FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Climate! The air is heavier in SF in the summer as it is super cold there. I know this does not explain the low HR rates on the road, but that could be explained by scouting. If a pitcheri s known to never give up homers, then to try to hit a homer off they guy might be discouraged by scouts, so the players are taught to swing for average and work the count against the pitcher.

    Just ideas.

    Comment by kick me in the GO NATS — May 30, 2011 @ 2:10 pm

  2. Late movement on pitches? What is the Giant pitcher’s average LD% and does this trend with HR/FB on a year-by-year basis? This is interesting stuff and probably worth a data-mining exercise to at least see what pops up. A certain pithcing philosophy should turn up results in some sort of metric (i.e. Duncan with GB% and seamed FB type, etc.). Perhaps there is something else in the Giants data (may have to separate pre and post-Giants pitcher history to find it.)

    Comment by Nick44 — May 30, 2011 @ 2:20 pm

  3. In cases like this, I wish I could see split categories/game progression graphs that show pitch type and value. Looking at year by year pitch usage and effect, kind of tells a story as to how a pitcher is being used, but having a higher resolution explanation (monthly, by game, against LHH/RHH, home/away, etc…) of how a pitcher’s use might be evolving within a season seems to be pretty informative, especially with the possibilities brought about by sudden team changes, ballpark, league, and coaching influence/adjustment, maturity…. Sometimes a new pitch is added/adjusted midseason by coaching… maybe pitch selections are slightly different between home/away splits… maybe a lefty/righty pitch selection approach is the successful adaptation…

    Maybe there isn’t much change that takes place, but there has to be see some patterns taking place that could direct a more detailed explanation to the rate of change between between all of those influences… so that when a player switches teams, for instance, the rate and type of change could suggest that it is more of a switch in park/league factors, or maybe it’s more the growth influence of coaching, etc…

    Comment by baty — May 30, 2011 @ 2:25 pm

  4. Climate would make sense because it is seems to be the same way in Oakland.

    Comment by letitrain10 — May 30, 2011 @ 2:44 pm

  5. Kick me- you may have hit it on the nose. None of this is using hard data but there seems to be a common bond when it comes to pitcher’s parks vs. their hitter friendly counterparts: Water!!! All of the teams that play on the West Coast all play in what are widely considered “pitcher friendly parks” – Seattle, San Fran, Chavez Ravine, Oakland, and Petco. As are, in most case the teams that play on the East Coast – Old Shea and Citi Field are both pitcher’s parks. Boston is great for righthanded hitters but not so for lefties as we once thought. Old Yankee stadium stadium was death on right-handers and would have been neutral if not for the short porch down the right field line. New Yankee stadium is a launch pad for all (still more so for lefties) but that has more to do with the stadium design and the jet streams that were created by such design. Target Field in Minnesota has winds from the Great Lakes killing fly balls, a complete 180 compared to the Metro Dome days.

    Conversely look at extreme hitters parks for a sec. They are either located inland or in the midwest – Cincinatti, Wringley (in the summer), U.S Cellular, Denver pre-Humidor, New Busch. Or places where the air is “hot and dry” – Arlington, Houston, Arizona.

    So yeah, the closer you are to a major body of water the more likely you are to experience things that depress HR, like colder temperatures, stronger wind gusts and thicker moister air.

    Another factor to consider which I sorta covered above and may help explain why they are so good at limiting road HR: Their schedule! Think about it. They play 81 games at a pitcher friendly home. In their division they play a 20 or so total games in LA and San Diego every year. The Humidor has neutralized Coors field for the most part. Add to that the three games they play in places like Oakland during interleague play or place Citi Field and Washington when they come out East and when you tally it all up, the Giants, year-in-and-year-out, play around 120 games in “pitcher’s parks”.

    Comment by boxx — May 30, 2011 @ 3:13 pm

  6. As Baty said, some splits would also be nice. The HR/FB splits for opposing pitchers when they pitch at At&T Park compared to the other parks would help. Are pitchers who are prone to gofer balls suddenly better at preventing them when their teams travel to San Fran? How about those same splits for the Giants offense? Do the HR numbers go up when they hit the road? No fault to Dave, but the numbers provided simply don’t allow for a logical conclusion. Since sample size isn’t an issue, their has to be some underlying stats that could allow us to do more than just make guesses. Or how about examining the HR/FB rates of pitchers before and after signing with Giants? Those splits may tell us nothing but the extra info can’t hurt.

