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

Prospect Thread XIV

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2013, 04:15 PM
  #276
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,799
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
You really think that Erik Johnson is better than Claude Giroux?



Since 1990:

Owen Nolan vs Jaromir Jagr/Martin Brodeur (wrong)
Eric Lindros vs Scott Niedermayer/Peter Forsberg (wrong)
Roman Hamrlik vs Alexei Yashin/Sergei Gonachar (wrong)
Alexandre Daigle vs Chris Pronger/Paul Kariya/Sauku Koivu (wrong)
Ed Jovanovski vs Mattias Ohlund/Daniel Alfredsson (wrong)
Bryan Berard vs Shane Doan/Jarome Iginla (wrong)
Chris Phillips vs Danny Briere (wrong)
Joe Thornton vs Roberto Luongo/Marian Hossa (right)
Vincent Lecavalier vs Brad Richards (wrong)
Patrik Stefan vs Sedins/Havlat (wrong)
DiPietro vs Heatley/Gaborik/Hartnell (wrong)
Kovalchuk vs Spezza/Hemsky (right)
Nash vs Semin/Ward/Keith (wrong)
Fleury vs Staal/Parise/Perry/Weber (wrong)
Ovechkin vs Malkin (wrong)
Crosby vs Kopitar (right)
Johnson vs Giroux (wrong)
Kane vs Couture (right)
Stamkos vs Karlsson/Eberle (right)
Tavares vs Duchene (right)
Hall vs Seguin/Skinner (wrong)

Too early to tell for 2011 or 2012. So we're looking at 6 cases where #1 was better vs 15 where he wasn't.

I think your point is being lost in the noise.

In some of the cases listed above there were other factors. In the 1990 draft for instance, everyone knew that Jagr was, by a wide margin, the best player in the draft. He wasn't selected first because his status / availability was uncertain. The Czech Socialist Republic fell in March 1990 - 3 months before the draft. It wasn't know if, in the new Czech Republic he would have to defect to play in NA, or if he would be required to complete mandatory military service.

The draft classes of the 1980's and early 1990's were totally distorted by a influx of players from eastern Europe. Look at the 1989 draft where Sergei Federov was drafted in the 4th round and Pavel Bure in the 6th round. This wasn't because teams didn't think they were outstanding players, but because there was uncertainty over their availability.

Eric Lindros vs Scott Niedermayer/Peter Forsberg is only clear in hindsight and because Lindros' career was shortened by injury. Had Lindros played healthy, and at the same level for 15+ years, his legacy would have been different.

Vincent Lecavalier vs Brad Richards - Push. Could be argued either way. Richards looks better at this point in their careers, but Lecavelier's best years were elite. Richards has a better PPG, and is a better player at this point, but he has also been injured more.

Ovechkin vs Malkin -A push, but Malkin is probably better "right now".

DiPietro vs Heatley/Gaborik/Hartnell - that was Mike Millbury drafting. Nobody else thought DiPietro was the best available player.

Marc-Andre Fleury - wasn't a BPA pick, he was picked to fill a need.

Hall vs Seguin - Push. It's way to early to make this call, but even now, Hall has a better PPG.

Drafting/scouting is also getting better. You have to go back to 2000 and 1999 to find a first overall draft bust, and 2000 was a Mike Millbury pick. Using your criteria - 6 of 15 where #1 was better, notice that 4 of these 6 are in the last 6 years?

Anyways - I think it's too early to evaluate Yakupov vs Galchenyuk. I agree that draft position is not a solid basis to evaluate them on, but when they haven't played a meaningful number of games, at this point it's really the only thing there is.

LeftCoast is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 04:21 PM
  #277
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 21,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
Anyways - I think it's too early to evaluate Yakupov vs Galchenyuk. I agree that draft position is not a solid basis to evaluate them on, but when they haven't played a meaningful number of games, at this point it's really the only thing there is.
Given that I was responding to the claim that 90% of 1st round picks are the best players in the draft, I think you could've saved yourself time and not posted that.

And there's no reason to judge prospects' whole careers based on their draft position when they're 6 months removed from draft. It's obvious that at the time of draft, the Oilers and everyone else thought that Yakupov would be the better pro. That doesn't mean that's guaranteed to happen which is what the poster was implying in another thread while making fun of anyone who thought that a #12 drafted prospect could possibly be better than a #1 drafted prospect.

But if you had bothered to follow this conversation, instead of just jumping in midway, you would realize that the real argument was over him not watching anyone play and basically deciding prospect value based on stats and draft position.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouter View Post
This.
What "this."? Even if I'm being generous and I side with all of his and your opinions, we're still at more than 50% 1st round picks in the past 30 years being worse than later picks. Even for the most generous sample size, that being the last 6 years, your statement was still wrong.


Last edited by Tiranis: 01-21-2013 at 04:33 PM.
Tiranis is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 04:32 PM
  #278
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,637
vCash: 500
How about the stance that draft position means jack **** after the draft.

I'd take many late rounders over first overall in hindsight.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 04:35 PM
  #279
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,799
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Given that I was responding to the claim that 90% of 1st round picks are the best players in the draft, I think you could've saved yourself time and not posted that.

And there's no reason to judge prospects' whole careers based on their draft position when they're 6 months removed from draft. It's obvious that at the time of draft, the Oilers and everyone else thought that Yakupov would be the better pro. That doesn't mean that's guaranteed to happen which is what the poster was implying in another thread.

But if you had bothered to follow this conversation, instead of just jumping in midway, you would realize that the real argument was over him not watching anyone play and basically deciding prospect value based on stats and draft position.



What "this."? Even if I'm being generous and I side with all of his and your opinions, we're still at more than 50% 1st round picks in the past 30 years being worse than later picks.
I should have stayed out of it.

Draft position is meaningless 10 minutes after the draft, but on these forums, a player's draft pedigree is accorded far too much status. However when players have only played 1 NHL game, there isn't much else to go on.

I do think drafting and scouting is getting better. I recall the Canucks drafting Libor Polasek in the first round having not even seen him play. Now, for anyone likely to go in the first round, they are extremely well scouted. But comparing 1 vs 3 is silly, particularly when up right up until the draft, the consensus was Yakupov, but it was far from unanimous.

LeftCoast is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 04:45 PM
  #280
Scouter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,512
vCash: 1232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Given that I was responding to the claim that 90% of 1st round picks are the best players in the draft, I think you could've saved yourself time and not posted that.

And there's no reason to judge prospects' whole careers based on their draft position when they're 6 months removed from draft. It's obvious that at the time of draft, the Oilers and everyone else thought that Yakupov would be the better pro. That doesn't mean that's guaranteed to happen which is what the poster was implying in another thread while making fun of anyone who thought that a #12 drafted prospect could possibly be better than a #1 drafted prospect.

But if you had bothered to follow this conversation, instead of just jumping in midway, you would realize that the real argument was over him not watching anyone play and basically deciding prospect value based on stats and draft position.



What "this."? Even if I'm being generous and I side with all of his and your opinions, we're still at more than 50% 1st round picks in the past 30 years being worse than later picks. Even for the most generous sample size, that being the last 6 years, your statement was still wrong.
Look, all you are doing is selecting certain criteria to make your arguments fit properly, so they are selective, and not actually true.

Scouter is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 04:48 PM
  #281
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 21,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouter View Post
Look, all you are doing is selecting certain criteria to make your arguments fit properly, so they are selective, and not actually true.
Enlighten me. Where was I being selective?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouter View Post
you really aren't going to make the argument that the 12th pick is better than the 1st are you, and you think I don't know prospects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouter View Post
Yeah, so Giroux is better than Johnson, so what, that rarely happens though.

More like you look like a fool now, cause like 90-99% of the time, the #1 pick is the best player in the draft.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 06:07 PM
  #282
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,102
vCash: 500
Alright, everyone - this is the Canucks' Prospect Thread. The conversation about Drafting can stop altogether, or be taken to the Prospects' Board.

Mr. Canucklehead is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 07:08 PM
  #283
Waveburner
RIP Luc
 
Waveburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In Morrison's house.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,490
vCash: 500
I am suprised how much Boychuk has struggled to adapt to the NHL. I never saw him as a potential first line talent, but I did believe he was an excellent bet to be a second line winger. He can still get there, but the odds are getting really long. I thought he'd be a regular NHLer by now.

As for Canucks prospects, is there still no updates on McNally? Is he sitting out the season? Awful choice if so. For a guy as raw as he is, he needs to be playing lots of minutes. I wonder if being a pro hockey player is really his dream? Seems like an odd decision to sit out a season if he wants it badly.

Waveburner is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 07:40 PM
  #284
thedavid
Registered User
 
thedavid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 179
vCash: 500
I'm sure his continuing education is some kind of factor in McNally's decision and he's not taking it lightly. For now I would assume he's planning on honouring his suspension and will return next year.

Also congrats Tiranis on your new modly powers!

thedavid is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 08:43 PM
  #285
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waveburner View Post
I am suprised how much Boychuk has struggled to adapt to the NHL. I never saw him as a potential first line talent, but I did believe he was an excellent bet to be a second line winger. He can still get there, but the odds are getting really long. I thought he'd be a regular NHLer by now.

As for Canucks prospects, is there still no updates on McNally? Is he sitting out the season? Awful choice if so. For a guy as raw as he is, he needs to be playing lots of minutes. I wonder if being a pro hockey player is really his dream? Seems like an odd decision to sit out a season if he wants it badly.
Hockey isn't everything. Someone people have multiple big goals they hope to achieve in their lives. Perhaps his life long dream is to become a professional hockey player but not at the expense of his Havard education.

YogiCanucks is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 09:40 PM
  #286
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,660
vCash: 500
^ Hence why he fell in the draft IIRC. Would still suck though for him to sit out that long. And have any of our media even asked about it? Would not be surprised if so...

vanuck is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 09:44 PM
  #287
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 21,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
And have any of our media even asked about it? Would not be surprised if so...
This is the Canucks media you're talking about. They can't ask if Schroeder is getting called up or what AV/Gillis think of him. The same guys that thought it was beneath them to catch a single AHL game during the lockout. Do you really expect them know who McNally is, let alone ask about him?

Tiranis is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 10:17 PM
  #288
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
This is the Canucks media you're talking about. They can't ask if Schroeder is getting called up or what AV/Gillis think of him. The same guys that thought it was beneath them to catch a single AHL game during the lockout. Do you really expect them know who McNally is, let alone ask about him?
I think deep inside, I guess I already knew even that was expecting too much from them lol. I've probably got more faith in PITB if they've got media credentials with the Canucks, or Nucks Misconduct, and these guys don't even get paid.

vanuck is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 10:19 PM
  #289
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
^ Hence why he fell in the draft IIRC. Would still suck though for him to sit out that long. And have any of our media even asked about it? Would not be surprised if so...
He fell because he wanted to spend all 4 years getting his degree right? Perhaps he's not just sitting out but working on some skillz?

YogiCanucks is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 10:21 PM
  #290
701
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver & OK Falls
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogiCanucks View Post
Hockey isn't everything. Someone people have multiple big goals they hope to achieve in their lives. Perhaps his life long dream is to become a professional hockey player but not at the expense of his Havard education.
In general I'm sure you're right about this.

However, it's possible that the Canucks and the McNally family agreed that Pat isn't quite ready for pro hockey, despite his age, and that a year of skating with teams in practice only (as reported way back in this thread), plus serious off-ice training, would make the most sense in his lousy situation. Given that Danny Biega will graduate in June, McNally can return to be the go-to D during his third NCAA season (but still as a Harvard sophomore), and then decide, with the Canucks, whether to complete his final NCAA year (as a junior) or go directly into the pros.

Edit: Yeah what Yogi said. Except he's stated since the draft that he'll turn pro when the Canucks think he's ready.

I doubt he'll complete his senior academic year anytime soon, since that would involve a second non-hockey-playing year. He can graduate later, I think as Schneider did.

Call this season McNally's lockout year. It's not ideal, but he'll come back, possibly a stronger and a wiser man.

701 is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:04 PM
  #291
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogiCanucks View Post
He fell because he wanted to spend all 4 years getting his degree right? Perhaps he's not just sitting out but working on some skillz?
Yeah, that's what I remember what they said about him at the draft. If he isn't going to play this year, at least I hope he's working out.

vanuck is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:46 PM
  #292
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,635
vCash: 500
So MG has spoken regarding our scouting and "dearth" of prospects:

Quote:
• ON CANUCKS’ SCOUTING:

“We’ve been slowly making changes over the years, to address some concerns I’ve had — let some people go, made a fairly significant change internally. Eric Crawford is far more involved on the amateur side.”

• ON PROSPECTS, OR DEARTH OF:

“If you look at our picks, Yann Sauve got hit by a car, almost killed. Luc Bourdon was killed. Those are not things you expect to happen. We’ve traded picks in order to try to win Stanley Cups. We’ve picked at the end of the first round for three years.

“We picked Cody Hodgson which got turned into Zack Kassian who I think is going to be an impact player here. We’ve picked a lot of young defencemen who are coming along but they take time. I’m sure there’s people who don’t even realize Peter Andersson is a player we left in Sweden for two years who’s going to be a really good player. And Kevin Connauton we think is going to be a very good player.

“We expect some of those players will be ready to emerge now — Andersson, Connauton, Frankie Corrado, who is ahead of schedule. (Danish centre) Nick Jensen left junior hockey to play in the Swedish Elite League. (Belleville Bulls centre) Brendan Gaunce is the captain of his team, we think is going to be a solid player. We’ve got college players we picked later in the draft so that they could stay in college, and we wouldn’t lose their rights.

“(Harvard defenceman) Patrick McNally, he’s in college, so he’s not right in your face, so people tend to forget about him.”

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/C...#ixzz2Ifyp8g6q
He says they have made some changes internally, but is it really enough? I still feel there are significant issues in the Q and W. Would have liked to see him admit that the scouting still needs some work.

Some love for Andersson

thefeebster is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 12:27 AM
  #293
Wayne Maki
Registered User
 
Wayne Maki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
So MG has spoken regarding our scouting and "dearth" of prospects:


He says they have made some changes internally, but is it really enough? I still feel there are significant issues in the Q and W. Would have liked to see him admit that the scouting still needs some work.

Some love for Andersson
The McNally quote seems to suggest he's not signing a pro contract any time soon.

I take the Andersson praise with a grain of salt when he praises Connauton in the same sentence.

Wayne Maki is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 12:40 AM
  #294
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,437
vCash: 500
Not a fan at all of Eric Crawford's work as a pro scout based on what I've read in terms of the acquisitions he's really lobbied for (apparently he pushed hard for Alberts, Oreskovich, and Booth among others). I can't say I'm particularly enthused about him getting involved with the amateur scouting as well.

That said, that's just an outside perspective based on articles and whatnot; who knows who has been behind the Canucks poor pro scouting decisions that last few years. I've just gotten the impression that he's blinded by size.

opendoor is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 02:00 AM
  #295
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
So MG has spoken regarding our scouting and "dearth" of prospects:


He says they have made some changes internally, but is it really enough? I still feel there are significant issues in the Q and W. Would have liked to see him admit that the scouting still needs some work.

Some love for Andersson
Nice. I wonder what this "fairly significant change" is though... anything that doesn't involve removing Delorme from his scouting post isn't significant enough for me. I have the same sentiments about Crawford too, although IIRC he did recommend getting Kassian?

Also good to see MG give some recognition to Andersson.

vanuck is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 02:06 AM
  #296
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Not a fan at all of Eric Crawford's work as a pro scout based on what I've read in terms of the acquisitions he's really lobbied for (apparently he pushed hard for Alberts, Oreskovich, and Booth among others). I can't say I'm particularly enthused about him getting involved with the amateur scouting as well.

That said, that's just an outside perspective based on articles and whatnot; who knows who has been behind the Canucks poor pro scouting decisions that last few years. I've just gotten the impression that he's blinded by size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Not a fan at all of Eric Crawford's work as a pro scout based on what I've read in terms of the acquisitions he's really lobbied for (apparently he pushed hard for Alberts, Oreskovich, and Booth among others). I can't say I'm particularly enthused about him getting involved with the amateur scouting as well.

That said, that's just an outside perspective based on articles and whatnot; who knows who has been behind the Canucks poor pro scouting decisions that last few years. I've just gotten the impression that he's blinded by size.
Agree with this. Some real big mistakes. I don't know how involved Crawford was in the Sturm situation but that was a huge example of incompetence. Everyone makes mistakes but when you make one as outright bad as that one your judgement becomes absolutely suspect. I would say also the belief that someone like Ebbett really offered any kind of NHL ability is another example.

In general, there seems a lack of accountability in the organization. Best example is the WHL where drafts and free agent puck ups have obviously been bungled big time.

The problems with the WHL scouts is well documented and has been discussed to death. However, it should be recognized that the retention of the people involved in such miserable decision making calls into question the willingness of the team to correct problem areas. There are some teams that have demonstrated a keen ability to draft. I don't know why the team does not poach some of these scouts from these teams by offering them higher salaries. The team has said it is willing to spent the money necessary to improve the product but seemingly has done little to address clear questions about their pro scouting and some of their amateur scouting.

As far as the Bourdon and Sauve situations are concerned, there was already issues with Sauve decision-making prior to car accident and Bourdon should never have picked before Kopitar.

It seems to me that the team is far too defensive about acknowledging mistakes and far too ready to offer up excuses rather than bringing new people to replace people with a record of failure (and this is most particular again in the WHL) Moreover, having Crawford oversee amateur scouting does not negate the need to have competent scouts who are focused directly and full time on areas such as the
WHL.

orcatown is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:11 AM
  #297
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 21,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Not a fan at all of Eric Crawford's work as a pro scout based on what I've read in terms of the acquisitions he's really lobbied for (apparently he pushed hard for Alberts, Oreskovich, and Booth among others). I can't say I'm particularly enthused about him getting involved with the amateur scouting as well.

That said, that's just an outside perspective based on articles and whatnot; who knows who has been behind the Canucks poor pro scouting decisions that last few years. I've just gotten the impression that he's blinded by size.
The thing is that all three of those were bargain bin pick ups. Booth, even with all his flaws, is good value for what we gave up. Oreskovich was a good gamble. Alberts is crap, but everyone makes mistakes. What we don't know is who he recommended that the Canucks haven't been able to get. Perhaps he has good track record of recommending guys who go on to be good players and we just haven't been able to acquire them.

It also sounds like the revamping of scouting is a work in progress. I didn't get the impression from that article that Gillis is satisfied with where it's at.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:14 AM
  #298
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
The thing is that all three of those were bargain bin pick ups. Booth, even with all his flaws, is good value for what we gave up. Oreskovich was a good gamble. Alberts is crap, but everyone makes mistakes.
alberts is still above replacement level and if your 7th dman is above replacement, you probably have a good defence

Verviticus is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:27 AM
  #299
Bgav
We Stylin'
 
Bgav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
The thing is that all three of those were bargain bin pick ups. Booth, even with all his flaws, is good value for what we gave up. Oreskovich was a good gamble. Alberts is crap, but everyone makes mistakes. What we don't know is who he recommended that the Canucks haven't been able to get. Perhaps he has good track record of recommending guys who go on to be good players and we just haven't been able to acquire them.

It also sounds like the revamping of scouting is a work in progress. I didn't get the impression from that article that Gillis is satisfied with where it's at.
Congrats on being a mod!

Bgav is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 08:26 AM
  #300
jigsaw99
Registered User
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,134
vCash: 500
Hm.. Gillis said he let some people go in scouting... yet he kept Ron Delorme? looks like he didn't do much.

jigsaw99 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 08:45 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.