Preparing for September Roster Expansion and Other Bullets

mike olt iowaOnward (sometimes I draw a blank up here) …

  • The Cubs’ front office will soon meet with Dale Sveum to discuss possible September call-ups, per Cubs.com. For those who don’t know, in September, the 25-man roster expands to include anyone on the 40-man roster (as in, you can bring up anyone on the 40-man that you’d like, regardless of the previous 25-man roster limit). Plausible call-ups include Jake Arrieta, Justin Grimm, Brooks Raley, JC Boscan (most teams go to three catchers in September), and Dave Sappelt. Josh Vitters and Brett Jackson are also possible, but each probably needs to just keep playing to make up for lost time. Matt Szczur and Christian Villanueva are still probably a bit too green to come up, and Mike Olt probably needs to keep working on whatever issues are plaguing him right now (being further exposed at the big league level won’t do much for his confidence). I’m not sure the Cubs will want Alberto Cabrera to get too many more innings, and I’m not sure Trey McNutt is long for the 40-man. Logan Watkins is already in Chicago, so he’s not really a “September call-up,” but he would have been considered.
  • Otherwise, we could see a few guys come off of the DL (Brian Bogusevic, Ryan Sweeney, Luis Valbuena), and could see the Cubs finally add Scott Baker, if his rehab is completed in the next few weeks. In other words, short of Arrieta and Grimm both being inserted into the rotation, I don’t know that there’s going to be a ton to get excited about – in terms of seeing new-ish, young players – when rosters expand.
  • There is also, of course, the possibility that the Cubs could add a player or two to the 40-man roster and bring them up. Given how tight the 40-man figures to be this offseason, I wouldn’t be surprised if the only players under serious consideration for addition to the 40-man in September are guys that the Cubs might need to add anyway to avoid Rule 5 Draft eligibility. (If the Cubs add a guy now whom they don’t otherwise have to add, he eats up a 40-man spot all offseason or he gets waived and could be plucked from the Cubs.) Per Arizona Phil over at TCR, there are quite a few interesting guys that project to be Rule 5 eligible this year, including Arismendy Alcantara, Eric Jokisch, Gioskar Amaya, and more. This will all make for some very difficult decisions come November, but the Cubs could make a couple of the decisions in September.
  • Theo Epstein remains firmly in Jeff Samardzija’s corner, regardless of a stretch of rough starts. “I want him to continue to grow as a pitcher and continue to develop the consistency, which is the last remaining hurdle for him,” Epstein said, per CSN. “He’s got tremendous stuff and tremendous makeup. Really, the only thing separating him from being the pitcher we believe he can be is consistency, taken to the mound every time.” The Cubs will presumably work on extending Samardzija this offseason.
  • Marc Hulet offers a scouting report on pitching prospect Kyle Hendricks, who had one of his worst outings this year in his second start at AAA yesterday (4 ER, 8 H, 3 BB in 5 IP (but 7 K)). The conclusion is a familiar one: lots of polish, lots of pitches he can command, not dominate stuff, and a Number 4 future.
  • More on recently-promoted first baseman Dan Vogelbach (who immediately homered at High-A Daytona) from CSN.
  • One scout, in speaking with Carrie Muskat, likened 18-year-old Taiwanese pitching prospect Jen-Ho Tseng (whom the Cubs signed for $1.625 million) to netting an additional compensatory draft pick (i.e., just after first round).
  • Ernie Banks was honored at last night’s game, on receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

87 responses to “Preparing for September Roster Expansion and Other Bullets”

  1. ETS

    too bad soler is out for the season. :(

    1. ETS

      ST next year should be fun though!

  2. Cheese Chad

    What are the conditions to becoming eligible for the Rule 5 Draft? Anyone out there the cubs could be interested in grabbing this year?

    1. cjdubbya

      Honestly, check out Arizona Phil’s work. Dude is flat-out amazing at understanding the intricacies of the roster rules. Well worth a read.

      1. Cheese Chad

        Much appreciated

      2. Cheese Chad

        I enjoy the last stipulation. Why don’t we just make the guys we want to keep player-managers so they can decline the selection?

  3. Teddy

    I really like that Scott hariston trade now. Pineyro is destroying high a (I think). Any chance he is in for a promotion?

    Also Bryant homered in his first game as well.

