HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

The Markov Conundrum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-04-2013, 04:04 PM
  #126
JayKing
Go Habs Go
 
JayKing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,294
vCash: 390
If Montreal is a borderline playoff team or lower at the deadline, we should trade him. If we're a well established 1 to 6 team in the Conference, we should keep him and try to make a run for the cup.

JayKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 04:18 PM
  #127
HiggsBozon
LOLZ, keep hating
 
HiggsBozon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmdubois585 View Post
If Montreal is a borderline playoff team or lower at the deadline, we should trade him. If we're a well established 1 to 6 team in the Conference, we should keep him and try to make a run for the cup.
So we can build our team on the likes of players as glorious as Erik Christensen, Angelo Esposito or Daulton Leveille? So we can rush Beaulieu in the NHL and ruin him once and for all?

Not interested into dealing Markov right now. Pittsburgh didn't deal Gonchar even after their horrendous 05-06 season, and it paid off big time, as he played a crucial role in the development of guys such as Letang, Goligoski, and even Malkin. Rebuilding a team is also about having key veterans your young players can learn from.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 04:43 PM
  #128
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
So we can build our team on the likes of players as glorious as Erik Christensen, Angelo Esposito or Daulton Leveille? So we can rush Beaulieu in the NHL and ruin him once and for all?

Not interested into dealing Markov right now. Pittsburgh didn't deal Gonchar even after their horrendous 05-06 season, and it paid off big time, as he played a crucial role in the development of guys such as Letang, Goligoski, and even Malkin. Rebuilding a team is also about having key veterans your young players can learn from.
You can run off thousands of drafted players who don't make it, you can also chime off thousands of draft players who did make it. This year is considered a deeper draft than last season, and we had by far what is considered one of the best drafts in the league. Does it pan out? time will tell, but the more chips you have, the better your odds.

Keeping Markov (while great for many reasons and i'm not opposed to it) there should be at least the consideration of the value in moving him. It's widely assumed that Markov isn't the same player and has lost the step. He is still a great player which would net us a very good return at the deadline. But that knee is always going to be a questionmark, and he is is past his prime. Markov is not in the teams long term future, he's a great piece to have, but you aren't building your team around him for the next 5+ years.

No one is talking about rushing players up like Beaulieu. But you look at the UFA pool, and while not always any flashy names, there are solid vets who are out there to mentor. A mentor doesn't have to be in a top 2 role, or even a top 4 role. I get the argument to keep Markov to help mentor our offensive guys, but if you are gonna turn down a trade that could net potentially good quality players in return then you are holding your team back.

People want a Detroit model where the team is a contender year in and year out? well that needs to start somewhere. (No, I am not saying trade every vet. But being closed on any possability of trading a player based purely on mentor value or that warm fuzzy feeling they give you as a fan is handicapping yourself.


Last edited by disturbedraven: 02-04-2013 at 05:34 PM.
disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 04:54 PM
  #129
HiggsBozon
LOLZ, keep hating
 
HiggsBozon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
You can run off thousands of drafted players who don't make it, you can also chime off thousands of draft players who did make it. This year is considered a deeper draft than last season, and we had by far what is considered one of the best drafts in the league. Does it pan out? time will tell, but the more chips you have, the better your odds.

Keeping Markov (while great for many reasons and i'm not opposed to it) there should be at least the consideration of the value in moving him. It's widely known that Markov isn't the same player and has lost the step. He is still a great player which would net us a very good return at the deadline. But that knee is always going to be a questionmark, and he is is past his prime. Markov is not in the teams long term future, he's a great piece to have, but you aren't building your team around him for the next 5+ years.

No one is talking about rushing players up like Beaulieu. But you look at the UFA pool, and while not always any flashy names, there are solid vets who are out there to mentor. A mentor doesn't have to be in a top 2 role, or even a top 4 role. I get the argument to keep Markov to help mentor our offensive guys, but if you are gonna turn down a trade that could net potentially good quality players in return then you are holding your team back.

People want a Detroit model where the team is a contender year in and year out? well that needs to start somewhere. (No, I am not saying trade every vet. But being closed on any possability of trading a player based purely on mentor value or that warm fuzzy feeling they give you as a fan is handicapping yourself.
Name me a buyer/seller deal that actually has paid off great dividends for the selling team, to the point they at least replaced the player they gave up with what they received? I can guarantee, especially with his injury history, that the return wouldn't be anywhere close to the value Markov has for this team.

You wanna sell? Great. At some point, it can become an option. But let's do it with our brain, not systematically.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 04:59 PM
  #130
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
Name me a buyer/seller deal that actually has paid off great dividends for the selling tea.
Craig Rivet for Josh Gorges and Max Pacioretty says hello

disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:06 PM
  #131
Beendair Donedat
Registered User
 
Beendair Donedat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,661
vCash: 500
Jarome Iginla?

Beendair Donedat is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:12 PM
  #132
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,688
vCash: 500
Can we sort of wait to see how this season goes before starting trade talks?

This is as embarrassing as the TANK thread.

SouthernHab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:17 PM
  #133
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
This isn't a tank or clean house discussion. This is a logical discussion, and a discussion only

disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:18 PM
  #134
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
Keeping Markov (while great for many reasons and i'm not opposed to it) there should be at least the consideration of the value in moving him. It's widely known that Markov isn't the same player and has lost the step. He is still a great player which would net us a very good return at the deadline. But that knee is always going to be a questionmark, and he is is past his prime. Markov is not in the teams long term future, he's a great piece to have, but you aren't building your team around him for the next 5+ years.
I think you mean widely assumed

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:33 PM
  #135
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
I think you mean widely assumed
Yeah, that's more like it. One day I will somehow learn to master english..... not likely

disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:39 PM
  #136
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
This isn't a tank or clean house discussion. This is a logical discussion, and a discussion only
It's pointless.

I think starting a discussion on how to marry a supermodel would be more beneficial...

SouthernHab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:42 PM
  #137
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
It's pointless.
Then why bother posting or reading the thread? Ignore it.
I believe the subject has legit merit, which is why I created this topic.

disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:51 PM
  #138
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
Yeah, that's more like it. One day I will somehow learn to master english..... not likely
And you're not worried that you're assumption is based on hardly any facts. If the doctors say he will make a full recovery and not have a greater risk of re-injury than anyone else why would his knee always be a question mark now that he's back. Is Malkin's knee a question mark?

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 05:55 PM
  #139
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,405
vCash: 500
I wouldn't have picked "Conundrum" for part of the cycle. Maybe "ascendancy", but it's a return to ascendancy really... "resurrection"? If we could borrow "Supremacy" from the other cycle, that'd be ok. And end it (as many years as possible from now) with another borrowed "Legacy". So make the cycle...
The Markov Resurrection (2013)
The Markov Ascendancy (2014 - back to Norris/elite consideration, league-wide)
The Markov Supremacy (Norrises and Cups)
The Markov Legacy (#79 to the rafters)
/fin
(non conundrums involved)

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 06:00 PM
  #140
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
And you're not worried that you're assumption is based on hardly any facts. If the doctors say he will make a full recovery and not have a greater risk of re-injury than anyone else why would his knee always be a question mark now that he's back. Is Malkin's knee a question mark?
They say his knee is fine, and I am fine with that answer. History has shown over the past 2 seasons that he has had problems with it. While every player is susceptible to having a knee injury, players who have had them previously are more at risk than those who have not had them. The same has been argued with concussions, so because Crosby has had concussion problems he is more likely than say Tyler Kennedy to receiving one.

Doctors say to players all the time for most injuries that they will make a full recovery. While health wise they can, they are hardly ever the same after a serious or multiple serious injuries. More often than not they are not as dominant or a "step behind" who they used to be, even after rehab and getting back in the swing of things.

Markov brings a lot to our team, and we are lucky to have him. He's always been an continues to be an amazing player. He deserves all the props he can get for working through the nightmare of the past 2 seasons, and still being one of the best defenceman in the league.

disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 06:01 PM
  #141
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
Craig Rivet for Josh Gorges and Max Pacioretty says hello
Neither Craig Rivet or Max Pacioretty has ever had close to the impact Markov has on the Habs.

Your example is bad, just as bad as the premise of this thread.

Ownership saw what happened last season when the team tanks, the stands aren't full. Ownership just bought this team, they have financial obligations, and quite probably, have the same directive given to Bergevin than Gainey had when he came in. Win as soon as possible, and whatever you have to do to make it happen, make sure the product is good enough so that the stands are full.

With this logic in mind, you can be sure that selling Markov won't happen unless the Habs tank hard which is unlikely if he's in the lineup.

That's the actual conundrum. If Markov is healthy, they need him so they can win and sell tickets and in all likelyhood it's what happens, but if he's out of the lineup because of injury, likelyhood is they tank and then they could trade him away but can't because he's injured.


Last edited by Ozymandias: 02-04-2013 at 06:08 PM.
Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 06:06 PM
  #142
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Neither Craig Rivet or Max Pacioretty has ever had close to the impact Markov has on the Habs.

Your example is bad, just as bad as the premise of this thread.
I was asked to give an example of a trade where the seller received equal or greater return for what they gave away. That example proved said point. Gorges and Pacioretty were far better value than a Rivet. So if you want to bash my example then why don't you read what the example was about first before chiming in. The fact you didn't read what the example was about makes your opinion of the premise of this thread flawed.

If you want to argue that Markov brings more to the team than Pacioretty or Rivet well I am sorry but I am not going to argue that point because Defense means a lot more to a team than forwards, especially one of Markov's caliber. The only way to get a Markov unless you are a buyer is through the draft. You have ZERO chance at getting one through the draft without picks. The more picks, the better your odds.


Last edited by disturbedraven: 02-04-2013 at 06:16 PM.
disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 06:07 PM
  #143
AntonCH
Registered User
 
AntonCH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,683
vCash: 500
To the OP - there is no conundrum
It amazes me how "assets" are valued greater than actual players

Markov is still great
if you want to even consider dealing him it will be next year, even then i would look to extending him as he can help the new young guys lining up to join our D corps. Can you imagine the ease of transition a Tinordi would have playing next to Markov?
Its widely accepted that Dmen take longer to come into their own than their forward counterparts. Anything wrong with trying to help them ease into the process?
Remember how good Markov helped Komisarek look?
Or the role Hamrlik played?
Why can't Markov transition into the new Hamrlik?

This board amazes me at times

AntonCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 06:26 PM
  #144
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
No offense Lafleur's Guy, your intentions are good and I get where you are coming from, but you'd make a bad GM.
None taken.

That being said... I don't see how I could've done any worse than what we've had. I sure as **** wouldn't have let Koivu and co. go for zero and I wouldn't have dealt for Gomez. Feel free to look up my history on those moves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
The first objection to this proposal is that trading Markov may not bring the Habs any closer to a championship. The second is that this is the suggestion of an armchair GM who reads blogs and web sites. Fans who attend games at the Centre Bell want to see the Habs win, not dream of some fantasy Cup win years hence.
The fans are often wrong... go look at their three star selections. Then again... some of us on the forum are often wrong too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
Lafleurs guy, I've been reading you for quite some time as a lurker and I get the main idea behind your philosophy. That being said, I think people are generally overrating the return big time for players being sold. Just look at what a guy like Marian Hossa got Atlanta. There are many other examples out there.

The best hockey deals to be made out there are just that, hockey deals. Neal-Goligoski and Stewart/Shattenkirk-Johnson kind of deals. The Carter and Richards trades also are good examples. When you give the best player in a deal, more often than not, you end up losing it. Giving up Markov at this point of his career when he has expressed the will to spend his whole career in MTL and when his value ain't even at a peak would not do Montreal any good. Especially since no other offensive d-men are anywhere close to breaking in the NHL in the organisation.
You may be right. And bottom line is if we didn't get something great for Markov, just don't make the trade.

And don't worry, it's never going to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
This is thehfboards, 90+% of the people here would make bad GM's.
While I will never say I would make a good one myself, in my opinion being able to look at situations rationale and being willing to consider ALL possibilities is a key requirement for any gm to be "good". Bad GM's are the ones who shut the door on any ideas through knee jerk reactions or without fully considering all aspects. That's my philosophy. Whether you agree with Lafleur's Guy's points or not, he at least has that openness to consider the possibility of a move (even if he doesn't go through with it). To me that makes him a better GM than 90% of people here.
Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
as per usual, you've completely missed the point.

And stop putting words into my mouth. I never said neither of those things.
Yeah right, you never say anything about not trading these guys... You just come up with crap like this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Come on, Draft Pick and Cap Space are the two best players you can have.

They sell tickets and keep both your fans (especially season ticket holders and corporate suites) and your stockholders happy, very happy, because they know, there's always a bright future ahead, always ahead.
So... yeah, you didn't say "don't trade player x" you just come up with snarky crap like this whenever somebody suggests it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Few people seem to understand that hockey in Montreal is a big business.

They think the Habs have the same freedom and luxuries to tank and sell out their vets as teams who are financially strapped. It's unrealistic. It can only happen (like our 15th place last season) when many specific things happen, and those things do not happen by design.

Little kiddies on this board still live by the illusion that the bottom line for Habs ownership is winning the cup. The bottom line is the same as any big business.
Please go on. We all yearn to hear more. Please tell us again how the Habs can't rebuild because the league would go broke if they missed the playoffs and how it's okay for the Leafs to do it for over a decade...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
It's pointless.

I think starting a discussion on how to marry a supermodel would be more beneficial...
Why come in here then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Neither Craig Rivet or Max Pacioretty has ever had close to the impact Markov has on the Habs.
Are you serious? Gorges and Pac have been with the league a couple of years man. Of course they haven't had the same impact. Rivet wasn't as important as Markov but its still an example of weakening yourself in the short term for long term gains.

And if we got a return like this for Markov now we'd be crazy not to do it. Markov is good for a couple of years and is an injury risk. If neither one of these guys ever becomes as good as Markov is beside the point. You're getting younger players who will build and grow with your team for years maybe decades. They don't have to be as good for it to be a good trade because by the time they hit their prime Markov is probably an old man or out of the league.

How do you not understand this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Your example is bad, just as bad as the premise of this thread.
Its a great example. You're telling me that you wouldn't deal a 34 year old Markov for Pac and Gorges? Give your head a shake. Nevermind the fact that the poster was talking about an actual deal where we give up Rivet (not Markov) to make it an absolute slam dunk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonCH View Post
To the OP - there is no conundrum
It amazes me how "assets" are valued greater than actual players
By assets do you mean prospects? Do you mean picks? Sometimes it actually is worth more than the player you've got man. Nothing wrong with keeping an open mind.

Nobody is suggesting we just show him the door and ditch him. But if the right offer came along and the circumstances are right, sure.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 02-04-2013 at 09:02 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 06:40 PM
  #145
disturbedraven
Lets rock
 
disturbedraven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Peterborough
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
if we didn't get something great for Markov, just don't make the trade
This is the point that the people opposed to considering moving Markov in this thread are continually missing. Thank you for pointing this out yet again, maybe people will understand this now that it's bolded and underlined.

disturbedraven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 06:57 PM
  #146
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
They say his knee is fine, and I am fine with that answer. History has shown over the past 2 seasons that he has had problems with it. While every player is susceptible to having a knee injury, players who have had them previously are more at risk than those who have not had them. The same has been argued with concussions, so because Crosby has had concussion problems he is more likely than say Tyler Kennedy to receiving one.
Here's an article from just before the start of last season about Markov and ACL tears in general.
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/daily-hab...mpany-1.692174


Some highlights
Quote:
Dr. Brian Cole, the team physician for the Chicago Bulls, estimates the probability of a reconstructed ACL tearing again at between 2.5 and 5 per cent, so the case history is not massive, and Markov's luck was clearly horrendous. In fact, Cole says the second tear is often due to "another random event" and not a failure of the initial surgery.
Quote:
Wisniewski first tore the ACL in his right knee playing for the U.S. in the U-18 world championships in 2002, tore it again in March of 2007, and then again five months later.
But he has not suffered a knee injury since.
Concussions are a completely different story and not at all comparable

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 07:02 PM
  #147
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Here's an article from just before the start of last season about Markov and ACL tears in general.
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/daily-hab...mpany-1.692174

Some highlights

Concussions are a completely different story and not at all comparable
I wouldn't want either one but concussions are definitely worse.

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 07:14 PM
  #148
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmdubois585 View Post
If Montreal is a borderline playoff team or lower at the deadline, we should trade him. If we're a well established 1 to 6 team in the Conference, we should keep him and try to make a run for the cup.
Trading Markov at the deadline would ruin the Habs' chances in the playoffs as well as next season and it wouldn't bring in enough to make them strong contenders next season either. I'd hate to contemplate the Habs D without him. Neither Tinordi nor Beaulieu could fill his shoes right away (if ever), nor would the compensation the Habs received in a trade,

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 07:25 PM
  #149
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
This is the point that the people opposed to considering moving Markov in this thread are continually missing. Thank you for pointing this out yet again, maybe people will understand this now that it's bolded and underlined.
You can't blame those people. You constantly hear moronic trade proposals here, to the point some even said they'd move PK for anything (just because they considered himself despite not knowing a thing about him or the negotiations).
So, really, can't blame some posters here..

However, I would also argue about what ''great'' means. Personally, I don't think we would ever get proper value in return.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2013, 09:36 PM
  #150
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbedraven View Post
Craig Rivet for Josh Gorges and Max Pacioretty says hello
Flukey combination of circumstances that in hindsight worked out very well. San Josť was DESPERATE for a RH defenceman and preferred Rivet over Souray, just to show you their state of mind.

Rivet was NOT in the Habs plans, he was already a healthy scratch twice.

Rivet's best was NEVER as good as Markov's average days.

Rivet was gong to be a UFA in a few weeks, and the team was not going to re-sign him.

Markov has almost two years left on his contract and will likely re-sign again.

Now, on top of that, San Jose had no idea Gorges would turn out as he did, say hi to Aaron Palushaj. And of course Max Pacioretty turned out to be WAY better than the 22nd player of his draft year. No guarantee of that always happening, not be a long-shot.

BaseballCoach 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 06:54 PM.

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.