Fack Youk? Sou Yuck!
I've been reading a lot about Bobby Abreu lately. The things I've been reading came out in two waves; the first wave featured complimentary articles praising Abreu for the impact he's had on the Angels hitters. How through Abreu's influence, they've become more selective at the plate, drawing more walks and having an overall better approach to hitting. The second wave of articles set out to discredit the first wave claiming Abreu had nothing to do with the Angels' improvements, they in fact hadn't really improved that much.
Below is an article from a Yankee blog called "Fack Youk" that is pretty typical of the second wave of Abreu articles.
My comments are in bold.
The Fallacy Of El Comedulce
Good morning Fackers. The completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869 allowed for far easier and faster transportation from the East Coast to the West Coast than had previously existed. Yet, from what I've been hearing and reading over the past several months, the concepts of the base on balls and working the pitch count still did not make its way west until some 140 years later when Bobby Abreu signed with the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.
Yeah, and the Angels just recently started using gloves.
Don't get me wrong, Bobby Abreu is a very good baseball player. Depending upon how the Johnny Damon and Hideki Matsui situations work out this off-season, he might be a good option for the 2010 Yankees to explore. He was initially acquired in one of the best deals Brian Cashman has made and provided the Yankees with two and a half years of good to excellent offensive production, even if his phobia of outfield walls was downright comical by the end of his tenure in the Bronx. The Yankees rightly refused to offer him arbitration following last season, as the $16M he earned in 2008 would have made his 2009 arbitration figure far more than what he's worth. That coupled with the collapse of the free agent market last off-season in light of both the U.S. economy and the ever changing landscape of baseball economics allowed the Angels to sign Abreu for the bottom basement price of $5M for 2009.
I don't know what a "bottom basement" price is, but I'm sure the Angels front office is happy with what they were able to sign Abreu for. He's been more than worth the bargain basement salary of $5M plus incentives.
While the prevaling narrative is that Abreu enjoyed something of a comeback season, the reality is that his OPS+ of 115 this year is worse than last year (120), essentially equal to his 2007 (114), and the second lowest total of his career since becoming an everyday player in 1998. Some of that can be attributed to the continued diminishing of his power late in his career. But while his OBP of .390 and his BB% of 14.1 are improvements on 2007 and 2008, they still rank as his third lowest marks since 1998.
Was it a comeback or not? His OPS+ was the second lowest of his career, but his OBP were improvements over his previous two years. I don't see how it matters anyway, the point is what type of impact has Abreu made on the other hitters through mentoring and example.
Yet if you were to listen to the announcers during ALDS or any other nationally televised Angels' game this year, or if you were to google "Bobby Abreu influence on Angels", you would be subjected to scores of hyperbolic statements crediting Abreu with teaching the Angels, who have made the playoffs three straight seasons and six of the last eight, how to finally work a pitch count and take a walk. Nevermind that as recently as 2007 the Angels finished third in the AL in OBP, just as they did this year, with a mark .345, just a half percent lower than this year's .350.
Here's where I think the falicy begins. Abreu's team mates have never said he taught them how to take a walk, but instead to have a different approach when in the batter's box. Here's what they've said:
- "Bobby has brought something different to this ballclub," center fielder Torii Hunter says. "I won't say it's all patience. I'll say it's more about hitting pitches that are in the strike zone. When you hit a pitch in the strike zone, you have a better chance of getting a hit than when it's out of the strike zone. I've learned from Bobby and that's why I'm hitting .300 for the first time," he admits.
- Third baseman Chone Figgins puts it this way: "It's not that I'm trying to take pitches. I'm just trying to eliminate putting a pitcher's pitch in play. Instead of swinging at a 1-0 pitch that I can't do much with, I'm taking it so maybe I can get to 2-0, a better situation for me. The big thing is, you have to become confident hitting behind in the count. You have to be willing to take that close 1-1 pitch to get to 2-1 and be confident you can hit with two strikes."
- "I think Bobby has had an influence on some guys more as a mentoring tool," Scioscia said. "Plate discipline has been a big part of our guys getting into good counts and then being productive in those counts. I think Bobby has had an influence on that. I don't think that there's been any drastic change in some players we're looking at as far as them looking at Bobby and saying I want to do what he's doing. I do think some players have become enlightened maybe about not trying to do too much with a pitch or when you get in a hitter's count don't get so aggressive you give the count right back to the pitcher. It's gotten us better looks at the plate than we've had in a long time."
- Hunter says when he's in the on-deck circle and Abreu is hitting, "I'm going crazy. He's staying alive, staying alive. You don't want to go up there and swing at the first pitch after he just had a seven-pitch at-bat. It trickles down. It's a domino effect. We all want an Abreu at-bat."
- "Abreu has helped me in many ways," said Aybar, whose .312 average led the club. "He's always showing me things, teaching me the right way."
- "I'll go in the clubhouse and he's studying video and talking baseball with Chone Figgins, Kendry Morales and Erick Aybar," general manager Tony Reagins said. "That's where he has a big impact. A lot of players after the game are so quick to leave. Bobby stays. He is very bright. He's bilingual. He studies the game and has no problem passing information along."
And Abreu himself never mentions going up to the plate looking to walk, but rather, looking for better pitches to hit. "The guys are doing good trying to understand that you need to wait for your pitch. When you're hitting, you don't have to be afraid of the count. The count doesn't matter to me. Sometimes, I see the best pitch to hit with two strikes."
In this post yesterday, Rob Neyer, vamping on Tyler Kepner's piece in The Times, pointed out that the Angels walked 66 more times this year than last, boosting their walk rate from 7.8% to 8.7% and rising from 11th in the AL in OBP back to third, where they had finished in 2007. Yet Neyer also notes that the difference can be entirely attributed to the performance of Abreu alone, who had 65 more walks than the man he replaced - Garrett Anderson, a notorious free swinger whose career high in walks is a whopping 38. In addition to Abreu, Chone Figgins walked 39 (actually it's 41) more times this year than in 2008. So outside of Figgins and swapping Anderson for Abreu, the rest of the Angels walked 38 fewer times than they did in 2008.
Once again, it's not about the base on balls, it's about having better at-bats. But note that Figgins increased his walk total by 41 over last season. Figgins' OBP increased from .367 in 2008 to .395 this year, but the increase isn't entirely because of added number of walks. His batting average also increased from .276 to .298 which means the majority of the increase in OBP was a result of more hits, not more walks. This also explains why the Angels OBP increased while actually getting fewer (as Neyer claims) walks. The Angels hit better than last year...and this is where the Angels say Abreu's influence has impacted the team.
While their average pitches per plate appearance increased from 3.65 to 3.88, that only equates to about 12.5 extra pitches per game, of which about 5.5 can be attributed to Abreu and Figgins. So the rest of the line up saw, on average, one extra pitch each over the course of a game. And while the team's walk rate did increase by 0.9% this year, their IsoD is consisent with last year (.065 this year as opposed to .062 last year). Their 20 point boost in on base percentage is just as much due to a 17 point jump in batting average, which in turn can be attributed to a 23 point jump in team BABIP despite just a one percent increase in LD%.
Can their 17 point jump in batting average really be attributed to an increased BABIP? Can't their 23 point jump in BABIP and 28 point increase in slugging percentage be attributed to better at bats?
Again, looking at Figgins' season, his 2009 LD% remained the same as it was in 2008, while his FB% increased and his GB% decreased. His batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage increased in every category, regardless if it were a groundball, flyball or line drive. Was it possible by being more selective Figgins hit less routine flyballs and more harder hits to the outfield? And if he's trying to eliminate putting the pitcher's pitch in play wouldn't that improve the outcome of his at-bat by eliminating weak groundballs? If a player improves his approach at the plate, and his results in turn improve, why can't we believe the results are for the reason the player gives? Figgins stated, "I've learned a lot being around Bobby. He helped me improve an important part of my game with his discipline and approach."
And now, here it comes Angel fans. The word people use when they can't explain the Angels' performance...
So much for Abreu's influence; it appears luck has far more to do with the Angels' surge in OBP than Abreu does.
Once agan it comes down to LUCK. Sure. If your kid comes home from school with better math grades and tells you it's because his teacher showed him a better way to solve the equation, are you going to tell him, "No, you just got lucky".
Bobby Abreu was the best bargain of the 2008-2009 Crazy Eddie style off-season. You don't need FanGraphs to tell you that Abreu was a steal $6M ($5M base plus $1M incentives), but just to put a number on it, FanGraphs places Abreu's worth at $11.8M this year, nearly twice his salary. That's one helluva deal the Angels got for themselves, but it doesn't mean that Abreu, as one of the most selective hitters in the game, has bestowed his patience upon the rest of the lineup through his mere presence. Keep that in mind as Joe Buck, Tim McCarver, Ken Rosenthal, and the print media try to beat that story line into our head over the course of the ALCS.
This part pisses me off, "through his mere presence". If numerous Angel players say the reason they've done better this season is because of the influence of Bobby Abreu, why can't people believe them? Especially if the stats support their beliefs?
Keep that in mind as Joe Buck, Tim McCarver, Ken Rosenthal, and the print media point out one of the reasons for the Angels improved offense over the course of the ALCS.
34 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"In my experience, there is no such thing as luck."
— Obi Wan Kenobi
Look forward to blowing up their goddamn Death Star over the next week…
by Big Easy Halofan on Oct 16, 2009 7:57 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Seriously, I have no idea...
how SO many fackin people can sit there and believe LUCK has anything to do with the sustained success the Halos have had over this decade. Could make a case for any one year if performance was shitty prior to or after that year. But 7 years running of playoff caliber, division winning baseball?!? Cmon, that luck argument is facking moronic.
Free Brandon Wood!
Rob Neyer continues to be a douchebag, I see.
Never mind that we have pretty solid evidence for improvement in plate discipline for guys like Erick Aybar and Howie Kendrick, not to mention Torii Hunter, who all posted the highest walk rates of their careers. No, the only reason the Angels OBP improved was by replacing Garret Anderson with Bobby Abreu’s walk totals. In fact, by some spurious addition, we can conclude that the Angels actually got WORSE at taking bases this year, says Neyer.
And some people try to claim this guy isn’t a complete Angel-hating tool.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Good Job...
Patience at the plate has never been about getting walks, but having better ABs. Great job dissecting their over-simplified analysis.
Sure, why the hell not?
All I know is, the Angels got a .302 OBP out of the second spot in the lineup in 2008. .302! That’s Yuniesky Betancourt batting second, 733 times in a season. This year? .360. Thanks Bobby. You improved the offense.
Actually, the Angels took only 66 more walks this year than last, which put them at about average with 541. Figgins and Abreu took 36% of them, no one else had more than 50. Some players showed more slightly patience than last year (Hunter, Aybar, Kendrick), but some did worse (Guerrero, Napoli, Mathis).
As a whole, the Angels’ plate discipline stats this year are really weird. They swung only 43.7% of the time, which was third lowest in the AL (they were fourth highest last year at 47.2%), but they actually saw the fewest strikes of any team (47.9%). So they swung at pitches outside the zone quite a lot, but swung at relatively fewer pitches inside the zone. They also got more fastballs than anyone else. Not sure what to make of all that.
But look at who went up in BBs...
Hunter, Aybar, Kendrick and Figgins (along with Abreu) make up the 8,9,1,2,3 hitters. Just the guys expected to get on base and be selective with their pitches. The guys who went down are power hitters often in the position for rbis and knocking in the guys who walked more in front of them. It makes sense in the context of a lineup (excluding Mathis who just sucks at hitting in general).
Also wasn’t Guerrero hitting in front of Rivera/Morales all year? Perhaps the rise of Rivera and Morales is finally providing that protection Vladdy always needed.
I’m totally evaluating this qualitatively and hbe no stats to back me up. I could easily be wrong.
by BruinHalo on Oct 16, 2009 12:59 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Hello Halo fans. Thanks for the link.
I’ll concede that Abreu’s approach may have helped others on the team to improve their approach. But the point of what I wrote was to point out that outside of Figgins’ season, I didn’t see anything in the numbers that bear that out.
Just because the players on the team say that Abreu helped them improve doesn’t mean that it’s true. Athletes say dumb stuff all the time that isn’t necessarily true..
I wasn’t trying to say that the Angels are a lucky team. Their run differential gave them third best pythagorean record in baseball. That’s not luck (though they did outplay that record by 5 games, the Yankees outplayed theirs by seven, so in that regard the Yankees are the luckier team).
But, I do think that the Angels did get lucky with respect to their batted balls this year. From 2008 to 2009 there was no appreciable change in their HR%, LD%, or their ratios of HR/FB or IF/FB. They put the ball in play at essentially the same rate (72% last year, 71% this year). That their BA and BABIP increased so drastically without an appreciable change in any of those ratios speaks to nothing other than luck. It’s not a knock against them, it’s not say that they aren’t a good team, it’s not to say that they don’t belong in the ALCS. But it is what the numbers say.
Even if his influence was just spurring others to be more selective, and to go after better pitches, I don’t see the evidence of that. As I said, outside of Figgins and Abreu, the rest of the line up saw just one additional pitch each per game. That doesn’t appear to be a very big influence to me.
I like Abreu; I liked having him on the Yankees and I wouldn’t mind if the Yankees pursued him this off-season under the right circumstances. But I do think the magnitude of his influence on the Angels has been grossly overstated. I don’t know that plate discipline is something that can be so easily conferred to others so quickly. Apparently I can’t prove that he wasn’t that influential, but I’ve yet to see anything that proves he was as influential as the media has made him out to be.
by Matt @ Fack Youk on Oct 16, 2009 9:04 AM PDT reply actions
Tell me this then
was it “luck” that the Angels had better numbers this year, or was it “bad luck” that their numbers last year weren’t better?
~Till the Halo burns out...
I’m not really concerning myself with luck. I don’t know if the “real” Angels are this year’s or last year’s. I’m not really sure it matters. The nature of baseball is such that there are going to be fluctuations from year to year.
I was concerned with investigating if Abreu’s influence was as great as is being parrotted across the print and broadcast media. After looking at the numbers, in my estimation it’s not. Unless Abreu imparted everything he know to Chone Figgins and ignored everyone else.
From the numbers I’ve seen, the improvements this year are more likely the result of more batted balls falling in for hits despite the fact that nothing in the team’s batting ratios suggested that they should have had more batted balls falling in for hits. Call it luck if you want, call it chance, call it random statistical distribution, call it the universe correcting itself because they were “unlucky” last year. But whatever it is, I don’t think it’s Bobby Abreu.
by Matt @ Fack Youk on Oct 16, 2009 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Or call it insufficient data
There is still a key component missing from batted ball data and that is the information that Hit f/x will provide once it is widely implemented. That’s not to say to completely ignore batted ball stats. I just think the data can be further enhanced and as such provide better insight as to what is driving the numbers.
by Fan Since 1981 on Oct 16, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Matt...
the numbers may not show without a doubt that Abreu has made the team better hitters, but the fact that just about every member of the team has openly said that he has helped them in their approach at the plate, plus the manager and GM say how he has had a positive impact, shouldn’t that count as something? Your excsue of “athletes say dumb things all the time” is a weak argument. Of course the announcers are going to talk about it every time Abreu comes up to the plate, thats what they do, say the same shit over and over because they have nothing better to say. just because you are tired of hearing about it does not mean its untrue.
I will now start my essay which will dispove the theory that we’ve been hearing so much that the addition of Swisher and CC has made the Yankees clubhouse looser and a much more fun environment, which is equating to the team’s success…
by 2pintsofbooze on Oct 16, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions
I’d welcome that essay. Having better pitching, better defense, and better overall offense this year has far more to do with the Yankees winning this year than a looser clubhouse. In my opinion winning begets chemistry, not vice-versa. But I’m not sure that has to do with what I was talking about.
I’ll say it again. Maybe Abreu did have an influence on everyone, but just because people say it doesn’t make it so. I’ve yet to see any evidence that makes me believe it to be true. Where are the stories about Vlad’s influence making Abreu more of a free swinger?
by Matt @ Fack Youk on Oct 16, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions
The Fallacy of Swisher
you obviously missed my sarcastic point. the media and players talk a lot about the chemistry being so much better and the clubhouse being “looser” for the Yanks, so the media talks about that factoring in to them being more successful. The media and players talk about Abreu helping some Angels players in their approach at the plate, which in-turn has the media talking about it being a reason for the team’s success. the situations are essentially one in the same man. a new player(s) joining the team and influencing the other players around them in a specific way.
all the numbers you put up shows some things which may show Abreu’s influence has been less than what has been talked about, but at the same time the Angels had the best offensive season in the team’s history. all of it can’t be attributed to Abreu, but I’m certainly willing to give him a fair share of the credit since so many of the players and managers are willing to do so.
since you refuse to beleive that Abreu has done anything to help the team besides his on-the-field work, then thats on you. I really don’t care. but I think its funny that you’re so willing to discount what everyone who is actually on or around the team says just because the media brings it up a lot. nameen?
by 2pintsofbooze on Oct 16, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Matt, thanks for commenting
I think the problem I have with all of this is I’m skeptical that big changes in BABIP is because of luck. I agree, small changes could be the result of “seeing eye singles” or bloop hits, but I don’t buy significant changes in BABIP are caused by luck. If luck were the answer, over a certain period of time, that luck would have to change. A team can’t be lucky for such a long period…can they? Even over the course of a season, wouldn’t the luck work both ways? In a sense canceling out the lucky days with the unlucky ones?
I agree in principle, but I think we’re looking at different sides of the same coin. Big changes in BABIP shouldn’t be the result of luck. They should be the result of increases in line drive percentage, or maybe in groundball percentage to a lesser extent. The fact that their LD% is essentially the same this year leads me to believe that jump was due to luck. Maybe it’s an improbably large amount of luck, but I think that’s what it is nonetheless.
I also agree that luck should even out over the course of 6000+ plate appearances in a season. But we also have years of statistical data that show BABIP is accrued predominantly on LDs, in part due to GBs, and almost nothing to do with FBs. That the Angels had an LD% lower than the league average yet had a BABIP 22 points greater than the league average is a huge statistical anomally to me. Sure, being more selective may lead to “better” ground balls or “better” flyballs, but is it enough to beat the odds by that much? I just don’t think it is, I don’t know how one could make a demonstrable argument that it is.
by Matt @ Fack Youk on Oct 16, 2009 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions
We had a babip around .302 in 2008 and that was with a worse linedrive rating almost 1% lower than this year.
So even if we take 2008 as a “base” we still see an improvement in their BABIP this year to the point of being .312. The Angels have a bunch of “fast” players who are better able to execute on ground balls (Figgins, Abreu, Kendrick, Izturis, Aybar) and our groundball % is quite a bit above league average. This could easily explain the BABIP gap.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Also
The Angels have a much higher GB/FB % than league average, and IIRC, batting average is historically higher on ground balls than fly balls. Add that to the increase in LD%, and I think we’ve made a demonstrable argument.
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
Do you have any idea just how many infield hits a team would need to produce a 22 point jump in BABIP over the course of a season. The Angels had 6305 plate appearances this year and put the ball in play 71% of the time. That would be about 98 infield hits above last year’s total. Did Abreu make these guys faster this year too?
by Matt @ Fack Youk on Oct 16, 2009 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Good FanGraphs article about line drives
One interesting point from the article is that there is significant variance from ballpark to ballpark as to how line drives are coded. In fact, for the data set analyzed (2003-2008), it was 14% less likely that a batted ball would be coded as a line drive in Angels Stadium. Angels Stadium was the 3rd worst stadium in the majors for this type of error.
by Fan Since 1981 on Oct 16, 2009 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions
It's possible
The relationship between LD% and BABIP really only holds across very large samples, several full MLB seasons or more. Since each MLB season is equivalent to 30 seasons for one team, it’s totally possible for a team to overperform for an entire year.
But maybe averaging over all teams makes the “bad” BABIP teams cancel out the “good” BABIP teams? I don’t have a quantitative answer for that, but I believe currently there is little evidence to suggest that beating your predicted BABIP is a repeatable skill. Last year the Angels LD% and BABIP matched up right on the dot. This year the offense was mostly the same, both in batted ball type and actual players, and yet they rocked a .326 team BABIP. On the other hand, their “clutch” rating, another indicator of luck, actually went down considerably from 2008. There’s more than one way to be lucky.
Speaking of which, the Yankees posted a comical 14.0% HR/FB rate this year, among the highest since the start of mandatory drug testing. Does building a stadium the size of a hockey rink complete with its own wind generator count as luck, skill, design, accident, or incompetence? Now this is what I call lucky.
I don’t disagree with that. Things happen. A team can have a random change from one season to the next. I’m not calling the Angels “lucky” as an insult or to suggest they’re an inferior team. I just don’t think the influence of Bobby Abreu has everything, or even a lot, to do with their offensive improvements this year.
As for the Yankees, YS certainly has helped their home run totals. But it’s likely helped that of their opponents as well. If you were to discount all the Yankees’ home runs in the Bronx and just double their road total, it would still be second in the AL, just 8 behind the Rangers.
Through 81 games of play Yankee Stadium certainly produced some cartoonish numbers. But just as in your LD%/BABIP argument, I think a larger sample size of data is needed before a final verdict is rendered on the park. The HR numbers there fell off significantly as the season wore on.
by Matt @ Fack Youk on Oct 16, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Actually...
I don’t know why the New York media freaked out about the home run numbers in that stadium. So there’s a short porch in right and gusts blowing to right-center. But the Yankees have a lineup packed with left-handed flyball hitters. Sounds like a genuine home-field advantage to me, not this psychological stuff that doesn’t seem to be that big a deal in baseball.
Maybe we WERE lucky
The opponents just played consistently bad defense – over and over and over and…
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
I sent an message to Neyer
I wish I had saved the text of that email, but I didn’t. Anyway, I was basically refuting the notion that just because the Angels walks didn’t increase outside of Figgins and Abreu himself (replacing GA) that doesn’t mean that the Angels hitting approach didn’t drastically change in response to Abreu’s presence.
In support of that point I cited pitches per plate appearance. Every single one of Angels regulars (outside of Vlad, who is incorrigible when it comes to this kind of thing) increased their P/PA this year over last year. Some (Hunter, Rivera, Morales) were significant increases. No, I’m not attributing all of this to Abreu’s influence, but when they players all say how much they appreciated his approach to batting and tried to emulate it in some ways, you can’t completely ignore that either, especially when the evidence supports that notion. Everyone is citing walk rate and OBP not having increased significantly, but the Angels saw more pitches this year, had better at bats, and were rewarded with better BABIP.
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
This is what I was trying to say, but
you’ve said it better. Just because the team walk rate didn’t increase doesn’t mean the hitter didn’t have better at bats.
Thanks
I just don’t get the backlash. Yes, the media picks up a story, especially a clean, feel-good story like this one, runs with it and sensationalizes it to some degree. There’s hyperbole and other stuff that help make it a better story, because that’s what writers are paid to do. But just because that happens doesn’t mean you can dismiss it out of hand. When Torii Hunter says that he sees Bobby Abreu have a good 7-pitch at bat and he goes up with that same approach, are you calling him a liar? When Figgins talks about how great Abreu’s been working with Erick Aybar, is that meaningless? Oh hey, look, Aybar’s pitches per plate appearance increased to 3.47 from 3.26 last year! And oh, look there, Torii Hunter posted 3.80 P/PA, the highest figure of his career, 6% higher than the next highest total! Wait, what’s this? Kendry Morales, another guy that the Angels have said Abreu has worked with, increased his P/PA to 4.02 from a previous high of 3.64!
I’ll grant that some of the Angels BABiP increase is luck-driven, but there’s plenty of evidence to support a good portion of that increase. Even if you argue that point, there’s indisputable evidence to support the notion that Bobby Abreu’s presence and display of a solid batting approach has had a quantitative effect on the way the rest of the Angels approach hitting. Coincidence? Given all the quotes we have from Angels players and coaches, I’m inclined to think not.
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
by Gorbachav5 on Oct 16, 2009 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
THE REAL STORY ABOUT BOBBY'S INFLUENCE:
Bobby broke out a picture of Miss Venezuela/Universe and told his teammates:
“This bitch cheated on me… If a babe this hot can cheat on Bobby Abreu, no woman will ever be true to any of you…. You are all going to be in the major leagues only so long, so get all the major league pussy you can… Two girls every night… if you want to take a free pass, do it at the plate, but a winner bangs in the hotel room every night.”
It worked.
44fan posted a fanshot showing the tart that broke Bobby's heart.
I love this team.
by Downing Rules on Oct 16, 2009 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions
To see what Bobby brings to the Angels
just watch him step into the batter’s box for that last AB in the ALDS.
I am fan various years ago.

by 



