    1. cubchymyst

      I doubt he get promoted, the season is almost over and Daytona looks like they are going to make the playoffs for their league which gives them a few extra games. So, he probably stays there to help with the playoff push and get the experience of being in the playoffs.

    2. Cubswin

      I agree, that Pineyro trade is looking better and better as season wears on. Thought we would just get some nobody long shot for Hairston but Pineyro is having some solid success and hopefully he can continue that when he moves up the ladder next year

  4. BD

    I think they should call up McNutt and see what he’s got. That could make that decision easier.

    1. ssckelley

      If the Cubs removed McNutt from the 40 man he would be gone in a heartbeat. The Cubs do not have a surplus of pitching prospects right now to justify removing him. Even with his struggles McNutt is still only 23 years old and is capable of rediscovering that command that made him a top 50 prospect 2 years ago.

      1. CubFan Paul

        Wasn’t McNutt’s problem last year a blister? What’s been up this year?

        1. ssckelley

          Injuries, he is on a rehab assignment in Arizona.

  5. Spencer

    Yeah…I don’t think the Cubs will have a ton of trouble freeing up 40 man spots ahead of the Rule 5 Draft, because there are a lot of people are on the 25 man roster that don’t deserve to be on it, let alone on the 40 man.

  6. Jed

    They definitely need to add Eric Jokish and Arismendy Alcantara to 40-man. I like Amaya, but I don’t see any team (knock on wood) being able to keep him on the major league roster long enough.

    1. On The Farm

      No way anyone could hold on to Amaya. He is going to be a A+ ball player, even the Astro’s wouldn’t select him for their team because it would pretty much ruin his development. I am fine leaving him unprotected.

  7. Eternal Pessimist

    I wonder if Brett Jackson has just about played himself off the 40 man roster. Seems like we have a lot more assets to protect and his low average, and lack of ‘serious’ power lately has me thinking that there are better prospects that we would hate to lose.

    1. Noah

      Alcantara will surely end up on the 40 man, but looking at Amaya as a counterpoint to Jackson: I think if Jackson goes off the 40 man, he’s claimed on waivers. Still just too much talent. Amaya hasn’t played above Low A yet. Will a team honestly be able to stash him on the active roster long enough to make it work?

      1. ETS

        I think I’d rather have Ha on the 40 man than BJax, but my guess is both end up on there.

      2. Kyle

        If anyone wants Jackson on waivers, they are welcome to him.

        1. Good Captain

          I think I agree w/ you on that but if BJax has some residual interest, perhaps we can trade him to someone for an interesting DSL/VSL prospect or two ala the Campana trade. I realize this is probably a notch above lottery ticket level but its better than the alternative IMO. Of course, this only works if someone else has a 40 man slot, but that’s the direction I’d pursue if its available.

          1. Noah

            Yeah, I’d be fine with trading Jackson for lottery tickets as well. But considering Jackson has minor league options left (I believe 2 of them, since he was added to the 40 man and active roster and the same time in 2012 and was not sent back down to Iowa that season), I’d find it surprising if he wasn’t picked up on waivers very early. If you think he’s utterly worthless at that point, that’s not a big deal. And if there’s someone of a higher priority level that needs to be protected, obviously you do that. But I don’t find Eric Jokisch a higher priority to protect than Jackson.

    2. Dustin S

      Actually he’s one of the easier calls to take off at this point, been thinking that for a couple months and he’s continued declining since. Vitters is a tough call though because he’s actually been hitting pretty well this season in-between his plethora of injuries. For sure Alcantara and probably Jokisch need to go on it.

      The front office has done pretty well though at these decisions. A lot of guys have made it through waivers that I didn’t expect to, and so they seem to have a good measure of who needs to be on it and who can slide by not getting picked up.

  8. Austin8466

    We have a few expiring contracts of 40-man guys, correct? Shouldn’t that free up some spots before November?

    1. Kyle

      At the moment, we have five free agents at the end of the year. We also have eight men on the 60-day DL (including three of the FAs) which disappears during the offseason. So when the offseason begins, we’ll be at exactly 40.

      1. Noah

        Your math is a bit off (don’t mean that to be snarky). We have 40 guys on 40 man, 8 on the DL, and 5 will be free agents, although I can’t figure out who the 5th free agent is. I have Baker, Guerrier, Gregg, and Navarro, with everyone else having less than 6 years of service time, but I’ll use your numbers for simplicity. You have 40 + 8 – 5. So that would mean that the Cubs would be at 43.

