| By Alex Carson |  | By 01-05-2012 |
The Seattle Mariners and Hisashi Iwakuma have struck a deal, according to several reports.
You may remember that a little over a year ago, the Mariners were thought to have won the posting rights for Iwakuma. Then it was learned that the Mariners had not won those rights and that the Oakland Athletics prevailed. The A's failed to sign him, however, so he returned to Rakuten.
This time around, Iwakuma was a free agent, and one entering his age 31 season and coming off a year that saw his shoulder hurt and his velocity dip. Those two occurrences could be related as his velocity reportedly did come back up a bit as he got healthy.
What can we expect from him?
When healthy, he wasn't a flame thrower. Iwakuma is a high-80's pitch-to-contact ground-ball guy. Safeco Field tends to be nice to these pitchers. While he'll be facing better competition, he's not going to transform into a flyball pitcher.
His age and recent injury certainly create some risk, but for the right price this could end up being a good sign. It could even end up being a nifty bargain at the price he's guaranteed on the one-year deal, which is reportedly $1.5 million. The chance of this being a disaster is slim.
Yes, the Mariners need offense. But, behind Felix and Pineda, their rotation has a lot of question marks heading into 2012. Value is value and if they can get a one-win stopgap on a fair deal, we should all consider that a job well done by GM Jack Zduriencik.
This move should have little bearing on the pursuit of you-know-who, but it could provide depth if the club wants to move a starting pitcher or hold off Danny Hultzen for a couple of months.
Scouting Iwakuma
Iwakuma, who will be 32 in April, stands at 6-foot-3 and about 190 pounds. He offers a fastball that tops out at 92 mph when fully healthy, and generally sat in the 87-89 mph range this past season until he shook some of the rust from his time on the disabled list. His fastball command is above average and he generates good sink and arm side run to get the ground ball.
He also offers a split-finger/forkball type changeup in the 78-82 mph range and a slider in the low-80s that can induce some swings and misses. His performance and the effectiveness of his pitches, however, have come against non-MLB competition, so he profiles as a back-end starter with a No. 3 ceiling and a swing man floor. He'll have to keep the ball down, maintain his upper-end velocity and show a consistent array of breaking pitches to reach that ceiling, so we're probably looking at a No. 4 starter.
His shoulder injury is a concern, but he is a good athlete who puts in a lot of hard work and by all accounts is presently healthy.
- Jason A. Churchill
impact-of-hisashi-iwakuma
Comments
The following 59 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: rotoenquire on 01-05-2012 23:38:12 SO looking at the pitching staff and bull pen as it stands right now. 1. Felix 2. Pineda 3. Vargas 4. Iwakuma 5. Beavan, Hultzen, Paxton CL League LHS Sherrill RHS Wilhelmsen LR Furbush SR Ruffin SR Kelley LHS(Left Hand Specialist) RHS(Right Hand Specialist) LR(Long Relief) SR(Short Relief I would prefer Beavan in long releaf and one of Hultzen or Paxton as your #4 Starter and move Iwakuma to 5. Using Furbush and League in some sort of trade. Leaving Ruffin and Sherrill to battle for the closer role. The pen does not over thrill me as is. I am still of a firm belief that the season after this will be when the club is ready to go for it all for a nice long stretch. A Pitching Staff of Felix, Pineda, Hultzen, Paxton and Appel would be impressive. But just as important to a team as a solid pitching staff is having that long term catcher. That position can make all the difference. M. Zunino C Fla would be that fit instead of Appel who will most likely be gone by pick #3. Zunino in most mock drafts going anywhere from 4th to 6th pick. With he M's figured to pick Buxton HS OF or McCullers HS RHP. Both the other kids project out very well. And by most accounts would be solid gets. But as you all know, I would love to see Zunino come to Seattle. |
| 2. By: pwhit44 on 01-05-2012 23:42:11 If Ruffin and Sherrill are battling to be closer, something has gone horribly, horribly wrong. Batten down the hatches! Run for the hills!! |
| 3. By: StandinPat on 01-05-2012 23:56:17 @2 1) They Aren't 2) You don't know how they'll pitch in 2012 3) What the hell was your point again? |
| 4. By: pwhit44 on 01-06-2012 00:26:42 @3... Seriously, pal? Take a moment to read the first comment of the thread. You might figure out what the point was. I was responding to the comment immediately preceding mine. If you dig hard, you might find it. The PI comment section is a cluster right now. Do better, PI commenters. |
