Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • Thoughts On Brian Dozier


    David Mensing

    Let me preface what will undoubtedly be a long entry by saying I am a Dozier fan. I have spoken to him at spring training a couple of times and like the young man. I believe he has been the Twins MVP for each of the last four seasons, including this one, and I have no doubt that he is the team's best player at this point. Certainly he isn't flawless, but the Twins need more players like Brian Dozier, not fewer.

    Image courtesy of Jordan Johnson- USAToday. image of brian Dozier

    Twins Video

    Over the course of this long, horrible season, Brian Dozier has often been a hot topic of conversation in Twins Territory. He isn't shy about stepping up to a microphone, my wife and daughters think he's good-looking and he's been a regular with the club as their second baseman for four years. If someone casually follows the Twins, he knows who Dozier is, so it figures that he would be a topic of conversation.

    Let's see why Dozier has been discussed so much and what I think should be the conclusion of the topic: First of all, when the season started, Dozier couldn't get it going. After a bad second half in 2015, Dozier came out of the gate slow in 2016. Through all of April and May, Dozier barely reached .200 and the signature power was lacking. Had the league figured him out? Was the 28 year old (turned 29 in mid-May) regressing already? Should he be benched or put at the bottom of the order? My thought, then and now, was that it is a long season. If a guy is a good player, he'll come out of a funk. Robbie Cano had a similar stretch at the end of 2014 and beginning of 2015 and Cano might be a Hall-of-Famer. Along for the ride early in the season were the questions of whether BD was too pull-happy and if he used the whole field, would he be a more consistent and productive hitter. My thought was that Dozier needed to be able to hit the ball with authority when he was pitched away and as the season has progressed, he has accumulated some oppo hits and several to the middle of the field, the key being that he hit the ball hard, not lazy popups or routine fly balls.

    Moving on, Dozier has spent most of the season hitting #1 or #2. Many have thought it wasn't ideal for a guy whose calling card is big power to hit first or second. My thought then was that the Twins simply didn't have a better option. Dozier takes some of the longest at-bats on the team, he's walked a fair amount since arriving in the majors and he's a good base runner who doesn't clog the bases for those behind him. Ideally, he should have hit lower in the order to make a few more of his homers multi-run shots and I think that where Dozier hits in the lineup in 2017 will be a hot controversial topic if he is in a Twins' uniform next year.

    As the season rolled toward the All-Star break, the calls to sell and rebuild the Twins included Dozier's name prominently. He had some value and the club is/was going nowhere in '16, so cashier him for a prospect or two and let Jorge Polanco handle second base. In June and July, Dozier recovered from his slow start. He put up a great line in June, posting an OPS for the month in excess of 1.000. He slowed in July, hitting only .240 but still putting up an OPS of .824. Trade Dozier at the deadline? Didn't happen and IMHO shouldn't have happened. He hasn't slowed down much since his monster June and with a team-friendly contract and relative youth, his value should only be higher in the off-season or at next year's trade deadline.

    Another topic that has emerged is defense. After a truly stout year in 2013, Dozier's defense has been categorized as below average by most metrics. While I don't believe Dozier is elite defensively, my eyes tell me he is in the average range. He makes a few outstanding plays (probably more than any other Twins player) and doesn't get to some balls he should, perhaps because of shifting, maybe because the position of shortstop has been in flux since he became a second baseman, maybe because in three of the last four years, the team never had a shot at contention. I don't know. In checking BB Ref, Dozier lags in zone rating but is above average in runs saved. I see it as a wash, making Dozier average in the field. I'm waiting for someone to refute this, but in the final analysis, defense probably is an "eyes of the beholder" topic.

    Since the All-Star break, Brian Dozier has been en fuego. He's hitting .320, with an OPS of 1.091 and an MLB-leading 21 homers. I guess that puts to rest the "first half player" meme that was circulating among the diehard fans who remained. The question that stems from his performance in both the cold April and May and his elite performance since is what to expect going forward.

