people over and over, despite them just not wanting to hear or believe it.

        I also particularly liked the part later in the thread where the strike zone was compared to Iceland.

  41. Mick taylor says:

    Ha ha payback for calling arod out at 1st base in 2004 for interference, which probably gave six their series. And the call last nite was the right call. Ump had no choice but to call interference on middlebrooks. It was not a bad call.

    • ArchStanton says:

      Well, the A-Rod call was correct, too. Umps were right in both situations. That said, I don’t quite get why the runner at first had to go back to first in game 6–I believe that’s how it went down, trying to block that series out as much as possible!

  42. Mick taylor says:

    Actually the umpires in that game did something they had never done before in baseball playoff history, they reversed 2 calls the foul ball which was changed to a home run and the arod call. In the arod call, the run scored and it was4-3 sox with a rod on second base . It is irrelevant whether they were the right calls since up to that game umps never reversed calls. Yanks probably wiN series if Joe Yankee hater west does not change 100 years of baseball precedent. Cards are lucky fat fuck west ain’t umping.

  43. Bob Buttons says:

    Giants win! Though certainly an up and down day for ST.

  44. Betty Lizard says:

    Just east of Moorefield, Nebraska (population 52) stopped for half an hour for highway paving (they had to wait for another car driving my direction, as it seems they won’t escort just one car) I’m happy to report that I could access RAB. And now, baseball! On TV! (Haven’t seen a game on a network since 2011.) I am lucky. I just hope something happens tonight to make Boston cry like the whiney-assed titty babies that they are.

  45. Mick taylor says:

    Tim and buck of course are beginning the game by mouthing off how the obstruction rule needs to be changed. Sure, because the rule went against red sux it needs to be changed after being in the game for100 years. If it had been the yanks, they would be saying the umpire courageously and correctly called the play right.

  46. forensic says:

    Did Erin Andrews really just say that if Buchholz isn’t comfortable then he’ll slow down on the mound?

    Is it really possible for him to pitch slower than he normally does???

  47. pat says:

    Buchholz look like a total meth head.

  48. WhittakerWalt says:

    Ugh, pitcher at-bats.
    Oh, wait. We got to see plenty of those this past season, what with the Alberto Gonzaleses and Ben Franciscos.

  49. Wheels says:

    Nice bullsnort, Bucholtz. Disgusting

  50. CashmanNinja says:

    So Tanaka dominated his start today. He’s won 31 consecutive decisions. 12 K complete game. In a pressure game (Game 2 of the Japan Series) in front of tons of scouts. I’ll say it now — I don’t care what the cost of the posting fee is. I don’t care if they spend $110 mil since that money won’t count against the payroll. We simply cannot miss this guy even if that means we have to blow other teams out of the water the way the Sox did with Matsuzaka.

  51. Dan says:

    Let’s talk about something serious: Does Clay Buchholz have AIDS?

  52. forensic says:

    And Matheny’s arguably slow hook costs the Cardinals again…


  53. Captain Turbo says:

    Question: if I said the Cardinals need to start playing with some balls, would that be considered sexist?

  54. forensic says:

    Wow, talk about TOOTBLAN!

  55. Need Pitching & Hitting says:

    That was brilliant.

  56. WhittakerWalt says:

    Shades of Charles Gipson.

  57. Improbable Island's Dirty Midget Whores (formerly RRR) says:

    So the end of that Cards game was a thing. A man got picked off with Carlos Beltran at the plate as the tying run.

    I’m speechless.

  58. Justin says:


    Red sox rank #1 farm system in baseball. Yankees were rank #16

    • Destiny99 says:

      To clarify, that’s ranking farm systems based on prospects who are closest to the majors and prospects listed (like Puig) who broke into the bigs already. Kind of a weird list.

    • Jim Is A (Bored) Peckerhead says:

      Wait, 16? You mean everyone who has constantly said our system is average(not worse, and not better) isn’t a polyanna? We’re not 30th?

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.