| 5. By: StandinPat on 01-06-2012 00:41:18 "Seriously, pal? Take a moment to read the first comment of the thread. You might figure out what the point was. I was responding to the comment immediately preceding mine. If you dig hard, you might find it." Consider it read and re-read. Still makes no sense. If Sherill is a lefty specialist and Ruffin is the 3rd right hander, how does that have either of them "battling to be closer?" Maybe you're "digging" a little too hard. "The PI comment section is a cluster right now. Do better, PI commenters" See comments 2 and 4 |
| 6. By: pwhit44 on 01-06-2012 00:46:13 I was responding to this: "...Leaving Ruffin and Sherrill to battle for the closer role...." My response was brief and lighthearted. Fly a kite. |
| 7. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-06-2012 00:49:52 Fellas, come on. Pat, how did you miss that, man!? It was right there! I think we're all on edge because it's January. |
| 8. By: pwhit44 on 01-06-2012 00:53:53 Seriously. Can a dude banter? ... I'm going to refrain from further comment. |
| 9. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-06-2012 00:57:30 I just like the fact that roto typed out bullpen as TWO words. |
| 10. By: StandinPat on 01-06-2012 01:00:58 I guess I missed that one line, because it contradicted the first half of his post. Roto has Sherill as a LOOGY and Ruffin as the third RH in the bullpen, which wouldn't normally suggest either one of those guys being the next man up. |
| 11. By: pwhit44 on 01-06-2012 01:01:18 Haha! Yes, let's be sure to enunciate our written words. "Bull. Pen." ... Nailed it. |
| 12. By: Jason A. Churchill on 01-06-2012 01:52:40 There's an inside joke I had going last year at Cheney Stadium with one of the official scorers. It's not funny unless you're staring at the diamond vision screen and see: No. 35 Carlos Triunfel Short Stop |
| 13. By: pwhit44 on 01-06-2012 02:17:36 I'd imagine there's way more fun to be had at Cheney Stadium than the average fan knows about. Different environment -- you guys must have a blast. Wish I could get down there more often. |
| 14. By: ajhedglin on 01-06-2012 07:05:10 Pwhit44: I believe you mean "different enviro mint." No? |
| 15. By: rocketdawg31 on 01-06-2012 10:46:50 Thoughts on the Great Sherrill/Ruffin As Closer Debate: Well, if Brandon League is traded (and I'm thinking now that that's pretty unlikely until just before July 31st of 2012), there's no real reason why Chance Ruffin couldn't audition to be the closer. But right now, I see him as an 8th-inning guy. Maybe a long man. He throws okay hard enough, I've seen worse control for a pitcher his age and he seems to have a few pitches...but nothing that I would consider so dominant that he'd be a natural fit as a closer. Sherrill I don't see at all, unless he's solved righties with power somehow over the winter. Sidenotes: I would love to see us pick Mike Zunino with the #3 pick of the draft. But I'm not certain if he's worth getting picked that high. This seems like a good time to say: "JAC....what'cha think about Zunino? Doe he make sense to you right now at #3? In terms of Best Available Talent." |
| 16. By: nater on 01-06-2012 11:38:29 Now someone needs to go over to the Seattle Times and post that Jack Z plans to have Ruffin and Sherrill battle for the closer job. |
| 17. By: sexymarinersfan on 01-06-2012 12:09:59 Wilhelmson has the best chance to be the closer if League was gone which I don't think I'd gonna happen, right now. I think the M's should take the Best Player Available at #3. I don't think Zunino would be a bad pick, he's just not whom I would select. You never know what's gonna happen though between now and then. Remember that Anthony Rendon at this time last year was the no doubt about it pick in most of our minds. It could be anybody. They've got their list of targeted guys though. Maybe you can ask Z at Fanfest?! |
| 18. By: Adam H. Wong on 01-06-2012 12:34:22 Ruffin and Sherrill will battle at Kitchen Stadium, and Brandon League will judge their utilization of the secret ingredient: spam. |
| 19. By: rocketdawg31 on 01-06-2012 12:54:53 You never know what's gonna happen though between now and then. Remember that Anthony Rendon at this time last year was the no doubt about it pick in most of our minds. It could be anybody. They've got their list of targeted guys though. Maybe you can ask Z at Fanfest?! Heh. I think the odds of any of us- even JAC- being told any really accurate, pertinent and valuable org info at FanFest from Zduriencik lies right along the same odds of winning the Mega Millions. Back to back. |
