View Poll Results: Who is the better player?

Voters
96. You may not vote on this poll
  • Theodore

    62 64.58%
  • Barry

    34 35.42%
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 256

Thread: Bonds vs. Williams

  1. #201
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    the same Ted Williams who REFUSED to go to the 1946 pennant celebration party and then lied about going to see someone in the hospital when he realized what an ass he was
    what a great teammate
    Is this it? Is this the one that's going to trump Barry. Let's see:

    "It's called talent. I just have it. I can't explain it. You either have it or you don't."

    -Barry Lamar Bonds
    September, 2001, ESPNMag

    2001....as in.... in between 1998 and 2004.

    "You either have it or you don't."

    Wow. There is NOTHING on Williams that approaches this. What exactly do you call it when someone is using something secretly to make themselves look better than they are and pretends it's just natural talent? Hmmmmm......

    Ted Williams did not come to my party and fibbed. I wish he could have been like Barry, who won't come either but will tell us how much "talent" he has.


    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    the hyperbole of going to a dead man;s funeral 50 years after he was a jackass teammate
    No. You see, hyperbole means exaggeration, as in they walked 1,300 miles over hot coals. Saying they drove was either a fact or a lie. It seems like hyperbole because well we know that it takes a lot of friendship to do that....

    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    ted williams travels to west coast for baseball games = zero
    Meaningless. Bonds had planes, Williams didn't. And it would have been strange for Williams to go to the west coast when no teams were there. Moreover, it has NOTHING to do with Williams having more WAR than Bonds. Everyone traveled the same during Williams' time as they did the same in Bonds' time. It doesn't give Williams an advantage or Bonds a disadvantage.

    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    ted williams facing an integrated league and a competitive league = zero
    It was zero % difference unless you want to post an adjustment and support. Simply saying "it was not integrated" may sound important, but without something else it flutters in the wind.
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    ted williams facing relief pitchers who were specialists = zero
    More statements with zero % attached to it. More importantly, it has nothing to do with Bonds until you explain it. Having or not having specialists does not change the fact of how much WAR they had since everyone else in their league faced the same conditions.
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    ted williams playing full seasons after age 30 = almost zero
    More pesky stats.

    Crediting Williams for 223 games in 1952-53. His hands are still tied from before. We aren't going to hog tie him as well, right? He was a fighter pilot in Korea. Or do we want to punish him for fighting for his country?

    Williams played 1108 games from age 31-41. We'll add 223 for his time in Korea. That's now 1331 games. But he has a 154 game schedule, not 162, so we'll have to adjust the 1331 to 1400.

    Ages 30-41

    Williams 1400 games
    Bonds 1435 games

    Now what shall we give Ted Williams from age 31 to 41, assuming he was consuming HGH and steroids like Bonds from ages 34-39? Oh ok...ok. The horse has changed colors. Seems like, with no REAL help from syringes, Mr T ballgame was the horse who kept playing through aches and pains and injuries while the primadonna was the slacker.


    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    ted williams benefitting from a freaking bandbox that uniformly over inflates offense = MAXIMUM
    see 1951 splits for example
    Why cherry pick? Here are the facts for all the years in question.

    Bonds H/A HR splits 1986-98 203-208
    Williams H/A HR splits 1939-51 158-165
    Last edited by drstrangelove; 01-22-2013 at 11:51 PM.

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by bluesky5 View Post
    Have you read "The Teammates"? Good book.

    I haven't. I'm going to add a bunch to my Kindle and become a bookaholic. I'll happily add this one.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Home of the Twins
    Posts
    1,832
    Quote Originally Posted by drstrangelove View Post
    I tried but I couldn't recalculate your numbers. I re-did them below.

    1) Williams had 81.7 WAR between 1939-51. (I think you picked up his oWAR.) No biggie.
    2) I've tried to recreate the numbers but to no avail. I'm particularly confused as to how Bonds in a 10 year stretch can have 82.1 WAR while playing in a 162 game schedule, can be calculated to 8.9 / WAR per year in a 162 game schedule, since that implies a calculated total of 89 WAR. Where did the extra 7 WAR come from?
    3) can you explain why we are using Williams performance from ages 20-23, but dropping Bonds performance from ages 21-23?

    In the meantime, these are the numbers that I think represent this:

    Williams 81.7 WAR in 10 years adjusted to 85.9 for 162 game schedules, equates to 8.59 WAR per year
    Bonds 96.9 WAR in 13 years (no adjustment needed), equates to 7.45 WAR per year.

    Williams is 15% higher.

    A) Of course, Bonds had the benefit of not playing at age 20 (when he was still not ready for the majors.) Had Bonds played at age 20, like age 21 (when he got 3.3 WAR), he would have averaged 7.16 WAR over 14 years, giving Williams a 20% edge.

    B) And then, Williams missed 3 years at the peak of his career (43-45). Had he played in those 3 years at the same level as 1940-41-46-47, he would have added 30 WAR and 3 years bringing his total to 111.7 WAR (adjusted to 117.5) over 13 years and averaging 9.04 WAR a year, or 21.3% over Bonds.

    Williams is 15% better IF you ignore BOTH Bonds not playing at 20 (while he was not ready) and Williams missing 3 peak years. The proverbial hand is being tied behind his back and Williams still has a healthy lead.
    I averaged WAR per 162 games played, not scheduled. Williams does get docked a bit for that. However, I have a pretty steep adjustment for league quality. Also, I am more of a peak guy than a running total type of guy. I give about 70% of my weight for 10 year peak. That's why I'd put Albert Belle in the Hall, despite his short career. I rate Mickey Mantle higher than most due to his incredible 10 year run. He wasn't great the other years, probably due to his health and heavy drinking. As it sits, I have Bonds ranked 4th overall, Mantle 5th, and Williams 8th. Bonds' 180+ OPS+ from 1990-1998 while also swiping 35+ bags a year and 8 gold gloves is too much for Williams' hitting to overcome, especially when I doc Williams 10% for league quality. Mantle's 180 OPS+ over 10 years while playing centerfield decently while swiping bases at an 80% clip squeaks by Williams too. If I added more weight to longevity, counting numbers, and added lost years to the war, then Williams wins. I do have Williams as the 2nd best hitter ever, behind Babe Ruth.

  4. #204
    Ted Williams did not come to my party and fibbed

    you are the one extolling Ted's virtuoso greatness as a teammate

    facts and history differ with your opinion

    he was moody, argumentative, fought with teammates over his refusal to give in the the shift, tempermental and it affected him so much he did not go to the celebration in the ONE year he won something

    great teammate my ass

    you also don;t seem to understand park illusions

    Ted WIlliams out hit Joe DiMaggio .344 to .325 over their careers

    take them out of their home parks and Dimmagio out hits Williams .333 to .328, Williams benefitted from Fenway to the tune of .361

    Williams was a moody. tempermental, selfish, no base running, no fielding, no full season player who benefitted from a park illusion that inflated his stats and played in an era with no relief specialists and no integration

    those are all FACTS
    Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 01-23-2013 at 09:15 AM.
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://somgamersparadiseforum.smfforfree4.com/index.php

  5. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by pheasant View Post
    I averaged WAR per 162 games played, not scheduled. Williams does get docked a bit for that. However, I have a pretty steep adjustment for league quality. Also, I am more of a peak guy than a running total type of guy. I give about 70% of my weight for 10 year peak. That's why I'd put Albert Belle in the Hall, despite his short career. I rate Mickey Mantle higher than most due to his incredible 10 year run. He wasn't great the other years, probably due to his health and heavy drinking. As it sits, I have Bonds ranked 4th overall, Mantle 5th, and Williams 8th. Bonds' 180+ OPS+ from 1990-1998 while also swiping 35+ bags a year and 8 gold gloves is too much for Williams' hitting to overcome, especially when I doc Williams 10% for league quality. Mantle's 180 OPS+ over 10 years while playing centerfield decently while swiping bases at an 80% clip squeaks by Williams too. If I added more weight to longevity, counting numbers, and added lost years to the war, then Williams wins. I do have Williams as the 2nd best hitter ever, behind Babe Ruth.
    Ok, cool. So we did things differently. I was really focused on your math for WAR per year, not your conclusions or adjustments. thanks

  6. #206
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    Ted Williams did not come to my party and fibbed

    you are the one extolling Ted's virtuoso greatness as a teammate

    facts and history differ with your opinion

    he was moody, argumentative, fought with teammates over his refusal to give in the the shift, tempermental and it affected him so much he did not go to the celebration in the ONE year he won something

    great teammate my ass

    you also don;t seem to understand park illusions

    Ted WIlliams out hit Joe DiMaggio .344 to .325 over their careers

    take them out of their home parks and Dimmagio out hits Williams .333 to .328, Williams benefitted from Fenway to the tune of .361

    Williams was a moody. tempermental, selfish, no base running, no fielding, no full season player who benefitted from a park illusion that inflated his stats and played in an era with no relief specialists and no integration

    those are all FACTS
    We're comparing Bond to Williams. Believe me, I can truly understand why one would prefer to compare Williams to DiMaggio, or Stan Musial, or Mother Teresa or Albert Einstein. Really. I can see why some folks won't mention the name Bonds in a post discussing Bonds vs Williams.

    Compared to those Mother Teresa and Albert Einstein? Teddy loses every time. He'd be the first to admit.


    But let's not make up a new thread here...let's deal with this one: BONDS VS WILLIAMS Not Williams vs DiMaggio or Williams vs Henderson or Williams vs Musial.

    1)Bonds H/A HR splits 1986-98 203-208
    Williams H/A HR splits 1939-51 158-165

    It's not hard to see. Of course saying many many times what is not true may seem worthwhile. Williams had no advantage from Fenway.

    2) WAR takes into account league, park, defense, and base running.

    Williams 81.7 WAR in 10 years adjusted to 85.9 for 162 game schedules, equates to 8.59 WAR per year
    Bonds 96.9 WAR in 13 years (no adjustment needed), equates to 7.45 WAR per year.

    Williams is 15% higher. Under the most favorable means of measuring (Bonds not playing at 20 and Williams missing 3 peak years).

    Williams is better.

    3) Moody, argumentative and temperamental? Same applies to Bonds in spades. Which of his teammates will drive 1300 miles to his deathbed in 40 years?


    4) "It's called talent. I just have it. I can't explain it. You either have it or you don't." -Barry Lamar Bonds September, 2001, ESPNMag Vol 4, no 19.

    In 2005, MLB started testing players for talent.

    5) Let's do a poll: Who will win? Who is the most likely person to use steroids: Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Joe DiMaggio or Barry Lamar Bonds? I wonder if this will work for the Sesame Street game.



    Back to square one. One only has to justify a 20% adjustment in league quality. If it's a FACT, then show the math. Easy preazy.
    Last edited by drstrangelove; 01-23-2013 at 02:20 PM.

  7. #207
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Rockland County, NY
    Posts
    12,014
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    you also don;t seem to understand park illusions

    Ted WIlliams out hit Joe DiMaggio .344 to .325 over their careers

    take them out of their home parks and Dimmagio out hits Williams .333 to .328, Williams benefitted from Fenway to the tune of .361
    That's weak, Roy. Everyone knows OBP and SLG are more important than batting average and correlate better with run scoring.

    OBP/SLG ON THE ROAD
    Dimaggio .405/.610
    Williams .467/.615

    Yet you cite a (gasp!) FIVE point advantage in batting average for Dimaggio as proof that he was a better hitter on the road than Williams. 5 points in batting average overrides 62 points in OBP and 67 points in OPS??? You're a riot.

  8. #208
    Quote Originally Posted by GiambiJuice View Post
    That's weak, Roy. Everyone knows OBP and SLG are more important than batting average and correlate better with run scoring.

    OBP/SLG ON THE ROAD
    Dimaggio .405/.610
    Williams .467/.615

    Yet you cite a (gasp!) FIVE point advantage in batting average for Dimaggio as proof that he was a better hitter on the road than Williams. 5 points in batting average overrides 62 points in OBP and 67 points in OPS??? You're a riot.
    There was also a knock on Williams for taking the close pitches in situations where a base hit with runners on might have better served his team. Of course we will never know, that was Ted's hitting philosphy and it worked for him but as you can see, hitting alone batting average and slugging close and Joe was a RH hitter. Your talking 5 points slugging difference. Seven of the top ten career batting averages are LH handed.
    Only one RH batter in the last 80 years hit .325 or better, Dimaggio, Pujols a possibilty. Medwick .324, Foxx.323.
    I don't think Joe was the hitter Ted was, how many were but the lefty righty batter plays a part.

    Williams OBA and overall hitting is too much for Barry to overcome.
    Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 01-23-2013 at 03:35 PM.

  9. #209
    Quote Originally Posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    There was also a knock on Williams for taking the close pitches in situations where a base hit with runners on might have better served his team. Of course we will never know, that was Ted's hitting philosphy and it worked for him but as you can see, hitting alone batting average and slugging close and Joe was a RH hitter. Seven of the top ten career batting averages are LH handed.
    Only one RH batter in the last 80 years hit .325 or better, Dimaggio, Pujols a possibilty. Medwick .324, Foxx.323.
    I read his hitting book, can't remember the name, over the winter my freshman year of high school and adopted that philosophy. Worked great. Improved my hitting a lot. From tolerable to slightly above average. Saved me a lot of angst.

    Thanks Ted.

  10. #210
    Quote Originally Posted by bluesky5 View Post
    I read his hitting book, can't remember the name, over the winter my freshman year of high school and adopted that philosophy. Worked great. Improved my hitting a lot. From tolerable to slightly above average. Saved me a lot of angst.

    Thanks Ted.
    Nio doubt Ted new the science of hitting like not many did.
    I believe he got his start by speaking to Hornsby who told him........ get a good pitch to hit, worked for Roger, worked for Ted.

  11. #211
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,869
    If someone could just dig up a Williams quote praising Bob Gibson...
    3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

    Im honored to go into the Baseball Hall of Fame with such a great group of men. - Tom Glavine.

  12. #212
    Quote Originally Posted by Los Bravos View Post
    If someone could just dig up a Williams quote praising Bob Gibson...
    Did they ever face off, maybe an All Star Game, or was Ted gone before Bob came around.

  13. #213
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Home of the Twins
    Posts
    1,832
    Quote Originally Posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    There was also a knock on Williams for taking the close pitches in situations where a base hit with runners on might have better served his team. Of course we will never know, that was Ted's hitting philosphy and it worked for him but as you can see, hitting alone batting average and slugging close and Joe was a RH hitter. Your talking 5 points slugging difference. Seven of the top ten career batting averages are LH handed.
    Only one RH batter in the last 80 years hit .325 or better, Dimaggio, Pujols a possibilty. Medwick .324, Foxx.323.
    I don't think Joe was the hitter Ted was, how many were but the lefty righty batter plays a part.

    Williams OBA and overall hitting is too much for Barry to overcome.
    In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

    Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.

  14. #214
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Rockland County, NY
    Posts
    12,014
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by pheasant View Post
    In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

    Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.
    Exactly.

    And yet despite all these disadvantages, Ted was STILL a better hitter on the road than Dimaggio was.

  15. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Nio doubt Ted new the science of hitting like not many did.
    I believe he got his start by speaking to Hornsby who told him........ get a good pitch to hit, worked for Roger, worked for Ted.
    Didn't work so much for Mike Epstein. Maybe Bonds was on to something.
    Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Alex Sparky
    Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
    Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
    Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
    Robin JEDI

  16. #216
    Quote Originally Posted by pheasant View Post
    In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

    Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.
    Should we factor that in with all hitters now, look at the pitching on the teams they played for and those that they hit against.
    Did Musial face tougher pitching than Ted, only an example, where does it end.
    Yes the Yankees did have the better pitching.
    But if thats part of the game your using the pitching faced factor, and it is legit it does matter then I'm going to bring back the fact that Joe, like all RH hitters had the more unfavorable match up with RH pitchers, many more than there were LH pitchers.

    1939-1951, only two RH batters batted .300. Dimaggio .322 and Appling .310.
    1939-1951 LH .300 or better---.347-.347-.310-.308-.304-.303-.302-.300.
    That is a hugh gap.
    We know the lefthanded batters were not just born better, we do know why they dominate the hitters list, go back as far as you like.
    Despite the fact that that many more RH batters in those years, a bigger pool of hitters, yet there were so many more LH .300 batters.
    You could just say, tough luck Joe, your a righty or we could consider it.
    I never said Joe was the hitter Ted was but when you factor in batting right against many more RH pitchers, the gap is not as wide as some think it is.
    On the parks, does anyone had Joe on the road minus Fenway and Ted on the road minus Yankee Stadium
    Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 01-24-2013 at 01:04 PM.

  17. #217
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Somewhere in the Seven Valleys
    Posts
    3,254
    Ted Williams, the .406 hitter in 1941, or Barry Bonds from whatever year you drum up before his PED's career began? I'll take '41 Ted on my fantasy team any day of the week.

    Three of his teammates were his close friends for life. How many of us can say the same thing about our co-workers?
    "He's tougher than a railroad sandwich."
    "You'se Got The Eye Of An Eagle."

  18. #218
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyK View Post
    Ted Williams, the .406 hitter in 1941, or Barry Bonds from whatever year you drum up before his PED's career began? I'll take '41 Ted on my fantasy team any day of the week.

    Three of his teammates were his close friends for life. How many of us can say the same thing about our co-workers?
    I think there were a few incidents in Ted's life in Ted's life not positive.
    Overall, not a bad guy, his own man and some didn't like that side of him but he stuck with it.
    Teammates seem to speak well of him.

  19. #219
    One of my favorite Ted stories.
    Called out on strikes, throws bat into air, bat strikes woman, she bleeds from the head. Not life threatening but scary, taken to hospital.
    You can see Ted leaning on rail. Walks bck to the bench crying.
    The woman, Gladys Heffernan.............housekeeper for Bosox General Manager Joe Cronin.
    The woman is forgiving, not upset at all, she understands.
    Later Ted buys her a very expensive watch.

  20. #220
    Here is a follow up to that earlier post, had a problem uploading photos.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  21. #221
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Somewhere in the Seven Valleys
    Posts
    3,254
    Quote Originally Posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    One of my favorite Ted stories.
    Called out on strikes, throws bat into air, bat strikes woman, she bleeds from the head. Not life threatening but scary, taken to hospital.
    You can see Ted leaning on rail. Walks bck to the bench crying.
    The woman, Gladys Heffernan.............housekeeper for Bosox General Manager Joe Cronin.
    The woman is forgiving, not upset at all, she understands.
    Later Ted buys her a very expensive watch.
    He wore his emotions on his sleeve for sure. The 1958 photo reminded me of how tanned he would be from his endless fishing trips.
    "He's tougher than a railroad sandwich."
    "You'se Got The Eye Of An Eagle."

  22. #222
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Somewhere in the Seven Valleys
    Posts
    3,254
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Cold Nose View Post
    Didn't work so much for Mike Epstein. Maybe Bonds was on to something.
    ...or on something?
    "He's tougher than a railroad sandwich."
    "You'se Got The Eye Of An Eagle."

  23. #223
    thank god he matured as he got older - 1958 would have been 19 years since he broke into the majors

    Quote Originally Posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Here is a follow up to that earlier post, had a problem uploading photos.
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://somgamersparadiseforum.smfforfree4.com/index.php

  24. #224
    Quote Originally Posted by pheasant View Post
    In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

    Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.
    The old Yankee Stadium was constructed to be a haven for LH hitters, especially LH pull hitters

    it was not a disadvantage, it was a huge advantage if you were a LH pull hitter

    Williams was as big a LH pull hitter as there was in history

    your premise is dead wrong, and therefore your conclusion is not well founded
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://somgamersparadiseforum.smfforfree4.com/index.php

  25. #225
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Later Ted buys her a very expensive watch.
    Yep a gold Rolex.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •