HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

All-Time Draft #12, Part II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-29-2009, 09:10 AM
  #76
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bugg View Post
pitseleh list-picks D Harry Howell
AWESOME pick! Howell is so unbelievably underrated, and I personally think he should be top-100.

jarek is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 09:14 AM
  #77
JFA87-66-99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Leaf View Post
This still looks to be relevant for the next couple hours.
Ok I just got a little worried for second there. I thought I was up but I never got a PM.

JFA87-66-99 is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 09:16 AM
  #78
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
AWESOME pick! Howell is so unbelievably underrated, and I personally think he should be top-100.
Why? It's a great accomplishment to win the Norris, but that's also the only all-star team he made in his whole career. To put him in the top-100 would have him ahead of guys who made 3,4,5 allstar teams.

arrbez is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 09:37 AM
  #79
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
I have pappy's pick. He's proud to select a steady, rangy defenceman who can move the puck: D Allan Stanley.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 09:42 AM
  #80
JFA87-66-99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,312
vCash: 500
The VICTORIA COUGARS with pick #138 are very pleased to select

F PAVEL BURE

....One of the most exciting & thrilling players in NHL history. He was a pure goal scorer & had a rare ability to perform timely bursts of speed just as an opening in the defense appeared. He was one of the fastest players in the league during his career with tremendous acceleration. He also had some excellent stickhandling skills and an elite wrist shot. I beileve Pavel would have been a hall of famer had his career not ended so soon & I think he was one of the best offensive players left in ATD #12. But I did have a hard time making this pick & was leaning towards Grant Fuhr untill he was selected 2 spots ahead of me. It was then either Pavel Bure or Alexander Ragulin for me. Nice pick God Bless Canada!


Last edited by JFA87-66-99: 09-29-2009 at 09:54 AM.
JFA87-66-99 is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 09:43 AM
  #81
Stoneberg
Bored
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
I have pappy's pick. He's proud to select a steady, rangy defenceman who can move the puck: D Allan Stanley.
Damn, and I was only picks away.

Stoneberg is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 09:45 AM
  #82
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
The Medicine Hat Tigers are proud to select a rock-solid defensive defenceman who can compliment Denis Potvin on the top pairing. He's big, he's strong and he's excellent at clearing the front of the net. He also has excellent hockey sense, and a heavy shot from the point that we believe can be used on the second power play unit. A tandem of Potvin and D Alexander Ragulin gives us a tandem that can log big minutes against the opposition's top line, which frees us up for more options on the second and third pairings.


Last edited by God Bless Canada: 09-29-2009 at 10:44 AM.
God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 09:59 AM
  #83
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
Why? It's a great accomplishment to win the Norris, but that's also the only all-star team he made in his whole career. To put him in the top-100 would have him ahead of guys who made 3,4,5 allstar teams.
He never got the recognition he deserved because he constantly played on bad teams. The facts are that he was the best defensive defenseman of his time, and he was an absolute master of the poke check and using his positional play to force opponents to the outside. He also had a decent offensive peak that translates to a good transitional game - he was known to always make a good, safe first pass out of the zone. Doug Harvey himself said that Howell was as consistent as you can get and he barely ever made any mistakes at all. Nevermind his playing 20 seasons and missing less than 100 games or something like that. I have tons of respect for this guy and if he had played on better teams, surely he would have has more awards.

jarek is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:01 AM
  #84
Stoneberg
Bored
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,672
vCash: 500
After much consideration (as I was really hoping Stanley would fall, then got stuck between two guys), I've decided to go with Bill Barber.

Stoneberg is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:08 AM
  #85
papershoes
Registered User
 
papershoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Kenora, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,573
vCash: 500
the kenora thistles are pleased to select...

gentleman joe primeau (c)


Quote:
Originally Posted by joe pelletier
Gentleman Joe Primeau, a playmaking wizard and star center of the famed “Kid Line” with Busher Jackson and Charlie Conacher, got a late start as a hockey player.

Success was immediate, but Joe, who like so many Ontario boys of the day idolized Frank Nighbor immensely, worked hard over the next few years to make up for lost time, and before long he was one of the hottest prospects on the hockey scene. He blossomed with the junior Marlies team.

Primeau found a permanent spot on the Leafs in 1929-30, as the Kid Line appeared and changed hockey history forever. While Jackson and Conacher are remembered for their scoring theatrics, it was Primeau who was the glue of the unit.

Not unlike Doug Gilmour years later, the slippery Primeau masterfully set up his two line mates time and time again, as well as acting as the line’s defensive conscience. He was as good a defensive center and penalty killer as there was in his day.

Primeau led the NHL in assists three times. He was never better than in the 1931-32 season. He not only led the league in assists, but he established a new season record with 37 helpers. That record would stand for 9 seasons. Joe, who was named as the Lady Byng trophy winner despite picking up a career high 25 penalty minutes, then went on to lead all NHLers in assists in the playoffs, as the Leafs won the Stanley Cup – the only championship of Primeau’s playing career.

After the war he switched to the junior ranks with the St. Michael’s Majors and captured two Memorial Cup championships. Some of his notable protégés were xxx xxx, xxx xxx, xxx xxx, and Red Kelly. Kelly of course went on to become one of the top forwards in Maple Leaf history, but before that was an all star defenseman with the Detroit Red Wings. It was Primeau who originally converted Kelly to defense.

papershoes is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:12 AM
  #86
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
He never got the recognition he deserved because he constantly played on bad teams. The facts are that he was the best defensive defenseman of his time, and he was an absolute master of the poke check and using his positional play to force opponents to the outside. He also had a decent offensive peak that translates to a good transitional game - he was known to always make a good, safe first pass out of the zone. Doug Harvey himself said that Howell was as consistent as you can get and he barely ever made any mistakes at all. Nevermind his playing 20 seasons and missing less than 100 games or something like that. I have tons of respect for this guy and if he had played on better teams, surely he would have has more awards.
I hardly see how your claim that he was the best defensive defenseman of his time is a fact. I don't doubt that he was an good player, but his teammate Bill Gadsby was a 4-time allstar on the same team at the same time. It doesn't look like playing for the Rangers hurt his allstar votes.

arrbez is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:18 AM
  #87
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
I hardly see how your claim that he was the best defensive defenseman of his time is a fact. I don't doubt that he was an good player, but his teammate Bill Gadsby was a 4-time allstar on the same team at the same time. It doesn't look like playing for the Rangers hurt his allstar votes.
True, but Gadbsy only played for those Rangers for 6 years, and by the time he did, he was already established as an elite defenseman. Howell didn't get recognition because his defensive work always came in a losing cause, so I imagine he was simply looked over. As for my claims, they come from Ultimate Hockey. Whether or not you put any stock in that is up to you.

jarek is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:22 AM
  #88
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFA87-66-99 View Post
The VICTORIA COUGARS with pick #138 are very pleased to select

F PAVEL BURE

....One of the most exciting & thrilling players in NHL history. He was a pure goal scorer & had a rare ability to perform timely bursts of speed just as an opening in the defense appeared. He was one of the fastest players in the league during his career with tremendous acceleration. He also had some excellent stickhandling skills and an elite wrist shot. I beileve Pavel would have been a hall of famer had his career not ended so soon & I think he was one of the best offensive players left in ATD #12. But I did have a hard time making this pick & was leaning towards Grant Fuhr untill he was selected 2 spots ahead of me. It was then either Pavel Bure or Alexander Ragulin for me. Nice pick God Bless Canada!
At pick 138 Bure is pure offence. He was alot better than that on offence. To me though he is a team killer.. an incredibly selfish player with a zillion question marks aside from his injury history.... which has more question marks. How do you make Bure play a complete game? He rarely ever did. He might have got 60 goals on the Panthers but he was a total disaster there... they sucked.

Bure is an insane talent... and a great, great goal scorer and a great player. But even if he never had a major injury, to me he also makes me ask the most questions... he is maybe the worst line or team destroyer in the ATD. He was so incredibly selfish on the ice. The most selfish player I have ever seen play.

He could score 58 goals on a weak team and maybe not even be a net benefit. Granted he did come through in 94 when he got to the final... he played more than just a selfish game. But that was a one time thing.

Bure is a crazy talent... a goal scoring dynamo. But he gives you nothing else. And sadly he COULD do more... he did it in the 94 playoffs to a degree. He was a smart player.... he saw the ice well, he could have had a career where he was not so selfish and was still awesome and successful... but he did not ever play that way but for a handfull of games. A top 50 talent.. maybe a top 20 talent all time.... but picked at 138th? why?

He needs to be sheltered in an ATD format IMO. He needs to not be counted on in an ATD.

He was very fun to watch. I would never pick him here... unless he was gonna be a weapon on my third line.... he has the most question marks IMO of any forward... and that is not including injuries... which he had a lot of... and shortened his career.

Maybe others disagree with me but Bure to me is almost a team cancer.... he is more than any other player a guy I consider to put himself over a team.

IMO the way to argue him is to argue from his 1994 playoffs... where he was at his best and the least selfish.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:34 AM
  #89
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
At pick 138 Bure is pure offence. He was alot better than that on offence. To me though he is a team killer.. an incredibly selfish player with a zillion question marks aside from his injury history.... which has more question marks. How do you make Bure play a complete game? He rarely ever did. He might have got 60 goals on the Panthers but he was a total disaster there... they sucked.

Bure is an insane talent... and a great, great goal scorer and a great player. But even if he never had a major injury, to me he also makes me ask the most questions... he is maybe the worst line or team destroyer in the ATD. He was so incredibly selfish on the ice. The most selfish player I have ever seen play.

He could score 58 goals on a weak team and maybe not even be a net benefit. Granted he did come through in 94 when he got to the final... he played more than just a selfish game. But that was a one time thing.

Bure is a crazy talent... a goal scoring dynamo. But he gives you nothing else. And sadly he COULD do more... he did it in the 94 playoffs to a degree. He was a smart player.... he saw the ice well, he could have had a career where he was not so selfish and was still awesome and successful... but he did not ever play that way but for a handfull of games. A top 50 talent.. maybe a top 20 talent all time.... but picked at 138th? why?

He needs to be sheltered in an ATD format IMO. He needs to not be counted on in an ATD.

He was very fun to watch. I would never pick him here... unless he was gonna be a weapon on my third line.... he has the most question marks IMO of any forward... and that is not including injuries... which he had a lot of... and shortened his career.

Maybe others disagree with me but Bure to me is almost a team cancer.... he is more than any other player a guy I consider to put himself over a team.

IMO the way to argue him is to argue from his 1994 playoffs... where he was at his best and the least selfish.
He was actually at his most selfish early in 1994. He threatened to hold out prior to Game 7 against Calgary if he didn't get a new contract.

The Canucks brass and Bure deny it, but there's plenty of evidence. He did not play well in the first six games, and was hindered by the checking of Mike Sullivan, Zarley Zalapski and another Flame. (I hope nobody plans to pick Sullivan and Zalapski. If you do, please resign from the draft. Especially if you want perpetual underachiever Zalapski). Then he suddenly had a lights out game in Game 7 against Calgary, and followed that up by playing, for my money, the best hockey of his life against Dallas.

And, to top it off, Bure and the Canucks announced a five-year contract extension two days after Game 7 against New York.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:36 AM
  #90
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
True, but Gadbsy only played for those Rangers for 6 years, and by the time he did, he was already established as an elite defenseman. Howell didn't get recognition because his defensive work always came in a losing cause, so I imagine he was simply looked over. As for my claims, they come from Ultimate Hockey. Whether or not you put any stock in that is up to you.
Howell's a rock. He's steady. He's consistent. He's reliable. Those are traits that I want in any defenceman in the draft. He wouldn't be my pick for the best defensive defenceman of the 60s. That honour should belong to Tim Horton. But you know what you'll get from Howell each night. He's also a tremendous shot blocker.

He's not top 100 all-time. When I look at my top 100 list, I see guys like Leetch, Pronger, Quackenbush and Stewart outside of the top 100. Howell's not better than them.


Last edited by God Bless Canada: 09-29-2009 at 10:45 AM.
God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:42 AM
  #91
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Howell's a rock. He's steady. He's consistent. He's reliable. Those are traits that I want in any defenceman in the draft. He wouldn't be my pick for the best defensive defenceman of the 60s. That honour should belong to Tim Horton. But you know what you'll get from Howell each night. He's also a tremendous shot blocker.
Considering he played 20 years, I think we could say his defensive prowess encompasses all of the '60s, most of the '50s and early '70s. Collectively, was there anyone else better?

jarek is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:45 AM
  #92
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
He was actually at his most selfish early in 1994. He threatened to hold out prior to Game 7 against Calgary if he didn't get a new contract.

The Canucks brass and Bure deny it, but there's plenty of evidence. He did not play well in the first six games, and was hindered by the checking of Mike Sullivan, Zarley Zalapski and another Flame. (I hope nobody plans to pick Sullivan and Zalapski. If you do, please resign from the draft. Especially if you want perpetual underachiever Zalapski). Then he suddenly had a lights out game in Game 7 against Calgary, and followed that up by playing, for my money, the best hockey of his life against Dallas.

And, to top it off, Bure and the Canucks announced a five-year contract extension two days after Game 7 against New York.
I was looking more at the final. It is sad a player as pervesly talented as Bure was so much of a prima donna.. apparently off the ice (as you have said) I did not even allude or think of that... but on the ice.... he just was a freak. He could do anything... he could have been Fedorov... he could have shut down teams... he could have chosen to do anything.... and be a goal scorer extradinaire.... instead it seams he only chose to score goals.... and anything else did not matter.

It is bad.. at 138th... I kinda like Bure.... but then I maybe do n ot like him on any team even at pick 400. So much talent and so many goals... but so little to show for it... except I guess a bunch of $$$$.

I picked Brett Hull. A guy with question marks for sure. But he obeyed his coaches... he played PK in Detroit. He scored after his prime. He was IMO a winner... he changed his game a bit and won. Even with Hull's bloodlines and wicked shot... he was not near Bure in talent and yet he was so much more successful.

I hate to so put down a pick... but Bure is just a fail. A fail as a player, a teammate, in winning. With Bure's talent.. he could have been SOOOOOOO much better.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:54 AM
  #93
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
Considering he played 20 years, I think we could say his defensive prowess encompasses all of the '60s, most of the '50s and early '70s. Collectively, was there anyone else better?
Yeah. Horton. They basically came into the league at the same time, and their NHL careers ended at the same time. In fact, Horton held a league record for GP by a defenceman that stood for about a quarter century.

Incidentally, I'm trying to find the details on this trade between EB and MXD. (I think those were the trading partners). Can somebody tell me when the deal was done?

I'll be away from the Internet this evening and much of tomorrow morning, so somebody will have to take care of the main board.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 10:56 AM
  #94
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Howell's a rock. He's steady. He's consistent. He's reliable. Those are traits that I want in any defenceman in the draft. He wouldn't be my pick for the best defensive defenceman of the 60s. That honour should belong to Tim Horton. But you know what you'll get from Howell each night. He's also a tremendous shot blocker.

He's not top 100 all-time. When I look at my top 100 list, I see guys like Leetch, Pronger, Quackenbush and Stewart outside of the top 100. Howell's not better than them.
Since I respect your opinion.. more than almost anyone else's on these boards... saying Horton... my second round pick was the defensive D-Man of the 60's is pretty sweet. Plus he was a pretty good for his time offensive D-Man.

Is he the best non-Norris D-Man? Is Park or Howe more deserving of the honour of best non Norris D-Man?

I love the Howe pick by the way. I started to really get into hockey in around 1985... And the Flyers massively successful yet non Cup winning team (Oilers Dynasty) was led by Howe.. by far more than anyone else.

As I become a hardcore hockey fan... I realize Howe is a ridiculous ommission from the HHOF. He was a true top D-Man and he had this LW career as a great in the WHA and that seemingly does not even count for the HHOF.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 11:07 AM
  #95
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
Since I respect your opinion.. more than almost anyone else's on these boards... saying Horton... my second round pick was the defensive D-Man of the 60's is pretty sweet. Plus he was a pretty good for his time offensive D-Man.

Is he the best non-Norris D-Man? Is Park or Howe more deserving of the honour of best non Norris D-Man?

I love the Howe pick by the way. I started to really get into hockey in around 1985... And the Flyers massively successful yet non Cup winning team (Oilers Dynasty) was led by Howe.. by far more than anyone else.

As I become a hardcore hockey fan... I realize Howe is a ridiculous ommission from the HHOF. He was a true top D-Man and he had this LW career as a great in the WHA and that seemingly does not even count for the HHOF.
Park's my best pick for the best non-Norris defencemen. (Since the Norris came into existence, of course. Shore would have Park beat. And you could make a case for King Clancy, too, although I would take Park). Horton's up there.

Horton was the first name that came to mind when talking best defensive defenceman of the 60s. Doesn't necessarily mean he was the best. But it's the first one I thought of. There might be others who were better. But I would take Horton over Howell.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 11:12 AM
  #96
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Park's my best pick for the best non-Norris defencemen. (Since the Norris came into existence, of course. Shore would have Park beat. And you could make a case for King Clancy, too, although I would take Park). Horton's up there.

Horton was the first name that came to mind when talking best defensive defenceman of the 60s. Doesn't necessarily mean he was the best. But it's the first one I thought of. There might be others who were better. But I would take Horton over Howell.
As would I.

jarek is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 11:14 AM
  #97
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Park's my best pick for the best non-Norris defencemen. (Since the Norris came into existence, of course. Shore would have Park beat. And you could make a case for King Clancy, too, although I would take Park). Horton's up there.

Horton was the first name that came to mind when talking best defensive defenceman of the 60s. Doesn't necessarily mean he was the best. But it's the first one I thought of. There might be others who were better. But I would take Horton over Howell.
So while Harvey played in the 60's.. he also was past his prime and not as good. Punch Imlach loved Horton on the Sabres.

I have seen Howe not win a Norris. I think Park was awesome and no Norris. I think Horton was an ATG D-Man even though he has no Norris.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 11:18 AM
  #98
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,091
vCash: 500
Pilote vs Horton. Horton has 0 Norris vs Pilote with 3 consecutive.

Who was better? Was someone else of the era better than those two?

Pilote was 39th in the ATD and Horton 46th.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 11:24 AM
  #99
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
So while Harvey played in the 60's.. he also was past his prime and not as good. Punch Imlach loved Horton on the Sabres.
Harvey did win the Norris in 1960, 1961, and 1962, but yeah, he was pretty much done after 1963.

Just looking things over, I'm surprised Harvey didn't make an allstar team in 1963. He led all defensemen in scoring by a 30% margin that year. Did his defensive play drop noticeably from the previous year when he won the Norris (despite finishing well back of the defensive scoring leader)? Does anyone have some insight?

arrbez is offline  
Old
09-29-2009, 11:24 AM
  #100
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Ken Dryden. (And Turk Broda as well.) Strongly disagree.
... and Plante.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
I hate to so put down a pick... but Bure is just a fail. A fail as a player, a teammate, in winning. With Bure's talent.. he could have been SOOOOOOO much better.
And if he was a success instead of a fail as a teammate and at winning, maybe he's a top-80 pick along with Brett Hull. As it is, he's a pretty fair selection at 138.

seventieslord 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 05:39 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.