New York Mets prospect Andres Gimenez (3) poses for a photo before the baseball game against the Marlins at Marlins’ minor league complex in Jupiter, Florida, Wednesday, April 26, 2017. (Gordon Donovan)
Generally speaking we think of the corner positions being the power/offensive positions and the up the middle ones being more defensive oriented. Of course there are exceptions – Mike Piazza could hit a little bit and Keith Hernandez wasn’t too bad with the glove – but this is a solid rule of thumb. Adjusted stats, which account for ballpark and run scoring environment, don’t differentiate for positions. A catcher with a 105 wRC+ is a different thing than a 1B with the same numbers. If league average is 100 than it stands to reason that the corner positions will be above that mark and the middle positions will be below it. Everyone can’t be above average.

In 1972, MLB shortstops posted a .231/.290/.298 line, which in that era was good for a 71 wRC+. Meanwhile, RF in that same season had a .716 OPS and a 108 wRC+. The Mets weren’t helping in the former, as their shortstops put up a 64 wRC+ in ‘72. It’s tough to win with offensive sinkholes in the lineup and the ‘72 Mets, despite great pitching, only won 83 games because their offensive production at SS (and 2B and 3B, too) was so poor.

It’s why Francisco Lindor is such an attractive trade target. Lindor has a lifetime 118 wRC+. Last year wasn’t his best season but he still had a 100 wRC+. Yeah, it turns out that’s not so hot. MLB shortstops in 2020 had a 101 wRC+. As for the Mets, while Amed Rosario was doing his best impression of a 1972-era shortstop with his 76 wRC+, Andres Gimenez put up a 105 mark in the category, He was better than league average and better than Lindor in his MLB debut.

Last season started with many fans wondering why Gimenez was even on the roster. It ended up with him having the larger half of a platoon and him out-hitting Lindor. Not too shabby.

Gimenez was long considered one of the club’s top prospects, a guy that former general manager Brodie Van Wagenen made untouchable when he was trading off prospects left and right. He debuts in the majors at age 21 and is an above-average hitter, a strong fielder and an excellent base stealer. So, why does it feel like no one believes in Gimenez?

Maybe chasing after Lindor isn’t a knock on Gimenez. But it seems like maybe people are in love with the idea of Lindor, that he’s going to be this year’s version of Mookie Betts, rather than really looking at either what the club already has in Gimenez or what they’d really be getting in Lindor. Betts came to the Dodgers with a 10.4 fWAR season under his belt and four top-8 MVP finishes, including a first-place finish in the 2018 balloting. Lindor’s best season was three wins worse than Betts and his best finish was a fifth-place in the MVP balloting.

It’s possible that Lindor will be one of those guys who performs best when the biggest spotlight is on him. Betts played in the spotlight in Boston before moving to Los Angeles while Lindor, well let’s just say the lights aren’t quite as bright in Cleveland.

Any club would be lucky to write Lindor’s name in as their starting shortstop. In addition to his bat, he’s also a two-time Gold Glove Award winner in the field. In no way is this post trying to bad-mouth Lindor.

Yet from 2000-2017 the league-wide average wRC+ for shortstops fell in the 84-93 rate. But starting in 2018, the numbers were: 95, 98 and 101 in the shortened 2020 campaign. If you can put up a 117 mark while your positional peers are 30 points below that, well, that’s pretty good. But Lindor was 16 points above the league average in 2019 and a point below average in 2020. Maybe we can’t put a ton of faith into what happened in the Covid year of 2020 but we saw a marked drop in relative performance from Lindor in 2019.

Meanwhile, Gimenez came up and succeeded pretty much the way you would have hoped him to do. He didn’t put up outrageous slugging marks and he didn’t have a Michael Conforto-like .400 BABIP. Instead, he had a .136 ISO and a .318 BABIP, compared to league average SS rates of .158 and .313, respectively.

Let’s say Lindor is slightly better than what he was in 2019 and Gimenez is slightly worse than what he was in 2020. In a vacuum, that would make Lindor a much better option to deploy as your team’s shortstop. But there’s the acquisition cost of Lindor and then the monetary cost once you do trade for him. And it’s tough to see how those two costs don’t cancel out his advantage.

Gimenez is five years younger and significantly cheaper. With the Wilpons gone and Steve Cohen in their place, this doesn’t have to be the main thought in the front of our minds 100% of the time. But we shouldn’t throw it out the window, either. Because of this, some people think that trading for Lindor should be a back-burner issue.

For me, it shouldn’t even be on the stove.

40 comments on “On having Andres Gimenez and potentially trading for Francisco Lindor

  • Mike W

    I do not want the Mets to trade for Lindor. He will be a free agent after next season along with Story, Correa, Baez and I believe Seager too. We have Ginenez, Rosario and Mauricio.

    The teams that lose those players will need a new shortstop. We could sign one if them if we wanted, but also have a valuable trade chip in one of our three as trade bait.

    The best long game move is to wait.

  • Barry

    “For me, it shouldn’t even be on the stove.”
    Completely agree, Brian. Thanks for saying it.

    Besides the metrics, simply from watching Gimenez you can see the clutch hits, the terrific plays, the slick fielding, and the high baseball IQ.

    How can you not want to wait to find out what you have in him before taking on a huge contract and trading away cheap major or minor league-ready talent when there are actual holes that need to be filled instead.?

    I’m amazed at how many people don’t feel this way.

    • Ray from Brooklyn

      I Love Lindor and everything he brings ,youth he has a A+ Glove, above average speed and more importantly his baseball IQ its off the charts, Power from both sides of the plate what is there not to like about him, he is also very charismatic. Mets have to be patient Lindor will be a free agent at the end of the year, they must wait and simply sign him when he becomes a free agent for lets say 5yrs. at $150 Million, but dont mortgage the future, Gimenez looks like a keeper ,Im gonna tell you why the reason, why a lot of Minor leaguer’s come to the Major league’s and do well is simple Major League Pitchers throw strikes or are around the plate more often then not while in the Minors there re a lot of pitchers that haven’t mastered the strike zone, so a player like Gimenez who knows the strike zone unlike Rosario is going to do very well because he also puts the ball in play and stays within his limits , he actually reminds me of Iglesias who when he came up was considered just a glove , it turned out he can hit for average.I think he could be a excellent number 2 hitter. Rosario (untouchable)they meant he can’t make contact with the ball does not know the strike zone ,Pitchers in the N.L stop throwing him strikes, If im a M.L. Pitcher I would not throw him a strike High Fastballs and breaking balls in the dirt all day ,he will get himself out.

    • Rae

      I would rather keep Giminez as the Mets 2021 shortstop, and have Rosario try to play 3B. SS is a harder position to play than 3B so le’ts see if Rosario can handle this change as he will not need the larger range that shortstops need as 3B has a smaller range diameter so perhaps playing this position will help Rosario defensively? The guy has a strong arm so if he can utilize the smaller range needed perhaps he can acclimatize too 3B, and learn how to field the ball at third, set, pivot and throw, as this change might help him become a better fielder and thrower overall

  • Edwin e Pena

    Agreed. Lindor is nice to have, such as would be a Bugatti vs a Mercedes. However, the Mercedes is fine thank you very much, especially when you need a new roof done on the house as well.
    Mets have other needs at CF, SP, and possibly another BP piece. Getting Lindor and trading prospects is not the best use of resources at this time. Would be a “splash” move, but not a substantive one. My guess is Uncle Stevie didn’t become as successful as he is by choosing “splash” vs “substance”.
    Lindor = good, but also Lindor = pass.

  • Remember1969

    My thoughts on this topic:
    * Shortstop is not a position of need this off-season.
    * Gimenez looks like a truly solid if not better than average player – offensively and defensively
    * I absolutely do not want to trade Gimenez
    * Lindor has been one of the best players in the game for 6 years
    * Lindor just turned 27 years old since the 2020 season ended
    * Cleveland has stated that it is almost a given that he will be traded this off season
    * The shortstop market is flooded with good players this year
    * The shortstop market will be even more flooded with better players next year
    * The market for Lindor is extremely limited. Cleveland cannot expect to get much in return – the cost in players will not be prohibitive.
    * Robinson Cano generously donated about $20M to the team for 2021 improvements
    * The cost of Lindor will be about $20M for 2021. (in salary)
    * Inserting Lindor at shortstop and sliding Gimenez to second base would give the Mets arguably the best keystone combination in the majors and arguably the best in Mets history.
    * Or, slide Gimenez to third and the entire left side would be a wall.
    * If Lindor works out well for the team in 2021, re-signing him is a possibility. If not, not much lost.
    * If Gimenez shows that he is for real in 2021 and continues hitting, the option to make him the long term shortstop is still there.
    * This down market is the time to pounce on a player that could very easily be the the one to take them over the top.
    * Trading for Lindor should absolutely be on the stove, if not the front burner

    • Bob P

      I agree with a lot of your points but I think the problem is that the price will be too high. Cleveland will not want to give Linder away and I think there’s a good chance someone will give them more than I would be willing to give up from the Mets. What would you be winning to part with for Lindor?

      • Remember1969

        My bold trade plan is:

        Mets trade:
        Jeff McNeil
        Amed Rosario
        Robert Gsellman
        Franklyn Kilome
        Mark Vientos
        Freddy Valdez
        Thomas Szapucki

        Mets receive:
        Francisco Lindor
        Right handed starting pitcher Zach Plesac
        Cleveland’s #15 prospect LHP Joey Cantillo

        • TexasGusCC

          Way too much.

          McNeil for Plesac is close. So, that leaves the rest of the package for Lindor and Cantillo. Instead, give Cleveland from your excess, your first basemen. Give them one of the first basemen and Rosario for Lindor and Plesac. I don’t even think this needs to throw in a Kilome/Gsellman piece.

          • Remember1969

            I don’t agree that the two first basemen are an excess.

            Smith is the better fielder. Alonso has a better power and excitement ceiling. With a DH, they are extremely complementary parts. Without a DH, Smith is the only back-up first baseman on the roster, can play some left field, and is the team’s best pinch-hitter.

            In my mind McNeil is the excess here. I guess you could argue that Nimmo might be a better trade chip than McNeil, but I’d rather keep the OBP and natural outfielder in left-field and leadoff spot.

            I believe everything I proposed in that trade is ‘excess’. I don’t agree that it is too much I don’t see Cleveland giving up Lindor and Plesac for two players, one arguably a back-up shortstop. They need the deal sweetened with at least a mid-level prospect (Vientos)

            • TexasGusCC

              If you feel Smith is your backup, then trade him. McNeil gives you great lineup flexibility and JD Davis can back up Alonso. Not to mention that McNeil is a proven hitter too, that plays multiple positions well. He’s more important than all the other names you mentioned.

              All things considered, first base is the easiest position to fill and a deep position on the team. Don’t expect the DH. Trade Smith if he’s your backup, keep the guys that play harder positions and have more value. Don’t forget, you’re selling very high on Smith too!!! Why not use that?

  • Metsense

    Lindor is a very good shortstop but he doesn’t fulfill the needs of the Mets. Now right the Mets need at least two mid rotation starters and defensive improvements in centerfield and third base without diminishing their offense. The Mets have a good rookie ss, a young veteran ss and a top prospect ss. The Mets don’t need another shortstop.

    • Remember1969

      I guess I understand the thinking that ‘he doesn’t fulfill the needs of the Mets’, but I think that is a little bit of tunnel vision. I would ask the question: Would obtaining Lindor make the team better? I think the answer is yes.

      I am not asking to acquire Lindor in lieu of Springer and shoring up the rotation; they certainly need to do those moves first and foremost.

      • Mike W

        Ok, so you trade for Lindor. Then you extend him for 25 mil a year. You sign Springer for 25 mil. That’s 45 before you even sign a starter or two. That’s before you extend Conforto and Syndergaard. Add in Cano when they bum returns and suddenly you have no financial flexibility.

        • Remember1969

          I am not advocating extending Lindor at this point.
          There are several things that need to be sorted out before 2022.
          * Is Conforto ‘signable’? He is a Boras client, and while he may want to settle in New York long term, Boras may be a pain in the butt for the Mets to deal with.
          * Is Conforto the player he showed in 2020? His .412 BABIP is pretty scary. If he regresses to a normal, or even slightly above normal, will he still be a $25M player long term?
          * While at this point, it looks like Cano’s salary will be back on the books in 2022, it is possible there might be some better resolution to that
          * Syndergaard’s situation is still fluid, depending on whether he comes back strong and whether he even wants to be in New York.

          My approach here is to use the Cano money for 2021 to bring in Lindor, mostly because of the reduced cost of acquiring him. Let 2021 play out – perhaps Lindor completely outplays Conforto and he is the guy you want to extend. Perhaps Conforto is the guy and let Lindor walk.

          Also, remember that it is not only Cleveland that is stuck with a poor market, all the good shortstops are too – there are simply too many of them with not enough teams with the money for them all, so Lindor in his prime may come at a very good value.

          My point is that Lindor would improve the team in 2021. And the cost figures to be right.

          • Steve Cohen's Billions

            Holy shit I thought your trade with 10 players was crazy and then to hear that you don’t even want to extend Lindor?!?!?!?!?!

            Quit being so crazy with my money and my players

  • Name

    One should still be wary of the small sample size/luck based on his minor league performance.

    Let’s take a look at the typical AA-> MLB translation (unfortunately the Mets have graduated very few recent position players from the AA level)

    Alonso: 999 OPS at AA, 909 OPS at MLB. 9% reduction
    McNeil: 989 OPS at AA, 884 OPS at MLB. 11% reduction
    Guillorme: 706 OPS at AA, 683 OPS at MLB. 3% reduction
    Rosario : 845 OPS at AA, 705 OPS at MLB, 16% reduction
    TJ Rivera: 815 OPS at AA, 780 OPS at MLB, 4% reduction
    Conforto: 899 OPS at AA, 843 OPS at MLB, 6% reduction

    That’s 6 players and not one of them exceeded their AA numbers at the MLB level.
    Now Gimenez:
    697 OPS at AA, 732 OPS at MLB. 5% increase

    Now, it’s possible that Gimenez is the exception to the norm, but the data indicates that he more likely than not outperformed this year and that the 102 OPS+ is not his true talent level. If instead we took that 5% increase and made it a 5% reduction, then that translates to a 662 OPS which is probably around a 85 OPS+ and much below average hence the desire to improve if the goal is to win in the short term.

    • Brian Joura

      You’re using career rates in the majors, which is ok, I guess. But then you’re really compounding the sample size issue. But what about Brandon Nimmo? He had a .728 OPS in Double-A compared to an .838 mark in the majors. Dominic Smith had an .824 OPS in AA and an .811 OPS in the majors. It’s possible by the end of next season Smith’s MLB OPS will exceed his AA mark. And we have to acknowledge the age factor, too.

      Age at Double-A

      Alonso – 22/23
      McNeil – 23/24
      Guillorme – 22
      Rosario – 19/20
      Rivera – 25/26
      Conforto – 22
      Gimenez – 19/20

      Along with his age, we also have the fact that Gimenez had a completely uncharacteristic bad stretch in Double-A in 2019. In 38 games during the middle of the year, he had a .560 OPS. Prior to that he had a .773 OPS in 100 PA and afterwards he had a .771 in 219 PA

      I don’t blame anyone for being skeptical of Gimenez for what he did in 132 PA during the Covid year. But I’d be leery of basing it on his OPS at one minor league stop when he momentarily hit a speed bump.

      • Name

        Not sure how i missed those two. Instead of looking at career let’s cut it off at 3 years then (an arbitrary number) to see how well a player’s early MLB career relates to their AA performance.

        Alonso: 999 OPS at AA, 909 OPS at MLB(19-20). 9% reduction (still has 1 yr to add stats)
        McNeil: 989 OPS at AA, 884 OPS at MLB (18-20). 11% reduction
        Guillorme: 706 OPS at AA, 683 OPS at MLB(18-20). 3% reduction
        Rosario : 845 OPS at AA, 711 OPS at MLB(17-19), 16% reduction
        TJ Rivera: 815 OPS at AA, 780 OPS at MLB(16-17), 4% reduction
        Conforto: 899 OPS at AA, 843 OPS at MLB(15-17), 6% reduction
        Nimmo: 728 OPS at AA, 840 OPS at MLB(16-18), 15% increase
        Smith: 824 OPS at AA, 745 OPS at MLB(17-19), 10% reduction

        So we see that Nimmo is the only exception, but I think there’s no denying the trend. Of course there are player specific reasons to increase/decrease a projection, but if one were to build a statistical simulation using this provided data, the most likely scenario is that Gimenez is going to post a sub 697 OPS mark for his first 3 years, and if i were a betting man, that’s where i would be putting my money at.

        Steamer is the only with a 2021 projection up at this point and not sure if it’s by coincidence or is using a methodology similar to mine, but it projects a 692 OPS for next year.

      • Name

        I forgot to check how many PA each person had at AA:

        Alonso: 320
        McNeil: 271
        Guillorme: 558
        Rosario: 247
        Rivera: 496
        Conforto: 197
        Nimmo:581
        Smith: 542

        Gimenez: 632
        Andres actually had the most PA out of all the players. I see no reason to isolate a stretch and say that’s not characteristic of him or why he shouldn’t fall under the same rule of thumb as the others. If he’s prone to a bad stretch at AA that brought down his numbers, then the same thing could happen to him at the MLB level.

        • TexasGusCC

          Good stuff Name. I agree that Gimenez is young, but many other prospects came up young and didn’t need very long to get going. One such is Rosario, who people seem to have frowned on at only 24. Meanwhile, Lindor came up at 21 too, and hit 12 HRs and stole 12 bases in about 1.5x the plate appearance Gimenez had.

          My point is we need to glance how much better can Gimenez really get, if he improves as opposed to how much can re regress if he follows normal production patterns of other players? Your work Name is rather eye-opening.

      • Name

        One final thought – 2020 was heavily based towards intra-division teams , will his bat hold up against pitchers and teams he sees less frequently? Instead of facing 40-50 pitchers on a semi-frequent basis, he’ll have to learn and study upwards of 200 pitchers with longer breaks between the same pitchers.

        98 of his 132 PA (74%)were intra division.
        In comparison, in a normal year 2019 Alonso had 328 of his 693 PA (47%) vs in division opponents.

  • TJ

    I agree that there are higher priorities than Lindor and SS for trhe Mets, and I also agree that the Mets need to manage their limited prospect depth with extreme caution. That said, the big boy teams are always “in the market” when players of Lindor’s stature are available. All the points above to focus else are accurate…but markets are unpredictable and the current environment makes things even more unpredictable. If other positional acquisitions don’t work out, and Lindor’s market collapses, a low cost acquisiton makes sense for the Mets. AS noted above, even if he left after 2021, the Mets would get a draft pick. Keep him on the backburner and name your price.

    • Remember1969

      Interesting comment – “if the market collapses”. In my opinion, the market for Lindor is already flatter than a pancake.

      I’ll repost a comment I put out a few weeks ago on the same topic:

      The market is already saturated with decent (yes, cheaper) shortstops – Semien, Simmons, Gregorius, perhaps Kim Ha-Seong and even Freddy Galvis. Next year’s FA list of Story, Seager, Correa is perhaps the strongest ever from that position.

      With that said, the market is really not there. A look at the teams that need to fill the position (because they lost theirs to free agency):
      * Angels: Lost Simmons, just traded for Iglesias
      * A’s: Lost Semien. Will not dive into the top $$ for a replacement.
      * Phillies: They are as vocal as anyone about losing dollars last year.
      * Cincinnati: Possible, but they seem to be second tier players rather than top shelf

      There are really only four teams that could pay for a shortstop, and none of them have a pressing need.
      * Mets: Have a good one in Gimenez, and other pressing needs first.
      * Yankees: Have a good one in Torres
      * Blue Jays: Have a good one in Bichette, have other needs as well
      * Dodgers: Have Seager at this point, although Turner is (for the moment) gone at third base.

      The others either have a good shortstop (Nats, Red Sox, Rays, Braves, Cardinals, etc) or will never pay for one (Tigers, Rangers, Marlins, Mariners, etc).

      Lindor would upgrade almost any team instantly, but my point is that nobody has a priority to get him. The Indians are stuck on this one. I don’t think they are going to get any top 10 prospects. As a baseline, I see the best they are going to do is something like Rosario/Davis/Szapucki, or something along those lines.

      The pot may be sweetened if they agree to part with one of their young pitching studs – Plesac, MacKenzie, or Civale. A package deal might be their only way to get much back.

      I suppose there could be the infamous ‘mystery team’ out there that might drive up the price, but I don’t see who it might be (Twins?) of the

      • Remember1969

        BTW, I agree with your thoughts TJ – very well put!

        • TJ

          Yes, Yours is a very good analysis. So, by market collapsing, I guess I mean that the Yanks, Dodgers, and Blue Jays drop due to filling out their payrolls with other options. All those other teams can afford to pay more in terms of prospects for only one guaranteed year.

          • Remember1969

            I kind of think that either the Yankees or the Dodgers might decide the market is deflated enough to offer just a little better package and get themselves a steal for 2021. I don’t see Toronto getting in on this with their other needs. Like the Mets, shortstop is probably their 5th highest priority, if that. (Altho the point that Lindor makes any team better is still valid).

            One other point about Cleveland’s conundrum is that 2021 is still very up in the air about how many games and under what circumstances it will be played under. I cannot see any team paying top prospects for a player that may not even play a full season. The Mets got burned on the Stroman deal for Covid; I don’t think it will happen again.

  • TexasGusCC

    When we don’t need a 30/30 shortstop with gold glove defense, we are disillusioned.

    • TexasGusCC

      I thought I wrote “entering his prime”…

      • Remember1969

        I agree with you 100%. I guess the only thing we don’t meet on is the price it will take to acquire him.

  • Mike W

    While we were distracted in this Lindor talk, the Padres just traded for Blake Snell.

    We need to be focused on Springer and pitching.

  • Darrell M Noel

    Agreed! Trading for shortstop is not a priority. I prefer a trade for a defensive wiz at centerfield. Nimmo, J.D. Davis and Brad Brach to Tampa Bay for Kevin Keirmaier and reliever Nick Anderson. spend them money saved on Springer on extending Michael Conforto this year (when you might still get him for around 25 mil AAV).

  • Dan Capwell

    I’m still dizzy from the time warp that took us from 1972 (and memories of Bud Harrelson, Ken Boswell, and Wayne Garrett) to whether or not the Mets should pick up Francisco Lindor. These outrageous trade proposals are only adding to the nausea.

  • Herb G

    A Lindor trade would still be attractive if it did not include Gimenez as the give back, and, of course, if you can extend him. Trade Rosario, Josh Wolf and Mark Vientos for Lindor. Move Gimenez to 2B, McNeil to 3B, and you have stellar fielding up the middle with McCann, Lindor, Gimenez and Springer.

  • Sam

    Most of the “Get Lindor” was started by NY sport “so called” media. Most of the stories were “click” bait and conjuring stories after Steve Chan purchase was approved. None of them really made sense. Centerfield and pitching is the need… period! BTW, Dominic Smith great hitter, great first baseman, not…not an outfielder. So stop listing him as an outfielder

  • NYM6986

    Thanks for all the great discussion. Bottom line is that Lindor comes at a huge acquisition and payroll cost if he can be extended and while he makes the team better SS is not a need. Springer in CF is a need that makes us better and a #2 starter is a need and makes us better. Now is not the time to trade prospects unless the return throws us over the top – but we are not yet at that point. Now JD Davis and Dom Smith might just get us a 3B but hate to get a 30 something with $199 million left to pay. Any chance for Kris Bryant??

    • John Kolb

      Yes, but if Rockies take back Cano we are only on hook for 150 mill. Arenado will still be best fielding 3rd baseman for 3 or 4 more years and will hit better than our current options.

      • MYM6986

        That is a fair observation but why would they want Cano unless they plan on sneaking some substances in his food and getting rid of the last two years. Wait- shhhh that’s not a bad idea. 3-4 years with a top level 3B might throw us over the top.

  • Darrell M Noel

    Why this obsessive focus on Lindor? Shortstop is not a train wreck for the Mets and, centerfield and pitching should be higher priorities. Also, fans need to stop thinking the answer to every problem involves the presumptive number one name at every position. There are ways to spread money around and solve most if not all of their needs. Two mid rotation pitchers instead of Bauer, trade for Kevin Keirmaier instead of Springer then, load up on bullpen (Brad Hand and either Liam Hendricks or Alex Colome).

  • TexasGusCC

    I did the trade valuation website and Lindor’s trade value is 36; Alonso is 47; Plesac is 53; JDG is 55; and McNeil is 61, for comparison purposes.

    I ran a Lindor, Cantillo (6) and Plesac trade, and equated it to Alonso, Gimemez (28) and Vientos (13). I can easily live with this, but Lindor must be resigned. Plus, Name makes a very good point that Gimemez was much better than his norms in the minors so if we can get a stud hitter/fielder and a promising young arm for Gimenez and our second first baseman, we should.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: