Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: AdamKilgoreWP and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

Name that player

Here's a little game, a comparison between Nats 2B Adam Kennedy and somebody I'll call a "Very Special Mystery Player." The mystery player is also a second baseman. The mystery player, measured both sabermetrically and with eyes-on scouting, is near-identical to Adam Kennedy, and the Nats front office knows it. Asked a few days ago if he was aware that Kennedy had a statistical twin, GM Mike Rizzo said "Yes" instantly, and then named the very special mystery player.

Here's the tale of the tape between Kennedy and the unidentified.

(He's named at the end of this post. In an anagram.)

Age: 34, 34

CAREER STATS:
Avg.: .277, .275
ABs: 4,583, 4,883
RBI: 486, 582
OBP: .330, .339
SLG: .391, .418
AB/HR: 67.4, 43.6
SO%: 13.8%, 14.0%
Pitchers per plate appearance: 3.72, 3.71

CAREER HIGHS, SINGLE SEASON
Avg.: .312, .295
HRs: 13, 17
RBI: 72, 78
SLG: .449, .473
OPS: .795, .845

162-GM AVERAGE (per baseball-reference.com)
Kennedy: 548 AB, 69 R, 152 H, 29 2B, 5 3B, 8 HR, 58 RBI, 38 BB, 83 K
Mystery player: 564 AB, 76 R, 155 H, 37 2B, 3 3B, 13 HR, 67 RBI, 54 BB, 88 K

FIELDING STATS
Career innings at 2B: 10,045.0; 9861.0
Career fielding %: .983, .981
Career assists: 3,260, 3,200
Career UZR/150: 8.2, 0.3

OBSCURE STAT (BONUS):
2009 WAR (wins above replacement): 1.7, 1.4

Nadir Rebellion.

By Chico Harlan  |  February 26, 2010; 11:00 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Trainer says Nationals not pursuing Jose Julio Ruiz
Next: Livan Hernandez makes his return to Nationals

Comments

Ronnie Belliard?? Really?

Posted by: bartlebooth | February 26, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Ronnie Belliard, although before I read through the stats and the anograms I was afraid it was going to be Felipe Lopez!

Posted by: BigTrain | February 26, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Ronnie Belliard. Though I thought that Nadir was an anagram for his first name and Rebellion was his last so it took some extra time.

Posted by: jsaltman | February 26, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

I was thinking Julio Lugo, but this makes sense. Although i feel like we all just went in a big circle now.

Posted by: Stu27 | February 26, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Woah, you mean, the guy we got as a consolation prize is a statistical replacement of the guy that beat out the guy we were going for?

Posted by: swang30 | February 26, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Belliard has way better hair. Things like that don't show up in raw statistics.

Posted by: Sunderland | February 26, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Here I thought Ralph had finally flipped his lid.

Wacky!

Posted by: Section506 | February 26, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

What the stats DON'T reflect is the way Belliard would tank it when he wasn't happy. THe guy made some crazy plays and could really hit in the clutch -- when he was motivated to do so. Kennedy, though even with Belliard statistically, is an improvement. He'll show up every day and he's good in the locker room to boot. You can't say that about Belliard, which is why he can't seem to find a home.

Posted by: outsider6 | February 26, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Belliard signed with the Dodgers for $850,000 for 2010. Kennedy signed with the Nationals for $1.25 for 2010 (almost 50% more).... Ouch....

Posted by: Y2kob | February 26, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Is it Ireland Oberlin?

Posted by: SorenKierkegaard | February 26, 2010 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Off topic -
I'm wondering why Strasburg is on the 40 man roster. (I'm not questioning if he deserves to be on the roster)
Is he required to be because of something about his contract?

Obviously there are some things about this that I don't understand, hoping you can fill me in.

Posted by: Sunderland | February 26, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Yes, Strasburg's contract requires him to be on the 40-man. It has something to do with the fact that he signed a Major League contract, but I don't know the exact details.

Posted by: cassander | February 26, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Yes his contract required it, Sunderland.

Posted by: Section314 | February 26, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Ok, but is it the 230 pound Belliard that we had or the one that tries hard in LA?

Posted by: dfh21 | February 26, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

the most telling difference in those two sets of stats is UZR.

at this point in his career, belliard has to run 20 yards just to get back into the infield because he positions himself so far back. i have to wonder how many infield hits were given up last year because belliard was essentially playing shallow right field and Dunn was on 1B.

Posted by: sec231 | February 26, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

So he signed an MLB contract and the other draftees signed Minor League contracts.

Is a multi-year dealfor a draftee required to be an MLB contract?

Just ignore me if this is too mundane.
I'll go away.

Posted by: Sunderland | February 26, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

I have nothing bad to say about Belliard, but I am eager to see Kennedy play. His reputation as a good clubhouse and clutch performer and his post season experience certainly seem like good qualities to bring onto the roster. Also, they play differnt positions. Kennedy plays 2B, Belliard was more of a short right fielder.

Posted by: natbiscuits | February 26, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Unless I somehow missed it above, the stats you list don't include number of stolen bases ... I'm guessing Kennedy's career totals in this category - and recent season totals - are considerably higher than Ronnie's.

Posted by: mgilham | February 26, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Career, Kennedy 156 SB's, caught 57
Belliard, 41 SB's, caught 26 (ouch)

Last 3 years:
Kennedy 33 and 9
Belliard 9 and 2

Posted by: Sunderland | February 26, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

"His reputation as a good clubhouse and clutch performer and his post season experience..."

Here's to hoping we find out.

Posted by: horseydeucey | February 26, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Sunderland, the Nats and Strasburg agreed on a multi-year major league contract.

Most draftees just get a bonus (if they even get that) and assigned to the minors.

Posted by: comish4lif | February 26, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Hah, but Belliard was also a Nats (and apparently a Dodgers) good luck charm. Is Kennedy?

Posted by: periculum | February 26, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

"He'll show up every day and he's good in the locker room to boot. You can't say that about Belliard, which is why he can't seem to find a home."

Belliard was with the Nats for two full seasons and most of a third before he was traded to the Dodgers, who have signed him again for 2010. Contrast that with the guy who REALLY can't find a home, Felipe Lopez. Four teams in the last two years, none of whom wants him back. And no one else seems to want him either. So it would seem that the problems with Belliard aren't as bad as you're making them out to be.

Posted by: TBCTBC | February 26, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

I think the key point here is that people who are thinking Kennedy makes the Nationals better than they were last year will be disappointed.

Posted by: sbiel2 | February 26, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Don't think Ronnie was not giving us those career average numbers his last 1/2 year hear.

I like belliardo and wish him well but think Kennedy will improve us.

Posted by: alm1000 | February 26, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Sunderland - there are major league contracts, minor league contracts and split contracts. Langerhans used to have split contract saying he made $400k in the bigs and I think like $200k in the minors but that last figure seems too high...

If I understand it right, draftees don't have multi-year deals because the team has the right to set their salary at the minimum (about $400k this year) or higher if they want for the first three years of ML service.

It's VERY rare for a draftee to get a major league contract. I'm pretty sure SS was the only one is last year's draft. Mark Prior got one, I think David Price did. Very few. Normally that bonus is all you have to keep you going.

Nerd confession, I have downloaded and occasionally consult the collective bargaining agreement. It's a hard read, but I just go for answering specific questions one at a time, that helps.

Posted by: Avar | February 26, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Detwiler had one, didn't he? (Major league contract) Or was that Balester?

Posted by: swang30 | February 26, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

sorry, sbiel2, i disagree. kennedy will make us better at 2B. offensive wash, at worst. defensive improvement over most games played at 2B last season.

not hating on belliard, just realizing that he was a defensive liability at best at this point in his career. one RF is more than enough on the field at the same time. i prefer second basemen who can position themselves in the actual infield defensively and still make a play.

Posted by: sec231 | February 26, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Detwiler got a major league contract, didn't he? He was a Sept callup the year he was drafted. Likewise Zimmerman in 2005. I can't recall who the 2006 #1 pick was so I don't know if he fits the pattern, but it seems like a #1 pick usually gets a major league contract.

Posted by: TBCTBC | February 26, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I will add my thanks to Chico for two years of service, both on the beat and on the blog. Happy Trails!

Wow, lots of posts. If you missed the one with the link to the KC Royals tome, it's worth reading. For those without the inclination to go back and find it, some excerpts are posted below. Does any of this sound vaguely familiar? I think the Lerners should be forced to read the entire thing, it's full of warnings:

*The weird thing is I think the sheer horror of that pitching staff gave the Royals a weird sense of self-assurance. It was almost like they thought, “Well, our offense is terrific, all we need to do now is improve our comically bad pitching staff.” But their offense was not terrific either.

*I know that the difference between 99 losses and 100 is only symbolic. It only matters to sportswriters and historians. But it seems to me that when you are trying to turn around a franchise, symbolism plays a role. And I think if you stop caring about little things like the difference between 99 and 100 losses, you will not care enough about bigger things and you will slip deeper and deeper.

Posted by: BobLHead | February 26, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

A few more Royals excerpts:

*The Royals went 18-9 heading into the All-Star Break and led the division by a full seven games. Absurdity had become reality. The Royals suddenly seemed a real threat to win the division. Of course it didn’t work that way. The season is always longer than you think. Allard had a pretty good track record at finding treasures in other people’s trash … but it’s no way to build a baseball team.

*And finally, the Royals decided they had no choice but to fire Allard Baird. Of course, they screwed that up too. They kept him dangling for weeks while looking for his replacement. Everyone KNEW Allard was fired, but no one SAID Allard was fired. It was probably the least classy move I’ve ever seen from any sports organization — Baird, for all his weaknesses as a GM, had given his heart and soul to the Royals. They treated him like a bum. I don’t know how much I believe in karma. But I believe good organizations — even ruthlessly good organizations — don’t treat people that badly.

*Dayton Moore is an impressive guy. I like him a lot. He came to Kansas City with a purpose … and he accomplished some important things right away. One, his reputation and background gave him enough presence to make owner David Glass and president Dan Glass spend more money on infrastructure and back off somewhat. Two, he was able to hire some excellent baseball people. Three, he worked hard to create a new baseball mindset — one which the Royals would be one of baseball’s classier organizations. The Royals had been so cheap they had canceled their annual banquet and one year did not have have the players in Negro Leagues Uniforms on Negro Leagues Day. It was a ragtag operation. Moore worked hard to change that.

Posted by: BobLHead | February 26, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I think Zimm did get one. Balester did not. But, I think Detwiler did.

Forgot to mention that big league contracts are guaranteed. No matter how awful you are, you get paid. See Kearns, Austin and Young, Dmitri.

Arbitration deals are NOT guaranteed. That's why some guys turn them down. Even if they get less money, at least it will be guaranteed.

Posted by: Avar | February 26, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Evidently the Royals also have something called "The Process" which is roughly the equivalent of "The Plan" (and which has produced similar results to date).

The link to the full post is here:

http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2010/01/02/the-royal-decade/

Let's hope we're not writing something like that in five years or so.

Finally, Nats320 has a picture up that shows a Nationals banner, I guess somewhere on the field in Viera, which contains the slogan "We're on our way." Seriously. You can't make this stuff up:

http://nats320.blogspot.com/

Posted by: BobLHead | February 26, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

By all accounts Belliard is very good in the locker room?

Posted by: periculum | February 26, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was an anagram for Drain Rebellion. Actually, I didn't really, but did you know that there are anagram generators on the Internet? Cool. I think I need to get out more.

I'll add my thanks (again) to Chico. Good luck on your new beat, and don't forget to throw strikes.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | February 26, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of being in shape BEFORE spring training Estes apparently went through x-treme physical training before coming to camp. Makes you wonder?

"Outdoors participants would warm-up, take that as you may, by beating a 450-pound fire truck tire with a sledgehammer before heading indoors where temperature began at 100 degrees. That work included weights, cardio, and hitting a punching bag to, get this, sparring in a 160-degree sauna, after class."

-- excerpted from Mark DeCotis

http://springtraining.flatoday.net/

Posted by: periculum | February 26, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

and the point of all that is to do what, burn the steroids out of your system? Yeesh.

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | February 26, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

2005: "The season is always longer than you think."

2006: "Everyone KNEW [Robinson] was fired, but no one SAID [Robinson] was fired. It was probably the least classy move I’ve ever seen from any sports organization — [Robinson], for all his weaknesses as a [head coach], had given his heart and soul to the [Nationals]. They treated him like a bum. I don’t know how much I believe in karma. But I believe good organizations — even ruthlessly good organizations — don’t treat people that badly." [See supporting Wise story here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/11/AR2009071102401_3.html]

Posted by: BobLHead | February 26, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

FYI, the Nationals Buzz blog on MASN has posted an updated radio and television broadcast schedule for the Nats (including scheduled MLB Network broadcasts, perhaps of interest to those who are not in the DC Metro area).

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | February 26, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

2007: "[Bowden] had a pretty good track record at finding treasures in other people’s trash … but it’s no way to build a baseball team."

2008: "If you stop caring about little things like the difference between 99 and 100 losses, you will not care enough about bigger things and you will slip deeper and deeper."