        However, some of the guys on the 40 man or 60 day DL aren’t likely to be brought back on a major league contract. I’d be surprised if the Cubs offer both Sweeney and Bogusevic major league deals. Maybe one of them, but not both. And if the Cubs bring back one of them, it would like be Sweeney, who the Cubs would probably non-tender, then try to bring back on a cheaper MLB deal than he’d get in arbitration. Either way, he wouldn’t be an issue at Rule 5 draft time. Others who I expect the Cubs will not tender a major league contract to and will be off the 40 man at the time of the Rule 5 draft: Thomas Neal, Darnell McDonald, Cole Gillespie, Donnie Murphy, J.C. Boscan, and at least a couple of the pitchers on the 40 man (I’d guess Zach Putnam and Michael Bowden are the most likely candidates). Then you have the free agents (Baker, Guerrier, Gregg, Navarro). So currently there are 48 men on the extended roster plus the 60 day DL, and on my calculations you’re probably looking at somewhere between 37 and 40 on the 40 man roster once you get through the “easy” round of cuts, depending how deep they go on pitcher cuts (I wouldn’t be shocked if Eduardo Sanchez and Brooks Raley got DFA’d as well, particularly Sanchez.)

        1. TheDondino

          Sweeney is the 5th FA.

        2. Kyle

          Try again.

          1. Kyle

            Sorry, premature clickulation. You’re right, I screwed it up.

            1. Eternal pessemist

              Isn’ there some kind of medicine you could take for premature calculation?!

            2. Noah

              Actually, I was off on my end run math… but off on the high side. I forgot to subtract the free agents. Presuming Sweeney isn’t on the 40 man roster either because he’s a free agent or not tendered arbitration you have the following players who are highly unlikely or flat out won’t be on the 40 man at the time of the Rule 5 draft: Baker, Gregg, Guerrier, Navarro, Sweeney, Bogusevic, Neal, McDonald, Gillespie, Murphy, Boscan. That gets us down to 37 before having to make any tough choices, including fringy relief pitchers. Considering I don’t think anyone would shed any tears if Bowden and Putnam were DFA’d, that gets us down to 35. The Cubs have some room to maneuver to protect the guys they need to.

          2. TheDondino

            Cot’s Contracts shows Gregg, Navarro, Baker, Guerrier and Sweeney as 2014 FA’s, just going by what he shows, if you have something different, tell us.

            1. Noah

              You might be right on Sweeney, but I don’t know exactly how the service time calculations work. I think Cots’ just updates their “potential free agents” list at the beginning of the year, and Sweeney did have the potential of going over 6 years of service time. With when Sweeney was called up, it should be very, very close.

              Either way, it works for my general calculation: Sweeney won’t be on the 40 man roster at Rule 5 draft time.

  9. Bilbo161

    Depending on how the Cubs feel about all the fringe outfielders on the 40-man, I think the cubs have plenty of spots available to free up for guy just becoming eligible. I would put Amaya on the 40. Never know what Miami or Houston might do. They seem to want to keep out of contention by tossing what talent they have on the trash heap so their Manager finds it impossible to be competitive.

    1. On The Farm

      Playing AAA or AA guys is one thing, trying to play Amaya who has yet to take an A+ at bat is another thing. Amaya’s youth will be his protection.

      1. Bilbo161

        I agree really, but also think Miami and Houston don’t care how bad they are so still think its possible. The cubs can afford to use a 40 spot on him so why not.

  10. Josh

    Will Ha get protected? They also have guys like Rosscup and Schlitter who are eligible.

  11. Austin8466

    Guys I’d be fine dropping from the 40-man roster:

    Michael Bowden
    Hector Rondon
    JC Boscan
    Donnie Murphy
    Brett Jackson
    Darnell McDonald
    Brian Bogusevic

    Thoughts?

    1. On The Farm

      Didn’t we just acquire Rondon from the Rule 5 last year? I have a hard time believing that we kept him on the roster all season just to remove him at the end of it. I am fine losing McDonald and Boscan for sure, Bowden too probably.

      1. Good Captain

        In addition, Bowden cleared waivers earlier this year and doubt his second round has heightened interest in his services.

