HFBoards

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

Reviewing Gillis's Off Season at this point

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2012, 03:46 AM
  #1
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,831
vCash: 500
Reviewing Gillis's Off Season at this point

Often takes some time to evaluate the off season and often the immediate views are off base. Given we have half the season under our belt, I think we have a much better perspective on Gillis’s success in the off season.

Looking Excellent

1. Bieksa contract – any fear that Bieksa would revert to erratic form of a couple of years ago seem misplaced. Bieksa has been very good and has evolved into a top end defenseman. Given that, his contract, in both in terms of amount and length, is excellent.
2. LaPierre contract – in the end a great trade and very good re-signing. Very solid value even if offensive upside still appears limited. I mill. for a good 4th line center who can play up if necessary is a bargain. Only query is that they might have got a longer term than 2 years.
3. Hansen contract– Hansen has more than fulfilled any hope Canucks had and is very good value at 1.3
4. Re-signing Higgins – at this point represents one of the best moneypuck signings in the League.
5. Re-signing Salo – very good bargain at 2 mill. Has been durable enough, to date, to totally justify the contract.

Looking Good

1. Dumping Tambellini – fact he couldn’t catch on anywhere else indicates lack of value. Prolonging his stay in Vancouver made no sense. Other dumps of Baumgartner, Desbiens, Bolduc, Lee Sweatt, Bliznak also deserved and opened up some contract slots.
2. Signing Climie – has played very well in Chicago and provides goaltending depth. Might be important if a good deal comes along for Schneider.

Looking OK

1. Oreskovich re-signed. Near the minimum and still something of prospect. Retained his RFA status so should be an easy re-sign next year. At least provides the team with depth
2. Alberts contract - has shown enough to suggest he is a decent 6th defenseman. Could, however, make a case he is a little over-paid
3. Ebbett at the cap minimum, given his play, seems a reasonable pick up. Very fringe and probably others could have equally fulfilled his role on the team but has been somewhat helpful to date. Contract should probably been two way but that’s quibbling.
4. Sulzer – might be somewhat over priced at 700,000 (and this represents a cap burden) given his role on the team but has played fairly solidly and provides some insurance on defense.

Looking Questionable

1. Not re-signing Glass – Canucks did not replace his toughness and he is having a very decent year for the Jets. Glass’s poor play in the playoffs last year made dumping him appear a good choice at the time but some reconsideration seems appropriate here. At 750,000 might have been a reasonable contract.
2. Signing Mancari – about what was expected. Heavy footed Mancari can’t skate well enough to really play at the NHL level and won’t play tough enough to compensate for this. Doubt that you can say he even provides any form of NHL depth and uses up a contract slot.
3. Trading Ehrhoff. Most controversial deal and most difficult to rate. Really has a lot of moving parts. Could say that the Canucks have not really missed Ehrhoff as their PP remains as good and his 50 points are being made up elsewhere. Might also say that Ballard (who was the obvious choice to leave if Ehrhoff stayed) has been half decent. Yet Ehrhoff still seems clearly better than Ballard and, recent injury aside, seems a top 4 defenseman who can log a lot more high quality minutes than Ballard can. Might also be said that Ballard might have fetched a higher return than the deal forced on the Canucks by the Ehrhoff situation . Moreover, the deal that Ehrhoff ultimately signed (at 4 mill per) might have been one the Canucks would have done with the tacit and clear probability that Ehrhoff would never play out the contract. But, long term there is also the concern about Edler contract as well.

Looking Bad

1. Not resigning Torres – Torres provided toughness that the Canucks have not replaced. Producing adequate numbers for the Coyotes and continues to play a belligerent style when necessary. Canucks simply did not replace his grit and, at the price, Torres still represents good value. Big part of the success of the third line last year must be attributed to Torres and how he made the players around him more aggressive. This is most particularly true of Malhotra who now seems a whole lot more tentative. I think Torres provided people like Malhotra a comfort zone which made them tougher to play against. Maybe that factor was not considered carefully enough by the team and, at this point, this refusal to get back Torres looks like a mistake by the Canucks
2. Signing Strum – probably one of the worse signings by any team during the off-season and the person in the organization who initiated this signing has egg all over their face. The signing, especially at the price, never made sense unless someone was reckoning that they could package him to get Booth. Fact that Strum has continued to flounder in Florida ( 3 points in 27 games) confirms that the signing was a huge mistake.
3. Duco for Shirkov. Shirkov is in the top 5 in KHL and getting very good reviews. Duco looks like mediocre AHL player. You have to wonder if the whole Shirkov situation was badly mishandled. Even though he was clearly the best forward in Manitoba, Shirkov was never given any real chance by the Canucks. Instead they messed around and carried the patently weak Tambellini. To me, Shirkov was the obviously superior player and should have been here before Tambellini. At least then they could have made a better judgement on this player. True there were cap implications but you have to wonder if the Canucks let a potentially good player get away. Would not be the first time.

Insufficient Data

Pinnzotto, Bitz

Non Events

Tryout contracts to Fedorak, Nolan, Legace, Begin. I guess this provided the some players with a little more rest.

Overall

Canucks did a good job, in general, of re-signing their in- house players. The exceptions IMO were the release of Torres and the inability to get Ehrhoff to accept a cap friendly deal. However, the team did a pretty poor job in the free agent market with the Strum deal highlighting this. In the end, they seemed to be looking mostly in the bargain basements and attracted only very fringe players. And perhaps the biggest disappointment was their inability to get more grit when the Stanley Cup finals suggested this should have been a priority. Instead, a strong case can be made that they got less gritty. What they did get were, it seems, AHL caliber players (some of whom were damaged goods) who could neither play or enforce at the NHLlevel.

I’d give Gillis a B at this point and give due recognition that he did rectify the Strum debacle in a seemingly meaningful and swift way.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:00 AM
  #2
RobertKron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,654
vCash: 500
Just a quick note - I think Baumgartner is still under contract, is he not? He's listed as such on Capgeek.

RobertKron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:05 AM
  #3
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 21,592
vCash: 500
How is not re-signing Torres a mistake? He wasn't re-signed because he clashed with the rest of the room. The team had no interest in bringing him back.

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:19 AM
  #4
AlexandreBurrows
Registered User
 
AlexandreBurrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
How is not re-signing Torres a mistake? He wasn't re-signed because he clashed with the rest of the room. The team had no interest in bringing him back.
What's the source on this?

AlexandreBurrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:20 AM
  #5
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
How is not re-signing Torres a mistake? He wasn't re-signed because he clashed with the rest of the room. The team had no interest in bringing him back.
In conjunction with losing Glass and not finding replacements for the physicality from either winger is more what he is addressing. I think if there was someone brought in, maybe Ward for example, at a rate that the Caps didn't up and pay for, we wouldn't be looking back at the non-signings in a negative light.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:20 AM
  #6
Slashy McSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Slashy McSlewfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
How is not re-signing Torres a mistake? He wasn't re-signed because he clashed with the rest of the room. The team had no interest in bringing him back.
Gillis offered Torres another 1-year deal supposedly. Where did you hear this?

Slashy McSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:21 AM
  #7
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 14,475
vCash: 500
Agree with most of this.

The Alberts re-signing is still garbage to me, though. Yes, he's looked decent as a #7 defender this year. But he looked decent in the regular season last year, too, and the year before. Then when the pace ramped up in the playoffs he was completely unplayable - couldn't handle the playoff tempo, was a total pylon and an utter disaster. And I see no reason why the same thing won't happen again this year.

And it's a two-year deal to boot, at about the same cap hit as Scott Hannan.

If Weise is considered an offseason addition, he's been a solid success in my books although I know orcatown disagrees with this.

_________

The biggest failure of the offseason was the failure to add a quality 2nd line winger with a bit of size, but that was addressed a month into the season.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:22 AM
  #8
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slashy McSlewfoot View Post
Gillis offered Torres another 1-year deal supposedly. Where did you hear this?
I can't think of an official source, but the rumor and here say was that it was Torres and Higgins that didn't get along. If there is any merit to that, and I can't back that up or believe it as a whole without something, I'd say Higgins over Torres 11 times out of 10.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:22 AM
  #9
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,611
vCash: 50
not re-signing torres and glass were excellent choices. torres did dick all for almost the entire playoffs short of one gwg and getting suspended. his "toughness" was the start of nearly losing that series, and glass is a replacement to be had from any team for a 6th

mancari was ultimately signed for very low depth and was meant to be a way to boost the strength of our AHL club - something gillis did with the moose as well. a healthy relationship with our farm was the reason our ahl defence was so ready to jump into the canucks system - by effectively controlling their roster with our players and money, we also had the ability to call them up to no detriment

since shirokov hasn't actually made the nhl yet for the team we traded him to, we got something for nothing - in short, everything that you've said is bad is not actually bad

Verviticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:27 AM
  #10
Slashy McSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Slashy McSlewfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=orcatown;41827403Not re-signing Glass – Canucks did not replace his toughness and he is having a very decent year for the Jets. Glass’s poor play in the playoffs last year made dumping him appear a good choice at the time but some reconsideration seems appropriate here. At 750,000 might have been a reasonable contract.[/QUOTE]

Well, to be fair, Gillis had guys like Volpatti and Pinizzotto lined up to replace Glass - was kind of bad luck that they both got injured. In hindsight though, yeah Glass would be nice to have in the lineup right now.

Slashy McSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:29 AM
  #11
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
Agree with most of this.

The Alberts re-signing is still garbage to me, though. Yes, he's looked decent as a #7 defender this year. But he looked decent in the regular season last year, too, and the year before. Then when the pace ramped up in the playoffs he was completely unplayable - couldn't handle the playoff tempo, was a total pylon and an utter disaster. And I see no reason why the same thing won't happen again this year.

And it's a two-year deal to boot, at about the same cap hit as Scott Hannan.

If Weise is considered an offseason addition, he's been a solid success in my books although I know orcatown disagrees with this.

_________

The biggest failure of the offseason was the failure to add a quality 2nd line winger with a bit of size, but that was addressed a month into the season.
Even at a slight increase in pay for an earlier contract offer (no one can say we'd have expected certain players to not sign), it's like saying Vokoun is making the same amount as Ellis....no one would have seen Hannan for 1ish million, let alone Vokoun for 1.5. There were better options then Alberts for maybe a marginal increase, but I'd feel safer with the monster we know too.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:30 AM
  #12
Slashy McSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Slashy McSlewfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
I can't think of an official source, but the rumor and here say was that it was Torres and Higgins that didn't get along. If there is any merit to that, and I can't back that up or believe it as a whole without something, I'd say Higgins over Torres 11 times out of 10.
If you had to choose between the two, yeah I agree. But I swear I remember hearing Gillis offered Torres the same 1-year deal, but Torres wanted 2-years. If that's true then I can't see there being much truth to the rumours. But who knows.

Slashy McSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:31 AM
  #13
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 21,592
vCash: 500
I'm not sure where it was from, but there was a reliable source (Hockey Widow?) that said the room described Torres as a "pig" and most guys thought he was a total weirdo. He also apparently didn't really become friends with anyone on the team. Don't have the time to look it up right now.

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 04:54 AM
  #14
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
since shirokov hasn't actually made the nhl yet for the team we traded him to, we got something for nothing - in short, everything that you've said is bad is not actually bad
The Sturm signing was pretty bad - he seems to be completely done as an effective NHL player. It was at least quickly rectified though.

I agree that Shirokov wasn't much of a loss. He was good, but not dominant as a 25 year old AHLer, and although he has been doing very well in the KHL, there have been quite a few marginal NHLers that have become top players in the KHL. His skills didn't seem quite good enough to overcome his size and speed.

Zarpan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 05:15 AM
  #15
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 14,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
Even at a slight increase in pay for an earlier contract offer (no one can say we'd have expected certain players to not sign), it's like saying Vokoun is making the same amount as Ellis....no one would have seen Hannan for 1ish million, let alone Vokoun for 1.5. There were better options then Alberts for maybe a marginal increase, but I'd feel safer with the monster we know too.
Alberts was our #8 defender at the end of last season. There's no way he should have received a two-year deal under *any* circumstances.

If we were offering him a deal - and I don't think he should have been brought back at any price based on his last two playoff performances - it should have been 1 year/$1 million or good luck elsewhere.

We jumped the gun in signing this marginal player to an overpayment in both dollars and term.
_________

On the Sturm front, I still don't understand how that signing happened.

It was such an obviously terrible signing from the second it was made and completely at odds with the normal common sense shown by this management group.

How does a guy who had been with 3 teams in 6 months and had cleared waivers get a $2 million contract? Utterly baffling. He should have been happy with a league minimum deal as his career was heading into camp tryout territory.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 05:19 AM
  #16
wienerdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 26
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
I'm not sure where it was from, but there was a reliable source (Hockey Widow?) that said the room described Torres as a "pig" and most guys thought he was a total weirdo. He also apparently didn't really become friends with anyone on the team. Don't have the time to look it up right now.
Tiranis is right: Hockey Widow did pass on info that Torres was a bad mix for the room.

Apparently, he's a total boor and has low respect when talking about women (perhaps wives and/or girlfriends?) and that went over like a lead balloon with many guys in the room.

It's also been reported that the reason Higgins held off re-signing here was to 100% ensure that Torres had signed elsewhere.

I miss what Torres brought in terms of physicality and would have loved to have had him back for that, but apparently he was a real drain on the overall morale of the team. If that is indeed true, good riddance.

Would love for MG to add a Torres v2.0 before the deadline, though.

wienerdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 05:47 AM
  #17
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,260
vCash: 500
I don't know if this thread is really relevant anymore. One of the off season moves has already been traded for IMO s great return.

All gms make mistakes, it's how they fix them that is important.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 06:02 AM
  #18
AndyPipkin
PSN: Lord_Of_War
 
AndyPipkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Cee View Post
I don't know if this thread is really relevant anymore. One of the off season moves has already been traded for IMO s great return.

All gms make mistakes, it's how they fix them that is important.
Oh for sure, and I think that is what is telling about Gillis. Sooner or later he seems to correct his mistakes or have them pay off in other ways.

Like you said, Sturm was one of those moves, but we ended up flipping 2 underperforming players making more then they should(Sammys turned poor because of health and play) for a pretty decent player in Booth. Who by the way seemed to fit in quite nicely where we wanted him on the 2nd line.

AndyPipkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 06:36 AM
  #19
Agent007
Registered User
 
Agent007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,584
vCash: 500
I still believe that there's more to why Gillis didn't resign Ehrhoff and perhaps its because Gillis is gambling that he'll be able to land a big fish on the back end somewhere down the line.

At the same time I wouldn't be surprised if Gillis saw Ehrhoff has a 40-45 point defencemen who hit the 50 point mark thanks to playing on the best power play in the NHL (and playing with the twins).

I'm not quite sure but he's not an idiot and I think he's got something bigger up his sleeve.

Agent007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 07:04 AM
  #20
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,831
vCash: 500
Lot of murky speculation about Torres here . Most of the rumors seem to have originated from Hockey Buzz and Paul Tessier as indicated by this thread

http://forum.canucks.com/topic/30952...torres-factor/

But you also can find articles where Tessier and other Hockey Buzz source that point out the importance of Torres and even talk about the Canucks getting him back. Don't see them suggesting this if it was common knowledge around Hockey Buzz that Torres was some kind of dressing room cancer.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=38524

http://my.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?us...&post_id=12251

Far as I know Hockey Widow is just a poster on another site who repeats stuff. Don't know if he is that reliable a source and I don't know if we can go on the sketchy evidence presented here to say the Torres was this tremendous drain on team morale.

Also for those saying Torres did nothing in the playoffs I'd like to ask who scored the winning goal in Game 1 of the finals and who deliver some key hits in the Chicago series. Indeed he is just the kind of player you need in the playoffs as illustrated by the run last year and when Edmonton went to the 7th game of the Finals.

Point here is that they did not replace the grit of Torres and Glass. If, for what ever reasons, you wanted to move Torres out then you needed some reliable alternative. (especially given the way the Canucks got pushed around by the Bruins) Taking flyers on people like Duco, Pinnzotto, Nolan, Mancari and the like, or hoping Volpatti could move up after a mediocre year in the AHL was not IMO doing that. I believe this valid criticism especially in light of the abuse the Canucks have had to endure this season. I do believe the Canucks did make a run at some muscle (such as Janssens and Boulton) but they just couldn't get it done.

Saying that Gillis was able to correct the Strum situation does not deal with the issue of the off season signing of Strum. If you are considering the off-season then the signing of Strum has to be based on its own merits. I think the signing reflects very poorly on Canuck scouting. If we are to believe Canuck brass, Strum was brought in because they thought he could really contribute. I don't believe the Canucks brought him in with the idea of trading him and Samuelsson for Booth.

Again overall Gillis did fine but there certainly seem room for criticism.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 07:25 AM
  #21
Jack Tripper
I Don't Even...
 
Jack Tripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,188
vCash: 533
aside from the completely baffling sturm signing (which has been masked by the equally impressive booth swap), gillis and gilman had the kind of offseason that most top clubs have...some hits, some misses, but generally positive overall and didn't disturb any of the team chemistry in the room

best move was the bieksa resigning...when you see the money and term thrown around to average d-men like josh gorges, bieksa looks like a steal for his package of offense, defense, and toughness...its actually scary to think his physically un-intimidating this team becomes if he wasn't around, the team chose ehrhoff instead, and let go of glass and torres

ehrhoff loss may still hurt down the road when salo inevitably picks up an injury or shows his age when the speed of play picks up, but it still amazes me how so many posters think that signing both bieksa and ehrhoff to long term deals would have been smart...it would have given the canucks little to no cap flexibility (ie: booth trade likely not doable) in both the present and future

Jack Tripper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 07:26 AM
  #22
Hyack57
Registered User
 
Hyack57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Airdrie, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,388
vCash: 500
I fail to see the need for Torres. He's suspended again and that's after his second question hit in a week. Carcillo also made a poor choice last night for a hit and cost his team. Why do we want these players?

Hyack57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 07:30 AM
  #23
Potatoe1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Far as I know Hockey Widow is just a poster on another site who repeats stuff. Don't know if he is that reliable a source and I don't know if we can go on the sketchy evidence presented here to say the Torres was this tremendous drain on team morale.
I have known her close to 10 years and am pretty much totally convinced she has a friend in the organization.

There have been well over a dozen instances where she has told us stuff well before any other source had the info.

The "Torrez is a weirdo" thing makes perfect sense BTW, just look at his interviews.

Potatoe1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 07:36 AM
  #24
Agent007
Registered User
 
Agent007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Potatoe1 View Post
I have known her close to 10 years and am pretty much totally convinced she has a friend in the organization.

There have been well over a dozen instances where she has told us stuff well before any other source had the info.

The "Torrez is a weirdo" thing makes perfect sense BTW, just look at his interviews.
Even before she mentioned anything about Torres there were some Oiler fans who said that he apparently had a shady past.

Agent007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2012, 07:42 AM
  #25
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,260
vCash: 500
I would be very hesitant to repeat hear-say allegations about a player like Torres and that he treats women poorly, and/or to the liking of his teammates or that Higgins wanted to know what happened with Torres before he resigned etc.

These are actionable comments and a good case of prima face defamation, which would involve the person whose comments you attributed it to in the first place.

For all the things so strictly modded here, I'm surprised sometimes that people don't take legal issues and risks here more seriously.

Jay Cee 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 02:34 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.