| 20. By: Edman on 01-06-2012 14:26:44 The Prince Fielder saga continues. With the Cubs acquiring Rizzo, Fielder starts to look a lot less important as the Theo era begins. I'm not even sure how big a player Washington is. The don't really need Prince, especially at the price tag he'll demand. Granted, he's a large step up from LaRoche, but that's a lot of money to commit. I would LMAO if Boras ended up screwing Fielder, because he didn't act quick enough. It's a typical Boras tactic. Try to build a bidding war, wait until the last minute, then see who panics. The problem is, as big as Fielder's potential is right now, teams will always have concerns about his weight. Fair or not, when you talk about an investment over $150 million, it's a real concern. Nothing would make Me happier than to see Scott Boras miscalculate. Unfortunately, his miscalculations have hurt his clients in the past. But, when he wins, he wins big. Honestly, who couldn't do well for their family with even $20 million? You could bank it and live off the interest and live quite well. |
| 21. By: Adam B. on 01-06-2012 17:44:44 Well if your definition of "screwing Prince Fielder" is getting him Adrian Gonzalez's contract, I might see it. The problem is, even if Boras continues to lose leverage and Fielder's price tag comes down (which it will), that just means teams like the Blue Jays, Rangers and perhaps the Marlins would just jump back into contention with the M's. I just get the feeling that Prince would only consider Seattle if he had no other choice, or if they made the best financial offer by a fairly significant sum. Honestly though, I'm kind of at the point where I hope someone like the Nationals signs him for 8-years and 200M just so the M's can get to work on a "plan B." |
| 22. By: titans12 on 01-06-2012 19:35:44 What is plan B ? |
| 23. By: aerichner on 01-06-2012 19:42:01 Plan B? The F.O. knows - that's why they get paid and not us. Sit tight and stop bitching. The Mariners DONT LEAK INFO |
| 24. By: titans12 on 01-06-2012 19:52:51 How did I bitch? Just wondering what you thought plan B was. |
| 25. By: valencia on 01-06-2012 20:06:47 All these Fielder nay-sayers hoping for a Plan B don't realize Plan B is just "do nothing." There's nothing wrong with doing nothing, but don't imagine that there's anything special planned. There probably isn't. |
| 26. By: titans12 on 01-06-2012 20:29:46 We will sign Fielder for 8/170. The Nats are not in.Just have to hope Darvish signs in Tex. |
| 27. By: rotoenquire on 01-06-2012 23:30:42 Closers seem to always come from the last place you look. Aardsma was supposed to be the second coming 5 years ago. And League was never viewed as a can't miss closer. Bullpen is a word spell check does not seem to like unless it is at the beginning of a sentence and capitalized. |
| 28. By: rotoenquire on 01-06-2012 23:44:44 What about the report the M's are kicking the tires on P. Maholm to add to the staff. I like it at the right price. |
| 29. By: baseballman on 01-07-2012 02:56:13 You're right valencia, Jack Z has no plan past Prince. Yep I bet he's just sweating bullets while he twiddles his thumbs. Yeah that's right, because we all know how much Jack Z hates to make trades... |
| 30. By: valencia on 01-07-2012 05:11:24 What does he have to trade? Vargas? Wilhelmsen? Beavan? Ryan? Gutierrez? We're out of MLB talent to trade. Sorry but he's not going to trade our Top 6. Why would we trade future talent for current talent at this point? He won't, unless he's fleecing someone. And I don't know what kind of return you expect to get from the non Top 6 like a Erasmo Ramirez, but it's probably a 4th OF on the Padres or something. Do you listen to Jack Z interviews? He preaches the same thing - "patience". His plan is to keep our prospects and develop them. So yes, if he doesn't get Fielder, his plan is "do nothing." If he got Fielder it would be the same, do nothing. Let the prospects develop. I have zero problem with doing nothing. I don't know why you guys are so butt hurt about the plan Z has been preaching in interviews. How do you guys praise Z's "plan" but then secretly want him to deviate and make a trade? I'd love whatever kool-aid you're drinking. |
| 31. By: kyle_mahlstedt on 01-07-2012 11:10:47 There is no plan B. Becuase plan A is to sign Prince and Jack Z will... Prince WILL be a Mariner in 2012... |
| 32. By: maqman on 01-07-2012 13:05:51 Z said after signing Iwakuma that he just might sign another pitcher if the right deal was available. With Felix, Pineda, Vargas, Beaven, Iwakuma, Hultzen and K-Pax why would he spend on another pitcher? 'Cause he will out wait Boras and Fielder and sign Fielder at a reasonable deal. If it turns out that is not possible GMZ most likely has a Plan B, C and D and they will most likely require trading pitching and/or prospects for bats. He's just waiting to see the big frog jump, or not. Either way he is not finished dealing yet. |
