HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

How Improved Are The Oilers.

View Poll Results: How improved are we?
Enough to make the playoffs 57 16.62%
Enough to make us compete for the final spot 184 53.64%
Only Enough to move up a spot or two 80 23.32%
We did not improve 22 6.41%
Voters: 343. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-15-2013, 10:10 AM
  #51
Sheeshta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CupofOil View Post
Again, i disagree....

Perron > Paajarvi
Horcoff = Gordon IMO

It seems that you're implying that the difference between Horcoff and Gordon is greater than the difference between Perron and Paajarvi. I couldn't disagree more but I guess we'll just have to see how it plays out.

Also, i never said that i was happy with the bottom 6 and in particular those 4th line/AHL tweeners, i think it's atrocious beyond Gordon, perhaps Jones and i guess Hemsky if one considers him a legit 3rd liner but it was also atrocious last season too so i don't think it necessarily got worse.
I've said it twice: I think the difference between Horcoff and Gordon (net loss) and between Perron and Paajarvi (net improvement) is about the same. I think the bottom six will be as bad this year as it was last year. If RNH didn't have surgery, I'd say the forward corps would be no worse or better this year than last.

However, he did have surgery, he will likely be messed up/not in the line up for October. We will be playing, most likely, nine out of our first 14 games on the road with a centre depth of Gagner, Arcobello, Gordon and Lander. By December they're going to be in a hole they couldn't dig themselves out of with a back hoe.

All of that said, while I never think replacing one rookie with another rookie makes your team all that much better, Eakins will have a really really hard time being worse than Krueger was, so who knows. There almost has to be some improvement there.

Sheeshta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 10:24 AM
  #52
CupofOil
Registered User
 
CupofOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rock Bottom
Country: United States
Posts: 14,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheeshta View Post
I've said it twice: I think the difference between Horcoff and Gordon (net loss) and between Perron and Paajarvi (net improvement) is about the same. I think the bottom six will be as bad this year as it was last year. If RNH didn't have surgery, I'd say the forward corps would be no worse or better this year than last.

However, he did have surgery, he will likely be messed up/not in the line up for October. We will be playing, most likely, nine out of our first 14 games on the road with a centre depth of Gagner, Arcobello, Gordon and Lander. By December they're going to be in a hole they couldn't dig themselves out of with a back hoe.

All of that said, while I never think replacing one rookie with another rookie makes your team all that much better, Eakins will have a really really hard time being worse than Krueger was, so who knows. There almost has to be some improvement there.

If Horcoff was here, Gordon wouldn't be. Gordon was brought in due to the cap space freed up by the Horcoff trade.
You seem to think that losing Horcoff significantly hurt the Oilers when in reality, it would have been a lateral move to keep him.

Also, can you explain why replacing Horcoff with Gordon is such a big net loss? I fail to see how it is. There really isn't that big of a difference offensively as of now. The reason why Horcoff's numbers over the last few seasons have been better than Gordon's is because he played significantly more PP time. Otherwise, their 5 on 5 production is fairly equal with Horcoff having played with much better offensive players. Gordon is also significantly better on faceoffs and better defensively plus the fact that he's in his prime while Horcoff is declining.
Now that i think about it, i think i was being generous to Horcoff by saying that they are equal.

CupofOil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 10:34 AM
  #53
Sheeshta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CupofOil View Post
If Horcoff was here, Gordon wouldn't be. Gordon was brought in due to the cap space freed up by the Horcoff trade.
You seem to think that losing Horcoff significantly hurt the Oilers when in reality, it would have been a lateral move to keep him.

Also, can you explain why replacing Horcoff with Gordon is such a big net loss? I fail to see how it is. There really isn't that big of a difference offensively as of now. The reason why Horcoff's numbers over the last few seasons have been better than Gordon's is because he played significantly more PP time. Otherwise, their 5 on 5 production is fairly equal with Horcoff having played with much better offensive players. Gordon is also significantly better on faceoffs and better defensively plus the fact that he's in his prime while Horcoff is declining.
Now that i think about it, i think i was being generous to Horcoff by saying that they are equal.
I don't think it's a big net loss, I think it's likely a small to medium sized one - as much of a loss as Perron over Paajarvi is a gain.

Horcoff had a bad season last year relative to his career, Gordon had a good one. Their 2013 numbers relative to their career ones are probably outliers for both of them and I think next season (taken in isolation, which is what we're talking about here) Horcoff ends up being a better player than Gordon.

Would I, were I MacTavish, trade Horcoff and sign Gordon? Absolutely. I just don't think that it improves the team next year. The year after that and the year after that, when Gordon's 31 and Horcoff's 37? That's likely when the improvement comes.

This is a hair-splitting argument, really. I like Horc more than Gordon and think that last year was an anomaly rather than a trend. It's perfectly reasonable to think it's a trend rather than an anomaly, in which case you're right.

Sheeshta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 10:36 AM
  #54
Petro Points
Registered User
 
Petro Points's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OCTA8ON View Post
1. I guarantee you that Perron will have better hands than anyone else on the Oiler's roster, including Hemsky.

2. Perron has been on a 55-60ish points per season rate in a Hitchcock system. Imagine him in the oiler's top 6. I wouldn't be surprised if he hit 70. You are so underrating him, its not even funny.
1. depends on your definition of 'hands'. Yakupov and Eberle IMO are a lot better than Perron when it comes to sniping.. Hemsky of 5 yrs ago was sick when it came to undressing Dmen and goalies. Him and RNH should still be an upgrade over Perron when it comes to playmaking.

Perron from the clips ive seen and from STL fans' comments sounds like Hall lite.. a little selfish who tries to do it all himself using his skill, speed and hard forecheck.

Edit: Horcoff vs Gordon ... put me in the Gordon>Horc camp .. Gordon has a defined role.. Horcoff's ice time will be put to better use especially on PP.

Petro Points is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 10:41 AM
  #55
CupofOil
Registered User
 
CupofOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rock Bottom
Country: United States
Posts: 14,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheeshta View Post
I don't think it's a big net loss, I think it's likely a small to medium sized one - as much of a loss as Perron over Paajarvi is a gain.

Horcoff had a bad season last year relative to his career, Gordon had a good one. Their 2013 numbers relative to their career ones are probably outliers for both of them and I think next season (taken in isolation, which is what we're talking about here) Horcoff ends up being a better player than Gordon.

Would I, were I MacTavish, trade Horcoff and sign Gordon? Absolutely. I just don't think that it improves the team next year. The year after that and the year after that, when Gordon's 31 and Horcoff's 37? That's likely when the improvement comes.

This is a hair-splitting argument, really. I like Horc more than Gordon and think that last year was an anomaly rather than a trend. It's perfectly reasonable to think it's a trend rather than an anomaly, in which case you're right.
Horcoff has had 2 bad seasons relative to previous seasons because he's a declining player. Gordon had better numbers because he's a player entering his prime.
It seems like we agree to disagree but i just want to know why you think Horcoff is better. In what facets of the game? If you put Gordon on a line with high end offensive players which Horcoff had the luxury of at times the last few seasons and give Gordon oodles of PP time with elite offensive talents, i'm pretty sure the offensive numbers would have been close if not in favor of Gordon.
I think it's pretty obvious that Gordon is better defensively and on faceoffs so how is Horcoff better currently?
Who knows what will happen next season and beyond, i'm just talking about the last couple of seasons.

CupofOil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 10:47 AM
  #56
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,189
vCash: 351
My greatest concern is in the center ice area. After Gagner things get a bit slim and RNH will miss between 2 to 8 weeks to start the season.

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 10:48 AM
  #57
nofool6110
Best @ tanking ainec
 
nofool6110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,397
vCash: 500
Forwards
This year top 6 > Last year top 6
This year bottom 6 => last year bottom 6
Centre depth this year =< centre depth last year
Core health this year =< core health last year

Defence
Top 4 this year >> Top 4 last year
Health this year >= health this year
Depth this year >> depth last year

Goaltending
Dubnyk this year => Dubnyk Last year
LaBaraBara > Khabibulin (imo)

Coaching
Eakins >=< Krueger

Enough to compete for the last playoff spot, wher'er it may be.

nofool6110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 10:54 AM
  #58
488fitter
Registered User
 
488fitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,276
vCash: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozwell View Post
My greatest concern is in the center ice area. After Gagner things get a bit slim and RNH will miss between 2 to 8 weeks to start the season.
Did I miss something? Thought it was 0 to 4 weeks.

488fitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 11:20 AM
  #59
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,650
vCash: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlapshotSuperstar View Post
T
Fedun is also still a wildcard, lets all not forget that he made the team right before he broke his leg, and its as good as it was back then.. and on top of that he did develop quite a bit last year..
I just don't get this. If he almost made the team one year and developed the next, then how come he couldn't make this team and it's horrid defense?

joestevens29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 11:31 AM
  #60
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,189
vCash: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by OilCountry84 View Post
Did I miss something? Thought it was 0 to 4 weeks.
his project date of return was given as November first shortly after the operation. Shoulder injuries can not be rushed back and that is why he got the second one. Players with same sort of surgery did not come back till November/December in previous years. RNH had the operation in late april or early may in Cleveland (the same guy who worked on Hall for a similar injury). The recovery time was given as 6 to 7 months. This is his second shoulder injury and doctors will take extra precaution before signing off on him.

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 11:32 AM
  #61
Yak City
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
I just don't get this. If he almost made the team one year and developed the next, then how come he couldn't make this team and it's horrid defense?
Because even though his total level of development was higher at the end of last season than it had been at the start of 2011-12, he had to start from a significant setback recovering from his broken femur.

Not to mention that while our defence was hardly good in 2012-13, it was still leaps and bounds ahead of 2011-12 where Cam Barker actually received semi-regular playing time.

Yak City is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 11:34 AM
  #62
Aerchon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheeshta View Post
I've said it twice: I think the difference between Horcoff and Gordon (net loss) and between Perron and Paajarvi (net improvement) is about the same. I think the bottom six will be as bad this year as it was last year. If RNH didn't have surgery, I'd say the forward corps would be no worse or better this year than last.

However, he did have surgery, he will likely be messed up/not in the line up for October. We will be playing, most likely, nine out of our first 14 games on the road with a centre depth of Gagner, Arcobello, Gordon and Lander. By December they're going to be in a hole they couldn't dig themselves out of with a back hoe.

All of that said, while I never think replacing one rookie with another rookie makes your team all that much better, Eakins will have a really really hard time being worse than Krueger was, so who knows. There almost has to be some improvement there.
I read stuff like "Horcoff and Gordon (net loss) and I want to throw up.

Horcoff played ok last year for a third line center at the rediculis price of 5.5 mill.
Year before played ok for a fourth line center.
Years before that played like the worst player in the league... at times lead the league in minus.
Had one really good year.

Gordon, at a much cheaper price, is better in every conceivable way except on the PP. I am sure we can find someone to replace Horcoff on the PP without too much trouble.

Also: Eakins is the main factor of success for this team. We will rise and fall with his systems and coaching.

Aerchon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 11:59 AM
  #63
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,189
vCash: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aerchon View Post
I read stuff like "Horcoff and Gordon (net loss) and I want to throw up.

Horcoff played ok last year for a third line center at the rediculis price of 5.5 mill.
Year before played ok for a fourth line center.
Years before that played like the worst player in the league... at times lead the league in minus.
Had one really good year.

Gordon, at a much cheaper price, is better in every conceivable way except on the PP. I am sure we can find someone to replace Horcoff on the PP without too much trouble.

Also: Eakins is the main factor of success for this team. We will rise and fall with his systems and coaching.
Sorry, for the past 4 years Horcoff has played tough minutes across the board. Gordon played tough minutes rarely. Because of the system the Coyotes played, Gordon was part of a rolling system where nearly all of the top 9 faced about the same amount of tough minutes on the ice. For the past four years Horcoff played nearly all the tough minutes. We will have to see how Gordon re acts to the wear and tear that comes with replacing Horcoff. The key will be winning on the DOT and if he fails there, he will fail everywhere and will be the whipping boy early and often.

I would love to see someone take a part Horcoff without bringing up his cap hit. Gordon is getting paid 9mill over the next 3 years while Horcoff is getting 7 over the next 2-- next season both players will be getting the same money

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 12:00 PM
  #64
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,650
vCash: 369
If we had Horcoff could we afford Ference?

joestevens29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 12:02 PM
  #65
Jimmi Jenkins
Just Walk Away
 
Jimmi Jenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 38,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozwell View Post
Sorry, for the past 4 years Horcoff has played tough minutes across the board. Gordon played tough minutes rarely. Because of the system the Coyotes played, Gordon was part of a rolling system where nearly all of the top 9 faced about the same amount of tough minutes on the ice. For the past four years Horcoff played nearly all the tough minutes. We will have to see how Gordon re acts to the wear and tear that comes with replacing Horcoff. The key will be winning on the DOT and if he fails there, he will fail everywhere and will be the whipping boy early and often.

I would love to see someone take a part Horcoff without bringing up his cap hit. Gordon is getting paid 9mill over the next 3 years while Horcoff is getting 7 over the next 2-- next season both players will be getting the same money
Those are some rosy Horcoff glasses you seem to have on, if you take them off, it looks a little different.

No one is suggest Gordon is "world beater", but to say he will be as good or better then Horcoff as a 3rd line center is more then reasonable.

Jimmi Jenkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 12:03 PM
  #66
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,650
vCash: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozwell View Post
Sorry, for the past 4 years Horcoff has played tough minutes across the board. Gordon played tough minutes rarely. Because of the system the Coyotes played, Gordon was part of a rolling system where nearly all of the top 9 faced about the same amount of tough minutes on the ice. For the past four years Horcoff played nearly all the tough minutes. We will have to see how Gordon re acts to the wear and tear that comes with replacing Horcoff. The key will be winning on the DOT and if he fails there, he will fail everywhere and will be the whipping boy early and often.

I would love to see someone take a part Horcoff without bringing up his cap hit. Gordon is getting paid 9mill over the next 3 years while Horcoff is getting 7 over the next 2-- next season both players will be getting the same money
Looking at those player usage charts suggests otherwise.

joestevens29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 12:13 PM
  #67
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CupofOil View Post
Horcoff has had 2 bad seasons relative to previous seasons because he's a declining player. Gordon had better numbers because he's a player entering his prime.
Point of fact: Gordon will be 30 when the season starts. Younger than Horcoff, sure, but he's right at the age where players start to decline.

Quote:
It seems like we agree to disagree but i just want to know why you think Horcoff is better. In what facets of the game? If you put Gordon on a line with high end offensive players which Horcoff had the luxury of at times the last few seasons and give Gordon oodles of PP time with elite offensive talents, i'm pretty sure the offensive numbers would have been close if not in favor of Gordon.
That's a pretty big assumption, IMO. Gordon pipped Horcoff by 2 points last year in nearly 20 more games. His best full season point totals were around Horcoff's worst. Even if we agree Horcoff is declining, there's just not much evidence to suggest Gordon has much untapped potential offensively.

Quote:
I think it's pretty obvious that Gordon is better defensively and on faceoffs so how is Horcoff better currently?
I don't know if it's exactly obvious. We've seen what happens when faceoff/defensive specialists depart the desert for the wilds of the north before and it wasn't pretty.

We'll see.

Moose Coleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 01:32 PM
  #68
Sheeshta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CupofOil View Post
If you put Gordon on a line with high end offensive players which Horcoff had the luxury of at times the last few seasons and give Gordon oodles of PP time with elite offensive talents, i'm pretty sure the offensive numbers would have been close if not in favor of Gordon.
This is the exact kind of assumption I don't like to make. As I said before it's not unreasonable to make it, but I'm tired of assuming the positive. I also take issue with your assertion that Gordon is "obviously" better than Horcoff defensively, but let's agree as you said to disagree.

Sheeshta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 02:32 PM
  #69
KarmaPolice
No Hope...
 
KarmaPolice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In Limbo
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,848
vCash: 777
Send a message via MSN to KarmaPolice
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
If we had Horcoff could we afford Ference?
I think trading him allowed us to have the cap space for both him AND Perron. So it was an excellent trade.

Another thing. I think the addition of Ference is being overlooked. He may be a bit short, but he's strong and feisty as hell, and sees the defensive zone extremely well. Better than any other defenseman on the team. That's going to improve the goals against, I can only logically assume.

The biggest question is down the middle. I really like the wingers. I think the defense will be above average in the league. Dubnyk isn't elite, but he's proved he's a number one guy, even if he does let in the odd stinker. But it's funny how people forget that so does every other goalie. Maybe he gives up a few more over a season than most number one goalies, but that shouldn't be a make or break issue.

With all centres healthy, RNH-Gagner-Gordon-Lander is a pretty strong unit. But what about injuries? RNH will probably miss the start of the season. If Gagner gets hurt while RNH is still recovering it's going to get ugly. Not sold on Lander or Arco playing big minutes, so this is a risky way to go forward. That's my biggest concern.

KarmaPolice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2013, 04:09 AM
  #70
nexttothemoon
The Drive for Nine
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc08 View Post
We are no longer using Conference-format playoffs.
No kidding.

I realize it's top 3 from each division and then 2 next best records for wild cards from each conference... that still effectively means top 8 in each conference will get in though (unless one division is uberweak).

Anyway I said the Oilers will finish with the 11th most pts in the West.. no matter how you cut that = no playoffs.

nexttothemoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2013, 05:38 AM
  #71
blackwater
Registered User
 
blackwater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 961
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozwell View Post
his project date of return was given as November first shortly after the operation. Shoulder injuries can not be rushed back and that is why he got the second one. Players with same sort of surgery did not come back till November/December in previous years. RNH had the operation in late april or early may in Cleveland (the same guy who worked on Hall for a similar injury). The recovery time was given as 6 to 7 months. This is his second shoulder injury and doctors will take extra precaution before signing off on him.
wow, i would really like to know where your getting your information. because the last article i read, just posted a couple of days ago, stated that RNH was ahead of schedule and could very well be ready by oct.1.

i have no idea where you're reading that he would be out 6-7 months , everything i've read stated that the pessimistic return date would be november 1st and the optimistic date was october 1st.

blackwater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2013, 05:53 AM
  #72
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,189
vCash: 351
here is the line up for this coming year

*************based upon everyone being healthy***************

Hall----RNH-------Eberle
Perron-----Gagner---Yakupov

Very little grit there

Smyth--Gordon--Hemsky
Jones-Lander-Brown-Joeensu

D
Schultz-Smid-Schultz-Ference-Petry-Grebeshkov-Belov-Larson-Potter (My guess either Potter or larson start on the farm)

D
Doobie Doo--LaBarbara

How improved are the oilers? Depends if Eberle and Hall can turn their game up a degree, whether Yak can capitalize and carry forth his last two weeks, how long RNH os out, Doobie steps it up and if we get more grit out of the line up

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2013, 06:45 AM
  #73
Marc08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nexttothemoon View Post
No kidding.

I'll fix it for you.

I realize it's top 3 from each division and then 2 next best records for wild cards from each division of the Western Conference... that still effectively means top 8 in each conference will get in though (unless one division is uberweak).

Anyway I said the Oilers will finish with the 11th most pts in the West.. no matter how you cut that = no playoffs.
We don't care about Western Conference standings anymore. It appears that you want to ignore the playoff race and to focus on redundancy.

Marc08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2013, 06:48 AM
  #74
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 54,189
vCash: 351
For those who need a refresher course here is our division

duck
Kings
Sharks
Phoenix
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2013, 01:20 PM
  #75
oilexport
Registered User
 
oilexport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 882
vCash: 500
The biggest question mark for me will be Coaching, Dallas is an unknown at this level just like Ralph was last year. Inexperienced NHL coach with a young team is concerning. Dallas obviously has some talent but until the players buy in and we see just how his systems are executed, I'm concerned. All this fitness talk that he preaches is great but should'nt he be a trainer then ?? We need a smart hockey mind to coach an NHL team. Tippet or Hitchcock come to mind...

Bucky and Steve Smith...give me a break.

Goaltending is another concern but it may turn out good.

I did see the talent takeoff and skate circles around a lot of Teams last year yet we still lost too many games. This was a leadership and coaching weakness.

We got the horses to dominate, no question in my mind.

oilexport 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 03:15 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.