HFBoards

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

Who wants to buy some Handguns? (Off-Season Speculation Part III)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-14-2012, 10:27 PM
  #1
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,410
vCash: 567
Who wants to buy some Handguns? (Off-Season Speculation Part III)

Annnd, new thread.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Top 6 Spaling View Post
Any more interest in Patric Hornqvist? Sergei Kostitsyn? Alexander Radulov? just throwing out names here, I'll let you work them into a package.
I have lots of interest in Hornqvist. I'd do Thornton and Clowe for Hornqvist, Wilson, Austin Watson, and maybe a pick.


Last edited by TheJuxtaposer: 05-14-2012 at 10:34 PM.
TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
05-14-2012, 10:49 PM
  #2
MarleauApologist
fun must be alwalys
 
MarleauApologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,367
vCash: 500
I don't like some of the core of this team. Our top 6 forwards are my biggest concern. They're all slow, except for Marleau, whose playoff performances have been very inconsistent, and disappointing in general. So by looking at Marleau's mediocre and inconsistent play, my first instinct is "trade him, he's not the kind of player you win a cup with.". However, if we do get rid of him, this team gets even SLOWER. Our top 6 consists of Pavelski (Slow), Clowe (Slow), Thornton (Slow), Couture (Slow), Marleau (Fast), Havlat (Fast). Notice the issue here? I used to be against acquiring Nash, but at this point I'm not TOO against it if we were to get rid of Marleau. I've seen plenty of Nash's play, and I can say that he is pretty good. His defensive game is decent, but not necessarily great. However, he does seem unmotivated in some of his games. I do feel that being with a contending team, he could do well, and I think a Power Forward could do wonders for him. I'm honestly not sure if we have enough to acquire him, and even if we do, what I'd be willing to give up. I'm not keen on giving Pavs up; he's been one of our most consistent players for a while, and even if his SCORING isn't necessarily consistent, effort out of him is generally there. Clowe, IMO, is somebody we're going to have to give up; if we can do something around Clowe and Nash, then we can, but I think we'd have to be looking at somebody lower in terms of value, and with a nicer contract :/. I haven't seen too much of Kulemin admittedly, but his mediocre year worries me. I won't do a Capgeek since its really not my type of thing, but I do think that with some smart acquisitions, this team is still a contender in 2012-2013.

My point is, this team has a questionable core, but with some moves and acquisitions of SPEED IN THE TOP 6, we can still be a good team next year.

MarleauApologist is offline  
Old
05-14-2012, 11:09 PM
  #3
Winky
Registered User
 
Winky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 500
Watching the goaltenders still remaining in the playoffs, it obvious that in order to go deep, your goalie needs to outstanding (<2.00GAA and ~9.25+ give or take?).

I just don't see Niemi playing at the necessary level behind this defense. So unless we improve our team defense (bring in top level defensive talent and/or improve team speed), we need to address our goaltending.

Winky is offline  
Old
05-14-2012, 11:35 PM
  #4
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,410
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winky View Post
Watching the goaltenders still remaining in the playoffs, it obvious that in order to go deep, your goalie needs to outstanding (<2.00GAA and ~9.25+ give or take?).

I just don't see Niemi playing at the necessary level behind this defense. So unless we improve our team defense (bring in top level defensive talent and/or improve team speed), we need to address our goaltending.
Despire Niemi having a crap year, we were 6th in even strength goals against on the year, and that's with this team sometimes icing Murray, White, and Demers at the same time. This team is very good defensively. If Nemo has even an average year for him next season and we replace Murray with Stuart, I think we'll be fine in that category. It's offense that I'm worried about.

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
05-14-2012, 11:39 PM
  #5
VP and GM
Havlat is gone!
 
VP and GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: at home
Country: United States
Posts: 5,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winky View Post
Watching the goaltenders still remaining in the playoffs, it obvious that in order to go deep, your goalie needs to outstanding (<2.00GAA and ~9.25+ give or take?).

I just don't see Niemi playing at the necessary level behind this defense. So unless we improve our team defense (bring in top level defensive talent and/or improve team speed), we need to address our goaltending.
That is for sure on the need for outstanding goal tending as well as defense in the playoffs. I think we're close in this area, perhaps another top 4 D, a better PK and a couple of timely saves and this will work with Nemo i'm thinking. We've not designed to play a stifling brand of team D like the Kings, Blues, etc. or to win low scoring games. We a very good defensive team that relies on scoring/offense to win. GF which we did not get this post season and most of the regular season, hence the fall in team success.

So yes, get just a little better on D, yes, get alot better with the forwards by adding more scoring and speed. This is the shortest path to success for this team as it suggests the smaller number or roster changes.

VP and GM is offline  
Old
05-14-2012, 11:40 PM
  #6
VP and GM
Havlat is gone!
 
VP and GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: at home
Country: United States
Posts: 5,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Despire Niemi having a crap year, we were 6th in even strength goals against on the year, and that's with this team sometimes icing Murray, White, and Demers at the same time. This team is very good defensively. If Nemo has even an average year for him next season and we replace Murray with Stuart, I think we'll be fine in that category. It's offense that I'm worried about.
Great minds think alike !!

VP and GM is offline  
Old
05-14-2012, 11:44 PM
  #7
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 12,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Despire Niemi having a crap year, we were 6th in even strength goals against on the year, and that's with this team sometimes icing Murray, White, and Demers at the same time. This team is very good defensively. If Nemo has even an average year for him next season and we replace Murray with Stuart, I think we'll be fine in that category. It's offense that I'm worried about.
Well then we just add Nash and Semin and we're all set!

In case the sarcasm smiley isnt enough I'm 1000000000000000000000000% against Nash. lolz

Mafoofoo is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:22 AM
  #8
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,410
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by VP and GM View Post
That is for sure on the need for outstanding goal tending as well as defense in the playoffs. I think we're close in this area, perhaps another top 4 D, a better PK and a couple of timely saves and this will work with Nemo i'm thinking. We've not designed to play a stifling brand of team D like the Kings, Blues, etc. or to win low scoring games. We a very good defensive team that relies on scoring/offense to win. GF which we did not get this post season and most of the regular season, hence the fall in team success.

So yes, get just a little better on D, yes, get alot better with the forwards by adding more scoring and speed. This is the shortest path to success for this team as it suggests the smaller number or roster changes.
As well, look at our playoff history. Our failures are all alike; not enough scoring. We've always been losing these games 2-1, 2-0, etc. It's not like we're losing all these games 7-6 Pittsburgh style. We have the defense, and despite our worries about Nemo, he is capable of making big saves.

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:24 AM
  #9
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,627
vCash: 500
There are not likely to be any 'sure thing' goalies available. You either take a risk on a reclamation project (Mason) or you give the best goalie you have in the system a shot and see what he can do (Stalock/Sateri).

Sticking with Niemi is pointless, he's not a bad goalie, but he's no better than Greiss, and costs a LOT more. My bet is it will be Stalock, but you really don't have a lot to lose at this point.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:26 AM
  #10
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,627
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
As well, look at our playoff history. Our failures are all alike; not enough scoring. We've always been losing these games 2-1, 2-0, etc. It's not like we're losing all these games 7-6 Pittsburgh style. We have the defense, and despite our worries about Nemo, he is capable of making big saves.
I honestly think that's more to do with the system then the personnel. However, a faster top-6 would help as well, but the system itself is the #1 problem.

We need to replace 2 of our top-6, and Murray, with faster players (and get rid of Handzus of course). After that, the system has to work.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:29 AM
  #11
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,410
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I honestly think that's more to do with the system then the personnel. However, a faster top-6 would help as well, but the system itself is the #1 problem.

