HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

Offensive D-men in the draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-09-2007, 08:48 PM
  #1
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Offensive D-men in the draft

Our cupboard is relatively bare of top-end offensive defensemen. Guys like Brewer and Backman were always billed as offensive defensemen but given their results to date (as seen in the power play) we have a curious weakness within our overall strength at D. Junland is more of a pure offensive minded D prospect, but if he turns out to be a stud NHL offensive D-man that's an overachievement.

So, who in this draft, if they happen to be the BPA in the first round, are considered the top guys for offensive production? I've done a little reading but not super-extensive research into Dmen. Alzner, Ellerby, Petrecki don't seem to be those guys from what I've read. They seem more physical (Petrecki) and smooth, puck-moving but not necessarily offensive top-enders.

Who are the MacInnae? (plural form)

Thoughts?

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2007, 09:08 PM
  #2
Stealth JD
Drexel's dead!!!
 
Stealth JD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Safari Motor Motel
Country: United States
Posts: 6,190
vCash: 500
Marc Katic is undersized but known for his offense....he seems to be falling towards the 2nd or 3rd round. Kevin Shattenkirk supposedly has as much offensive potential as any d-man in this draft, but I doubt he's still on the board when theBlues later 1st rounders come up.

Stealth JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 03:07 AM
  #3
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Outside of Ellerby, Plante, Petrecki and McDonaugh ALL of this years top D prospects are offense oriented. Even Petrecki and McDonaugh fall into that "2-way" category like Woywitka, Jackson and Brewer(Alzner does also; but he is MUCH more finesse than these 2).

The problem is that outside of Alzner, Cross and Blum(he has a good frame but he needs to do a LOT of bulking up(to the tune of 40-60 lbs)); all of them have the same weaknesses(undersized, not very good defensively and questionable upside due to their limited Defensive ability).

Personally, I wouldn't touch ANY of this years D prospects with the exception of the 7 I mentioned(certainly not with next years HUGE crop of D men loomng on the horizon). I might consider one of them as a 3rd rounder if they drop, but A) Jarmo usually doesn't go after players that drop(he goes after players that jump in the rankings) and B) I doubt that any of them are still available in round 3 as teams desperate for D men will reach for their offensive skills(you can say "don't draft for need" all you want; but NHL history still says that teams do it). This years crop of forwards is just SO much better than their Defensive counterparts.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 07:28 AM
  #4
Carl Racki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Carl Racki
PN, I think Junland will be a bona-fide NHL'er...not saying he will be a Brian Leetch, but I watched him at the prospects camp, and next to EJ he was the best D there...Al Mac is really high on him, as well...I think he will be a good player...of course, I thought Sergei Krivokrasov would be a stud, too...

Carl Racki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 08:55 AM
  #5
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
Outside of Ellerby, Plante, Petrecki and McDonagh ALL of this years top D prospects are offense oriented. Even Petrecki and McDonagh fall into that "2-way" category like Woywitka, Jackson and Brewer (Alzner does also; but he is MUCH more finesse than these 2).

The problem is that outside of Alzner, Cross and Blum (he has a good frame but he needs to do a LOT of bulking up(to the tune of 40-60 lbs)); all of them have the same weaknesses (undersized, not very good defensively and questionable upside due to their limited defensive ability).
Let me understand... are you calling Nick Petrecki "undersized" and "not very good defensively?"

If the Blues end up keeping all three of their first-round picks, and Petrecki is, by some miracle, still available when Atlanta's pick comes up, I'd take him without a minute's hesitation, and I believe the Blues would do so as well.

I would even package Atlanta's pick, one of the third-round picks, and Backman to move up into the top 10-12 so I could draft him while keeping the 9th overall (which I would use on a forward, probably Lars Eller at this point).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
Personally, I wouldn't touch ANY of this years D prospects with the exception of the 7 I mentioned (certainly not with next years HUGE crop of D men loomng on the horizon). I might consider one of them as a 3rd rounder if they drop, but A) Jarmo usually doesn't go after players that drop (he goes after players that jump in the rankings) and B) I doubt that any of them are still available in round 3 as teams desperate for D men will reach for their offensive skills (you can say "don't draft for need" all you want; but NHL history still says that teams do it). This years crop of forwards is just SO much better than their defensive counterparts.
Oh, I don't know... I'd agree that the seven you listed are the top seven d-prospects available this year, but there are a few defensemen outside of the top seven that I think merit consideration for the middle rounds.

Yannick Weber, for example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by McKeen's website
Weber shows all the tools to man the PP as his puck skills and ability to join the play are at a premium .. has good puck skills and can weave in and out of areas .. has a small frame but is put together incredibly well making it almost impossible for a forward to get by him as he forces them to the outside or makes them take a low risk shot .. has improved many aspects of his game by constantly being played and earning the respect of coach DeBoer .. has really blossomed in Kitchener and is a solid contributor on the back end .. plays a physical game, he relishes in looking for a well-placed hit that can change the complexion of the game .. puck skills are at a premium, he works the line so well, and offensively he knows when to jump into the plays .. he comes back well when he is deep in the offensive zone as his footwork and mobility give him that luxury .. swift skater with short strides but is very mobile .. does not hurry or pinch unnecessarily for an offensive play, as he is smart enough to know when to back off, showcasing his maturity and patience .. does not take any guff and readily administers body checks while maintaining proper positioning, has innate ability to line up guys perfectly and really get the most into his checks .. has the skills to be competitive at higher levels.
5-11, 195. 13-28-41, 11 PP goals, 3 GW goals, plus-5, 42 PIM in 51 games for Kitchener (OHL). Nine points (3 goals, all on the PPG, 6 assists) in nine playoff games for the Rangers, too.

He was a minus-10 in the playoffs, but minus-9 of that came in the Plymouth series, in losses of 6-5, 5-4 and 4-1. After sweeping Sarnia out in four games in the first round, Kitchener fell victim to the Whalers in the second, losing the series 4-1 while being outscored 20-16.

On top of all that, Weber's a right-shooting defenseman, which the Blues can certainly use in the system.

Besides Weber, I also like:

T.J. Brennan (St. John's/QMJHL): 6-00, 204, shoots L, 68 GP, 16-25-41, 79 PIM
Ted Ruth (USNTDP U-18): 6-01, 199, shoots R, 39 GP, 5-11-16, 64 PIM
Kevin Shattenkirk (USNTDP U-18): 5-11, 193, shoots R, 48 GP, 12-22-34, 60 PIM
Taylor Ellington (Everett/WHL): 6-00, 200, shoots L, 60 GP, 5-8-13, 65 PIM
Eric Doyle (Swift Current/WHL): 6-02, 180, shoots R, 58 GP, 8-21-29, 40 PIM
Blake Kessel (Waterloo/USHL): 6-01, 210, shoots R, 59 GP, 11-27-38, 38 PIM

All of these guys are ranked in the top 99 of the CSS final rankings.

As for Euros, I'd look at:

Jens Hellgren (Frolunda Jr/SWE): 6-03, 192, shoots L, 40 GP, 4-6-10, 26 PIM
Harri Ilvonen (Tappara Jr/FIN): 6-02, 187, shoots L, 39 GP, 9-21-30, 38 PIM
Juraj Mikus (Trencin/SVK): 6-04, 185, shoots L, 42 GP, 9-15-24, 72 PIM
Joonas Jarvinen (TPS Jr/FIN): 6-03, 211, shoots L, 37 GP, 2-4-6, 26 PIM

All ranked in the top 37 of Euros.

Next year's crop of defensemen may well be "better," but there are decent prospects to be had this year as well. The Blues do need to bolster the ranks of their forward prospects, but they should definitely not focus on forwards to the exclusion of defensemen.

They have, as it stands now, ten picks in seven rounds. It wouldn't be a bad thing to spend three or even four of those picks on defensemen... especially if one of them was Petrecki.

P_B


Prussian_Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 09:02 AM
  #6
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian_Blue View Post
Let me understand... are you calling Nick Petrecki "undersized" and "not very good defensively?"
1) Petrecki was in the 1st group with Ellerby, Plante and McDonaugh.
2) Petrecki's defensive ability has been questioned at times(mostly in regards to how it will translate to the next level). I wouldn't call it a "weakness" but he does need to improve that aspect of his game, just like Woywitka has had to do since he was drafted.

Quote:
If the Blues end up keeping all three of their first-round picks, and Petrecki is, by some miracle, still available when Atlanta's pick comes up, I'd take him without a minute's hesitation, and I believe the Blues would do so as well.
I agree completely.

Quote:
I would even package Atlanta's pick, one of the third-round picks, and Backman to move up into the top 10-12 so I could draft him while keeping the 9th overal (which I would use on a forward, Lars Eller at this point).
If we can pull this kind of trade off there are better players I'd be going after than Petrecki. I like the kid a lot, but I wouldn't be making a scene JUST to get him. IMO he's relatively on par with Scott Jackson and I wouldn't take him with a top 15 pick.


Quote:
Oh, I don't know... I'd agree that the seven you listed are the top seven d-prospects available this year, but there are a few defensemen outside of the top seven that i think merit consideration for the middle rounds.

Yannick Weber, for example.

The middle rounds are seperate issue altogether. The question was solely in regards to our high-end picks. There are number of D men I like in the middle rounds(if, by some miracle, TJ Brennan is still there for our 3rd round pick I take him without hesitation); but they aren't the "high-end offensive types" that p-9 was asking about.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 10:05 AM
  #7
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
1) Petrecki was in the 1st group with Ellerby, Plante and McDonagh.

2) Petrecki's defensive ability has been questioned at times (mostly in regards to how it will translate to the next level). I wouldn't call it a "weakness" but he does need to improve that aspect of his game, just like Woywitka has had to do since he was drafted.
1. I don't want to argue with you, kimzey, but you did say that "all of them" were "undersized" and "not very good defensively," except for Alzner, Blum and Cross.

If that wasn't what you meant to say, I apologize... but you know I'm the Blues' forum English major...

2. Plante's draft stock is falling faster than George W. Bush's approval rating, mainly due to skating deficiencies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by McKeen's website
(Plante) has significant skating limitations that will need to be improved if he is to succeed at the top level .. acceleration and top gear are very sluggish, and has sub par lateral agility.
3. Question: Who, exactly, has "questioned" Petrecki's defensive ability, and his ability to take it to the next level?

Central Scouting hasn't questioned it, raising Petrecki from 31 at midterm to 21 in the final rankings.

McKeen's hasn't questioned it, with Petrecki currently ranked 20th overall:

Quote:
Originally Posted by McKeen's website
.. nearly unbeatable in one-on-one situations, as once he locks on his man it is over .. neutralizes his man every time and often in the most physical way possible .. great one-on-one coverage down low and along the boards .. uses his long reach well and is unbeatable off the rush because of his fine gap control and superb mobility .. throwback defenseman in the mold of Scott Stevens has tremendous lower and upper body strength that allows him to land devastatingly powerful checks .. finishes his man every time with vigor even after the whistle .. excellent at protecting his goalie and clearing the crease .. is short-tempered and may have the nastiest mean streak among the 2007 NHL Draft class .. uses tremendous lateral speed to close the gap on his man and rub him out along the boards with a stiff check .. stands his man up inside the blueline and has a knack for the big open-ice hit .. maintains a tight gap with his man and does a good job using his long reach to poke the puck away .. pressures the puckcarrier and does a good job limiting the opponent's options .. great skater for a big man as he possesses a powerful stride with exceptional backward and lateral mobility ..
ISS hasn't questioned it, having Petrecki ranked as high as fourth overall in October, and at 13th overall every month since January.

Boston College, a well-known power in NCAA Division I, certainly doesn't question it, as they are supposed to be chomping at the bit to get him in the maroon and gold next year.

This defenseman isn't ranked between 13th and 21st in this draft because of his offensive prowess, so what's left to justify that high ranking?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
If we can pull this kind of trade off (NOTE: Atlanta's first-rounder, a third-rounder, and Christian Backman for a top 10-12 pick) there are better players I'd be going after than Petrecki. I like the kid a lot, but I wouldn't be making a scene JUST to get him. IMO he's relatively on par with Scott Jackson and I wouldn't take him with a top 15 pick.
You're entitled, of course, to your opinion... and I respect your opinion greatly.

I think you're off-base, though, both in your comparison of Petrecki to Jackson, and in your implication that you wouldn't spend a top-15 pick on Petrecki (since you compare him to Jackson, and wouldn't spend a top-15 pick on Jackson).

I think it's entirely possible that the trade I mention could return a pick higher than ninth overall. Not likely, perhaps, but possible.

In that scenario, I'd go for whichever of van Riemsdyk, Voracek, Gagner or Eller (in that order) was still on the table, and use the ninth-overall pick on Petrecki. Absolutely.

If the Blues pull off a trade like I describe, and end up with picks at, say, ninth and twelfth overall, I draft whichever one of the forwards mentioned is still there at ninth, and then take Petrecki if he's still there at twelfth. Again, absolutely and without hesitation.

I realize that there are any number of guys who have been touted as "the next Scott Stevens," but Petrecki seems different. He's almost exactly a physical match for Stevens in terms of their respective size; he's a good skater, as Stevens was; he's physical almost to a fault, as Stevens was; and he has offensive upside and leadership qualities out the wazoo, as Stevens had.

Since the Blues were screwed out of the best years of the prototype's services, I'd really like to see them be the ones to get -- and develop in-house -- the new and (hopefully) improved version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
The middle rounds are a seperate issue altogether. The question was solely in regards to our high-end picks. There are number of D men I like in the middle rounds(if, by some miracle, TJ Brennan is still there for our 3rd round pick I take him without hesitation); but they aren't the "high-end offensive types" that p-9 was asking about.
I see, but I didn't understand the question to be solely about the high-end (first-round) picks, and I consider Petrecki a very viable option with one of those high-end picks under any circumstances.

Also, you did say that you wouldn't touch any defense prospects outside of the top seven. I took that to mean that you wouldn't draft any defensemen if you couldn't get one of those seven guys. Again, if that wasn't what you meant to say, sorry... blame it again on the repressed English/History teacher lurking inside of me...

As always, great talking hockey and the draft with you, kimzey. It's nice to have someone else here who, apparently, takes prospects and scouting as seriously as I do.

P_B



Last edited by Prussian_Blue: 05-10-2007 at 10:14 AM.
Prussian_Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 11:43 AM
  #8
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian_Blue View Post
1. I don't want to argue with you, kimzey, but you did say that "all of them" were "undersized" and "not very good defensively," except for Alzner, Blum and Cross.

If that wasn't what you meant to say, I apologize... but you know I'm the Blues' forum English major...

That statement was strictly in regards to the "offensive" D men in this years draft. By that, I mean JUST the Shattenkirk/Katic/etc... crowd.

The Ellerby, Plante, McDonaugh and Petrecki group are a seperate entity altogether. This group has their own question marks. Ellerby and Plante have questionable offensive upside; Petrecki I'll touch on later and McDonaugh's upside isn't easy to read. The bottom line on this years D crop is that none of them are a complete package(even Alzner) and if I'm taking a D man that high in the draft I want him to be the complete package.



Quote:
2. Plante's draft stock is falling faster than George W. Bush's approval rating, mainly due to skating deficiencies.

True, and I've backed off of him as a result. One thing I would note, however, is that this flaw wasn't nearly as apparent early in the year. That makes me think he may have some stamina/work ethic issues on top of some skating issues.


Quote:
3. Question: Who, exactly, has "questioned" Petrecki's defensive ability, and his ability to take it to the next level?
Nobody with the kind of "professional resume" you would take seriously enough(just the "old time College coach" crowd I hang with). The common thought among my circle is that Petrecki will need a lot of time to develope as his game will be difficult to translate at each level he progresses to(similar to Woywitka or Jackson). He'll get there eventually, but it will take a lot of time from the team who drafts him(at the very least I see him needing 4 years in various minor leagues like Jackman had).

Quote:
This defenseman isn't ranked between 13th and 21st in this draft because of his offensive prowess, so what's left to justify that high ranking?

You're entitled, of course, to your opinion... and I respect your opinion greatly.
As I just said; it's not that he doesn't have the ability, it's that he will take time to adjust to every level he progresses to. Petrecki is getting his ranking primarily from his upside and "tool box". I don't question any of his tools, it's his mental game that I question(and that will affect both his offensive and defensive game as he goes on to the higher levels).

Quote:
I think you're off-base, though, both in your comparison of Petrecki to Jackson, and in your implication that you wouldn't spend a top-15 pick on Petrecki (since you compare him to Jackson, and wouldn't spend a top-15 pick on Jackson).
I think you're under-rating Scott Jackson. I don't know why, but it seems to me that people have it in their head that he'll top out as a 3/4 D man. From what I've seen of the kid I think he has the tools to be a legit 2/3 D man. His offensive abilities appear to be more suited to the pro game; and his physical and defensive game are as good as any D prospect we've had since Jax.

Quote:
I think it's entirely possible that the trade I mention could return a pick higher than ninth overall. Not likely, perhaps, but possible.

In that scenario, I'd go for whichever of van Riemsdyk, Voracek, Gagner or Eller (in that order) was still on the table, and use the ninth-overall pick on Petrecki. Absolutely.

If the Blues pull off a trade like I describe, and end up with picks at, say, ninth and twelfth overall, I draft whichever one of the forwards mentioned is still there at ninth, and then take Petrecki if he's still there at twelfth. Again, absolutely and without hesitation.

OK; let's say your hypothetical trade does happen.

Say, by some miracle of luck, that we luck into JVR with the #9 pick,

With the #12 pick: do you still take Petrecki if Eller is still available?
What about somebody like Joakim Andersson, Bill Sweatt, Brandon Sutter or Maxime Mayorov?

Don't get me wrong here, I like Petrecki's game and would love to have him in the system; but I'm not sure if I can justify picking him over any of those forwards.

Quote:
I realize that there are any number of guys who have been touted as "the next Scott Stevens," but Petrecki seems different. He's almost exactly a physical match for Stevens in terms of their respective size; he's a good skater, as Stevens was; he's physical almost to a fault, as Stevens was; and he has offensive upside and leadership qualities out the wazoo, as Stevens had.

Since the Blues were screwed out of the best years of the prototype's services, I'd really like to see them be the ones to get -- and develop in-house -- the new and (hopefully) improved version.
Again, I don't disagree with you on Petrecki's upside, but I'm just not sure if I can justify picking him if somebody like Eller was still on the board.



Quote:
I see, but I didn't understand the question to be solely about the high-end (first-round) picks, and I consider Petrecki a very viable option with one of those high-end picks under any circumstances.

Also, you did say that you wouldn't touch any defense prospects outside of the top seven. I took that to mean that you wouldn't draft any defensemen if you couldn't get one of those seven guys. Again, if that wasn't what you meant to say, sorry... blame it again on the repressed English/History teacher lurking inside of me...
Bad repressed teacher!

1) What I meant by that statement was that WITH A FIRST ROUND PICK(or our 2nd round pick since it's in the same stratosphere) I would only be looking at those 7 D men, and I doubt any of them even falls to us at Atlanta's #24 pick. A lot of teams are truely desperate for D men and I expect to see a LOT of D men go in the 1st round this year(FAR more than are truely deserving of being 1st rounders). With our later picks I see a LOT of Hellstrom/Gauthier types at the bottom of this draft and wouldn't hesitate to start plucking them in the 4th round.

2) In regards to Petrecki I'll even go one farther; I'm hoping like mad that teams are focused more on the "short term" and let Petrecki(who will very likely take a bit longer to develope) slip to us at Atlanta's pick.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 11:59 AM
  #9
pdxshark
@jmbradd
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 1,059
vCash: 500
Thomas hickey of seattle is who I would go after. I get to watch him like 8 times a year and he's always impressed me since he was a 16 year old. Don't need to have top pair potential to be an effective offensive defenseman. I see hickey as a second pair defenseman but top line power player.

pdxshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 09:14 PM
  #10
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Thanks for the discussion so far. (kimzey and PB, you're obsessed! )

To clarify a bit since it came up as an issue, I was more asking about which Dmen are considered offensive threats that might go top-39. The reason is that if Jackman is your top PPG offenisve Dman then Brewer and Backman are not "two-way" threats because they are not threatening offensively (plus Jackman's points were not inflated by power play results). I am thinking about guys who might need a stay-at-home partner to cover up some risk-taking but who might be great on the power play and chip in 45-55 points a year, putting that guy in the top 25-30 of the league. Brewer has many nightmarish defensive moments but was not in the top 50 defensemen in PPG - that's unacceptable production from someone with that many issues in his own end. (God, why, why, why didn't we trade him for more first rounders at the deadline instead of an obscene 4 year NTC deal?)

So we definitely have a lot of defensive talent in the pipeline overall, just nobody who is that offensive anchor. EJ hopefully provides that once he's established into a 23+min a night Dman a few years from now. But it would be nice to have more than that in the pipeline. (Which reminds me, cross your fingers that Wagner is a real steal).

I realize with those first 4 picks we are going BPA, so if the BPA happens to be a Dman who is more of a shutdown type but with limited offensive range, then we still take him because he's BPA. I am more thinking of it that who in that top end, ranked purely on an offensive scale, might the Blues select where we feel like we got one of the most promising O-oriented Dmen in the draft. Sounds like Shattenkirk might be the best option, though the chance of him falling to 24 is slim.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2007, 09:55 PM
  #11
Robb_K
Registered User
 
Robb_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NordHolandNethrlands
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post

So we definitely have a lot of defensive talent in the pipeline overall, just nobody who is that offensive anchor. EJ hopefully provides that once he's established into a 23+min a night Dman a few years from now.
I think E.J. will average over 23 minutes in just his second season. By the end of his rookie season he should be around 20. This will be especially true (even despite rookie mistakes), as he can carry the puck well. He should average 16-17 for his rookie year.

How many minutes did Pronger play per game in his rookie and 2nd seasons at Hartford? I'll bet he was over 20 by his 2nd season, despite all his errors.

He'll get a lot more chance to show what he can do under Murray, than he would have under Kitchen.

Robb_K 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 02:02 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.