    I have turned over in my mind what the most likely trajectory of Dozier's career figures to be. One extreme is Dan Uggla, who like Dozier wasn't highly regarded, got a chance in his mid-twenties and became a star in large part because of his power numbers. Uggla fell off a cliff in his early thirties. An opposing example is Jeff Kent. Kent was an okay player, but not even a full-time regular until he was 29. Starting from age 30, Kent won an MVP, was an All-Star five times with three different teams and posted OPS+ numbers over 119 every year until he was 39. These seem to be the extremes for power-hitting second basemen. Is Dozier going to be productive for most of another decade or is regression going to meet him around his 30th birthday? My answer is that no one knows for sure. It appears to me that Dozier has made adjustments to become a more complete hitter without diminishing his best asset--home run power. This makes him a candidate to sustain high-end performance, although his work from mid-2015 through May of this year give a good argument that he could turn into a pumpkin at any time.

    In the last few weeks as the tumult in my life has moved Twins baseball onto the back burner, I've managed to check the box scores, cluck over the disastrous pitching and watch highlights of games. Dozier has been front and center continuing his power surge. He now projects to exceed 40 homers and if he hits just one more long ball, he will have hit more in a single season than any Twin since Harmon in 1970. 40 homers would be a Top Ten season in franchise history dating back to the Senators who started playing at the turn of the 20th century. Only Harmon and Roy Sievers (once) have ever hit 40 homers in a single season in franchise history. Dozier is projected to score and drive in over 100 runs, also a rare feat, especially for a guy who has hit first or second most of the season. He may or may not make 40 homers, 100 RBIs or 100 runs, but on such a bad team those numbers stand out big and bold.

    Although I'm not a big fan of WAR, it does represent a quick and dirty assessment of value and Dozier's 5.6 WAR for this season is in the Top Ten in the league. Because the season has been so bad, I don't think Dozier has gotten the attention he deserves for his huge season. He won't win a Silver Slugger or MVP, he won't win the HR championship or set any other records, so there hasn't been any national coverage, but his overall season and particularly his production since June have been off the charts.

    Now in the season's final month, most Twins fans are thinking about the future (with good reason). Augmenting a terrible rotation is Priority One and trading Brian Dozier to get pitching help makes sense, since his value should be at an all-time high. This argument is buttressed by the play of Polanco, who has hit over .300, showed good on-base skills, but a questionable glove at short or third. I believe Jorge Polanco is best suited to second base and I believe adding him for Dozier wouldn't be all bad since Polanco is a switch hitter and wouldn't be prone to long slumps with his swing and approach. However, unless the payoff is monumental, Brian Dozier should be the Twins second baseman next year. He has had a season for the ages despite the wreckage around him, he's only 29 and if the last 100 days are an indication, he might get even better. Finally, he's been a solid citizen off the field. If the club wants somebody as the face of the franchise, they could do worse than Mr. Dozier.

    Just a couple more thoughts before I summarize--Dozier has been durable. Since becoming the team's second baseman, he hasn't been disabled and has missed only a handful of games with injuries. Secondly, my observation is that he is a good teammate. He doesn't sulk, cheers for his mates, appears to like their company off the field (loved the State Fair video) and despite having strong religious views, doesn't put that in the face of his teammates or the media.

    I have mentioned many of these thoughts in previous threads on the forums of Twins Daily. I find this player to be fascinating, especially in light of his minor league career and low status when drafted. I think Brian Dozier is a fine player who hasn't gotten the appreciation he deserves for this, his best season. I will continue to be a Dozier fan, even if he is traded, but hopefully he continues as a Minnesota Twin. In the event that he is traded, I will be pulling for the players acquired in return and hope they make the Twins better.

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

     

    Kinsler is tied for 1st in DRS for MLB 2Bs and Cano is 3rd.  Might be awhile for them to drop off enough to be considered a detriment at 2B.

     

    Referring only to age, not effectiveness!!  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Referring only to age, not effectiveness!!  

    Yeah, but they are so very good even at their age the drop might take a bit.

     

    And no Pedroia then?  Dozier is about to join the 30 yo club too.

     

    In any event,  I think there's a market for him.  I also think there's no way he gets traded this offseason.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I think you're missing the point. I am saying that Dozier-by himself- will not bring in an ace or even cusp prospects that project as front of the rotation starters. If the Twins want to get those types, Dozier will not be a centerpiece in the trade. He might be involved, but to get those types of pitchers, you need to send back prospects. That's why it will have to be a three team type trade. 

    Maybe I am.  Still think you're wrong.  Span brought back Alex Meyer who projected as a 1-3 type.  Revere brought May who was projected as a 2-4.  Yoenis Cespedes netted Michael Fulmer.  Corey Kluber was had for Jake Westbrook (similar to big Erv).  

    You stated that Dozier couldn't be the centerpiece of an impact trade.  That there was no way we could get close to what we consider fair return.  I think most of us would be happy turning Dozier over for a good 2.  Which for us would be an ace.  Not to mention the fact that we have quite a few prospects to sweeten the pot.  Duffey, May, Stewart, Jay, and numerous others further away are arms we probably aren't married to if the deal was right.  Bottom line, Dozier is movable, and we don't need another team to add prospects.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Yeah, but they are so very good even at their age the drop might take a bit.

     

    And no Pedroia then?  Dozier is about to join the 30 yo club too.

     

    In any event,  I think there's a market for him.  I also think there's no way he gets traded this offseason.

     

    My point is, having another 2nd baseman on the team wouldn't prevent someone from grabbing Dozier's now 39 HR. No one's adding Dozier for his glove! Dozier can play 3rd or 1st, maybe even OF, or if you like him better, move your 2B over or into the OF.  Whether he's traded depends a lot on the new regime, and teams' need to add offense in general.  There shouldn't be a more "gettable" slugger this off season.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Maybe I am.  Still think you're wrong.  Span brought back Alex Meyer who projected as a 1-3 type.  Revere brought May who was projected as a 2-4.  Yoenis Cespedes netted Michael Fulmer.  Corey Kluber was had for Jake Westbrook (similar to big Erv).  

    You stated that Dozier couldn't be the centerpiece of an impact trade.  That there was no way we could get close to what we consider fair return.  I think most of us would be happy turning Dozier over for a good 2.  Which for us would be an ace.  Not to mention the fact that we have quite a few prospects to sweeten the pot.  Duffey, May, Stewart, Jay, and numerous others further away are arms we probably aren't married to if the deal was right.  Bottom line, Dozier is movable, and we don't need another team to add prospects.

     

    The mass amounts of quality 2nd basemen this off season-not based on historic trades- plus the glut of quality starting pitching in free agency means that Dozier is not nearly as valuable as you think he is this off season. No rational thinking baseball executive would part with a front line starter or even a cusp type with high projections. Not without getting some high end prospects back. Duffey, May, Stewart are not going to sweeten anything. As they stand right now-this off season- they have little to no value. We are talking Gordon. Diaz, Gonslaves, Jay, Romero types and that might bring one front end starter with Dozier added in. 

     

    Basically, Dozier will be a Minnesota Twin come next season and I am fine with that. He is having a great season and is a solid player. He just isn't that much better than what other teams already have as in-house options. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If FOs around the league like polanco half as much as TD people I say trade polanco and keep dozier. Does no one see the error in constantly chasing the almighty prospect? Guys who never live up to their potential are a dime a dozen. I see everyone saying we need to trade dozier so we can upgrade our horrendous pitching. How recently was everyone saying these same pitchers were amazing prospects? How many star prospects have we had the last several years that didn't pan out--how many currently in the system not materializing?

     

    At some point people need to gain their sanity and stop trading a bird in the hand for two in the bush. Let someone else make the mistake of thinking every single player in our farm is the next trout/kershaw.

     

    to build a championship team you need a good mix of vets and young talent. In 2 years dozier is more likely to still be good and polanco is more likely to still be learning the game (or in AAA for the 10th time, haha. That's not funny)

     

    Keep dozier please. Don't trade him for a bag of chips like some people were suggesting a couple months ago.

     

    Other random thoughts:

    Ugh I HATE the royals!!!!

    Can someone please tell me what we got for Arica?! I assume just a little cash but I can't find it anywhere! And for that matter, what we got for Jamey Carroll--that one has been haunting me for years haha! Prolly just a steak dinner...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Twins need pitching, and more than one. The only two ways to get the type of pitchers they need is trade a high end veteran, or a high end MLB prospect. Our list of high end veterans is not a list, it's a name. (Sanatanas age and contract won't bring much, he's a wash) As for prospects you probably could include Sano, Buxton, Kepler, and Polanco. On a sliding scale. I believe Sano and Buxton still have high MLB interests. Kepler will have admirers, likely more than we think. Polanco? He won't bring what Dozier would, but on this team he would fill our needs well. He likely can play second, better than SS, he seems a very solid hitter, and we really don't need power, we have plenty of that profile player. And he will be here when we are relevant (maybe) again. Notice I did not include the FA market. While the options above are open for debate, there is little need to include irrational fantasy in that discussion,

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    It's a problem for the Twins that there seems to be a glut of outstanding second-basemen right now. There are a lot of teams whose best player (or close to best) plays 2B. Altuve, Pedroia, Kipnes, Cano, Kinsler, are all excellent with the bat, and that's just the American League. Has there ever been a time with more outstanding offensive talent at this traditionally defensive position?

     

    Alomar, Knoblauch, Baerga, and Biggio were all playing at a high level at the same time.   Two HoF, Knoblauch looked like he was on that track for a while, and Baerga was probably #2 on the list before he aged 10 years overnight.  I'm not sure this list is better, but they are at least comparable.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    NOT saying don't trade Dozier if you could really add a #2 type starter, or a top, top prospect ready to burst on the scene, plus someone else to balance the trade.

     

    And maybe I'm selfish about BD or short-sighted, but as much as we need pitching, especially SP, and as much as I like Polanco as a young talent, I'm still not sure if losing Dozier's bat, and replacing him with a high end starter gets us to where we need to go.

     

    It might a lot, don't get me wrong, but whether it's our current coaching staff, bad luck, whatever, Berrios finding himself would be huge. May could really help, IMO, and Gonsalves could be ready...along with Mejia...at some point in 2017. And you can also mix in, of course, Santana and Gibson along with maybe Santiago, for now.

    There is a big part of me that says this is smarter in a 2017 approach.

     

    BD won't turn 30 until after the season starts. He's not old. He made some nice adjustments this season. He is cost controlled, could possibly be resigned,(just not another big long term deal please), and would probably have mid-season trade value next year.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    This is awfully cynical. His overall stats from last whole year and this whole year are still quite good by themselves. No player is exactly as good every game of the year, this isn't a video game, we are talking about a human being. Does Dozier appear more streaky than other players? Sure. But who cares?

    July 2015 thru May 2016 with no month higher than a .216 average is not streaky it's lousy.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    July 2015 thru May 2016 with no month higher than a .216 average is not streaky it's lousy.

    As I said earlier, take a look at Robbie Cano from mid 2014 until July 1st 2015. I can't be sure on the exact interval, but he was lousy for most of a year (doing this from memory). Bad slumps happen to good players. For a long time, the longest position player hitless streak by a Twin belonged to a pretty good hitter-Butch Wynegar.

     

    I think minor injuries figure into diminished performance, as well. I don't believe Dozier was completely healthy at the conclusion of last year.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Dozier is now 8th in the majors in WAR for position players.  He's 6th in the AL, right behind the big 5 who keep being mentioned for AL MVP: Trout, Altuve, Donaldson, Betts and Machado.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    As I said earlier, take a look at Robbie Cano from mid 2014 until July 1st 2015. I can't be sure on the exact interval, but he was lousy for most of a year (doing this from memory). Bad slumps happen to good players. For a long time, the longest position player hitless streak by a Twin belonged to a pretty good hitter-Butch Wynegar.

     

    I think minor injuries figure into diminished performance, as well. I don't believe Dozier was completely healthy at the conclusion of last year.

    I believe Robbie Cano had a sports hernia during this time that wasn't dealt with until after the season, IIRC.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    July 2015 thru May 2016 with no month higher than a .216 average is not streaky it's lousy.

    Uh, yeah. My point was that his 2015 numbers overall were still good. And his 2016 numbers overall are almost MVP worthy. There are peaks and valleys in any players' seasons. Would you honestly not take his exact 2016, or even his exact 2015 season every year?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Uh, yeah. My point was that his 2015 numbers overall were still good. And his 2016 numbers overall are almost MVP worthy. There are peaks and valleys in any players' seasons. Would you honestly not take his exact 2016, or even his exact 2015 season every year?

     

    Depends what I'm taking in it's place I suppose.  Guys that are this feast or famine aren't ones I feel very comfortable building a team around.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guys who seem to be so streaky that they ebb and flow every half season are naturally going to book end bad/good half seasons from time to time.

     

    As Levi has pointed out, he's not comfortable building around a player that streaky and that's fine.

     

    But using Dozier's Arbitrary Date 2015-Arbitrary Date 2016 as proof of anything seems disingenuous.

     

    Seasons are natural cutoff points. Five years from now, no one is going to remember Dozier's 07/15-05/16 but they'll remember his 2015 and 2016 seasons as complete units (one pretty good, the other outstanding).

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Guys who seem to be so streaky that they ebb and flow every half season are naturally going to book end bad/good half seasons from time to time.

     

    As Levi has pointed out, he's not comfortable building around a player that streaky and that's fine.

     

    But using Dozier's Arbitrary Date 2015-Arbitrary Date 2016 as proof of anything seems disingenuous.

     

    Seasons are natural cutoff points. Five years from now, no one is going to remember Dozier's 07/15-05/16 but they'll remember his 2015 and 2016 seasons as complete units (one pretty good, the other outstanding).

     

    Why does it matter how people remember his seasons in five years?  

     

    We spent the first two months of this season with a sub .600 Dozier hitting in prime positions in the lineup.  We spent the last three months (when we were fringe contenders) with a slightly better, but still pretty bad, Brian Dozier hitting in those same spots.

     

    I don't think anyone has shown evidence either way, so I'm going to go with what is the most intuitive: feast or famine guys are probably less valuable than guys less prone to erratic production.  But I'd be really curious to get an answer on that.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I agree in that I suspect steady performers are more valuable than feast or famine guys. I'm not really arguing with you.

     

    I'm just tired of people constantly trotting out random dates to skew an argument, completely ignoring the fact he didn't even play baseball for five months in between those dates.

     

    Dozier's struggles early this season were a problem. It impacted wins. His late 2015 struggles were also a problem, as the team was in contention.

     

    But I fail to see how the two are connected other than they happened to the same player, a guy who went straight-up MVP style immediately afterward.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I would be very puzzled if it made a difference when a player hit.  Does it make a difference when a team wins?  Other than the playoffs of course!

     

    My theory would be that when guys are feasting, their huge surge in production has a less meaningful impact on wins and losses because some of that surge is probably surplus that doesn't really decide games.  But long stretches of awful play can have an impact.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I agree in that I suspect steady performers are more valuable than feast or famine guys. I'm not really arguing with you.

    I'm just tired of people constantly trotting out random dates to skew an argument, completely ignoring the fact he didn't even play baseball for five months in between those dates.

    Dozier's struggles early this season were a problem. It impacted wins. His late 2015 struggles were also a problem, as the team was in contention.

    But I fail to see how the two are connected other than they happened to the same player, a guy who went straight-up MVP style immediately afterward.

     

    Any time period we choose to judge a player is arbitrary.  If we choose April to September, it just seems more significant because that's one 162 game season stretch.  But really, how different is that than me saying April 2015-September 2016?  It's still random with the most notable trend being it's the same baseball player.  

