HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2, Vote 9

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-01-2008, 03:44 PM
  #51
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Don't really have an answer. The best I can say is that the point is that if you aren't elite, you don't matter. So a 10th place finish is the bare minimum of being a top talent.

That, and, I wanna keep it simple.
There's nothing unsimple about it, though. Take every occurrence in the top-10 and give the player 20 points just for being there. Then what you have is as follows:

1st place - 30 points
2nd - 29
3rd - 28
4th - 27
5th - 26
6th - 25
7th - 24
8th - 23
9th - 22
10th - 21

The result is, your first place player is receiving 38% more points than your tenth-place player, and the 9th is receiving 5% more points than tenth, as opposed to the implication that first place is ten times better than tenth, and ninth is twice as good as tenth.

A player who is 5th once and never on the leaderboard again, would have 26 points, whereas the guy who was 9th, 10th, 9th, 10th would have 86 points, reflecting his more frequent placement among the leaders. Under your system they would tie, 6-6.

It also falls in with your "if you're not elite you don't matter" statement. Players off the top-10 would receive nothing under this system, just like how you currently do it.

Using that adjustment, Dionne still has a sizeable lead over the others (688), Cook and Mahovlich remain 2nd and 3rd (476, 460), and Coffey (397) overtakes Conacher (318) for 3rd, rightfully so, because he was in the top-10 much more often, though not as high as Conacher when he was. It also shows that there is a bigger gap between Mahovlich's top-10 finishes and Coffey/Conacher's than "100 to 98 to 97"

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2008, 10:36 PM
  #52
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
I hear alot of people calling Taylor a lock but have yet to see any real arguments for his inclusion. Anyone care to present his case and try to convince me?
Taylor's offensive dominance is the key to his case. He lead the PCHA in scoring five of his seven seasons as a full time player in that league. He was beaten in 1912-13, his first year in the league, and in 1916-17 when he missed over half the season, injured I'll assume. (Going by points per game, it appears as though Taylor would have won that year's scoring title as well). In fact, being injured in that particular year is a bit of a double-whammy. During Taylor's time, the PCHA played a 16 or 18 game schedule, but in this particular year they played 24, so the injury (or whatever the reason) cost him 13 games (nearly 10% of his PCHA career), and he takes a bigger hit on the PCHA career scoring list than he otherwise would have. In addition, his Vancouver club was pretty much even with Seattle despite his absence. That Seattle team won the Stanley Cup. I'm definitely not big into what ifs, but I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that he may have another Stanley Cup on his resume had he been available to play.

Getting back to the career leaders, Taylor is first in both assists and points, and is third in career goals. On a per-game basis he is the leader in all three categories. Points per game averages are pretty meaningless now, but in the pre-NHL era of frequent player movement, leagues folding and popping up, and much smaller schedules, I think they gain some relevance. He averaged 1.19 goals per game. Bernie Morris is second amongst top-10 career scorers at 0.95, while Frank Fredrickson comes in third at 0.89 gpg. Scoring dipped by about 30% right around the time Taylor retired, so a very rough adjustment puts him and Fredrickson even with each other, while Morris would be a little behind. In the assist category Taylor burries all relevent competition at 0.76 apg. Morris appears to be in second place again in this category, but a very distant second at 0.46 apg. Taylor's 1.94 ppg average gives him a very solid lead over second place (again it's Morris at 1.41), and Frederickson (1.33) may be closer upon adjustment. So bascially I think this makes it pretty clear that Cyclone was certainly the dominant point-producer and playmaker, and probably the best goal scorer in PCHA as well. Despite playing only about 60% as long as many of the other greats in the league, there is no doubt he is the league's greatest player.

Going by what others were saying and writing at the time furthers Taylor's case. Howie Morenz was often called the Babe Ruth of hockey. If Taylor were born just a little later on, I think he would hold this distiction as well. There was nobody else the fans lined up to see like they did Taylor. He was hockey's most exciting star. Now we need to be careful not to confuse excitment and greatness, but this lends plenty of credibility to the beleif that Cyclone was one of the most skillful players ever to take to the ice. It probably wouldn't be wrong to call him the best skater the game has ever known.