| 33. By: on 01-07-2012 13:11:27 While part of Zduriencik's job is to rebuild our minor league system, I think part of his job is also to put the best possible product on the field for Seattle's fans, every season. And in his case, I believe his job is to balance both, as both were neglected under the previous GM. I tend to agree that the Mariners have enough good prospects coming up that they might not have to make major deals now in order to field a competitive team in a few years. On the other hand, I don't see why the Mariners wouldn't trade a prospect if it meant acquiring someone who can hit decently at the major league level, is reasonably young, and is cost-controlled for a couple years or more. If part of the process of rebuilding the Mariners team includes acquiring upgrades at positions where there are no kids knocking on the door (so as to have capable guys manning those positions in Seattle until kids are ready), it seems he might consider trading a prospect or two. If they find a young player available who projects higher at his position than what they have in their system, I hope they go for it. Our minor league system has gotten much better during the last three years, and I love how that's going. I'm not necessarily saying I advocate Z trading Hultzen, Paxton, Walker, Catricala or any of these other young guys who are showing us that their ceiling is that of a pretty good major leaguer at worst. I think that it is not outside the realm of possibility that Zduriencik might trade a good prospect if he sees a chance to improve the Mariners by acquiring a good young player or two from outside the organization... not just for 2012 but for beyond. |
| 34. By: Ungnome on 01-07-2012 13:27:46 Tacoma is stocked with players that could make an impact in the majors in 2013. Z has done an excellent job of acquiring players who will be major leaguers. There is a ton of value in that. Z has no plan in FA past Prince because there is very little value in FA past Prince. He was looking at a bunch of league average players who would cost more than the league average players already on the roster. Z has maintained payroll flexibility while still making marginal upgrades and avoiding real commitments to players who lack upside. I will repeat what I said over at USSM (Into the Unknown) about the market for Prince. The longer that Prince sits on the market the better it is for the M's chances of landing him on a reasonable deal. The market has not developed and the suitors are dropping out (Cubs), have stated they wil go in another direction (Nationals, Rangers), are not interested (Marlins), or will not come close to the reported demands (Blue Jays). The only team to not be 'out' of the running has been the M's. Z is not stupid and realizes a bad deal for Prince could hurt the organization. Every day that passes without Prince signing is a good day for the low bidder. Z is beating Boras at his own game. Be patient. |
| 35. By: rocketdawg31 on 01-07-2012 13:45:30 The Prince Fielder saga continues. With the Cubs acquiring Rizzo, Fielder starts to look a lot less important as the Theo era begins. I'm not even sure how big a player Washington is. The don't really need Prince, especially at the price tag he'll demand. I agree with this, Edman...where the Nats stand in all of this is the most difficult thing for me to gauge, as well. Is it all a smokescreen are are they working feverishly to put in a deal that would reel him in? My gut feeling says so, despite what they're claiming to the contrary. I'm of the mind that Fielder isn't a West Coast guy, and would prefer playing in DC over Seattle...but in terms of dollars, if the Nats pony up anything close to respectable, hey. The Washingtons are poised to be a power even now, with the right move furthering that along. I know they like LaRoche...but c'mon. Fielder performing at even 80% of his career numbers is a clear upgrade over LaRoche. |
| 36. By: rocketdawg31 on 01-07-2012 13:48:42 I would like to point out I am NOT an advocate for signing Prince Fielder at any cost. If there's a reasonable price, I can live with it. But a decade of mostly-bad free agent signings doesn't have me anxious for more- especially when I think a healthy Justin Smoak has a chance to put up MVP-caliber numbers. I am a big Justin Smoak believer. All he needs is health. |
| 37. By: Hackinator on 01-07-2012 15:44:02 I agree with you Rocket ...lets give him a chance.... When i read thru these blogs ,improvement by players doesn't get consideration a lot of the time.... Look where Carp has come since we got him .. In Z I trust ,...... I wouldn't want to play pocker with him..... Actually I would that would be pretty cool.... |