     

    While I don't deny I want to arbitrarily pick a stretch of consistently bad play that crossed seasons, it's no different than you.  You just want to cut those dates apart arbitrarily.  When Danny Santana sucks in 2016 like he did in 2015, we don't cut those dates apart because the season ended, we look at the whole of the data.  Hell, if we didn't use cross-seasonal data to analyze players it'd be rather silly. Baseball reference could really simplify their site too!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The key difference being that there is a five month gap to rest/get healthy/whatever in between seasons.

     

    Never mind that actual team wins are accumulated and counted per season.

     

    Or that, when using a season of data, I'm not picking and choosing when to start/stop counting to slant an argument.

     

    They're not really the same thing at all. One is a natural, logical cutoff and the other is entirely determined by the person making the argument.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    The key difference being that there is a five month gap to rest/get healthy/whatever in between seasons.

    Never mind that actual team wins are accumulated and counted per season.

    Or that, when using a season of data, I'm not picking and choosing when to start/stop counting to slant an argument.

    They're not really the same thing at all. One is a natural, logical cutoff and the other is entirely determined by the person making the argument.

     

    Team wins don't really matter much to me when I'm evaluating trends in a hitter's results.  If we want to extrapolate that to team success that's another matter.  That five month gap can mean a lot or mean nothing and for many (most?) players it generally means nothing.  

     

    I could just as easily argue that a logical cut-off of evaluation could be between adjustments by Dozier.  We make similar cut offs when we judge young players (like we are with Buxton).  The truth is, that five month gap is arbitrary as a cut-off for player production.  We use it for convenience sake, not because it has any special meaning.  (Unless there is a specific reason to believe it does, like injury rehab)

     

    We also make many cases for player evaluation based on cutting off statistical analysis at various points.  We talk all the time about things like "Since June 1st Brian Dozier has slashed...."  or "Since being moved to the top of the order" or "Pre-allstar".  All of these are arbitrary.  It doesn't invalidate them.  Short of taking the whole players career into focus, we're always relying on arbitrary time frames.  That isn't a valid argument against a statistical study, especially if it takes a large, time consistent sample size.

    Edited by TheLeviathan
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    My theory would be that when guys are feasting, their huge surge in production has a less meaningful impact on wins and losses because some of that surge is probably surplus that doesn't really decide games.  But long stretches of awful play can have an impact.

    He did start the year in a slump, and the Twins got off to a horrid start. On the other hand he hit 13HRs in August and the Twins still had a losing record.

    I do not think one man decides most games either way.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    He did start the year in a slump, and the Twins got off to a horrid start. On the other hand he hit 13HRs in August and the Twins still had a losing record.

    I do not think one man decides most games either way.

     

    I tend to agree, but that's why I don't think a feast or famine player is as good as a consistent one.  A lineup of consistent players gives your more than one person who are liable to produce for you over the course of every game of a season.  As opposed to hoping a rotating bunch of hot hands can make up for the rest of their teammates.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I tend to agree, but that's why I don't think a feast or famine player is as good as a consistent one.  A lineup of consistent players gives your more than one person who are liable to produce for you over the course of every game of a season.  As opposed to hoping a rotating bunch of hot hands can make up for the rest of their teammates.

    This theory just doesn't seem to bear out in reality. Not for this year's Twins anyway.

    April: 7-17; Dozier: .617

    May 8-19: Dozier: .632

    June 10-17; Dozier: .1.163

    July: 15-11; Dozier: .824

    Aug: 9-20; Dozier: 1.072

    Sept: 2-4; Dozier: 1.724

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The entire lineup isn't made up of streaky batters, so its a moot point. The entire lineup is made up of some average hitters and then a guy with an OPS that's .150 points higher than everyone else- Dozier.

    If the rest of the lineup moved up to Dozier's batting line- regardless of how streakily or consistently they achieved it, this would be a much improved team.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...