2009: "The weird thing is I think the sheer horror of that pitching staff gave the [Nationals] a weird sense of self-assurance. It was almost like they thought, “Well, our offense is terrific, all we need to do now is improve our comically bad pitching staff.” But their offense was not terrific either."

2010: "[Mike Rizzo] is an impressive guy. I like him a lot. He came to [Washington] with a purpose … and he accomplished some important things right away. One, his reputation and background gave him enough presence to make owner [Ted Lerner] spend more money on infrastructure and back off somewhat. Two, he was able to hire some excellent baseball people. Three, he worked hard to create a new baseball mindset — one which the [Nationals] would be one of baseball’s classier organizations. The [Nationals] had been so cheap they had [virtually no scouting operation] and and one [game] did not have have the players in uniforms [with the word "Nationals" spelled correctly]. It was a ragtag operation. [Rizzo] worked hard to change that."

See what I mean? Scary.

Posted by: BobLHead | February 26, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

"Actually, I didn't really, but did you know that there are anagram generators on the Internet?"

Where do you think Gal Revels in Pee came from anyway? Someone was playing with an anagram generator, put in Levale Speigner, et voila!

Posted by: TBCTBC | February 26, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Oh, wow. Am I relieved to read that.

********
Where do you think Gal Revels in Pee came from anyway? Someone was playing with an anagram generator, put in Levale Speigner, et voila!
Posted by: TBCTBC | February 26, 2010 1:51 PM

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | February 26, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

but Bobl: "Head coach" ???

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | February 26, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

"Finally, Nats320 has a picture up that shows a Nationals banner, I guess somewhere on the field in Viera, which contains the slogan "We're on our way." Seriously. You can't make this stuff up."

So where's the problem with this? I don't see it. Beats the hell out of "Pledge Your Allegiance" or "Welcome Home." (Sorry, can't find the Curly W key on my keyboard for taht last one.)

Posted by: TBCTBC | February 26, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Someone is thinking "Redskins".

Posted by: periculum | February 26, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Keep forgetting. Take care Chico. I enjoyed having you and totally agree w/ others that have praised your writing skills as rarely matched. I'm confident your career will continue to blossom. I would click on just about any story with your byline.

Bob - actually that '09 bit pasting in Rizzo sounded good to me. Especially the part about his track record and reputation giving Lerner confidence to spend more money and back off.

The Lerners got billions by insisting on getting return on their investments. Would you have given Bowden your own money to pick players?? I wouldn't. It's obvious they trust Rizzo a lot more but at the same time maybe they are smart enough to insist on performance here in DC before really opening the purse strings. If this team makes strong progress in '10, I think Lerner will raise the payroll in '11. And if that's true, I think it's smart. Ask Dan Snyder what team results and fan love you get by opening your wallet to sign big names absent a demonstration of competence in building a team effectively.

Posted by: Avar | February 26, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Hmmmm ... I did kinda blow it with the "head coach" instead of "manager" thing. Maybe I was channeling Jim Zorn.

And TBCTBC, that's the point, it's another crappy slogan that has nothing to do with winning. It's no better than "We were in it 'til the end" or any of the similar slogans we've proposed in here. It's a joke, except they don't get it.

Posted by: BobLHead | February 26, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

I always thought that Belliard was on the cream or the clear. He's very puffy around the face. Think back to the great second basemen of the '80s. Frank White never looked puffy a day in his baseball life.

Posted by: 6thandD | February 26, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Personally, I couldn't care less what their slogan is, good or bad. I care about what the record is.

Posted by: Avar | February 26, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Atleast this year you all will be able to watch the Natinals lose close to 100 games in beautiful HD.

Posted by: Poopy_McPoop | February 26, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Good luck Chico, hope that 20 hour flight out of Dulles isn't too hard on you ... see if you can upgrade to business class ... ~smiles~

Check out Langkawi Island when you get a chance ...

Posted by: periculum | February 26, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

belliard was puffy *EVERYWHERE,* not just the face... ;)

Posted by: sec231 | February 26, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

I recall that GRIP was an anagram but didn't recall the origins.

As for slogans, I'm with Avar. Whatever.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | February 26, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

agreed on the slogan stuff. it's *SUPPOSED* to be marketing fluff.

what did you expect?

WE WON'T SUCK AS MUCH AS WE DID LAST YEAR! GIVE US YOUR MONEY!

Posted by: sec231 | February 26, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

BobL.

I agree. It's a joke and they (Lerner's) don't get it.

Stop with all the silly BS and just spend some money on plyers for crying out loud.

The comparison to the Royals is strikingly similar and the thing that chaps my arse is, that the Royals have more of a reason to be cheap because they ARE in a small market. the Lerner's are running things on the cheap because...they are...well...Cheap.

Posted by: Section505203 | February 26, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Is it Ireland Oberlin?

Posted by: SorenKierkegaard | February 26, 2010 11:30 AM |

Lebron al Ridien?

Posted by: poncedeleroy | February 26, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

"Let's try again in 2010!"

Posted by: Section506 | February 26, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Natinals new slogan:

"We suck, but atleast we'll suck in HD"

Posted by: Poopy_McPoop | February 26, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Exactly, 506. Maybe I shouldn't be so critical, at least they're being honest.

"Pledge Your Allegiance," because we're a new team in town, and we're going to need loyal fans because we're going to suck for awhile.

"Welcome Home," because let's face it, this year is all about the new park and not about what's on the field.

Looking at it that way, "We're on the way" falls right in line. But so does "Let's try again." Which is kind of sad.

I'm not trying to say that slogans matter much compared to building a winning team, they don't. But this organization has, in the past, proven incompetent in so many areas (food service, to pick one) that continued failure in any one area (marketing) is cause for concern in all other areas. If their radio marketing campaign has anything to do with Metro or parking this year I may have to take drastic action.

Posted by: BobLHead | February 26, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

"Stop with all the silly BS and just spend some money on plyers for crying out loud."

Yeah, and while they're at it, they need to get some wrenches and nails (they already have a Hammer).

Posted by: erocks33 | February 26, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Natinals new slogan:

"More people watch Small Wonder re-runs than the Nats, but hey, who doesn't love a robot girl"

Posted by: Poopy_McPoop | February 26, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

""Pledge Your Allegiance," because we're a new team in town, and we're going to need loyal fans because we're going to suck for awhile.

"Welcome Home," because let's face it, this year is all about the new park and not about what's on the field.

Looking at it that way, "We're on the way" falls right in line. But so does "Let's try again." Which is kind of sad."

Wrong. The slogan this year represents a 180 degree turn from slogans past. "Pledge Your Allegiance" and "Welcome Home" could just as easily be rephrased as "Ask not what the team can do for the fans, ask what the fans can do for the team." "We're on our way" is all about what the team is promising to do this year. Promises as yet to be delivered, yes, but they're no longer asking us to do something for them. They're promising to do something for us. Big, big difference.

Posted by: TBCTBC | February 26, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

the real point about the slogans is this:

they mean nothing.

nada.

zilch.

this is the lamest part of marketing (spoken as someone who works in the field). we spend so much time working on ridiculous stuff like this and less time on improving the perception of the product. and slogans won't fix the perception. they're more likely to make people laugh at you than with you (or respect you). i usually advise people not to use taglines and slogans like this too heavily unless they're really catchy or special because i think it's very possible that they'll garner more negative reaction than positive.

as far as the nats go, the only thing that really matters is the product on the field. a sh!tty product with a great slogan will not draw fans. a great product with a sh!tty slogan *will* draw fans.

so in the end, if they improve significantly (which shouldn't be too hard, considering), fans will start coming out again. if they stay in the vicinity of 100 losses, it won't matter what the slogan is.

Posted by: sec231 | February 26, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Okay, while we're on (meaningless) slogans: it always frosted my shorts when they'd read those ads exhorting me to "become a citizen of NatsTown" by buying season tickets. I just thought NatsTown had, or should have, a broader citizenry than that. Like, I think JohninMpls is a citizen, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't have a season-ticket plan.

I dunno. Just didn't like the implication that you have to buy one of their plans to earn citizenship.

Like I said, it meant nothing. But I was always curious if it irritated anyone else.

Posted by: Scooter_ | February 26, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I've never liked the Nats marketing style. But I figure they aren't after me since I already know I like baseball.

Posted by: longterm | February 26, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Scooter, I didn't mind the slogan, but I do also find the association of having season tickets with being a NatsTown citizen somewhat off-putting. (Random thought: if somebody has a 20-game or mini-plan, does that make them a second-class citizen? :-))

I understand that it's a business and the bottom line is important, but there are other ways that fans contribute financially (buying merchandise or paying to watch broadcasts, for example, or buying numerous single-game tickets, for individuals or a group).

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | February 26, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

That's fun that they're so close, if you leave out any base running stats and don't account for fielding range (though it comes through in the UZR/WAR). Always loved Ronnie, but I'd rather have Kennedy on the field.

Posted by: ParkShark | February 26, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company