HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Kings open contract talks with Jonathan Quick

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-27-2012, 10:52 PM
  #151
Kings man 4 life
Registered User
 
Kings man 4 life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Peoples Repub. of CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
I'm say 6 years at 5.7 million Cap hit.

Kings man 4 life is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 10:53 PM
  #152
SCARFACE909
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 912
vCash: 500
6 years, 35M

SCARFACE909 is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 11:18 PM
  #153
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,599
vCash: 500
7 years, avg 6.5 per year is what I think.

5 years, avg 6.25 per year is what I want.

Will be satisfied with either or anything in between

SLang is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 11:31 PM
  #154
Herby
Culture Changer
 
Herby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,077
vCash: 500
If Quick signs for anything less than 7 it will be considered a hometown discount.

I think anything less than 6.5 would anger the NHLPA. I think it will be 7 years, 51 million.

And worth every penny.

Herby is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 11:47 PM
  #155
TonySCV
Moderator
Two Timer!
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 12,924
vCash: 500
Just back the AEG Brinks truck up to his house and let him take whatever he wants.

TonySCV is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 11:55 PM
  #156
Reclamation Project
I Not Much Like LA
 
Reclamation Project's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 18,695
vCash: 592


"Look at this ******* pile of cash! Look at it!"

Reclamation Project is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:33 AM
  #157
Malakian#13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: capo beach california
Posts: 2,921
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Malakian#13
There gonna build the guy a statue you don't think there gonna pay the man?!?

Malakian#13 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 02:04 AM
  #158
Moses Doughty
LA's offense offends
 
Moses Doughty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Drewbacca
Country: United States
Posts: 8,069
vCash: 500
Quick with his agent right now. "Show me the money"

Moses Doughty is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 02:37 AM
  #159
tsanuri
Registered User
 
tsanuri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Grants Pass OR
Country: United States
Posts: 2,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herby View Post
If Quick signs for anything less than 7 it will be considered a hometown discount.

I think anything less than 6.5 would anger the NHLPA. I think it will be 7 years, 51 million.

And worth every penny.
I think it can be argued that 7 mil is a hometown discount. He has done better than Rinne on awards at the time Rinne signed and is 3 years younger than him. I do think you are about right on what the hit will be but it would not shock me to see it 8 years which would take him to 35. It would also not be a surprise to see a signing bonus of 1mil per year of the contract. That shows him some instant gratitude for what he has done as well as insulates him if there is some kind of change in the cap that could lower his salary.

We have been so lucky to get him on the cheap for so long,time to pay the man.

tsanuri is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:14 AM
  #160
Cruel11
Son, just don't.
 
Cruel11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 15,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reclamation Project View Post


"Look at this ******* pile of cash! Look at it!"

Cruel11 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 08:49 AM
  #161
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 20,308
vCash: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reclamation Project View Post


"Look at this ******* pile of cash! Look at it!"
He's not Mike Commodore


Gentle Ben Kenobi is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 10:11 AM
  #162
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
It's a fallacious argument for an agent to use a contract as a comparable in a situation that isn't comparable. The Kings are not Nashville. That and Nashville made a mistake.

Quick doesn't lose 2 years and $17M on the table, he still gets to play at age 31 and make what he is worth.



I love Quick, but there are no guarantees when it comes to goaltending, which is why 5 years is plenty. At age 31, if Quick is still on the top of his game, (let's face it folks the odds are against it) then you can pay him again for 3 more seasons.

I advocate maintaining the type of salary cap and contract flexibility that allows the GM to make the moves that need to be made.




Big money goalies that can't win often can't be moved if they have a long term deal. I think there is ample evidence of that, but I see many of you are overcome by the euphoria of winning a Stanley Cup.
It's a fallacious argument to use Rinne's contract as an example? In what planet is it? Rinne is a starting goalie with nearly identiical regular season numbers who was alongside Quick for the Vezina and in his final year before UFA, just like Quick. If anything, Quick can look at Rinne and say "I did everything that he did, and then I won a cup and a Conn Smythe, so I deserve more." Being on different teams has little to do with anything. If you think players from other teams aren't factored into negoatiations, you know jack about negotiations.

Careers: (GAA and sav% approximated as I couldn't find a career average for those two stats)

Rinne: 250 GP - 25 SO - 138 W -72 L -2.36 GAA - .920 sav%
Quick: 249 GP - 24 SO - 131 W -87 L -2.30 GAA - .917 sav%

Rinne has 28 playoff games, Quick has 32. Quick has a Stanley Cup and a Conn Smythe trophy while Rinne has two Vezina nominations to Quick's one.

Where in all of that is there much difference to you and how the heck are they not comparible?

And yes, he would leave 2 years and $17 million on the table because he could earn it. Just because he walks away at 31 (from your contract) under your scenario doesn't mean he doesn't walk away from what more he could easily get.

And it's not euphoria from winning the cup, it's basic market dynamics. Goalies like Quick who are UFA's to be either get long-term deals of six years or more, or they move on. It's called precident, not some blind emotion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAkings20 View Post
One part of me thinks Quick will take less money like Brownie did, the other part says he will rightfully cash in.
Me as well, which is why I'm expecting it to be anywhere between $6.5 million and $7.2 million per year on a 6-7 year deal.

I say $7.1 million for 7 years though.


Last edited by kingsfan: 06-28-2012 at 10:19 AM.
kingsfan is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:07 PM
  #163
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
It's a fallacious argument to use Rinne's contract as an example? In what planet is it? Rinne is a starting goalie with nearly identiical regular season numbers who was alongside Quick for the Vezina and in his final year before UFA, just like Quick. If anything, Quick can look at Rinne and say "I did everything that he did, and then I won a cup and a Conn Smythe, so I deserve more." Being on different teams has little to do with anything. If you think players from other teams aren't factored into negoatiations, you know jack about negotiations.

Careers: (GAA and sav% approximated as I couldn't find a career average for those two stats)

Rinne: 250 GP - 25 SO - 138 W -72 L -2.36 GAA - .920 sav%
Quick: 249 GP - 24 SO - 131 W -87 L -2.30 GAA - .917 sav%

Rinne has 28 playoff games, Quick has 32. Quick has a Stanley Cup and a Conn Smythe trophy while Rinne has two Vezina nominations to Quick's one.

Where in all of that is there much difference to you and how the heck are they not comparible?

And yes, he would leave 2 years and $17 million on the table because he could earn it. Just because he walks away at 31 (from your contract) under your scenario doesn't mean he doesn't walk away from what more he could easily get.

And it's not euphoria from winning the cup, it's basic market dynamics. Goalies like Quick who are UFA's to be either get long-term deals of six years or more, or they move on. It's called precident, not some blind emotion.



Me as well, which is why I'm expecting it to be anywhere between $6.5 million and $7.2 million per year on a 6-7 year deal.

I say $7.1 million for 7 years though.
On Planet Earth. The Rinne deal is ridiculous and was done to show Suter and Weber that the Predator organization is serious about being contenders. The idea that one GM has to be as desperate or stupid as the next one is wrong.

Quick had a fantastic season. He deserves to be rewarded. I don't think 7-10 year deals make sense for any goaltender. They do not work out in most situations.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:17 PM
  #164
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,828
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
On Planet Earth. The Rinne deal is ridiculous and was done to show Suter and Weber that the Predator organization is serious about being contenders. The idea that one GM has to be as desperate or stupid as the next one is wrong.

Quick had a fantastic season. He deserves to be rewarded. I don't think 7-10 year deals make sense for any goaltender. They do not work out in most situations.
Except on Planet Earth, players and agents use comparables to place a value on their client. Do you really think Karlsson would have received his $6.5 million cap hit if Doughty didn't already set the bar at $7 million?

Whether you like it or not, Rinne and Nashville have set the bar. It's up to Quick on how much he is willing to go below it, he will be an UFA at the end of his contract.

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:26 PM
  #165
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydor25 View Post
Except on Planet Earth, players and agents use comparables to place a value on their client. Do you really think Karlsson would have received his $6.5 million cap hit if Doughty didn't already set the bar at $7 million?

Whether you like it or not, Rinne and Nashville have set the bar. It's up to Quick on how much he is willing to go below it, he will be an UFA at the end of his contract.
Of course the agents use other players as a point to negotiate from, that's their side of the negotiation. Management is allowed to make counterpoints.

There are other comparables out there other than Rinne. If anything he is quite a bit outside the norm and it is obvious as to why that happened.

I would love to negotiate my rates and/or salary with some of you.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:30 PM
  #166
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,828
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Of course the agents use other players as a point to negotiate from, that's their side of the negotiation. Management is allowed to make counterpoints.

There are other comparables out there other than Rinne. If anything he is quite a bit outside the norm and it is obvious as to why that happened.
It's not really that out of line.

Rinne $7
Lundqvist $6.875
Ward $6.3
Miller $6.25
Backstrom $6.0

I'm too lazy to see what their cap hit % was when they signed their deals, but the NHL and NHLPA just set the 2012-13 cap at $70.2 million. I'm guessing that $7 per season is the going rate for a top 5 goalie. Do you think that Quick is not a top 5 goalie?

If the CBA lowers the cap, I expect a salary roll back too.

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:31 PM
  #167
Inner Turbulence
Registered User
 
Inner Turbulence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Country: Denmark
Posts: 337
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Inner Turbulence
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
On Planet Earth. The Rinne deal is ridiculous and was done to show Suter and Weber that the Predator organization is serious about being contenders. The idea that one GM has to be as desperate or stupid as the next one is wrong.

Quick had a fantastic season. He deserves to be rewarded. I don't think 7-10 year deals make sense for any goaltender. They do not work out in most situations.

Just because the Rinne contract may have been ill-advised by the Predators that doesn't make it an invalid comparison for Quick. His agent can just point to Rinne and say "they gave that guy 7 million, I wonder what my guy could get on the open market. Maybe Philadelphia needs a new goalie soon ..."

I hope Quicks contract comes in under 7 million. And I hope he maintains his high level of play, so his contract doesn't become a cinderblock. Maybe Lombardi can make get creative with a front-loaded deal that tails off after a couple of years. Not the circumvention type of way though. but 12-8-5-5-5-5-5. Quick gets rich quickly and the Kings get a managable contract.


Last edited by Inner Turbulence: 06-28-2012 at 12:38 PM.
Inner Turbulence is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:46 PM
  #168
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
On Planet Earth. The Rinne deal is ridiculous and was done to show Suter and Weber that the Predator organization is serious about being contenders. The idea that one GM has to be as desperate or stupid as the next one is wrong.

Quick had a fantastic season. He deserves to be rewarded. I don't think 7-10 year deals make sense for any goaltender. They do not work out in most situations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Of course the agents use other players as a point to negotiate from, that's their side of the negotiation. Management is allowed to make counterpoints.

There are other comparables out there other than Rinne. If anything he is quite a bit outside the norm and it is obvious as to why that happened.

I would love to negotiate my rates and/or salary with some of you.
You don't want Quick to get that type of contract. We get it, that's fine and makes sense. But you're burying your head in the sand if you think that it won't be used as a comparision, and justifiably so. As I point out in my post, Quick and Rinne are nearly identical stats wise and honors wise, with Quick holding the edge in that category thanks to his Conn Smythe and Stanely Cup ring.

If you look at goalies signed in similar situations in recent years at similar ages to Quick, you see that Quick isn't out of line at all to get $7-million-plus from LA, or elsewhere on the open market. Lundqvist and Rinne both signed their deals at around the same age as Quick and all three were nominated for the Vezina.

You are speculating on whether or not that is why Rinne got the deal he did get. There's nothing factual about that comment that can be proven. What is factual is that Rinne and Lundqvist each make $6.875 million and $7 million and that Quick's numbers are comprible to both of them this year, and extremely comparible to Rinne's over their respective careers. Just because you think Rinne's deal is to much doesn't mean jack when it comes to negotiations. Unless Quick wants to take the hometown discount to be a lifer in LA, he has zero motivation to not ask for every penny Rinne got or go test the UFA waters. If he feels he can even come close to duplicating his success again next year, and he really wants $7 million or more, he'll get it or he'll go and see what UFA offers.

I agree that signing a goalie long-term is a risk, but I'm all in for a 7-8 year deal with Quick. The only real risk is Quick regressing and being surpassed by a better goalie or simply not being a capable number one anymore. To me, that's not a valid reason at this stage to not sign Quick, given what he has done so far. Injuries do not worry me as any long-term injury, LA can use the LTIR if needed and insurance will cover much of the contract.

I'd like to see you list these comparibles you speak of. And if you're going to use guys signed a few years back, like Fluery, then factor in the actual percentage of the cap those signings covered at the time. Percentage wise, few would be far off what Quick will get.

kingsfan is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:53 PM
  #169
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
You don't want Quick to get that type of contract. We get it, that's fine and makes sense. But you're burying your head in the sand if you think that it won't be used as a comparision, and justifiably so. As I point out in my post, Quick and Rinne are nearly identical stats wise and honors wise, with Quick holding the edge in that category thanks to his Conn Smythe and Stanely Cup ring.

If you look at goalies signed in similar situations in recent years at similar ages to Quick, you see that Quick isn't out of line at all to get $7-million-plus from LA, or elsewhere on the open market. Lundqvist and Rinne both signed their deals at around the same age as Quick and all three were nominated for the Vezina.

You are speculating on whether or not that is why Rinne got the deal he did get. There's nothing factual about that comment that can be proven. What is factual is that Rinne and Lundqvist each make $6.875 million and $7 million and that Quick's numbers are comprible to both of them this year, and extremely comparible to Rinne's over their respective careers. Just because you think Rinne's deal is to much doesn't mean jack when it comes to negotiations. Unless Quick wants to take the hometown discount to be a lifer in LA, he has zero motivation to not ask for every penny Rinne got or go test the UFA waters. If he feels he can even come close to duplicating his success again next year, and he really wants $7 million or more, he'll get it or he'll go and see what UFA offers.

I agree that signing a goalie long-term is a risk, but I'm all in for a 7-8 year deal with Quick. The only real risk is Quick regressing and being surpassed by a better goalie or simply not being a capable number one anymore. To me, that's not a valid reason at this stage to not sign Quick, given what he has done so far. Injuries do not worry me as any long-term injury, LA can use the LTIR if needed and insurance will cover much of the contract.
I am not speculating on the Rinne deal. I am drawing a logically conclusion given the data at hand. People do it all the time. Speculation would be something like Rinne must have had pictures of Poile with farm animals.

Well, if that's the only risk through the end of the 2021 season then the Kings should definitely just do it.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 12:58 PM
  #170
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,242
vCash: 500
Whether you like it or not, the Rinne and Lunqvist contracts set a new standard for contracts for top 5-10 goaltenders in the NHL.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 01:06 PM
  #171
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Whether you like it or not, the Rinne and Lunqvist contracts set a new standard for contracts for top 5-10 goaltenders in the NHL.
Why just the Rinne and Lundqvist contracts?

As I said if I was negotiating on the Kings behalf, I would start by saying the Rinne contract is out of the norm. Then you come to Lundqvist who has been at the top of his game for quite some time. Quick deserves something approaching that, but he doesn't have the resume that Lundqvist has in terms of length of superior play.

Maybe you guys can get a little more snippy and convince me of your winning argument.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 01:08 PM
  #172
Crowne Royale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
You don't want Quick to get that type of contract. We get it, that's fine and makes sense. But you're burying your head in the sand if you think that it won't be used as a comparision, and justifiably so. As I point out in my post, Quick and Rinne are nearly identical stats wise and honors wise, with Quick holding the edge in that category thanks to his Conn Smythe and Stanely Cup ring.

If you look at goalies signed in similar situations in recent years at similar ages to Quick, you see that Quick isn't out of line at all to get $7-million-plus from LA, or elsewhere on the open market. Lundqvist and Rinne both signed their deals at around the same age as Quick and all three were nominated for the Vezina.

You are speculating on whether or not that is why Rinne got the deal he did get. There's nothing factual about that comment that can be proven. What is factual is that Rinne and Lundqvist each make $6.875 million and $7 million and that Quick's numbers are comprible to both of them this year, and extremely comparible to Rinne's over their respective careers. Just because you think Rinne's deal is to much doesn't mean jack when it comes to negotiations. Unless Quick wants to take the hometown discount to be a lifer in LA, he has zero motivation to not ask for every penny Rinne got or go test the UFA waters. If he feels he can even come close to duplicating his success again next year, and he really wants $7 million or more, he'll get it or he'll go and see what UFA offers.

I agree that signing a goalie long-term is a risk, but I'm all in for a 7-8 year deal with Quick. The only real risk is Quick regressing and being surpassed by a better goalie or simply not being a capable number one anymore. To me, that's not a valid reason at this stage to not sign Quick, given what he has done so far. Injuries do not worry me as any long-term injury, LA can use the LTIR if needed and insurance will cover much of the contract.

I'd like to see you list these comparibles you speak of. And if you're going to use guys signed a few years back, like Fluery, then factor in the actual percentage of the cap those signings covered at the time. Percentage wise, few would be far off what Quick will get.
Very well-reasoned posts. I think an AAV of around 6.5-7.2ish is a very reasonable cap hit. Things that should be considered:

-He'd get a bump next year over his $2M salary, which should be reflected in the overall number. Let's say he merits $7M AAV. Distribute the $5M immediate increase that the Kings aren't obligated to pay over the term of, say a 5 year contract, and the cap hit goes from $7M to $6M.
-The guy was the MVP of the team in the regular season, plus the Conn Smythe winner of the Stanley Cup champions. Although his 1 year excellence overshadows his previous 2 years of, shall I say, "goodness", plainly stated, the guy was the biggest reason from a player performance standpoint that the Kings won the Cup. If the Devils made $23M during the playoff run, I'd be confident the Kings made twice that amount.
-Devoting roughly 10% of your available cap space to arguably the most important position/player on your team seems like a fair weight.
-Lombardi pointed to the Doughty negotiations as being frustrating because of the internal salary structure of the team. Making Doughty the highest paid player on the team (over Kopi) didn't sit well with him, nor does he like paying for "potential" -- Quick has more than proven himself.
-Comparatively, there are mediocre goalies (basing last year's stats) making between $6-7M. Rinne is probably the best comparison.
-Ultimately, I see Quick being a team player and signing a bit of a fair and team friendly deal for $6.5M over, let's say, 7 years. That's $45.5 million on one contract alone, which will position him for a lifetime earning of $60-70M. I think that's enough to live on.

Crowne Royale is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 01:09 PM
  #173
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,242
vCash: 500
You're argument isn't anymore convincing, especially in the real world. We are dealing with the reality of the situation. In your fantastical scenario, Quick and his agent would balk. Thankfully it appears they are close to a lengthy extension. Once the details are announced we'll see who was closer to reality.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 01:40 PM
  #174
Maynard
Registered User
 
Maynard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,149
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Maynard
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Quick deserves something approaching that, but he doesn't have the resume that Lundqvist has in terms of length of superior play.
I would argue Quick's record setting postseason (statistically among the best of all time) Conn Smythe, Stanley Cup, etc. are worth more than Hank's awesome history of regular season success. I could be overrating those things because I am still firmly mired in a full blown fog of Stanley Cup disbelief.

Maynard is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 01:51 PM
  #175
LombardiTool
Registered User
 
LombardiTool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Fontana, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 2,762
vCash: 500
I'll guess 5 year, $29 million. Will probably get more but I am still guessing Quick will take a discount to stay.

LombardiTool 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 03:43 AM.

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.