HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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.

Van-Tor-Wsh

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-10-2012, 05:22 PM
  #26
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,364
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW6 View Post
Yes, exactly the same....

You can spinn it this way also! Canucks are giving up their "soon to be overpaid back-up on a lifetime contract", their "overpaid-by-$2M-5th-Dman-that only-will-play-top-4-if-someone-get-injured", a third line winger who just has his salary lowered, and their worst D-man

for

a winger that would've been 4th in goals and 5th in scoring of all your forwards, a 3C better than anything they have at the moment, a D-prospect that projects higher than anyone they currently have, a young and cheap C/W that would've avg. the 8th highets pts/g while avg. the 11th most minutes/game and a D that won the league in +/- 3 years ago.
I won't go into detail about how a lot of that isn't true, as I get your main point. The pieces we get are okay-ish, but it's still a lot of quality over quantity(the point I think Seatoo was making).

If it were, say:

To Toronto: Johansson, Luongo, Ward
To Washington: Bozak, Kulemin, Raymond, Ballard
To Vancouver: Lupul/Grabovski, Schultz, Perreault

for example, it would be a lot more palletable.


Last edited by Vankiller Whale: 11-10-2012 at 05:33 PM.
Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:24 PM
  #27
Reverend Mayhem
CRJ + RNH = Sex
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,167
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
^ Toronto isn't going to like that deal...and neither should Washington.

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:25 PM
  #28
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW6 View Post
Yes, exactly the same....

You can spinn it this way also! Canucks are giving up their "soon to be overpaid back-up on a lifetime contract", their "overpaid-by-$2M-5th-Dman-that only-will-play-top-4-if-someone-get-injured", a third line winger who just has his salary lowered, and their worst D-man

for

a winger that would've been 4th in goals and 5th in scoring of all your forwards, a 3C better than anything they have at the moment, a D-prospect that projects higher than anyone they currently have, a young and cheap C/W that would've avg. the 8th highets pts/g while avg. the 11th most minutes/game and a D that won the league in +/- 3 years ago.
You are literally wrong in every single thing you just said. MacArthur would be a 3rd liner, we have better options so no he wouldn't be 4th on this team. Lombardi is garbage and Lapierre played fine in the SCF as 3rd C and comes at 3M+ cheaper. Blacker would be 3-4 on the D prospect chart (Tanev, K-Conn are both way above him). Schultz is interesting but not exciting leaving Perrault as the centre piece.

It is not a good deal. Period.

Seatoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:27 PM
  #29
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,364
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
^ Toronto isn't going to like that deal...and neither should Washington.
For Washington it would be the same give/get they had in the OP.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:31 PM
  #30
Reverend Mayhem
CRJ + RNH = Sex
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,167
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
For Washington it would be the same give/get they had in the OP.
They give way down the middle in this one though. Johansson and Perreault were really good for them and they get back Bozak, who if they want a checking line should be playing in the top 6. They get some good depth pieces, though. I'm just not sure why they would include Schultz for Ballard though.

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:32 PM
  #31
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I won't go into detail about how a lot of that isn't true, as I get your main point. The pieces we get are okay-ish, but it's still a lot of quality over quantity(the point I think Seatoo was making).

If it were, say:

To Toronto: Johansson, Luongo, Ward
To Washington: Bozak, Kulemin, Raymond, Ballard
To Vancouver: Lupu/Grabovski, Schultz, Perreault

for example, it would be a lot more palletable.
That's still terrible IMO. Wouldn't do this or the op as a Canucks fan.

DJOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:45 PM
  #32
PierreMcGuire*
How dissapointing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
They give way down the middle in this one though. Johansson and Perreault were really good for them and they get back Bozak, who if they want a checking line should be playing in the top 6. They get some good depth pieces, though. I'm just not sure why they would include Schultz for Ballard though.
That's what they give in the OP, as well.

PierreMcGuire* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:47 PM
  #33
ottawa*
go habs go
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,002
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrophorus View Post
So, Bozak who has never scored less than Johansson, had a disappointing season, despite trending upwards in goals in all 3 years.
What does this make Johansson who produces less.

In fact it sounds like Johansson doesn't solve the #1C issue.
Johansson just turned 22 and completed his 2nd season and Bozak is turning 27 in 4 months and just completed his 3rd season, they produced almost exactly the same amount of points (Bozak had 47, Johansson 46). I'll admit I haven't had the opportunity to see Johansson play nearly as much as Bozak but from what I have seen he appears to have upside and I don't think anyone would be surprised to see him break the 50 point barrier next season. Bozak played between Lupul and Kessel for most of the year, one of the 3 didn't even come close to being ppg while the other 2 did, do you want to guess which one? This isn't a knock on Bozak at all, all I'm saying is he played between two ppg players and couldn't keep up with them so I don't think he's a 1C or even a 2C and next year he'll most likely be the 3rd line C exactly where he belongs. He's 26 years old and I don't think he has room for improvement unlike Johansson who's only 22 and got much better from his rookie season and I bet we'll continue to see that trend. I didn't mean to make it sound as though Bozak sucked cause he doesn't, and you are right his production is trending upwards but given his age and the great opportunity he was given by centering Kessel and Lupul, I think Bozak has peaked or is at least close to it, I think he'll be a 40-50pt guy and I think I along with others expect over 50 pts for Johansson.

ottawa* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 05:58 PM
  #34
MW6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Halland
Country: Sweden
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
You are literally wrong in every single thing you just said. MacArthur would be a 3rd liner, we have better options so no he wouldn't be 4th on this team. Lombardi is garbage and Lapierre played fine in the SCF as 3rd C and comes at 3M+ cheaper. Blacker would be 3-4 on the D prospect chart (Tanev, K-Conn are both way above him). Schultz is interesting but not exciting leaving Perrault as the centre piece.

It is not a good deal. Period.
never said anything about him being on any line, had he played on the Canucks last year he would've scored the 4th most goals trailing only Daniel, Burrows and Kesler. Add Henrik and you have the only forwards scoring more points than MacArthur last season.
Garbage ey? that's some solid proof right there.. I'm not saying Lapierre didn't perform well, but I assume by looking at previous statistics Lombardi is the better player. Blacker have the highest upside of all the mentioned prospects according to hockey's future (not a reliable source but I guess it's the best we have), even though Tanev should count as a roster player.
I won't argue against you if you feel that way about the trade, it's totally up to you to decide, I'm only making suggestions!

MW6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 06:05 PM
  #35
MW6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Halland
Country: Sweden
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
That's still terrible IMO. Wouldn't do this or the op as a Canucks fan.
I think you should look further down the line, after this season this trade also would've free'd up almost $7-8M in capspace to spend on better/more useful players.

MW6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 06:15 PM
  #36
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW6 View Post
I think you should look further down the line, after this season this trade also would've free'd up almost $7-8M in capspace to spend on better/more useful players.
I'm more concerned with next season than the season after. Things have a way of working themselves out.

Also, keep in mind that I'm one of the posters that thinks that it would be silly to put all my eggs in the "Schneider will remain an elite goalie given the starters role" basket. I think he might, but I might as well have an elite goalie for cover if he doesn't.

DJOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 06:21 PM
  #37
MW6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Halland
Country: Sweden
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I won't go into detail about how a lot of that isn't true, as I get your main point. The pieces we get are okay-ish, but it's still a lot of quality over quantity(the point I think Seatoo was making).

If it were, say:

To Toronto: Johansson, Luongo, Ward
To Washington: Bozak, Kulemin, Raymond, Ballard
To Vancouver: Lupul/Grabovski, Schultz, Perreault

for example, it would be a lot more palletable.
Acctually, I can back those statements, as I've done to Seatoo.

I assume you mean quantity coming your way and quality leaving?
Who is it you feel that you can't do without or do you feel this trade makes the Canucks worse? or is it because you think Canucks can do better for Luongo who really is the only quality piece leaving?
Those changes doesn't change how I feel about the trade.

MW6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 06:23 PM
  #38
MW6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Halland
Country: Sweden
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
I'm more concerned with next season than the season after. Things have a way of working themselves out.

Also, keep in mind that I'm one of the posters that thinks that it would be silly to put all my eggs in the "Schneider will remain an elite goalie given the starters role" basket. I think he might, but I might as well have an elite goalie for cover if he doesn't.
OK, I hear you. If that's how you feel about Schneider I completly see how this trade doesn't make sence to you.

MW6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 06:25 PM
  #39
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,364
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW6 View Post
Acctually, I can back those statements, as I've done to Seatoo.

I assume you mean quantity coming your way and quality leaving?
Who is it you feel that you can't do without or do you feel this trade makes the Canucks worse? or is it because you think Canucks can do better for Luongo who really is the only quality piece leaving?
Those changes doesn't change how I feel about the trade.
Lombardi, Macarthur, Blacker, and to some extent Perreault are all "throw in" players. The Canucks already have a solid amount of depth at all positions, what we need is an impact player as opposed to numerous depth players.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 06:44 PM
  #40
MW6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Halland
Country: Sweden
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Lombardi, Macarthur, Blacker, and to some extent Perreault are all "throw in" players. The Canucks already have a solid amount of depth at all positions, what we need is an impact player as opposed to numerous depth players.
I won't argue against that they're not impact players, but IMO a player can be something between a throw-in and impact as well. Schultz is a throw in, the other can make a difference considering what they're replacing.
There isn't lots of room for improvment in the Canucks top-6 as it is right now, I think it's pretty good. It might be a question of chemistry between the players on the 2nd line, but that's it. IMO it's the bottom-6 that needs upgrading for the Canucks to challenge again, and a team serious about winning can't afford to waste money on players underperforming their salaries (ie. Luongo on the bench, Ballard on the bottom pair)

MW6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 06:51 PM
  #41
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,364
vCash: 5555
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW6 View Post
I won't argue against that they're not impact players, but IMO a player can be something between a throw-in and impact as well. Schultz is a throw in, the other can make a difference considering what they're replacing.
There isn't lots of room for improvment in the Canucks top-6 as it is right now, I think it's pretty good. It might be a question of chemistry between the players on the 2nd line, but that's it. IMO it's the bottom-6 that needs upgrading for the Canucks to challenge again, and a team serious about winning can't afford to waste money on players underperforming their salaries (ie. Luongo on the bench, Ballard on the bottom pair)
Our bottom 6 consists of Higgins, Hansen, Lapierre, Kassian, and Raymond, all of whom are above average top-6ers. We still need a replacement 3C for Malhotra, but that's all that we really need for our bottom-6, whereas our top-6 still needs a RW to play with Kesler. Lombardi would make a rather weak 3C, and other than him none of the players we get addresses our needs.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 07:46 PM
  #42
MastuhNinks
Registered User
 
MastuhNinks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Iron Throne
Posts: 4,448
vCash: 500
As a Leafs fan I like this trade. Very much a fan of Johansson.

MastuhNinks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 07:54 PM
  #43
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
i am not going to comment the proposal....but very nice presentation.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 09:10 PM
  #44
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW6 View Post
never said anything about him being on any line, had he played on the Canucks last year he would've scored the 4th most goals trailing only Daniel, Burrows and Kesler. Add Henrik and you have the only forwards scoring more points than MacArthur last season.
Garbage ey? that's some solid proof right there.. I'm not saying Lapierre didn't perform well, but I assume by looking at previous statistics Lombardi is the better player. Blacker have the highest upside of all the mentioned prospects according to hockey's future (not a reliable source but I guess it's the best we have), even though Tanev should count as a roster player.
I won't argue against you if you feel that way about the trade, it's totally up to you to decide, I'm only making suggestions!
If Hansen played with the Sedins he would probably be a 20-30-50 player and fit for a lot of teams first lines; however he's not playing with the Sedins, he's a third liner. McArthur would not break into the Canucks' top six hence he wouldn't be our 4th leading scorer. See how logic works? And I'm sorry but if the only way you evaluate the skill and potential of prospects is one website and literally no other research is done you have a pretty weak case.

Tanev is already a poor mans Hamhuis, and K-Conn would play in Ballar were injured/traded. Blacker wouldn't. You literally have next to no knowledge about the Canucks system or needs. We need a SOLID 3C, which clearly Lombardi isn't. And we need a playmaking Winger to play with Kesler and Booth, which clearly McArthur isn't. The other pieces are like I said, interesting but not exciting and definitely not pieces that any competent GM would consider as a centr piece for an elite #1 goalie.

TLDR: You have no idea what you are talking about and you did very little research into your proposal. Props for trying, but at the end of the day the Canucks get taken advantage of like that girl we all knew in high school.

Seatoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 09:21 PM
  #45
Phion Keneuf
Top Dawg Ent.
 
Phion Keneuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vaughan, Ontario
Country: Italy
Posts: 27,886
vCash: 500
Bozak and MacArthur are so underrated... I'll gladly keep them.

Mac is a versatile 45ish point guy who is a jack of all trades kinda player.
Same thing with Bozak, who doesn't get any credit because he's playing with Phil

Phion Keneuf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 09:44 PM
  #46
MastuhNinks
Registered User
 
MastuhNinks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Iron Throne
Posts: 4,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
If Hansen played with the Sedins he would probably be a 20-30-50 player and fit for a lot of teams first lines; however he's not playing with the Sedins, he's a third liner. McArthur would not break into the Canucks' top six hence he wouldn't be our 4th leading scorer. See how logic works? And I'm sorry but if the only way you evaluate the skill and potential of prospects is one website and literally no other research is done you have a pretty weak case.

Tanev is already a poor mans Hamhuis, and K-Conn would play in Ballar were injured/traded. Blacker wouldn't. You literally have next to no knowledge about the Canucks system or needs. We need a SOLID 3C, which clearly Lombardi isn't. And we need a playmaking Winger to play with Kesler and Booth, which clearly McArthur isn't. The other pieces are like I said, interesting but not exciting and definitely not pieces that any competent GM would consider as a centr piece for an elite #1 goalie.

TLDR: You have no idea what you are talking about and you did very little research into your proposal. Props for trying, but at the end of the day the Canucks get taken advantage of like that girl we all knew in high school.
Macarthur lead the Leafs in assists in '10-'11 with 41, which would've been good for 3rd on the Canucks (behind the Sedins) that year. I understand why you're cautious of a player with one standout season, but saying that he clearly isn't something that he was as early as a year ago seems like a disservice. He only had 23 assists last year, but his usual line's top goal scorer from '10-'11 had a terrible shooting season, scoring 23 less goals. Now you could argue that it was Kulemin's goal scoring that inflated Macarthur's assist totals in the first place, but in all likelihood it's somewhere in between. I don't think it's a stretch to say he could be a 30-35 assist guy (which again, would be more than any Canucks winger not named Sedin), especially playing on a line with Kesler. I think Macarthur is a lot better than you're giving him credit for and if it's a playmaking winger you want from the Leafs, Macarthur is probably your guy.

EDIT: And I dislike that you're so fast to discredit Blacker and you criticize others for not knowing enough about your prospects. Prior to training camp for this past season, Blacker was considered just behind Gardiner when it came to Leafs prospects.

MastuhNinks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 09:48 PM
  #47
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastuhNinks View Post
Macarthur lead the Leafs in assists in '10-'11 with 41, which would've been good for 3rd on the Canucks (behind the Sedins) that year. I understand why you're cautious of a player with one standout season, but saying that he clearly isn't something that he was as early as a year ago seems like a disservice. He only had 23 assists last year, but his usual line's top goal scorer from '10-'11 had a terrible shooting season, scoring 23 less goals. Now you could argue that it was Kulemin's goal scoring that inflated Macarthur's assist totals in the first place, but in all likelihood it's somewhere in between. I don't think it's a stretch to say he could be a 30-35 assist guy (which again, would be more than any Canucks winger not named Sedin), especially playing on a line with Kesler. I think Macarthur is a lot better than you're giving him credit for and if it's a playmaking winger you want from the Leafs, Macarthur is probably your guy.
If he had 3 years on his deal most fans would take it more seriously. As is McA is a throw in and Cap dump. It just isn't worth it for a rental.

Seatoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 09:54 PM
  #48
MastuhNinks
Registered User
 
MastuhNinks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Iron Throne
Posts: 4,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
If he had 3 years on his deal most fans would take it more seriously. As is McA is a throw in and Cap dump. It just isn't worth it for a rental.
Okay but you didn't say that, you said that he would not break into the Canucks top 6 and he clearly isn't a playmaking winger. I think he would make the Canucks top 6, I have no way of proving that, but I will say that if there is one way to describe his play, 'playmaking winger' sounds just about right. Don't be condescending and rag on people for not doing research and then follow it up with uneducated statements yourself.

MastuhNinks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 10:04 PM
  #49
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastuhNinks View Post
Okay but you didn't say that, you said that he would not break into the Canucks top 6 and he clearly isn't a playmaking winger. I think he would make the Canucks top 6, I have no way of proving that, but I will say that if there is one way to describe his play, 'playmaking winger' sounds just about right. Don't be condescending and rag on people for not doing research and then follow it up with uneducated statements yourself.
The main reason why I as a Canucks fan do not want McA is that besides his upcoming UFA status, if you compare him vs Higgins last year or Raymond in 10-11 their stats are basically the same. As been said many many times already we have enough middle six tweeners. He is not needed on Van. If that is condescending to you then you need to develop a thicker skin. He is redundant on our team.

Seatoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 10:33 PM
  #50
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
The main reason why I as a Canucks fan do not want McA is that besides his upcoming UFA status, if you compare him vs Higgins last year or Raymond in 10-11 their stats are basically the same. As been said many many times already we have enough middle six tweeners. He is not needed on Van. If that is condescending to you then you need to develop a thicker skin. He is redundant on our team.
I have a theory about Ryan Kesler and his effectiveness with certain wingers. I believe Kesler needs a right handed RW player who can pass the puck.
Kesler was most successful with Sundin and Samuelsson as his line mates at different times.

Kesler likes to use the right side of the ice a lot, and being a left handed shooting player myself, I find I pass better and easier to another left hand player. From what I've seen from Kes I've the past 10 years or so watching the Nucks I see he works better with at least one right handed player. Having Booth N Raymond on his line last year really didn't allow Kesler to do what makes him most effective. Booth always like to dump and chase whereas Raymond would carry the puck around and lose it.

Kesler needs someone to feed him forehand to forehand to utilize his shot more often, his shot is what makes Kesler most effective, since after getting 50 assists he decided he can pass the puck anymore

mstad101 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 05:22 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.