HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2017 NHL Entry Draft

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-27-2016, 10:12 PM
  #51
Lobster57
nosdoom
 
Lobster57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
18 is way too young to make any kind of reliable projection for goalies.

Lobster57 is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 10:12 PM
  #52
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan View Post
i did a quick study of the success rate drafting goalies in first round outside the top 10 picks. i choose a 20 year sample between 1990 and 2009 since goalies take awhile to develop

there was 31 goalies drafted

the best were
martin brodeau
jean sebastien gigure
cory schnieder
tuuka rask

4 of 31 picks turned into elite goalies

then comes this group
dan cloutier
martin biron
cam ward
devon dubynk
seymon varlemov
marc denis

6 guys that were pretty decent starters for awhile

the next group played some...

trevor kidd
johnathon bernier
brian boucher

so we are up to 13 of 31 guys now...the remaining 18 guys here show why drafting goalies in first round sucks...

tyler moss
eric fichaud
evgeni ryabchikov
craig hillier
jean francois damphouse
jean mark pelletier
patrick desrochers
matthew choinard
maxime oulette
ari ahonen
jason bacasihun
adam monroe
hannu toivonen
marek scwartz
miko helenius
leland irving
chet pickerd
tom mccullum

as you can see most starting goalies in nhl were never drafted in first round... and teams that used a first round pick on a goalie had about a 10% chance of being happy
Nice work.

The draft is a crapshoot.

Drafting goalies is an even bigger crapshoot.

Heck if you just looked at the Bruins, they've chosen a G in the 1st rd. three times. Ryabchikov, Toivonen, and Subban.

Combine NHL games = 63

Success rate = 0%

BruinDust is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 10:28 PM
  #53
pemulis
Registered User
 
pemulis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: postdocing in Sydney
Country: Australia
Posts: 650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan View Post
i did a quick study of the success rate drafting goalies in first round outside the top 10 picks. i choose a 20 year sample between 1990 and 2009 since goalies take awhile to develop

there was 31 goalies drafted

the best were
martin brodeau
jean sebastien gigure
cory schnieder
tuuka rask

4 of 31 picks turned into elite goalies

then comes this group
dan cloutier
martin biron
cam ward
devon dubynk
seymon varlemov
marc denis

6 guys that were pretty decent starters for awhile

the next group played some...

trevor kidd
johnathon bernier
brian boucher

so we are up to 13 of 31 guys now...the remaining 18 guys here show why drafting goalies in first round sucks...

tyler moss
eric fichaud
evgeni ryabchikov
craig hillier
jean francois damphouse
jean mark pelletier
patrick desrochers
matthew choinard
maxime oulette
ari ahonen
jason bacasihun
adam monroe
hannu toivonen
marek scwartz
miko helenius
leland irving
chet pickerd
tom mccullum

as you can see most starting goalies in nhl were never drafted in first round... and teams that used a first round pick on a goalie had about a 10% chance of being happy

im editing to point out rask, gigure, schnieder were all traded by their origional teams as goalies are very slow to develop

other famous goalies drafted in the top 10 didnt turn out too well either

calgary drafted brent krahn
nashville brian finley
islanders took louongo but traded him
then took diepietro
rangers struckout on dan blackburn
pascal leclair flaired out
of course montreal did good with price but we see hes the exception

its very very bad idea to draft goalies in first round
Thanks! Nice work. But this list is actually irrelevant until you compare to other positions. Compare the mean and standard deviation to Defensemen or centers using the same criteria you've used. If you find that there are statistical differences, then I'll agree, otherwise, I'm on the fence.

pemulis is online now  
Old
10-27-2016, 11:05 PM
  #54
riverhawkey91
Registered User
 
riverhawkey91's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Lowell, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 654
vCash: 500
Chiarelli & co. obviously deserve a lot of the flak they get for the drafting in those years, but people go way overboard when it comes to the Subban pick.

Has Subban turned out to be a good goalie? No. Is it a bad idea to draft a goalie in the first round? Probably. But if you go back and look at the draft, other than Tanner Pearson, there really isn't much legit NHL talent until the third round. The draft pretty much fell off in the early 20's, which if memory serves was what most people were projecting anyways.

The Bruins pretty obviously just tried to swing for the fences and went with a raw, inexperienced kid with some pretty high potential. Obviously it hasn't worked out, but what exactly was the downside there...missing out on Brady Skjei or Matt Finn or Sebastian Collberg? People can criticize the pick all they want, but honestly nobody taken in the next 20+ picks after Subban would be helping this team either (aside from the aforementioned Pearson).


Last edited by riverhawkey91: 10-27-2016 at 11:17 PM.
riverhawkey91 is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 06:33 AM
  #55
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,937
vCash: 500
Decent site showing us pick history of taking goalies in the first round. Same year Subban picked, the Bolts chose Vasilevskiy prior to him who`s played far more than Subban to this point. Other than that, 2012-2016, only 3 goalies picked in 1st round.

2007-2011= 4 with a list of goalies that aren`t exactly challenging for the Vezina

Going back a touch earlier if you wish you`ll see a few more goalies picked in the first round than in recent years, names like Rask/Price/Bernier etc...

Any way you cut it, drafting goalies in the first round is rarely the wisest thing to do
http://www.draftsite.com/nhl/draft-h...sition/g/33/2/

ODAAT is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 06:41 AM
  #56
MAINE-IAC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: southern maine
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
They should have kept Martin jones @ 3 years 3 mill per IMO .

MAINE-IAC is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 06:50 AM
  #57
ODAAT
Registered User
 
ODAAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAINE-IAC View Post
They should have kept Martin jones @ 3 years 3 mill per IMO .
few had any issues here as I recall when Sweeney moved Jones to the Sharks for a first rounder and Kuraly

The headache began forming when the Sharks surprised almost everyone here who, at the time of the trade, like myself, had the sharks as a bottom feeder team

Hindsight is 20/20

With Rask in the fold, I would wager 29 other GM`s also would have made that deal if it were out there

ODAAT is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 07:05 AM
  #58
Pia8988
Registered User
 
Pia8988's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Country: United States
Posts: 6,070
vCash: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by ODAAT View Post
few had any issues here as I recall when Sweeney moved Jones to the Sharks for a first rounder and Kuraly

The headache began forming when the Sharks surprised almost everyone here who, at the time of the trade, like myself, had the sharks as a bottom feeder team

Hindsight is 20/20

With Rask in the fold, I would wager 29 other GM`s also would have made that deal if it were out there
If Jones had the start to this year for the Bruins instead of the Sharks people would just be calling to trade him anyways. Whichever goalie that is here will have a score of people wanting him replaced.

Pia8988 is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 07:06 AM
  #59
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAINE-IAC View Post
They should have kept Martin jones @ 3 years 3 mill per IMO .
Ever consider that perhaps it was Jones who had no interest in staying?

BruinDust is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 07:08 AM
  #60
Pia8988
Registered User
 
Pia8988's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Country: United States
Posts: 6,070
vCash: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinDust View Post
Ever consider that perhaps it was Jones who had no interest in staying?
He was an RFA and the Bruins didn't have 3 million in space at the time anyways. I also think it's a terrible idea to invest 3 million into a back up when your starter is making 7.

Pia8988 is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 07:20 AM
  #61
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pia8988 View Post
He was an RFA and the Bruins didn't have 3 million in space at the time anyways. I also think it's a terrible idea to invest 3 million into a back up when your starter is making 7.
Yeah they did have space actually.

The rumor is Sweeney reached out to the Jones camp to see what it would take to get him signed. The Jones camp politely declined, wanted an opportunity at a starting job.

And it's not a terrible idea, at all. Considering your back-up starts 20-25 games a year. For the sake of 3 million, wouldn't you rather give you team it's best chance to win 82 games a year vs. 55 or 60?

Investing peanuts in their back-ups in 2015 and 2016 didn't exactly work out so good.

Or put it this way, what's a better investment? 3 million in a high-quality back-up, or 2.5 million for Hayes, or 2.75 for McQuaid, or 2.5 for Kevan? Doesn't look so bad now does it?

BruinDust is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 07:47 AM
  #62
DaStinger
Permanent Interim
 
DaStinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NB, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,958
vCash: 477
Send a message via MSN to DaStinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by pemulis View Post
Thanks! Nice work. But this list is actually irrelevant until you compare to other positions. Compare the mean and standard deviation to Defensemen or centers using the same criteria you've used. If you find that there are statistical differences, then I'll agree, otherwise, I'm on the fence.
This comes from TSNs Data from 2000-2009
http://www.tsn.ca/playing-the-percen...draft-1.206144

"So, this is reasonably what we would expect. 80% of first-round picks, 44% of second-round picks, and 30% of third-round picks will become low-level (or better) NHL players."

80% of first round picks become NHL players of some caliber, Alberta_OReilly_Fan found a 41.9% for goalies with his data. This leads one to believe that goalies picked in the first round have a FAR less chance to become a successful NHL player.

DaStinger is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 08:21 AM
  #63
Bmessy
Registered User
 
Bmessy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: East Boston, MA
Posts: 2,144
vCash: 500
I would not mind a top 10 pick this year. Best player available. A top prospect plus the ones we already have would really help the following 2-3 years. If everyone get's their **** together maybe we're a playoff team. But I don't want DS to buy parts in order to do so. If last year is any indication that's not the case.

I would not draft a goalie in round 1. You know what can make pro caliber goalies look good? A good defense in front of him. Work on the defense

Bmessy is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 09:24 AM
  #64
Ratty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Rive Gauche
Posts: 8,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAINE-IAC View Post
They should have kept Martin jones @ 3 years 3 mill per IMO .
Looking back at that trade, an interesting comment from a CBSSports article on Jones. "because the Bruins already have many quality goaltenders in the organization such as Tuukka Rask and Malcolm Subban, there wasn't a place for him in Boston".

Isn't second guessing fun?

Ratty is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 04:29 PM
  #65
MAINE-IAC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: southern maine
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinDust View Post
Ever consider that perhaps it was Jones who had no interest in staying?
Yes but I'm not in on all the negotiations . I just think this team has made a lot of bad personnel decisions the past few years and that was one of them.

MAINE-IAC is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 04:45 PM
  #66
MAINE-IAC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: southern maine
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ODAAT View Post
few had any issues here as I recall when Sweeney moved Jones to the Sharks for a first rounder and Kuraly

The headache began forming when the Sharks surprised almost everyone here who, at the time of the trade, like myself, had the sharks as a bottom feeder team

Hindsight is 20/20

With Rask in the fold, I would wager 29 other GM`s also would have made that deal if it were out there
It's hindsight with us here but I would like to think that the scouting staff here could see what the Sharks saw in him and maybe predict that he would be the better goalie to sign since it was 1/2 the money rask gets and ship raske out. I disagree with all 29 gm's doing the same but I will say most defiantly would have done the same.

MAINE-IAC is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 05:32 PM
  #67
Alberta_OReilly_Fan
Bruin fan since 1975
 
Alberta_OReilly_Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edmonton Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pemulis View Post
Thanks! Nice work. But this list is actually irrelevant until you compare to other positions. Compare the mean and standard deviation to Defensemen or centers using the same criteria you've used. If you find that there are statistical differences, then I'll agree, otherwise, I'm on the fence.
ive done quite a few lists which come to the conclusion that less than 50% of picks outside the top 5 will ever be worthy of a second contract... basically will be bottom line guys...

of course its subjective when i say a guy is unworthy of a second contract. people like chuck kobasew, eric nystrom, and danial paille hang around the nhl for years finding work... but id call them all first round busts.

the main difference between picking forwards in the first round... compared to dmen... compared to goalies is the % of stars found.

as a general rule almost all of the games 50 best forwards are first round picks and then that number drops alot for dmen... and then for goalies the vast majority of the starting 30 goalies were not first round picks.

i think what this proves is that high end offensive talent is easier to identify in 17 year olds... learning to play defense often requires 4-5 extra years of development... and having the mental makeup to play nhl goal is a total crapshoot when you are 17

teams can see skill when looking at 17... much harder to see mental toughness and a committment to keep working

the success rate taking top 5 picks is quite a bit higher... the kids taken top 5 usually are quite special as far as talent goes and even if their mental/work suffers they usually still score enough to compensate.

i think this is why you see dmen drop out of the top of the draft in recent seasons despite the success of drew doughty.

if i was a top scout id take only forwards top 5... then only forwards and dmen for rest of first round... i wouldnt gamble on goalies until second round

Alberta_OReilly_Fan is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 05:40 PM
  #68
Alberta_OReilly_Fan
Bruin fan since 1975
 
Alberta_OReilly_Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edmonton Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAINE-IAC View Post
It's hindsight with us here but I would like to think that the scouting staff here could see what the Sharks saw in him and maybe predict that he would be the better goalie to sign since it was 1/2 the money rask gets and ship raske out. I disagree with all 29 gm's doing the same but I will say most defiantly would have done the same.
let jones have 2 seasons before we annoint him the next one. i can point to guys like cam ward and ryan miller and mike smith and craig anderson and show you seasons they were contenders for the vezina.,. and then show you multiple seasons they were rather pedestrine.

rask career numbers still stack up top 5 in the league... career sv%... rate he gets shutouts... his wins...

outside of carey price and possibly now holtby, rask has had about as good a career as anyone.

of course, the fan base wants a cup win too... and be able to beat montreal...

rasks numbers through 3 games this year are near perfect... and thats despite playing on a team we all say is crap. i admit last season was his weakest but even last season with that defense, his numbers were still very middle of the pack better than average

the contract is high... but he deserves it based on results

Alberta_OReilly_Fan is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 07:26 PM
  #69
pemulis
Registered User
 
pemulis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: postdocing in Sydney
Country: Australia
Posts: 650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaStinger View Post
This comes from TSNs Data from 2000-2009
http://www.tsn.ca/playing-the-percen...draft-1.206144

"So, this is reasonably what we would expect. 80% of first-round picks, 44% of second-round picks, and 30% of third-round picks will become low-level (or better) NHL players."

80% of first round picks become NHL players of some caliber, Alberta_OReilly_Fan found a 41.9% for goalies with his data. This leads one to believe that goalies picked in the first round have a FAR less chance to become a successful NHL player.
Thanks for the context. But I don't think the way AOF got his numbers for goalies are the same as the tsn article got their numbers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan View Post
ive done quite a few lists which come to the conclusion that less than 50% of picks outside the top 5 will ever be worthy of a second contract... basically will be bottom line guys...

of course its subjective when i say a guy is unworthy of a second contract. people like chuck kobasew, eric nystrom, and danial paille hang around the nhl for years finding work... but id call them all first round busts.

the main difference between picking forwards in the first round... compared to dmen... compared to goalies is the % of stars found.

as a general rule almost all of the games 50 best forwards are first round picks and then that number drops alot for dmen... and then for goalies the vast majority of the starting 30 goalies were not first round picks.

i think what this proves is that high end offensive talent is easier to identify in 17 year olds... learning to play defense often requires 4-5 extra years of development... and having the mental makeup to play nhl goal is a total crapshoot when you are 17

teams can see skill when looking at 17... much harder to see mental toughness and a committment to keep working

the success rate taking top 5 picks is quite a bit higher... the kids taken top 5 usually are quite special as far as talent goes and even if their mental/work suffers they usually still score enough to compensate.

i think this is why you see dmen drop out of the top of the draft in recent seasons despite the success of drew doughty.

if i was a top scout id take only forwards top 5... then only forwards and dmen for rest of first round... i wouldnt gamble on goalies until second round
Interesting. Thanks for expanding on your thoughts. I'm definitely not disagreeing with you. I just like the numbers to back up assertions. Your explanation is logical, no doubt. I'd just like to add that I think inherently, comparing goalies to other positions is difficult just becasue the sample size is so much smaller in the first round, which in turn means that the variation is likely much larger. So even though absolute values (means or precentages) may be different, the variation may overlap making the differences insignificant.

cheers

pemulis is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 07:30 PM
  #70
MAINE-IAC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: southern maine
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan View Post
let jones have 2 seasons before we annoint him the next one. i can point to guys like cam ward and ryan miller and mike smith and craig anderson and show you seasons they were contenders for the vezina.,. and then show you multiple seasons they were rather pedestrine.

rask career numbers still stack up top 5 in the league... career sv%... rate he gets shutouts... his wins...

outside of carey price and possibly now holtby, rask has had about as good a career as anyone.

of course, the fan base wants a cup win too... and be able to beat montreal...

rasks numbers through 3 games this year are near perfect... and thats despite playing on a team we all say is crap. i admit last season was his weakest but even last season with that defense, his numbers were still very middle of the pack better than average

the contract is high... but he deserves it based on results
I don't disagree . Time will tell if it was the right decision for both teams. I like rask but not the contract especially if jones pans out. If he pans out then I say they screwed up. To me it's not hindsight. They get paid to project a players growth .

MAINE-IAC is offline  
Old
10-29-2016, 11:00 AM
  #71
FinnHockeyFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,299
vCash: 500
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjXlNUUp55A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8LLRzCME78
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVFbLXevTV0

Here's few highlight videos of Eeli Tolvanen.
How this kid would fit in Bruins offense.

He's committed to Boston college for next season ( 2017-2018)

FinnHockeyFan is offline  
Old
10-29-2016, 11:39 AM
  #72
Danton Heineken
Unlimited Pasta Goal
 
Danton Heineken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fall River
Country: United States
Posts: 18,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnHockeyFan View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjXlNUUp55A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8LLRzCME78
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVFbLXevTV0

Here's few highlight videos of Eeli Tolvanen.
How this kid would fit in Bruins offense.

He's committed to Boston college for next season ( 2017-2018)
He becomes a beast in EHM.

Danton Heineken is offline  
Old
10-29-2016, 11:45 AM
  #73
Rumpy
Registered User
 
Rumpy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinDust View Post
Nice work.

The draft is a crapshoot.

Drafting goalies is an even bigger crapshoot.

Heck if you just looked at the Bruins, they've chosen a G in the 1st rd. three times. Ryabchikov, Toivonen, and Subban.

Combine NHL games = 63

Success rate = 0%
LoL remember that time the Bruins picked a guy in the first round they'd never seen live and only saw some video and scouting through the grapevine.

Pretty sure there were some interesting articles about this back in the day. Could you imagine something like this happening in this day and age?

Just looked can't find any articles. Did I make this up or was it a TV blurb Sinden admitted they picked him without really knowing anything about him?


Last edited by Rumpy: 10-29-2016 at 12:00 PM.
Rumpy is offline  
Old
10-29-2016, 12:08 PM
  #74
Saxon Eric
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 3,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpy View Post
LoL remember that time the Bruins picked a guy in the first round they'd never seen live and only saw some video and scouting through the grapevine.

Pretty sure there were some interesting articles about this back in the day. Could you imagine something like this happening in this day and age?

Just looked can't find any articles. Did I make this up or was it a TV blurb Sinden admitted they picked him without really knowing anything about him?
I remember Sinden saying he did really well at some Jr tournament so they thought they had scooped the rest of the NHL....

Saxon Eric is offline  
Old
11-04-2016, 12:52 PM
  #75
Saxon Eric
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 3,625
vCash: 500
lSS For November

1 Patrick, Nolan C Brandon WHL
2 Liljegren, Timothy RD Rogle SweJE
3 Vilardi, Gabe C Windsor OHL
4 Tippett, Owen RW Mississauga OHL
5 Kostin, Klim C Dynamo KHL
6 Vesalainen, Kristian LW Frolunda SweJE
7 Comtois, Maxime LW Victoriaville QMJHL
8 Rasmussen, Michael C Tri-City WHL
9 Tolvanen, Eeli LW Sioux City USHL
10 Foote, Callan RD Kelowna WHL
11 Hague, Nicolas RD Mississauga OHL
12 Chmelevski, Sasha C Ottawa OHL
13 Mittelstadt, Casey C Green Bay USHL
14 Popugaev, Nikita A. LW Moose Jaw WHL
15 Poehling, Ryan C St. Cloud State NCHC
16 Necas, Martin RW Brno Kometa HC CzeE
17 Slepets, Kirill LW Yaroslavl MJU17
18 Mattheos, Stelio C Brandon WHL
19 Valimaki, Juuso LD Tri-City WHL
20 Martin, Luke RD Michigan BigTen
21 Hischier, Nico RW Halifax QMJHL
22 Vaakanainen, Urho LD JYP Jyvaskyla FinE
23 Rubinchik, Mark LD Saskatoon WHL
24 Bower, Shane C Waterloo USHL
25 Andersson, Lias LW HV71 SweE
26 Kneen, Nolan RD Kamloops WHL
27 Salo, Robin LD Sport FinE
28 Strome, Matthew LW Hamilton OHL
29 Anderson-Dolan, Jaret C Spokane WHL
30 Elvenes, Lukas RW Rogle SweJE
31 Studnicka, Jack C Oshawa OHL


Mississaugaís right winger, Owen Tippett, rises seven positions this month to #4 from last monthís #11 ranking. Nolan Patrick (#1), Timothy Liljegren (#2) and Gabe Vilardi (#3) continue to maintain the top 3 ranks for Novemberís release.

Saxon Eric 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 07:48 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.