Fw: [外電] Zobrist的例子和多重守位的重要性
※ [本文轉錄自 MLB 看板 #1KP7HbaT ]
作者: WingedHussar (寂寞哥) 看板: MLB
標題: [外電] Zobrist的例子和多重守位的重要性
時間: Thu Nov 13 17:05:38 2014
原文連結:http://ppt.cc/ADQH
Positional Versatility and the Zobrist Fallacy
Sometimes we’re taught to value the wrong things. Usually this happens
because, at some point prior, our elders didn’t know any better. An idea
gets ingrained into our culture and passed down from generation to generation
without ever really being questioned. Certain contrarians and rabble rousers
try to shake things up, but they’re almost always shouted down.
There is this thing—some fact or idea—that we know to be true, and it leads
to all sorts of other conclusions about related matters. This is why RBI and
wins remain so popular in baseball. There was a time when they were the best
stats we had, and changing your values when new information comes around is a
challenge for many people. We sometimes call this inertial reasoning.
But this isn’t about RBI or wins. I’ll spare you that diatribe. This is
about something else entirely. It’s about the way our conception of what a
player ought to be leads us to look down upon one of the most unique and
impressive players in baseball.
This is a story about Ben Zobrist and what it means to be a great player.
我們常被一些錯誤觀念誤導，因為許多舊的觀念一代一代傳下來並沒有受到甚麼質疑。
例如勝投和RBI依然在棒球界盛行是因為在過去那是最好的評估工具，而人們不願意輕易
改變價值觀。本文將藉由Ben Zobrist的例子來告訴你為何他是很好的選手。
The well-educated but unobsessed baseball fan likely knows two things about
Zobrist. First, he plays a lot of different positions for the Rays. Second,
people like me won’t shut up about how Zobrist is so underrated.
That’s the book on Zobrist. He’s a super-utility guy whom a small army of
baseball nerds seem to think is the second coming of Stan Musial. You might
even been aware of the fact that Wins Above Replacement (WAR) seems to adore
Zobrist. Lots of WAR skeptics like to point to that and use it as an example
of WAR’s imperfections, its flaws.
WAR doesn’t work because it says Ben Zobrist is about as good as Miguel
Cabrera and Robinson Cano. That’s the message. This is something that just
cannot be so. WAR is new. It requires a mix of math and subjectivity, and you
can’t calculate it with two swipes on a keyboard. So when it tells you
something you don’t believe, you dismiss it. Mock it.Forget it.
This formula says Ben Zobrist is one of the five best players in baseball.
What a joke.
大部分球迷對於Ben Zobrist的印象大概就兩個。1.他在光芒守過許多位置 2.許多人一
直強調他被低估了。 這也是Ben Zobrist有趣的地方，他是個多守位野手；而從WAR的
角度看他簡直是強爆惹，他的WAR值和Miguel Cabrera差不多，當然許多人認為這就是
WAR的缺陷所在，Ben Zobrist怎麼可能和Miguel Cabrera一樣強?!
WAR告訴我們Ben Zobrist是最好的五名棒球選手之一? 真是笑話!!
Let’s start at the end, though. WAR loves Zobrist. From 2009 to 2012,
Zobrist ranked second to Cabrera with 24.3 WAR to Cabrera’s 24.9. From 2009
to 2013, Zobrist trailed only Cabrera and teammate Evan Longoria. He became a
full-time player in 2009 and since then, WAR says he’s been the second-most
valuable position player in the entire sport.
Zobrist從2009~2012的WAR是24.3僅次於Cabrera的24.9。至2013年為止WAR說他是
全美第二有價值的棒球員。
Zobrist has a .270 batting average during that time and fewer than 100 home
runs. He’s nowhere near Cabrera’s equal at the plate, but his baserunning
and defense are superior. That’s typically the case with WAR. Most basic
analysis is about hitting and gives lip service to the rest of the game. We
went over this again and against both times we fought over Mike Trout and
Cabrera.
Zobrist2009~2012的打擊率.270 全壘打少於100，很明顯和Cabrera沒得比。他只有跑壘
和守備優於Cabrera，然而這就是WAR試圖說明的棒球員除了攻擊以外其他方面的貢獻。
But it’s more than that for Zobrist, because he doesn’t have a loud
defensive game. He’s not making amazing plays in center or making throws
like Andrelton Simmons. Zobrist plays a bunch of positions and plays them
well. No one really argues that he’s a poor defender, but he’s not
considered outstanding, either.
It’s not so much that defense outweighs hitting in this example. It’s that
there’s a perception that a guy who plays all over the diamond cannot
possibly be good enough to be mentioned in the same breath as the game’s
premier slugger.
Even the skeptic can watch Ozzie Smith play defense and realize that it’s
possible for him to make up for his weaker bat. But the skeptic can’t see a
guy who doesn’t even have a permanent position as being capable of providing
that type of value.
Don’t blame the skeptic here. He’s a product of his culture and of the
language he was taught.
他的守備只能算不錯，他的例子也不是說明守備比攻擊更重要，Zobrist的亮點在於
他幾乎場上每個位置能守。
One certainly could make the case that Zobrist is underrated simply because he
’s a well-rounded player without one defining tool. That’s probably true to
some extent, but I’d contend that Zobrist is primarily underrated relative
to other such players because of his most impressive skill.
Ben Zobrist can play average or better defense at every position—with the
possible exception of catcher—and Joe Maddon makes the most of that
wonderful skill. During his career, Zobrist has played more than 4,000
innings at second base, more than 1,700 frames at shortstop, over 2,000
innings in right field, and about 500 innings apiece among left field, center
field, first base, and third base.
Zobrist isn’t underrated because he’s a good-at-everything,
great-at-nothing player. Zobrist is underrated because pretty much every
player in baseball who is asked to play four or five positions during the
course of a season qualifies as a backup.
Just look at this list of players who played 50 or more innings at three
different positions in 2013:
Ben Zobrist二壘守超過4000局、游擊超過1700局、右外野超過2000局、左中外野一壘三壘
加起來超過500局。Ben Zobrist被低估不是因為他是全能守位的野手，而是在我們的觀念
之中，流浪在各個守位的野手不就是個替補嗎。
以下是2013年在超過三個守位守超過50局的野手:
Player WAR Played LF/CF/RF Only
Ben Zobrist 5.4
Chris Denorfia 3.9 X
Bryce Harper 3.8 X
Andre Ethier 2.9 X
Allen Craig 2.5
Mark Trumbo 2.5
Martin Prado 2.4
Josh Hamilton 2.0 X
Brandon Moss 1.9
Daniel Nava 1.8
Nick Punto 1.8
Curtis Granderson 1.4 X
Kelly Johnson 1.2
Rajai Davis 1.2 X
Michael Saunders 1.2 X
Ichiro Suzuki 1.1 X
Shane Robinson 0.9 X
Jordan Schafer 0.9 X
Charlie Blackmon 0.8 X
Eric Young 0.7 X
Ed Lucas 0.7
Jeff Bianchi 0.7
Emilio Bonifacio 0.6
Dustin Ackley 0.6
Joaquin Arias 0.6
Willie Bloomquist 0.5
Chris Young 0.5 X
Justin Turner 0.5
Jeff Baker 0.4
Clete Thomas 0.4 X
Ramiro Pena 0.4
Kyle Blanks 0.3
Mike Aviles 0.3
Ramon Santiago 0.2
Freddy Galvis 0.1
Wilkin Ramirez 0.1 X
Darin Ruf 0.1
Mark DeRosa 0.1
Don Kelly 0.0
Logan Forsythe 0.0
Alex Presley -0.1 X
Trevor Crowe -0.1 X
Logan Schafer -0.1 X
Collin Cowgill -0.2 X
Sam Fuld -0.3 X
Daniel Descalso -0.3
Chris Coghlan -0.5 X
Roger Bernadina -0.6 X
Alexi Amarista -0.8
Skip Schumaker -1.0
Jerry Hairston -1.3
Michael Morse -1.5
Jeff Keppinger -1.5
Maicer Izturis -2.2
It’s Zobrist and mostly a bunch of guys you might find on the waiver wire.
There are a few other good players in there, but almost every player who is
asked to move around the diamond is something less than a solid regular, and
this list counts left field and right field as different positions.
Of the 54 players on this list, 22 of them only played the three different
outfield spots, and you have to get down to Martin Prado at 2.4 WAR before
you find a player whom you might consider a “utility” guy. The average WAR
of the group, including Zobrist, is 0.7.
The fact that Zobrist moves around must mean he isn’t good enough to hold
down one position, right?
和Zobrist排在一起的是一票讓渡名單水準的野手，這份名單已經將左外和右外視為不同
守位，54人中有22人只是在三個外野守位輪流守。而我們從Zobrist一路往下看到Martin
Prado才讓我們感覺到這是個工具人。這群人的WAR平均是0.7，而Zobrist是5.4。
This belief is what I call the “Zobrist Fallacy.” It’s perfectly
understandable, as an automatic response, to see a player rotating around the
field during the course of the season and assume he’s the team’s 10th man.
He’s the best substitute, so he plays whatever position is open due to
injuries or days off. This is how players like Don Kelly make their living.
Our conception of a utility player is someone who is good enough defensively
to handle multiple positions but not good enough offensively to start at any
of them. They’re useful because you can usually avoid carrying extra bench
players for emergencies and can replace them with guys who are valuable pinch
hitters or platoon bats.
我們對工具人的印象就是守備足夠勝任多重守位，但攻擊不足站穩先發。
Plenty of major leaguers fit this description. They’re guys you like having
around, and their role calls on them to play a variety of positions over the
course of a season. They’re baseball duct tape. But we get lost with players
like Zobrist because he is capable of that kind of versatility while also
featuring a well-above-average bat. He breaks the mold a little.
我們存有這種觀念就會忽略Zobrist這種超級工具人。
In baseball, defensive flexibility is something you learn when your bat won’
t keep you in the lineup. It’s a matter of survival for many players rather
than true cause and effect. Guys who can play multiple positions aren’t
inherently bad, but most of them learn to play multiple positions because it’
s the only way they can be good enough.
Which bring us to Zobrist. Zobrist’s bat is good enough to start anywhere.
His 126 wRC+ since 2009 would be well above average anywhere on the diamond.
The baseball instruction manual tells us to put players at the best defensive
position they can handle if their bats are good enough to be in the lineup at
all. If Miguel Cabrera could play shortstop well, he’d be a shortstop.
在攻擊優先的棒球觀念中，工具人不是不夠好，這是他們唯一能生存的辦法。但Zobrist
證明他不管守哪個位子火力都足以擔任先發。自2009年起他的wRC+是126。
From a value perspective, this makes sense in the abstract. This isn’t one
of those silly baseball traditions that won’t die. You want a player to
provide as much value as possible and he will do so by playing his innings at
the most difficult possible defensive position. Anyone who doesn’t do that
isn’t maximizing his value.
The immediate realization, however, is that teams have to fill out an entire
lineup, so a team with Troy Tulowitzki and Andrelton Simmons couldn’t have
two players at short. One would move to third or second or center field. You
wouldn’t be maximizing Tulowitzki’s value if you put him at third, but he
could handle third just fine, and it would help the team overall.
So people don’t knock Zobrist simply because he doesn’t play shortstop when
the Rays have a better defensive shortstop on the roster. They knock him
because it appears as if the team has a better shortstop, second baseman, and
right fielder on the roster, and Zobrist is just finding his way into the
lineup by plugging whichever hole is open that day. And that’s simply not
true.
由於棒球守備位置的關係，各守位火力最大化一直都是教練最煩惱的問題，Zobrist這種
不管守哪火力都可以最大化的球員是稀有且珍貴的。
Zobrist is one of the Rays’ stars. Maddon builds the lineup around him.
Zobrist is a utility player because he’s special, not because he needs to do
it to survive. If you take the time to really think about it, you know that
Zobrist isn’t the Rays 10th-best player. But the fact that you associate his
most recognizable skill with guys who can barely stay above replacement level
leads you to psychologically undervalue him when comparing him to the game’s
best players.
Only a couple of players have been more productive major league players
during the last six seasons, but if you tell people Zobrist is a star and WAR
thinks he’s great, there’s pushback.
And that pushback is all in our heads. If you think about it dispassionately,
you know that a player with a 126 wRC+ who plays good defense and gets 600 or
more plate appearances is crazy valuable whether he plays right field or
shortstop. There’s a difference between those two, maybe around a win, but
both are All-Star type players or better. But when we see it with our own
eyes, it’s tough to break the well-ingrained conditioning. Great players don
’t move around the diamond. They just don’t.
Zobrist對光芒隊的重要性不言可喻 Maddon可以用他隨意安排打線。
WAR說Zobrist是明星球員但我們不相信，因為明星球員不可能到處換守位。
There’s a very human origin and baseball origin to this way of thinking.
From a simple perspective, it’s hard to switch between multiple positions
and play them well. We’re pretty confident as analysts that a good shortstop
could become a good outfielder, but asking a young player to learn both at
the major league level and switch between the two at a moment’s notice is
hard. The outfield isn’t harder than shortstop, but it’s absolutely a
challenge no matter how talented the player may be. It takes time to master a
position.
It makes sense that you wouldn’t want to bring a talented hitter up and
bounce him around the diamond. It would take his energy away from learning to
hit a big-league slider, and it might make him worse at both positions. In
other words, the actual development of versatility is challenging. That’s
problem one.
我們都相信一個好的游擊手也能成為好的外野手，但若要一個年輕選手學習兩個以上
大聯盟等級的守備位置是很困難的。沒人會要求潛力股以學習多重守位為目標。這可能
會影響他在打擊方面的發展。
Problem two is a product of problem one. In baseball, we develop and scout
talent without much concern for need at the major league level. If you have
to pick a position for a player, you pick it when he’s first coming up, and
you move him off the position when he proves he can’t handle it or the team
runs into a road block in the big leagues. Since it’s difficult to play
multiple positions, you find positions for your top prospects to succeed, and
you develop them there.
Essentially, you scout players based on the most difficult position they can
handle. If you’re watching a 20-year-old kid at Double-A with the potential
to hit 30 home runs with some decent on-base skill, you care about getting
him to the big leagues. If he can play third, he’ll play third. If he can’t
play third, he’ll learn left. His bat is getting him to the show, and his
glove is just keeping him from slowing that down.
On the other side, if you’re watching a superlative defender, you’re not
going to move him off the position and try others, because his presence at
that position is why you want hiem at all. Simmons didn’t get to Atlanta
because he was setting the world on fire at the plate. He got there because
of the runs he can save on defense.
You only shift to honing the utility craft when either of those avenues fail.
If you aren’t good enough to hit in the big leagues, you might be good
enough to fill a bench role, but that requires that you can cover a few
positions. Or if your bat is okay, but your defense isn’t good enough for
you to start at a premium defensive position, you might find yourself unable
to break in as a starter at an offense-first position.
At the development stage, you become a utility player when becoming a starter
fails. In talking with a few people who cover the player development world,
that’s the message that comes through. Utility players, or guys who play all
over the diamond, do so because they didn’t project as someone who could
play every day at the MLB level.
球探在看新秀時，也是先看棒子。球員本來守哪就守哪，如果棒子可以上大聯盟；本來
是個三壘手那就守三壘，三壘不行就左外。總是以棒子優先。能守甚麼位置不是優先考量
靠守備上大聯盟的人代表他們在棒子競爭中輸了。
When I asked our Marc Hulet what he means when he uses the term “utility
player” in a scouting report, he said that it means the player’s “
offensive skills project as replacement level or worse, but that they’re
athletic enough to handle multiple positions.”
Another FanGraphs and Hardball Times contributor, Nathaniel Stoltz, told me
that utility players “have interesting skills, and they don’t have a fatal
flaw that would leave them totally helpless in the bigs, but they don’t fall
neatly into any position on the field in terms of their skill set. One
prerequisite for a utility tag, of course, is the player’s ability (or
projected ability) to man several positions. In most instances, that includes
at least one up-the-middle spot (seems like [four-corner] types are pretty
rare nowadays).”
Stoltz went on to say that a utility guy is “either deficient enough on one
side of the ball to give you pause running him out there every day, or he’s
just fairly bland all-around and, therefore, doesn’t seem like the sort of
guy worth going out of your way to write into the lineup card regularly.”
Mark Anderson, who writes for Baseball Prospectus and TigsTown, puts it like
this: “Utility players have an MLB tool that holds them at the level, or the
collection of their tools warrants more than an org player projection…in
Tigers terms, think Ramon Santiago’s peak (glove as the carrying tool) or
Shane Halter (never embarrassed himself in any capacity at his peak),
respectively.”
Built into all of these characterizations is the idea that utility players
are good enough to be useful members of a 25-man roster but not good enough
that you would want them to start for your team. This won’t come as a shock
to anyone, but seeing their descriptions is important. When you call someone
a utility player, or project they have a utility future, you’re
acknowledging a lack of potential.
There are many players in professional baseball who fit this description. They
’re common, and we’re very aware of their existence. Just go back up and
look at that list. We have a good grasp on what it means to be a utility
player. Given that there are countless examples, we end up developing a very
fixed relationship between players who play multiple positions and players
who aren’t great by major league standards. It’s almost a perfect
relationship, truth be told.
If you take the time to really sit down and think, you know this isn’t a
guarantee. But as your subtle opinions develop and the lack of
counterexamples emerge, your brain accepts this conventional wisdom.
這裡是一些人對工具人的看法 大概就是"攻擊能力在讓渡球員水準，但運動能力可以負擔
多守位" "沒有致命缺點讓他們在面對大聯盟對手時顯得無助，但能力不足以先發"
大概就是工具人能力足夠擺在25人名單內，但不用抱太多期望。一般人對工具人的聯想
就是"潛力不足"。
Which brings us back to Zobrist. Over the last six years, he ranks second in
WAR, and even if you use WAR as a general guide, he’s easily been one of the
ten best position players in the game during that time. He has a well
above-average bat. He runs the bases very well. He’s an extremely valuable
defender. Zobrist isn’t just a good player who stands above other players
who play multiple positions; he stands above just about everyone.
Zobrist is versatile. He’s not a utility player by the common meaning of the
word. He has everything you need to be a major league starter at any position
and the added ability to handle many positions at a moment’s notice.
Sixty qualified players have posted a 120 wRC+ or better since 2009. Zobrist
ranks seventh in BsR (base running runs) among them and first in DEF
(fielding and positional runs). Think Chase Utley and Evan Longoria as
comparables.
Zobrist絕對不是潛力不足，他打擊很行，跑壘很行，守備很行，守哪都很行，他具有
所有成為大聯盟先發球員的條件，從打擊、跑壘、守備方面拿他和Evan Longoria、
Chase Utley比較的話...
BEN ZOBRIST COMPARABLES
Name PA wRC+ Bsr Off Def WAR
Ben Zobrist 3869 126 16.3 133.7 70.1 34.7
Evan Longoria 3533 131 6.8 135.0 67.4 33.4
Chase Utley 3133 123 26.5 113.0 57.1 27.9
Utley and Longoria are underrated in their own right for providing a lot of
value in aspects of the game other than at the plate, but imagine taking one
of those players and being able to use him at every position.
Which leads us to one final question: Why is versatility so valuable? If we
put Zobrist at shortstop or second base and let him play, he’d still be
plenty valuable. Baseball dorks would still consider him one of the best
dozen players over the last few seasons. Right? Yes, but it’s more than that.
Zobrist’s versatility makes the Rays better because he gives them the option
to run any number of rotating platoons across multiple positions. He’s a
switch hitter who can play basically every position. The Rays can gather
their best nine hitters for any given matchup, and the fact that they have
Zobrist and his versatility allows them to be less concerned about needing
the other eight to cover a specific set of positions.
It’s also a huge benefit when dealing with injuries. The Rays almost always
can replace an injured player with their next-best player because Zobrist can
shift positions to accommodate. He’s the best insurance policy money can buy.
從比較表可以看出Zobrist的價值。他也增加光芒調度的靈活性。
I’ve always had a fascination with versatility in baseball. When you’re in
little league, you’re either the kid who wants to play shortstop or you’re
the kid who tells the coach you’ll play anywhere. I was the latter. There
aren’t really any other players like Zobrist right now, or at least any
players who have done what he does for an extended period of time.
Chone Figgins comes to mind, but he had only two high-quality offensive
seasons. In 2013, Prado is about the closest thing we have, and he’s an
average major league rather than a down-ballot MVP.
Our conception of utility players leads us to relay a utility tag onto
players who play all over the diamond. As a result, we think less of those
guys who play multiple positions than we probably should, even if they’re
much better than a 25th man. Most of the time, that doesn’t have serious
consequences. In Zobrist’s case, though, it leads us to miss a star and
question a method of player evaluation (WAR), because it doesn’t feel like
Zobrist should be so well regarded.
Versatility should be celebrated. It’s a valuable skill we don’t properly
appreciate because the number of players who use versatility to move from
good to great is tiny compared to the number of players who use it to move
from career minor leaguer to bench player.
Looking down on versatile players is like looking down on buffets just
because buffets typically don’t offer high-quality food. But buffets could
offer high quality good. Some rare ones do. That’s Ben Zobrist. He has all
of the skills you need to succeed at any major league position and the
ability to play almost any of them.
Zobrist isn’t the reason WAR is flawed; he’s the reason it’s important. If
not for the existence WAR, even more people would undervalue one of the best
players of the last several years. Zobrist would be a great player if he were
anchored to second base, but the fact that he’s not makes him even more
valuable to the Rays despite the fact that though our brains have been
programmed to think otherwise.
這就凸顯了多功能性的重要性了，我們過去認為多功能性就是什麼都會一點，什麼都不精
這明顯地低估了Zobrist。我們覺得buffets就是什麼都有，但都不怎麼樣。事實上也有
高級的buffets；什麼都有，什麼都好。Zobrist的存在不是證明WAR有缺陷；相反的，
他證明為何WAR很重要，如果沒有WAR我們很可能低估了一個過去幾年最好的棒球選手。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 114.46.74.104
※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/MLB/M.1415869541.A.91D.html
→
11/13 17:11, , 1F
11/13 17:11, 1F
→
11/13 17:12, , 2F
11/13 17:12, 2F
→
11/13 17:13, , 3F
11/13 17:13, 3F
推
11/13 17:14, , 4F
11/13 17:14, 4F
推
11/13 17:15, , 5F
11/13 17:15, 5F
→
11/13 17:15, , 6F
11/13 17:15, 6F
推
11/13 17:21, , 7F
11/13 17:21, 7F
→
11/13 17:21, , 8F
11/13 17:21, 8F
推
11/13 17:22, , 9F
11/13 17:22, 9F
→
11/13 17:23, , 10F
11/13 17:23, 10F
→
11/13 17:23, , 11F
11/13 17:23, 11F
推
11/13 17:25, , 12F
11/13 17:25, 12F
推
11/13 17:28, , 13F
11/13 17:28, 13F
推
11/13 17:29, , 14F
11/13 17:29, 14F
推
11/13 17:40, , 15F
11/13 17:40, 15F
推
11/13 17:55, , 16F
11/13 17:55, 16F
推
11/13 17:56, , 17F
11/13 17:56, 17F
推
11/13 18:13, , 18F
11/13 18:13, 18F
推
11/13 18:14, , 19F
11/13 18:14, 19F
推
11/13 18:16, , 20F
11/13 18:16, 20F
推
11/13 18:30, , 21F
11/13 18:30, 21F
推
11/13 18:36, , 22F
11/13 18:36, 22F
推
11/13 18:41, , 23F
11/13 18:41, 23F
推
11/13 18:41, , 24F
11/13 18:41, 24F
→
11/13 18:51, , 25F
11/13 18:51, 25F
推
11/13 18:52, , 26F
11/13 18:52, 26F
推
11/13 18:58, , 27F
11/13 18:58, 27F
→
11/13 18:58, , 28F
11/13 18:58, 28F
推
11/13 19:06, , 29F
11/13 19:06, 29F
推
11/13 19:19, , 30F
11/13 19:19, 30F
→
11/13 19:19, , 31F
11/13 19:19, 31F
推
11/13 19:24, , 32F
11/13 19:24, 32F
推
11/13 19:29, , 33F
11/13 19:29, 33F
推
11/13 19:29, , 34F
11/13 19:29, 34F
→
11/13 19:29, , 35F
11/13 19:29, 35F
推
11/13 19:30, , 36F
11/13 19:30, 36F
→
11/13 19:30, , 37F
11/13 19:30, 37F
→
11/13 19:31, , 38F
11/13 19:31, 38F
推
11/13 19:38, , 39F
11/13 19:38, 39F
還有 123 則推文
→
11/13 23:59, , 163F
11/13 23:59, 163F
推
11/14 00:01, , 164F
11/14 00:01, 164F
→
11/14 00:01, , 165F
11/14 00:01, 165F
推
11/14 00:07, , 166F
11/14 00:07, 166F
→
11/14 00:08, , 167F
11/14 00:08, 167F
→
11/14 00:09, , 168F
11/14 00:09, 168F
→
11/14 00:09, , 169F
11/14 00:09, 169F
→
11/14 00:11, , 170F
11/14 00:11, 170F
→
11/14 00:11, , 171F
11/14 00:11, 171F
→
11/14 00:12, , 172F
11/14 00:12, 172F
推
11/14 00:12, , 173F
11/14 00:12, 173F
→
11/14 00:13, , 174F
11/14 00:13, 174F
推
11/14 00:14, , 175F
11/14 00:14, 175F
→
11/14 00:15, , 176F
11/14 00:15, 176F
→
11/14 00:56, , 177F
11/14 00:56, 177F
→
11/14 00:57, , 178F
11/14 00:57, 178F
推
11/14 01:49, , 179F
11/14 01:49, 179F
推
11/14 01:54, , 180F
11/14 01:54, 180F
→
11/14 02:04, , 181F
11/14 02:04, 181F
推
11/14 02:28, , 182F
11/14 02:28, 182F
推
11/14 03:03, , 183F
11/14 03:03, 183F
→
11/14 03:03, , 184F
11/14 03:03, 184F
→
11/14 03:04, , 185F
11/14 03:04, 185F
→
11/14 03:04, , 186F
11/14 03:04, 186F
推
11/14 03:36, , 187F
11/14 03:36, 187F
推
11/14 03:50, , 188F
11/14 03:50, 188F
→
11/14 05:04, , 189F
11/14 05:04, 189F
→
11/14 05:05, , 190F
11/14 05:05, 190F
→
11/14 05:05, , 191F
11/14 05:05, 191F
推
11/14 05:05, , 192F
11/14 05:05, 192F
推
11/14 06:40, , 193F
11/14 06:40, 193F
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
※ 轉錄者: genie2 (171.71.231.21), 11/14/2014 06:40:31
推
11/14 12:18, , 194F
11/14 12:18, 194F
推
11/14 15:42, , 195F
11/14 15:42, 195F
→
11/14 15:42, , 196F
11/14 15:42, 196F
→
11/14 15:42, , 197F
11/14 15:42, 197F
→
11/14 17:05, , 198F
11/14 17:05, 198F
推
11/15 00:42, , 199F
11/15 00:42, 199F
→
11/15 19:52, , 200F
11/15 19:52, 200F
→
11/15 19:53, , 201F
11/15 19:53, 201F