HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD 2012 Lineup Advice Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-23-2012, 07:59 PM
  #376
Stoneberg
Bored
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Hodge got plenty of PP time (198 points, 1968-1977). it was Cashman (69) who didn't get much.

In the 1973-1977 seasons, his PP% (% of PPGF on ice for) was 88, 95, 75, 68, 62.
Thanks for that! I thought I read somewhere he didn't see PP time with Espo.

I'll toss him up there on the first unit. Obvious weak link but there's enough skill there.

Stoneberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 08:09 PM
  #377
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneberg View Post
Thanks for that! I thought I read somewhere he didn't see PP time with Espo.

I'll toss him up there on the first unit. Obvious weak link but there's enough skill there.
I've read that too and avoided Hodge on my PP when I drafted him in my first draft. After seeing the stats, that quote probably just applies to seasons before 1973

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 10:57 PM
  #378
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,110
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Thoughts on my 3rd line of:

Stanfield-Linden-Hyland

It wasn't what I was planning to do, but I thought Hyland was such a good value, and that there were players I could use to make him succeed and form 3 dangerous lines. I think it brings a little bit of everything to the table.

BillyShoe1721 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 03:36 AM
  #379
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,748
vCash: 500
Considering my D use on special teams.

Guy Lapointe - Marcel Pronovost
Pat Stapleton - Ted Harris
Bert Corbeau - Rob Ramage

My tentative plan:

PP1: Lapointe - Stapleton
PP2: Corbeau - Ramage

PK1: Harris - Pronovost
PK2: Lapointe - Ramage

Thoughts?

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 10:22 AM
  #380
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,730
vCash: 500
Corbeau on the PP over Pronovost? That is my only concern.

Wow, you are done your top-6 already. You lacked a true #1 so you went and got two strong #2s. Stapleton is an excellent #3, and from past 32 team drafts I have always seen Harris and Ramage as top-end #4s who I target as #5s because I finish my top-4 earlier than most do. I never end up getting them, however. Corbeau is a 5-6 whose recent draft positions indicate some see him as a #3. You've done really well here. Hope your forwards aren't effed right up as a result.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 10:35 AM
  #381
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I have always seen Harris and Ramage as top-end #4s who I target as #5s because I finish my top-4 earlier than most do.
While I agree that Rob Ramage is a good bottom-pairing defenseman, a top-end #4 he is not.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 11:03 AM
  #382
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
While I agree that Rob Ramage is a good bottom-pairing defenseman, a top-end #4 he is not.
Agree

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Considering my D use on special teams.

Guy Lapointe - Marcel Pronovost
Pat Stapleton - Ted Harris
Bert Corbeau - Rob Ramage

My tentative plan:

PP1: Lapointe - Stapleton
PP2: Corbeau - Ramage

PK1: Harris - Pronovost
PK2: Lapointe - Ramage

Thoughts?
I would do this:

Lapointe-Stapleton
Pronovost-Ramage/Corbeau

Harris-Pronovost
Lapointe-Ramage

During the defenseman project, I became very surprised by how Pronovost was actually quite offensively oriented, at least early in his career.

Lapointe, despite being perhaps average defensively at even strength by ATD top pairing standards, is an accomplished PKer. But since he's top pairing at ES and on the PP, I think first unit PK time is too much to ask.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 11:13 AM
  #383
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
Thoughts on my 3rd line of:

Stanfield-Linden-Hyland

It wasn't what I was planning to do, but I thought Hyland was such a good value, and that there were players I could use to make him succeed and form 3 dangerous lines. I think it brings a little bit of everything to the table.
It's an awkward mix IMO, but maybe you can sell me on it.

Hyland is a very good goal scorer from the third line, but Stanfield (from LW) and Linden are so-so offensive players at this level, capable of chipping in, but not at Hyland's level.

I'm not sure how much you're getting from this line other than offense, either - Stanfield and Linden both have grit, and Linden is solid defensively, but the line doesn't scream elite intangibles, either.

I might be misremembering things, but wasn't Stanfield more of a grinder when he played LW?

I think I'd prefer moving Stanfield to center and dropping Linden to fourth line.

Maybe you can sell me on them, though.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 11:28 AM
  #384
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,738
vCash: 500
Should I load up on my first pairing:

MacInnis - Laperierre
Gardiner - Vadnais


or break apart the top pairing (like most GM's do):

MacInnis - Gardiner
Laperierre - Vadnais

markrander87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 11:33 AM
  #385
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Should I load up on my first pairing:

MacInnis - Laperierre
Gardiner - Vadnais


or break apart the top pairing (like most GM's do):

MacInnis - Gardiner
Laperierre - Vadnais
I always look to other teams in my division. If most of them are stacking their top lines, I stack the top defense pairing. If most are spreading out the offensive talent, I want my #2 on the second pairing.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 12:20 PM
  #386
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
While I agree that Rob Ramage is a good bottom-pairing defenseman, a top-end #4 he is not.
Are you sure? It seems every draft I get a solid #4 and then I get torn between filling out the forwards and nabbing a good #4 to be my #5. I always want to grab whoever falls from the Vadnais/Ivanov/Kuzkin/Hajt/Beck/Harmon/Harris/Ramage class but I can never seem to get one. Iíve always had him ranked up there with those guys. Shouldnít I? The guy averaged 24.5 minutes a game for over 1000 games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
but Stanfield (from LW) and Linden are so-so offensive players at this level,.
I thought I would look into this now, like I said I would. Stanfield had some pretty good assist totals that led to a few high rankings and I wanted to see if this was all because he played a lot of point on the PP. Because if it was, this obviously doesnít translate to even strength assists from LW.

His big assist years were 1968, 1971, 1972, and 1973. He ranked 7th, 6th, 4th, and 7th those years.

He was 8th in ESA in 1968 (good), 18th in 1971 (ok), 9th in 1972 (good), and 15th in 1973 (ok). So he does appear to have some ES playmaking skill, just not as much as his assist totals and rankings would have you believe. But he does stand up better to this scrutiny than I thought he would heading in.

He was not a very good goalscorer and cracked the top-10 in points just once Ė 9th in 1971. In his four significant seasons, his ES point rankings are 12th, 19th, 11th and 37th. So three of those four times he still had good overall ES production for an ATD 3rd liner. (I did even better than this for my last 3rd line in a 40-team draft, but thatís neither here nor there)

He also had a HHOFer linemate in Bucyk and another good one too, so itís worth seeing how close to their production he was:

1968-1973 ES scoring:

Bucyk: 452-131-166-297 (0.66)
Stanfield: 448-92-177-269 (0.60)
*********: 348-92-121-213 (0.61)

Itís very likely Bucyk was the catalyst for the lineís ES prowess, but itís not like he lapped them offensively either. They were both very good players.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 12:27 PM
  #387
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,309
vCash: 500
Would his years with Bucyk nit have been his years at centre?

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 12:28 PM
  #388
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Would his years with Bucyk nit have been his years at centre?
Yeah. Stanfield was Bucyk's regular center in Boston and played next to Orr on the other point of the power play.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 01:23 PM
  #389
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Are you sure? It seems every draft I get a solid #4 and then I get torn between filling out the forwards and nabbing a good #4 to be my #5. I always want to grab whoever falls from the Vadnais/Ivanov/Kuzkin/Hajt/Beck/Harmon/Harris/Ramage class but I can never seem to get one. Iíve always had him ranked up there with those guys. Shouldnít I? The guy averaged 24.5 minutes a game for over 1000 games.
For a guy who was a very respectable (averaged about 50 points/season) scorer in his prime, Ramage got remarkably few AST votes. Using the standard of at least one 1st place or two top-3 votes, here is Ramage's complete AST voting record:

1980-81: 11th
1985-86: 9th

I would not say that he compares well to guys like Vadnais, Beck, Harmon and Harris, all of whom do much better in AST voting. The Russians are sort of a your mileage may vary. Ramage was a guy who played a lot of #1 minutes for a lot of bad defensive teams, but was never really a "#1 defenseman" in the NHL, if you get my meaning. He was also sort of an "all-arounder", but I don't know if he's really good enough for any special teams role in the ATD, so that cuts into his value, as well. I think he would actually be one of the worst #4s at 32 teams, rather than one of the best.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 01:33 PM
  #390
BenchBrawl
joueur de hockey
 
BenchBrawl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,095
vCash: 500
What would you do with my PP?

players available as of right now:

LW: Denneny , Elias , Ramsay
C: Nighbor , Oates , Goyette
RW: Balderis , Hextall Sr. , Provost
D: Kelly , Howell , Boyle , Beck

Wasn't Goyette sometime used on the point?!