    Comment by boxx — May 30, 2011 @ 3:31 pm

  7. Then why don’t the Padres and Dodgers experience the same phenomenon? Petco is even worse for home runs than AT&T (which isn’t bad for RHH) but the Padres have a 10.1% HR/FB over the last ten years. The Dodgers are at 9.8%, but the Giants lead baseball at 8.5%.

    And while Coors has had the humidor for a few years, this dates back to the pre-humidor days, and you still have to account for Chase Field.

    I’m sure AT&T isn’t hurting the HR/FB rate, but the park factor isn’t so low that it can explain this entirely, and then there’s the road number, which even if the Giants play in a lot of pitcher’s parks, should be about the same as the road numbers for any other team, but they still lead baseball by a good amount.

    Comment by quincy0191 — May 30, 2011 @ 3:37 pm

  8. Latter is used in reference to two things, not more than two.

    Comment by Grammar Police — May 30, 2011 @ 3:54 pm

  9. Do you have any idea how Target Field is from a great lake? Any great lake?

    Comment by B — May 30, 2011 @ 4:00 pm

  10. *how far

    Comment by B — May 30, 2011 @ 4:00 pm

  11. Click on a few of the links in the post. We’ve done all this work already.

    Comment by Dave Cameron — May 30, 2011 @ 4:19 pm

  12. B- It’s close enough. The stadium doesn’t have to be “right on” the Great Lakes to be affected by it. New York isn’t anywhere near the Gulf of Mexico, that doesn’t change the fact many of the rain showers in the NY metro area come from low pressure systems that start in the Gulf and slowly make there way to northeast. Or another example is the quake near Japan. It caused dangerous tide levels on the California coastline despite the fact that Japan is several thousands of miles away. In any case, it’s an excuse I’ve heard and read in a few places as to why guys (especially Mauer) are having trouble hitting jacks there now. Unless of course your Jose Bautista.

    Comment by boxx — May 30, 2011 @ 4:23 pm

  13. Unless of course YOU’RE (not your) Jose Bautista

    Comment by boxx — May 30, 2011 @ 4:27 pm

  14. Because the Giants still have better starting pitchers than the Padres.
    Lincecum vs. Latos? (Latos is/was good for a stretch of 20 games. TL has 2 cy’s. That should nip *THAT* debate in the bud.)
    Cain vs. Richard?
    Sanchez vs. Harang?

    Even if the parks are equal, I would still expect the Giants to give up less home runs than the Padres staff.

    Comment by CDI — May 30, 2011 @ 4:44 pm

  15. Some slips in this discussion: LA may be a pitcher-friendly park but it’s by no means homer-unfriendly: Oakland doesn’t have quite the same climate as SF (because it’s not on the ocean). That said, kick me may have at least part of the answer.

    Comment by Mr Punch — May 30, 2011 @ 5:27 pm

  16. Trying to figure out what causes San Francisco’s home park to suppress home runs isn’t all that interesting, honestly. The weather, the tall wall, the dimensions – they all play into it.

    The real question is why the Giants pitchers continually prevent home runs, both at home and on the road, to a degree that can’t be explained by park factors.

    Comment by Dave Cameron — May 30, 2011 @ 5:29 pm

  17. About 100 mi from Lake Superior and 10 mi from Lake Minnetonka :-)

    Comment by bluejaysstatsgeek — May 30, 2011 @ 5:57 pm

  18. The weather isn’t a park factor, it’s a miasma the pitchers carry with them, obviously.

    Comment by B — May 30, 2011 @ 6:12 pm

  19. Oh, that HR suppression were the sole key to success.

    Comment by Victor Frankenstein — May 30, 2011 @ 6:54 pm

  20. Much like with IFFB rate, HR% is likely more able to be controlled than the current metrics account for.

    Comment by AA — May 30, 2011 @ 7:26 pm

  21. The Giants pitching RIGHT NOW is better than the Padres, and has been for a couple of years. But like the article says, look at the data for the last ten years, including the early 2000′s when the Giants’ pitching wasn’t particularly good. The HR/FB rates are still the best in baseball.