We need to replace 2 of our top-6, and Murray, with faster players (and get rid of Handzus of course). After that, the system has to work.
Which of Couture, Pavelski, or Thornton are you advocating moving?

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:31 AM
  #12
murdock1116
Registered User
 
murdock1116's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,551
vCash: 500
"Sharks For Cup" kinda nailed it on the head for me. I think our "core" is just not the right balance. Which got me thinking. How "untouchable" is Logan Couture really?

(Prepares himself to be flamed, sorry for the long post ahead of time)

Now if you take a look at our team, we know that the future is grim. If I consider "Young" 26 and below than we are really looking at Couture, Galiardi, Sheppard, Wingels, Vlasic, Demers and Braun as our team of the future. That's not a very good team, even with Couture as a Stud. So that then begs the question. What is the point of holding onto Couture if we have nothing to support him with 4-5 years from now. Our window to win is 2-3 years, granted Couture is a big part of our team, he doesn't help us with team speed and his trade value is very high.

I then started looking at likely trade partners....someone that can give us a top 6 winger with speed. And it took me to Tampa Bay. If we put a package together of Logan Couture & Jason Demers to TB and took back Martin St. Louis, Eric Brewer and MA Bergeron and picks/prospects to balance it out. Then got rid of Handzus and Murray. We could field a really solid team. We get a top 4 shutdown D man and a left handed PMD. We add St. Louis to our top 6 and now have 3 fast players up there in Marleau, Havlat, St. Louis.

Our lines could look like this:

CAPGEEK.COM CAP CALCULATOR ROSTER
My Custom Lineup

FORWARDS
Patrick Marleau ($6.900m) / Joe Thornton ($7.000m) / Martin St. Louis ($5.625m)
Ryane Clowe ($3.625m) / Joe Pavelski ($4.000m) / Martin Havlat ($5.000m)
T.J. Galiardi ($1.000m) / Andrew Desjardins ($0.850m) / Tommy Wingels ($0.875m)
Daniel Winnik ($1.300m) / Torrey Mitchell ($1.100m) / David Moss ($1.000m)

DEFENSEMEN
Dan Boyle ($6.667m) / Brent Burns ($5.760m)
Marc-Edouard Vlasic ($3.100m) / Eric Brewer ($3.875m)
Marc-Andre Bergeron ($1.000m) / Justin Braun ($1.200m)
GOALTENDERS
Antti Niemi ($3.800m)
Thomas Greiss ($0.588m)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled without the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $64,264,167; BONUSES: $0
CAP SPACE (20-man roster): $35,833

Maybe its not necessarily the right trade using Logan Couture, but I really think we want to try and win in the next 2 years, I like the look of that defensive core.

Then at next years trade deadline we can offer up our 1st round pick to grab a 3rd line depth player. But with the defense we could maybe get away with only 2 scoring lines.

murdock1116 is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:35 AM
  #13
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,297
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
There are not likely to be any 'sure thing' goalies available. You either take a risk on a reclamation project (Mason) or you give the best goalie you have in the system a shot and see what he can do (Stalock/Sateri).

Sticking with Niemi is pointless, he's not a bad goalie, but he's no better than Greiss, and costs a LOT more. My bet is it will be Stalock, but you really don't have a lot to lose at this point.
Personally, I wouldn't mind Niemi getting another year. The coaching staff needs to do a better job limiting his workload as Greiss ended up with the same save percentage as Niemi. That means he's done just as well with what he was given as your starter which means he's earned more time relative to your starter.

I would move him if a team is willing to give up something valuable for him because he is replaceable. But at the very least, whoever ends up the starter next year needs to not start 68 times and needs to not start 21 consecutive games to finish the season in a span of 40 days especially when 17 were in a span of 31 and multiple back-to-back situations.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:38 AM
  #14
Channing Tatum
Step Up: On Ice
 
Channing Tatum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
As well, look at our playoff history. Our failures are all alike; not enough scoring. We've always been losing these games 2-1, 2-0, etc. It's not like we're losing all these games 7-6 Pittsburgh style. We have the defense, and despite our worries about Nemo, he is capable of making big saves.
agreed. even with huskins and wallin getting significant playing time, we still were in games. the only constant is our lack of scoring

Channing Tatum is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:41 AM
  #15
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 12,982
vCash: 500
Better title: Welcome to the Handguns Show

Maybe?

Mafoofoo is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:46 AM
  #16
MarleauApologist
fun must be alwalys
 
MarleauApologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,367
vCash: 500
The lack of scoring is part of the reason I actually like Nash. Pavelski has some bad playoff seasons because his game style is easily countered. I think he will hit his prime around 30 or older, because his biggest flaw is his lack of size and therefore easiness to be pushed off the puck and countered. If he can fix this flaw, his playoff performance will see a significant rise in consistency.

Also fire Todd Mclellan, he just isn't able to coach this team. I blame him and his inability to adapt to a playstyle for our loss and crappy season.

One more thing; if DW signs Semin I will burn all of my Sharks memorabilia and never attend another game.

MarleauApologist is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:56 AM
  #17
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,297
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharks for Cup View Post
The lack of scoring is part of the reason I actually like Nash. Pavelski has some bad playoff seasons because his game style is easily countered. I think he will hit his prime around 30 or older, because his biggest flaw is his lack of size and therefore easiness to be pushed off the puck and countered. If he can fix this flaw, his playoff performance will see a significant rise in consistency.

Also fire Todd Mclellan, he just isn't able to coach this team. I blame him and his inability to adapt to a playstyle for our loss and crappy season.

One more thing; if DW signs Semin I will burn all of my Sharks memorabilia and never attend another game.
Yeah but top end scoring is not the only problem. What did the team get out of their third and fourth lines in scoring after the trade deadline and in the playoffs? They got spurts of solid play but they didn't have anything more than the one goal in the playoffs from Desjardins. While Nash adds offense, it's tough to expect to address the offensive depth by adding him which is just as important. The same really applies for Semin. As much as I can argue for either, it would take a significant turnover to get either when a good shot of depth additions can do wonders for this team. Third scoring line for starters would be nice.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 12:58 AM
  #18
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,410
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by murdock1116 View Post
"Sharks For Cup" kinda nailed it on the head for me. I think our "core" is just not the right balance. Which got me thinking. How "untouchable" is Logan Couture really?

(Prepares himself to be flamed, sorry for the long post ahead of time)

Now if you take a look at our team, we know that the future is grim. If I consider "Young" 26 and below than we are really looking at Couture, Galiardi, Sheppard, Wingels, Vlasic, Demers and Braun as our team of the future. That's not a very good team, even with Couture as a Stud. So that then begs the question. What is the point of holding onto Couture if we have nothing to support him with 4-5 years from now. Our window to win is 2-3 years, granted Couture is a big part of our team, he doesn't help us with team speed and his trade value is very high.

I then started looking at likely trade partners....someone that can give us a top 6 winger with speed. And it took me to Tampa Bay. If we put a package together of Logan Couture & Jason Demers to TB and took back Martin St. Louis, Eric Brewer and MA Bergeron and picks/prospects to balance it out. Then got rid of Handzus and Murray. We could field a really solid team. We get a top 4 shutdown D man and a left handed PMD. We add St. Louis to our top 6 and now have 3 fast players up there in Marleau, Havlat, St. Louis.
That's a nice joke.

I know everyone's a massive fan of Martin St. Louis, but I honestly he's a marginal upgrade on Couture next season, and then beyond that Couture is the better player. AND, we take back a cap dump (to us) in Brewer, and also we're forced to take MAB???

I'm not against trading Couture, but it would either be straight up for an equally talented young player (Evander Kane, for example) or in a package for a better young player. NOT for a bunch of old dudes.

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 01:00 AM
  #19
MarleauApologist
fun must be alwalys
 
MarleauApologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,367
vCash: 500
Yes, this is also true. We need a much deeper bottom 6. If I was Doug I would consider trading Patrick Marleau at this point, or Joe Thornton, but I'm really iffy on both for so many reasons.

MarleauApologist is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 01:33 AM
  #20
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,297
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
That's a nice joke.

I know everyone's a massive fan of Martin St. Louis, but I honestly he's a marginal upgrade on Couture next season, and then beyond that Couture is the better player. AND, we take back a cap dump (to us) in Brewer, and also we're forced to take MAB???

I'm not against trading Couture, but it would either be straight up for an equally talented young player (Evander Kane, for example) or in a package for a better young player. NOT for a bunch of old dudes.
The best part to me is the jump that because our young group is not stocked and loaded that that means we should trade the ones we have. Couture contributes to the window now so trading him only makes sense if we get better now and long term. Otherwise, you're only putting the team in an even bigger hole when it's time to suffer to make a new core.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 02:11 AM
  #21
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,410
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
The best part to me is the jump that because our young group is not stocked and loaded that that means we should trade the ones we have. Couture contributes to the window now so trading him only makes sense if we get better now and long term. Otherwise, you're only putting the team in an even bigger hole when it's time to suffer to make a new core.
I guess the idea is that with Couture, we'll never be a lottery team, and that we might as well trade him for a re-load and then tank for a few years?

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 08:36 AM
  #22
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,627
vCash: 500
I am 100% against trading Couture, I think that is the single dumbest thing DW could do this off-season. I'd literally trade anyone on the team before Couture.

If I could, I would probably trade Thornton and Clowe and keep Pavs and Couture as our centers. If not, I would explore what return I could get for Pavs, but that's a tough call to make.

The thing is we have enough young (or locked up) talent to avoid a rebuild. Couture, Pavelski, Havlat, Burns, Vlasic, Demers, Braun can still make up a pretty good core leaving everyone else to trade for rebuild pieces if need be. That's what I would be doing if I was DW.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 08:47 AM
  #23
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,297
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
I guess the idea is that with Couture, we'll never be a lottery team, and that we might as well trade him for a re-load and then tank for a few years?
Possibly but I can't see Couture being good enough and dynamic enough to carry the load for the team on his own to that many wins without the help of our current core or something similar.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 09:45 AM
  #24
MarleauApologist
fun must be alwalys
 
MarleauApologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I am 100% against trading Couture, I think that is the single dumbest thing DW could do this off-season. I'd literally trade anyone on the team before Couture.

If I could, I would probably trade Thornton and Clowe and keep Pavs and Couture as our centers. If not, I would explore what return I could get for Pavs, but that's a tough call to make.

The thing is we have enough young (or locked up) talent to avoid a rebuild. Couture, Pavelski, Havlat, Burns, Vlasic, Demers, Braun can still make up a pretty good core leaving everyone else to trade for rebuild pieces if need be. That's what I would be doing if I was DW.
Trading JT is horrible unless you are 100% blowing up the team and re-building it. Couture and Pavelski both have shown they aren't ready to play against top defensive pairings. If you are doing this then you may as well trade Havlat too...

MarleauApologist is offline  
Old
05-15-2012, 10:09 AM
  #25
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,627
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharks for Cup View Post
Trading JT is horrible unless you are 100% blowing up the team and re-building it. Couture and Pavelski both have shown they aren't ready to play against top defensive pairings. If you are doing this then you may as well trade Havlat too...
Pavelski played against consistently higher quality of competition than Thornton, by quite a bit. Couture wasn't that far off either.

And you clearly missunderstood my post totally. I said, no matter what we don't have to totally rebuild because we have a solid young core. We could, if we wanted to, trade any or most of our vets and still not bottom dwell. Would we make the playoffs next year? no guarantee, but we barely made it this year.

hockeyball 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 04:33 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.