HFBoards

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

Montreal Canadiens Drafting Hit Rate (under Trevor Timmins)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-02-2013, 03:46 PM
  #51
Habiton
Registered User
 
Habiton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I just double-checked, I didn't use the word "useless".

You obviously have a major problem with mere suggestions, never mind criticisms.

It's not ridiculous to point out that this can be done a lot better with a few hours of work.

Look man, you spent about 30 minutes looking up draft lists on hockeydb/wikipedia and then showed that Timmins is "above average": something we all already knew from having seen other people including ourselves do the exact same trick numerous times. Did you expect to be celebrated as a hero for your groundbreaking insight?
Obviously your misunderstanding me, where am I asking to be called a hero? I am making a point and you either agree with it or disagree with it. Arguing about how I didn't put enough effort into making it isn't useful, dont you see that?

I dont want to get into an argument about how we both suck individually and collectively, can we stay on topic here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I'll tell you what, if you actually have not seen that same post before, elsewhere, and you came up with the idea on your own, then kudos to you. But really, since that post has been written 100 times, and we don't learn anything new when somebody else writes the same post, it's valid to ask how it can be done better.

But if you have not seen it before, then great. I wrote a similar post in 2008 or so when I was just starting to read hockey message boards.
In the X amount of years I have been here I have never seen this done. Kudos to you for doing this but note that 2008 was 5 years ago. I don't believe I was posting on these boards at that time. The only reason I made this post was because I was tired of people saying that 2nds are worthless and Timmins is average. 2nds have a lot of value, the percentage of getting an NHL player is quite high and I just wanted to prove that. I didnt go into extreme detail because I didnt feel it was necessary this was enough to prove my point which I think I did more than adequately.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
It's an easy thing to do, just use where the player is selected as the rank. They come sorted, some players are selected 1st, some 2nd, and so on.

The harder part is evaluating players. You cannot sort the impact of players as well as you can sort their draft rank.
It seems easy but then I will get a clone of you saying you cant do that! The first overall pick holds significantly more value than the 5th, by the formula you were presenting I could trade someone my 3rd pick (70th overall) for their 3rd pick (80th overall) and that would be more valuable than trading up from 7th overall to 1st overall. Evaluating the players isnt difficult and even if there are errors by eluding to that your missing the point. The point of this thread is to say that your chances of drafting an NHL player under Trevor Timmins in the top two rounds is pretty high (~71%). Can it be +- 5%? Sure, why not but it doesn't change the fact that if we trade two seconds we are trading at least one NHL player and possibly a true impact player. If we trade them for a 3rd/4th liner thats a bad trade. Do you understand?

Habiton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 03:54 PM
  #52
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 10,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
The lack of depth hurt us as well so Timmins has to answer for that as well. The years of only focusing on BPA instead of projected needs is biting us in the ass.
and since you are not drafting the Best Player Available, you have to assume that drafting for need will increase the odd of that pick busting. hurting our lack of depth which you decry. its 4am and for all i know i might not be making any sense, but do you not realize this contradiction?

besides, always draft BPA.

MasterDecoy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 04:07 PM
  #53
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
and since you are not drafting the Best Player Available, you have to assume that drafting for need will increase the odd of that pick busting. hurting our lack of depth which you decry. its 4am and for all i know i might not be making any sense, but do you not realize this contradiction?

besides, always draft BPA.
But then BPA as in Best projection available and not Best player available.

I believe that you can draft for needs IF and only IF, players you are actually discussing have, in your own view, the same projection in its own position. Drafting by needs sucks ONLY if, with the exemple of a d-man need, that you have the choice between a surefire NHL'er 1st liner and the best d-man available at that rank that you might not even know the upside of the guy. This is where needs suck. But you have to believe that the best scouts know the difference. Or so they wouldn't have a job and would be discussing it in a hockey board...

I mean BPA is totally subjective. People say go with the talent first no matter the position. Fine. But will the talent translate? Will the guy use his talent to go along the boards or he hates to be hit? Okay then, you'll need to take the competition factor, the character as well, the speed most likely, the hockey sense for sure and so on....But then, have they hit their peak yet? You don't know so you look at their progression throughout their years and so on. And how they responded to an higher level of pressure like playoffs or tournaments and so on...So it always makes me laugh when I read "go for the BPA" as there are so many things in a BPA and one of those things might be needs. In the end, may Timmins draft the best projection available, based on everything to take into account. If it happens to fill a need, fine, that's one less player to acquire an give something great in return. If it doesn't fill a need hence we have too many of those types of players, fine again, we'll trade that asset to acquire a need. May Timmins do the best draft possible so we'd become a greater team in the short future. 'Cause the other teams in our conference are surely doing it as we speak....

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 04:38 PM
  #54
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
But then BPA as in Best projection available and not Best player available.

I believe that you can draft for needs IF and only IF, players you are actually discussing have, in your own view, the same projection in its own position. Drafting by needs sucks ONLY if, with the exemple of a d-man need, that you have the choice between a surefire NHL'er 1st liner and the best d-man available at that rank that you might not even know the upside of the guy. This is where needs suck. But you have to believe that the best scouts know the difference. Or so they wouldn't have a job and would be discussing it in a hockey board...

I mean BPA is totally subjective. People say go with the talent first no matter the position. Fine. But will the talent translate? Will the guy use his talent to go along the boards or he hates to be hit? Okay then, you'll need to take the competition factor, the character as well, the speed most likely, the hockey sense for sure and so on....But then, have they hit their peak yet? You don't know so you look at their progression throughout their years and so on. And how they responded to an higher level of pressure like playoffs or tournaments and so on...So it always makes me laugh when I read "go for the BPA" as there are so many things in a BPA and one of those things might be needs. In the end, may Timmins draft the best projection available, based on everything to take into account. If it happens to fill a need, fine, that's one less player to acquire an give something great in return. If it doesn't fill a need hence we have too many of those types of players, fine again, we'll trade that asset to acquire a need. May Timmins do the best draft possible so we'd become a greater team in the short future. 'Cause the other teams in our conference are surely doing it as we speak....
Well, drafting for need is just a lot riskier, depending on the draft. In a purely logical way of thinking, the further away you are drafted from #1 than the more likely you are to be a bust. So if you pick what many consider to be #25-30 pick in a top 10 slot just because he's the best center available at the time, as opposed to a Dman that actually is top 10, then don't be surprised if we hear people whine about how we missed out on that Dman and got nothing more than a 3rd line center.
Then again, sometimes the difference in both may be small enough to be well worth the risk.

Overall, Timmins has done a solid job with the position he drafted at. Not sure how anybody can argue otherwise really, it's not even debatable.

But the BPA is entirely subjective anyways. You and I may disagree on who's the BPA, same thing for scouts.
Personally I wouldn't go for a draft for need attitude unless you are seriously lacking in that department. It's been two years that I've said we need to draft a goalie, and we seriously should. But each round is different, and it doesn't mean that we should use our #1 pick for our need. I think in the first round, you have to go with BPA.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 04:58 PM
  #55
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky Habs Fan View Post
I know you don't like our scouting staff, but why all the hate? What are you expecting from a scouting staff?
I called him average which he is, just because most here wet their pants at the sound of anything involved with the habs I become a "hater".

I also criticised Gainey when he was being called "god" by the vast majority here. You can label me all you like but the truth is staring the team in the face with its lacklustre offensive talent and prospect depth. Either start to draft some skilled forwards or it is time to restructure the scouting department.

OneSharpMarble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 05:02 PM
  #56
Habiton
Registered User
 
Habiton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
I called him average which he is, just because most here wet their pants at the sound of anything involved with the habs I become a "hater".

I also criticised Gainey when he was being called "god" by the vast majority here. You can label me all you like but the truth is staring the team in the face with its lacklustre offensive talent and prospect depth. Either start to draft some skilled forwards or it is time to restructure the scouting department.
We already did.

2012 NHL Draft
Alex Galchenyuk
Sebastian Collberg
Tim Bozon
Brady Vail
Charles Hudon

Habiton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 05:16 PM
  #57
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habiton View Post
We already did.

2012 NHL Draft
Alex Galchenyuk
Sebastian Collberg
Tim Bozon
Brady Vail
Charles Hudon
Ya 9 years and top 3 pick and we finally got one. Wow superstar scouting there.

OneSharpMarble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 05:38 PM
  #58
Habiton
Registered User
 
Habiton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
Ya 9 years and top 3 pick and we finally got one. Wow superstar scouting there.
And you don't see how you have a least a little bit of hate towards Timmins?

Habiton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 05:48 PM
  #59
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But the BPA is entirely subjective anyways. You and I may disagree on who's the BPA, same thing for scouts. Personally I wouldn't go for a draft for need attitude unless you are seriously lacking in that department. It's been two years that I've said we need to draft a goalie, and we seriously should. But each round is different, and it doesn't mean that we should use our #1 pick for our need. I think in the first round, you have to go with BPA.
But my point is, let say you you have no real centermen in your prospect pool and at least 4-5 very good d-men prospects. It's your turn to talk and you have a choice between Nurse and Monahan. Who will you go for? And based your opinion on the fact that for half of your scouting crew, Nurse is the better athlete, better overall player and best talent...and the other half is leaning towards Monahan. As BPA is often not as clear cut as some would like to believe. Especially since it's not about best player RIGHT NOW, but best possibility of potential later. So in that example, I will believe that needs kick in.

How do we really determine who's BPA between Jones and MacKinnon. Is Mac BPA based on the Mem Cup? Wasn't Jones BPA based on the WJC? They both had great seasons...playing a different season, in a different environment....who's the BPA really? So when you are unable to really answer it...won't you go with needs then? Edmonton has all those forwards yet, can't defend properly...wouldn't their needs count? Why is it that the talk is already there that Nurse goes #7? Is Nurse REALLY a clear BPA? What if Nichuskin is still available? And so on.

Again, the needs talk is not about "Okay so we're the AVS and we NEED a goalie hence we will then go for Fucale as the #1 instead of Jones. I don,t think the needs talk was ever about that. But between 2 players that you could see yourself have no problem picking, I would believe that needs kicks in if there's a real need to fill up here. People say that you don't go for needs as your needs will most likely be different in 2-3-4 years...Well as we see, it takes time to change the culture. We've been talking for a big centerman for how many years again? And how about those great powerforwards? How about having some depth in goaltending? Or having more puck moving D-men, or even big punishing ones? Thing is, since it's not everybody who develop as you expect, it might takes more than 1 or 2 drafts to fix partially your needs. And if you can't fix it through UFA or trades, well the draft is still the way to go...and you still have to drafts quite a few guys to get a small minority to play.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 06:35 PM
  #60
onice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
I called him average which he is, just because most here wet their pants at the sound of anything involved with the habs I become a "hater".

I also criticised Gainey when he was being called "god" by the vast majority here. You can label me all you like but the truth is staring the team in the face with its lacklustre offensive talent and prospect depth. Either start to draft some skilled forwards or it is time to restructure the scouting department.
Name 5 teams that drafted better than the Habs between 2003 & let's say 2008/9. If you can't then that means Timmins and his staff are in the elite category.

onice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 06:57 PM
  #61
JPGoHabsGo
Registered User
 
JPGoHabsGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 540
vCash: 500
I was interested in the Nattinen pick when we made it, can anyone explain how he's a bust? I don't really follow the dogs but heard he was injured quite often. Wasn't his wrist usually giving him trouble?

JPGoHabsGo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 07:14 PM
  #62
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPGoHabsGo View Post
I was interested in the Nattinen pick when we made it, can anyone explain how he's a bust? I don't really follow the dogs but heard he was injured quite often. Wasn't his wrist usually giving him trouble?
Well we all love our big centermen picks...problem is that he got hurt a few times. But we might have overestimated his offensive ceiling.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 07:40 PM
  #63
JPGoHabsGo
Registered User
 
JPGoHabsGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Well we all love our big centermen picks...problem is that he got hurt a few times. But we might have overestimated his offensive ceiling.
Ahh I see, thanks!

Ill give him this year and hope he rebounds

JPGoHabsGo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 09:11 PM
  #64
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
Looks pretty average, every team in the league drafts regulars like those.
Evidently not.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 09:36 PM
  #65
SouthernHab
jak się masz
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 10,829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
and since you are not drafting the Best Player Available, you have to assume that drafting for need will increase the odd of that pick busting. hurting our lack of depth which you decry. its 4am and for all i know i might not be making any sense, but do you not realize this contradiction?

besides, always draft BPA.
Here is a problem with the BPA approach.

Lets look at Timmins' drafting record since 2003. Specifically, Left Wingers.

2003 - Jimmy Bonneau (8th round)
2004 - Greg Stewart (8th)
2007 - Max Pacioretty, (1st) Andrew Conboy (5th)
2010 - John Westin (7th)
2011 - Olivier Archambault (4th)
2012 - Tim Bozon (3rd), Charles Hudon (5th), Erik Nystrom (6th)

Other than Max Pacioretty (too early to tell about the 2012 class), it appears for ten years that Timmins looked at the LW position as an afterthought.

And it looks as if he realized that maybe this team needs some depth at LW and focused there in 2012.

An example of why BPA is a poor way to conduct a draft.

SouthernHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 10:45 PM
  #66
KadrüH
Registered User
 
KadrüH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,092
vCash: 500
Who is Nicolas Sandor? The 7th round pick in 2004 was Jon Gleed.

KadrüH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 12:43 AM
  #67
zzoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
I compare Timmins to a Baseball player who hits 1st (maybe like Suzuki).....high hitting %, but no home run and not a lot points produced.

zzoo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 12:48 AM
  #68
Physical HABuse
Registered User
 
Physical HABuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzoo View Post
I compare Timmins to a Baseball player who hits 1st (maybe like Suzuki).....high hitting %, but no home run and not a lot points produced.
You know....that's funny....and yet appropriate. I've often thought the same.

Physical HABuse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 01:07 AM
  #69
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 10,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
But then BPA as in Best projection available and not Best player available.

I believe that you can draft for needs IF and only IF, players you are actually discussing have, in your own view, the same projection in its own position. Drafting by needs sucks ONLY if, with the exemple of a d-man need, that you have the choice between a surefire NHL'er 1st liner and the best d-man available at that rank that you might not even know the upside of the guy. This is where needs suck. But you have to believe that the best scouts know the difference. Or so they wouldn't have a job and would be discussing it in a hockey board...

I mean BPA is totally subjective. People say go with the talent first no matter the position. Fine. But will the talent translate? Will the guy use his talent to go along the boards or he hates to be hit? Okay then, you'll need to take the competition factor, the character as well, the speed most likely, the hockey sense for sure and so on....But then, have they hit their peak yet? You don't know so you look at their progression throughout their years and so on. And how they responded to an higher level of pressure like playoffs or tournaments and so on...So it always makes me laugh when I read "go for the BPA" as there are so many things in a BPA and one of those things might be needs. In the end, may Timmins draft the best projection available, based on everything to take into account. If it happens to fill a need, fine, that's one less player to acquire an give something great in return. If it doesn't fill a need hence we have too many of those types of players, fine again, we'll trade that asset to acquire a need. May Timmins do the best draft possible so we'd become a greater team in the short future. 'Cause the other teams in our conference are surely doing it as we speak....
i don't know why

Quote:
So it always makes me laugh when I read "go for the BPA"
you assume that people can't make a complex, multi-layered evaluation of prospe-- oh wait, this is HF But yeah, of course! i guess it ultimately depends on how BPA means to you. to me at least, BPA is a combination of all those things you mentioned. Best Player Available is not a Draft Most Talented Player.

actually, based on his drafting record where he churns more NHL players than anybody else, you have to think that this is exactly what timmins is doing: draft players with great work ethics that have a very high chance of playing in the NHL rather than taking chance on somebody with a higher ceiling, but that is much more at risk of busting as a prospect. actually, i think he takes much more chances in the later rounds - which is how it should be anyways, and we have a great record to show for it.

Quote:
I believe that you can draft for needs IF and only IF, players you are actually discussing have, in your own view, the same projection in its own position.
absolutely.

MasterDecoy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 01:14 AM
  #70
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 10,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Here is a problem with the BPA approach.

Lets look at Timmins' drafting record since 2003. Specifically, Left Wingers.

2003 - Jimmy Bonneau (8th round)
2004 - Greg Stewart (8th)
2007 - Max Pacioretty, (1st) Andrew Conboy (5th)
2010 - John Westin (7th)
2011 - Olivier Archambault (4th)
2012 - Tim Bozon (3rd), Charles Hudon (5th), Erik Nystrom (6th)

Other than Max Pacioretty (too early to tell about the 2012 class), it appears for ten years that Timmins looked at the LW position as an afterthought.

And it looks as if he realized that maybe this team needs some depth at LW and focused there in 2012.

An example of why BPA is a poor way to conduct a draft.
no, that's looking at the end result first and applying your own conclusions. we were very, very fortunate that bozon and hudon fell to us. they were the best players available (no matter how you you want to describe it), by far. if im not wrong, these two were projected to be early second rounders.

MasterDecoy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 01:16 AM
  #71
McNuts
Registered User
 
McNuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
Looks pretty average, every team in the league drafts regulars like those.
He just literally posted data showing that our drafting is better than average, and you reply with "looks pretty average".

McNuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 01:18 AM
  #72
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 10,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzoo View Post
I compare Timmins to a Baseball player who hits 1st (maybe like Suzuki).....high hitting %, but no home run and not a lot points produced.
i mostly agree, but in your analogy, drafting NHL player does not produce points?


Last edited by MasterDecoy: 06-03-2013 at 01:56 AM.
MasterDecoy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 02:17 AM
  #73
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzoo View Post
I compare Timmins to a Baseball player who hits 1st (maybe like Suzuki).....high hitting %, but no home run and not a lot points produced.
Suzuki will be in Cooperstown one day, I like that analogy.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 03:25 AM
  #74
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzoo View Post
I compare Timmins to a Baseball player who hits 1st (maybe like Suzuki).....high hitting %, but no home run and not a lot points produced.
I'm not disagreeing with you but

PK was a home run.

Tinordi has a potential for being a home run.

Max Pac maybe.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 06:32 AM
  #75
Ezpz
No mad pls
 
Ezpz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPGoHabsGo View Post
I was interested in the Nattinen pick when we made it, can anyone explain how he's a bust? I don't really follow the dogs but heard he was injured quite often. Wasn't his wrist usually giving him trouble?
Every non-goalie Finnish prospect has busted since 2003 for every team. Finland produced a lot of NHLers for many years so the scouts falsely assumed SM-Liiga wasn't a garbage league. Unfortunately it is and the only players you can get from there are goalies. Even Mikael "greatest Finnish prospect since Saku Koivu" Granlund is having a very hard time adapting to the NHL.

Ezpz 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 02:44 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.