    Point is, over that much time there has been so much turnover in the Giants’ pitching staff that pure talent isn’t enough to explain the difference. Vogelsong’s a good example; he does suffer from SSS, but he’s sporting a 4% HR/FB.

    If the parks are equal, the Giants should give up fewer homers, but the parks aren’t equal, Petco is worse on homers. So the superior talent of the Giants is mitigated by the pitcher’s heaven that is Petco, yet the Giants’ HR/FB over the last ten years is significantly better.

    Comment by quincy0191 — May 30, 2011 @ 7:35 pm

  22. Actually, I believe the effect is even stronger than the analysis showed. To be fair, you need to compare how the other teams fared on the road EXCLUDING AT&T park. After all, the SF could not pitch there “on the road” since it is their home park and is already excluded. If you excluded AT&T, then the Padres, Dodgers, etc. would have an even WORSE road record for HR/FB, I am sure.

    I would guess it is either talent selection or coaching after they join the organization. The guess at the beginning of the article that Dave Righetti had something to do with it may not be so far off. It seems he started as pitching coach there in 2000…

    Comment by BMac — May 30, 2011 @ 8:46 pm

  23. Are there great fluctuations over the years? Do the Cubs go from 20 to 5 sometimes?

    Or I dunno maybe someone just has to be the lowest.

    Comment by MrKnowNothing — May 30, 2011 @ 8:48 pm

  24. mommy! he’s doing it again!!

    Comment by al — May 30, 2011 @ 9:14 pm

  25. No one likes to talk about it because they won the World Series for the first time in over a half-century, but most of the bullpen was throwing Gaylord Perry specials down the stretch. The ridiculous beards and long hair are used to hold slick, illicit substances used to doctor a ball and give it a little extra movement for certain pitches. The Giants are not the only team that has pitchers currently doing that, but it was never so blatant as them where most of the staff was doing it. Or did you really think that magical stretch of pitching down the stretch was all natural?

    You do not need to doctor the ball on every pitch for it to help, it would be caught by the umpires too easily. A possibly relevant sidebar to the Giants’ success at keeping homerun rates down.

    Comment by Phantom Stranger — May 30, 2011 @ 10:32 pm

  26. Moister air is not thicker. It is thinner. Air at sea level is denser than at altitude, which is why people make this association, but at a given altitude (pressure) the greater the water vapor content the less dense the air (Nitrogen gas makes up ~78% of air and it has an atomic weight of 28, Oxygen gas makes up ~21% and has an atomic weight of 32, while water has an atomic weight of 18; at 1 atmosphere and 20°C, water vapor is about 30% less dense than the surrounding N2 gas and 40% less dense than O2). Of course the partial pressure of water vapor is relatively low even on humid days, so it’s a small effect, but nonetheless moist humid air helps a baseball fly (slightly) further. What it doesn’t help is actually making a baseball fly off the bat, as a damp ball is less elastic (and a damp bat also, though not the the same extent). Which is why they put the balls in a humidor at Coors.

    Comment by joser — May 30, 2011 @ 10:55 pm

  27. ^ Wow. That’s about the most unintelligent argument I’ve ever heard.

    Comment by Ben — May 30, 2011 @ 11:28 pm

  28. A failure of a joke.

    Comment by My echo and bunnymen — May 30, 2011 @ 11:51 pm

  29. lol, must be a philly fan….

    Comment by al — May 31, 2011 @ 12:50 am

  30. In addition to a failure to mention the invisible humidor.

    Comment by victor frankenstein — May 31, 2011 @ 1:15 am

  31. Ninjas? Yes. Loggers? Yes. Golf players? Yes. Pine tar and nail files? Not so much

    Comment by dustygator — May 31, 2011 @ 1:33 am

  32. Dave, I ask for the following information because Fangraphs frequently will talk about correlations but not actually show us the math they’ve done:

    Have you done a proper statistical analysis that controls for park factor, schedule, etc., all at the same time, and do you still find a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05, but I'd imagine something stronger is warranted) between the Giants' HR/FB rate and the league average? If so, can we please see the data and analysis used? This is the sort of rigor I'm accustomed to seeing on, say, Tango Tiger's blog and I've found it to be a little lacking here. Thanks.

    Comment by J. Welderson — May 31, 2011 @ 2:00 am

  33. no, it’s my jose bautista; you can’t have him

    Comment by fredsbank — May 31, 2011 @ 2:05 am

  34. Can’t we adjust the percent for league/park/hitters?

    I mean really, they play in a big park, they play in the same division as San Diego (PETCO). Plus they play in the NL, which is the pitcher’s league. PLUS the NL had 6 of the top 9 pitcher friendly parks last year.

    To top if all off, their pitchers have really good stuff. You put all that together and it’s kinda hard to see them NOT having the best ratio.

    Comment by Antonio Bananas — May 31, 2011 @ 2:34 am

  35. I’ve been asking myself the same thing. These people throw together all kinds of stats that they seem to sometimes pull out of their asses but really don’t actually say anything because it doesn’t make normal statistical sense. For example, let’s say that Philly ends up with a better team average than Atlanta, are they a better offense? Maybe, but maybe not because they didn’t have to face 4 of the top 20 pitchers in the game.

    I don’t see why we don’t just use variance and LSD (least significant difference) and that sort of thing.

    Someone needs to get SAS or something.

    Comment by Antonio Bananas — May 31, 2011 @ 2:37 am

  36. Wow, did you miss the entire part about how they’re allowing fewer home runs on the road? Did you even read the article for that matter?

    Comment by Giant Torture — May 31, 2011 @ 7:42 am

  37. Did you even read the post for that matter? He acknowledges “this does not explain the low HR rates on the road” and then goes on to give a secondary explanation.

    I don’t buy the secondary explanation, but at least read a post before criticizing someone for the same thing.

    Comment by Yirmiyahu — May 31, 2011 @ 8:16 am

  38. Check out the leader boards for IFFB% among pitching staffs in the same time period. It would appear the Giants lead this category as well. This seems to me no coincidence, as HR/FB includes Infield Fly balls in it’s equation. It would be interesting to see how the giants fare in HR/OFFB (a stat I’ve been wishing fangraphs offered for a while now). Perhaps inducing IFFB’s is the skill we should be assessing, and not HR/FB rate (an IFFB is good for more reasons then just the fact that it’s not going to go for a homerun, it’s also much more likely to be caught, and if for some reason it’s not..not going for extra bases at all)

    Comment by slash12 — May 31, 2011 @ 9:08 am

  39. This really isn’t as hard as it seems. It can all be summed up in two basic principles:

    1. Fastball Command!

    2. Never give in to the hitter!

    The Giants draft and sign pitchers with great velocity who can command the fastball on both sides of the plate. Most HR’s are not lazy flyballs that just happen to carry over the fence. Most HR’s are crushed off one of two kinds of pitches: 1. Fastballs that catch too much of the middle of the strike zone and 2. Hanging breaking balls. Well commanded fastballs with velocity in the 90′s just don’t get crushed very often.

    Giants pitchers give up a lot of walks. I don’t think Righetti overtly tells the pitchers to walk batters to avoid giving up HR’s, but I do think he preaches incessantly to never, ever give in to the hitter. Even if it’s a 3-1 or 3-2 count with a couple of runners on base, they’re still trying to keep it on the corner. They aren’t pitching scared. They aren’t trying to walk the batter, but they also are not afraid to walk the batter while trying to get him out.

    Comment by DrBGiantsfan — May 31, 2011 @ 9:30 am

  40. Lake Calhoun is close though!

    Comment by Brad Johnson — May 31, 2011 @ 11:20 am

  41. Why did you have to ruin his cherry-picked anecdotal theory with your science?

    Comment by Matt — May 31, 2011 @ 11:44 am

  42. Assuming that’s true, wouldn’t understanding how the Giants have been able to control that rate assist us in tinkering/correcting metrics or coming up with new ones that would be more accurate?

    Comment by Matt — May 31, 2011 @ 11:48 am

  43. THIS, but I would add that Righetti seems to be a master teacher of the changeup. I’m not sure how that plays into this. Perhaps it doesn’t. Perhaps it really helps the fastball. I don’t now, but to me, it’s always been one of Righetti’s defining characteristics as a pitching coach.