Would you just put Kelly at the point with Boyle on the first unit even if he's known to have played a lot of forward on the PP.Any reason to think such a great offensive D couldn't quarterback a PP in this thing , especially considering Harvey probably was the first to do it and came just at the end of Kelly's prime?

I thought about something like this:

Denneny-Oates-Hextall Sr.
Boyle-Kelly

Elias-Nighbor-Balderis
Boyle(halfwaythroughit)/Beck-Goyette

any thoughts/advices appreciated

BenchBrawl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 01:41 PM
  #391
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Would his years with Bucyk nit have been his years at centre?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Yeah. Stanfield was Bucyk's regular center in Boston and played next to Orr on the other point of the power play.
yeah, I guess that analysis doesn't really answer what his LW offensive production would be, more of a general look at him as an ES producer at his best.

Being a center and outscored by his LW (as good a LW as it was) in his best years probably means he wasn't any better at LW.

My TOI sheet has him as a C every season. When do we think he played LW?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 01:43 PM
  #392
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchBrawl View Post
What would you do with my PP?

players available as of right now:

LW: Denneny , Elias , Ramsay
C: Nighbor , Oates , Goyette
RW: Balderis , Hextall Sr. , Provost
D: Kelly , Howell , Boyle , Beck

Wasn't Goyette sometime used on the point?!

Would you just put Kelly at the point with Boyleon the first unit even if he's known to have played a lot of forward at that position.Any reason to think such a great offensive D couldn't quarterback a PP in this thing , especially considering Harvey probably was the first to do it and came just at the end of Kelly's prime?

I thought about something like this:

Denneny-Oates-Hextall Sr.
Boyle-Kelly

Elias-Nighbor-Balderis
Boyle(halfwaythroughit)/Beck-Goyette

any thoughts/advices appreciated
I think Kelly-Boyle is absolutely your best option on the point of the first unit. Of course Kelly should be able to run a power play.

Goyette played the point in St Louis and Buffalo on expansion teams. Elias has played some point too I think, TDMM could comment better on his level of play there. Beck should definitely be on your second unit IMO. Kelly could stay out for most of the power play, so your second unit pointmen won't always get a lot of time. Might be simpler to just run Howell out there as the fourth option on the point instead of a forward so your coach doesn't have to juggle lines too much, and have Kelly or Boyle stay out for most/all of the PP.

I think your forward lines are set up pretty well.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 02:03 PM
  #393
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
yeah, I guess that analysis doesn't really answer what his LW offensive production would be, more of a general look at him as an ES producer at his best.

Being a center and outscored by his LW (as good a LW as it was) in his best years probably means he wasn't any better at LW.

My TOI sheet has him as a C every season. When do we think he played LW?
IIRC, he played some LW after leaving Boston. Dreakmur posted details last draft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I think Kelly-Boyle is absolutely your best option on the point of the first unit. Of course Kelly should be able to run a power play.

Goyette played the point in St Louis and Buffalo on expansion teams. Elias has played some point too I think, TDMM could comment better on his level of play there. Beck should definitely be on your second unit IMO. Kelly could stay out for most of the power play, so your second unit pointmen won't always get a lot of time. Might be simpler to just run Howell out there as the fourth option on the point instead of a forward so your coach doesn't have to juggle lines too much, and have Kelly or Boyle stay out for most/all of the PP.

I think your forward lines are set up pretty well.
Howell is underrated offensively - I think he's a competent second PP guy. Elias has played point at times, but I think he's better at the left wing, where he is more free to roam around (Elias is at his best when moving, he's not a very good static player).

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 02:10 PM
  #394
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,110
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
yeah, I guess that analysis doesn't really answer what his LW offensive production would be, more of a general look at him as an ES producer at his best.

Being a center and outscored by his LW (as good a LW as it was) in his best years probably means he wasn't any better at LW.

My TOI sheet has him as a C every season. When do we think he played LW?
He's listed as a LW here:

http://www.sabresalumni.com/playerpr...playerid=10069

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Stanfield

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...y.php?pid=5134

And as a C/W here:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...stanffr01.html

So between Stanfield's playmaking and two-way presence(with a little toughness) and Linden's two-way ability, toughness, and puckwinning, this line should be able to play decent defense, and be a threat to score by basically having Stanfield and Linden get the puck to Hyland? Because that was my ultimate goal. I won't be afraid to put them out against any line, and they should be able to hold their own offensively and defensively.

BillyShoe1721 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 02:12 PM
  #395
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
yeah, I guess that analysis doesn't really answer what his LW offensive production would be, more of a general look at him as an ES producer at his best.

Being a center and outscored by his LW (as good a LW as it was) in his best years probably means he wasn't any better at LW.

My TOI sheet has him as a C every season. When do we think he played LW?
Did he not play LW in Chicago?

Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 02:23 PM
  #396
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchBrawl View Post
What would you do with my PP?

players available as of right now:

LW: Denneny , Elias , Ramsay
C: Nighbor , Oates , Goyette
RW: Balderis , Hextall Sr. , Provost
D: Kelly , Howell , Boyle , Beck
I would basically just switch the centers on the forward units:

Denneny - Oates - Balderis
Elias - Nighbor - Hextall

Loading up the first unit with Denneny and Hextall looks good, but it deprives the 2nd unit of a crease-crasher, and at any rate, I think Balderis is probably close to Hextall, anyway, in terms of pure offense.

On defense, Boyle - Kelly should definitely be your top powerplay pairing. After that...hmmmm...overpass has a point about Goyette. In theory, you want to get an offensive talent like Goyette out there on the point, but using him there would definitely cause some major line juggling for powerplays that go the full two minutes, because your second unit would have forwards from all three lines on it. You could just send Denneny - Oates - Balderis out there after the PP, but that would not be a strong defensive line, and Pat Burns would probably have a stroke if that happened.

Another possibility is simply to keep the ES lines intact, and put Goyette on one point (with Beck) of the 2nd unit PP. You could then send one of the first two lines out after the PP is over, depending on how long it goes.

I think overpass' suggestion of playing Kelly/Boyle hard on the PP and using Beck and Howell as your #3/#4 options is probably your best bet unless you keep the ES lines intact. That way, you can deploy the Goyette line to "calm things down" after the PP is over.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 02:57 PM
  #397
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
He's listed as a LW here:

http://www.sabresalumni.com/playerpr...playerid=10069

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Stanfield

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...y.php?pid=5134

And as a C/W here:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...stanffr01.html

So between Stanfield's playmaking and two-way presence(with a little toughness) and Linden's two-way ability, toughness, and puckwinning, this line should be able to play decent defense, and be a threat to score by basically having Stanfield and Linden get the puck to Hyland? Because that was my ultimate goal. I won't be afraid to put them out against any line, and they should be able to hold their own offensively and defensively.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Did he not play LW in Chicago?
hockey-reference.com does break it down by season for most players now, if you go into their individual seasons for each team. Stanfield is listed as a C every year except 1965-66 with Chicago.

I will check the scouting reports tonight (I only have them for 1972 and on). they make a point of mentioning what positions the players play, as well as what they did last year.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 04:00 PM
  #398
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Any thoughts on my defense which is completed:

Doug Harvey-Glen Harmon
Eddie Gerard-Ott Heller
Ed Van Impe-Reijo Ruotsalainen

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 04:09 PM
  #399
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
Any thoughts on my defense which is completed:

Doug Harvey-Glen Harmon
Eddie Gerard-Ott Heller
Ed Van Impe-Reijo Ruotsalainen
Harvey is awesome, Gerard is an elite #2. Heller is an ok #3, Harmon is a pretty good #4. I agree with sturm that I like Heller better on the top pairing. You want to give Harvey massive minutes, do you really want to do the same with Harmon?

Your bottom pairing guys are bottom pairing guys. I think you could have gotten guys just as good if you waited, but they're solid bottom pairing guys. Edit: Both are specialists and quite good at what they specialize in.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 02-24-2012 at 04:48 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 05:20 PM
  #400
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
Curious as to what you guys think of Doug Weight possibly playing the point on our 2nd PP unit.

As of right now, I was thinking Bill Quackenbush and Art Ross on the 1st Unit, with Reg Noble on the 2nd.


EDIT: Ted Green and Bob Goldham are my other D so far. Green has the distinction of being the only RHS of the bunch

Hawkey Town 18 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 05:27 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.