Krejci

 

Hey gang, sorry for the lack of Cage Match articles the past couple of weeks. Unfortunately duty calls and I was called away to fight some cage matches of my own taking on formidable opponents such as forest fires, Yogi Bear, and fantasy hockey withdrawal. It was arduous (particularly the latter) but I survived and now that I’ve had my first bear encounter I feel comfortable bringing you this week’s Cage Match – Krejci vs. Bergeron. That’s right, it’s a bear fight!

 

 

The Bruins are competing in the Stanley Cup Final this season thanks in large part to the work of their GM: Peter Chiarelli. Two players he cannot take credit for however are David Krejci and Patrice Bergeron who were second round gems taken by the Bruins in back-to-back years prior to the Lockout. It may not have been the plan when they were selected but Bergeron (’03) and Krejci (’04) are now Boston’s formidable but not overwhelming one-two punch up the middle.

 

I say they aren’t overwhelming because while both are very good, and have potential, I would not consider either one a star right now. They have each shown flashes but to date they both appear to be tremendous second line centermen who can fill in on the top line in a pinch. At present moment Krejci is filling that role and I think that along with his chemistry with Horton and Lucic would have many people thinking Krejci will take this fight paws down.

 

I think it is much closer. Krejci may be the top-line centerman but he has few advantages beyond linemates. Krejci averaged only a minute of ice time more than Bergeron per game (18:51 vs. 17:53), and both saw the same average powerplay time per game this season. The Bruins spread things out and score by committee so first line vs. second line is not the end of the world.

 

Third line may become an issue though. This is because Tyler Seguin is gaining experience and is the Bruins long term plan for the top line center ice position. This has poolies wondering about who will be relegated to third line duties if/when Seguin takes the next step. The easy conclusion is Bergeron. He’s no stranger to the third line and his two-way play and faceoff acumen acquit him very well to the position but not so fast. Seguin may be years away from taking ice time away from either Bergeron or Krejci and he may even get moved to the wing more permanently.

 

Cap concerns are also an issue regarding the Seguin situation. Krejci has only one year left on his contract and will likely demand a raise. Bergeron has three seasons remaining at a near $ 5 million cap hit. Seguin has just two years left on his entry level deal. Assuming he doesn’t pull a Stamkos and skyrocket in his sophomore season, it seems more likely that cap issues will force Boston’s hand, regarding this trio, by the time Seguin is ready to knock one of them down the depth charts anyhow. Don’t count out Seguin making a move to the wing either.

 

The final knock on Bergeron here is that he is a Band-Aid Boy. With his concussion issues the saying always goes that “He is one hit away from being done,” but let’s get real for a second here. Isn’t every player one hit away these days? Crosby got knocked out buy a relatively innocuous hit and now people are talking like he could retire. While you cannot completely write off injury history the whole one hit away argument doesn’t fly, especially not when one considers that Krejci has also had a concussion.

 

Personally, I think the big issue with concussions is whether or not the player can return to the same level of play and not become damaged or timid. After a couple of symptom free seasons Bergeron is back. He may still be suffering in fantasy circles because of the Band-Aid Boy stigma but in the context of this match it is irrelevant. Bergeron may not be the 70-plus dynamo he once was but the production is solid and the upside is there.

 

Now that we have debunked any theories to the contrary we can now consider this bear fight to be on level ground. It is not like we have a Kung Fu Panda on our hands or something ridiculous like that; we have just got a couple of Bruins trying to assert dominance. With that in mind let us allow the numbers do the talking.

 

Over the past two seasons the numbers for both Krejci and Bergeron have been fantastically similar.

 

GP

Goals

Assists

Plus/Minus

PIM

PPP

SOG

Krejci

77

15

42

Plus-15.5

27

13

156.5

Bergeron

76.5

20.5

34

Plus-13

27

9.5

197.5

 

The only major advantage anyone has is Bergeron’s hold on SOG. It is the classic playmaker vs. shooter match up and as is most often the case the shooter wins. As a shooter, Bergeron has a small advantage in Goals that is countered by Krejci’s Assists. Plus/Minus is not only a minefield to navigate in general but is made even more difficult based on how close they have been. PIM is dead even, which is hilarious to me for some odd reason. Krejci does hold a slight advantage in PPP. It has nothing to do with minutes though so I am less inclined to see it as something major. That leaves us with SOG to decide things.