    Comment by hairball — May 31, 2011 @ 11:57 am

  44. I mean really, they play in a big park: -They take it with them on the road

    they play in the same division as San Diego (PETCO).: -So do 4 other teams, including San Diego (who you can also apply your #1 to)

    Plus they play in the NL, which is the pitcher’s league.: -So does the rest of the NL, and the NL West.

    PLUS the NL had 6 of the top 9 pitcher friendly parks last year.: -The other NL West teams play in those parks there just as often as the Giants

    To top if all off, their pitchers have really good stuff.: -This has been going on since 2000. Or were you including Kurt Ainsworth, Ryan Jensen, and Mark Gardner in that?

    Comment by Matt — May 31, 2011 @ 12:03 pm

  45. Again, the question is not whether there’s a difference, or a trend, but whether it’s significant. Simply citing sample size is not enough here. If all the AL West teams have relatively low HR/FB rates, it might well no longer represent a significant difference, despite the sample size. Examining changes in pitchers who moved away from SF, as well as to it, might also help. Again, I understand people are eager to jump in with theories to explain the Giants’ unusual ability to keep the ball in the park, but it would be nice to see some decisive methodology demonstrating that they are actually doing so.

    Comment by J. Welderson — May 31, 2011 @ 12:17 pm

  46. That’s just not true. I talked to Righetti about this. He doesn’t tell them what you’re assuming he tells them.

    Comment by Dave Cameron — May 31, 2011 @ 12:53 pm

  47. Uh, I believe the Giants have a pretty successful pitching staff, and suppressing HR’s is a big part of it.

    Comment by DrBGiantsfan — May 31, 2011 @ 12:57 pm

  48. Well, at least Righetti SAYS he doesn’t tell them that and maybe he even THINKS he doesn’t tell them that. Maybe he doesn’t say it quite like that, I don’t know. All I know is that is the way they PITCH, all of them, all the time. It’s been a very noticeable characteristic over the course of Righetti’s tenure as pitching coach. There are times when watching it as fan can be extremely frustrating. You find yourself yelling at the TV, “just throw strikes, dammit!”

    Now, I’m not saying that Righetti or the Giants or their pitchers have as their primary goal to avoid HR’s. I think their primary goal is to get the hitter out. Suppressing HR’s is likely a natural by-product of the way they go about getting hitters out, fastball command and not throwing fat pitches.

    Heck, they don’t even give in to sacrifice bunts! I bet if you look up % of successful sacrifice bunt attempts against, you’d find the Giants are pretty good at that too. Again, it’s all about fastball command. They come in high and hard on the inside corner and literally try to knock the bat out of the hands of the bunter, or at least get them to pop it up.

    I read a quote from Dick Tidrow talking about why they drafted Bumgarner. They look for pitchers who can command the fastball on both sides of the plate, so drafting the right type of pitcher is certainly part of the equation.

    I’ve heard Brian Wilson comment on post game interviews after one of his usual 2 walks and a 3-2 count with the bases loades Saves, that he didn’t want to give the hitter anything over middle of the plate he could hit for a HR. I’ve heard other Giants pitchers make similar comments. Mike Krukow, on the Giants TV broadcasts repeatedly comments when Rags comes out to talk to a pitcher who has put a runner or two on base that he’s probably reminding the pitcher he has a base to work with and not give in to the hitter.

    There is just a whole lot of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence pointing to a certainly organizational philosophy despite what Dave Righetti may say in an interview.

    Comment by DrBGiantsfan — May 31, 2011 @ 1:18 pm

  49. You know, all that stuff has been done in various articles on the subject. This is a subject that has been studied and discussed to death. The only people who still don’t accept it are the ones who don’t want to accept it. No matter how many times and way’s it’s proved they will still claim some nitpicky, irrelevant flaw in the analysis so they can go on claiming it doesn’t exist.

    Comment by DrBGiantsfan — May 31, 2011 @ 1:23 pm

  50. The air is not “hot and dry” in Houston. In fact Houston might be the most humid city on this list.

    Comment by Terence — May 31, 2011 @ 1:24 pm

  51. More on Tidrow. In the same interview where he talked about scouting Bumgarner, he said much the same thing about Matt Cain. Tidrow was impressed by Cain’s fastball command and exclaimed to Brian Sabean, “He’s perfect for us!”

    Comment by DrBGiantsfan — May 31, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

  52. I don’t see that Welderson’s question has been answered in those previous studies.

    Even over 10 years, perhaps JUST BY CHANCE, some team is going to end up #1 in exceeding the norm for HR/FB %, and some team is going to end up #30. Just because the Giants are #1 on the list does not mean it’s significant and has a cause other than random chance.

    Comment by KJOK — May 31, 2011 @ 1:55 pm

  53. This is actually one of the more fascinating saber subplots in baseball right now to me. I really don’t have any idea of the answer. I wonder what Tango thinks of it.

    Comment by Telo — May 31, 2011 @ 3:21 pm

  54. To all of those Righetti theory supporters – here’s a hyopthetical:

    Righetti gets hired by another team… does the entire pitching staff immediately, or within a reasonable amount of time (couple months), give up less homeruns?

    Comment by Telo — May 31, 2011 @ 3:24 pm

  55. Nicely done.

    Comment by Scout Finch — May 31, 2011 @ 3:27 pm

  56. I have a theory I’d like to proffer.

    Perhaps the lower HR/FB rate has to do with the type of game the Giants pitchers are occupied with the majority of time : a tight one with no margin for error.

    Can we conclude that a homerun is usually the product of a pitcher serving up a cookie to a batter looking for a cookie? And that this scenario plays out more frequently when a lead is large enough for the pitcher go after the batter or get ahead when in the lead?

    The Giants pitchers don’t have that comfort zone. Their focus is dedicated to limiting damaging where one long ball can spell doom for their inept offense.
    Because they don’t have the luxury of throwing get it in fastballs, they are more likely to throw a higher percentage of pitchers that the hitter just can’t quite get both cheeks into.

    Just a theory and I’m sure someone more crafty than I can string it out or refute it entirely.

    Cheers!

    Comment by Scout Finch — May 31, 2011 @ 3:47 pm

  57. Cool, can you point me to those studies? I haven’t seen them on Fangraphs or elsewhere, certainly not done rigorously, but maybe I just wasn’t looking hard enough.

    Comment by J. Welderson — May 31, 2011 @ 4:12 pm

  58. Yea, they take it on the road, but half of their games are at home. Significant amount.

    Yes, the other teams in the division play in Petco, but the Giants play in Petco AND at their park (AT&T?). So what? 55% of their games are in pitcher friendly parks. The difference between SD and SF is that SF has better pitchers and SD’s offense sucks, which SF gets to pitch against.

    You keep saying “yea but other teams do too”. However, you aren’t putting it all together. NO other team, except for San Diego, meets all the stadium criteria that SF has going for it, the difference is San Diego has an awful offense that SF gets to pitch against and SF has better pitchers. They have the perfect storm.

    Comment by Antonio Banans — May 31, 2011 @ 7:23 pm

  59. I agree. It’s really stupid to not use Least Significant Different, variance, etc. It baffles me that people on here, who can manipulate numbers and come up with all sorts of stats can’t include basic statistical functions.

    Comment by Antonio Banans — May 31, 2011 @ 7:26 pm

  60. Righetti himself had a pretty low HR/9 rate. Too bad we don’t HR/FB rates for him.

    The only good theory I’m seeing is that Righetti is altering something on a certain pitch that gives more late movement. It’d be an insane undertaking but maybe their is a certain pitch on the SF staff that has an extreme low HR/FB rate.

    Comment by Franco — June 1, 2011 @ 12:22 am

  61. Has anyone looked at the minor league affiliates of the Giants? If what DrB says is true, that the Giants have an organizational philosophy not only in drafting and acquiring players, but also in their teaching, to be homerun averse, this trend should show up in AAA, AA, A+, A, and rookie ball.

    Comment by Nivra — June 17, 2011 @ 9:17 pm

  62. One factor why the home park doesn’t allow as many home runs because it’s almost impossible to hit a ball out to right center where it’s 421 feet with a 20 foot wall. I believe I heard the announcers say they’ve only seen two home runs ever go out above that 421 area. It’s the only park in baseball like that. If you completely eliminate all home runs from one area of other stadiums then that HR/FB rate will also take a tumble.

    Comment by John — July 5, 2011 @ 2:28 am

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Current ye@r *

Close this window.

0.128 Powered by WordPress