Nationals may have trade interest in the Braves' center fielder Jordan Schafer

by gondeee on Jun 28, 2009 2:05 PM EDT in Trade News Comment 89 comments

As reported by a Washington Nationals beat writer (via MLBTR):

[Nyjer Morgan} is the not the only outfielder the Nationals are looking at. They have interest in Braves outfielder Jordan Schafer. He began the season as Atlanta's everyday center fielder, but was sent down after the team acquired Nate McLouth from the Pirates.

The Nationals have been unhappy with their outfielders for quite some time. They have come to the conclusion that Adam Dunn and Josh Willingham belong in the American League as designated hitters and Elijah Dukes makes too many mental mistakes.

Only Willie Harris and Austin Kearns have played solid defense, but they are not part of the team's long-term plans.

The presence of Nate McLouth does make Jordan Schafer expendable if trading him nets us a more established offensive player. Man, they're already looking to trade Adam Dunn... Jim Bowden really messed that team up. Dunn is only signed for two years, and is relatively affordable, but I can't fathom us trading for Dunn when we could have signed him without giving up anything just four months ago.

Josh Willingham has always intrigued me, and I would consider him a definite offensive upgrade over Jeff Francoeur or Garret Anderson -- Willingham has the best OPS on the Nationals at .919. I'm not convinced that I would trade a prospect on the magnatude of Jordan Schafer for Willingham, but maybe he's worth it.

The article also says that they are interested in acquiring a second baseman after the season, could they have interest in Kelly Johnson?

0 recs | Comment 89 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Food for thought

You cannot get much worse defense in LF than Garrett Anderson. That is not based on statistics, that is based on direct observation. If I could understand fielding metrics, I would attempt to provide them.

However, I understand offense:

FUGA in ’09: 84 OPS+
FYF in ’09: 66 OPS+ (I wish that were a type-o)
Big Donkey in ’09: 137 OPS+
Willingham in ’09: 140 OPS+ (in 140 ABs)

You can look up other numbers if you wish…I’m not saying we need to make the trade or not, but having either of those guys would inject some production into the lineup.

"Here comes Bream! Here's the throw to the plate! He is...safe! Braves win! Braves win! Braves win! Braves win!...Braves win!"

by jug on Jun 28, 2009 2:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well...

Like I’ve tried to point out, Anderson is hitting fine now and getting better. Francouer and Kelly are the real drains on our offense at this point…

"A player who conjugates a verb in the first person singular cannot be part of the squad, he has to conjugate the verb in the first person plural. We. We want to conquer. We are going to conquer. Using the word 'I' when you're in a group makes things complicated." ~ Wanderley Luxemburgo, 1999

by ejruiz on Jun 28, 2009 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, I agree. I was only comparing those 4 players, since that was what was in the OP.

"Here comes Bream! Here's the throw to the plate! He is...safe! Braves win! Braves win! Braves win! Braves win!...Braves win!"

by jug on Jun 28, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've been able to watch only a few games on tv this year

but from what I’ve seen, Anderson takes the worst routes and simply does not have the speed to make up for it. Either that or his speed is so bad it looks like his routes are, too.

Take care of the little things, and the big things will take care of themselves.

by SunDolphin on Jun 28, 2009 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i say do it..IF

the braves can make up a few more games on the phils the next few days..jordan may pan out, then again he may just be a realllly quick defensive player that strikes out ALOT in the majors..he has promise..kj may get better..but kj is expendable we have an option or two…it just depends on how close we are the next few days..at first i was dunn all the way..but it may not necessarilly be the lack a hitter like dunn..it may be coaching..i don’t know..seems like some days when our hitters should sit back and take a bunch of pitches..we are overly aggressive on first and 2nd pitches..and quick up and down innings.

by SidKotchman on Jun 28, 2009 2:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

a 1-5 of

McLouth, Yunel, Chipper, Dunn, and BMac would be formidable to say the least.

by was385 on Jun 28, 2009 2:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

We don’t have the money to take on Dunn. Not only that but his defense is terrible and he strikesout a ton.

by jack dein on Jun 28, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would be soooo pissed at Wren if he trades Schafer for Dunn and didn’t sign Dunn in the offseason. I think if we REALLY tried we could have signed Dunn for under $8 million that he got from the Nats this season and had him all year. I have been and will still remain on Wren side but that would be his biggest bonehead trade that he has ever done to sit there and give up Schafer for Dunn when we could have had Dunn in the offseason without given up nothin for him just cash.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

THAT is if we even have the cash to get this deal done now.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This.

by ejruiz on Jun 28, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

We could have signed him with an inferior offer? Why?

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 28, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think we could have had him for slightly less than what the Nationals offered. Dunn has played on bad teams throughout his career and the chance to win might have been a draw to him.

by jack dein on Jun 28, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

exactly

jack dein. Thats why i think we could have signed him for 1 or 2 million less. And plus it seemed like at the World Baseball when Chipper and Dunn were on the same team i saw them around each other quite a bit seemed like they were pretty good friends. He took an offer of $8 million this year from Nats and $12 million next year so somethin like 6 million and 13 or 14 million in 2010 would seem legit to me. So thats what i was talkin about MichaelProcton. The thing is im not even sure we even have the cash to take on Dunn salary now anyway these are just rumors.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You do know...

this is a guy who sat on that offer for three months hoping somebody would pay him more, right?

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 28, 2009 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

From what i heard we never even made an offer to him. Rumored was that Wren didn’t like his defense so he never even contacted him. If we had made an offer and had the cash i think he would have signed with us for $6 million or so for the 09 season. I mean i dont know for a fact but he has never made the playoffs and im sure he was aware that the Nats are just NOT gonna make the playoffs in 2009 or 2010.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and he has a MUCH better chance at maken the playoffs with us than the Nats thats for sure.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would do it

but I’m not really sure what the Nationals would have to offer. I’m became very unimpressed with Schafer and now I’m not that sure that he will ever pan out. I would take Kearns or Willingham but they would have to throw someone else to complete it.

by jack dein on Jun 28, 2009 2:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ok this is for the big time defensive stat guys. I dont know alot about the defensive stat thing i will be honest but doesn’t it show that McLouth is more suited in LF cause his defense in CF isn’t all that great? And Schafer is a natural in CF? Ummmm and plus we traded Gorkys, im thinkin that we need to keep Schafer cause we dont have any other defensive wiz CF out there.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 2:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Last year McLouth had the highest fielding percentage of any CF at .997

by jack dein on Jun 28, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ok its just i remember some defensive stat guys mentioning how bad his defense is his URZ or somethin like that i mean im not familiar with that kind of stat but the way they talked he is more suited for LF than CF in the future or whatever.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I remember hearing last year when he won the Gold Glove that everyone was surprised, but then a few days ago i saw he fielding percentage and it was pretty good.

by jack dein on Jun 28, 2009 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There are more things to defense than fielding percentage.

If his range isn’t that good and he only tries to make “sure thing” plays, there are certainly better options out there.

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 28, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fielding percentage is virtually useless as a statistic. It ignores too many aspects of defense.

McLouth’s career UZR in CF is -25.6 (also negative in RF), and -10.8 UZR/150. This year he is -3.5 UZR and -5.2 UZR/150.

Schafer OTOH is -2.3 UZR and -8.2 UZR/150 (in just his major league time).

UZR/150 is a normalized stat assuming 150 games. Both refer to runs above average. Its just one stat, and in Schafer’s case the sample size is small, but McLouth is a below average CF.

All stats from baseball cube.

by B_Agate on Jun 28, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think his offense makes up for any problems on defense. Would you rather have Schafer out there getting to more balls but striking out a lot or McLouth not getting to as many but providing good offense and some speed to our offense.

by jack dein on Jun 28, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Personally i would for next season rather have Schafer in CF and McLouth in LF but thats just me.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not mutually exclusive...

The question is more about who would be better in CF if they’re both on the team, not who should be on the team.

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 28, 2009 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He also had the lowest Dewan number at any position last year, if I remember correctly

BravesHeart, my new, corporate-sponsored blog - NEW STUFF DAILY!!!

by bigjoe on Jun 28, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is why I don’t understand fielding metrics. This sounds like calculus.

But I do at least agree the FP is pretty useless.

"Here comes Bream! Here's the throw to the plate! He is...safe! Braves win! Braves win! Braves win! Braves win!...Braves win!"

by jug on Jun 28, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

UZR divides the field into a bunch of zones. Each zone is the responsibility of a fielder. Every ball is plotted into the zone and whether the fielder made the play on it or not is recorded. For each zone, an average number of balls fielded is recorded and then each player’s results are compared to that average. For example, if McLouth fields 7 balls in zone 101, while the average center fielder fields 8 balls, McLouth would be charged with one play below average. The run value of a ball is determined by finding out what a single, double, etc. has been worth throughout baseball history, and for each play missed, the fielder is charged with that many runs and for each play made above-average, the fielder is credited with that many runs. There are park adjustments and other modifications, but that’s basically it.

A great fielder will be +15, very good is +10, above-average is +5, so on and so forth.

One thing to keep in mind is that defensive stats take a long time to stabilize because of how much is missing from the equation, so that a really good fielder could have three seasons where they are +10, 0, +10. You can just find the average or weighted average of those years to determine their true talent fielding level.

There’s lots of noise in the data and it’s not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but until better stuff comes out of Hit f/x and other tools like that, UZR is the best by far that we have.

by 17843 on Jun 28, 2009 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

great explaination

by eaheckman10 on Jun 29, 2009 8:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What about UZR+

what are the differences and which is better?

"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT

by justincredubil02 on Jun 29, 2009 9:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Uh, you mean UZR/150?

BravesHeart, my new, corporate-sponsored blog - NEW STUFF DAILY!!!

by bigjoe on Jun 29, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's the one

thanks.

"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT

by justincredubil02 on Jun 29, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thats spread out over 150 games to simulate what his number would be over a full season, as opposed to regular old UZR, which is just up to that point in time

BravesHeart, my new, corporate-sponsored blog - NEW STUFF DAILY!!!

by bigjoe on Jun 29, 2009 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What about positioning?

Does UZR take into account a fielders position before the batter makes contact? I understand that each fielder is responsible for a particular zone, but I also understand that just about all fielders are placed in spots due to scouting, batter tendencies, etc, and is almost never in “straight up” center field for example.

I guess this may be too much to ask for in a defensive metric and this may be one of the reasons why it isn’t completely accurate.

by In a Flash on Jun 29, 2009 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or shifts?

Like the Big Papi shift…what if he decides for whatever reason to go opposite instead of pulling and he hits it to where the 3B normally would be, but since the 3B is now in the SS position, he cannot get to the ball…

"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT

by justincredubil02 on Jun 30, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So is UZR a career average or seasonal? When you say “up to that point” it confuses me a little.

Would it be accurate to say that UZR is the season up to that point (whether it be 10 or 100 games) and UZR150 is the last 150 games, whether they be all this current season, or back into last season?

"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT

by justincredubil02 on Jun 30, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

UZR is seasonal...

the 150 is just adjusted to a (mostly) full season’s worth of games for normalization.

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 30, 2009 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

http://diamondbacks.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200806273015164&c_id=ari

No wonder nobody likes you, Tuttle... everything's a (Pujols) damn debate.

by royhobbs on Jun 30, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trade them all

Trade FUGA, FYF, and KJ for a port-o-john, 2 bottles of pepto and a janitor. We would get the best side of this deal. Throw in Schafer for a bat boy and you got yourself a block buster.

by Dammit JIm on Jun 28, 2009 2:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

have all of you lost your minds? Josh Willingham? Is winning this season worth that much to you guys? Your going to give up a future stud like JS for the CHANCE to make up ground on the Phils? ANd for Willingham? wow, 14 straight winning seasons has really pampered some fans. Look at how much the farm has been depleted from moves all season, and you are considering moving our #1 or 2 farmhand. Im shocked and appalled gondee, you would back this up. Granted, the team isnt very good this season, but we have a future to think about, and JS will be able to contribute to that more than willingham. Not only that, FYF is STILL going to be in RF, wheres JW going to play? Hes a 4th OF on the Nationals for Pujols sake.

If anyone is being moved, its Escobar, mark my words, his days are numbered

The New Punchout for Nintendo Wii......get it

by bravesguy311 on Jun 28, 2009 3:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Escobar?

Does this mean I get to watch Diory Hernandez start every day?

If Dunn walks 30 fewer times, he'll drive in 15 more runs. This is thanks to the scientifically proven formula: RBI = (this is nonsense) (I made it all up).

Here's a stat: Wins as manager: Dusty Baker, 1,162; Bill James, 0.

by TradeAndruw on Jun 29, 2009 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You'd imagine...

They would get an SS back if they traded him.

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 29, 2009 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No way we trade Schafer.

2009 Atlanta Braves Motto: We ♥ leaving RISP.

by mvhsbball on Jun 28, 2009 3:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree.

"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Jun 29, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dont think we can take on Dunns salary although I think some trade could develop in the off-season

by Heyward is the next crime dog on Jun 28, 2009 4:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Salary

Might be able to take on one year of his salary if the Nats ate the rest of this year.

by niekromurphy on Jun 28, 2009 4:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

possibly

by Heyward is the next crime dog on Jun 28, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t think Wren will trade Schafer after he shipped off Gorkys…right? Schafer’s a guy we need to hold on to. It will be a mistake if we let him go, even for Adam Dunn.

by soup du jour on Jun 28, 2009 4:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Don’t give up on Schafer. The kid has SO much potential. He has the ability to come back strong and help us win now and for the next 6 years.

by homerun on Jun 28, 2009 4:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I would like to see Jordan get his strikouts under control so we can put him back in CF and move nate to a corner.

by Heyward is the next crime dog on Jun 28, 2009 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The future is Schafer more than Dunn. I think they will regret it if they trade him because IMO it won’t be too long before he could come up and be a real contributor to the team for a very long time.

"Well behaved women rarely make history" ~ Laurel Ulrich

by NCChopper on Jun 28, 2009 5:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

keep JS in the ATL

im no expert, far from it…but he looks like .280/15HR guy with a lot of speeeeeed….perfect for the top of the lineup…..with time…

'09 NL East: 1.Braves 2.Phils 3.Mets 4.Marlins 5. Nats

by lemke2blauser2bream on Jun 28, 2009 5:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This is horseshit

In what scenario is trading Jordan Schafer for ANY outfielder on the Washington Nationals a good idea? Why is this not being shot down universally in here?

Willingham – What kind of significant, team-improving upgrade is he over anyone on the current roster?

Dunn – The money seems to be an issue here, not to mention, the fact that the Nats don’t want him should speak volumes for the Braves’ potential interest in him. Especially when he was on the market almost all winter. If we didn’t want him then, trading Schafer to get him now is beyond absurd.

Kearns – Not even sure where to start on how shitty this guy has become.

I’d be surprised if this rumor went further than it has already. It’d be giving up on Schafer way too soon. Kelly Johnson, though, they can have.

by hoboken_wood on Jun 28, 2009 5:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Yes.

by get swoll yunel on Jun 28, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

word

The New Punchout for Nintendo Wii......get it

by bravesguy311 on Jun 28, 2009 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’d probably trade him for PUT UP YA DUKES

BravesHeart, my new, corporate-sponsored blog - NEW STUFF DAILY!!!

by bigjoe on Jun 28, 2009 8:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 28, 2009 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Will someone please...

give Freddie Freeman a glove to play left field.

by mikie baseball on Jun 28, 2009 6:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I thought Heyward already had that on lock

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 28, 2009 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Would seem to me ...

he could move to right with all that athletic ability.The point should be obvious

by mikie baseball on Jun 28, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, it wasn't to me.

Were you suggesting that we have a lesser need at 1B?

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 28, 2009 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heyward plays right, Schafer plays center, McLouth plays left, Freeman plays first. That is how it will be

by acie4mvp on Jun 29, 2009 3:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thats the plan acie, BUT alot can change in a few years, either because of injury, underperformin or trades. But yeah i get what your sayin that is the plan at the moment.

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 29, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is not going to happen.

by 17843 on Jun 28, 2009 6:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Again, I agree.

"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Jun 29, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Logan has a lot of speed, a great arm and plays terrific center. He was absolutely rushed to the majors and got hurt once he got there. We HAVE to give him some time to get healthy and productive again. It would be ridiculous to not see what he’s capable of once properly prepared.