    2. ssckelley

      Replace Jackson with Sappelt. I doubt Ransom gets resigned, Gillespie I doubt will be around, Neal might get a minor league offer, and not sure about Sanchez.

    3. jt

      Cut: Bowden, McNutt, Rondon, Sanchez, Boscan, Ransom, Gillespie, B. Jackson, McDonald, Neal, Sappelt, either Murphy or Watkins or both.
      Trade: Raley, Rusin for whatever they can get.
      On the bubble: Baker,Sweeney, Bogusevic
      If they consider Vitters to have a problem with conditioning then cut him. If his work attitude is good then keep him.
      *
      That is a lot of names that really would not be missed. I mean, save for Sweeney, Baker and maybe Murphy/Watkins they can’t upgrade from these guy. C’mon!

      1. On The Farm

        Except we need some guys like Rondon (we kept him on our roster all year, you think we are going to remove him from the 40 now?) Sappelt, Watkins, Raley, and Rusin for depth in the minor leagues. Adding prospects to the 40 man does little if none of the guys on the 40 man can contribute at the MLB level. If someone goes down (like DeJesus, Sweeney, Bogie, Valbuena….) Also Baker isn’t a bubble guy considering he isn’t under contract for next season. Seems like you are cutting a lot of guys that need to be around to provide some sort of depth at AAA.

        1. jt

          Pitching depth.. Raley and Rusin?
          Hendricks, Arrieta, Villanueva and Cabrera are better. Jokisch is probably as good.
          The scrap heap will have better.
          Rondon was kept in the ML roster because he was considered to be at least close to being ML ready on a team experiencing a lost season. He is not close to being ML ready and is not even as good as Bowden.
          Sappelt offers less potential than Ha or Szczur or the scrap heap.
          There is no guarantee Sweeney or Baker will resign. I’d consider them on the bubble in the sense that they may or may not be offered a competitive bid for their services.
          I’d invite Bogie back to try to earn a spot but if he gets crowded out there wont be that many tears shed.
          I stand by my last statement. They can easily upgrade from the projected performances of most of these guys.

  12. jh03

    Cubs lineup is awfully.. ummm… bad today.

    1. Jon

      When is it not bad?

    2. Cubbie Blues

      Have you checked the 25 man roster?

      1. jh03

        Lol I know.. but it just always looks so much worse when Castro is out (even when he’s bad like this). Plus, Lake’s not in their either..

        It’s just pathetic how bad the roster is… Although, I shouldn’t complain too much… they’ve played pretty well against contenders lately, even if they’re not winning. I still think this 25 man can play spoiler.. Which will be fun…. I guess…

  13. baseballet

    Rusin and Raley reunited!

  14. Justin

    Hey what does everyone think about DeJesus being on the team next year? I know he’s well thought of by the FO and Sveum for his patient approach, but paying him $6.5 Mill next yr seems pretty stupid IMO. We already have a better version of him in Schierholtz, not to mention potential guys like Sweeney if he’s brought back on the cheap. If someone claims DeJesus on waivers I would say let them have him, so the Cubs get of out the $1.5 buyout next yr. And then spend that coin elsewhere..

    1. Cubswin

      While I won’t be too upset either way with DeJesus (even though he’s a standup guy and is a good role model for the younger guys) I think Sweeney can come in and give you better defense, younger legs, and at the minimum same offensively if not better. Sweeney was one of our best hitters at the time he went down

    2. ssckelley

      We debated this last night, it is IMO the Cubs bring DeJesus back for another year and find a low cost/high value right handed outfielder to compliment DeJesus and Schierholtz, a guy like Morse might be an intriguing option. Paying a veteran player an extra 5 million is cheap as opposed to cutting him for 1.5 million.

      1. Justin

        OK, I missed the conversation about DeJesus last night SSckelley, but I just feel that he is a redundant player. And it’s not like saving $5 Mill is nothing, even in today’s economics. I’m sure they could bring back Sweeney cheaper than that. Plus if someone claims him off waivers the Cubs get out of the buyout as well. Even though he’s a good guy, I think the Cubs could spend that money better in one of their many other holes. Just my thoughts.

  15. Jon

    Today’s game =
    Jerry-Seinfeld-No-Thanks-and-Leave.gif

  16. XavierGunz

    Is Solers injury really just a minor one? Also, what is a realistic time he may be brought up???