 

On the whole, 40 SOG per season is a pretty big advantage. That is 25% more production than Krejci each and every year and it is a wide enough margin to be consistent year after year. I cannot stress enough how much I prefer shooters to passers. It is easy to get hung up on point production but Points is not even a category. Krejci looks better when considering points only but give me Bergeron’s SOG advantage every time.

 

Upside is also definitely a factor in every Cage Match even those which are ursine in nature. As such it is important to look back at the career seasons that both Krejci and Bergeron coincidentally posted in their respective sophomore seasons.

 

GP

Goals

Assists

Plus/Minus

PIM

PPP

SOG

Krejci 2008-09

82

22

51

Plus-37

26

19

146

Bergeron 2005-06

81

31

42

Plus-3

22

29

310

 

Here again we see the classic playmaker vs. shooter battle and while it’s more complicated the shooter still wins.

 

Bergeron’s Goals advantage wipes out Krejci’s Assists advantage once again. This time however we see that Krejci is capable of much higher Plus/Minus totals. Conversely we see that Bergeron is capable of some truly outstanding production on the powerplay. PIM are a wash yet again leaving us tied going into SOG. Bergeron is in fact capable of putting up numbers that double Krejci’s in this category. He blows him out of the water. Bergeron is clearly asserting his dominance and comes with his ability to fling pucks at the net.

 

I understand if there is some trepidation over my decision. After all, it has been four long years since Bergeron reached anything resembling his upside. For Krejci it was only two years ago, yet both have sustained concussions since then and both have been slowed by injuries in general. I like both but since I do not fully trust the health of either player I am looking at the one tangible advantage I can find and that is Bergeron’s SOG numbers. He will consistently give you that advantage every time. So if you still disagree I’m unleashing the bears on you.

 

That’s right, everybody panic! There’s a bear loose in the coliseum! There will be no refunds. Your refund will be escaping this death trap with your life!

 

 


Write comment
Comments (15)add comment

Jeff said:

number54
Apologies to Steve RE: +/- Sorry Steve,

It was actually Pengwin7 who made a ratio of +/- scores when he was trying to equate Krejci's peripherals (PPP & +/-) with Bergeron's SOG advantage. All I intended to say is that there are statistical/scientific reasons why different statistics may not be comparable, so your countering of his argument using 'margins' was unnecessary. I should have been more clear about that.

I certainly never meant to say that you were wrong bout +/- being a minefield, but debating statistical categories becomes futile when one version is invalid. In fact, PPP are also statistically unsound variables, but I chose not to discuss them. That explanation concerns Poissant & Gaussian distributed variables, and I didn't think I could explain those in layman's terms.

Personally, I liked this cage match; I'd pick whichever one plays 1st line C next year, but I wouldn't pick the one playing 2nd line (even if they're really 1A & 1B in BOS). When coaches evaluate their players, they don't guess at future upside. They look at who's been the the better player for longer. Thanks for the sound comparison.
June 13, 2011
Votes: +0

steve laidlaw said:

metaldude26
... Pengwin7 my main issue, and this was pointed out by others, is tact. To me making an accusation as though you know it vs. as you are thinking it is a huge distinction. The latter is a lot less offensive.

Regarding the 300 SOG. I state explicitly that it`s upside so I don`t think I have to elaborate on all the things that would have to change as any number of things could change to make things more optimal for Bergeron and likewise for Krejci. Coaching change or a trade of Krejci would work but other things would also. The point of demonstrating the upside is to cover those thinking about the long term future and not about the next couple seasons where I`m not predicting change.

I also took issue with your continual statements that things are going too far back. You think it`s not valuable but I do. We`ve reached an impass regarding this.

Regarding the SOG difference I countered your points about the other categories and stressed the fact I`d pointed out margins originally and elaborated. Probably simply a confusion over wording though.

Regarding linemates. Bergeron played with a mess of different linemates this season. He may have played the most with Recchi and Marchand but I don`t think it was predominantly that trio so I chose not to point them out. I did however mention Lucic and Horton and that Krejci had the better linemates. You tossed out the blanket title `Linemates` so I took it to mean you thought it hadnt been covered at all when it had.

Regarding PPP. I never disagreed with this or the fact new information was included.

As far as your mathematical model is concerned, I`d have to see how you did that specific scoring to take it as gospel. I`d also point out that Krejci`s scoring would barely be higher IF he played the 80 games.

Overall, there was fingerpointing and disagreements but I don`t think it was juvenille. It`s tough to convey tone or intent over the internet so misunderstandings happen. I invite your comments in the future but I really want you to see where I`m coming from with stuff like my inclusion of past numbers.

All-In, a few general points. Yes your example is an exaggeration but you`ll note that with all my match ups I`ve done them with similarly aged players. When necessary (young players who haven`t broken out) I`ve made some general projections or indicated that there will be an upward trend. Often though, these players are in their primes (such as this week`s) so are projections necessary when I`m talking about there current production staying the same without any drastic lineup changes?

I do discuss situations regarding players when necessary but as I pointed out, this week I saw little reason to. Krejci has better linemates but that did him no good. That was part of the point of the article.

Yes I do watch games but with regards to Krejci/Bergeron I have no bias or favourite. As far as upside goes, I literally pointed out upside and the fact I think Bergeron has more and I think I always mention this in my articles. I definitely could/should have pointed out who has the better chance of getting there but I did mention I don't like the health of either one so really that's a coin toss IMO. So yeah, I feel like I am giving my opinions but as mentioned in another post perhaps that's comething I need to be more clear on.

Jeff, I still think margins are a factor. With both +/- and PPP it takes a couple of bounces to alter the winner of the category. With SOG it's a much more dependable number to track. I'd also like to point out that my critique of size was only to do with PPP and not +/-, although it does to a lesser extent coincide.

So I do agree with your analysis and I thank you for it as it was extensive. In the article I call +/- a minefield and that was meant to convey my frustration with the category, and also to generally explain what you broke down so superbly.
June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

Jeff said:

number54
Correction... wherever I wrote Ordinal, I mean INTERVAL "In fact +/- is not even an ordinal unit of measure, which would allow for comparisons of the form A = B + x."
June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

Jeff said:

number54
Steve's right that a % increase in +/- is meaningless, but he's wrong about WHY. I would have to agree with Steve that the SOG difference is likely more significant than the +/- difference between Krejci & Bergeron. However, it wouldn't be for the same reason that Steve gives. The real difference (in terms of statistical/scientific measurement scales) isn't the absolute magnitude of the number, but how it's arrived at. Time for a quick lesson in measurement & statistics...

On one hand, SOG is simply the additive aggregate of all shots on goal, and constitutes ratio scale unit of measurement. Ratio scales have a MEANINGFUL zero point denoting the absence of the measured event (i.e. 0 SOG indicates the absence of ANY shots on goal). As well, RATIOS (comparisons of the form A/B, where A and B are measurements on the same scale) exist only in ratio scales of measurement, obviously.

On the other hand, +/- is NOT an additive aggregate (different events are added and subtracted), and does NOT constitute a ratio scale unit of measurement. Remember from ratio scales that they must have a meaningful zero point. +/- records two events simultaneously (on the ice during goal for AND on the ice during a goal against), and therefore fails to have a meaningful zero point (a +/- of 0 might indicate +12 and -12, +5 & -5 or 0 & 0). A +/- of 0 does not necessarily indicate the absence of EITHER of the events it measures.

In fact +/- is not even an ordinal unit of measure, which would allow for comparisons of the form A = B + x. That last bit just means "A is x units more than B". The best example of such scales is temperature. A temperature of zero degrees just means its chilly outside; it doesn't mean there is a total absence of temperature (that's actually at -273 degrees celcius). That's also why you never hear the weatherman say "it's twice as hot out today as it was yesterday"; ratios do not exist on non-ratio scales of measurement. Instead, the weatherman could say "it's X degrees hotter today than it was yesterday", where A = today, B = yesterday (A = B + x).

To understand why +/- doesn't fit ordinal scales either, think about how you would phrase "A is x units more than B" in terms of +/-. If one player has a +12 and the other a 0, we cannot say how many more +'s or -'s one player has than the other. We can ONLY say that +12 is 'better' than 0. Now consider two players who have a +/- of 0; player A is +12/-12, while player B is +0/-0. Personally, I'd rather have the +12/-12 player on my hockey team, even though his +/- is IDENTICAL to his counerpart's.

As to the "size of the numbers" argument, it's not false, but it's out of context here. +/- typically has smaller values than SOG, but that's because of the way it's measured. If we counted only +'s, the values would probably (although not certainly) be much larger. I hope it's clear that the value of a +/- score does not reflect the sample size from which is it drawn.

The same thing applies to ANY other statistic. Think of goals per game, for instance. Players A & B have 2 & 1 goals per game respectively. Player B DOES have 200% of player B's goals per game. What DOES matter is the number of games over which this statistic was recorded. If I told you that these measures were taken over a span of 5 games, you'd be less inclined to believe that they represent the palyer's ability than if I told you they were taken over 82 games. The +/- measures you have are all recorded over samples of 80+ games, so don't confuse the magnitude of the statistic with the size of the sample.

In sum, the right way to deal with +/- scores is to break them down into two different categories: +'s and -'s. Each of these statistics, separately, is a ratio unit of measurement. The practical way to do it is to ignore it completely because it's a fairly meaningless statistic. Considering only one or the other, ratios comparing Krejci and Lucic would be appropriate. Looking at +/- is equivalent to computing SOG by adding all shots on goal and subtracting all shots that missed the goal. It's wrong and it shouldn't be done.

Sorry if this post seems obtuse and self-righteous, but I promise it's accurate! More respect to Dobber for hating +/-.
June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

All-in said:

All-in
Pengwin vs Writer Steve, if you give me permission, I would say that Pengwin is right… but has some difficulties to explain it with tact.

I also feel like your articles are too often based on the past of the players and not enough about future. Stats are fun but don’t mean everything.
Pengwin is right about saying that you should have talk about linemates and coaching staff. You didn’t talk about Savard because you think he will retire… why not having tell it? That would have been a plus to your article.

We need some kind of projections here. We want to know wich one is going to be the best player during the following years… not the past years. Following your kind of article based almost only on past stats, I’m pretty sure that a match between Recchi and Seguin would have concluded to pick Seguin for next year smilies/wink.gif
Of course I exaggerate, but I hope you understand what I mean. I don’t want to be mean, you’re doing a good job to compare stats, but we need more meat around the environment of players.

Also, do you watch games and players? I mean, do you have a favourite before your match-up? Do you think Krejci or Bergeron has more upside? Wich one has already reach his ceiling?
We want writers to give their opinions and not only to compile stats… and I’m sure you're able to do so.
June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

Pengwin7 said:

Pengwin7
... Our very own cage match! LOL! smilies/cheesy.gif

Match 1:
My assumption wording: "It is almost like you have decided in advance..."
Your assumption wording: "I kind of feel like you must skim these articles..."

You are now saying that my accusation is much worse (and different) than yours because you chose the word "feel". Oh come on now.... really...

Match 2:
"....however you pointed out a lot of stuff that was covered in the article and that's frustrating to me".
Yes - and I've already mentioned that a counter-point is made by referencing something that was initially stated.

I presented a LOT of information that you did NOT.
You are sweeping all of my points under the rug because I "pointed out a lot of stuff that was covered in the article and that's frustrating".

Point 1: I mention the effect of Julien. (Krejci wasn't even playing for Boston when Bergeron had his 300 SOG seasons.)
NEW INFORMATION: You did not mention Julien in your article. (And I'm not even sure you should go back this far considering how much Boston has been re-tooled since then)

Point 2: SOG difference. You say the SOG difference is a "pretty big advantage". I say the advantage can be balanced out by other statistics.
NEW POINT: You decided not to consider that two minor category differences (+/-, PPP) could offset that one visible category difference.

Point 3: Linemates. Where can I find the names Recchi & Marchand in your article?
NEW INFORMATION: Recchi could very well retire. Marchand played this season out-of-his-mind to prove himself and had a high shooting percentage. Your article does not mention Recchi or Marchand... and should have.

Point 4: Bergeron's spot on the PPP.
Your focal sentence "Krejci does hold a slight advantage in PPP. It has nothing to do with minutes though so I am less inclined to see it as something major."
NEW INFORMATION: I focus on the fact that Krejci's line + Chara will likely be PP1 and that Bergeron could be on PP2. You mention nothing about which unit each player plays on except to say: "It has nothing to do with minutes though so I am less inclined to see it as something major." I disagree. Often PP1 will play the first minute and PP2 will play the second minute. I'd still rather have the player on PP1... especially if it is likely that Chara will be on that PP.

I did a mathematical model of a 6-cat league based on this year's statistics.
FINAL SCORE
Bergeron 4.65 (in 80games)
Krejci 4.62 (in 75games)

Take those for what they are worth... in a full-82 game season, Krejci would have scored higher. I think he is the better bet for next year.


Overall - we've just clogged up your comment boards with all kind of finger-pointing and counter-accusations. Sort of a juvenile shouting match from both of us. I apologize. I give mods permission to withdraw all of my comments. I will try to refrain from commenting on future articles... I don't think it is in the best interest of your work.

Sorry, man.

June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

steve laidlaw said:

metaldude26
... Pengwin7, take a look at how you word your assumption versus mine. Yours is a statement and mine is a feeling. I'm fully aware of the hypocrisy behind calling someone out for assumptions and then making my own BUT mine is based on feeling where as you stated yours as if it were fact. For me that's where the line is.

Now I can take criticism and I think you've seen that in the past, however you pointed out a lot of stuff that was covered in the article and that's frustrating to me. Obviously it tells me to be more clear and concise in my writing if things are being missed so ultimately there is value but it doesn't mean I won't defend my piece, especially not when you asked for the bears.

I knew (and even stated as much) that there would be folks still clinging to Krejci. I think that's mainly because of perceived upside and odds of hitting it. Because as we both have mentioned Bergeron's big seasons were four years ago and Krejci's were only two people I thinks there's a big chance for recency bias to play a role.

JHM, there's no conflict here. Your main point was perfectly valid. These are tough decisions and I'm just telling you what I believe. As long as the piece has you thinking critically about the decision then I've done my job, regardless of if I've swayed you or not.
June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

Jocular Hockey Manager said:

JHM
... Steve,

Sorry, not trying to throw sand in the wheel. I enjoy your pieces. They do an excellent job of getting us thinking and comparing. I like to think and compare! Striving for conflict is never my intention. Keep up the good work!

JHM
June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

Pengwin7 said:

Pengwin7
... "Pengwin, you assume too much man. ... I kinda feel like you must skim these articles because your quibbles regarded a lot of information I already covered."

OUCH.

1. You have made an assumption too - that I skim articles. Oh no. I read it over three times. I had five browsers open at one time. I opened up two side-by-side browsers with each players stats, opened a 3rd browser to cross-reference Julien's tenure/bio and a 4th browser to access Frozen Pools for line combinations throughout the year, last 10 games of reg, and playoffs. There is a word that can be used when somebody accuses another of a poor assumption and then makes a poor assumption themselves.

I love the Cage Match articles... but they are a long way from the value of pieces written by Ma, Angus, Dub, Miller. My criticism is only here to help identify some holes in your writing/analysis style.

If you intend on seriously writing about hockey, you have to learn to take some criticism and build from it without attacking your reader (with a really, really, really bad assumption).

June 09, 2011
Votes: +0

steve laidlaw said:

metaldude26
... Thanks Gates! Good to be back but it was also good to see my absence allowed others to contribute.

Pengwin, you assume too much man. I never predetermine my winners. I look for good battles and I go through the process of comparison and then I write my article. I don't and I won't do it the other way around. I kinda feel like you must skim these articles because your quibbles regarded a lot of information I already covered. I love the feedback but I hate repeating myself.

With regard to your first quibble about SOG. I mention that this is upside. It's something he's done before. I stress that it was five years ago and prior to his concussions but never the less I feel that it is important to note what he is capable of under the correct circumstances.

Secondly regarding SOG. They are more important than the 20% difference in PPP because the margins are much greater. When 20% is the equivalent of 3 points that`s not a big difference. That`s only a few lucky bounces here and there. 40 SOG on the other hand is not something that any player can make up in a single game and that makes it a lot more significant. Again this is something I stressed in the piece.

I also mention that Krejci has better linemates but that it did nothing to improve his numbers over Bergeron`s.

You make some valid points but most of them were already covered in the article.

Jocular, regarding your suggestion regarding picking one`s poison. That is often the case with these Cage Matches but I like to be decisive whenever possible. Maybe I didn`t sway you and probably not a lot of other people but I definitely convinced myself.

