HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Dallas Stars
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Battle for Dman #5 and #6

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-06-2007, 01:49 PM
  #1
OttMorrow
Registered User
 
OttMorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,060
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to OttMorrow
The Battle for Dman #5 and #6

These guys will all be fighting for roster spots out of camp:

1. Robidas(probably fighting for his job)
2. Grossman
3. Niskanen
4. Khomitski
5. Baumgartner
6. Fistric

Who do you think stays and who goes? Why?


Last edited by OttMorrow: 08-06-2007 at 02:02 PM.
OttMorrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 01:52 PM
  #2
Walzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: somewhere in Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,307
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Walzy Send a message via AIM to Walzy Send a message via MSN to Walzy
you should add Fistric to that list

1. Robidas - i hope he's done in Dallas
2. Grossman - he'll fight with Fistric for the #6 spot
3. Niskanen - no, he should get his 20+ minutes in Iowa
4. Khomitski - should be on the team
5. Baumgartner - i guess they'll keep him as #7 if they need a short-term replacement (injury after the warm up or so). If they know they need someone in the line-up i guess they'll call someone up from Iowa. Can't Imagine Tippett plays Baumgartner for some games in a stretch

Walzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 02:05 PM
  #3
OttMorrow
Registered User
 
OttMorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,060
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to OttMorrow
I think Khomitski has a chance at taking Robidas's #5 spot. He's got the grit, plus more size and more offensive upside than Robidas. I really like what I've seen of him during the preseason in previous years.

OttMorrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 02:37 PM
  #4
Starsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,525
vCash: 500
Khomitski had some issue with turnovers but has way more talent and size. Unfortunately Robidas has astupid contract . fortunately virtually every FA defender has one too so maybe we can at least dump his salary if not get agood return

Starsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 02:49 PM
  #5
Chaos
3, 2, 1
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Chaos
1. Robidas- He's a dime-a-dozen d-man. I think he gets moved somewhere before the season.
2. Grossman- On the team, unless he performs poorly in preseason.
3. Niskanen-Better suited playing 20+ minutes a night in Iowa than 10 minutes or less with the Stars.
4. Khomitski- If Robidas gets shipped out, I think he has a good shot at making the team.
5. Baumgartner-#7 guy.

Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 03:24 PM
  #6
________
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 4,643
vCash: 181
Send a message via AIM to ________ Send a message via MSN to ________
Baumgartner should stay as the #7.

I'd like to see Grossman and Khomitsky both make the roster.

Niskanen and Fistric are better off starting the season in Iowa. Hopefully on the same defense pairing.

________ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 03:26 PM
  #7
ck26
Free Raptor Reagan
 
ck26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Coyotes Bandwagon
Country: United States
Posts: 7,410
vCash: 297
Why the hell did we sign Baumgartner anyway? He was a playoff stopgap ... with another year left on his contract. Freaking silly. He shouldn't be in the discussion for any situation other than someone being injured in warmups. It's not that he can't play ... there's just no reason to have him here when we have so many younger alternatives.

ck26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 03:34 PM
  #8
Walzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: somewhere in Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,307
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Walzy Send a message via AIM to Walzy Send a message via MSN to Walzy
Quote:
Originally Posted by cottonking View Post
Why the hell did we sign Baumgartner anyway? He was a playoff stopgap ... with another year left on his contract.
we never signed him...just a re-entry waiver pickup

Walzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 04:09 PM
  #9
Troy McClure
Registered User
 
Troy McClure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The KlINGberg
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 26,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cottonking View Post
Why the hell did we sign Baumgartner anyway? He was a playoff stopgap ... with another year left on his contract. Freaking silly. He shouldn't be in the discussion for any situation other than someone being injured in warmups. It's not that he can't play ... there's just no reason to have him here when we have so many younger alternatives.
Because he is so cheap. The Stars only have to pay him $600k.

Troy McClure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 04:12 PM
  #10
Stars99Lobo37
Moderator
Away Games - 13
 
Stars99Lobo37's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sec 314 - Richardson
Country: United States
Posts: 50,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cottonking View Post
Why the hell did we sign Baumgartner anyway? He was a playoff stopgap ... with another year left on his contract. Freaking silly. He shouldn't be in the discussion for any situation other than someone being injured in warmups. It's not that he can't play ... there's just no reason to have him here when we have so many younger alternatives.
He's a good guy to have IMO if we have injuries. Solid #7 for cheap.

__________________
"Now when people ask me where I'm from, I tell them Texas. Dallas, Texas." - Mike Modano, March 8th, 2014

Bossier-Shreveport Mudbugs - 1997 to 2011 - WPHL Champions 1998, 1999, 2000 - CHL Champions 2011
Stars99Lobo37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 04:16 PM
  #11
BigG44
Registered User
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 21,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars99Lobo37 View Post
He's a good guy to have IMO if we have injuries. Solid #7 for cheap.
I agree. Didn't they pay Klemm $900,000 to ride the bench? $600,000 for a guy to play a handful of games is a great value, plus he wasn't terrible in the few games he played for the Stars last year.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2007, 07:53 PM
  #12
sloanfan16
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 31
vCash: 500
baumgartner is the perfect #7 dman... he's cheap has talent and isnt too old and is past his development stage so sitting 8 games in a row doesnt hurt him or confidence...

robidas is a solid 3rd pair dman

khomitski should make the team based on what Ive seen I really think he's in a race with daley for the 4 spot.

and grossman should make it as well....

based on our injury history the last few years something tells me that this problem will take care of itself.

Fistric and Niskanen need to be playing 25 + in iowa in all situations this year not getting 10 in dallas on the 3rd pair...


ideally it will be Zubov and boucher as the 1 and 3 Norstrom paired with one of them as the top pairing. daley or khomitski with the other then a 3rd pair of whose healthy out of robidas, grossman and baumer.


The wilda$$ idea I had if daley and khomitski are both truly ready for 2nd pair ice time would be to roll all three pairs almost evenly with

Zubov Khomitski
Boucher Daley
Norstrom Grossman

but thats asking assuming alot of development with daley and khomitski and grossman


Last edited by sloanfan16: 08-06-2007 at 08:29 PM.
sloanfan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2007, 12:59 AM
  #13
john skull
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sloanfan16 View Post
baumgartner is the perfect #7 dman... he's cheap has talent and isnt too old and is past his development stage so sitting 8 games in a row doesnt hurt him or confidence...

robidas is a solid 3rd pair dman

khomitski should make the team based on what Ive seen I really think he's in a race with daley for the 4 spot.

and grossman should make it as well....

based on our injury history the last few years something tells me that this problem will take care of itself.

Fistric and Niskanen need to be playing 25 + in iowa in all situations this year not getting 10 in dallas on the 3rd pair...


ideally it will be Zubov and boucher as the 1 and 3 Norstrom paired with one of them as the top pairing. daley or khomitski with the other then a 3rd pair of whose healthy out of robidas, grossman and baumer.


The wilda$$ idea I had if daley and khomitski are both truly ready for 2nd pair ice time would be to roll all three pairs almost evenly with

Zubov Khomitski
Boucher Daley
Norstrom Grossman

but thats asking assuming alot of development with daley and khomitski and grossman
I think you will see those d parings this season. I thought about them the other day. a shutdown pair, boucher and daley have chemistry, and khomitski might do well with a russian tutor. Really you have the "by commitee" version of neidermeyer pronger last year. A top pairing guy on the ice all the time. I have to admit our d is great, at least on paper right now.

john skull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2007, 01:05 AM
  #14
john skull
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaos View Post
1. Robidas- He's a dime-a-dozen d-man. I think he gets moved somewhere before the season.
any guy who is that fast and plays with passion on every shift and has ANY skill, he might not have a shot, but if he was bigger he could be a decent shut down guy, is not a dime a dozen. Not saying that 1.5 is a good price for him, nor do I think we'll be able to get any kind of return for him, but dude is usefull. He's better than 70% of the 6th dmen out there, and better than many teams #5.

john skull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2007, 12:39 PM
  #15
Stars99Lobo37
Moderator
Away Games - 13
 
Stars99Lobo37's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sec 314 - Richardson
Country: United States
Posts: 50,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by john skull View Post
any guy who is that fast and plays with passion on every shift and has ANY skill, he might not have a shot, but if he was bigger he could be a decent shut down guy, is not a dime a dozen. Not saying that 1.5 is a good price for him, nor do I think we'll be able to get any kind of return for him, but dude is usefull. He's better than 70% of the 6th dmen out there, and better than many teams #5.
Whether he's useful or not, isn't the question.

We have younger players that are ready for the NHL. Keepin Robi is only keeping those younger players down.

Stars99Lobo37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2007, 03:10 PM
  #16
john skull
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
oh, no doubt. I'm not saying he should be playing. My only point was that guys like him are not a dime a dozen. Yeah I think khomitski and grossman should get a lot of time this year. By next year I hope we start to see niskanen and fistric.

john skull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2007, 08:22 PM
  #17
teddygmr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,524
vCash: 500
The wilda$$ idea I had if daley and khomitski are both truly ready for 2nd pair ice time would be to roll all three pairs almost evenly with

Zubov Khomitski
Boucher Daley
Norstrom Grossman

but thats asking assuming alot of development with daley and khomitski and grossman[/QUOTE]

I like that setup a lot......

teddygmr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2007, 09:16 PM
  #18
Kevin Wey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Des Moines
Posts: 1,927
vCash: 500
Niskanen and Fistric at 25+ minutes in Iowa: Do remember that when defensemen start playing these sorts of minutes that they start to have to "save" themselves during shifts. This is seen a lot in the major junior level, where some defensemen will play over 30 minutes! One might say, "All of that ice time is good for his development."

To the contrary, it alters a player's conditioning and the way he plays his game. If Niskanen and Fistric get used to submaximal efforts in Iowa and then are called up to Dallas (where they will not be playing anywhere near 25 minutes) the adjustment will be that much more stark. This is especially detrimental for a defenseman like Fistric, who will be expected to play a physical game. As an example, check out how few checks Scott Hannan has had for the Sharks this past season playing way more minutes than he should be. (I'm sorry, but Scott Hannan is NOT a first defenseman.) There was a time when Hannan played a more physical game...

This observation is especially seen when some top AHL forwards, especially those who are anticipated to make a physical impact, have been playing over 20 minutes a game in the AHL (at submaximal effort, because it's impossible, not because they're lazy) and then are asked to play 9 or 10 minutes (those number are if they're lucky to be on a team that rolls through four lines), you see the difficulty and then are often left disappointed. They've been playing all season that way and they can't just turn the wick up to 100% all of a shift for 9 or 10 minutes. It's like a runner training him or herself for mid-distance or distance running, and then asking them to do sprints and kick a$$ doing it. You can find some mid-distance runners who can run respectable sprints, but they won't be as fast as the true sprinters.

Now, I'm not saying top prospects should not receive significant ice time in the AHL, but (and this is my opinion) it does nobody any good in their long term development to skate over 22 minutes a game, consistently, at defense. On the back end, if you can't trust your sixth defenseman to play 18 minutes a game, alter your expectations or get a new sixth defenseman. I believe this at forward, too. The fourth liners should be getting close to 10 minutes a game. If you can't trust them for that, alter your expectations, learn to trust, or get different players. Having any forwards skate over 20 minutes a game is unnecessary and a sign of poor line depth. You're training your players to skate with a submaximal effort too much of the time. Come playoff time, if you're up against a team that can roll its lines and keep its players fresher, more able to battle, you're in trouble.

So, when I see the Tampa Bay Lightning lean so heavily on their top three forwards and their fourth line barely sees the ice, that's a problem. I could go on a lot longer on my philosophy on ice time distribution, but I'll keep it at this for now.

Back to Dallas: At defense, Dallas has the depth to roll its d-corps pretty well, whether it has Robidas and Khomitsky or Robidas is dealt and its Khomitsky and Grossman.

As for Iowa's blueline, I'd like to see Iowa receive a veteran defenseman to play with Niskanen on the first pairing and see Fistric skate with Scalzo on the second pairing. If Grossman starts the season with Iowa, he can skate with Niskanen on that top pair. Almost regardless, I'd prefer to see Fistric's physicality with Scalzo. The third pair would be Byrne and TBD, with Matt Nickerson as the seventh defenseman (unless Nickerson fixes his backwards acceleration, and the answer is obvious, it just needs to be implemented). It's very odd to see a defenseman of Nickerson's size to try and rely upon quick feet over power. He needs to watch Niskanen skate and do the same. If Nickerson fixes some finer points of his skating, he could become an NHL seventh defenseman. But, without the fixes, he's an AHL seventh defenseman. All of this assumes he's a defenseman, but there's no way in Hades he's going to beat out any of the natural forwards Dallas has in the system.

Kevin Wey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2007, 11:27 AM
  #19
Modo
Global Moderator
Mo'Benn
 
Modo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Etobicoke
Country: Canada
Posts: 42,569
vCash: 627
I'd much rather keep Robidas around than Baumgartner.

Zubov-Boucher
Daley-Norstrom
Robidas-Grossman
Khomitski

Lineup obviously subject to many changes, with Niskanen and Fistric down in Iowa getting plenty of ice time and fighting for the first call-up.

Modo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2007, 12:04 PM
  #20
Walzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: somewhere in Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,307
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Walzy Send a message via AIM to Walzy Send a message via MSN to Walzy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Modo View Post
I'd much rather keep Robidas around than Baumgartner.

Zubov-Boucher
Daley-Norstrom
Robidas-Grossman
Khomitski
Khomitski still has some upside, but he needs to play if we want to see getting him better....
and Baumgartner over Robidas also saves $900,000 we could invest for a forward upgrade

Walzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2007, 04:13 PM
  #21
DaStars99
Purdue Alumnus
 
DaStars99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,101
vCash: 500
although I like Robi I don't think that he has as good an up side as khomitski or grossman. Robi also has a larger price tag. Robi I think won't be a Star for long

DaStars99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-29-2007, 10:15 PM
  #22
Sandmachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Boston
Country: Scotland
Posts: 605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wey View Post
Niskanen and Fistric at 25+ minutes in Iowa: Do remember that when defensemen start playing these sorts of minutes that they start to have to "save" themselves during shifts. This is seen a lot in the major junior level, where some defensemen will play over 30 minutes! One might say, "All of that ice time is good for his development."

To the contrary, it alters a player's conditioning and the way he plays his game. If Niskanen and Fistric get used to submaximal efforts in Iowa and then are called up to Dallas (where they will not be playing anywhere near 25 minutes) the adjustment will be that much more stark. This is especially detrimental for a defenseman like Fistric, who will be expected to play a physical game. As an example, check out how few checks Scott Hannan has had for the Sharks this past season playing way more minutes than he should be. (I'm sorry, but Scott Hannan is NOT a first defenseman.) There was a time when Hannan played a more physical game...

This observation is especially seen when some top AHL forwards, especially those who are anticipated to make a physical impact, have been playing over 20 minutes a game in the AHL (at submaximal effort, because it's impossible, not because they're lazy) and then are asked to play 9 or 10 minutes (those number are if they're lucky to be on a team that rolls through four lines), you see the difficulty and then are often left disappointed. They've been playing all season that way and they can't just turn the wick up to 100% all of a shift for 9 or 10 minutes. It's like a runner training him or herself for mid-distance or distance running, and then asking them to do sprints and kick a$$ doing it. You can find some mid-distance runners who can run respectable sprints, but they won't be as fast as the true sprinters.

Now, I'm not saying top prospects should not receive significant ice time in the AHL, but (and this is my opinion) it does nobody any good in their long term development to skate over 22 minutes a game, consistently, at defense. On the back end, if you can't trust your sixth defenseman to play 18 minutes a game, alter your expectations or get a new sixth defenseman. I believe this at forward, too. The fourth liners should be getting close to 10 minutes a game. If you can't trust them for that, alter your expectations, learn to trust, or get different players. Having any forwards skate over 20 minutes a game is unnecessary and a sign of poor line depth. You're training your players to skate with a submaximal effort too much of the time. Come playoff time, if you're up against a team that can roll its lines and keep its players fresher, more able to battle, you're in trouble.

So, when I see the Tampa Bay Lightning lean so heavily on their top three forwards and their fourth line barely sees the ice, that's a problem. I could go on a lot longer on my philosophy on ice time distribution, but I'll keep it at this for now.

Back to Dallas: At defense, Dallas has the depth to roll its d-corps pretty well, whether it has Robidas and Khomitsky or Robidas is dealt and its Khomitsky and Grossman.

As for Iowa's blueline, I'd like to see Iowa receive a veteran defenseman to play with Niskanen on the first pairing and see Fistric skate with Scalzo on the second pairing. If Grossman starts the season with Iowa, he can skate with Niskanen on that top pair. Almost regardless, I'd prefer to see Fistric's physicality with Scalzo. The third pair would be Byrne and TBD, with Matt Nickerson as the seventh defenseman (unless Nickerson fixes his backwards acceleration, and the answer is obvious, it just needs to be implemented). It's very odd to see a defenseman of Nickerson's size to try and rely upon quick feet over power. He needs to watch Niskanen skate and do the same. If Nickerson fixes some finer points of his skating, he could become an NHL seventh defenseman. But, without the fixes, he's an AHL seventh defenseman. All of this assumes he's a defenseman, but there's no way in Hades he's going to beat out any of the natural forwards Dallas has in the system.
Nice post. I hadn't considered the detriment to a players development that could happen by playing too much at lower levels. I'm wondering if in your philosophy there should be some allowance or consideration concerning PP time. As in, 25 minutes a night for a offensive defenseman might be appropriate if the games tend to be filled with powerplays (which it seems they are moreso than they used to be). Or, do you believe that PP time on ice has the same effect on a player and shouldn't be considered less physically, mentally draining?

Sandmachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2007, 01:30 AM
  #23
ScubaSteve*
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,345
vCash: 500
1. Zubov
2. Norstrom
3. Boucher
4. Daley
5. Khomitski
6. Grossman
7. Baumgartner
8. Robidas
9. Niskanen
10. Fistric

ScubaSteve* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2007, 01:49 AM
  #24
Alistar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Azores
Posts: 9,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScubaSteve View Post
1. Zubov
2. Norstrom
3. Boucher
4. Daley
5. Khomitski
6. Grossman
7. Baumgartner
8. Robidas
9. Niskanen
10. Fistric
I dunno =p
1. Zubov
2. Boucher
3. Norstrom
4. Daley
5. Robidas
6. Baumgartner
7. Khomitski
8. Grossman
9. Niskanen
10. Fistric

is more accurate if you're ranking on skill. Theres no way either of our two potential regular rookie defenceman is better then Robidas, who is a very good depth defenceman with an unfortunate contract. Also Boucher is definetly our #2 guy.
If you picking defense pairs Id say that Robidas still makes the roster until he leaves. Weve always relied on our defense to carry us through, so I dont know why Dallas would bench a guy that clearly can play very well on our 5/6 line in favor of a rookie.

Alistar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2007, 08:38 PM
  #25
Kevin Wey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Des Moines
Posts: 1,927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandmachine View Post
Nice post. I hadn't considered the detriment to a players development that could happen by playing too much at lower levels. I'm wondering if in your philosophy there should be some allowance or consideration concerning PP time. As in, 25 minutes a night for a offensive defenseman might be appropriate if the games tend to be filled with powerplays (which it seems they are moreso than they used to be). Or, do you believe that PP time on ice has the same effect on a player and shouldn't be considered less physically, mentally draining?
A good point about the power play time. In theory, the power play should be less draining than even strength and shorthanded, so a player should be able to play more. That said, giving other guys a chance on the power play to work on their offensive skills isn't a bad thing. Obviously, the sort of situation you bring up would kind of depend on how the rest of the game has gone, how the players are playing in particular, their health, etc.

If you're on the PP a lot, hopefully you're converting and you can give some of your other forwards and defensemen an opportunity to work on their skills in these situations, too. If you're dominating an opponent and it shows on the scoreboard, it might be a good time to give some of the guys who don't get a lot of chances on the power play, or the penalty kill, to show their stuff.

I really liked how some of the old Soviet teams worked: they ran through four lines and had no real power play or penalty killing units (obviously, the PK effects rolling lines a little). Not every team has that skill, but back in those days all four Soviet lines matched up fairly well to the competition and they could do that. It's great that a coach has the confidence in each of his players to do that (and obviously the players in turn have to earn that extraordinary level of confidence).

Here's a fun question for everyone: what's truly the perfect record from a player development standpoint? (I do have an answer)

Kevin Wey 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 06:43 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.