If you look over out list, the top 10 seems to pretty much have the dominant player from every era. From the 90's decade back to the 20's decade you have Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr, Hull, Howe, Richard, Shore, and Morenz respectively (plus Beliveau and Harvey). I didn't realize until now how perfectly that seems to have balanced out. So my thinking is now, why should we have to go so far down the list to find the
dominant player of the 1910's? Because there was no NHL? Well admittedly the top-end talent was more spread out, but that doesn't mean those player weren't just as good. Newsy Lalonde is 29th on the list if you prefer him to Taylor (and Joe Malone hasn't appeared for voting yet if you like him) which seems like a sudden steep drop-off after the best player from every proceding decade has cracked the top 10. I highly doubt that in ~10 years the talent level suddenly ballooned like at no other point in history. As I'm sure many have guessed, I'm the one who had Cyclone at #12 on my list. That's probably a tad high and a result of me over-correcting the fact that I think he's the most under-appreciated player ever. But I still think he's top 20 material.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2008, 12:39 AM
  #53
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
Qualitatively speaking, from what I've gathered from reading old newspaper articles, Taylor is generally regarded as the best player before the Morenz era (with Lalonde and Nighbor being the only other contenders). It's likely that for every season he played he was the best or one of the best players in the world. I don't think there is anyone else available at this point in time to combine his dominance and longevity, even if his level of competition was at a lower level.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2008, 09:51 AM
  #54
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,388
vCash: 500
It seems like it's too early for Dit Clapper. In ten years as a forward, he had just two top-ten scoring finishes, and one of them was in the fluky 1930 campaign (due to bizarre, one-time rule changes that were adjusted mid-season). He had two 2nd-team all-star spots and no Hart consideration. Not bad, of course, but this certainly isn't top-50 material.

As a defenseman, Clapper earned four all-star spots (three 1st, one 2nd) and two Hart nominations (2nd and 3rd place) in just eight full years. He was the #1 defenseman on two Cup-winning teams. That's a great resume, even if we take into account the fact that one of those all-star spots came during the talent-depleted war years, and that his competition was a bit weak by all-time standards. Clapper sounded like Bourque: great defensively, not overless aggressive, but he could play tough when needed.

Basically I agree with Nalyd's earlier point. Clapper's decade as a forward doesn't add very much to his legacy (relative to top 50 players). Unless you want to project what he would have done in two decades as a blueliner, it's much too early for him.

Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2008, 05:14 PM
  #55
Wings4Life
Registered User
 
Wings4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ov Steamrolls Jagr!
Posts: 2,114
vCash: 500
Coffey is undoubtedly a great player but he was never really solid defensively at any point in his career, that will have to count against him to some extent imo.

Wings4Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2008, 07:22 AM
  #56
Howe Elbows 9
Registered User
 
Howe Elbows 9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gävle, Sweden
Posts: 2,577
vCash: 276
I'll go ahead and send my list in early. There just isn't any room for Taylor among my top 5, but I wouldn't be surprised if he makes the cut this week anyway. If you think I'm hypocritical since I voted for Lalonde earlier, so be it. I didn't really see any downsides with the players during the early 1900's until after that vote.

Yes, Taylor had insane scoring numbers, but I can't help but wonder what the level of goaltenders was during his playing career. I don't have many stats or extensive knowledge of the early days of hockey, so I'll admit that I'm just going on a gut feeling here. Also, his dominance raises some minor question marks about his competition.

41. Paul Coffey - Four Stanley Cups, three more finals appearances, always performed in the playoffs and put up really good numbers during the regular season. For me, that's enough to overlook any defensive shortcomings.
42. Bill Durnan - Dominated during six of his seven playing years. Take a look at how the Canadiens' GA changed when he played for them if you don't believe me.
43. Chris Chelios - Three Norris trophies, I think he deserves to get on the list this time.
44. Marcel Dionne - an incredibly talented player who was overshadowed by other greats.
45. Frank Mahovlich - I feel that left wingers are a bit underrepresented, so I'll vote for Big M. He made the first all-star team twice (1960-61 and 1962-63) during the time when both he and Bobby Hull played in the NHL.

Howe Elbows 9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2008, 10:57 AM
  #57
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Thing is, I can only judge Mahovlich on what he did, and what he did just isn't better than guys like Dionne, Cook, Conacher and Taylor. And while direct comparison is impossible, he's IMO, behind Chelios, Coffey and Durnan. This is about who was the best player, not who had the ability to be the best player. Otherwise Mario would be a unanimous #1 and Pavel Bure would be on the list already...
What Mahovlich did? Key player on five Cup champs. Anyone else eligible for this pick make key contributions to five Cup championships?

He beat Bobby Hull twice for a first-team all-star LW birth. Anybody else on this list beat out the best player ever at his position twice for a first-team all-star birth? And he beat Johnny Bucyk, a top-10 all-time LW, six times for a second team birth. (He also had Dickie Moore for competition early in his career).

He never led the league in goals, but he was second four times, and top five two other times. He topped 30 goals in the Original 6 era four times, at a time when 20 goals was an impressive feat.


Last edited by God Bless Canada: 05-03-2008 at 11:25 AM.
God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2008, 11:23 AM
  #58
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,792
vCash: 500
Incidentally, my top 5 not added yet:

1. Max Bentley (this is a recording)
2. Henri Richard
3. Dickie Moore
4. Andy Bathgate
5. Pierre Pilote

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2008, 02:34 PM
  #59
amnesiac*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,716
vCash: 500
Top 5 not added:

Nels Stewart
Cy Denneny
Bill Cowley
Peter Forsberg
Ladislav Tretiak

amnesiac* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2008, 07:27 PM
  #60
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,164
vCash: 500
This is getting tougher. I am ready to send my votes in and have made one change due to the discussions, moving Bill Cook ahead of Conacher & Mahovolich. I do feel some guilt about leaving Chelios off but I really can't get away from my hate for the guy.

My top 5 not added

1,Max Bentley (are GBC & I the only ones that appreciate his greatness)
2.Busher Jackson
3. Dickie Moore
4.Ted Kennedy
5.Andy Bathgate

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 12:52 AM
  #61
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Needless to say Taylor topped my list. Before the lockout I may have been blinded by dislike for a guy like Chelios. But with the direction the game is going, I can't help but appreciate the guys who will still play on the edge and do anything necessary to win, since they seem to be a dying breed. He had my vote last round and will get it again this round. Ditto Bill Durnan, the only guy on the list besides Taylor (IMO) who was the best in the world at his position for a number of years. Coffey's huge offensive contribution can now outweigh defensive short-comings, he's on the ballot. It seems wrong to leave Dionne and Mahovlich off the list, but Bill Cook had some strong arguments in his favour, and he will round out my five in this round.

My top 5 not yet listed:

Cy Denneny
Joe Malone
Nels Stewart
Pierre Pilote
Vladislav Tretiak

Mostly old guys for me, who could have predicted that

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 02:50 AM
  #62
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
1,Max Bentley (are GBC & I the only ones that appreciate his greatness)
He's second on my best not added list:

Earl Seibert
Max Bentley
Clint Benedict
King Clancy
Joe Malone

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 03:05 AM
  #63
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,388
vCash: 500
My top five: Bathgate, Benedict, F. Boucher, Clancy, Kennedy.

Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 03:18 AM
  #64
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
What Mahovlich did? Key player on five Cup champs. Anyone else eligible for this pick make key contributions to five Cup championships?
Key contributions?
'62: Leafs top scorer in the regular season, tied for 3rd in the post season.
'63: Leafs top scorer in the regular season, tied for 13th in the post season.
'64: 2nd in regular season, 1st in playoffs.
'67: 2nd in regular, 4th in playoffs.

And yeah, he was awesome in his two wins as a Hab.

He has three Cups where he lives up to his ability, 2 cups where he's a solid contributor but underperforms when he should have been his teams scoring star and one cup win where the Leafs won inspite of him.

Mahovlich is a perfect example of what a player like Dionne would achieve if he had a great team supporting him.

Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 10:51 AM
  #65
FissionFire
Registered User
 
FissionFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 10,760
vCash: 500
Just a reminder that votes are due at midnight tonight, or roughly 13 hours from the time of this post.

FissionFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 10:56 AM
  #66
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,970
vCash: 500
My top 5 not added yet.

Vladislav Tretiak
Joe Malone
Johnny Bucyk
Henri Richard
Pierre Pilote

Although I forgot to add certain greats to my list and rated certain greats way too low. Its my own fault for doing the whole thing in 1 day. After 40+ it started blending together.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 11:56 AM
  #67
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Key contributions?
'62: Leafs top scorer in the regular season, tied for 3rd in the post season.
'63: Leafs top scorer in the regular season, tied for 13th in the post season.
'64: 2nd in regular season, 1st in playoffs.
'67: 2nd in regular, 4th in playoffs.

And yeah, he was awesome in his two wins as a Hab.

He has three Cups where he lives up to his ability, 2 cups where he's a solid contributor but underperforms when he should have been his teams scoring star and one cup win where the Leafs won inspite of him.

Mahovlich is a perfect example of what a player like Dionne would achieve if he had a great team supporting him.
i don't see what puts mahovlich ahead of cook or bathgate, but i think you may be underrating him.

the fact that mahovlich had great seasons late in his career for less defensive teams, detroit and montreal, and that someone from the habs had told mahovlich he'd be better off on the habs, makes me think that the problem was not mahovlich, but toronto.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 11:57 AM
  #68
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Key contributions?
'62: Leafs top scorer in the regular season, tied for 3rd in the post season.
'63: Leafs top scorer in the regular season, tied for 13th in the post season.
'64: 2nd in regular season, 1st in playoffs.
'67: 2nd in regular, 4th in playoffs.

And yeah, he was awesome in his two wins as a Hab.

He has three Cups where he lives up to his ability, 2 cups where he's a solid contributor but underperforms when he should have been his teams scoring star and one cup win where the Leafs won inspite of him.

Mahovlich is a perfect example of what a player like Dionne would achieve if he had a great team supporting him.
Third and fourth on a Cup championship is actually impressive from my perspective.

If you'll notice, I said key contributor on five Cup championships. He won six. I wasn't counting 63 as a key contribution, since he was a mess in that year's playoffs, too.

How many players on this list have been key contributors to five Cup champions? I think the Big M is the only one.

You play this game to win. The regular season is the qualifier for the playoffs.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 11:45 PM
  #69
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,234
vCash: 500
Discussion in this round changed my mind on a few players no doubt.

Chris Chelios: An incredible defenseman. He could do it all and still going strong in his 40's (who woulf of thought?). I really like Chris Chelios and he's definitely in.

Dit Clapper: Probably my favourite player out of this list. However, it's true that his longevity as a defenseman hurt his legacy. 20 years of Clapper as a defenseman and he would of been in already. But what if's don't count. He's out for now, but probably in next round.

Paul Coffey: Probably in. An effortless skater with everything you look at for an offensive defenseman. He was really bad defensively, but as I already said if you can pair him up with a good Defensive D-Man, Coffey could kill a team by himself.

Charlie Conacher: Best peak of anyone list. Had a hunch Cook was better, but never digged the info. He's probably in, but Cook will go higher.

Bill Cook: Thanks HO for info I was too sloppy to do myself. I really see how Cook could be considered a top-40 talent. He's in, with honourable mention.

Marcel Dionne: Low 40's- high 50's on my list. I think he'll go next round. As everyone already said, his numbers are just incredible, however his playoff resume is ... well not good.

Bill Durnan: An incredible goaltender. Very underrated. I feel his ''bad'' playoff resume is overblowned. He was still one heck of a competitor come playoff time. The guys his in no doubt. A notch above Broda, who won't be in the top-50 unfortunately.

Tim Horton: Non-Factor this round. I have in ahead of MacInnis though.

Frank Mahovlich: Probably for him next round.

Fred "Cyclone" Taylor: I saw the light. Lalonde his too high or Taylor too low.

10)Tim Horton
9)Marcel Dionne
8)Frank Mahovlich
7)Dit Clapper
6)Paul Coffey
5)Charlie Conacher
4)Bill Durnan
3)Chris Chelios
2)Bill Cook
1)Fred Taylor


Top-5 not in yet:

Turk Broda
Scott Stevens
Pierre Pilote
Max Bentley
Bernard Parent

Another guy I think will move up my standing his Andy Bathgate. Ready to hear arguments on him in the next 2-3 rounds.

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2008, 11:58 PM
  #70
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
My top-5 not yet selected (alphabetical):

Clint Benedict
Turk Broda
Teeder Kennedy
Pierre Pilote
Earl Seibert

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 12:39 AM
  #71
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
Bill Durnan: An incredible goaltender. Very underrated. I feel his ''bad'' playoff resume is overblowned. He was still one heck of a competitor come playoff time. The guys his in no doubt. A notch above Broda, who won't be in the top-50 unfortunately.
I realize this might be a bit late, but why not? I'm confused why people consider Durnan a bad playoff performer. He won 2 Cups in six playoff seasons, and his GAA dropped 14%.

Durnan won the Stanley Cup and led the playoffs in GAA in 1944 and 1946 -- presumably nobody faults him for these years.

In 1947, Durnan lost in the SC final in six games, but still led the playoffs in GAA. His team scored exactly 4 goals in the four finals games he lost -- it looks like Durnan played extremely well this year, it's not Durnan's fault his teammates lost their scoring touch in the Stanley Cup finals.

The same thing happened in 1949 -- Durnan played well but his team didn't score (losing in seven games in the first round). In his four losses, the Canadiens put up four goals in four games. Durnan's 2.18 GAA was marginally higher than it was in the regular season, but it's still quite good given the era.

Durnan was probably decent in 1945 -- he had a marginally better GAA in the playoffs, but probably should have done better given how watered-down the league was.

Durnan did look pretty bad playing three of five games in 1950, his final year.

Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 02:33 AM
  #72
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,896
vCash: 500
Yeah, IMO, Durnan takes way too much blame and the rest of the 40's Habs don't take nearly enough blame.

Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 08:36 PM
  #73
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 22,316
vCash: 500
HO and Nalyd... You're right, but the bottom line remains

Durnan wasn't an extraordinary playoff goaltender, something that a few (goalies) picked above him can brag about (especially his more direct competitor Dryden)

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 08:40 PM
  #74
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 22,316
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
My top-5 not yet selected (alphabetical):

Clint Benedict
Turk Broda
Teeder Kennedy
Pierre Pilote
Earl Seibert
Joe Malone (hindsight, I had Malone just a little too high, and Taylor too low)
(GAP)
Turk Broda
Frank Boucher
Dickie Moore
King Clancy

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2008, 08:46 PM
  #75
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Joe Malone (hindsight, I had Malone just a little too high, and Taylor too low)
(GAP)
Turk Broda
Frank Boucher
Dickie Moore
King Clancy
I'm surprised at how much commonality there is in some of these lists. Of the players that weren't my top 5 not yet listed, Bentley, Malone, Clancy, Moore, and Bathgate were numbers 6 through 11 (with Cleghorn in there for good measure) and are all on others' lists (GBC, pappy, MXD).

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:06 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.