Larry, I basically wrote off Savard. With his head issues I think his career is over.

5Hole, if you have a small child, use it as a shield.
June 08, 2011
Votes: +0

5hole said:

5hole
I cant BEAR it! Im with Krecji!
June 08, 2011
Votes: +0

Larry said:

Rollie1967
1 other factor Marc Savard- if he's healthy (what is it with Bruin centers?) he figures into the top 6 somewhere. Put me in the camp that sees Seguin on the wing- which would be an upgrade offensively over all their wingers save for Lucic/Horton. Next season might not be a slam dunk for him-but its not far off.I'd be surprised if both Ryder and Recchi return,Boston could see quite a few changes for next season.
June 08, 2011
Votes: +0

Jocular Hockey Manager said:

JHM
Great discussion! 1) Shots of goal, sorry 160 to 200, I'm not going to dig in too much on that. 200 to 300 and I buy the theory. This could swing one way or the other over a short period of time. Neither is a shoot first guy.
2) Bergeron is one of the top draw men in the world. I believe he "edges' Krejci in this category. Again, not a deciding point.
3) age - resolves nothing
4) health - if you're worried about health, then Bergeron must be considered a concern.
5) World Class - yes both are World Class. They could face off against each other with one minute to go in the Olympic Gold game (one goal game)
6) proven history - again, not an overly decisive topic
7) linemates - What????? They have the same TEAMMATES. Linemates, change shift-to-shift.
smilies/cool.gif A trade could affect one of them. They'd look pretty snappy as the centre for a world class winger. I'm not trading for either of them speculating that they might be traded. Being traded wouldn't guarantee a world class winger.

I would suggest each Fantasy owner needs to 'pick his poison'!

I was clearly Bergeron prior to 2010-11. At this point, six of one, half a dozen of the other. The playoff scoring race re-emphasizes this! They are 1A & 1B on a team three wins short of STANLEY! They're both impressive! Both require multi-cat leagues, to be highly valuable in Fantasy.
June 08, 2011
Votes: +0

Pengwin7 said:

Pengwin7
One vote for Krejci. A good battle for the cage match.
There are still way too many comparisons you are "choosing" to pick your winner. It's almost like you have decided in advance who the winner will be and then go searching for the statistics to justify it.

1. re: SOG. You say "Bergeron is in fact capable of putting up numbers that double Krejci’s in this category". Looking at Bergeron's 2005-2006 seasons is going WAY to far back. He is consistently posting 200 SOG in an 80-game season these days. Stay with that. Boston is a defensive-minded hockey team coached by a former defenseman (Julien). Bergeron posted 300 SOG before Julien showed up. Things are different now - it is a bad argument to go back to pre-Julien numbers.

2. SOG difference. 40 shots, 25%. This is not as great a difference as you think. Just because the numbers are high (200-160) doesn't mean it is a huge difference. +15.5/+13 = 20% difference in plus/minus. 13PPP/9.5 PPP = 37% difference. There, Krejci's +20% & +37% just trumped Bergeron's 25% SOG difference. And I think you can count on Krejci maintaining his +/- and PPP advantages, read on.

3. Linemates. Krejci played the majority of the season as the #1 center with Lucic & Horton. All three players are under contract for next season. I would guess that they will stick together. Lucic & Horton are both shooters... which means BOS will stick with keeping the "playmaker" between them. Bergeron played the majority of the season as the #2 center with Recchi & Marchand. Is Recchi really going to play another season? IDK. Can Marchand repeat the 14.1% SH% he posted this year? Probably not.

4. PPP. Julien typically keep his lines in check on the PP. Lucic-Krejci-Horton will start PP1, if fresh. Chara will be on one point. The other point has been several players, Kaberle since he was acquired. PP2 is likely to be Marchand-Recchi-Seguin with Bergeron manning one point. Chara's "in front of the net" thing won't continue into next year as he takes too much of a beating to do that over a regular season.

Summary:
Going forward to next season, there is a lot to like about Krejci's cemented position on the team and less to like about Bergeron's position on the team. The SOG difference is not enough for Bergeron to win this war. Unleash the bears, I'm going with Krejci!
June 08, 2011
Votes: +2

GMGates said:

GMGates
... Glad to have you back!

This edition was Bear-tastic.

smilies/grin.gif
June 08, 2011
Votes: +0
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy