HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Notices

The Draft 2013

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-21-2013, 05:02 PM
  #301
SLarmer28
Registered User
 
SLarmer28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbridledid View Post
What would the compensation be if a team offered him 3.5 ? A first and third I believe ? Is that too steep a price for a good team to pay ?
Why would a team offer sheet Leddy when they are better restricted free agent defenseman on the market?

Bogosian
McDonagh
Pietrangelo
Shattenkirk

SLarmer28 is offline  
Old
06-21-2013, 09:41 PM
  #302
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Clendening and Leddy aren't similar players. Just because they're both PMDs, doesn't mean they're similar players.

Clendening tops out as a #4 Dman, that plays on the top PP unit. Leddy tops out as a #3 Dman, that plays on the 2nd PP unit.

In terms of capability, Leddy's going to be what Campbell was on this team and Clendening's going to be a poor mans Letang.

HockeySensible is offline  
Old
06-21-2013, 10:52 PM
  #303
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Clendening and Leddy aren't similar players. Just because they're both PMDs, doesn't mean they're similar players.

Clendening tops out as a #4 Dman, that plays on the top PP unit. Leddy tops out as a #3 Dman, that plays on the 2nd PP unit.

In terms of capability, Leddy's going to be what Campbell was on this team and Clendening's going to be a poor mans Letang.
Pretty much. But tbh let's wait until he manages to make the team before we call him a 'poor man's' anything.

In any event...the idea we deal leddy is bad...but the idea we deal him bc clendening will just 'fill in' for him next year is clown talk.

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
06-21-2013, 11:26 PM
  #304
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 8,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken View Post
Pretty much. But tbh let's wait until he manages to make the team before we call him a 'poor man's' anything.

In any event...the idea we deal leddy is bad...but the idea we deal him bc clendening will just 'fill in' for him next year is clown talk.
It's clown talk to replace a 3rd pairing defensmen with a rookie? Really? I think a lot of you guys have lost reality on what Nick Leddy is. He's not a superstar top pairing guy.

Sarava is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 12:42 AM
  #305
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarava View Post
It's clown talk to replace a 3rd pairing defensmen with a rookie? Really? I think a lot of you guys have lost reality on what Nick Leddy is. He's not a superstar top pairing guy.
I agree with you. However, I wouldn't trade him assuming that Clendening will replace him next year and fill his role in the future.

Just b/c Leddy isn't a "superstar top pairing guy" doesn't mean we should treat him as disposable and instantly replaceable by someone who has never played a game in the NHL (and is not nearly as similar to Leddy as people here pretend...and does not have Leddy's upside).

Why is Leddy currently so disposable? He's at the end of a ELC, has no leverage, and is unlikely to get any big offer sheet with the cap going down. For his age and level of experience he's performed well.

Clendening has proven nothing given his lack of NHL experience and there's nothing to suggest he projects to be an upgrade over Leddy.

so, yes...some of these posts are indeed "clown talk".

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 02:20 AM
  #306
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 8,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken View Post
I agree with you. However, I wouldn't trade him assuming that Clendening will replace him next year and fill his role in the future.

Just b/c Leddy isn't a "superstar top pairing guy" doesn't mean we should treat him as disposable and instantly replaceable by someone who has never played a game in the NHL (and is not nearly as similar to Leddy as people here pretend...and does not have Leddy's upside).

Why is Leddy currently so disposable? He's at the end of a ELC, has no leverage, and is unlikely to get any big offer sheet with the cap going down. For his age and level of experience he's performed well.

Clendening has proven nothing given his lack of NHL experience and there's nothing to suggest he projects to be an upgrade over Leddy.

so, yes...some of these posts are indeed "clown talk".
It's frustrating to me reading a post like this. Why is it clown talk? Why can't you just say that you disagree. I don't understand why there's a need to be insulting towards others just because they disagree with you?

As for the content of your post. The Hawks are going to have to move or let go of some nice players this summer. That doesn't make them disposable. It doesn't make Emery, Rozsival, Brookbank, Bickell, Stalberg or Leddy disposable. Chances are some of them won't be back. The salary cap is what it is.

Sarava is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 08:15 AM
  #307
unbridledid
Registered User
 
unbridledid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLarmer28 View Post
Why would a team offer sheet Leddy when they are better restricted free agent defenseman on the market?

Bogosian
McDonagh
Pietrangelo
Shattenkirk
Well there are 30 teams ...

unbridledid is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 08:32 AM
  #308
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,569
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
I might be alone in this but I see Leddy having way more potential than a solid second pairing guy. Top pairing all-star is where I see him topping out.

He's so much further along than Keith was at this point, and he's got better hockey sense.

IMO of course.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 09:47 AM
  #309
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 8,562
vCash: 500
Regarding an offersheet - it doesn't necessarily have to be the best player teams go after. That's why the Hawks need to be careful. He needs to be signed before other teams can poach him for virtually nothing. As of last year - you can sign a player for $3,364,391 per year and still only give up a 2nd round pick. A team like the Flyers is the primary team to fear. Since they signed Streit - they won't have capspace for guys like Shattenkirk or Pietrangelo....but probably could find room for a guy like Leddy at 3 mil or even 3.3 mil (if they go longterm). And they've already shown they will go the offersheet route.

When the season ends either on Monday or Wednesday, there will be either 4 or 6 days until the draft. Stan not only has to know by then what his plan for the summer is. The reality is he has to know already right now, and likely is executing it in the backgrounds already. He has no choice given the timeframe of everything. Or if he drags his feet again like he did with Hammer - he leaves himself open to getting screwed again.

The Hawks have already gushed over Clendening and his future and have reportedly had 'issues' with Leddy's agent in the past (notably in Suter contract talks). Who knows if the Suter part is true or not. But IMO it's naive to think that there's no chance Leddy gets moved. There's only so much capspace here and there's other good players that have roster spots on the line as well. The most known now of course is Bickell.

I keep seeing the 'Leddy is way better than Keith was at the same age' comments. Adam Clendening is as well. That Keith wasn't the speediest developer doesn't make all guys who start out ahead of his curve better, as good or even in the same stratosphere.

Sarava is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 09:54 AM
  #310
Atomic Punk
Mean Streets
 
Atomic Punk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Panama
Country: United States
Posts: 8,760
vCash: 50
I wonder if Leddy is a third pairing guy because Oduya is basically the same thing? If he was with 4 then maybe he is the same as Oduya? Just wondering here. I think there is a lot of projection of what Leddy could become. But you have to do the same projecting with his possible replacement. So it would be a difficult decision to move him. I like Leddy but I am not in love with him. He has progressed a little every year. I don't see him as some stud puck moving guy in the future as some on here think. If the return is right you move him. If he is offer sheeted you let him go.

Atomic Punk is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 09:59 AM
  #311
Sarava
Moderator
 
Sarava's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Naperville, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 8,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanny View Post
I wonder if Leddy is a third pairing guy because Oduya is basically the same thing? If he was with 4 then maybe he is the same as Oduya? Just wondering here. I think there is a lot of projection of what Leddy could become. But you have to do the same projecting with his possible replacement. So it would be a difficult decision to move him. I like Leddy but I am not in love with him. He has progressed a little every year. I don't see him as some stud puck moving guy in the future as some on here think. If the return is right you move him. If he is offer sheeted you let him go.
That's where you have to make the pre-emptive strike. The Hawks probably know already if Leddy is signable or not. If he is not likely to be re-signed - it's far better to trade him this coming week or on draft day, than letting him go via offsersheet. I'm sure you could get a 1st for him if you traded him, maybe even in the top half of the first round...but losing him via offsersheet you're likely looking at just a 2nd rounder. That would be terrible asset management to let him go that cheap.

Sarava is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 10:21 AM
  #312
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarava View Post
It's frustrating to me reading a post like this. Why is it clown talk? Why can't you just say that you disagree. I don't understand why there's a need to be insulting towards others just because they disagree with you?

As for the content of your post. The Hawks are going to have to move or let go of some nice players this summer. That doesn't make them disposable. It doesn't make Emery, Rozsival, Brookbank, Bickell, Stalberg or Leddy disposable. Chances are some of them won't be back. The salary cap is what it is.
I'm sorry if you found it offensive, because that wasn't my objective...but it's still how I feel.

It would be a very big mistake for them to let Leddy go for financial reasons at this point or because they think Clendening is just going to show up and fill in for him next year. I doubt Clendening is ready to play, he certainly wouldn't be at Leddy's level, and there's a decent chance that he's never as good as Leddy.

It would also be a mistake to let him go for financial reasons...the's on to his second contract and there's really only so much he can make. He'll be a 'bargain' insofar as a similar player who was an unrestricted free agent would get more. It would not be a good idea to move him because they want to re-sign a guy like Bickell.

I wouldn't be too worried about an offer sheet, because I doubt he'll get one big enough it's unmatchable for the Hawks with the salary cap coming down. And if he doesn't...then what? I can't imagine he'd just not show up for training camp next year and sit out like PK or Benn.

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 12:28 PM
  #313
SLarmer28
Registered User
 
SLarmer28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,644
vCash: 500
If the Chicago Blackhawks are hell bent on retaining Nick Leddy at all costs, Stan Bowman better have trades already in place for Dave Bolland and Michael Frolik to free up in excess of $5.5 million in salary cap space. In that case, the Chicago Blackhawks need to feel comfortable that right wingers Jeremy Morin and Ben Smith will be ready to go next season, as well as one of Brandon Pirri or Drew Leblanc at the center position. In either case, I don't envision the return of Viktor Stalberg nor Jamal Mayers for the 2013-14 NHL Season to the Chicago Blackhawks.

SLarmer28 is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 01:39 PM
  #314
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 101,647
vCash: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLarmer28 View Post
If the Chicago Blackhawks are hell bent on retaining Nick Leddy at all costs, Stan Bowman better have trades already in place for Dave Bolland and Michael Frolik to free up in excess of $5.5 million in salary cap space. In that case, the Chicago Blackhawks need to feel comfortable that right wingers Jeremy Morin and Ben Smith will be ready to go next season, as well as one of Brandon Pirri or Drew Leblanc at the center position. In either case, I don't envision the return of Viktor Stalberg nor Jamal Mayers for the 2013-14 NHL Season to the Chicago Blackhawks.
Why exactly?

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 02:28 PM
  #315
SLarmer28
Registered User
 
SLarmer28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Why exactly?
I have no idea how much the Chicago Blackhawks values defenseman Nick Leddy.

Personally, I currently believe Nick Leddy is not worth more the $2 million per season since he is a liability on the penalty killing unit and his playing time has been reduced from last season (2011-12 NHL Season). Nor I do believe a #5/#6 defenseman should be paid more than $2 million per season in the current salary cap environment.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...leddyni01.html

SLarmer28 is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 02:46 PM
  #316
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Right, but after next season, Leddy won't be a bottom-pairing Dman. When Clendening's ready, Oduya will be traded. That's likely going to happen after next season. At that point, Clendening will be on the third pair, and Leddy will be a full-time top-4 Dman.

The only way Nick Leddy breaks the bank is if the Hawks want to sign him to a 3-4 year deal. In that case, they'll have to pay for some potential. If they give him a 2-year deal, the can get him down for 2-2.4M. If it's 3-4 years, you're looking at 2.8-3.2M.

Term is the biggest question regarding Leddy's new contract. If the gap between a 2-year and 3-year deal isn't huge in terms of caphit, I'd expect Chicago to want to sign him for as long as possible - as longa as the dollars fit.

HockeySensible is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 02:46 PM
  #317
SLarmer28
Registered User
 
SLarmer28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Why exactly?
Also because I'm now on a Trade Dave Bolland Crusade.

SLarmer28 is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 02:58 PM
  #318
SLarmer28
Registered User
 
SLarmer28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Right, but after next season, Leddy won't be a bottom-pairing Dman. When Clendening's ready, Oduya will be traded. That's likely going to happen after next season. At that point, Clendening will be on the third pair, and Leddy will be a full-time top-4 Dman.
That's alot of assumptions on your part. Did you say the same about Dylan Olsen last year at this time?

As for Nick Leddy, he is not further along in his development than Subban or Del Zotto in which case both received two year bridge contracts. At least Marc Bergevin played hardball with Subban and at the end won. It's time Stan Bowman start playing hardball with restricted free agents and not give away the farm, as was the case with the ridiculous contract handed over to Michael Frolik, who based on his regular season goal scoring production is not worth over $1 million per season.

SLarmer28 is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 03:45 PM
  #319
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,529
vCash: 500
Leddy is a #4 on most teams in the league. You guys are underrating him league wide. The Hawks have incredible depth on D. Sure he hasn't played great this post-season but these are the best teams in the league we're going up against. He's still very young and is definitely improving on the defensive side of things to go along with being our 2nd best puck-moving defenseman. No way the Hawks should replace him with Clendening. That would be foolish in my opinion.

WarriorofTime is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 03:49 PM
  #320
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLarmer28 View Post
That's alot of assumptions on your part. Did you say the same about Dylan Olsen last year at this time?

As for Nick Leddy, he is not further along in his development than Subban or Del Zotto in which case both received two year bridge contracts. At least Marc Bergevin played hardball with Subban and at the end won. It's time Stan Bowman start playing hardball with restricted free agents and not give away the farm, as was the case with the ridiculous contract handed over to Michael Frolik, who based on his regular season goal scoring production is not worth over $1 million per season.
It's one assumption, and no I didn't. I think Olsen can play in the NHL. There were reports that he took a step back this year. To what extent, I'm not sure, but Olsen most certainly did not look bad in his 28 games last year - and he played some big minutes in a few of those games. He still needs to work on his skating.. but more than that, he needs to learn how to compensate for his lack of acceleration. Olsen isn't a slow skater once he gets going, but he doesn't have quick feet. More than improving that, Olsen needs to better understand how to control his gap in the NHL so he doesn't get burned regularly.

And based on Michael Frolik's resume at the time, he was most certainly worth what he got. That was the going rate for young, presumed 20-goal scorers at the time. Most posters believed his 11-goal season in 2010-11 was simply a down season, and that he'd bounce back the following year. Clearly that wasn't the case. Hindsight's 20/20.

Also, Bowman has a good track record of playing hardball with RFA's when he needs too. He went to arbitration with Campoli and Niemi. He likely would have signed Hammer for less had the offersheet not been thrown his way. He also signed Bickell for next to nothing and got Stalberg on a 800K per, 2-year contract. I'm not seeing too many instances where Bowman's thrown ridiculous amounts of money at an RFA hat didn't deserve it - you may be thinking of Dale Tallon, how routinely bet on potential and that's a huge reason why the Hawks got in the mess they were in after 2010. The RFA screw ups on Versteeg/Barker's deals, Bolland and Buff getting dramatically overpaid for 1 good year, etc.

HockeySensible is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 03:52 PM
  #321
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Right, but after next season, Leddy won't be a bottom-pairing Dman. When Clendening's ready, Oduya will be traded. That's likely going to happen after next season. At that point, Clendening will be on the third pair, and Leddy will be a full-time top-4 Dman.

The only way Nick Leddy breaks the bank is if the Hawks want to sign him to a 3-4 year deal. In that case, they'll have to pay for some potential. If they give him a 2-year deal, the can get him down for 2-2.4M. If it's 3-4 years, you're looking at 2.8-3.2M.

Term is the biggest question regarding Leddy's new contract. If the gap between a 2-year and 3-year deal isn't huge in terms of caphit, I'd expect Chicago to want to sign him for as long as possible - as longa as the dollars fit.
The problem with that it they're not getting any UFA years. If they're paying more for a longer term, they really need to go to at least 5.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SLarmer28 View Post
That's alot of assumptions on your part. Did you say the same about Dylan Olsen last year at this time?

As for Nick Leddy, he is not further along in his development than Subban or Del Zotto in which case both received two year bridge contracts. At least Marc Bergevin played hardball with Subban and at the end won. It's time Stan Bowman start playing hardball with restricted free agents and not give away the farm, as was the case with the ridiculous contract handed over to Michael Frolik, who based on his regular season goal scoring production is not worth over $1 million per season.
Not necessarily. PK won the Norris next year and another big year next year is going to drive his price up. The Habs probably would have been better off giving him more money on a longer contract at this point...b/c now it's just going to cost them more money...his starting point for that contract will be higher.


Last edited by UsernameWasTaken: 06-22-2013 at 03:59 PM.
UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 03:54 PM
  #322
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLarmer28 View Post
That's alot of assumptions on your part. Did you say the same about Dylan Olsen last year at this time?

As for Nick Leddy, he is not further along in his development than Subban or Del Zotto in which case both received two year bridge contracts. At least Marc Bergevin played hardball with Subban and at the end won. It's time Stan Bowman start playing hardball with restricted free agents and not give away the farm, as was the case with the ridiculous contract handed over to Michael Frolik, who based on his regular season goal scoring production is not worth over $1 million per season.
Montreal is going to have to pay Norris winner Subban close to 7.0+ a year from now. He's still an RFA true but he was significantly more leverage now. We'll see how great that bridge contract turns out for MTL.

WarriorofTime is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 04:23 PM
  #323
SLarmer28
Registered User
 
SLarmer28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
And based on Michael Frolik's resume at the time, he was most certainly worth what he got. That was the going rate for young, presumed 20-goal scorers at the time. Most posters believed his 11-goal season in 2010-11 was simply a down season, and that he'd bounce back the following year. Clearly that wasn't the case. Hindsight's 20/20.
These past two seasons, Frolik has scored 8 regular season goals in 108 regular season games. Prorated to an 82 game schedule, that equates to 6 goals per season. A fourth line winger who only averages 6 goals per season is barely worth the NHL minimum.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...frolimi01.html

As for Frolik's resume with the Florida Panthers, I could care less. In the 28 games with the Chicago Blackhawks during the 2010-11 NHL Season, Michael Frolik only scored 3 regular season goals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Also, Bowman has a good track record of playing hardball with RFA's when he needs too. He went to arbitration with Campoli and Niemi. He likely would have signed Hammer for less had the offersheet not been thrown his way. He also signed Bickell for next to nothing and got Stalberg on a 800K per, 2-year contract. I'm not seeing too many instances where Bowman's thrown ridiculous amounts of money at an RFA hat didn't deserve it - you may be thinking of Dale Tallon, how routinely bet on potential and that's a huge reason why the Hawks got in the mess they were in after 2010. The RFA screw ups on Versteeg/Barker's deals, Bolland and Buff getting dramatically overpaid for 1 good year, etc.
Dale Tallon was a complete idiot when it came to contracts, none worse than Cristobal Huet who wasn't even worth half of the 4 year, $22.5 million contract.

Though not as bad, Montador was not worth a 4 year, $11 million contract. Heck, Montador was not even worth $1.55 million per season with the Buffalo Sabres. Montador averaged less than 15 minutes of ice time per game last season with the Chicago Blackhawks.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...montast01.html


Last edited by SLarmer28: 06-22-2013 at 04:32 PM.
SLarmer28 is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 04:32 PM
  #324
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,529
vCash: 500
We're tied 2-2 in the SCF and everyone is complaining about contracts.

Every bad move Bowman made was low-risk with little or no longterm implications. Sorry we haven't railed off four straight Cups like some people seemed to expect.

WarriorofTime is offline  
Old
06-22-2013, 05:25 PM
  #325
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post

Every bad move Bowman made was low-risk with little or no longterm implications.
Absolutely. The team is more flexible than most, not sure why that isn't appreciated.

hockeydoug is offline  
Closed Thread

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 06:38 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.