HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Rangers trade Ethan Werek to Phoenix for Oscar Lindberg

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-09-2011, 04:52 PM
  #201
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,028
vCash: 50
Awards:
I think the goaltending depth is okay. Not great, not awful.

I was never as high on him as most people here, but I still think he can be an adequate NHL backup. I like Cam Talbot more. I think he has potential to be a solid backup.

Stajcer, as I alluded to earlier, has good potential but is maddeningly inconsistent. If we sign him, I'm interested to see what Allaire and co. can do with him. I like his potential more than both Johnson and Talbot, but he also has the highest "bust" potential, by a good margin.

I don't know anything about Missiaen. The organization must see something there though to give him the contract. I would have liked to sign Kinkaid instead, but unfortunately he went to NJ.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 04:53 PM
  #202
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
What happens after next year and Biron is a free agent?
I think the Rangers re-sign Biron, he is definitely someone you want to hold onto and I think he likes the Rangers and would like to re-sign with us.

Clowes Line is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 04:56 PM
  #203
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
Eh, whatever. He struck me as a good pick at the time, and I think most scouting services and individual scouts agreed. Just didn't pan out for us unfortunately. It sucks, but it happens.

Lindberg is a second round pick as well, so rather than focusing on Werek and what he is/isn't, I think the focus shifts to what we have in Lindberg. He could still become a decent player.



Leslie spoke to discipline problems. Is she making it up, wrong, or does she have knowledge of something your friends don't?
Quote:
Originally Posted by we want cup View Post
If every team's fanbase got upset over every pick who didn't work out as well as some of the people who picked after them, this board would be empty because we'd all have killed ourselves by now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerFan10 View Post
no. The draft is a crapchute, especially after the 1st round.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
They're not afraid to cut bait and move on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draft Guru View Post
I'm fine with this trade.

Werek had to be signed by June 1st...The Rangers made the decision they weren't going to sign him, so rather than risk losing him for nothing they got back a solid prospect in Lindberg. Can't complain.

Revolving door of prospects and yet another mistake that had to be corrected doesnt bother any of you right?

How about we get it right the first time?

What if we're here two years from now when either Thomas or Mcilrath are busts or traded before they even play one game?

Business as usual in Rangerland and most are like 'whatever'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbop View Post
So true. Reminds me of one of the first lessons I learned when I was managing minor league hockey teams. Ron Ingram (former Ranger defenseman, now deceased) told me "you can't fall in love with a player you are evaluating. They are all pieces of meat."

Hard, hard lesson but true.
Just last year I was hearing about how great the future was with Werek included in that. Which prospect do they change their mind on next year?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Mistake, IMO.
I like him too, but not ready to say it was good or bad, just kinda pissed that our guys have little clue on what theyre doing.

Bluenote13 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 04:56 PM
  #204
free0717
Registered User
 
free0717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Old Bridge, NJ
Posts: 2,169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
Ok, I agree with the fact that we have no set in stone "future" goaltender. But Hank is only 29 and goalies have good durability. We still have time to find/draft a future goalie, it doesn't necessarily need to be addressed now.

Also you wouldn't be wasting high draft picks on goalies, I think Lundqvist going 205th overall just proves that where a goalie is drafted has no bearing on how good they turn out to be.

We can pick goalies with our 5th, 6th, or 7th round picks and we will more than likely get one that turns out to be a solid future NHL goalie
I have always had the philosophy that every year a goalie should be taken with a late round pick(5th or later). Especially a guy who is a European or College type.

Being European or College bound gives us more time before we have to make a decision to offer an ELC.

free0717 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 04:57 PM
  #205
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
Ok, I agree with the fact that we have no set in stone "future" goaltender. But Hank is only 29 and goalies have good durability. We still have time to find/draft a future goalie, it doesn't necessarily need to be addressed now.

Also you wouldn't be wasting high draft picks on goalies, I think Lundqvist going 205th overall just proves that where a goalie is drafted has no bearing on how good they turn out to be.

We can pick goalies with our 5th, 6th, or 7th round picks and we will more than likely get one that turns out to be a solid future NHL goalie
I agree, you dont waste high draft picks on goalie's but we have twice and they both backfired, Blackburn being an unfortunate incident of course..

Look @ a guy like Dom Moore, we all ran him out of town but he has been a very important player for Tampa, I will admit I wasn't sad to see him go but we gave this guy a year and dumped him. It is just very frustrating being a Ranger fan most of the time.

Orr Nightmare is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 04:59 PM
  #206
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,028
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
What happens after next year and Biron is a free agent?

I just see a baron system in terms of goaltending and we have been very lucky that Hank hasn't gotten hurt.

This has nothing to do with Montoya but they just give guys time to develop.
Veteran goaltenders are available on the open market every year.

Look at this year: you'll have Brian Boucher, Johan Hedberg, Jose Theodore, JS Giguere, Marty Turco and Peter Budaj headed to UFA. Those are all veteran goalies that will sign short, cheap contracts to play backup somewhere. The kind of guys you'd like to have backing up Lundqvist--capable of starting and providing decent play for an extended period if need be. And these types of guys are available every single year.

I'd rather go into a season with a veteran backup than a kid with little to no NHL experience, regardless of his minor league/junior pedigree. I don't disagree that we do need to address the goaltending position in the system sooner rather than later, but I think it's far from pressing.

nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 04:59 PM
  #207
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
I agree, you dont waste high draft picks on goalie's but we have twice and they both backfired, Blackburn being an unfortunate incident of course..

Look @ a guy like Dom Moore, we all ran him out of town but he has been a very important player for Tampa, I will admit I wasn't sad to see him go but we gave this guy a year and dumped him. It is just very frustrating being a Ranger fan most of the time.
I hear ya man, but I think the old Sather is gone, he seems to be getting it and like Torts says, "We're heading in the right direction"

Clowes Line is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:01 PM
  #208
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Revolving door of prospects and yet another mistake that had to be corrected doesnt bother any of you right?

How about we get it right the first time?

What if we're here two years from now when either Thomas or Mcilrath are busts or traded before they even play one game?

Business as usual in Rangerland and most are like 'whatever'.



Just last year I was hearing about how great the future was with Werek included in that. Which prospect do they change their mind on next year?



I like him too, but not ready to say it was good or bad, just kinda pissed that our guys have little clue on what theyre doing.
A second rounder traded for a second rounder with a similar game and impressive faceoff prowess.

Hardly a big deal. Yet you want to make it one.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:01 PM
  #209
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Revolving door of prospects and yet another mistake that had to be corrected doesnt bother any of you right?

How about we get it right the first time?

What if we're here two years from now when either Thomas or Mcilrath are busts or traded before they even play one game?

Business as usual in Rangerland and most are like 'whatever'.



Just last year I was hearing about how great the future was with Werek included in that. Which prospect do they change their mind on next year?



I like him too, but not ready to say it was good or bad, just kinda pissed that our guys have little clue on what theyre doing.
Thank you, no one seems to have a problem with all the bust and all the misery that goes along with having Sather and Dolan run this ship.

This kid was a steal in the 2nd round and now after 2 years...lets dump this 4th line bum.

Orr Nightmare is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:01 PM
  #210
JeffMangum
I'm v
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 58,424
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
I like him too, but not ready to say it was good or bad, just kinda pissed that our guys have little clue on what theyre doing.
How does a minor trade like this imply that "our guys have little clue on what they're doing"? That makes little to no sense whatsoever. What if Werek refused to sign? How is that management's fault?

I agree with the idea that this team's management is not the most expensive brand of lightbulbs out there, but something as minor and currently undecided as this is pretty small in comparison to some of the other thing this team has done.

__________________
Soon.
JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:04 PM
  #211
Callahan Auto
Rational Police
 
Callahan Auto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by free0717 View Post
I have always had the philosophy that every year a goalie should be taken with a late round pick(5th or later). Especially a guy who is a European or College type.

Being European or College bound gives us more time before we have to make a decision to offer an ELC.
Yeah, not to mention that systems outside of juniors are harder to scout. I feel like later picks are better with taking risks with international or small market prospects. If you find 1 Lundqvist or Datsyuk every ten years with 9 busts, you're still coming out ahead with those late-round picks.

Callahan Auto is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:05 PM
  #212
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
People also look at Werek's numbers in the OHL and look at Lindberg's numbers in the SEL and think, wow wtf are they doing, Werek is so much better. Wrong. SEL is arguably the 2nd best/hardest league behind the NHL.

Werek showed no improvement in the OHL and putting up 50-60 points in the OHL is not gonna cut it compared to a guy like Lindberg who put up 14 points in the SEL this past year which is realllllly good for a 18-19 year old.

Lindberg also brings many things to the table that Werek doesn't, including his 69% face-off percentage and his great defensive play. I like Lindberg more than Werek, this is just MY opinion, feel free to disagree, but I probably won't listen to you

Clowes Line is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:16 PM
  #213
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,028
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Revolving door of prospects and yet another mistake that had to be corrected doesnt bother any of you right?

How about we get it right the first time?

What if we're here two years from now when either Thomas or Mcilrath are busts or traded before they even play one game?

Business as usual in Rangerland and most are like 'whatever'.
I think you're being a little overly dramatic.

We traded a second round pick for another second round pick. Yes, it would have been great were Werek to work out here, but it didn't happen. That happens to every team. About 25% of second round picks turn into career NHL players, the rest bust. 3 out of 4 picks fail, across the NHL.

In the past decade, we've drafted the following players in the second round:

Ivan Baranka
Lee Falardeau
Fedor Tyutin
Darin Olver
Dane Byers
Bruce Graham
Brandon Dubinsky
Mike Sauer
MA Cliche
Artem Anisimov
Antoine Lafleur
Derek Stepan
-----------
Ethan Werek
Christian Thomas

Of the players whose futures can reasonably be determined, we have 5 NHL players from 12 picks. We can't evaluate Werek and Thomas yet. Baranka may have become an NHL player had he decided to stay, but we won't count him. We're drafting at over a 40% success rate in the second round, which is considerably better than the average NHL team.

If we were talking about another first round pick for us that didn't pan out, that would be different. Nearly 60% of first round picks pan out and become career NHL players, and I'm sure we're well below that. But in the second round, the chances of success are far lower. I'm not going to throw my arms up in frustration that we moved one second rounder for another, especially when the jury is still out on both of them.

If Thomas busts, that sucks, but I'd still tell you there's a 75% chance that it was going to happen. And that we're still above the curve with second round picks. McIlrath is not completely relevant to this discussion, as there's that huge gap between success of first and second round picks. Would you compare a failed fifth round pick to a failed second round pick? No, apples and oranges. But the difference in success rates between a fifth and a second is similar to the rates between a second and a first.

Quote:
Just last year I was hearing about how great the future was with Werek included in that. Which prospect do they change their mind on next year?
I don't know who "they" refers to, but it's not me. I think you know me well enough to know that I'm realistic, bordering on pessimistic with my projections (and my hopes for the future).

It's easy to lump together a generic group of "they." But who is "they?" We all know there are quite a few people on HF who don't know their ass from their elbow.

Quote:
I like him too, but not ready to say it was good or bad, just kinda pissed that our guys have little clue on what theyre doing.
Speaking particularly to players taken in round two, that's untrue. We're well above average. The first round is the problem. We're one of the most successful teams in the league drafting NHL players outside of round one. That we suck in the first round is obviously a HUGE problem, but only part of the discussion when it comes to our drafts.

Let's say the team has evaluated Werek since we drafted him, and now feels that he has a lower ceiling or higher bust potential than previously thought. Should we sit on our hands, and hold onto Werek, just because we drafted him? If they've soured on him as a player, I'd much rather they go and get a comparably valued player than sit back allow Werek to renter the draft. What if HE didn't want to sign with us? Again, do we sit back? I like that the team is constantly evaluating and reevaluating players.


Last edited by nyr2k2: 05-09-2011 at 05:32 PM.
nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:23 PM
  #214
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Revolving door of prospects and yet another mistake that had to be corrected doesnt bother any of you right?

How about we get it right the first time?

What if we're here two years from now when either Thomas or Mcilrath are busts or traded before they even play one game?

Business as usual in Rangerland and most are like 'whatever'.



Just last year I was hearing about how great the future was with Werek included in that. Which prospect do they change their mind on next year?



I like him too, but not ready to say it was good or bad, just kinda pissed that our guys have little clue on what theyre doing.
I don't know bluenote--we seem to disagree often enough but you usually make good points anyway. I don't think so here though. You know as well as anyone that some of these picks don't pan out the way you would want them too and often there are extenuating circumstances--such as injuries in Werek's case. I can remember a few months back--you going over the guys you targeted each year at the entry draft and some of them would have been better picks than the Rangers made but others didn't work out at all--no team hits the bullseye every time and it also may be that if Lindberg had been available in 2009 that the Rangers would have picked him instead of Werek which is to say they just might like Lindberg better than Werek anyway.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:24 PM
  #215
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,641
vCash: 500
Too bad Hartford got eliminated so quickly. We could've gotten a chance to get a good look at guys like Kreider, Thomas, Werek, Hagelin at the pro level. It could've made the Werek decision, among others, much easier.

Beacon is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:29 PM
  #216
cheerupmurray
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,465
vCash: 500
Im not saying he will, but theres a real possibility that Lindberg have a breakout season next year, I think that hes been steadily improving and might get a more important part for his SEL-team next year. He is a nice player, especially liked him in the playoffs.

cheerupmurray is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:35 PM
  #217
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,685
vCash: 500
A point that's being missed here: it takes two to trade.

Has anyone considered that this deal may have gone down some other way than the Rangers deciding they had to dump Werek at all costs - and that Lindberg was the best return they could fetch? What if LINDBERG is the key player here from management's point of view? What if they've been after him since the draft? Or if they've grown more and more enamored with him during his post-draft year? What if they've been targeting him all along and as it turned out Werek wound up being the price required to acquire him...?

I'm not saying that this is necessarily what happened, but much of the analysis going on here is very focused on who we're letting go rather than who we're bringing back. You've got to give to get - and maybe they really wanted to get Lindberg?

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:37 PM
  #218
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,028
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
A point that's being missed here: it takes two to trade.

Has anyone considered that this deal may have gone down some other way than the team deciding it had to dump Werek at all costs? What if LINDBERG is the key player here? What if they've been after him since the draft? Or if they've grown more and more enamored with him during his post-draft year? What if they've been targeting him all along and as it turned out Werek wound up being the price required to acquire him...?

I'm not saying that this is necessarily what happened, but much of the analysis going on here is very focused on who we're letting go rather than who we're bringing back. You've got to give to get - and maybe they really wanted to get Lindberg?
It's a valid point, and a definite possibility. tuponlol also made a good point regarding contract limits and signability windows earlier in this thread.

There's any number of things that could have triggered this deal. Hopefully we find out more in coming days.

And please, not "news" from Jess Rubenstein.

nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:38 PM
  #219
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
A point that's being missed here: it takes two to trade.

Has anyone considered that this deal may have gone down some other way than the Rangers deciding they had to dump Werek at all costs - and that Lindberg was the best return they could fetch? What if LINDBERG is the key player here from management's point of view? What if they've been after him since the draft? Or if they've grown more and more enamored with him during his post-draft year? What if they've been targeting him all along and as it turned out Werek wound up being the price required to acquire him...?

I'm not saying that this is necessarily what happened, but much of the analysis going on here is very focused on who we're letting go rather than who we're bringing back. You've got to give to get - and maybe they really wanted to get Lindberg?
Great point, I for one am very happy with this trade, every thing I see in Lindberg, I really like and I look forward to seeing him blossom into an even better player.

Clowes Line is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:38 PM
  #220
Leetch3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,379
vCash: 500
this thread is becoming laughable...

trading a 19 year old former 2nd round pick that projects to be a 3rd or 4th line forward for another 19 year old former 2nd round pick that projects to be a 3rd or 4th line forward doesn't mean that the first player is a bust and isn't even in the same galaxy as trading a former 1st rounder for a 6th round pick cause he is so bad.

Leetch3 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 05:46 PM
  #221
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Werek put himself in the NYR doghouse between not following training plan and not communicating about his injury
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leslie Treff View Post
This is not true. Werek was aware of his status with the Rangers.
I fail to see the correlation between these two statements. Werek could have both put himself in the doghouse and been aware of it.

n8 is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 06:12 PM
  #222
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
Catastrophic? Hardly. We moved an overpaid dman for an overpaid forward because we were hurting for offense...and we saved a little cap room in the process.

And trading Korpikowski isn't going to set us back months, let alone years. He wasn't going to get top 6 minutes on the team and we have no shortage of bottom 6 guys in these parts.

Really much ado about nothing.

ah, i see you were being sarcastic. lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
It's a valid point, and a definite possibility. tuponlol also made a good point regarding contract limits and signability windows earlier in this thread.

There's any number of things that could have triggered this deal. Hopefully we find out more in coming days.

And please, not "news" from Jess Rubenstein.
Hey, all I did was post the quote for those who were lazy.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 06:23 PM
  #223
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM PUNK View Post
this thread is becoming laughable...

trading a 19 year old former 2nd round pick that projects to be a 3rd or 4th line forward for another 19 year old former 2nd round pick that projects to be a 3rd or 4th line forward doesn't mean that the first player is a bust and isn't even in the same galaxy as trading a former 1st rounder for a 6th round pick cause he is so bad.
Yes, but his name is Oscar, so therefore, he can't be a good player...oh, wait, wrong board.

jas is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 06:38 PM
  #224
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,939
vCash: 500
As I recall, Lindberg was one of those guys I was really wishing that we had when I watched him play in the WJC.

I'm not so worried about the #s, his are better than Tedenby's the year after he was drafted, and not far off from Josefson's. We'll see how it goes.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline  
Old
05-09-2011, 06:43 PM
  #225
RangerFan10
Registered User
 
RangerFan10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Long Island/Plattsbu
Country: United States
Posts: 5,327
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to RangerFan10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
So, we give up a 3rd line player who is now 24 years old and had 40 points for a lazy piece of *****. Sounds like a dumb trade to me.

btw, we hope this kid will produce what Lauri has already done.

I am not devasted by losing Lauri, I am just saying we should have done better than Lisin.

That was as one sided as a trade gets. We give up a first rounder player who is forming into a solid player for nothing at all...great use of a chip.

Can you please touch my second point...
I mean hindsight is 20/20. The trade made perfect sense at the time. I don't know why everyone gets so hung up when we lose a small trade like that. Korpi probably would've been out of NY by now...at least we got SOMETHING for him

RangerFan10 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:28 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.