HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Flyers's offseason disaster list

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-26-2010, 12:19 AM
  #26
usahockey22flyers
Forza Roma
 
usahockey22flyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Jersey, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrudez View Post
Responded in bold.

I am not arguing whether the team is improved or not, I am listing Holmgren's **** ups this offseason because I feel like some people are losing track due to the sheer quantity of them.



Biron '07-'08: 59 GS, 30-20-9, 2.59 GAA, .918 SVPCT
Biron '08-'09: 53 GS, 29-19-5, 2.76 GAA, .916 SVPCT
Biron '09-'10: 26 GS, 9-14-4, 3.27 GAA, 0.896 SVPCT

You could make an argument that last year solidified him as a career backup, but I could make the argument that NYI sucked terribly and that even with a pretty porous defense in Philly he still posted almost .92 SVPCT, which would be tops in the league.

Biron would be a giant upgrade in net for this team, he gets way too much undue hate on these forums.
1st of all, i wasnt implying that were going to throw all of our money into Backlund. Id love to see some posts that I've read on this, Facebook groups, about Leighton.. I remember people saying "Just because his name is Michael Leighton, dosent mean he cant be a starter" - then has a bad SCF and everyone hates him again. I really dont see what Homer did so bad besides the Walker move, the goalie pool was lame this offseason, every goalie out there had huge question marks. The only good one was Nabby, who Homer tried to get. The Flyers do have alotta question marks also, (JvR, Leino, Hartnell, Zherdev, Leighton, Mez) - if 4 of those players play like there projected to, its going to be a great season.

As for us not getting better, Giroux is great in the D zone and he can bloom into Gagne's defensive role, and common man, the top 6 d-man are incredible, and i doubt Mes's 5 million will be on the 3rd pairing.

Next offseason, trade Timonen. I dont see why nobody complains about his 6.33 Million, he is REGRESSING. Free up his addition 6 mil, re-sign Giroux/Carter and Leino or Zherdev (Leino/Zherdev obv depending on this years stats). Maybe, just maybe we can sign a goalie also! Or maybe Bobs is ready for the NHL come 2011-2012

usahockey22flyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:26 AM
  #27
infidelappel*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by usahockey22flyers View Post
Next offseason, trade Timonen. I dont see why nobody complains about his 6.33 Million, he is REGRESSING.
Just because Pronger is better does not mean Timonen is regressing. He's still incredible.

After doing a little digging, the only way in which you could say Timonen regressed this year is in his regular season +/-. Which, as many have pointed out, is a terribly overrated stat for evaluation. Either way, though, at -2 on the year it was definitely a down year in that regard, but his point production only dropped by a few points.

In the playoffs, he actually had his best year - statistically - that he's had with us.


So I don't understand how people can say he's regressing and slowing down. I personally haven't seen it...I just think that people are getting confused because, with Pronger on the team, Kimmo Timonen isn't obviously the man doing everything anymore.


Last edited by infidelappel*: 08-26-2010 at 12:38 AM.
infidelappel* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:40 AM
  #28
Adam Warlock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan1221 View Post
...exactly that you expect from Homer? You do know about the salary cap don't you? The old saying about wanting your cake and eating it too never applied more than it does this post. It seems like every three - four weeks we get one of these "Homer screwed up" posts. Dude, Homer built the team that went to
the cup finals last season...so...give him, and us, a break
All Homer had to do this offseason...

Resign: Coburn, Carcillo, Powe

Sign 1 of: Ellis/Turco/Mason

Sign a vet 3rd pairing Dman: Odonnell, etc

Thats it. Thats all this team needed. Adding Zherdev wouldve been a nice bonus. Adding Mez wouldve been ok too if they dealt Carle...but even then its getting too trickey.

Two free agent signings is all this team really needed. Instead he went overboard and not only screwed up the cap this year forcing us to trade gagne, but also forcing us to trade a key player next year as well. Not to mention left us with a HUGE ? in goal.

Adam Warlock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:03 AM
  #29
Spongolium*
Potato Magician
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bridgend,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
I have a feeling that one of Timonen/Carter/Briere is outta here next season. I think homer wants to see how Zherdev or mezaros does to decide who is to go.

Spongolium* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:51 AM
  #30
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrudez View Post
Because small sample sizes tell such an incredibly accurate story.
I find this response particularly hilarious seeing that you are *****ing and moaning without having played a single ****ing game yet.



Can the season please already start?

chaosof99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 09:22 AM
  #31
agrudez*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosof99 View Post
I find this response particularly hilarious seeing that you are *****ing and moaning without having played a single ****ing game yet.

Can the season please already start?
I am basing my opinions off of watching damn near every game the Flyers played last season and also off the entire previous careers of all the players in question, as well as logic when it comes to how asset management can be done.

I fail to see the connection that makes my statement so hilarious... are any of the above three things equatable to small sample sizes?

And yes, I wish the season would start already as well, because once it starts the offseason **** ups will largely be put on the backburner (unless Leighton becomes... Leighton) until next offseason when the true ramifications of this current offseason come to rear their ugly heads and we lose key players for peanuts... again.

agrudez* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 09:30 AM
  #32
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
So what happens if Mezarso becomes this years Eminger but cant be moved because of his 4mm price tag?

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 09:45 AM
  #33
agrudez*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
So what happens if Mezarso becomes this years Eminger but cant be moved because of his 4mm price tag?
I actually like Meszaros to become a pretty decent dman paired with Timonen. It still doesn't excuse the blatant overspending on defense that cost us both at forward (Gagne) and goalie (Leighton/Boucher).

It is Coburn at 3.2M on the 3rd pairing that worries me. Hopefully O'Donnell can stay healthy and anchor that pairing... the less decisions Braydon makes the better.

agrudez* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 11:45 AM
  #34
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,863
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
How about because Homer never even gave him an offer during free agency by all accounts? Usually if you want to sign a player, you actually try to, you know, sign him. Not just give up before free agency even starts.
That is because he moved on. He decided to go with Leighton. If he signed Turco, Leighton may or may not have been signed. But by Turco turning the offer down, Homer decided he wanted Leighton as the starter. It is as simple as that. He could still sign Niemi, Theodore, etc. but he has made up his mind and is going with Leighton. It's not like he doesn't know who is out there. He picked Leighton because he could get him at a reasonable price and he proved last year that behind this team he can be a competent goalie. (Go ahead and tell me how stupid I am because I said he was competent, I am not going to respond because I have gotten into that argument like four times this month, at least once with you already. The gist of it is, he got the W's, he put up solid numbers, end of story.)



Quote:
Yeah, shame on Turco for trying to play out the market and not accepting the first offer that landed on the table.
There is nothing wrong with him doing that, but that is what he did and that is what happened. You can't blame Homer for that.



Quote:
I'm not sure what throwing up some insane hypothetical does to make your point. Of course we wouldn't have been happy if Homer offered him 4 mil. What's your point?
You are mad because he low-balled Turco at the draft. That means you wanted him to offer more money. If he offered more money, you would be mad.



Quote:
What both ways? I don't see how wishing our GM would actually try to sign a goalie during free agency is asking too much.
Turco turned down $2 mil. Yes he wound up signing for less, but there was no guarantee of that. WHen Turco turned it down, he went with Leighton.



Quote:
It was actually a low-ball offer for the time. You're also missing a couple of critical aspects here. Such as the fact that Homer completely gave up on signing Turco before free agency even started.
See above

Quote:
How was Homer right? If Homer knew that would have been good enough to sign Turco eventually then why wouldn't he have, you know, actually used that terrific foresight and intuition to actually sign him?
He was right, but you have to move on at some point. He turned down the offer and as a GM, businessman, etc, you have to move on. You can't just hold out hope that a guy will change his mind because while that strategy may work, it is not a guarantee. A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. How pissed would you bee if we had Boucher as the only goalie on the roster right now?



Quote:
Except that Turco ended up signing for less then Leighton in the end and the fact that there was a plethora of other options outside of Turco and Leighton available.
Yes he did sign for less, and that sucks because I would have loved Turco here especially for that price, but this goes back to my point about waiting and no guarantees.

Quote:
Except that those weren't the only two options available.
You're right, but none of the goalies outside of Turco and Nabby were such great upgrades that re-signing Leighton was so stupid as to garner all this attention. Ellis, Mason, etc are better, yes. Better stats, better skill, whatever. But it is not like the other options would guarantee a Stanley Cup and Leighton guarantees us no Stanley Cup. Someone else was saying earlier about how having a better goalie on this team is negligible. Look at his posts because they are far better in articulating those facts, but I agree with him and was trying to say that a while ago, albeit in a far less convincing way.

Quote:
Besides, it's not like Leighton is some kind of prized gem that Homer had to sign immediately to an overpaid contract.
His contract, while it may be an overpayment, is not egregious by any means. He made it to the Cup Finals. Doesn't matter how much everyone thinks he sucks, you knew he was getting a raise no matter where he wound up. And for that matter, you knew he was getting signed somewhere. Making to the Stanley Cup is not just something that can happen to you or me or any old Joe. No matter how much you think he sucks, he still backstopped this team to the Stanley Cup, and in pretty impressive fashion (See Boston and Montreal series). I know that had absolutely nothing to do with the shutouts in Montreal or the series comeback in Boston (***sarcasm***), but the guy earned a job and his paycheck.


Quote:
Actually, no, he wouldn't of. Currently both Niemi and Theodore are still available, Chris Mason signed for dirt cheap on a non-playoff team, Biron signed as a backup on a non-playoff team, and Ellis signed as a pseudo-starter/backup on a non-contender.
I didn't say it WOULD have happened, I said it could happen. See above about birds and hands.

Quote:
Quite literally almost every knowledgeable analyst and hockey fan knew, before free agency even started, that there were more goalies available then there were positions available. Going by that logic and the fact that nearly every single one of the goalies available is better then Leighton (or at the very least Boucher), Homer should have been able to get someone. A ******** monkey should have been able to sign someone.
Michael Leighton was signed. Turco and Nabby didn't want to come here. The others are not all that great. Leighton will be fine, as he showed last season playing on this team. (I know, that goal he let in by Kane was terrible and that proves that he is so bad that he could never EVER in his entire career ever make it to the Stanley Cup Finals, or even win a series or a game because that goal was so bad and there were some other bad goals and he is the only goalie ever to let in a bad goal but especially let in a bunch of bad goals. )

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 11:51 AM
  #35
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Doof Warrior
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 48,541
vCash: 500
michael leighton is a terrible, horrendous, abominable signing as a starting goalie, especially at 1.55 million, and there's really no rational way to defend it. its easier to argue that the flyers dragged leighton to the finals, instead of him taking the flyers there.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:13 PM
  #36
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,863
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
michael leighton is a terrible, horrendous, abominable signing as a starting goalie, especially at 1.55 million, and there's really no rational way to defend it. its easier to argue that the flyers dragged leighton to the finals, instead of him taking the flyers there.
That is what I am saying. Leighton on a different team would spell disaster. But Leighton was the goalie last year, and it surely didn't spell disaster. I know the Flyers got Leighton there, but what I am saying is that on THIS TEAM, with THESE PLAYERS, Leighton will be fine. He's not gonna break any records, but he can continue to get the W's and that is all that matters. I don't care if they make the playoffs on the last day of the season again and go seven games in every series and allow 7 goals a game, as long as they win, nothing else matters.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:29 PM
  #37
dbr2
Lockout Beard
 
dbr2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,343
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dbr2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
I have a feeling that one of Timonen/Carter/Briere is outta here next season. I think homer wants to see how Zherdev or mezaros does to decide who is to go.
I could see Hartnell being shopped. I don't see Carter gone. Nor, Timonen.

Briere is a different story.

dbr2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:30 PM
  #38
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Doof Warrior
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 48,541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That is what I am saying. Leighton on a different team would spell disaster. But Leighton was the goalie last year, and it surely didn't spell disaster. I know the Flyers got Leighton there, but what I am saying is that on THIS TEAM, with THESE PLAYERS, Leighton will be fine. He's not gonna break any records, but he can continue to get the W's and that is all that matters. I don't care if they make the playoffs on the last day of the season again and go seven games in every series and allow 7 goals a game, as long as they win, nothing else matters.

leighton has never had anything close to a starter's load. i have zero faith in his natural talents to compensate for the inevitable physical and mental fatigue he will encounter as a starter. and when it truly mattered the most for this team, leighton failed.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:35 PM
  #39
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,863
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
leighton has never had anything close to a starter's load. i have zero faith in his natural talents to compensate for the inevitable physical and mental fatigue he will encounter as a starter. and when it truly mattered the most for this team, leighton failed.
That is the least of my concerns. While yes it is true he has never played 40 games in an NHL season. But he has played plenty of career AHL games and they guy is not some young kid who is going to be overwhelmed by playing a lot of minutes. He's 28 or 29 years old and over the course of his career has played in a plethora of games. It's not like he is 20 and coming out of college getting ready for his first professional season. He has several years where he has played 40+ games. While it will be a change for him and obviously playing more games in the NHL is harder than playing those games in the AHL, I doubt that will be a factor. However I just checked hockeydb and saw that he played nearly 50 games last year including playoffs and I didn't notice any real difference in his play from game one to the last game of the season. I know that he will be expected to play more this season, but I just don't see that being a big issue.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:46 PM
  #40
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrudez View Post
I am basing my opinions off of watching damn near every game the Flyers played last season and also off the entire previous careers of all the players in question, as well as logic when it comes to how asset management can be done.

I fail to see the connection that makes my statement so hilarious... are any of the above three things equatable to small sample sizes?

And yes, I wish the season would start already as well, because once it starts the offseason **** ups will largely be put on the backburner (unless Leighton becomes... Leighton) until next offseason when the true ramifications of this current offseason come to rear their ugly heads and we lose key players for peanuts... again.
The connection is that you are ready and willing, in a possible scenario, to dismiss any potential of this team proving itself based on "too small a sample size" but you are quite eager to put the team down, declare the whole thing ****ed and a "disaster" as you put it into the thread title, without even a single game played. You are a hypocrite.

I don't really care what you base your opinion off. It still remains speculation, Mr. Nostradamus. However, you dismissing the opinion of someone else who doesn't share your pessimism on trivial grounds is nothing short banal.

Not to mention that what the guy actually said wasn't meant to be any sort of demonstration of the quality of the team, but meant to be a scenario where with all probability the mood in the fanbase would swing to something positive.

chaosof99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 12:54 PM
  #41
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That is because he moved on. He decided to go with Leighton. If he signed Turco, Leighton may or may not have been signed.
...And? You might be the only person here that would miss him.

You just said yourself how idiotic Homer was by saying that he moved on before free agency even started. Meaning that he didn't even try to sign someone else during free agency. He also went for the worst option available despite the fact that there was an over-saturated market filled with better goalies.

There's no way you can legitimately rationalize this.

Quote:
But by Turco turning the offer down, Homer decided he wanted Leighton as the starter.
And somehow that's okay with you. If it is okay with you then there's obviously no point in me discussing this with you.

Quote:
He could still sign Niemi, Theodore, etc. but he has made up his mind and is going with Leighton.
So, in reality, he can't sign Niemi or Theodore because he won't. So there's two legitimate starters much better then Leighton (one of which clearly outplayed him in the SCF to win the Cup) and Homer isn't even going to entertain the idea of trying to get one of them.

Once again, I'm not sure how you can sit there and not see anything wrong with that.

Quote:
He picked Leighton because he could get him at a reasonable price and he proved last year that behind this team he can be a competent goalie.
And there wasn't any other competent goalies (that were better then Leighton in fact) out there at reasonable prices? Let's looks at the list.

Chris Mason: Has three, arguably four, seasons of starter play in his resume, two or three of which he's had good stats in. Ended up signing for only 300k more then Leighton on a much worse team with no shot at the Cup.

Antti Niemi: Clearly outplayed and beat Leighton in the SCF for the Cup and is still unsigned. He was awarded about 1.2 mil more then Leighton has in arbitration. It's likely that Niemi would be willing to sign for much less then that considering the fact that he still doesn't have a team.

Jose Theodore: Has an established resume of being a starter in this league and has won a Hart. Probably willing to sign dirt cheap (probably cheaper then Leighton) considering that he's still unsigned and no team looks to have any interest in him right now.

Dan Ellis: Has an established record of being a backup in this league (which is still better then Leighton's resume) and he signed for 50k less then Leighton on a non-contender.

Marty Turco: Has a very large record of being an established starter. Ended up signing for 250k less on a former SC winning team that just gutted their depth.

Martin Biron: Has a record being both a starter and backup in this league. Ended up signing for 675k less then Leighton on a likely non-playoff team as a backup.

That's probably not even all of the goalies that were available. Still, out of those six goalies, two are still unsigned and three signed for less then Leighton.

Quote:
(Go ahead and tell me how stupid I am because I said he was competent, I am not going to respond because I have gotten into that argument like four times this month, at least once with you already. The gist of it is, he got the W's, he put up solid numbers, end of story.)
If you want to ignore all the established evidence that points to Leighton being an NHL scrub and not a legitimate starting goalie then that's all on you to be quite honest.

Quote:
There is nothing wrong with him doing that, but that is what he did and that is what happened. You can't blame Homer for that.
I can sure as hell blame Homer for completely giving up and, in the end, practically not even trying to sign a goalie (other then Leighton obviously).

Quote:
You are mad because he low-balled Turco at the draft. That means you wanted him to offer more money.
What? Where did I say I was mad that Homer low-balled Turco? You're just making up crap now.

I'm mad that Homer completely gave up on signing him after making on low-ball offer before free agency even started.

Quote:
If he offered more money, you would be mad.
Of course I would be mad if he overpaid Turco. In other news, the sky is blue. What's your point?

Quote:
Turco turned down $2 mil. Yes he wound up signing for less, but there was no guarantee of that.
Yeah, except that you're, once again, convienantly ignoring the fact that there were many other options besides Turco and Leighton.

Going by simple math and common sense, every analyst (amateur or professional) predicted and knew that there would be goalies left out in the wind without a job. Look what happened. Niemi and Theodore are still free agents and Nabokov went to the KHL.

Quote:
WHen Turco turned it down, he went with Leighton.
And somehow you're fine with that.

Quote:
He was right, but you have to move on at some point. He turned down the offer and as a GM, businessman, etc, you have to move on.
So, because Homer wasn't smart enough to let Turco actually test the market in free agency before offering him another contract, that means he should move on? Not that Homer is a ******? Okay then.

Quote:
You can't just hold out hope that a guy will change his mind because while that strategy may work, it is not a guarantee.
It actually was about as close as a guarantee as you can get in free agency.

Like I've said many times before, it was painfully obvious that there were more goalies then jobs available. Meaning that lots of goalies would be willing to sign for cheap and a couple would be left without a job at all.

Meaning that a guy like Turco or Nabokov would have to lower their asking price eventually. Which they did since Turco signed for 1.3 mil and Nabokov went to the KHL.

Quote:
A bird in hand is worth two in the bush.
Except that that doesn't really apply to this situation at all.

Quote:
How pissed would you bee if we had Boucher as the only goalie on the roster right now?
I'd be absolutely fine with it since that means we could sign Theodore or Niemi and possibly even sign Leighton (assuming no one signed him) as our backup instead of Boucher and to a much cheaper contract.

Quote:
You're right, but none of the goalies outside of Turco and Nabby were such great upgrades that re-signing Leighton was so stupid as to garner all this attention.
So, you're saying that our GM failing to upgrade in a position of weakness in a market over-saturated with better goaltenders isn't "stupid as to garner all this attention".

I wonder what our GM has to do for you to actually think that it's stupid enough to discuss.

Also, frankly, I have to lol at you not thinking that all of these guys available aren't upgrades over a Leighton/Boucher tandem.

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that whoever we could have signed (Theodore, Turco, Niemi, whoever) didn't have to necessarily replace Leighton. Most of us are and were fine with keeping Leighton in as a backup. What most of us actually wanted was for Leighton to replace Boucher and for an upgrade to take the starter's spot.

Quote:
Ellis, Mason, etc are better, yes. Better stats, better skill, whatever. But it is not like the other options would guarantee a Stanley Cup and Leighton guarantees us no Stanley Cup.
...Let me get this straight. You admit all of these guys are have better stats, skills, and resumes then Leighton yet you say that they're not significant upgrades and nothing to get upset about. That makes zero sense.

Of course there's no ****ing guarantee that Mason or Ellis or whomever would get us a Cup. Thanks for stating the ****ing obvious. There's never a guarantee with anything in life, let alone hockey. However, a GMs job is to attempt to improve the team by all means possible, which is what signing a guy like Mason would have done. So, in other words, our GM failed at his job.

Quote:
His contract, while it may be an overpayment, is not egregious by any means. He made it to the Cup Finals. Doesn't matter how much everyone thinks he sucks, you knew he was getting a raise no matter where he wound up.
He was obviously going to get a raise, but he was getting payed peanuts before so he should have been only getting around 1 mil in the end.

The guy hasn't even established that he's a legitimate NHL goalie in his career, let alone a starter. SCF appearance or not (which he was horrific in anyway), you don't sign guys that might be scrubs to that kind of contract and to be your starter.