    1. Cubbie Blues

      My guess would be by October …

  17. JB88

    How the hell is Amaya even Rule 5 elibible at this point? He’s 20 years old, turns 21 in December. There is no way he’s been in the organization for 5 years at this point, given his birth date. This is only his 4th year in the organization and he was signed as a 16 year old. He isn’t Rule 5 eligible until after next season. Meaning that he’ll need to be on the 40 man before December 2014.

    1. Josh

      He began his minor league career with the DSL Cubs in 2010. This is the 4th offseason since he joined the Cubs, which makes him Rule 5 Eligible. His age, although young, is not the deciding factor.

      1. JB88

        His age does matter. Depending on whether you are younger than 18 during June of your signing year, you are not eligible until after your 5th season. If you are 19 or older during the June of your signing year, you are eligible after your 4th season.

    2. TheDondino

      Even though 2010 was his first season with the Cubs, he signed his contract in June 2009, making this upcoming Rule 5 draft the fifth since he signed his contract, making him eligible.

      1. JB88

        I do not believe this is correct. The MLB page says that the player must have “played” for 5 years. 16 year olds who sign as IFA are not elibigle to play until they are 17.

        I think Phil is wrong on Amaya.

        1. TheDondino

          Could be since I was using AZPhil’s Rule 5 explanation. He doesn’t stipulate season’s played, just the number of Rule 5 drafts having occurred since the player signed a contract.

  18. Ivy Walls

    Next year and roster management will have to be more productive at the MLB level. Certainly the Cubs MLB roster management has been a mess since 2010 and the FO has had to remove liabilities, (dead end, dead wood and obstacles) to gain flexibility but now if I were Ricketts & Family I will be expecting a move towards genuine competitiveness.
    Pitchers

    Jake Arrieta
    Alberto Cabrera *
    Scott Baker 60-day DL (decision both ways)
    Kyuji Fujikawa 60-day DL **
    Kevin Gregg
    Justin Grimm *
    Matt Guerrier 60-day DL **
    Edwin Jackson
    Trey McNutt
    Rafael Dolis 60-day DL **
    Zach Putnam 60-day DL **
    Blake Parker
    Brooks Raley *
    Hector Rondon
    Chris Rusin
    James Russell
    Jeff Samardzija
    Pedro Strop
    Carlos Villanueva
    Arodys Vizcaino 60-day DL **
    Travis Wood

    Catchers
    Welington Castillo
    Dioner Navarro

    Infielders

    Darwin Barney
    Starlin Castro
    Mike Olt *
    Anthony Rizzo
    Luis Valbuena 15-day DL *
    Christian Villanueva *

    David DeJesus
    Junior Lake
    Nate Schierholtz
    Jorge Soler *
    Ryan Sweeney 60-day DL **
    Matt Szczur *

    Waived 15 players

    Michael Bowden
    Rafael Dolis 60-day DL **
    Matt Guerrier 60-day DL **
    Brooks Raley *
    Eduardo Sanchez
    J.C. Boscan *
    Cody Ransom
    Donnie Murphy
    Josh Vitters
    Logan Watkins
    Cole Gillespie
    Brett Jackson *
    Darnell McDonald
    Thomas Neal 60-day DL **
    Dave Sappelt *

    Cubs will then protect any all their prospects includingEric Jokisch, Gioskar Amaya, and more…

    But they cannot have 50 players earning time at the MLB level anymore.

  19. Mr. Future Ashley Chavez

    I’m sorry, I know I just posted this, but I wanted to get this on a more recent thread to see some of your thoughts:
    Does anyone think that sending Almora, Hendricks, Vogelbach, Alcantara and a PTBNL might be enough to land a guy like Price from the Rays? Then our rotation can look (depending on other moves) something like this:
    1) Price
    2) Samardzija
    3) Wood
    4) Jackson
    5) Arrieta

    1. TK

      We better get get at least Wil Myers +1 more if we give up all those high ceiling guys. You a Rays fan, by chance? I just ask bc that’s an extremely 1 sided trade proposal.

      1. Jon

        ? Cubs get Price without having to give up Baez, Bryant or Soler ? Count me in. Almora may never develop power, And Vogelbach is blocked. I do that deal in a sec

        1. GoCubsGo

          To land Price you will probably need to give up 2 of the big 4. For sure at last 1 and probably Alcantara, Vogs and Pierce Johnson

          1. kubphan82

            I don’t want Price or Stanton…

            I’d like to have the next Price/Stanton. I’d take my chances with the current crop and the possibility of more quality young players producing at the MLB level in the years to come than the oft-DL’d Stanton or feeding Tampa just what they want to continue to compete for one player.

            1. ETS

              You want stanton.

              1. kubphan82

                He had right knee surgery last year; he was out a month with a bad right hamstring this year. You don’t mortgage your future, especially at the price of Stanton, for a player trending toward knee injuries.

                Let alone when keeping the players you would trade for Stanton have incredible power and health on their current sides. I keep the package that you would trade for Stanton. (Soler/Baez/Bryant). If a trade could be done without any one of those involved, I’d do it.

            2. ETS

              The “next” stanton? The guy is 23. Stanton is the next miggy.

              1. GoCubsGo

                I would give Soler, Vogs, Alcantara, Olt, pierce Johnson for Giancarlo Stanton in a heart beat without blinking twice. That package I just laid out is probably low balling the marlins for what they could get for him.

                Stanton would without a doubt take 2 of the big for and another arm or maybe even 3 of the big 4 to land him. No joke it will take 5 of your top 10 prospects to land the guy and that’s if you have a great farm system

                1. On The Farm

                  Not sure low balling a team for a player when the prospects going are one top 30 (Soler), One top 70 (Alacantra), another top 100 (Olt), and two guys who will probably work their way into top 100 before they are called up, that is a ton of talent for one player.

                  1. Kyle

                    It’s still a bit of a lowball. “top 30″ doesn’t mean much as a prospect when you are talking about players of this caliber.

                  2. GoCubsGo

                    I’m pretty sure the Marlins could get a top 10 prospect, 50 and another top 100 along with a couple fringe 100 guys who will eventually make there way into the top 100 for Giancarlo Stanton.

                    It might be overpaying but that’s the going rate for landing a special bat like Stanton who is only 23 and has Chris Davis/Miguel Cabrera power. Stanton is very special and proven and will only get better. The prospects still have a lot of risk. But I will agree it would really hurt to lose all that young talent

                2. Soler Power

                  Is this a complete joke, or are you stupid?

                  1. GoCubsGo

                    Soler Power: you can call me stupid all you want but the truth hurts. You are probably doing the classic fan opinion of overvaluing your own prospects.

                3. Mr. B. Patient

                  The Tigers gave up their Top 2 prospects, plus two more from their top 10, to get Miguel Cabrera. Cabrera was probably better at that point than Stanton is now, but not enough to lower their expectations on that trade.
                  I’m in the it would take 2 the top 4 and 2/3 more top 10′s

                  1. On The Farm

                    They also got Dontrelle Willis who was 2 years removed from a 2.7 WAR and three years from a 6 WAR season. It wasn’t a top prospects for one player deal.

                4. X the Cubs Fan

                  Stanton is the only player I would consider trading Castro for. Castro, Almora, Olt, Johnson and Amaya for Stanton and Steve Cishek.

              2. kubphan82

                I don’t like power hitters with knee/leg injuries. We’ll remain on opposite sides of the fence here. Neither of us know what the group of Cubs prospects will be, I’ll take the odds on their health and as a group the idea that the Cubs would make out better.

                The Cubs need more than Stanton, ask the Marlins.

                1. mjhurdle

                  i agree with this completely. Stanton has produced, but has had injuries of the hamstring, knee, and shoulder already in his incredibly young career.
                  You would have to give up a king’s ransom to get him, and because of that would have to sign him to a new contract to make it worth the price. So then you pay not just a ton of prospects, but then pay a ton of money to a guy that has already indicated he might be an injury risk.
                  I love him as a player, but if i am paying that high of a price for someone, i want a little more security in my investment. Just my opinion though.

  20. Johnny C

    They really should bring up matt szczur in september.. Matt can flat out fly and he can definitely cover the gaps out in center field!

    1. TWC

      Too bad he can’t slug his way out of a wet cardboard box.

      He’s Tony Campana 2.0.

      1. On The Farm

        2.0 would indicate he is better than 1.0 (Campana). If that is true the man-crush by this fan base is about to go through the roof

        1. DarthHater

          Does that mean Windows 8 is better than Windows 7?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.