| 38. By: nighthawk180 on 01-07-2012 17:49:47 I am not so worried about how much the mariners are going to pay fielder to get him to come. If one looks at the big picture here we are only going to be losing these big contract players and replacing them with prospects from within. Take Ichiro for example 18m per is gone after this year. No way is he going to be making that much from here on out or at all after his contract is up. Take what you save from Ichiro's next contract/retirement whatever and apply that to Fielder. If we have the farm system to fill the holes we need or trade for others why not? Cheap replacements :) Granted Jack Z isnt stupid so he wont be forced to pay some retarded number to fielder but i mean really i would much rather sign Fielder then have to trade away our talent to land one big bat like him. The chances of a player like him coming to the market are getting slim. A young Power hitting/On Base machine are rare. Granted all F/A have their ups and downs but Im trying to look long term we need a Fielder type bat along with another. If we trade for a player like him we are not only losing some valuable prospects that fill the holes we will have but also limits us to trade for others, in other words you will have less trade chips. Besides look at what its going to take to land said players? Pineda plus at least 2 of our top 6 to land a marquee bat(taking from the pitching trades of late and assuming bats might cost a little more). If we sign him then we use the prospects for lower salary players or trade chips that would make the team better. If only Fielder isnt the answer then why would trading the farm to acquire two said talents be any better? Sry for the long post and im sure im looking at it differently then some but im trying to make it the least painful to see the small surplus we have not be depleted along with keeping the overall payroll somewhat low. :) Nighthawk180 |
| 39. By: rotoenquire on 01-07-2012 18:38:38 OK, things are shaping up in a way nobody expected. The Cubs are going young and acquired A. Rizzo. The Nat's "SAY" there set at 1B with LaRoche. The yanks have Teixeira and the Sox have Youk. The Jays, M's and Brewers appear to be all that is left in regards to going after Fielder. Yes I know the Marlins are rumored to still be in it. But really the Marlins?!? Texas #1 goal is to get Darvish done asap. They could still be in it, but after spending what could be 110 Million on one player are they really in it? I was at the beginning not thinking the M's stood a chance. I think they have a chance, the one thing standing in there way is location. It is widely believed Fielder wants to stay close to home and his kids. Ala Piniella, Griffey and Johnson, we also do not want to end up being the only team offering him what he wants and him taking it and not being happy about it. IF that happens look for an out clause in any deal with the M's say after 3 years.. To get fielder I would think 7 years 170-180 is what we maybe looking at with that out clause.. |
| 40. By: Wes45 on 01-08-2012 00:26:11 I'm going to sound petty but I hearby apply a negative mutiple to the comments of those who cannot differentiate between "than" vs. "then" and "lose" vs. "loose". |
| 41. By: nighthawk180 on 01-08-2012 00:57:26 You are right Wes i could have reread my post and looked at it a little closer but i hope you got what i was trying to say there its something that hasnt really been said to full extent. I was trying to point out what we could do verses Fielder or bust. I mean if you look at it which is better Fielder at whatever the cost it takes verses no fielder and trading a bulk of the talent to get a player of the same caliber and still have to pay him to stay and lose out on the talent for the future whatever that may bring. I choose the Fielder but he has to want to come here in the first place and second i trust in JZ but i have to wonder if by waiting this long his "plan" has been altered from the start of the offseason. All the 2nd tier F/A that would have filled the holes we needed are gone now and the only one left is Fielder. Im good either way but would very much like Fielder here and then either trade or use the farm to get a player of his talents. We need more than one Fielder type bat period. |
| 42. By: KingFelix on 01-08-2012 09:41:18 I would love to see Fielder in our lineup taking the pressure off our young bats. I just do not see it happening and I think Plan B is to pocket the cash and have another year of playing the kids and taking our lumps until 2013 with Ichiro off the books. If this is what Plan B is it will be a long season but it will be easy to get great seats since there will be a ton of seats available to Ms home games. |
