HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Washington Capitals
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2/7/13 7PM Draft Lottery Riggers vs. Draft Lottery Losers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2013, 11:10 PM
  #576
troyerlaw
Life is party again
 
troyerlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 4,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberati0n View Post

Whatever, I obviously may be wrong about Oates, but pinning this mess on him is absolutely insane.
Why is it insane? Team's performance has been dramatically worse under him than under Hunter. In fairly short order, Hunter was able to instill discipline, keep games close and generally do away with the blowouts which had become increasingly frequent under BB. We weren't a powerhouse under DH, but we were in contention.

The frequent shuffling of lines, the extended use of Ovie with Crabb and Beagle, the recurrence of the total blowouts from latter BB days, the yanking of the goalie tonite at 2-1 ... I think a case can certainly be made that Oates seems lost and flailing. It's reminding me of John MacLean's shortlived stint as Devils coach. I think Oates is definitely part of the problem.


Last edited by troyerlaw: 02-07-2013 at 11:22 PM.
troyerlaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:10 PM
  #577
SimplySensational
Heard of Hough
 
SimplySensational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: VA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,883
vCash: 500
FFS, can a moderator change sonsofcain's name back.

SimplySensational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:12 PM
  #578
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
It's not a misrepresentation at all. You're asserting that he shouldn't be judged on not being able to get the players in line because of his inexperience and the bad habits of the roster. As much as I disliked him as a coach, remind me again how much experience Dale Hunter had?

I'm not judging him based on the fans dissatisfaction. I merely said it seemed their negative attitude towards him (which you're dismissing entirely because it's only based on the PP) seems to have been justified, based on this season.


How is it not the same thing at all? Oates was hired as the coach of a playoff team, and it's tanked. They were hired as coaches of bad teams, and elevated their performances.

You think those bad teams were well constructed and full of players with good habits?
It seems like we have a fundamentally different view of how ****ed up this team is. Hunter got them to brutally grind out games and win coin tosses by pulling back into a shell and just out-desperating teams. It was a band-aid. If you want to adopt that as a permanent system because you believe in it, then fine I guess. Hunter's approach masked how ****ed up the team was; it was probably necessary because of how ****ed the team was, how incapable of coherent play they were/are. It was an impressive job under the circumstances, but it doesn't mean Oates is failing right now.

To me, Hunter was a band-aid, but none of the fundamental problems that had existed before him were solved under him, so when the band-aid is peeled back and an attempt at a coherent approach is made, the team that lost all those games to get Boudreau fired is still right where it was.

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:16 PM
  #579
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplySensational View Post
FFS, can a moderator change sonsofcain's name back.
Can I get it changed to SimplySensati0nal instead please?

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:18 PM
  #580
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
 
NobodyBeatsTheWiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Burbs
Posts: 22,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberati0n View Post
It seems like we have a fundamentally different view of how ****ed up this team is. Hunter got them to brutally grind out games and win coin tosses by pulling back into a shell and just out-desperating teams. It was a band-aid. If you want to adopt that as a permanent system because you believe in it, then fine I guess. Hunter's approach masked how ****ed up the team was; it was probably necessary because of how ****ed the team was, how incapable of coherent play they were/are. It was an impressive job under the circumstances, but it doesn't mean Oates is failing right now.

To me, Hunter was a band-aid, but none of the fundamental problems that had existed before him were solved under him, so when the band-aid is peeled back and an attempt at a coherent approach is made, the team that lost all those games to get Boudreau fired is still right where it was.
2-8-1 means Oates is failing right now.

NobodyBeatsTheWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:20 PM
  #581
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
2-8-1 means Oates is failing right now.
Seriously though, I can't believe you only get one name-change per year. Ridiculous policy.

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:30 PM
  #582
caps4cup
Dynasty
 
caps4cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 4,891
vCash: 500
The problem isn't Oates, its the players. Oates didn't give up that weak ass 5 hole goal to Dupuis, or somehow give up a breakaway on a 2 on 2, or take stupid penalties. That's on the players.

When they actually play hard you can see its a very effective system. The only problem i have with it is that they need to keep the dumps away from the goalie. Way too many dump ins are landing on the opposing goalies stick.

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised to see them completely turn it around, as there have been extended glimpses of this being a really good team just about every single game, but I do think they should go out and trade for some offensive help (Setoguchi and Goligoski would be great).

caps4cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:04 AM
  #583
calicapsfan
Moderator
NFA
 
calicapsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berserkly
Country: United States
Posts: 10,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberati0n View Post
He's improved their puck possession by a ridiculous amount. There have been periods of the strong forechecking he wants. You can see the potential when the players actually execute his system for a period or two here and there. Yes, he needs to get them to execute more consistently, but I think it's clear their failure to do so is coming from themselves at this point (based on how much this group has crumbled in the past in similar ways).

It would be funny if Ribeiro demanded a trade.
Totally agree, except that last part. Not funny at all. ;-)

But what really chaps me about Ribeiro is that we spent 3 ****ing years clamoring for a 2C of his calibre and when McPhee finally gets one, he cuts loose our only scoring winger beside Ovie.

What's the thought process there? He can't really have thought 90 was a replacement 28.

calicapsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:12 AM
  #584
Brad Tolliver
Terror Goes Into
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Overtime
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Kirk Muller was 3-6-2 in his first 11 games.

Paul MacLean was 1-5-0 in his first 6 games.

The Caps PP is actually not doing badly at 20+%. The PK being barely over 70% is a bigger problem, but Oates doesn't coach that, right?

Brad Tolliver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:26 AM
  #585
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Their puck possession is a smokescreen. It mostly comes when rival teams aren't fighting back. Ottawa pretty much took a nap for half the game then boop, 3 goals.

Halpysback* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:30 AM
  #586
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halpysback View Post
Their puck possession is a smokescreen. It mostly comes when rival teams aren't fighting back. Ottawa pretty much took a nap for half the game then boop, 3 goals.
It goes to what Langway said about the lack of a second gear. They, and most importantly Ovechkin, finally showed one in the third period tonight (obviously too late to win this game). Their puck possession is a "smokescreen" because the players have no backbone and aren't executing, not because of the system (as discussed above).

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:36 AM
  #587
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberati0n View Post
It goes to what Langway said about the lack of a second gear. They, and most importantly Ovechkin, finally showed one in the third period tonight (obviously too late to win this game). Their puck possession is a "smokescreen" because the players have no backbone and aren't executing, not because of the system (as discussed above).
Being able to sustain your momentum/contain other team's momentum is really the pinnacle of coaching. Oates has shown absolutely zero ability to do so, backbone or not. If his players are pansies, he should realize that and adjust his coaching accordingly. Ditto if his players are *******, or grinders. That's what coaching is about, not try to teach your guys the most intricate system known to man.

Did our entire backbone evaporate from last season, when Hunter was robotically controlling momentum pretty much every game? I know Semin was a huge part of our backbone, but I didn't think we'd lose so much gut and grit just with him.

Halpysback* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:43 AM
  #588
Brad Tolliver
Terror Goes Into
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Overtime
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halpysback View Post
Being able to sustain your momentum/contain other team's momentum is really the pinnacle of coaching. Oates has shown absolutely zero ability to do so, backbone or not. If his players are pansies, he should realize that and adjust his coaching accordingly. Ditto if his players are *******, or grinders. That's what coaching is about, not try to teach your guys the most intricate system known to man.

Did our entire backbone evaporate from last season, when Hunter was robotically controlling momentum pretty much every game? I know Semin was a huge part of our backbone, but I didn't think we'd lose so much gut and grit just with him.
Hunter contained the other team's momentum by preventing the Caps from establishing any momentum. Oates is actually trying to establish momentum and this roster is not doing it like he wants.

Brad Tolliver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:48 AM
  #589
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Tolliver View Post
Hunter contained the other team's momentum by preventing the Caps from establishing any momentum. Oates is actually trying to establish momentum and this roster is not doing it like he wants.
Exactly. The team was a similar mess when he arrived, so he trapped really hard and tried to eliminate momentum altogether in the sense you're (Halpysback) talking about. He tried to make puck possession irrelevant, I guess. Like I said, it was a band-aid. It didn't address any of the problems that resulted in his hiring in the first place. It just created a way around them. If you wanted Hunter to stay, that's fine; whether such a system is sustainable long-term is a separate question.

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:57 AM
  #590
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Hunter's "band-aid" was really the first time they could legitimately go toe to toe with any team in the playoffs. For the first time ever we didn't have a team that was humiliated defensively on the way out. Moral victories, whatever, but given the circumstances very impressive. It was a system they could and should slowly and intelligently have built on. Building momentum is nice and sexy and fun until you realize half your defense is pylons and early goals against are extremely deflating. Why was this roster able to do it like Hunter wanted but unable to do it like Oates wants? Could it be... the coaching maybe? Perhaps one coach realized what he could get them to do well and one didn't?

What's the point? To win a cup or to play pretty?

Halpysback* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:04 AM
  #591
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halpysback View Post
Building momentum is nice and sexy and fun until you realize half your defense is pylons and early goals against are extremely deflating.
I guess you do raise a valid point. Since he's the general manager, Oates really is to blame for the personnel.
Quote:
Why was this roster able to do it like Hunter wanted but unable to do it like Oates wants? Could it be... the coaching maybe? Perhaps one coach realized what he could get them to do well and one didn't?
Yeah, because that's an indication Hunter's system is better. They executed Hunter's system better because Hunter's system was lowest-common-denominator hockey. Simplify everything as much as possible. Man-to-man coverage; chase your guy around instead of trying to determine the most efficient, coherent, team-based coverage. You think it implies something bad about Oates that the players aren't grasping his system as well as they grasped Hunter's. I think it implies something terrible about the players themselves (and by extension, the person who put them on the roster as a group) that they need the absolute simplest of "systems" to be able to execute what their coach wants.

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:20 AM
  #592
Brad Tolliver
Terror Goes Into
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Overtime
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
The thing about Cup winning teams is that they don't just go toe-to-toe with any team, they can flat out dominate many of them and win easily.

Brad Tolliver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:21 AM
  #593
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberati0n View Post
I guess you do raise a valid point. Since he's the general manager, Oates really is to blame for the personnel.
He is to blame for not figuring out how to use whatever personnel he has effectively, absolutely. I guess John MacLean didn't suck either since he didn't assemble all those Devils players.

Quote:
Yeah, because that's an indication Hunter's system is better. They executed Hunter's system better because Hunter's system was lowest-common-denominator hockey. Simplify everything as much as possible. Man-to-man coverage; chase your guy around instead of trying to determine the most efficient, coherent, team-based coverage.
You're kidding, right? That's how you put together a winning team. Put together a team trying to think their way through a game against a team that plays through one and the latter will crush it. Thinking slows you down. Thinking causes you to second-guess your reflexes and shank shots and not go 100% on the forecheck. If you played any sports you know the moment you start to lose is the moment you stop going with your instincts and start pondering things.

Higher IQ players don't think any more than lower IQ players. They can simply process more complex situations with the same ease as the Chimeras of the league can process dump and chase. Lidstrom wasn't solving differential equations every time he broke up a dump in. He wasn't thinking at all. Datsyuk doesn't think every time he steals the puck. You want to see a team deep in thought? Look at the Washington Capitals on the power play when they stand in one spot for 30 seconds at a time trying to think their way to that perfect play, rather than just playing hackey sack with the puck and having that inevitably open up the other team.

The human mind is the worst thing to ever happen to the human body

Quote:
You think it implies something bad about Oates that the players aren't grasping his system as well as they grasped Hunter's. I think it implies something terrible about the players themselves (and by extension, the person who put them on the roster as a group) that they need the absolute simplest of "systems" to be able to execute what their coach wants.
Putting together a super cerebral system and trying to impart it on not particularly high IQ players is going to lead to a massive failure rate. It is literally the worst thing you can do. McPhee is at fault but a good coach needs to realize what he's working with. Something tells me Oates' system wouldn't shine with higher IQ players either.

Halpysback* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:23 AM
  #594
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Tolliver View Post
The thing about Cup winning teams is that they don't just go toe-to-toe with any team, they can flat out dominate many of them and win easily.
That could have been the next step. Making the PP more dynamic, applying more pressure when you're ahead. Little expansions drilled in over time.

Another thing about cup winning teams is they have much better overall personnel than we do. Who knows what we look like if instead of Schultz-Wideman we have a pairing that gives up 3/4 as many goals.

Halpysback* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:29 AM
  #595
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halpysback View Post
That could have been the next step. Making the PP more dynamic, applying more pressure when you're ahead. Little expansions drilled in over time.
Sounds like a special ed class trying to work their way up to taking the SAT two years late with extra time.

(No offense txpd )


You seem to believe that learning can't cement thought-based decisions into habit. I think that's ridiculous and don't agree. Oates said himself the game did not come naturally to him. He used analysis to learn and create new habits. The game comes naturally to Mike Ribeiro; he has elite physical awareness. You think that's all that exists, but it's not.

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:34 AM
  #596
Brad Tolliver
Terror Goes Into
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Overtime
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halpysback View Post
He is to blame for not figuring out how to use whatever personnel he has effectively, absolutely. I guess John MacLean didn't suck either since he didn't assemble all those Devils players.



You're kidding, right? That's how you put together a winning team. Put together a team trying to think their way through a game against a team that plays through one and the latter will crush it. Thinking slows you down. Thinking causes you to second-guess your reflexes and shank shots and not go 100% on the forecheck. If you played any sports you know the moment you start to lose is the moment you stop going with your instincts and start pondering things.

Higher IQ players don't think any more than lower IQ players. They can simply process more complex situations with the same ease as the Chimeras of the league can process dump and chase. Lidstrom wasn't solving differential equations every time he broke up a dump in. He wasn't thinking at all. Datsyuk doesn't think every time he steals the puck. You want to see a team deep in thought? Look at the Washington Capitals on the power play when they stand in one spot for 30 seconds at a time trying to think their way to that perfect play, rather than just playing hackey sack with the puck and having that inevitably open up the other team.

The human mind is the worst thing to ever happen to the human body



Putting together a super cerebral system and trying to impart it on not particularly high IQ players is going to lead to a massive failure rate. It is literally the worst thing you can do. McPhee is at fault but a good coach needs to realize what he's working with. Something tells me Oates' system wouldn't shine with higher IQ players either.
You do realize there is this whole interview process where the GM can figure out whether a coaching staff fits the GM's personnel and vision? It's not like it's a blind date where Oates could have just waltzed in and pulled Myspace angles on GMGM.

Brad Tolliver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:45 AM
  #597
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Sounds like a special ed class trying to work their way up to taking the SAT two years late with extra time.
No, teaching that special ed class calculus while they need to learn how to play hockey is a way more fruitful approach, as we're seeing firsthand.

Quote:
You seem to believe that learning can't cement thought-based decisions into habit. I think that's ridiculous and don't agree. Oates said himself the game did not come naturally to him. He used analysis to learn and create new habits. The game comes naturally to Mike Ribeiro; he has elite physical awareness. You think that's all that exists, but it's not.
That's bull and fairly easy to recognize as such. You don't finish your career with over 1400 points at over a PPG without a **** ton coming naturally to you. Did he analyze things? Probably. But for him both the analysis and acting on the analysis came much easier then for your average player.

In the present day and age cementing thought based decisions into habit is all but doomed to fail. The Soviets did it well enough because their guys played as a five man unit for decades on end and practiced 11 months a year. It was more a circus act than hockey. The NHL nowadays simply does not compare. Your average NHL team does not have the time and the synergy between players to get them to do more than comes naturally to them. You can work on set plays and execution but those will only be successful if the players can do them without much mental commitment. Hunter, who made his career playing completely on instinct and got more out of it than his skill level would have allowed him otherwise, understood this as only few can. Detroit is the only real exception, and they were at their recent dominant time loaded with a multitude of high-IQ players who played together in the same system for a decade. Right now, the game is completely about whoever can do the most while thinking the least.

Halpysback* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:45 AM
  #598
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Tolliver View Post
You do realize there is this whole interview process where the GM can figure out whether a coaching staff fits the GM's personnel and vision? It's not like it's a blind date where Oates could have just waltzed in and pulled Myspace angles on GMGM.
You do realize we had George McPhee conducting this interview? The dude who presided over the league's most run and gun and most trappy teams back to back?

Halpysback* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 02:00 AM
  #599
Liberati0n*
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halpysback View Post
No, teaching that special ed class calculus while they need to learn how to play hockey is a way more fruitful approach, as we're seeing firsthand.
I think the special ed class shouldn't be sent to the mathletes tournament in the first place, and if it is sent, the calculus teacher who can't get them up to speed in a week shouldn't be fired for "failing."

Quote:
That's bull and fairly easy to recognize as such. You don't finish your career with over 1400 points at over a PPG without a **** ton coming naturally to you. Did he analyze things? Probably. But for him both the analysis and acting on the analysis came much easier then for your average player.
Obviously he has physical talent too. It's all there in the post-practice interview from a couple of days ago. I doubt he was lying in anticipation that I would use it to defend his coaching on hfboards later in the week.
Quote:
You do realize we had George McPhee conducting this interview? The dude who presided over the league's most run and gun and most trappy teams back to back?
That's exactly his point. It's not Oates' fault McPhee constructed an incoherent roster, and it's not Oates' fault McPhee, in your view, hired the wrong coach for that roster. Oates' system was laid out clearly for McPhee, and he apparently thought it sounded like a great fit. That's on him, not Oates.

Liberati0n* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 02:31 AM
  #600
Halpysback*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberati0n View Post
I think the special ed class shouldn't be sent to the mathletes tournament in the first place, and if it is sent, the calculus teacher who can't get them up to speed in a week shouldn't be fired for "failing."
That special ed class beat out one gifted and talented class and went neck and neck with another under Hunter's guidance. As good as we've ever done (arguably better if you wanna get into game 7 semantics) with zero preseason prep and just about as dysfunctional a roster as we ever had. Perhaps the PE teacher was on to something.

Quote:
Obviously he has physical talent too. It's all there in the post-practice interview from a couple of days ago. I doubt he was lying in anticipation that I would use it to defend his coaching on hfboards later in the week.
Lying or not, it's fairly obvious the game came naturally to him. He may have dissected it to get further ahead ("hmm, pass to Hull = $$$" and whatnot) but the ability to do that and capitalize on it is a natural skill. You can spend all day drawing diagrams for Ovechkin or Chimera and they'll only play worse because of it.

Quote:
That's exactly his point. It's not Oates' fault McPhee constructed an incoherent roster, and it's not Oates' fault McPhee, in your view, hired the wrong coach for that roster. Oates' system was laid out clearly for McPhee, and he apparently thought it sounded like a great fit. That's on him, not Oates.
Oates took the job. If he can't perform with this roster, which he had a good look at before taking the job, it simply does not matter how "good" a coach he is in theory.

Things that make me doubt his coaching

- trying to implement a complex offensive system with limited training camp. I'd have started out with the last thing they did, which was fairly successful. Man to man defensive coverage, emphasis on defense. Extra important since goalies are fragile. They should be able to pick up right where they left off since that's what they have been doing. As they get a few wins and some confidence, shift towards your more offensive system bit by bit. The more confident they are the more likely the transition is to go smoothly.

-Ovechkin with Beagle and Crabb after 3 games

-Crabb as a 3rd line center

-Stationary PP/PK

Hunter perfected defense and PK to cup level. We were able to play some aspects of hockey at cup level. With this ****ing roster. You better know what you're doing if you decide to throw that away and not build on.

Going to the pens boards after we beat the Bruins last year and watching them be jealous and in awe of Hunter and the caps' disciplined playoff style was as good as it ever got


Last edited by Halpysback*: 02-08-2013 at 02:37 AM.
Halpysback* 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 10:13 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.