HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Post-Olympics: Evaluate the Performance of the Sharks Players!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-01-2010, 03:21 AM
  #26
Ninja Hertl
formerly sharkohol
 
Ninja Hertl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Yay
Country: United States
Posts: 5,256
vCash: 500
I don't think people understand that a team with 12 elite SCORING forwards doesn't mean that every game is going to end with a 7-6 score, ensuring all of these star forwards can match their NHL ppg. There are only so many goals/points to go around folks.

Is it that hard to grasp? Really? Especially in a single game elimination tournament. Thornton had a different role, and did it well. The shark line had good pressure more often than not, and guess what, when you have the puck in your opponent's offensive zone, your opponent is probably not scoring on you.

It's funny how the +/- stat is only brought up to bash someone - yet it's a meaningless stat when it's used to laud someone's play. Only on HF.

Ninja Hertl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:52 AM
  #27
Blades of Glory
Troll Captain
 
Blades of Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 18,363
vCash: 500
I have noticed that most of the fans who criticize Joe Thornton shamelessly on the main board are fans of teams that A) have never won anything, B) have not been relevant since the Gretzky era, or C) just plain suck. It makes it a lot easier to ignore.

Blades of Glory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 05:26 AM
  #28
godeepdown
 
godeepdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 251
vCash: 500
Thornton and Nabby are great regular season players, among the best. But I see for sure now they do not have the ability kick it into a higher gear when they need it which makes them average in a playoff or tournament situation.

godeepdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 05:42 AM
  #29
gonegonegone*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,338
vCash: 500
As much as we defend the Sharkies on the main boards, I think we all realize that it was a pretty disappointing tourney for some of our key players. Heatley, Boyle, and Marleau were on par, nothing spectacular but solid so no complaints. But Nabby and JT were pretty weak and played similar to last years playoffs, where they showed they simply do not take up their play up a notch at all.

Bottom line, I really think beyond all the excuses we tell ourselves over the years, there really is something off about some of our players when it comes to the big games. The pressure just gets to them or something.

gonegonegone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 06:40 AM
  #30
tiburon12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 58
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post

As a fan of Team Canada, I did not want them on the ice. They didn't create enough offensive chances and they didn't compete as hard as the other lines in their own end.
I sure did. I knew that the entire time they were on the ice, the puck was going to be in Canada's offensive zone, and as long as opponents couldn't get it out, they weren't gonna score. The line was pretty successful at limiting scoring opportunities

tiburon12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 09:34 AM
  #31
CheeseSandwich*
 
CheeseSandwich*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Gloucester
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,738
vCash: 500
Hey Shark fans, I just wanted to chime in.

I thought Heatley played the best that I've ever seen him play (like Nash). He was physical and making plays which is something he's never done in the playoffs. He really cared and wanted it.

Marleau always impresses me with his size and speed.

Thornton though, as we entered the elimination round was handling the puck like a grenade. Almost all his passes were too hard or soft and he was painfully slow. I really think he cared and wanted it, it just looked like he couldn't control his nerves.

Boyle is an elite defenceman.

As for why the line wasn't scoring in the elimination round, I'd say that it was Thornton's fault. If you put the other two on other lines they would have done fine.

CheeseSandwich* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 11:15 AM
  #32
kyle747
Registered User
 
kyle747's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiburon12 View Post
I sure did. I knew that the entire time they were on the ice, the puck was going to be in Canada's offensive zone, and as long as opponents couldn't get it out, they weren't gonna score. The line was pretty successful at limiting scoring opportunities
You must be watching something different from me.

I thought Boyle played great & Marleau played well. Hard to judge him because his linemates were pathetic - in the medal round.

Thronton & Heatley coughed the puck up constantly trying to enter the offensive zone.
Team CAN played them against the Slovak 4th line and they were still dominated at times......

A horrible Olympics from those two.

kyle747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 11:31 AM
  #33
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,648
vCash: 500
I thought all the Sharks players preformed well. You have to remember when you only play 8-10 minutes a night, you are not going to put up numbers like you would during the regular season.

However, Nabby blew chunks, words cannot explain how bad he was.

I sure hope he got it out of his system, cause its gonna get ugly come playoffs...

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 12:29 PM
  #34
Dan K211
Jaws
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davidhye View Post
Interesting statistic:

Thornton has 2 points in the entire tournament. Wanna see a list of skaters who had less? Bergeron, Seabrook.
He made 4 shots on goal. Wanna know who has less? Bergeron, Pronger, Seabrook.
He also ended up with -1. Wanna see one other player with a negative +/-? Bergeron.

Mother****er!
That is hard to stomach. Yuck

Dan K211 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 12:47 PM
  #35
KzooShark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,178
vCash: 500
Nabokov was crap. Hope the defense come playoff time minimizes the odd man rushes.

Thornton was his usual regular season self, trying to slow everything down and showing little to no aggressiveness, whether it's taking the occasional shot on net, driving to the net, or hitting.

You think after a dozen years in the NHL, he'd figure out that regular season effort doesn't cut it when the game speeds up.

KzooShark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 01:06 PM
  #36
SJGoalie32
Registered User
 
SJGoalie32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: TealTown, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
I guess I'm wondering if the Sharks line was best during the "regular season" portion of the Olympic tournament (i.e. the preliminary round) and then was largely invisible for the "playoff" portion of the Olympic tournament (i.e. the elimination games).

When the Canadian team dialed up the intensity, the Sharks line didn't, and they became less and less important as the tournament went on.

Boyle was the best player by far in terms of a Shark.

Quote:
http://www.ctvolympics.ca/hockey/news/newsid=54608.html

Joe Thornton: Contributed what he could but seemed to struggle at times with pace of game. 6.
You know, the more I think about it and watch his play, I think this is a very astute assessment about the play of Thornton overall.

In the medal round games at the Olympics, just like in the NHL playoffs, when the intensity becomes greater, the game seems to speed up. But in the NHL/Olympic playoffs Thornton doesn't seem able to keep up with the pace of the game, much less be the one who accelerates and sets the pace of the game--the sort of thing one would normally expect a perennial All-Star/MVP candidate to do.

That's why Thornton seems to "disappear" in the playoffs/Olympics. The game gets too fast for him and he doesn't keep up.

Crosby, Iginla, Nash.......even Getzlaf and Perry (*gag* *cough* *hack*) had no problem adjusting to the intensity and speed.

Marleau looked solid and I was impressed with most of Heatley's play throughout the tourney. Hopefully those two guys will be enough. Maybe put those two guys with Pavelski and drop JT to the second line where his passing might help Clowe and Seto

SJGoalie32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 01:18 PM
  #37
SJGoalie32
Registered User
 
SJGoalie32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: TealTown, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkohol View Post
I don't think people understand that a team with 12 elite SCORING forwards doesn't mean that every game is going to end with a 7-6 score, ensuring all of these star forwards can match their NHL ppg. There are only so many goals/points to go around folks.
True. However, of the 12 elite forwards on Canada's roster, Patrice Bergeron was the only forward less productive than JT. Heck, more than half of Canada's DEFENSEMEN were more offensively productive than Thornton.

For a player with a history of disappearing in clutch situations and for an NHL team/fanbase in desperate need of a stud player to come through in such situations, his performance once again on the big stage was, I'm sorry to say, uninspiring.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkohol View Post
Is it that hard to grasp? Really? Especially in a single game elimination tournament. Thornton had a different role, and did it well. The shark line had good pressure more often than not, and guess what, when you have the puck in your opponent's offensive zone, your opponent is probably not scoring on you.

It's funny how the +/- stat is only brought up to bash someone - yet it's a meaningless stat when it's used to laud someone's play. Only on HF.
Look, I know the +/- isn't really a great measure of the performance of a player......

BUT, you can't excuse Thornton's poor offensive performance by stating that Thornton's puck possession game kept the opposition from scoring goals....and then turn around and try to dismiss the very statistic that SHOWS Thornton was not only on the ice for more goals against than for, but had the second worst goals for/against differential when he was on the ice of his entire team. You just can't.

SJGoalie32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 01:40 PM
  #38
SC2008
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,018
vCash: 500
Here's mine:

Nabby - C-, against Team Canada he flubbed, but he won two games convincingly before that. (Russia's lost to Slovakia had Bryz in net). Russia's D was horrendous.

Murray - C, Adequate.

Paveski - B, He was there to win faceoffs, I believe he ended the tournament with 70%, good for second best. Solid play on both ends.

Marleau - A- I thought his play was fantastic. Sure he didn't score in the final game, but I always noticed him on the ice. Forechecking, acting as a decoy on the perry goal, solid PKing, defense. if you know how to watch hockey you would have appreciated the little details in Patty's game.

Heatley - A- Same as Marleau above.

Thornton - C+ Always provided solid offensive pressure despite not always scoring, but helped keep momentum for Team Canada. Would've liked to see him do more.

Boyle - A He factored in huge in the prelims when Nieds and Pronger were faultering. He was a big contributor in demolishing Russia. Just great overall play.

SC2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 02:02 PM
  #39
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJGoalie32 View Post
True. However, of the 12 elite forwards on Canada's roster, Patrice Bergeron was the only forward less productive than JT. Heck, more than half of Canada's DEFENSEMEN were more offensively productive than Thornton.

For a player with a history of disappearing in clutch situations and for an NHL team/fanbase in desperate need of a stud player to come through in such situations, his performance once again on the big stage was, I'm sorry to say, uninspiring.



Look, I know the +/- isn't really a great measure of the performance of a player......

BUT, you can't excuse Thornton's poor offensive performance by stating that Thornton's puck possession game kept the opposition from scoring goals....and then turn around and try to dismiss the very statistic that SHOWS Thornton was not only on the ice for more goals against than for, but had the second worst goals for/against differential when he was on the ice of his entire team. You just can't.
thornton was on the ice for 5 goals against, out of the teams 16 goals scored against them. thornton was on the ice for, 7 goals for on the teams 33 goals for.

so really can't find a stat that thornton was on the ice for more goals for then against?

1 of those 5 goals was an empty net goal. 1 of those 5 goals was marleaus fault the puck ended up in the back of the net (went off his skate and right into the net), the goal against the germans in which thornton was on the ice for, he made a nice play to an oncoming defender to take the shot, the players stick shatters puck goes the other way on a 2 on 0 scores on loungo.

just being on the ice for a goal against, doesn't mean that a player played bad. and i bet it would be hard for any one to find 1 instance, where thornton lost a man, or was a direct result of the goal being scored.

Barrie22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:03 PM
  #40
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Assuming the NHL players are going in 4 years, I think another way of evaluating Olympic performance is figuring if the player would be selected again.

On Greiss, I don't think Germany has much of a choice after seeing Patzold.

On Boyle, he would probably be picked if he doesn't age out.

Marleau has a good shot, if only for his special team skills.

Heatley justified his spot more than Nash, should be a lock.

Thornton and Bergeron should feel the heat as Stamkos and Duchene are nipping at their heels.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:05 PM
  #41
NeverSayNever
ESPN NHL rly ♥s Teal
 
NeverSayNever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Forever San Fran
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyQuil View Post
What I noticed is that they didn't compete as hard as the other lines.

They didn't play as physical, they didn't forecheck as hard, and they tended to play at the perimeter instead of driving the net. Passes across the zone would get picked off.

Marleau would get the odd rush along the wing and he'd shoot at the logo of the goalie.

Canada's momentum as a team would die whenever they'd go out there. Thornton and Heatley were also relatively slow on the backcheck.

As a fan of Team Canada, I did not want them on the ice. They didn't create enough offensive chances and they didn't compete as hard as the other lines in their own end.



Well, I wanted to make that clear because I watched every game of the tournament and early on they were important.

Also, they were decent as a PP unit but that didn't involve the same kind of pressure.

For the record, I'm not extrapolating this into any kind of prediction for the Sharks. It's apples and oranges.

I'm just saying that, as of the Russia game through the Slovakia and US games, they were the worst of the four lines IMO. How much of that was Thornton I'm not sure.

Now, they didn't lose any games over that stretch so naturally there's a limit to that kind of criticism.

As for Boyle, he might have been Canada's MVP in the all-important Canada-Russia game. Him or Nabokov.

It's not like my Senators were particularly great in the tournament. Volchenkov got lit up, Alfredsson was ok but Sweden choked out, and Michalek, while exciting, did not finish his opportunities enough to help his team. Ruutu was decent. Kuba was a non-factor.
NyQuil, (which reminds me, I have to buy some NyQuil) all very good points.
Just because the team won the gold, the fact that they underperformed in the latter stages of the tourney can't be all swept under the rug.

However, as a Sharks fan, knowing too well of their past performances and reputations in pressure situations, I was only hoping for them not to screw up, as in being responsible for the gold medal losing goal.

They weren't, and I'm happy.
And good luck to your Senators!

NeverSayNever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:08 PM
  #42
polmaniac932
Registered User
 
polmaniac932's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 1,374
vCash: 500
After seeing how Thornton played in this tourney, I really think this is the last postseason to give him a chance to step it up. I've given him as many excuses as the next person, but he's been given too many chances in too many big game situations to not have had a great postseason/olympic run at least once. I'll be rooting for him more than anyone else.

polmaniac932 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:12 PM
  #43
NeverSayNever
ESPN NHL rly ♥s Teal
 
NeverSayNever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Forever San Fran
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Assuming the NHL players are going in 4 years, I think another way of evaluating Olympic performance is figuring if the player would be selected again.

On Greiss, I don't think Germany has much of a choice after seeing Patzold.

On Boyle, he would probably be picked if he doesn't age out.

Marleau has a good shot, if only for his special team skills.

Heatley justified his spot more than Nash, should be a lock.

Thornton and Bergeron should feel the heat as Stamkos and Duchene are nipping at their heels.
Nipping at their heels?
I think JT and Bergy have already been replaced in a lot of people's heads mid-tourney.

NeverSayNever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:40 PM
  #44
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverSayNever View Post
Nipping at their heels?
I think JT and Bergy have already been replaced in a lot of people's heads mid-tourney.
thats what is said after every single international tourny with thornton, he will never get another shot, he just doesn't bring it enough, he's had enough time to get over the "choke" label. but every single time he still gets selected, so maybe its something that thornton actually does bring to the table, that keeps getting him invited to tournaments?

would i be suprised if thornton doesn't get another olympics, not really considering he will be 34/35 by the time the next olympics roll around. but i wouldn't be suprised (if his game hasn't dropped off to much) if he did make it to 1 more olympics.

Barrie22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:41 PM
  #45
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverSayNever View Post
Nipping at their heels?
I think JT and Bergy have already been replaced in a lot of people's heads mid-tourney.
I was being nice. I went down the US roster as well. My shock came on Kessel who I think is replaceable, big drop from draft day. I figure Pavs locked at least the 13th spot as a special teams player, like Drury. I am still trying to figure the US defense, figuring if Whitney and Gleason get knocked. I am on the fence on them as Rafalski likely won't last that long. I am taking into account players that will likely age out like Niedermayer and Pronger for Canada. Iginla will be on the fence for aging out as well.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:45 PM
  #46
one2gamble
Registered User
 
one2gamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I was being nice. I went down the US roster as well. My shock came on Kessel who I think is replaceable, big drop from draft day. I figure Pavs locked at least the 13th spot as a special teams player, like Drury. I am still trying to figure the US defense, figuring if Whitney and Gleason get knocked. I am on the fence on them as Rafalski likely won't last that long. I am taking into account players that will likely age out like Niedermayer and Pronger for Canada. Iginla will be on the fence for aging out as well.
Kessel was terrible, I think Pavs did ok but hes going to have to continue to work on his skating. His lack of foot speed hurt him a bit, though his face off skills were well above what I was expecting.

one2gamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:49 PM
  #47
5H4RK5
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,689
vCash: 500
Evgeni Nabokov - He is good at stopping the initial shot but if there are multiple chances and the D doesn't scoop up the first shot secondary and multiple shots could be a problem because of his acrobatic style.

Thomas Greiss - no comment, didn't watch

Joe Pavelski - watch the gold medal game and thought he played very well throughout especially with the takeaway from Nieds.

Joe Thornton - He needs to watch film and see when he needs to utilize his calm energy. You can see where other players pick it up and it looks like he doesn't care but he has to have that push in him to elevate his game when the opposing team elevates there game. He should play every game like it's just another game because when he thinks of the overall magnitude it tends to hinder his true capabilities. He has to have something in his life that can bring him to that level of elite play without distractions.

Dany Heatley - I think he did his job and took as many shots as possible.

Douglas Murray - no comment, didn't watch

Patrick Marleau - great defensively, and had some good chances, overall very reliable.

Dan Boyle - You can tell when there are players that are made for big games and that outlet pass showed it. I think when we draft we have to get guys that have ice cold veins like Boyle because he can energize the team.

5H4RK5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 03:53 PM
  #48
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I was being nice. I went down the US roster as well. My shock came on Kessel who I think is replaceable, big drop from draft day. I figure Pavs locked at least the 13th spot as a special teams player, like Drury. I am still trying to figure the US defense, figuring if Whitney and Gleason get knocked. I am on the fence on them as Rafalski likely won't last that long. I am taking into account players that will likely age out like Niedermayer and Pronger for Canada. Iginla will be on the fence for aging out as well.
iginla, pronger, neids, boyle, brodeur won't be on the next olympic team. this was a changing of the old guard and bringing in the new guard tournament.

morrow, thornton, heatley, marleau, are on the fence i do believe. players who are like the ones above who were there for olympic experience and veteran presence. it all depends on how good the players below them are progressing, and how well there own careers are going at that point in there careers.

Barrie22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 04:10 PM
  #49
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrie22 View Post
iginla, pronger, neids, boyle, brodeur won't be on the next olympic team. this was a changing of the old guard and bringing in the new guard tournament.

morrow, thornton, heatley, marleau, are on the fence i do believe. players who are like the ones above who were there for olympic experience and veteran presence. it all depends on how good the players below them are progressing, and how well their own careers are going at that point in their careers.
Thanks Barrie (and O2G). Appreciate the breakdown on age outs. Also appreciate confirmation on Kessel.

On Canada, I figure centers who play the wing like Marleau and Staal have a far better chance. I was impressed with Staal. I wasn't impressed with Nash. On the center issue, I figure that Crosby and Toews will lock the top two spots. Then its Getzlaf, Stamkos, Thornton, Bergeron, and Duchene. I don't think Tavares is going to even make it. JT and Getzlaf have to make the third line spot because they really aren't suited to a utility/4th line role.

One afterthought. Again assuming participation in 2014. I figure Okposo gets a spot for the US. He is good for both his setups and shot and he is right up there with Backes for his ability to bang.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2010, 04:22 PM
  #50
one2gamble
Registered User
 
one2gamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Thanks Barrie (and O2G). Appreciate the breakdown on age outs. Also appreciate confirmation on Kessel.

On Canada, I figure centers who play the wing like Marleau and Staal have a far better chance. I was impressed with Staal. I wasn't impressed with Nash. On the center issue, I figure that Crosby and Toews will lock the top two spots. Then its Getzlaf, Stamkos, Thornton, Bergeron, and Duchene. I don't think Tavares is going to even make it. JT and Getzlaf have to make the third line spot because they really aren't suited to a utility/4th line role.

One afterthought. Again assuming participation in 2014. I figure Okposo gets a spot for the US. He is good for both his setups and shot and he is right up there with Backes for his ability to bang.
As much as the US hyped this as a changing of the guard so to speak, I dont see them getting a whole lot older in four years. The Vets are surely out only to be replaced by guys like Okposo who will still be young. What they seem to need is a true sniper and a somewhat more solid defensive core but some of that will be covered just by experience.

Theres no way Thornton makes the next team, the game just isnt suited to him, he cant "skate" with the new breed of players and he doesnt get the space to slow the game down.

I think Patty makes it if he stays consistent with his goal scoring and two way play, though I will say that he will remain borderline. I also dont see how stamkos doesnt make this team for the next go around assuming this year isnt an anomaly.

one2gamble 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 02:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.