HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

top 10 greatest players in terms of elite longevity

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-19-2010, 02:30 PM
  #1
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
top 10 greatest players in terms of elite longevity

ok

I thought of this while the top 10 primes thread rolled along which I think produced some very insightful discussions. I also think the timing is good to balance things out now that I have questioned Howes peak a little in the Orr vs Howe thread.

i feel peak performers often get more appreciation so letīs give some love to the true warriors of the game.

I would also like to see what people mean by longevity, if we feel the same or if it varies a lot.

I will list some things that I would deem important.

Injuries
how many games did they miss? (bye Orr, Lemieux, maybe Chelios etc.)

Consistent elite
seasons in top 5, top 10?
numbers of all star teams (with adjustment for position and competition) compilers are not welcome (bye Gartner, Francis etc.)

Consistent game
having to modify their game while losing important parts because of injuries, lack of defence etc. (bye Stevens, Trottier, Yzerman).

Playoff performance
did their concistency carry over to the post season? (bye Dionne)

Troublemaking
did they ever have a negative influence on a team? (bye Messier, Jagr, Hull? (WHA))


other factors that could come into play are crazieness, number of teams and maybe even number of cups (well, it usually does).

I donīt have the insight about some of the older players as some here but I will start with a few names.

1. Mr Hockey. nobody even close.

2. Beliveau, perhaps the best captain ever. ppg at 39.
3. Bourque, his all star record is amazing.
4. Lidström, never misses games. second most playoff games ever.
5. Harvey, donīt know much about him but seems to fit this
6. Brodeur, so many of the "elite longevity records"
7. Mikita, see Harvey. have a feeling he could do it all, all the time.
8. Sakic, always elite, most of the times both ways.
9. Hall, the streak.
10. Chelios, missed a few games and made some trouble but also incredible longevity. most playoff games, 22 years between cups.

Gretzky, might have dropped off more than the others (maybe injured a bit) but who wouldenīt from those levels.
Robinsson, missed a few games but great +/-.
Henri Richards, maybe not good enough peak but great longevity and 11 cups.

thoughts?
lists?


Last edited by pluppe: 06-19-2010 at 03:44 PM.
pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 02:39 PM
  #2
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,761
vCash: 500
A glaring omission is Chelios.
And I would not omit Trottier and Yzerman for a lack of two-way play but then include Gretzky.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 02:53 PM
  #3
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
A glaring omission is Chelios.
And I would not omit Trottier and Yzerman for a lack of two-way play but then include Gretzky.
I mentioned Chelios in the injuries category. He regularly missed games all through his career. but I understand if you would include him since he plays forever.

I I think Gretzky is hard. But he did lead the league in assists as a 37 year old. I feel like I would punish him for having a ridiculous prime. but I agree he is questionable.

come to think of it I will put Cheli in and put Gretzky as a maybe.

I donīt think Trottier and Yzerman fits. I should probaberly frase that factor better. Trots had to much of a drop. Yzerman never combined offence and defence like most other on the list did. He was also injured a lot in the end.

who would you exchange them for?
what is your list?


Last edited by pluppe: 06-19-2010 at 03:08 PM.
pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 03:08 PM
  #4
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluppe View Post
I mentioned Chelios in the injuries category. He regularly missed games all through his career. but I understand if you would include him since he plays forever.

I I think Gretzky is hard. But he did lead the league in assists as a 37 year old. I feel like I would punish him for having a ridiculous prime. but I agree he is questionable.

I donīt think Trottier and Yzerman fits. I should probaberly frase that factor better. Trots had to much of a drop. Yzerman never combined offence and defence like most other on the list did. He was also injured a lot in the end.

who would you exchange them for?
what is your list?
Yzerman won the Selke while placing top 10 in the league in points. I think you have made it too subjective by having elimination categories. Just simply who played at or near the top of the league for the longest time?

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 03:10 PM
  #5
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Yzerman won the Selke while placing top 10 in the league in points. I think you have made it too subjective by having elimination categories. Just simply who played at or near the top of the league for the longest time?
but those were just my categories. I would love a discussion about this since i tis a factor that often comes up. Iīm interested in what you value. and what your list would be?


Last edited by pluppe: 06-19-2010 at 03:16 PM.
pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 03:18 PM
  #6
goalsversusthreshold*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: HFBoards
Posts: 851
vCash: 500
Joe Sakic and Jarmoir Jagr both had 100 point seasons at like 37. Ron Francis is third all-time in seasons with at least 60 points behind only Howe and Gretzky.

goalsversusthreshold* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 03:18 PM
  #7
poise
Registered User
 
poise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 232
vCash: 500
I'd put Gretzky as a very close second to Howe. Yes there was a big drop from his play in the 1990's, but even with that he was still the 2nd best player in the early 1990's with a good argument for the best player if you count the fact that he didn't miss games as much as Lemieux.

From 1989 to 1999 he is comfortably the top scorer by almost 100 points from second place Oates, and is second in PPG to Lemieux who played half the games he did.

He remained an elite playmaker into the late 1990's despite injuries, age, and the more defensive nature of the game, he was in the top 10 for assists from the lockout shortened season onwards, including 2 first place finishes. He had 37 (lockout), 79, 72, 67, 53 assists.

poise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 03:20 PM
  #8
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goalsversusthreshold View Post
Joe Sakic and Jarmoir Jagr both had 100 point seasons at like 37. Ron Francis is third all-time in seasons with at least 60 points behind only Howe and Gretzky.
Sakic is on my list.

Jagr spent a few years in Washington before 37.

Ron Francis was in my eyes not good enough. Who would you change for him?

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 03:24 PM
  #9
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by poise View Post
I'd put Gretzky as a very close second to Howe. Yes there was a big drop from his play in the 1990's, but even with that he was still the 2nd best player in the early 1990's with a good argument for the best player if you count the fact that he didn't miss games as much as Lemieux.

From 1989 to 1999 he is comfortably the top scorer by almost 100 points from second place Oates, and is second in PPG to Lemieux who played half the games he did.

He remained an elite playmaker into the late 1990's despite injuries, age, and the more defensive nature of the game, he was in the top 10 for assists from the lockout shortened season onwards, including 2 first place finishes. He had 37 (lockout), 79, 72, 67, 53 assists.
yeah, Gretzky is hard. but even though he still scored a lot at a high age you could argue that it was not at the level that it still compensated his weaknessess as it once did. he was a - player almost every year in the 90:s.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 06:33 PM
  #10
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,748
vCash: 500
I don't think Bobby Hull should get penalized for going to the WHA. It's not like he went to that league because he wasn't able to hang in the NHL. It does make him hard to judge though. I'm not sure where/if he would be on this list...His performance at the 74' Summit suggests that he was still an elite player in his mid 30's.

Hawkey Town 18 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 07:53 PM
  #11
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluppe View Post
I donīt think Trottier and Yzerman fits. I should probaberly frase that factor better. Trots had to much of a drop. Yzerman never combined offence and defence like most other on the list did.
Your thread so your topic ....but I'd respectfully challenge your definition of consistent. Clearly, you define it strictly in offensive terms.

Yzerman's numbers, relative to his earlier years, decreased somewhat as his career moved forward. But he was a better player. And it is no coincidence that his team started winning a lot more as his game rounded out more. Trottier's offensive numbers decreased notably in the second half of the 80s. But he re-engineered his role to become an invaluable part (per Mario) of the Pens' multi-Cup winners. Just me, but I consider that consistency. As in: making a consistent, major contribution to a team. A lot of players, once they stopped producing big numbers, are of little to no value.

If the criteria is strictly offensive output, then yes, you are correct in counting him out of the discussion.

Trottier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 07:59 PM
  #12
steve141
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 878
vCash: 500
Good question. Not really sure what to go on, but I'll throw some more names into the mix to spark conversation:

* Bycyk. Only player older than 33 years old to score 50 goals (he was 35). 83 points as a 40 year old, playing without both Orr and Esposito.

* Delveccio. Rarely missed a game during his career, 0.92 PPG at 40.

* Bobby Hull. Even if we discount WHA, he was one of the best 33 year olds ever when he left (one of only three to score 50 goals). Second in goals at 33 in the NHL, first in goals at 36 in the WHA.

* Messier. Yes he played too long, but if people are nominating Yzerman (who never passed 52 points after 34) and Trottier (who never passed 45 after 31), then surely Messier must be ahead if them on the longevity scale? He played more games than anybody else in the NHL.

steve141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 08:04 PM
  #13
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD View Post
I don't think Bobby Hull should get penalized for going to the WHA. It's not like he went to that league because he wasn't able to hang in the NHL. It does make him hard to judge though. I'm not sure where/if he would be on this list...His performance at the 74' Summit suggests that he was still an elite player in his mid 30's.
I agree and thats why I put a ? by his name. and I think he is in the picture. but as you say his WHA years make it harder to value and it might drop him out of the top 10.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 08:17 PM
  #14
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
Your thread so your topic ....but I'd respectfully challenge your definition of consistent. Clearly, you define it strictly in offensive terms.

Yzerman's numbers, relative to his earlier years, decreased somewhat as his career moved forward. But he was a better player. And it is no coincidence that his team started winning a lot more as his game rounded out more. Trottier's offensive numbers decreased notably in the second half of the 80s. But he re-engineered his role to become an invaluable part (per Mario) of the Pens' multi-Cup winners. Just me, but I consider that consistency. As in: making a consistent, major contribution to a team. A lot of players, once they stopped producing big numbers, are of little to no value.

If the criteria is strictly offensive output, then yes, you are correct in counting him out of the discussion.
and I think all 3 (Stevens as well fits your words exeptionally) made great changes and should be rewarded for it but it still for me drops them out of the top-10. which are mostly made up of people who did not have to change anything.

but I appreciate your opinion and still would like to see others lists to se what you value. would you put Trottier/Yzerman top 10? who would you remove?
this was mostly made to get a discussion going about how to define longevity and learn new things.

as always defence is harder to evaluate but I think this is equally important and I disagree that I define it strictly in offensive terms. you will find that all players in my top 10 are great 2 way players (even Brodeur has quite the offensive game). Itīs just harder to categorize. Iīm open to suggestions.

I also think the Detroit turnaround is even more influenced by my number 4.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 08:21 PM
  #15
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve141 View Post
Good question. Not really sure what to go on, but I'll throw some more names into the mix to spark conversation:

* Bycyk. Only player older than 33 years old to score 50 goals (he was 35). 83 points as a 40 year old, playing without both Orr and Esposito.

* Delveccio. Rarely missed a game during his career, 0.92 PPG at 40.

* Bobby Hull. Even if we discount WHA, he was one of the best 33 year olds ever when he left (one of only three to score 50 goals). Second in goals at 33 in the NHL, first in goals at 36 in the WHA.

* Messier. Yes he played too long, but if people are nominating Yzerman (who never passed 52 points after 34) and Trottier (who never passed 45 after 31), then surely Messier must be ahead if them on the longevity scale? He played more games than anybody else in the NHL.
I think Messiers career after his Ranger cup hurts him too much, especially his time in Vancouver, to put him on the top 10. but I see the argument for Hull. I donīt know if the others were quite elite enough for my top 10 but depending on how you define it I can see it.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 08:47 PM
  #16
Bonzai12
Registered User
 
Bonzai12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Denver CO
Country: United States
Posts: 9,797
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Bonzai12



This guy

Bonzai12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 09:10 PM
  #17
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,404
vCash: 500
Messier was still a superstar at the age of 37, then went downhill fast. That's still spectacular longevity, though. So he should have retired several years before he did. He still had great longevity.

Jacques Plante was a 2nd team All Star at 40 years old! (But he did have some down years before then).

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 09:26 PM
  #18
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 11,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Messier was still a superstar at the age of 37, then went downhill fast. That's still spectacular longevity, though. So he should have retired several years before he did. He still had great longevity.

Jacques Plante was a 2nd team All Star at 40 years old! (But he did have some down years before then).
Maybe when he was 35, not 37.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 09:32 PM
  #19
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,761
vCash: 500
Goalies - Plante and Broduer definitely... Hasek? The guy is still going, and still obviously clutch.

I wouldn't have Yzerman or Trottier in the top ten, just didn't think they should be eliminated off the bat for a lack of two-way play.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 09:41 PM
  #20
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Maybe when he was 35, not 37.
Messier turned 37 in 96-97. That season, he scored 84 points in 70 games during the dead puck era. He dominated the Devils in the playoffs. When he signed with Vancouver, he was expected to lead them to new heights.

He absolutely still was a superstar at that age. His decline was fast.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 09:46 PM
  #21
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,680
vCash: 500
I fail to see how Gretzky could be left off a top 10 list. He was either the best or second-best player in the game for like 15 years. I think only Howe would rank clearly above him. Seasons in which he placed 9th and 6th in league assists would qualify as his two worst (injured for much of '93 regular season, but sensational in the playoffs).

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2010, 09:46 PM
  #22
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 11,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Messier turned 37 in 96-97. That season, he scored 84 points in 70 games during the dead puck era. He dominated the Devils in the playoffs. When he signed with Vancouver, he was expected to lead them to new heights.

He absolutely still was a superstar at that age. His decline was fast.
Position: LW/C
Shoots: Left
Height: 6-1 Weight: 210 lbs.
Born: January 18, 1961 in Edmonton, Alberta

How's your math?

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2010, 03:08 AM
  #23
shazariahl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,902
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by poise View Post
I'd put Gretzky as a very close second to Howe. Yes there was a big drop from his play in the 1990's, but even with that he was still the 2nd best player in the early 1990's with a good argument for the best player if you count the fact that he didn't miss games as much as Lemieux.

From 1989 to 1999 he is comfortably the top scorer by almost 100 points from second place Oates, and is second in PPG to Lemieux who played half the games he did.

He remained an elite playmaker into the late 1990's despite injuries, age, and the more defensive nature of the game, he was in the top 10 for assists from the lockout shortened season onwards, including 2 first place finishes. He had 37 (lockout), 79, 72, 67, 53 assists.
I have to agree. I don't care how much he dropped off at the end - the fact is he maintained a high level of play longer than many on this list (Howe being the obvious exception). For 6 years he averaged over 200 points. Fine, though incredible, that's only 6 years. Lots of great players have had 6 year primes. But for 10 years he averaged over 180 points. 10 years... averaging a point total that no players save him and Lemieux (who only broke that mark once ever, mind you) have ever achieved.

Even beyond that, he was a solid player for 4-5 more years before he really began to drop off, and like others have mentioned his playmaking never really did, which was always his greatest strength. I don't think you can punish him for not having the productivity he had in his youth, especially when it was a level no one else has ever reached. Of course the drop would look worse - he climbed higher than anyone else, so the fall would also be longer. Fact is, he was still a good player, even near the end of his career, as others have pointed out as well.

Ironically, by the "drop off" logic, he'd have apparantly rated higher on the "longevity" scale, if he'd retired earlier. Doesn't that completely undermine the idea of rating players on longevity, if we punish them for playing longer past their prime?

shazariahl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2010, 05:06 AM
  #24
Regal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by poise View Post
I'd put Gretzky as a very close second to Howe. Yes there was a big drop from his play in the 1990's, but even with that he was still the 2nd best player in the early 1990's with a good argument for the best player if you count the fact that he didn't miss games as much as Lemieux.

From 1989 to 1999 he is comfortably the top scorer by almost 100 points from second place Oates, and is second in PPG to Lemieux who played half the games he did.

He remained an elite playmaker into the late 1990's despite injuries, age, and the more defensive nature of the game, he was in the top 10 for assists from the lockout shortened season onwards, including 2 first place finishes. He had 37 (lockout), 79, 72, 67, 53 assists.

I think Gretzky definitely deserves to be up there as well. He may not have been among the truly elite after his last Art Ross at 33, but still leading the league in assists at 36 and 37 and being a second team all-star is pretty impressive. And he was awesome for the Rangers in the playoffs in 96-97, leading them to the conference finals with 10 goals and 20 points in 15 games.

I suppose it depends on how you determine longevity, though. I think some people think of it mainly think of it as playing to an old age, but I like to think of it in terms of seasons. If a player has a late start on his career and then plays longer, is his 'longevity' really greater than that of a guy who started very young, and didn't play quite as long? In comparison to a guy like Beliveau, Gretzky was elite, already the MVP of the league at 19, and remained either the best or second best offensive player, and at the very least top 5 player for 15 years, when he won his last Art Ross at 33, and was still a 2nd team All Star 19 years later at 37, whereas Beliveau wasn't elite until 23 (perhaps he could have sooner if he given more opportunity earlier, but we can't be sure), and while still great at 39, (like Gretzky, earning a 2nd team all-star nod at a late age) that only spans 17 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pluppe View Post
and I think all 3 (Stevens as well fits your words exeptionally) made great changes and should be rewarded for it but it still for me drops them out of the top-10. which are mostly made up of people who did not have to change anything.

but I appreciate your opinion and still would like to see others lists to se what you value. would you put Trottier/Yzerman top 10? who would you remove?
this was mostly made to get a discussion going about how to define longevity and learn new things.

as always defence is harder to evaluate but I think this is equally important and I disagree that I define it strictly in offensive terms. you will find that all players in my top 10 are great 2 way players (even Brodeur has quite the offensive game). Itīs just harder to categorize. Iīm open to suggestions.

I also think the Detroit turnaround is even more influenced by my number 4.
I don't see why changing ones game though should matter if they're still a great player though. For Trottier I think this applies, because while he changed his game and continued to be a valuable player, but he was still just a role player.

Yzerman and Stevens, however, changed their games and continued to be great players. It's debatable whether he was actually a better player as some people claim, but Yzerman was still a first line centre, close to point per game scorer and Selke candidate, while Stevens actually became a better defenseman, arguably the best shutdown defender in the league and continued to receive legitimate Norris consideration.

I'm not saying they belong in the top 10. Yzerman's injury problems and subsequent deterioration after 34 is probably too much to put him on. Stevens was a very good to great defenseman for 20 years, finishing 6th in Norris voting as a 19 year old, and third as a 36 year old (and still receiving votes at 37 and 38) and based solely on consistency and durabilty, he could probably make the list, but I'm not sure if he was quite good enough compared to the other guys to bump any of them off. However, I don't think changing their game should be a strike against them at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Goalies - Plante and Broduer definitely... Hasek? The guy is still going, and still obviously clutch.
I was thinking about him too. Vezina winner at 36, sets a playoff shutout record while winning the cup at 37, retires, comes back briefly before the lockout, but then after the lockout is one of the Vezina frontrunners at 41 before getting hurt, then at 42, takes his team to the conference finals while posting very good numbers. I guess the knock on him is he wasn't a full time NHL starter until 29, so it's hard to judge how good he was before then, which hurts his "longevity" as it pertains to full career

Regal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2010, 09:25 PM
  #25
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD View Post
I don't think Bobby Hull should get penalized for going to the WHA. It's not like he went to that league because he wasn't able to hang in the NHL. It does make him hard to judge though. I'm not sure where/if he would be on this list...His performance at the 74' Summit suggests that he was still an elite player in his mid 30's.
I think it is rather obvious that Hull was an elite player for many years after he went to the WHA. In the 76 Canada cup, at age 37, he was team Canada's top goalscorer & the second in points. he was able to perform for several more seasons at a extremely high level while carrying a league on his back. It is ridiculous to ignore his WHA legacy.


Last edited by pappyline: 06-20-2010 at 09:40 PM.
pappyline 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 12:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. Đ2017 All Rights Reserved.