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.

Luongo: "Whatever the future holds is going to be fine with me"

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-18-2012, 08:25 PM
  #76
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
GMs may consider them "not in the spirit of hockey" or whatnot, but considering the amount of lifetime contracts around(Weber, Kovalchuk, Luongo, Hossa, Suter, etc, etc) you'd think GMs know what they're doing, right? Has anyone ever said there's too much risk involved to acquire one of them? To my knowledge, no.

Especially with no NMC, there quite literally is no risk involved.
You seem to be missing the point as to why these contracts are made.

They're not made to carry value late, they're made so that a very good team can get a guy's cap hit well below his current salary to help win a cup immidiately, and worry about the problem later. Luongo's burned years off the front end (favourable for the team), but still has all of the risky years to go. Sure, one can reasonably rely on him being a star goalie for the next couple of seasons, but a team like Toronto's outlook has to be beyond that. They're not winning the cup in the next 2 years.

As for the no NMC stuff, there's substantial risk. Even if you assume the same rules as the previous CBA (highly unlikely), you've still got $5.3m in tagging room that's taken up every year, if in fact you want to bury him in the minors. If you don't want him in the minors, that's potentially a $5.3m goaltender that just isn't good enough, and his value will even less because there will be no upside in his contract.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 08:29 PM
  #77
Paranoid Android
ERMAHGERD
 
Paranoid Android's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 11,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
This is where you're wrong. Van gets something. They get to lose his $5.3mill cap hit without taking any bad contracts back. If the return is better than that, sure trade him. But all Canuck fans are hearing here is that he's worth little to nothing - sell him for pennies on the dollar - and the Canucks would be forced to take on a bad contract. For a contending team, taking on a bad contract while getting prospects who may not even help this team in a few years - if at all - isn't better than just losing that contract and using that cap space and your own futures to add a rental or two that actually addresses team needs.

Waivers is a last resort situation where losing his cap hit without taking anything back is a better deal than taking on crap contracts that don't address team needs. Of course there's no need to consider that option until you actually need his cap space for other areas... Until then there's no problem just keeping him on the team, and keeping the team's 1-2 punch which were the biggest reason for the last President's win.
Why can't you just waive the crap contracts instead of Luongo? That way, you at least get some good assets along with those crap contracts.

I don't see waiving as a possibility at all. I guess it's only an issue if those bad contracts come with a NMC so they can't be waived. Doubt it will come to that though.

Paranoid Android is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 08:55 PM
  #78
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,940
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
You seem to be missing the point as to why these contracts are made.

They're not made to carry value late, they're made so that a very good team can get a guy's cap hit well below his current salary to help win a cup immidiately, and worry about the problem later. Luongo's burned years off the front end (favourable for the team), but still has all of the risky years to go. Sure, one can reasonably rely on him being a star goalie for the next couple of seasons, but a team like Toronto's outlook has to be beyond that. They're not winning the cup in the next 2 years.

As for the no NMC stuff, there's substantial risk. Even if you assume the same rules as the previous CBA (highly unlikely), you've still got $5.3m in tagging room that's taken up every year, if in fact you want to bury him in the minors. If you don't want him in the minors, that's potentially a $5.3m goaltender that just isn't good enough, and his value will even less because there will be no upside in his contract.
I'm not sure I follow. He would be sent to the minors at around age 39 or whenever his play declines enough that it's not worth keeping him on the team, only if he doesn't retire early. The CBA isn't going to disallow all contracts from being sent to the minors, that's absurd and the owners would never allow it.

The purpose of the cap circumvention contract isn't "win now, screw the future," it's to have a star at a lower cap hit than they would normally be at for the duration of their career. As soon as they are no longer up to it, they are expected to retire, with the threat of being sent to the minors if they don't.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:09 PM
  #79
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
2 hours ago...

@strombone1

FUN FACT: Stanley C. Panther was at my wedding! #RIP
HF members, make me proud!

RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:15 PM
  #80
echlfreak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 921
vCash: 500
Without reading this entire post...sorry if I am repeating>



Option C besides Toronto or Florida

Work out a trade with Columbus or Edmonton

Columbus gives up: Brassard and a 1st Round Pick for Higgins...example only!!!

Then Vancouver places Luongo on waivers for Columbus who is first in line

if the deal does not fit in Columbus' plan you move on to Edmonton and so fourth...



It increases the value of Luongo and doesn't pigeon hole Vancouver in only working off of Luongo's set teams

echlfreak is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:25 PM
  #81
SunshineRays
Registered User
 
SunshineRays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundwave View Post
If there's a cap rollback, I don't see his value going higher though, teams will have less cap room going forward.
I'm fairly certain a new CBA will means more teams will be interested in Loungo.

If there's a rollback, it means NHL owners are getting a larger piece of the $$ pie. Teams that couldn't afford his contract last season, will likely be able to with a new CBA. It's exactly what happened with the 04/05 lockout.

Also, it'll likely mean owners will get some fort of amnesty buyout. So teams with undesirable/inefficient contracts could buy them out without penalty and make room for a contract like Lu's.

SunshineRays is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:25 PM
  #82
Four1 Lead
We got Nylander.
 
Four1 Lead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: YYZ
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,778
vCash: 500
This doesn't change anything.

His value is what it is. Vancouver isn't going to get anything more than a decent young roster player, a 2nd and a prospect.

You're not going to get Huberdeau or Kadri.

Four1 Lead is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:31 PM
  #83
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Dancer View Post
So the Leafs just hired Rick St Croix as a goalie coach (Schneider's one of his) and let Allaire take a hike (Loungo's guy). hmmmmmmmm, I wonder, have we been looking at this wrong?
Just kidding.
Actually the trade is:

To Leafs: Cory Schneider, Henrik Sedin, Daniel Sedin
To Canucks: Toronto's 2013 third round pick

Henrik and Daniel have decided they want to end threir career playing for the GM who drafted them. Because the Leafs have to take on $12.2 million per year salary cap hit with the Sedins, Burke demands the Canucks send the Sedins for no return plus include Cory Schneider in the deal. Gary Bettman wanting to see the Leafs improve so that they again return to represent the NHL to the world supports this move and applies pressure to the Canuck management. Obviously Gillis has again been outsmarted by Brian Burke and is forced to agree.

At the beginning of the 2011 - 2012 season there were numerous posts on HF that established beyond a doubt that the market value of goal tenders in the NHL were at an all time low and on top of that Cory Schneider had never proved he could be anything more than being an average backup to an elite goalie like Luongo. Those HF posters estimated that the most the Canucks could ever get in return for Cory Schneider would be a 3rd or 4th round draft pick or a long shot prospect.












Also just kidding

Hi-wayman is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:32 PM
  #84
ronnyweed
Registered User
 
ronnyweed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,613
vCash: 500
10 million on goalies when the cap drops should work just fine

ronnyweed is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:36 PM
  #85
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I'm not sure I follow. He would be sent to the minors at around age 39 or whenever his play declines enough that it's not worth keeping him on the team, only if he doesn't retire early. The CBA isn't going to disallow all contracts from being sent to the minors, that's absurd and the owners would never allow it.

The purpose of the cap circumvention contract isn't "win now, screw the future," it's to have a star at a lower cap hit than they would normally be at for the duration of their career. As soon as they are no longer up to it, they are expected to retire, with the threat of being sent to the minors if they don't.
39?? You sure it's not 40? or 38? or 37? or 41? Furthermore, how do we know if A) he'll be eligible to be sent to the minors, or B) they'll be anything to gain from doing so. We know there's a lot of people involved who don't like the fact that teams can bury mistakes in the minors, for all we know a new CBA could remove the incentive to do that by counting contracts in the minors (beyond a certain amount).

The purpose of those contracts is to get a player to a lower cap hit now, with the expectation that his play later will be inferior to his cap hit.

You seem to act like sending him to the minors is no big deal, when in fact; under the previous CBA, it meant a loss of tagging room, under the new CBA, could do absolutely nothing to alleviate cap hit, and under any CBA, is likely to cause a tumultuous situation with team and player at odds.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:47 PM
  #86
7thOverdrive
Registered User
 
7thOverdrive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Port Coquitlam
Country: Canada
Posts: 373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Zibanejad View Post
This doesn't change anything.

His value is what it is. Vancouver isn't going to get anything more than a decent young roster player, a 2nd and a prospect.

You're not going to get Huberdeau or Kadri.
Mika and the crystal ball strikes again.

Fitting your criteria:
Kulemin + Kadri + 2nd round pick? Certainly meets that absolute requirement you listed

On a side note, I'd honestly like to see Kulemin here (now that Doan and Kostitsyn are gone) if Luongo's going to Toronto.
Would Toronto fans be on board with trading Kulemin + for Luongo? Unless Luongo is only worth Komiserak and a pick...

7thOverdrive is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:47 PM
  #87
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,940
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
39?? You sure it's not 40? or 38? or 37? or 41? Furthermore, how do we know if A) he'll be eligible to be sent to the minors, or B) they'll be anything to gain from doing so. We know there's a lot of people involved who don't like the fact that teams can bury mistakes in the minors, for all we know a new CBA could remove the incentive to do that by counting contracts in the minors (beyond a certain amount).

The purpose of those contracts is to get a player to a lower cap hit now, with the expectation that his play later will be inferior to his cap hit.

You seem to act like sending him to the minors is no big deal, when in fact; under the previous CBA, it meant a loss of tagging room, under the new CBA, could do absolutely nothing to alleviate cap hit, and under any CBA, is likely to cause a tumultuous situation with team and player at odds.
So I guess there's no real point in arguing until we see if whether or not the new CBA disallows burying contracts in the minors.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:48 PM
  #88
Taelin
Moderator
Resident Hipster
 
Taelin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,964
vCash: 500
No matter what the poor guy says, it's always wrong.

Sounds like he quoting a song lyric or something, as a side note.

Taelin is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:48 PM
  #89
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,940
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7thOverdrive View Post
Mika and the crystal ball strikes again.

Fitting your criteria:
Kulemin + Kadri + 2nd round pick? Certainly meets that absolute requirement you listed

On a side note, I'd honestly like to see Kulemin here (now that Doan and Kostitsyn are gone) if Luongo's going to Toronto.
Would Toronto fans be on board with trading Kulemin + for Luongo? Unless Luongo is only worth Komiserak and a pick...
Meh, not high on Kulemin.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 09:54 PM
  #90
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,719
vCash: 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Zibanejad View Post
This doesn't change anything.


His value is what it is.
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Zibanejad View Post
You're not going to get Huberdeau or Kadri.
How are these 2 players in the same value range?

Even Canucks fans realize the immense value of Huberdeau and rarely (if at all) include them in proposals without sending Kesler the other way.

Kadri on the other hand seems a notch below what Gillis has apparently been asking for (Bjugstad).

IMO

Huberdeau
-
Bjudgstad
-
Kadri / Howden

kthsn is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:01 PM
  #91
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Luongo is a bad acquisition for many teams. He has a 10 year contract and is already pushing 34. His playoff performance is lacking. He lost his starting position to an up and comer many year earlier then expected. He's asked to be traded. He has an NTC. He is to be paid $6.7M for 3 more years.

What else needs to be said? Sure, he's a good regular season goaltender. Come playoff time though, he's just a big question mark.
He's getting paid $6.7 million for 6 more years. And he's pushing 33, not 34.

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:09 PM
  #92
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7thOverdrive View Post
Mika and the crystal ball strikes again.

Fitting your criteria:
Kulemin + Kadri + 2nd round pick? Certainly meets that absolute requirement you listed

On a side note, I'd honestly like to see Kulemin here (now that Doan and Kostitsyn are gone) if Luongo's going to Toronto.
Would Toronto fans be on board with trading Kulemin + for Luongo? Unless Luongo is only worth Komiserak and a pick...
To put it simply... no.

To expand.... no... when Toronto says they're willing to part with a young roster player, it means Clarke MacArthur or Cody Franson. Kulemin is grossly overvalued in Toronto because of how much we lack size up front. Guys like Frattin, Ashton, Kadri, etc. should be made available, but not an integral piece like Kulemin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
So I guess there's no real point in arguing until we see if whether or not the new CBA disallows burying contracts in the minors.
To be perfectly fair, there's no point in arguing anything relating to specific value until we know where the new CBA lands and how much Vancouver has to clear.

What we're doing now, is arguing generic value, which is based on the fact that the cap will be going down by an undetermined amount, and there being an undetermined, but present, negative impact of Luongo's contract extending beyond when there's a high likelyhood he will not be worth that type of money.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:12 PM
  #93
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,722
vCash: 500
What's with the obsession amongst underrating Leafs players by Canucks fans? The inferiority complex is actually quite sad... you've got posters who would actively take a worse deal, just to keep Luongo out of Toronto. You'd think that fans of a team would be concerned about their own team and the teams they actually have a chance at playing more than twice a year.

Bjugstad vs. Kadri... Kadri was drafted a year before Bjugstad, who's yet to play a professional game. Sure, he's got upside, but Kadri has just as much upside, and is further ahead in his development curve -- something that a team who's looking for help now will undoubtedly value.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:14 PM
  #94
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Zibanejad View Post
This doesn't change anything.

His value is what it is. Vancouver isn't going to get anything more than a decent young roster player, a 2nd and a prospect.

You're not going to get Huberdeau or Kadri.
Definitely not Huberdeau. Don't get why Kadri is so untouchable.

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:18 PM
  #95
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 View Post
Definitely not Huberdeau. Don't get why Kadri is so untouchable.
He's not. Kadri should be on the block if Brian Burke could manage his team objectively, include Lombardi to help balance the salaries, and both teams should go away getting what they need. If the cap remains high enough, offering Kadri straight up for Luongo may even make sense, at which point the Canucks would have the cap space to pursue another centre.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:18 PM
  #96
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by echlfreak View Post
Without reading this entire post...sorry if I am repeating>



Option C besides Toronto or Florida

Work out a trade with Columbus or Edmonton

Columbus gives up: Brassard and a 1st Round Pick for Higgins...example only!!!

Then Vancouver places Luongo on waivers for Columbus who is first in line

if the deal does not fit in Columbus' plan you move on to Edmonton and so fourth...



It increases the value of Luongo and doesn't pigeon hole Vancouver in only working off of Luongo's set teams
Do you really think Vancouver would bend over Luongo that way?

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:21 PM
  #97
YouCantYandleThis*
Moustache Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
He's not. Kadri should be on the block if Brian Burke could manage his team objectively, include Lombardi to help balance the salaries, and both teams should go away getting what they need. If the cap remains high enough, offering Kadri straight up for Luongo may even make sense, at which point the Canucks would have the cap space to pursue another centre.
Didn't think I'd ever agree with a seanlinden post, but hell, that makes sense. I like Lombardi too, he's a nice piece despite the contract. Lombardi, Kadri, 2nd?

YouCantYandleThis* is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:27 PM
  #98
7thOverdrive
Registered User
 
7thOverdrive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Port Coquitlam
Country: Canada
Posts: 373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
To put it simply... no.

To expand.... no... when Toronto says they're willing to part with a young roster player, it means Clarke MacArthur or Cody Franson. Kulemin is grossly overvalued in Toronto because of how much we lack size up front. Guys like Frattin, Ashton, Kadri, etc. should be made available, but not an integral piece like Kulemin.



To be perfectly fair, there's no point in arguing anything relating to specific value until we know where the new CBA lands and how much Vancouver has to clear.

What we're doing now, is arguing generic value, which is based on the fact that the cap will be going down by an undetermined amount, and there being an undetermined, but present, negative impact of Luongo's contract extending beyond when there's a high likelyhood he will not be worth that type of money.
Ahh that definitely makes sense. Not too much size on that roster, but of course that's gonna change in the future with your bigger prospects making the team.

I'd honestly accept Connolly + Kadri + Holzer + 2nd for Luongo + 3rd but I may be the only one. Canucks need some offensive support and Connolly's just a short term stop gap for some offense and 2nd PP unit center/playmaker. I'm gonna get roasted, but what do you think? It's tough leaving Kadri and I may be out to lunch with him in the proposal, but the Leafs make the playoff with Kadri out and Luongo in.

Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
JVR - Grabovski - Kulemin
MacArthur - McClement/Lombardi - Frattin
Brown - Steckel - Ashton

Phaneuf - Gunnarsson
Gardiner - Franson
Liles - Komiserak

Luongo
Reimer
*Don't know exactly where everyone fits or what side the play on D.
That team has a better chance of making the playoffs then if you guys had Kadri.

7thOverdrive is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:27 PM
  #99
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YouCantYandleThis View Post
Didn't think I'd ever agree with a seanlinden post, but hell, that makes sense. I like Lombardi too, he's a nice piece despite the contract. Lombardi, Kadri, 2nd?
If I was Burke, I would've made that deal (2nd being conditional upon Leafs making the playoffs, 2014 3rd otherwise) prior to the lockout.... but I likely don't have as good information as to how far the cap is going to drop as compared to Burke. Of course I don't overvalue Kadri for no good reason like Burke does either.

seanlinden is offline  
Old
09-18-2012, 10:28 PM
  #100
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden View Post
39?? You sure it's not 40? or 38? or 37? or 41? Furthermore, how do we know if A) he'll be eligible to be sent to the minors, or B) they'll be anything to gain from doing so. We know there's a lot of people involved who don't like the fact that teams can bury mistakes in the minors, for all we know a new CBA could remove the incentive to do that by counting contracts in the minors (beyond a certain amount).

The purpose of those contracts is to get a player to a lower cap hit now, with the expectation that his play later will be inferior to his cap hit.

You seem to act like sending him to the minors is no big deal, when in fact; under the previous CBA, it meant a loss of tagging room, under the new CBA, could do absolutely nothing to alleviate cap hit, and under any CBA, is likely to cause a tumultuous situation with team and player at odds.
or maybe under a new CBA they will do the same thing as the NFL where no contracts are guaranteed and a team can just walk away from Luongo's deal? Does that make him even more valuable then under the new CBA?

while that's not likely to happen, it's no less likely than the new CBA putting restrictions on already negotiated contracts. Those contracts, including Luongo's, were negotiated under an active CBA, with those rules in place. If they now change rules, those contracts will be grand-fathered in, as they always are in any business that changes CBA rules that effect contracts. You can't just make those changes that impact previously negotiated contracts as they were done under the rules of the previous CBA.

Chances that the new CBA will now force restrictions on Luongo's contract that weren't there before are basically slim to none. But none of that even matters at this point - as no trade will be done until a new CBA is in place, so we will know full well what his value under a new CBA is when he's going to be traded.

This discussion should just end now until a new CBA is in place. Until then everyone arguing what his value is, are all just talking out of their ass. We have NO IDEA what his value under a new CBA will be. And we have no idea whether his value changes - improves or not - with the changes that the NHL may see under a new CBA. Again, there's just as good a chance that a new CBA improves his value as there is that it decreases. What happens if there are no more guaranteed contracts, with another 24% rollback in salaries? Is a $4mill/yr cap hit on Luongo, which a team can walk away from whenever they want, not make him a more valuable asset overall? Can you guarantee that won't happen, while the CBA changes all NTC to NMC where players can't be waived or their full cap hits continue to count?

We don't know what will happen... and therefore we don't know what his value will be when a new CBA is in place.. arguing otherwise is just pointless - like all these Luongo discussions have turned into.

NFITO 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 03:35 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.