| 43. By: Rudolf on 01-08-2012 10:34:54 this ^ There could be worse things than watching our kids play for a year or two. We'll get to see if Seager, Catricala, Robinson, etc. can hack it at the major league level, and might develop some extra trade chips we might otherwise have buried in the depth charts. And we'll have a pukey little payroll that will allow us to go in any direction. |
| 44. By: ripperlv on 01-08-2012 13:16:49 I was in Newport Beach yesterday sitting at the table behind Boras and Fielder at Fat Burger. I heard Prince, and I swear it was something about emerald rain, or the new rain man, or maybe The Reign Man being purple. Anyways, forget the rumors, he says he wants to play in the rain, I mean Seattle. No joke. |
| 45. By: d2ret on 01-08-2012 13:47:18 i thought Fielder was a vegan. |
| 46. By: baseballman on 01-08-2012 13:47:38 Re: 44, if that's true then no one tell him that Safeco has a retractable roof lol. |
| 47. By: Shawnuel on 01-08-2012 16:49:31 RE: #40. Can we include "should have" vs. "should of" as well? |
| 48. By: pwhit44 on 01-08-2012 18:18:42 I hate you, #44. Mostly because I'm just about at the point of being irrational enough to believe it. |
| 49. By: Edman on 01-08-2012 19:50:38 Or how about we stop bitching about typos and grammarical errors, and just pay attention to the content? Those in glass houses...... |
| 50. By: Shawnuel on 01-08-2012 21:58:56 Sure...we could bitch unrelentingly about how incorrectly people use WAR on this site instead....much more productive. |
| 51. By: valencia on 01-08-2012 22:01:41 Three 2 WAR players are worth more than one 5 WAR player and if you don't understand this you're using WAR wrong. |
| 52. By: nighthawk180 on 01-08-2012 22:55:26 What i want to know Shawnuel and Wes was what you thought of my post rather then the grammar of it. Last time i checked this was a baseball site not my high school English class. Or in other words please provide some thought about my post then be a grammar coach thx :) Nighthawk180 |
| 53. By: nighthawk180 on 01-08-2012 23:00:02 Valenica I think your logic is correct but your missing one key fact there 3 players vs. 1 player. There are 9 players on the field and another 15. 1 5 war player plus two more .5 war players equals the same here. Would you be pleased with 2 .5 war players playing everday? I sure wouldnt be pleased with that. 1 5 war player plus 2 other 2 war players is 9 vs. your 3, 2 war players equaling 6. Just saying. |
| 54. By: nighthawk180 on 01-08-2012 23:01:02 i meant another 16 players lol sry my fault |
| 55. By: Shawnuel on 01-09-2012 00:23:33 Nighthawk I didn't even notice the grammatical errors in your post. I was solely responding to Wes. I think he was speaking generally about this thread not about your post(s)specifically. Sometimes I am just an imp and inadvertently stir things up. Sorry. Will stick to baseball. |
| 56. By: Edman on 01-09-2012 02:16:42 Yes, Shawnuel, because if someone is talking about WAR, rather than typos, then they are talking about baseball. So yes, it is more applicable than worrying about if someone uses "then" or "than". Yes, being a writer, I noticed. But I'm not a grammar snob, so it was pretty meaningless to me. You feel the need to correct english, go be a grade school teacher. |
| 57. By: StandinPat on 01-09-2012 14:27:28 "Three 2 WAR players are worth more than one 5 WAR player and if you don't understand this you're using WAR wrong." If you think that's an incorrect use of WAR, then your statement is an incorrect use of logic. You are assuming that those three players would be replacing replacement level performance, which simply can't be assumed. Last year the Mariners had 25 different players that were better than replacement level, most of which did so in limited time, so the net gain wouldn't be 6 WAR, it'd be 6-(Whatever the current roster holders produce). Furthermore, 2 Win players are considerably easier to find than 5 Win players. Fister, Vargas and Ryan were all acquired for next to nothing, yet produced higher than 2 WAR. In fact, over 100 position players produced 2 or more Wins last year, however, only 29 position players in all baseball produced more than 5 WAR. |
| 58. By: Shawnuel on 01-09-2012 15:40:30 #56 I AM a grade school teacher. |
| 59. By: valencia on 01-09-2012 20:06:55 Whoosh. I was trying to create a meme but I guess I failed. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
 |
|
|
| Copyright 2010 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |