HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Canucks - Flyers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-21-2009, 12:09 AM
  #26
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
I won't comment on the value of the trade, but when was the last two time two solid prospects such as these were traded for each other? I'm guessing it hasn't happened often. If JVR was was guaranteed to turn pro next season, I would probably do something like this(Schneider and 2010 1st for JVR and 3rd or something).
If JVR was (was) guaranteed to turn pro next season, the Flyers aren't trading him.

YogiCanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 12:55 AM
  #27
CM-
Registered User
 
CM-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcBenz View Post
He's not raw... his big strong... and putting great numbers in college. He is like bobby ryan.

I rather have him anyday then scheider and raymond


It's JVR were talking about here man...
Um... Bobby Ryan didn't go to college

CM- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 09:36 AM
  #28
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury View Post
Can't do it right now because of the cap, but it's close.

JVR, Randy Jones, and the Flyers 3rd in 2009 for Schneider, Raymond, and a 1st in either 2009 or 2010.
Randy Jones has negative value in any deal to Vancouver. The canucks not only don't need him, they can't fit him into the lineup at his salary and role. If he was on waivers today, the canucks would end up passing on him because they simply can't add a $2.75mill #6 dman to the team. If the Flyers need to move him for salary reasons they need to find another team, or waive him. He just will not fit on the canucks roster.

The canucks already have Ohlund, Bieksa, Salo, Mitchell, Edler and O'Brien on defense... and all are playing well and at salaries that justify their roles on the team. Randy Jones simply does not fit.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 11:21 AM
  #29
Shadow Flyer
Why So Serious?
 
Shadow Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Interwebs
Country: United States
Posts: 3,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
I won't comment on the value of the trade, but when was the last two time two solid prospects such as these were traded for each other? I'm guessing it hasn't happened often.
No matter how many times I point that out, it seems to get ignored.

For the millionth time, elite prospects (like JVR and Schneider) do not get moved for one another, but rather used as part of a package to land a proven commodity, if they are even moved at all.

Shadow Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 11:35 AM
  #30
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowFlyer View Post
No matter how many times I point that out, it seems to get ignored.

For the millionth time, elite prospects (like JVR and Schneider) do not get moved for one another, but rather used as part of a package to land a proven commodity, if they are even moved at all.
Yea exactly. It's probably just as rare for a a top 3 pick such as JVR to get moved before even stepping foot in his team's line-up. The only time I can think of off the top of my head is when Jack Johnson was moved because Rutherford was frustrated with his inability to get JJ signed. I guess the only way JVR could really be dealt is if it turns out to be a similar situation, which it may, but in that case it's more likely that the Flyers deal him for more proven assets.

Peter Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 11:41 AM
  #31
Shadow Flyer
Why So Serious?
 
Shadow Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Interwebs
Country: United States
Posts: 3,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
Yea exactly. It's probably just as rare for a a top 3 pick such as JVR to get moved before even stepping foot in his team's line-up. The only time I can think of off the top of my head is when Jack Johnson was moved because Rutherford was frustrated with his inability to get JJ signed. I guess the only way JVR could really be dealt is if it turns out to be a similar situation, which it may, but in that case it's more likely that the Flyers deal him for more proven assets.
Totally agree. And quite frankly, I think the Canucks would view it much the same way (though I don't think they're frustrated with Cory). Why move Schneider unless its in a package for a proven commodity? (Or Hodgson or Grabner for that matter).

Shadow Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 12:18 PM
  #32
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
Randy Jones has negative value in any deal to Vancouver. The canucks not only don't need him, they can't fit him into the lineup at his salary and role. If he was on waivers today, the canucks would end up passing on him because they simply can't add a $2.75mill #6 dman to the team. If the Flyers need to move him for salary reasons they need to find another team, or waive him. He just will not fit on the canucks roster.

The canucks already have Ohlund, Bieksa, Salo, Mitchell, Edler and O'Brien on defense... and all are playing well and at salaries that justify their roles on the team. Randy Jones simply does not fit.
Though I don't disagree that Randy Jones is not a good fit for the Canucks, the Canucks do need another roster defenseman more than they need a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick

Philli's weakness is definately in goal and the lack of quality goalie prospects. Philli's strength is in the roster forwards and in their depth in defensive prospects. In the east speed is more inportant than size while that is the opposite more so in the west.

Vancouver's strength is in goal, in experienced roster defensemen and down the middle with their forwards, but are weak in offensive defensemen and on the wing. Vancouver is also very weak on the farm for potential near ready NHL players.

This has the basis of a good trade for both teams. Philli can definately use both Schnieder and Raymond much more than Vancouver can. Raymond's speed is useful to Vancouver, but not near as much as the advantage that speed would bring to either Philli or to Pittsburgh (another good trading partner for Vancouver).

The Canucks, giving up a roster player in Raymond, need a roster player coming back as they are also in the playoff hunt. Vancouver can fill in a forward postion with the depth they have, so Vancouver would look for a defenseman coming with JVR rather than a draft pick. That defenseman should be a big, top four defenseman who perferably plays an offensive style. My choice would be either Carle or Coburn. Philli is also fairly stocked with good prospects at this time, Vancouver on the other hand has a very shallow farm. I would say Philli would deserve a 1st round pick, but it would serve both teams to delay that pick for two or three seasons.

Neither Schnieder or JVR are ready to play this season so the lineup changes for now would only be Raymond and Carle.

Revised trade suggestion:

to the Flyers: Raymond, Schnieder, Vancouver's 2011 first round pick
to the Canucks: Carle, JVR


Last edited by Hi-wayman: 02-21-2009 at 12:24 PM.
Hi-wayman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 01:05 PM
  #33
mercury
Registered User
 
mercury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Philly/SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 11,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
Though I don't disagree that Randy Jones is not a good fit for the Canucks, the Canucks do need another roster defenseman more than they need a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick

Philli's weakness is definately in goal and the lack of quality goalie prospects. Philli's strength is in the roster forwards and in their depth in defensive prospects. In the east speed is more inportant than size while that is the opposite more so in the west.

Vancouver's strength is in goal, in experienced roster defensemen and down the middle with their forwards, but are weak in offensive defensemen and on the wing. Vancouver is also very weak on the farm for potential near ready NHL players.

This has the basis of a good trade for both teams. Philli can definately use both Schnieder and Raymond much more than Vancouver can. Raymond's speed is useful to Vancouver, but not near as much as the advantage that speed would bring to either Philli or to Pittsburgh (another good trading partner for Vancouver).

The Canucks, giving up a roster player in Raymond, need a roster player coming back as they are also in the playoff hunt. Vancouver can fill in a forward postion with the depth they have, so Vancouver would look for a defenseman coming with JVR rather than a draft pick. That defenseman should be a big, top four defenseman who perferably plays an offensive style. My choice would be either Carle or Coburn. Philli is also fairly stocked with good prospects at this time, Vancouver on the other hand has a very shallow farm. I would say Philli would deserve a 1st round pick, but it would serve both teams to delay that pick for two or three seasons.

Neither Schnieder or JVR are ready to play this season so the lineup changes for now would only be Raymond and Carle.

Revised trade suggestion:

to the Flyers: Raymond, Schnieder, Vancouver's 2011 first round pick
to the Canucks: Carle, JVR
No way the Flyers either trade Matt Carle or trade JVR and wait two years for a 1st rounder.

mercury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 01:08 PM
  #34
mercury
Registered User
 
mercury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Philly/SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 11,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
Randy Jones has negative value in any deal to Vancouver. The canucks not only don't need him, they can't fit him into the lineup at his salary and role. If he was on waivers today, the canucks would end up passing on him because they simply can't add a $2.75mill #6 dman to the team. If the Flyers need to move him for salary reasons they need to find another team, or waive him. He just will not fit on the canucks roster.

The canucks already have Ohlund, Bieksa, Salo, Mitchell, Edler and O'Brien on defense... and all are playing well and at salaries that justify their roles on the team. Randy Jones simply does not fit.

Then we can try to send him to a team that needs a defenseman. Also, Jones is not a #6 on most teams. Don't label him that way because he would be 6th-best on the Canucks. I hate his contract, and I don't particularly care for him as a player, but he is not a marginal NHL'er.

mercury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 01:15 PM
  #35
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury View Post
Then we can try to send him to a team that needs a defenseman. Also, Jones is not a #6 on most teams. Don't label him that way because he would be 6th-best on the Canucks. I hate his contract, and I don't particularly care for him as a player, but he is not a marginal NHL'er.
I'm sure he could be higher on a lot of team's depth charts... but on Vancouver he's a #6, and I'm not sure he'd even be that as O'Brien really has been playing pretty solid in a #6 role for the canucks.

on the canucks however, Jones, at best, is a $2.75mill #6 dman basically.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 03:45 PM
  #36
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,909
vCash: 500
I think the original proposal is fair.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
I won't comment on the value of the trade, but when was the last two time two solid prospects such as these were traded for each other? I'm guessing it hasn't happened often. If JVR was was guaranteed to turn pro next season, I would probably do something like this(Schneider and 2010 1st for JVR and 3rd or something).
I think JVR will turn pro if he has a legit shot at making a NHL roster.

Haute Couturier is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 07:07 PM
  #37
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury View Post
No way the Flyers either trade Matt Carle or trade JVR and wait two years for a 1st rounder.
A first rounder is a first rounder in what ever year he is drafted. The Flyers have a number of good prospects developing in the minors now. They also have a number of vetern players locked in for the next few years. The easiest way to waste a good draft pick is not have a proper roster spot for them when they are ready to move up. The Flyers would be better to spead out their draft picks over the next two, three, four years. It takes a draft pick time to develop, but the Flyers already have five players (a quarter of their roster) tied up until after the 2012/2013 season. Better to draft players who will not be ready to step into the NHL until the 2014 season as you already have prospects developing in the minors before that.

Both the Flyers and the Canucks are already pretty solid teams. This trade proposal is two teams trying to fill in weaknesses, not just trying to acquire strong players for the sake of strengthening each team willie-nillie. This means value going each way doesn't have to be exactly equal. What's important will be is each team stronger after the trade than befor the trade.

Hi-wayman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 07:17 PM
  #38
Mike Richards 18
Registered User
 
Mike Richards 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 50
very well put solid post on your part.

Mike Richards 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 07:20 PM
  #39
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 107,617
vCash: 6115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Griffin View Post
I won't comment on the value of the trade, but when was the last two time two solid prospects such as these were traded for each other? I'm guessing it hasn't happened often. If JVR was was guaranteed to turn pro next season, I would probably do something like this(Schneider and 2010 1st for JVR and 3rd or something).
Almost never. That's why it's not a realistic trade proposal.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 07:22 PM
  #40
mercury
Registered User
 
mercury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Philly/SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 11,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
A first rounder is a first rounder in what ever year he is drafted. The Flyers have a number of good prospects developing in the minors now. They also have a number of vetern players locked in for the next few years. The easiest way to waste a good draft pick is not have a proper roster spot for them when they are ready to move up. The Flyers would be better to spead out their draft picks over the next two, three, four years. It takes a draft pick time to develop, but the Flyers already have five players (a quarter of their roster) tied up until after the 2012/2013 season. Better to draft players who will not be ready to step into the NHL until the 2014 season as you already have prospects developing in the minors before that.

Both the Flyers and the Canucks are already pretty solid teams. This trade proposal is two teams trying to fill in weaknesses, not just trying to acquire strong players for the sake of strengthening each team willie-nillie. This means value going each way doesn't have to be exactly equal. What's important will be is each team stronger after the trade than befor the trade.
It may be a first, but A) people always value assets that are current or in the immediate future more than things down the road (hence the concept of "interest"); B) 2009 is supposed to be a particularly good draft, with 2010 slightly less so; and C) who knows where that pick will be two years from now. The pick is based on how good or bad the team is.

mercury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 07:25 PM
  #41
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 107,617
vCash: 6115
The strength of the upcoming drafts has minimal affect as far as to the value of draft picks. San Jose have been trading their 1sts for years and they're always churning out good young players.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 10:43 PM
  #42
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury View Post
It may be a first, but A) people always value assets that are current or in the immediate future more than things down the road (hence the concept of "interest"); B) 2009 is supposed to be a particularly good draft, with 2010 slightly less so; and C) who knows where that pick will be two years from now. The pick is based on how good or bad the team is.
Again you are approaching this with a viewpoint of trying to win the trade. Though the game of hockey is a win-lose proposition, the business of hockey is not, but rather based on analyzing your team's ability to play well, now and in the future. If either GM believes his team will be worse off, that GM will back away. Trades in the NHL are seldom made with the idea of taking advantage of the other team. That kind of mentality is best left behind in high school.

Neither GM wants to trade because he thinks his players are busts. The GM's want to field a competitive team this year, next year and beyond. This changes constantlty due to retirement, injury, player fit and how the rest of the league has adjusted. as a fan you may not vision the team beyond this season's draft, but rest asured all NHL GM's do.

Hi-wayman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 10:49 PM
  #43
backhander
Registered User
 
backhander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 1,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogiCanucks View Post
First time proposal so I could very well be WAY out to lunch here. Flyers are supposidly shopping JVR for a young proven NHL goalie, Canucks have Cory Schneider in the AHL who's anything but proven but is never the less a great prospect...

To Flyers

Cory Schneider
Mason Raymond
1st in '10

To Vancouver

JVR
2nd/3rd in '09
\\


jvr goes no where

backhander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2009, 11:50 PM
  #44
mercury
Registered User
 
mercury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Philly/SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 11,014
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
Again you are approaching this with a viewpoint of trying to win the trade. Though the game of hockey is a win-lose proposition, the business of hockey is not, but rather based on analyzing your team's ability to play well, now and in the future. If either GM believes his team will be worse off, that GM will back away. Trades in the NHL are seldom made with the idea of taking advantage of the other team. That kind of mentality is best left behind in high school.
Completely, totally false. What you just said actually makes no sense. Ask a GM of a playoff team if he would rather have a second 1st round pick in 2009, or a second pick in 2011.

Quote:
Neither GM wants to trade because he thinks his players are busts. The GM's want to field a competitive team this year, next year and beyond. This changes constantlty due to retirement, injury, player fit and how the rest of the league has adjusted. as a fan you may not vision the team beyond this season's draft, but rest asured all NHL GM's do.

This is really condescending, and obviously not true. I would appreciate it if you just stopped now. I know you believe that 1st rounder in 2011 = 1st rounder in 2009, but that is simply not how the world works.

mercury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2009, 12:14 AM
  #45
Shadow Flyer
Why So Serious?
 
Shadow Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Interwebs
Country: United States
Posts: 3,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
A first rounder is a first rounder in what ever year he is drafted
Fine, we will give you three 1st rounders for Schneider. A 1st in 2015, one in 2020 and the last in 2025.

That's three first rounders for Schneider, so it should be more than fair, right? Afterall, a 1st rounder is a 1st rounder, no matter the year, eh?


Last edited by Shadow Flyer: 02-22-2009 at 12:21 AM.
Shadow Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2009, 12:24 AM
  #46
ELab2
Registered User
 
ELab2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlantic City
Country: United States
Posts: 5,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowFlyer View Post
Fine, we will give you three 1st rounders for Schneider. A 1st in 2015, one in 2020 and the last in 2025.

That's three first rounders for Schneider, so it should be more than fair, right? Afterall, a 1st rounder is a 1st rounder, no matter the year, eh?
I know you're just making a point but you couldn't actually do that. There's a limit on how far in advance you can trade a pick.

ELab2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2009, 12:52 AM
  #47
Shadow Flyer
Why So Serious?
 
Shadow Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Interwebs
Country: United States
Posts: 3,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELab2 View Post
I know you're just making a point but you couldn't actually do that. There's a limit on how far in advance you can trade a pick.
Yea, I know. I'm just being a sarcastic lil' turd.

Saying a 1st rounder in 2009 has no more or less value than a 1st rounder in 2010 or beyond is simply not reality. The value of that pick goes down the further away it happens to be from the present. I figured that making a proposal that wasn't based in reality would help him to see the flaw in his logic.

*shrugs*

Shadow Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2009, 02:14 AM
  #48
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
Man, the Canucks are giving up a lot here. For one prospect?
it's an elite prospect and probably pretty fair. Only happens once the Nucks lock up Luongo thoug so look for it in the off-season.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2009, 02:19 AM
  #49
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
Though I don't disagree that Randy Jones is not a good fit for the Canucks, the Canucks do need another roster defenseman more than they need a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick

Philli's weakness is definately in goal and the lack of quality goalie prospects. Philli's strength is in the roster forwards and in their depth in defensive prospects. In the east speed is more inportant than size while that is the opposite more so in the west.

Vancouver's strength is in goal, in experienced roster defensemen and down the middle with their forwards, but are weak in offensive defensemen and on the wing. Vancouver is also very weak on the farm for potential near ready NHL players.

This has the basis of a good trade for both teams. Philli can definately use both Schnieder and Raymond much more than Vancouver can. Raymond's speed is useful to Vancouver, but not near as much as the advantage that speed would bring to either Philli or to Pittsburgh (another good trading partner for Vancouver).

The Canucks, giving up a roster player in Raymond, need a roster player coming back as they are also in the playoff hunt. Vancouver can fill in a forward postion with the depth they have, so Vancouver would look for a defenseman coming with JVR rather than a draft pick. That defenseman should be a big, top four defenseman who perferably plays an offensive style. My choice would be either Carle or Coburn. Philli is also fairly stocked with good prospects at this time, Vancouver on the other hand has a very shallow farm. I would say Philli would deserve a 1st round pick, but it would serve both teams to delay that pick for two or three seasons.

Neither Schnieder or JVR are ready to play this season so the lineup changes for now would only be Raymond and Carle.

Revised trade suggestion:

to the Flyers: Raymond, Schnieder, Vancouver's 2011 first round pick
to the Canucks: Carle, JVR

WAY too much for the Flyer to be giving up. Basically we gave up two 1st for Carle so unless you are giving us a 1st in 2010 AND 2011 along woth Schneider for Carle and JVR it's not worth it to us. JVR is still viewed as an EITE prospect and has a much higher value that Schneider. Scheneider and a 2010 1st for JVR is pretty fair.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2009, 07:08 AM
  #50
LEIFey
Context Matters!
 
LEIFey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 7,268
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LEIFey
when does it serve a team well to delay on a pick in a very deep draft? 2009 1st round pick is worth way more than a 2011 draft pick, just because of the certainty value. we know the kind of players that are available for 2009, who knows what the 2011 draft will be like? it's a gamble.

LEIFey 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 08:44 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.