"When life gives you lemons, just say 'F*ck the lemons,' and bail."

by Bravely going forward on Jun 28, 2009 6:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This

is exactly what I feared. We don’t need to trade away the future for the sake of one season. Schafer needs more time to develop, but he can be a killer center fielder and, with Heyward and McLouth in the corners, our outfield will be pretty fearsome. Dunn/Willingham is a short-term band-aid that wouldn’t really help us for more than a year or two.

by sexbobomb on Jun 28, 2009 8:00 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

This

braves#1

by rockybull on Jun 28, 2009 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No Kearns, he has never done anything,

Willingham maybe, but not for Schafer, maybe KJ

Adam Dunn, is still a pipe dream however he is more of a 1st basemen then an OF.

Regardless we need the offense so getting Dunn would be nice and I guess I would give up Frenchy or KJ but not Schafer.

by Holty_Panthers_Fan on Jun 28, 2009 10:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He’s more of a DH than anything that has to do with a glove.

"If I had a little humility, I would be perfect" - Ted Turner

by Little Lady on Jun 29, 2009 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Imagine this outfield in 2012. Jordan CF Heyward RF Nate LF

by Heyward is the next crime dog on Jun 28, 2009 11:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

trades

Why not ship KJ and Kotchman and get a right handed batter back . I hope we could deal them to Florida for Ross , Cantu or Uggla . Yes i know Uggla is struggling but he can play 2nd and has power .

by ~~banditwolf~~ on Jun 29, 2009 1:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

Because there isn’t an ML-ready 1B in the system. I know you might say Canizares, but I really don’t think he has the hitting to make up for his weak glove. Something like Kotchman’s defense is not the kind of thing you’d notice until it was gone.

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 29, 2009 2:05 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

umm

Trade Schafer for the nationals trash? Great idea

by acie4mvp on Jun 29, 2009 3:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

"Nationals may have trade interest in the Braves' center fielder Jordan Schafer"

In other news, I’d like to date Megan Fox. Hoo-ah.

by Yakker on Jun 29, 2009 2:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i dont concur

she’s to skinny

by drumzalicious on Jun 29, 2009 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

blasphemy

The New Punchout for Nintendo Wii......get it

by bravesguy311 on Jun 29, 2009 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

nah doc

i like my women with some meat on em especially in the lower regions

by drumzalicious on Jun 29, 2009 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Then buy her a steak and tape it to her ankle

by Yakker on Jun 30, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know if that's my reason, exactly...

But I’m definitely not into her either.

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 29, 2009 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I feel like statements like these are only acceptable if they’re made with the understanding that, if she were to approach you in real life, there is no scenario where you wouldn’t gladly accept her advances. To say that, as a dream woman, she’s not your preference is perfectly fine, but if anyone’s going to argue that that woman isn’t completely desireable, well, that’s insane.

"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Jun 30, 2009 1:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

But I wouldn’t say that puts her in a particularly exclusive club among Hollywood actresses.

Remember, kids...don't ever let facts get in the way of your argument.

by MichaelProcton on Jun 30, 2009 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t disagree with that at all.

"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Jun 30, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True

but her having a huge crush on Olivia Wilde kind of does…

Yeah, chew on that for a while…

"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT

by justincredubil02 on Jun 30, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

so true…in fact, there are probably only a handful of celebrity-type people who I would not giggle with glee over in a real-life situation.

They may not be the “fantasy filler” to some, but when you are comparing Ferraris to Aston Martins, who gives a damn? lol

"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT

by justincredubil02 on Jun 30, 2009 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I find that’s a real problem with the women I date. Too skinny.

by Yakker on Jun 30, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

as crazy as it sounds...it is possible:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/06/24/article-1028963-01B8E60600000578-499_468x852.jpg
http://www.nairaland.com/attachments/95826_too_damn_skinny_jpgc830f2a543ffc9b7a36c6b3a7a2dce4b

"Actually, Justin was right."
by bigjoe on May 15, 2009 9:04 AM PDT

by justincredubil02 on Jun 30, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, good point. That’s some pretty sick shit there. Although I’d still probably nail at least 2 of those girls. Add in a fifth of JD and that number probably goes up.

by Yakker on Jun 30, 2009 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs