HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

2013 Offseason roster build thread part Additional Nauseum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-24-2013, 02:17 PM
  #301
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
What recent trade deadline moves are comparable to what you think Vanek and Pavelski would return?

I have this feeling that a guy like Vanek would get more than a guy like Pavelski.

Offense returns a premium and I could see teams viewing Pavelski as a guy that benefits from playing with Joe T and Vanek is a guy that produces regardless of linemates.
I think a player like Pavelski would be the most sought after deadline acquisition.

Offense returns a premium? really? you believe that?

Paul Gaustad returned a 1st
Derek Roy returned a 2nd

Pavelski has moved all throughout the lineup in san jose the last 4 years... and produces regardless of linemates.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 02:39 PM
  #302
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,267
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
I think a player like Pavelski would be the most sought after deadline acquisition.

Offense returns a premium? really? you believe that?

Paul Gaustad returned a 1st
Derek Roy returned a 2nd

Pavelski has moved all throughout the lineup in san jose the last 4 years... and produces regardless of linemates.
Deadline vs. summer acquisition. Summer pricing/costs are always less than the premiums supposed contenders pay at the deadline.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 02:42 PM
  #303
is the answer jesus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,059
vCash: 500
I think Pavelski and Vanek would have similar value at the trade deadline. So if the sabres have already spoken with Vanek and he has no interest in re-signing with the team why not trade him for Pavelski? Pavelski fills an immediate need and we'd have over half a year to discuss an extension with him. Also i'd have no problem giving Pavelski 6 million a year he's worth every penny of it. If he's intent on hitting free agency you've still got a valuable asset you can flip at the deadline for futures. Seems like a win win for the sabres. As others have said I think with the style Pavelski plays he'll have more productive years left in him than Vanek which also factors into my desire to trade for him.

is the answer jesus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:13 PM
  #304
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
So you just want futures then.



In the meantime, we'll just keep waiting and hoping that Girgensons (who still hasn't played center consistently as a pro) or Larsson (who may be a better LW than C) can fill the hard minutes, shutdown center.

$6m is the market price for a player of that ilk, especially in a world where Bryan Little and Sam Gagner make $4.8m.
If i am trading Vanek I want picks and young players---not 1 yr rentals.

Those werent arbitration awards--those were agreed to overpayments. Neither player was worth it.

As for Pavelski---who says he would even sign here? I dont see it happening. all thinks being equal Id rather keep Vanek over Pavelski.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
Pavelski is no more a 3C than Evgeni Malkin is a 2C. Pavelski is a top line player in the NHL. Period. A guy who can net 60 pts and do all the other things that he does is an invaluable asset.


Pavelski would be the 1C on this team. You think Cody Hodgson and Mikhail Grigorenko should see more ice than Pavelski? You crazy.
I am not questioning Pavelski as a player...Im questioning how he fits on this team at the price of Vanek and the risk of him walking.

Pavelski's stats do not say top level first line Center. His states say 2nd line center at best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
We can have both Pavelski and Girgensons on the team. There is no law that Girgensons has to play center once he makes the big club. You could build a very good shutdown line around him and Pavelski, or you could deploy Girgs with Grigs or Hodgson to cover some of their shortcomings.


.
Sure...but at what price for Pavelski...remember if his stats drop he becomes a bench mark for future contracts of Hodgson and Grigorenko if their stats exceed his.
I also know Pavelski can also play wing which he has done quite a bit. but if you view him as a wing Vanek has more value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
Yours is the type of thinking that constantly gets Regier and the Sabres in trouble: "Oh, we have one of these, so we don't need more of that good stuff, because we already have one."
.
Actually no....

I have said numerous times that Regier hasnt done what I think he should have done.

what i dont believe in doing --is stockpiling players where you already have more than enough players. It hurts their future trade value and their development.

No you cant take a winger and move them to center or a center and move them to winger. Its not that simple.

Be honest how would you react if buffalo traded Vanek to EDM for Klefbom and Musel or to PHX for Gormley and one of their vet Dmen under contract the next few years?

Is that really how you build a team by just stockpiling on items you dont really need thus having a glut and thus reducing their value because there are two many players so they cant all develop so some of them lose out and dont develop hurting their value.

you do have to look at a team and say where do you need to add players...winger is the obvious one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
So you re-sign Pavelski. What's the problem? His game plays throughout a career. He has good defensive abilities and he has good hockey sense. He's still going to be a valuable player at 31-32 when this team is trying to make the playoffs again.

There is no guarentee he even signs here and at what cost. He sets a benchmark for a likely high point production out of Hodgson and Grigorenko.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
your looking way too far down the road... and underestimating the vast cap space the Sabres will have.

They could throw 6 million at Pavelski... over 5 years... and it won't be a problem at all.
The way i see their cap space....

If Miller and Vanek are dealt.....they would be around $44M...they would have $20M to play with.

I have no problem signing Pavelski then.....then i would have him and get the picks and prospects for Vanek. Trading him for Vanek---I dont like at all.

I want to pay him at a reasonable cap hit. sure the contract could be front loaded then drop off later for a lower cap hit.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:15 PM
  #305
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
Deadline vs. summer acquisition. Summer pricing/costs are always less than the premiums supposed contenders pay at the deadline.
Roy got a 2nd + B prospect at the deadline. Depending on how you view Corrado (and if you believe Regier got offered a first for Ott) he actually had more value over the summer.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:27 PM
  #306
drinking bleach irl
p trendy tbh
 
drinking bleach irl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Virginia
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 10,930
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar View Post
Roy got a 2nd + B prospect at the deadline. Depending on how you view Corrado (and if you believe Regier got offered a first for Ott) he actually had more value over the summer.
For me Connaughton + 2nd > Ott + Pardy, but I know some will disagree.

drinking bleach irl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:28 PM
  #307
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
I think a player like Pavelski would be the most sought after deadline acquisition.

Offense returns a premium? really? you believe that?

Paul Gaustad returned a 1st
Derek Roy returned a 2nd

Pavelski has moved all throughout the lineup in san jose the last 4 years... and produces regardless of linemates.
So Derek Roy during a less than stellar season is a trade deadline comparable for Vanek?

I would think that there are much better comparables than Roy for Vanek.

Plus, Regier has done well as a seller at the deadline. I would factor that into the Roy vs Gaustad comparison, too. That and the other pieces in those deals that were left out.

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:29 PM
  #308
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
As for Pavelski---who says he would even sign here? I dont see it happening. all thinks being equal Id rather keep Vanek over Pavelski.
that's funny



Quote:
I am not questioning Pavelski as a player...Im questioning how he fits on this team at the price of Vanek and the risk of him walking.

Pavelski's stats do not say top level first line Center. His states say 2nd line center at best.


As far as fit.... Pavelski fits better

Quote:
Sure...but at what price for Pavelski...remember if his stats drop he becomes a bench mark for future contracts of Hodgson and Grigorenko if their stats exceed his.
that's not how you build a team.

Quote:
I also know Pavelski can also play wing which he has done quite a bit. but if you view him as a wing Vanek has more value.
Does Vanek have more value than Backes?



Quote:
Actually no....

I have said numerous times that Regier hasnt done what I think he should have done.

what i dont believe in doing --is stockpiling players where you already have more than enough players. It hurts their future trade value and their development.

No you cant take a winger and move them to center or a center and move them to winger. Its not that simple.
yea, stockpiling players at the same position throughout the pipeline and NHL stages of development is stupid... everyone know all prospects reach the NHL and their full potential


Quote:
Be honest how would you react if buffalo traded Vanek to EDM for Klefbom and Musel or to PHX for Gormley and one of their vet Dmen under contract the next few years?

Is that really how you build a team by just stockpiling on items you dont really need thus having a glut and thus reducing their value because there are two many players so they cant all develop so some of them lose out and dont develop hurting their value.
I'd feel great, Klefbom could be the franchise defensemen we need.... oh wait... my bad, all of our defensive prospects will reach their ceiling....

Quote:
you do have to look at a team and say where do you need to add players...winger is the obvious one.
**** wingers...



Quote:
There is no guarentee he even signs here and at what cost. He sets a benchmark for a likely high point production out of Hodgson and Grigorenko.
you mean if we pay Pavelski like a 60 pt 2 way center, and then Hodgson and Grigorenko become 60 pt 2 way centers, then we'll have to pay them too

oh ****, that would be ****ing terrible


Quote:
The way i see their cap space....

If Miller and Vanek are dealt.....they would be around $44M...they would have $20M to play with.

I have no problem signing Pavelski then.....then i would have him and get the picks and prospects for Vanek. Trading him for Vanek---I dont like at all.
I want to pay him at a reasonable cap hit. sure the contract could be front loaded then drop off later for a lower cap hit.
what happened to your argument about the impact on coho/grigs... that argument dissipated quickly.

So you would pay free agent market price for Pavelski, but wouldn't trade Vanek for him.

So to you, the prospect return on a vanek trade (you obviously have one of those bloviated opinions of what Vanek will return with 1 year left) is worth more to the future of the franchise, then a full year of Coho/Grigs development being properly situated.... and that's where your wrong.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:33 PM
  #309
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
So Derek Roy during a less than stellar season is a trade deadline comparable for Vanek?

I would think that there are much better comparables than Roy for Vanek.

Plus, Regier has done well as a seller at the deadline. I would factor that into the Roy vs Gaustad comparison, too. That and the other pieces in those deals that were left out.
the comparable was in response to the claim that teams put a premium on offense at the deadline.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:39 PM
  #310
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
the comparable was in response to the claim that teams put a premium on offense at the deadline.
So I guess deals for guys like Kovalchuk don't indicate that teams put a premium on offense at the deadline?

Gaustad also brings certain things to the table that Pavelski doesn't. Namely size.

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:41 PM
  #311
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
What recent trade deadline moves are comparable to what you think Vanek and Pavelski would return?

I have this feeling that a guy like Vanek would get more than a guy like Pavelski.

Offense returns a premium and I could see teams viewing Pavelski as a guy that benefits from playing with Joe T and Vanek is a guy that produces regardless of linemates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
I think a player like Pavelski would be the most sought after deadline acquisition.

Offense returns a premium? really? you believe that?

Paul Gaustad returned a 1st
Derek Roy returned a 2nd

Pavelski has moved all throughout the lineup in san jose the last 4 years... and produces regardless of linemates.


Gaustead +high 4th (around 100) for a 1st
Roy for a 2nd + a top 5 prospect.

Kovi/Hossa brought back 3 players + 1st. Hossa was a 4 for 2 deal.


Vancouver paid less for roy because they were looking at this as a more of a pure rental and not a likely re-signing.

If Vanek or Pavelski state publicly they are going to test free agency then their values will go down.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:43 PM
  #312
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
So I guess deals for guys like Kovalchuk don't indicate that teams put a premium on offense at the deadline?

Gaustad also brings certain things to the table that Pavelski doesn't. Namely size.
Gaustead also has the reputation of being one of the best face off men and a great PK...Pavelski doesnt have that reputation.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:45 PM
  #313
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegomyLeggio View Post
So I guess deals for guys like Kovalchuk don't indicate that teams put a premium on offense at the deadline?
Kovalchuk was on pace for 100 pts when he was traded... he averaged about 90 pts a season in the previous 4 years.

Kovalchuk was a top 5 forward in the NHL when he was traded. Is that really your comparable for Vanek? (It's probably the closest thing we have as far as trade value)

So take Kovalchuks return : late 1st, 3 pieces of garbage.... and now downgrade it to Vanek.

1 super star being traded doesn't change the overall complexion of what teams are trying to do at the deadline.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:50 PM
  #314
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
Gaustead also has the reputation of being one of the best face off men and a great PK...Pavelski doesnt have that reputation.
wrong... among top 6 centers he's one of the best. I'd put him in the same class as Toews and Bergeron

(i bet you looked at his faceoff % this year, and quickly jumped to a conclusion)

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 03:56 PM
  #315
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,267
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar View Post
Roy got a 2nd + B prospect at the deadline. Depending on how you view Corrado (and if you believe Regier got offered a first for Ott) he actually had more value over the summer.
Generally speaking, summer pricing is lower -- that's why mid-pairing shutdown defensemen go for mid-round picks in July and 2nd rounders in the spring. I was trying to make a tangential point to the comments about what trade returns would be now vs. at the deadline.

Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 04:02 PM
  #316
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
08-09 56.3% (59 pts / 1274 draws)
- No one scored more points with a better draw %
09-10 58.1% (51 pts / 821 draws - 67 games)
- No one scored more points with a better draw %
10-11 54.3% (66 pts / 1020 draws)
- better draw and points : Kesler, Toews (Crosby and Datsyuk by PPG)
11-12 58.7% (61 pts / 864 draws)
- better draw and points : Toews and Bergeron

Don't let last season fool you.... Pavelski is a top tier faceoff guy

Pavelski has also been #1 or #2 in SH TOI among forwards the last few years (on his team)


Last edited by Jame: 07-24-2013 at 04:08 PM.
Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 04:34 PM
  #317
drinking bleach irl
p trendy tbh
 
drinking bleach irl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Virginia
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 10,930
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Kovalchuk was on pace for 100 pts when he was traded... he averaged about 90 pts a season in the previous 4 years.

Kovalchuk was a top 5 forward in the NHL when he was traded. Is that really your comparable for Vanek? (It's probably the closest thing we have as far as trade value)

So take Kovalchuks return : late 1st, 3 pieces of garbage.... and now downgrade it to Vanek.

1 super star being traded doesn't change the overall complexion of what teams are trying to do at the deadline.
Vanek's scoring, when drafted in comparable rank rather than raw production, actually matches up pretty well to the Hossa and Kovalchuk situations if you lend a bit of weight to goal scoring in order to lessen the impact of secondary assists.

It doesn't speak to the value of the package but I don't think he'll return much of a downgrade.

drinking bleach irl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 04:40 PM
  #318
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucky Gleason View Post
Vanek's scoring, when drafted in comparable rank rather than raw production, actually matches up pretty well to the Hossa and Kovalchuk situations if you lend a bit of weight to goal scoring in order to lessen the impact of secondary assists.

It doesn't speak to the value of the package but I don't think he'll return much of a downgrade.
Kovalchuk, Salmela, early 2nd
for
1st, Bergfors, Oduya, Cormier, late 2nd

funny how everyone forgets that 2nd round swap.... in the Devils favor



I think you will see a downgrade in the quantity, but the quality will remain the same...

1. A 1st for sure (or equal prospect)
- and that will be the bulk of the package.
2. A Bergfors/Luke Adam type of prospect. Someone that showed a sliver, but in all likelihood is utility depth.
3a. Possibly a 3rd piece, limited upside (Cormier)
or
3b. An NHL cap dump (although Oduya turned into something good, at the time his value in the trade was more cap dump...while also probably earning that 2nd round swap)

That's it...

These pipedreams of a 1st, a high prospect, and a young NHLer.... foolish

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 04:47 PM
  #319
drinking bleach irl
p trendy tbh
 
drinking bleach irl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Virginia
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 10,930
vCash: 300
Bergfors had a 45 point year at 22/23. He was a bit further ahead than Luke Adam, who very well may just fade away.

drinking bleach irl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 05:01 PM
  #320
1972
Registered User
 
1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,010
vCash: 500
If vanek would resign it's would probably be best.

1972 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 05:13 PM
  #321
Rowley Birkin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Country: England
Posts: 3,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Stafford for Havlat is a ****ing horrendous proposal
If you had read my post - it was not Stafford for Havlat.

It was Vanek/Stafford for Pavelski/Havlat as opposed to Vanek + for Pavelski.

Rowley Birkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 09:13 PM
  #322
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post



what happened to your argument about the impact on coho/grigs... that argument dissipated quickly.

So you would pay free agent market price for Pavelski, but wouldn't trade Vanek for him.

So to you, the prospect return on a vanek trade (you obviously have one of those bloviated opinions of what Vanek will return with 1 year left) is worth more to the future of the franchise, then a full year of Coho/Grigs development being properly situated.... and that's where your wrong.
If he comes in knowing his role in the future and isnt asking for $6M+ then I dont have a problem signing him as a 3rd line center. There is no risk in trying to sin him as a UFA---there is big risk in seeing him walk for nothing as part of a trade.

i do have a problem trading Vanek for him and then see him walk.

history supports my viewpoint that he will get a 1st/2nd + 2 decent prospects/young players in a trade.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2013, 09:16 PM
  #323
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
If he comes in knowing his role in the future and isnt asking for $6M+ then I dont have a problem signing him as a 3rd line center. There is no risk in trying to sin him as a UFA---there is big risk in seeing him walk for nothing as part of a trade.

i do have a problem trading Vanek for him and then see him walk.

history supports my viewpoint that he will get a 1st/2nd + 2 decent prospects/young players in a trade.
If he doesn't extend, at the deadline you can trade for the same thing or better that you'd get trading vanek for futures

Enlighten me on the history that supports your opinion

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 12:45 AM
  #324
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
If he doesn't extend, at the deadline you can trade for the same thing or better that you'd get trading vanek for futures

Enlighten me on the history that supports your opinion
I dont see you getting more for Pavelski than Vanek.

Vanek isnt all that much different than Hossa or Kovalchuk.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 09:19 AM
  #325
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,039
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
If he comes in knowing his role in the future and isnt asking for $6M+ then I dont have a problem signing him as a 3rd line center. There is no risk in trying to sin him as a UFA---there is big risk in seeing him walk for nothing as part of a trade.

i do have a problem trading Vanek for him and then see him walk.

history supports my viewpoint that he will get a 1st/2nd + 2 decent prospects/young players in a trade.
Why do you keep calling Pavelski a 3C? He's leaps and bounds better than anything Grigorenko or Hodgson have shown. Apparently, you think Grigorenko and Hodgson (and Girgensons and Larsson) are locks to hit their ceilings. Pavelski would be a 20-minute/game, all-situations 1C in Buffalo, with Grigs and Hodgson gobbling up the easy minutes that Pavelski leaves for them.

Zip15 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 08:23 PM.

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.