HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Trottier vs. Crosby

View Poll Results: Who was the better player?
Trottier 56 53.85%
Crosby 48 46.15%
Voters: 104. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-25-2012, 01:04 PM
  #126
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazerbullet View Post
Evaluating season-by-season is not getting silly and in fact quite common and reasonable approach. Summer 2010 Crosby was not a consensus best player. Period.

And I really don't see a reason why one should take an average of just two seasons (1.5 to be precise). That's just cherry-picking to prove a point. If you want to talk about consistency then why not 3 or 4 seasons?
If the question is when was Crosby the consensus best player in the world then it's a period of time and it's pretty clear that over teh period of 10 (where he is a clear top 3 and probably only AO or Keith is really close to him) and the 1st 40 games of 11, where it is really clear and add them up then yes he is the best player over that period of time.

going forward from 11 is less clear because of time lost but when he was playing it was still at that best player in the world level, going back only AO is really in the mix and Sid loses some of the luster due to another injury and only playing in 53 games.

Even with the huge amount of time lost here is the top scorers since 06

He is 12 in Goals
3rd in assists
3rd in points

Per game he is

5th in GPG
1st in APG
1st in PPG

In the playoffs he is

4th in goals
2nd in assists
3rd in points

Per game he is

5th in GPG
1st in APG
1st in PPG

It's pretty easy to say that Crosby, even with his injuries has been the best player over that 6 year period of time

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:07 PM
  #127
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
But it's still being done.
Personally, I think Lindros, before he ran into his concussion issues, was the better and more dominant player than Crosby has been so far.

In fact...
After 7 seasons:
Lindros 431GP 263G 600P
Crosby 434GP 223G 609P

Even if you try to use Adjusted stats, the difference is maybe 30 points total and once you factor in Lindros' superior defensive play and supreme physical dominance/intimidation, I think Lindros is pretty clearly the better overall player.

Trots is a lot closer to matching Lindros physically than Crosby, and Trots is already the better defensive player than either of them.
Throw in the quality of line mates, of lack of, and playoff performance Sid might win that battle, but Lindros 1st 7 years is often overlooked in how dominant it really was even with the missed time.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:10 PM
  #128
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
Adjusted
Lindros '94-'00: 423 GP , 256 G (.60 GPG), 601 P (1.42 PPG)
Crosby '06-'12: 434 GP, 237 G (.55 GPG), 632 P (1.46 PPG)

That's starting with Lindros' second season, but also only giving him credit for actual games in '95, and it's about as close as you can get.

As Phil says, we aren't penalizing Crosby for games missed due to injury, but we can't give him too much extra credit for those missed games either. I mean, saying he was at a dominant level in '10 & '11 isn't much of a stretch... but including '12 (only 22 games after already missing half of '11) and the current lockout is going too far. If he wants ANY credit for this season, then he should be playing in one of the top leagues available... whether that's the NHL, KHL, or even the Swiss league... at least prove he can stay healthy for N games and dominate a bunch of yodelers. [/B]
To be fair though insurance costs prevent him from playing anywhere in the lockout.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:14 PM
  #129
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Throw in the quality of line mates, of lack of, and playoff performance Sid might win that battle, but Lindros 1st 7 years is often overlooked in how dominant it really was even with the missed time.
Lindros may have had the LoD line but it was still just one line. Crosby had something more, a "second line" center backing him up that had more to do with the Pens winning the Cup than Crosby did.
When Detroit shut down the LoD line, they shut down the Flyers. When Detroit shut down Crosby in the finals, Malkin saved the day.
And do I really have to mention the difference between having M.A. Fleury vs Snow/Hextall heh

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:15 PM
  #130
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack mullet View Post
so if i dress for one playoff game, and get 3 points, that means I am the better player? LMAO
Well 48 games tells us alot more than 1 does right?

I'll refrain from commenting on what I really think about this comment though.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:18 PM
  #131
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Lindros may have had the LoD line but it was still just one line. Crosby had something more, a "second line" center backing him up that had more to do with the Pens winning the Cup than Crosby did.
When Detroit shut down the LoD line, they shut down the Flyers. When Detroit shut down Crosby in the finals, Malkin saved the day.
And do I really have to mention the difference between having M.A. Fleury vs Snow/Hextall heh
Well MA Fleury before 12 there is a point yes, but Malkin wasn't around in 06 and missed 15 games in 10.

Still the LOD and Crosby's line mates are night and day.

I'm not one to criticize Erics playoff performance, you can see Phil I believe for that, but it is notable that Sid's in much better and was accomplished at a younger age as well.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 02:21 PM
  #132
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Well 48 games tells us alot more than 1 does right?

I'll refrain from commenting on what I really think about this comment though.
not according to the logic the person i replied to was talking about.

say what you want Hoss, that's why were all here!

jack mullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 02:27 PM
  #133
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
but Malkin wasn't around in 06 and missed 15 games in 10.
Huh?
Crosby nor the Pens even made the playoffs in '06 and Malkin didn't miss any playoff games in '10.

I coulda swore we were just talking about the playoffs at this point.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 03:07 PM
  #134
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack mullet View Post
not according to the logic the person i replied to was talking about.

say what you want Hoss, that's why were all here!
Well 68 games to 48 games isn't a big spread in looking at things, 1 game sure is mate.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 03:44 PM
  #135
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Well 68 games to 48 games isn't a big spread in looking at things, 1 game sure is mate.
no doubt.

i think this thread has about run its course. now were talking about Lindros and Crosby for some reason.

i stated from the begining this wasnt a fair comparison, as Trottier and Crosby are no where near the same "type" of player

a better comparison, IMO, would be something like Trottier vs Bergeron, and Crosby vs Lafleur.

jack mullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 03:47 PM
  #136
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Because whether a player is injury prone or not is a big part of his makeup as a player maybe?
1) I don't judge players as being better or worse at hockey because of their injury status. Again, Larry Murphy was not better than Bobby Orr, GP and counting stats be damned.

2) Calling Crosby "injury prone" is... I dunno, not quite right. We're not talking about a guy who misses games with sore ankles or broken noses. Holding players out of action to heal concussions is a post-Lindros standard, and Crosby is the highest profile player of the era to get his brain scrambled. How many games would Trottier have missed in his prime if he were held out for even the slightest sign of concussion?

Above and beyond this thread, I think we're going to have to start changing the way we think about durability. Concussions are not like twisted ligaments, and if the medical knowledge had always been there to identify the long-term danger of repeated concussions we would have seen a lot more missing GP in years past.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 03:52 PM
  #137
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Huh?
Crosby nor the Pens even made the playoffs in '06 and Malkin didn't miss any playoff games in '10.

I coulda swore we were just talking about the playoffs at this point.
sure if we are talking about the playoffs but in the whole picture if one wants to take a comp between Eric and Sid and Trotts for that matter if would be

Trotts
Eric
Sid


in the line mates and team support factors IMO.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 03:57 PM
  #138
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
1) I don't judge players as being better or worse at hockey because of their injury status. Again, Larry Murphy was not better than Bobby Orr, GP and counting stats be damned.

2) Calling Crosby "injury prone" is... I dunno, not quite right. We're not talking about a guy who misses games with sore ankles or broken noses. Holding players out of action to heal concussions is a post-Lindros standard, and Crosby is the highest profile player of the era to get his brain scrambled. How many games would Trottier have missed in his prime if he were held out for even the slightest sign of concussion?

Above and beyond this thread, I think we're going to have to start changing the way we think about durability. Concussions are not like twisted ligaments, and if the medical knowledge had always been there to identify the long-term danger of repeated concussions we would have seen a lot more missing GP in years past.
An injury is an injury regardless of whether it's the brain or the ankle. Some players are more prone to concussions than other players. Crosby certainly seems to be. Lindros certainly was. How is that any different than, say, Peter Forsberg being more prone to foot injuries than other players? If you're hurt and can't play then you're injured, bottom line.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 04:11 PM
  #139
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
An injury is an injury regardless of whether it's the brain or the ankle. Some players are more prone to concussions than other players. Crosby certainly seems to be. Lindros certainly was. How is that any different than, say, Peter Forsberg being more prone to foot injuries than other players? If you're hurt and can't play then you're injured, bottom line.
When the playoffs were on the line, Forsberg would go out there and skate through intense pain until his ankle was simply not capable of supporting his weight. We would like to think the majority of hockey players would do the same, because a wonky ankle is a small price to pay for immortality.

That doesn't compare to a concussion, where the standard is now that the player must be symptom-free before he's allowed to practice. It doesn't matter whether Sid wants to play or whether he is capable of playing. As long as his brain shows signs of damage, a phalanx of doctors, lawyers and insurance agents is going to ensure that he doesn't even get his feet inside a pair of skates.

So no, an injury is not an injury. Concussions are a different animal.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 04:21 PM
  #140
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
When the playoffs were on the line, Forsberg would go out there and skate through intense pain until his ankle was simply not capable of supporting his weight. We would like to think the majority of hockey players would do the same, because a wonky ankle is a small price to pay for immortality.

That doesn't compare to a concussion, where the standard is now that the player must be symptom-free before he's allowed to practice. It doesn't matter whether Sid wants to play or whether he is capable of playing. As long as his brain shows signs of damage, a phalanx of doctors, lawyers and insurance agents is going to ensure that he doesn't even get his feet inside a pair of skates.

So no, an injury is not an injury. Concussions are a different animal.
Did Forsberg play in the finals against New Jersey in '01? Nope, he was injured and didn't play. It isn't a matter of whether he WANTED to play or not, the bottom line is he DIDN'T play because he was hurt. This isn't a case of someone being in a freak car accident and missing games. It's a matter of being hurt as a result of playing and missing a bunch of games because of it. That's the bottom line: He was prone to getting hurt and missed a bunch of games because he was prone to getting hurt. If a player gets concussions every time someone sneezes harshly in his general direction then yeah, he should be considered injury prone.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 05:31 PM
  #141
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabbychuk View Post
Was first in points and goals in 2010-11. So he was on his way. Oh yeah it was only 41 games so that does not meaning anything I forgot....
It isn't that it doesn't mean anything, it is just that we were robbed of seeing what he could do for a full year. He was on pace for exactly 132 points. That's impressive and would have been a great season possibly giving him a 25 point lead on the next best player. But we're woulda, coulda, shoulda this and that. He missed 41 games for his team and that hurts a player. We have to wait for a minimum until 2013-'14 to see him play a full season. Until then, there are a lot of all-time greats that have had far superior seasons than him and that can include Trottier. If Crosby wants to be in the upper echelon of all-time talent the guy has to play and prove it to us. And yeah, the 25 game point streak was epic, the best I've seen since maybe Lemieux's 46 in 1990.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 05:32 PM
  #142
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
An injury is an injury regardless of whether it's the brain or the ankle. Some players are more prone to concussions than other players. Crosby certainly seems to be. Lindros certainly was. How is that any different than, say, Peter Forsberg being more prone to foot injuries than other players? If you're hurt and can't play then you're injured, bottom line.
I think that at some point, unless the NHL actually cleans up it's act, that there is going to be a clear indication that injuries and ones like concussions are era related, certainly hitting is.

There is quite simply more collisions and at higher speeds than there ever has been and unless that's taken into account the old "he's a baindaid boy" thing really doesn't apply the same way as you are suggesting.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 05:37 PM
  #143
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Did Forsberg play in the finals against New Jersey in '01? Nope, he was injured and didn't play. It isn't a matter of whether he WANTED to play or not, the bottom line is he DIDN'T play because he was hurt. This isn't a case of someone being in a freak car accident and missing games. It's a matter of being hurt as a result of playing and missing a bunch of games because of it. That's the bottom line: He was prone to getting hurt and missed a bunch of games because he was prone to getting hurt. If a player gets concussions every time someone sneezes harshly in his general direction then yeah, he should be considered injury prone.

So this is obvious right?

Being prone to getting hurt.

You can tell this in advance or is it the usual metric of hindsight always being 20/20?

Until you actually provide some kind of evidence of this proneness being a deficiency in any player then it's just an opinion supported by little in the way of facts. Sorta like Early don cherry with the wimpy guys from Europe crap he always spouted.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 05:39 PM
  #144
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
So this is obvious right?

Being prone to getting hurt.

You can tell this in advance or is it the usual metric of hindsight always being 20/20?

Until you actually provide some kind of evidence of this proneness being a deficiency in any player then it's just an opinion supported by little in the way of facts. Sorta like Early don cherry with the wimpy guys from Europe crap he always spouted.
It's called a track record. Something Crosby obviously has.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 06:19 PM
  #145
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,009
vCash: 500
Trottier all day every day.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 07:08 PM
  #146
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Did Forsberg play in the finals against New Jersey in '01? Nope, he was injured and didn't play. It isn't a matter of whether he WANTED to play or not, the bottom line is he DIDN'T play because he was hurt.
Ok. And what about all the times he DID play through injury, which has been the expectation for hockey players since the dawn of the game? Do we not always make an effort to credit players who perform in spite of injury, as is currently happening over in the Wings/Avs/Devils thread?

Well, things are a bit different for the modern concussed player. There is no, "stick a needle in it and get out there for your next shift". Policy across the board states that he sits until symptoms are 100% gone.

I'm not surprised to be having this conversation in 2012, but I expect that by 2022 we will have a very different view "injury proneness" as it relates to concussions.


Quote:
If a player gets concussions every time someone sneezes harshly in his general direction then yeah, he should be considered injury prone.
It's not like these guys have glass brains or something. Crosby got elbowed blindside in the head when he wasn't even close to the puck. What exactly makes him "injury prone" on that play, or responsible for the misdiagnosis that had him concussed again the following week? Is he supposed to check his blind spot before every turn, and diagnose himself at the hospital? "Keep your head up" doesn't quite serve as an antidote in this league.

I'm curious what you think about the point I made earlier: if concussions had always been diagnosed by 2012 standards, how do you think Trottier's career would look?

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 07:12 PM
  #147
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
if concussions had always been diagnosed by 2012 standards, how do you think Trottier's career would look?
You'd have to ask him. Maybe he never got one. I am pretty sure Gretzky would never have gotten one. He was very difficult to hit as well. Either way, we have seen Trottier's career, it is signed sealed and delivered. It isn't his fault that the player we are comparing him to right now has yet to deliver a season that bests Trottier's best.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 08:45 PM
  #148
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
It isn't his fault that the player we are comparing him to right now has yet to deliver a season that bests Trottier's best.
I do think that's a legitimate point, and admittedly I have had my mind changed a little about Trottier's high-water mark -- it's easy to overlook what a Gretzky-less league would have looked like.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 09:07 PM
  #149
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
When the playoffs were on the line, Forsberg would go out there and skate through intense pain until his ankle was simply not capable of supporting his weight. We would like to think the majority of hockey players would do the same, because a wonky ankle is a small price to pay for immortality.

That doesn't compare to a concussion, where the standard is now that the player must be symptom-free before he's allowed to practice. It doesn't matter whether Sid wants to play or whether he is capable of playing. As long as his brain shows signs of damage, a phalanx of doctors, lawyers and insurance agents is going to ensure that he doesn't even get his feet inside a pair of skates.

So no, an injury is not an injury. Concussions are a different animal.
I think it's hard to discuss this at the moment because we don't have any historical perspective on the concussion issue. Maybe rule or equipment changes will make the "concussion era" a blip in NHL history, for all we know.

I understand that there are different issues involved with concussions but it doesn't seem right to throw out all the traditional standards about the value of being on the ice and playing. Maybe you can't blame Crosby for missing games, but you can't give him credit for playing every game either.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 11:13 PM
  #150
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,411
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
It's not like these guys have glass brains or something. Crosby got elbowed blindside in the head when he wasn't even close to the puck. What exactly makes him "injury prone" on that play, or responsible for the misdiagnosis that had him concussed again the following week? Is he supposed to check his blind spot before every turn, and diagnose himself at the hospital? "Keep your head up" doesn't quite serve as an antidote in this league.
Didn't he blindly skate out of a turn and run face first right into a much taller player's shoulder? Isn't this a player who is purported to have amazing "hockey sense"? Maybe he could have found a position by the boards to watch the play develop behind him?

What's probably most amazing to me is that Crosby's behavior since the concussion is only making him more likely to get another concussion IMO. He allegedly slashed Giroux's wrists repeatedly in the face-off circle... acted like a complete jerk between whistles... and then Giroux decked him to start game 6. Does that sound like a player trying to keep himself healthy and focused? I think he does bear a lot of responsibility for any future concussions, and perhaps some for those already sustained as well (if they were at all intentional). Fair or not, when you flop around on the ice and act like a baby, it doesn't exactly endear you to some of your opponents. Whatever the reason, he wasn't able to avoid potentially damaging collisions and/or didn't have the durability to sustain such collisions and keep playing under the policy already present at that time. I didn't see much pity for Jagr when Ruutu intentionally checked Jagr's head into the boards in an Olympic game. Jagr put himself in a prone position with a flimsy helmet, knowing that Ruutu was on the ice. In either case, I don't blame exactly "blame" the player that got hit. I wouldn't be surprised if that Ruutu hit caused a mild concussion. I'm guessing there are players that just don't report mild symptoms, esp. as it could affect their future career. It's not wrong for Crosby to report his symptoms, nor for the team/doctors to decide to prevent him from practicing as a precaution. However, to say it's some "special situation" other than an injury is going a bit far IMO. It probably be handled differently in past eras, but whether that would be good or bad for Crosby's career I'm not sure. There were probably players playing at less than their full potential due to their brains being scrambled... but then they are now considered "lesser players" for playing through it, while Crosby is a "better player" for sitting out??

Czech Your Math 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 06:09 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.