HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Florida Panthers
Notices

Horton-Stafford trade talks heating up

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-12-2009, 05:00 PM
  #101
JonathanHuberdoh
Maybe.....next year?
 
JonathanHuberdoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Towanna
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,988
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to JonathanHuberdoh
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADoubleD View Post
You obviously have never seen him play either. He's a RW not a center. He isn't particularly fast but he isn't slow and he isn't a 3rd liner. He still has potential to become better. This past season was his first full season as he only played 64 games in 07-08 due to injuries and only 41 in 06-07 as he was in the AHL for majority of that season. To say he has already reached his ceiling is ridiculous. There is still plenty of room for him to grow.
I love how the only ones that say anything are Sabres fans.

I'd be bigging up Stafford too if I could get someone like HORTON for him!

JonathanHuberdoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 05:41 PM
  #102
Laus723
Future Now
 
Laus723's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 27,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthiasitchy View Post
I love how the only ones that say anything are Sabres fans.

I'd be bigging up Stafford too if I could get someone like HORTON for him!
Bigging up? He's not anywhere remotely close to how you described him.

__________________
So you're saying there's a chance!
Laus723 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 05:56 PM
  #103
CaptPantalones
Registered User
 
CaptPantalones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acadmus View Post
Does the station cite any source? Because up to now, the only source is Eklund, and that's not worth even talking about (as GP now knows ). If this radio station is merely giving legs to Eklund's rumor, it's as worthless as he is.
the station cited "team sources". They are the Sabres flagship station

CaptPantalones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 06:42 PM
  #104
SuitedAces*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptPantalones View Post
the station cited "team sources". They are the Sabres flagship station
Which means nothing more than they are the station that won the bid to do the radio broadcasts.
The lineup of radio hosts on that station are hacks from top to bottom.

SuitedAces* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 06:48 PM
  #105
Holy Jokinen
Registered User
 
Holy Jokinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tampa/Boca
Country: United States
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Just going to throw my opinion out there...

I'm not in favor of trading Horton. Too many times we've traded young guys just a year too early, and watched them kick all kinds of ass in another jersey. He's got a nice contract, so let's see what he can do this year.

Holy Jokinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 07:17 PM
  #106
FlaPanthers7
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Country: France
Posts: 4,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptPantalones View Post
the station cited "team sources". They are the Sabres flagship station
Someone on the TRB said they also hate Eklund so it would be unlikely they are citing to him. Take that for whatever it's worth. I'm still not buying it b/c I don't understand the logic behind trading Horton for an RFA.

FlaPanthers7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 07:26 PM
  #107
NJ_CATS_FAN
We Suck Yet Again
 
NJ_CATS_FAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: N.J.
Country: United States
Posts: 4,779
vCash: 500
I dont buy this rumor for the fact that we have absolutely no reason to get rid of him. He is young, signed to a reasonable contract, and is our most vital part of our offense. If he was to be traded, we would get a much better return than Stafford. I just dont buy this rumor.

NJ_CATS_FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 07:02 AM
  #108
jol
Registered User
 
jol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Miami Beach, Florida
Posts: 1,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ_CATS_FAN View Post
I dont buy this rumor for the fact that we have absolutely no reason to get rid of him. He is young, signed to a reasonable contract, and is our most vital part of our offense. If he was to be traded, we would get a much better return than Stafford. I just dont buy this rumor.
Like somebody mentioned here (maybe another thread) I also think that only reason why Panthers would trade Horton is to save money. In return they would get somebody with lower salary.

JOL

jol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 09:42 AM
  #109
Acadmus
Moderator
 
Acadmus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vermont
Country: United States
Posts: 15,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb1300 View Post
Did I once say that he was slow?
When people start denying charges that were never made, you know to start paying attention to what they just charged themselves with.

Wonder what Stafford's speed is really like?

__________________
"...and ultimately it doesn't matter."
Acadmus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 10:25 AM
  #110
Markstrom Rules
Sup
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 16,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jol View Post
Like somebody mentioned here (maybe another thread) I also think that only reason why Panthers would trade Horton is to save money. In return they would get somebody with lower salary.

JOL
It is a valid point that I didn't think of before. I don't think it's the only factor, but it might be one of them if this rumor is true. The Panthers have a lot of backloaded contracts. Horton, Weiss, Olesz, and more. They'll have an expensive team in a couple years, because even though some veteran contracts will expire, young guys like Frolik, Campbell, Markstrom/Salak etc. will be getting hefty raises from what they are making now. Horton's cap hit is 4M, but his salary in the last two years of his deal are 4.5 and 5.5M. They can probably sign Stafford for 2-3M and that will be considerable savings in the long run. Plus I'm sure more would be thrown in from the Sabres.

Markstrom Rules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 11:12 AM
  #111
pb1300
BLEED RED
 
pb1300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aiyio, Greece
Country: Greece
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to pb1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
It is a valid point that I didn't think of before. I don't think it's the only factor, but it might be one of them if this rumor is true. The Panthers have a lot of backloaded contracts. Horton, Weiss, Olesz, and more. They'll have an expensive team in a couple years, because even though some veteran contracts will expire, young guys like Frolik, Campbell, Markstrom/Salak etc. will be getting hefty raises from what they are making now. Horton's cap hit is 4M, but his salary in the last two years of his deal are 4.5 and 5.5M. They can probably sign Stafford for 2-3M and that will be considerable savings in the long run. Plus I'm sure more would be thrown in from the Sabres.
I dont think that is quite the case with us. While most of our long term deals are back-loaded, we are talking about a little more than $3 million total in raises up until the last players signed. It would be more of an issue if that number was closer to $10 million for example, but giving that the amount is that so low, I dont think it would be a serious reason to consider moving Nate. I think what is more important is the way we handle Rusty. Olesz needs to either pick his game up immensely or we have to figure out what to do with him, because unlike Nate, Rusty contributes nothing compared to his salary. We look much better in a few years with Booth and Ballard on the roster at $8.6 million, rather than Booth, Ballard, and Olesz for $12.9 million. Now if Rusty all of a sudden loses the injury bug, and starts contributing, then thats a whole different story.

pb1300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 12:49 PM
  #112
Markstrom Rules
Sup
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 16,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb1300 View Post
I dont think that is quite the case with us. While most of our long term deals are back-loaded, we are talking about a little more than $3 million total in raises up until the last players signed. It would be more of an issue if that number was closer to $10 million for example, but giving that the amount is that so low, I dont think it would be a serious reason to consider moving Nate. I think what is more important is the way we handle Rusty. Olesz needs to either pick his game up immensely or we have to figure out what to do with him, because unlike Nate, Rusty contributes nothing compared to his salary. We look much better in a few years with Booth and Ballard on the roster at $8.6 million, rather than Booth, Ballard, and Olesz for $12.9 million. Now if Rusty all of a sudden loses the injury bug, and starts contributing, then thats a whole different story.
What? It's well over 3 million. Horton's salary in his last year alone is 1.5M more than his cap hit.

Olesz is unmovable right now. Nobody's going to take on that cap hit and increasing salary for his production to date. We'd have to overpay just to get rid of him.

Maybe they firgure that Stafford can hit his 65ish pt. ceiling and provide most of Nate's potential production, at a much cheaper total cost over the next few years. And get other pieces as well. Like I said, I don't think that's the only factor, but it could definitely be one of them.

Markstrom Rules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 01:36 PM
  #113
pb1300
BLEED RED
 
pb1300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aiyio, Greece
Country: Greece
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to pb1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
.7 what? The fact is Horton has scored 62 pts. twice, and likely would have again last season if he didn't get hurt and played on the wing. Stafford is still unproven and had a subpar year last year. Their production isn't really that close.

I actually think we'd be looking at another forward coming back with Stafford or a good prospect, or both. We don't need any of their d-men they'd be willing to give up.

Hortons salary vs cap hit has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We are talking about the increase in salary since most of our long term deals are back-loaded. But like I said earlier, its not a big issue:

the 10/11 season - $3.7 million increase from 09/10 season
the 11/12 season - $1.7 million increase from 10/11 season
the 12/13 season - $1.7 million increase from 11/12 season

Those are the increases of our guys signed to long term deals. The increases in salary shouldnt be taken into effect when handling our long term deals. Unless Stafford is signed for a considerably less amount than what Horton is making, I see no upgrade in trading Horton for Stafford, no matter who else is coming from Buffalo. Horton is the superior goal scorer, and for a team that lacks that ability with him already on this team, I think its a definite downgrade if we deal him off for Stafford.

pb1300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 02:04 PM
  #114
Laus723
Future Now
 
Laus723's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 27,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb1300 View Post
Hortons salary vs cap hit has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We are talking about the increase in salary since most of our long term deals are back-loaded. But like I said earlier, its not a big issue:

the 10/11 season - $3.7 million increase from 09/10 season
the 11/12 season - $1.7 million increase from 10/11 season
the 12/13 season - $1.7 million increase from 11/12 season

Those are the increases of our guys signed to long term deals. The increases in salary shouldnt be taken into effect when handling our long term deals. Unless Stafford is signed for a considerably less amount than what Horton is making, I see no upgrade in trading Horton for Stafford, no matter who else is coming from Buffalo. Horton is the superior goal scorer, and for a team that lacks that ability with him already on this team, I think its a definite downgrade if we deal him off for Stafford.
You're killing me PB. My interest in this deal is 1. I don't like Nate, haven't for some time, and 2. Stafford is a RFA meaning more would have to come back. It won't be Roy, etc., but if it were...it wouldn't matter? I think people are allowing emotions to roll into this too much.

If it is for some incredibly stupid reason a straight swap Nate for Stafford, well then I'll be pissed as well, however, if anything doesn't make sense, it would be a straight swap.

Laus723 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 03:59 PM
  #115
Markstrom Rules
Sup
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 16,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb1300 View Post
Hortons salary vs cap hit has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We are talking about the increase in salary since most of our long term deals are back-loaded. But like I said earlier, its not a big issue:

the 10/11 season - $3.7 million increase from 09/10 season
the 11/12 season - $1.7 million increase from 10/11 season
the 12/13 season - $1.7 million increase from 11/12 season

Those are the increases of our guys signed to long term deals. The increases in salary shouldnt be taken into effect when handling our long term deals. Unless Stafford is signed for a considerably less amount than what Horton is making, I see no upgrade in trading Horton for Stafford, no matter who else is coming from Buffalo. Horton is the superior goal scorer, and for a team that lacks that ability with him already on this team, I think its a definite downgrade if we deal him off for Stafford.
How can you say it has nothing to do with what we are talking about? That's exactly what we are talking about. Horton, Weiss, Olesz, and Allen's salaries only go up every year from here on out. Horton is signed through 12-13. We will lose some veteran contracts, but they will have to be replaced. Either by prospects in our system or by UFA's which we'll have to overpay for. Again, you're not factoring in that a lot of our youth will be getting considerable raises over the next few years, hopefully. At least, the hope is that your prospects will improve enough to warrant substantial raises by the end of their ELC's. Campbell is a RFA in 10-11. Frolik, Matthias, Repik, Ellerby, and Salak will be RFA's in 11-12. Dadonov and Kulikov(if he signs this summer) will be RFA's in 12-13. Markstrom will be a RFA in 13-14. Now, if you hope for the best and plan ahead, then you're looking at a considerable raise in total salary for those players over the next 4 years.

Like I said, maybe what management is thinking is that they hope Stafford produces most of what Horton would produce for about half the price over the next few years. A lot of Sabres fans think Stafford will end up being forced to sign for around 2M. Do I agree with it? No. But one could certainly assume that if this rumor is true, that's what management might be thinking. And then we get other stuff thrown in too which could pay dividends in the future. Also, depending on what is coming back, they also might figure that the something extra combined with Stafford would makes us better than we are with just Horton next season. Again, do I agree? No, I think it's too risky. But if this rumor is true, then there has to be reasons why they are thinking about doing it. I think the salary issue is a valid point.

Markstrom Rules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 04:47 PM
  #116
pb1300
BLEED RED
 
pb1300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aiyio, Greece
Country: Greece
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to pb1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
How can you say it has nothing to do with what we are talking about? That's exactly what we are talking about. Horton, Weiss, Olesz, and Allen's salaries only go up every year from here on out. Horton is signed through 12-13. We will lose some veteran contracts, but they will have to be replaced. Either by prospects in our system or by UFA's which we'll have to overpay for. Again, you're not factoring in that a lot of our youth will be getting considerable raises over the next few years, hopefully. At least, the hope is that your prospects will improve enough to warrant substantial raises by the end of their ELC's. Campbell is a RFA in 10-11. Frolik, Matthias, Repik, Ellerby, and Salak will be RFA's in 11-12. Dadonov and Kulikov(if he signs this summer) will be RFA's in 12-13. Markstrom will be a RFA in 13-14. Now, if you hope for the best and plan ahead, then you're looking at a considerable raise in total salary for those players over the next 4 years.

Like I said, maybe what management is thinking is that they hope Stafford produces most of what Horton would produce for about half the price over the next few years. A lot of Sabres fans think Stafford will end up being forced to sign for around 2M. Do I agree with it? No. But one could certainly assume that if this rumor is true, that's what management might be thinking. And then we get other stuff thrown in too which could pay dividends in the future. Also, depending on what is coming back, they also might figure that the something extra combined with Stafford would makes us better than we are with just Horton next season. Again, do I agree? No, I think it's too risky. But if this rumor is true, then there has to be reasons why they are thinking about doing it. I think the salary issue is a valid point.
I understand that the salaries go up towards the end of each players deal. The point I was trying to make is that we are talking about a few million dollars, not something substantial like $10+ million for example. I dont think we are in bad shape whatsoever when it comes to re-signing some of the youth like you mentioned. Im just adding this to the production I have seen from Nate and Stafford, and that is where I get my opinion on the deal.

pb1300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 04:52 PM
  #117
pb1300
BLEED RED
 
pb1300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aiyio, Greece
Country: Greece
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to pb1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laus723 View Post
You're killing me PB. My interest in this deal is 1. I don't like Nate, haven't for some time, and 2. Stafford is a RFA meaning more would have to come back. It won't be Roy, etc., but if it were...it wouldn't matter? I think people are allowing emotions to roll into this too much.

If it is for some incredibly stupid reason a straight swap Nate for Stafford, well then I'll be pissed as well, however, if anything doesn't make sense, it would be a straight swap.
Obviously Roy, Vanek, Pommenville arent going to be coming back, so that is why I said what I said. I dont want to give up on Horton just yet. We gave up on Boyle, and look what happened. Same with Huselius and Hagman. Well, Nate would hurt as bad as anyone else we gave up on. Comparing the two, if both reach their peaks, is NO comparison. So many players have taken seasons to put it all together, and I think it would be a huge mistake to give up on Horton at such a young age. If we are talking about a "bigger name" return, then thats one thing, but a package centered around Stafford just doesnt do it for me. And I really dont think that they are going to include Butler, Myers, or Ennis, so I would rather keep Nate for now, and see what is available later on down the road.

pb1300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 05:08 PM
  #118
Laus723
Future Now
 
Laus723's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 27,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb1300 View Post
Obviously Roy, Vanek, Pommenville arent going to be coming back, so that is why I said what I said. I dont want to give up on Horton just yet. We gave up on Boyle, and look what happened. Same with Huselius and Hagman. Well, Nate would hurt as bad as anyone else we gave up on. Comparing the two, if both reach their peaks, is NO comparison. So many players have taken seasons to put it all together, and I think it would be a huge mistake to give up on Horton at such a young age. If we are talking about a "bigger name" return, then thats one thing, but a package centered around Stafford just doesnt do it for me. And I really dont think that they are going to include Butler, Myers, or Ennis, so I would rather keep Nate for now, and see what is available later on down the road.
I don't think Hagman or Huselius have been tremendous, what sucks is our return on those guys. However, at the time, every team in the NHL passed on SillyJuice for free. Boyle wasn't at all close to what he currently is and i don't recall any signs pointing to him being that type of player, either.

As I said, if it's just a straight swap, or even a mediocre pick in return, I'll be seriously scratching my head, but Stafford is a RFA, can't be all that we're getting back.

Laus723 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 05:32 PM
  #119
Rattrick
Registered User
 
Rattrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 12,894
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rattrick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laus723 View Post
I don't think Hagman or Huselius have been tremendous, what sucks is our return on those guys. However, at the time, every team in the NHL passed on SillyJuice for free. Boyle wasn't at all close to what he currently is and i don't recall any signs pointing to him being that type of player, either.

As I said, if it's just a straight swap, or even a mediocre pick in return, I'll be seriously scratching my head, but Stafford is a RFA, can't be all that we're getting back.
We never put Huselius on waivers if I recall. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I know we eventually traded him to Calgary for Montador, but don't remember us putting him on waivers before that.

Rattrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 05:34 PM
  #120
Laus723
Future Now
 
Laus723's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 27,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattrick View Post
We never put Huselius on waivers if I recall. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I know we eventually traded him to Calgary for Montador, but don't remember us putting him on waivers before that.
Yes, we put him on waivers and he cleared, we then traded him to Calgary.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...rs/?printer=1/

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=145100

Laus723 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-13-2009, 08:07 PM
  #121
Markstrom Rules
Sup
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 16,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb1300 View Post
I understand that the salaries go up towards the end of each players deal. The point I was trying to make is that we are talking about a few million dollars, not something substantial like $10+ million for example. I dont think we are in bad shape whatsoever when it comes to re-signing some of the youth like you mentioned. Im just adding this to the production I have seen from Nate and Stafford, and that is where I get my opinion on the deal.
I still think you are underestimating the raises some of our youth could get over the next few years. It's that combined with the escalating salaries of Horton, Weiss, Olesz, and Allen that could make this an expensive team in a few years. Not just those 4 players' salaries themselves. If Frolik is a 60-70 pt. scorer by the end of his ELC, then he'll probably get 4-5M on his next deal. If Repik is a 20 goal scorer by the end of his deal, he probably gets around 3M. If Kulikov plays the way I think he can, he probably gets 3M. If Markstrom is a star by the end of his contract, he probably gets 3-4M. etc. etc. Of course, not all our prospects are going to pan out, but hopefully most of them will, and I don't think it's unsound to plan for the worst. If our prospects turn out like we hope they will, then we'll have an expensive team and it will only get more expensive if we try to keep everyone together. I'd rather hold onto Horton and let the chips fall where they may, but like I said I don't think it's unsound to plan for the worst either.

Markstrom Rules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2009, 07:26 AM
  #122
Rattrick
Registered User
 
Rattrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 12,894
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rattrick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laus723 View Post
Yes, we put him on waivers and he cleared, we then traded him to Calgary.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...rs/?printer=1/

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=145100
Gotcha, thanks for the links.

Rattrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2009, 10:15 AM
  #123
catEye
Oh No! We suck again
 
catEye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Miami, FL.
Country: Cuba
Posts: 940
vCash: 500
Horton needs to stay here. We don't need to give up whatever little offense we have left. How bout surround him with some skill talent first then we can judge?

catEye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2009, 10:21 AM
  #124
Mogo
(╯□)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Mogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 9,872
vCash: 813
This rumours seems so bogus IMO. Why trade a guy signed long term for RFA and not even a proven scorer. That alone makes this sound insane. Then again.. It's the Panthers anything can happen.. Wild guess.. Horton + 2nd for Stafford + some project prospect. Sounds like a Panthers deal

Mogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2009, 10:22 AM
  #125
Mogo
(╯□)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Mogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 9,872
vCash: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by catEye View Post
Horton needs to stay here. We don't need to give up whatever little offense we have left. How bout surround him with some skill talent first then we can judge?
What a crazy idea! Your mad. Give Horton supporting cast? Nooo..... Trade him to a team that give him that and devolep into a 80-90 point guy

Mogo 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 04:32 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.