Quote:
And for that matter, you knew he was getting signed somewhere.
Uh...not really. Nabokov, Niemi, and Theodore all haven't been or weren't signed to NHL contracts so far. If those guys can't find a job in such an over-saturated market then there's no way in hell that a borderline scrub like Leighton is getting signed.

Even if Leighton was going to be signed by someone, who gives a ****? If someone else wants to overpay him then that's fine by me. Doesn't mean our GM should overpay him as well.

Quote:
Making to the Stanley Cup is not just something that can happen to you or me or any old Joe.
Well, no ****. We're not in the NHL.

Quote:
No matter how much you think he sucks, he still backstopped this team to the Stanley Cup,
lol. He backstopped this team? Not Chris Pronger, Kimmo Timonen, Mike Richards, Jeff Carter, Danny Briere, or Claude Giroux right? No, it was definitely the waiver-wire pickup that played 27 regular season games and only one and a half series in the playoffs before the SCF.

Quote:
and in pretty impressive fashion (See Boston and Montreal series).
You call that impressive? You're also giving Leighton the credit for our victories over Boston and Montreal? Wow.

Quote:
I know that had absolutely nothing to do with the shutouts in Montreal or the series comeback in Boston (***sarcasm***)
Actually, us coming back in Boston had more to with Mike Richards taking out the Bruins best forward and Simon Gagne coming back at the same time and scoring 4 goals and 1 assist, with two of the goals being GWG, in four games. There's also the fact that the team scored 15 goals in four games (almost 4 goals a game).

But, nah, it was all the great Michael Leighton's doing.

I'm sure the team scoring 17 goals in 5 games (more then 3 goals per game) and the Habs having an anemic offense that relied on two players (Gionta and Cammalleri) also had nothing to do with winning the Habs series.

That was definitely all the great Michael Leighton.

Michael Leighton also wasn't obviously a huge cause for our loss in the SCF.

Quote:
but the guy earned a job and his paycheck.
Yeah, as a backup at a cheaper price.


Last edited by Garbage Goal: 08-26-2010 at 01:02 PM.
Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 01:01 PM
  #42
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
leighton has never had anything close to a starter's load. i have zero faith in his natural talents to compensate for the inevitable physical and mental fatigue he will encounter as a starter. and when it truly mattered the most for this team, leighton failed.
People also seem to ignore the fact that he played very few top offenses and/or elite teams in the regular season (which surely inflated his stats) and the only time he faced a scary good offense in the post-season he got torn to shreds.

Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 01:07 PM
  #43
agrudez*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosof99 View Post
The connection is that you are ready and willing, in a possible scenario, to dismiss any potential of this team proving itself based on "too small a sample size" but you are quite eager to put the team down, declare the whole thing ****ed and a "disaster" as you put it into the thread title, without even a single game played. You are a hypocrite.

I don't really care what you base your opinion off. It still remains speculation, Mr. Nostradamus. However, you dismissing the opinion of someone else who doesn't share your pessimism on trivial grounds is nothing short banal.

Not to mention that what the guy actually said wasn't meant to be any sort of demonstration of the quality of the team, but meant to be a scenario where with all probability the mood in the fanbase would swing to something positive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
I'm curious if we win our first 3 games (and not just slip by either), would you guys still complain?

Because small sample sizes tell such an incredibly accurate story.


That line was a direct response to that statement. Basically I meant that 3 games would not sway my opinion because I am not a "What have you done for me lately?" fan.

Btw, I am not dismissing this team's potential. I have stated a few times I think they are a good team that should challenge in the East; however, the job Holmgren did this offseason was brutal and arguing otherwise is very difficult.

You are fighting with air. In fact, this whole thread was meant to be a non argumentative thread and rather a place for the vast majority who hated this offseason to come vent and attempt to compile a list of all the things we thought Holmgren did wrong this offseason. Instead of coming in and arguing with us may I suggest that Holmgren supporters attempt to make a similiar thread as this to list this offseason's accomplishments?

I will be very eager to see how long that list is.

agrudez* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 01:32 PM
  #44
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Doof Warrior
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 48,541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
That is the least of my concerns. While yes it is true he has never played 40 games in an NHL season. But he has played plenty of career AHL games and they guy is not some young kid who is going to be overwhelmed by playing a lot of minutes. He's 28 or 29 years old and over the course of his career has played in a plethora of games. It's not like he is 20 and coming out of college getting ready for his first professional season. He has several years where he has played 40+ games. While it will be a change for him and obviously playing more games in the NHL is harder than playing those games in the AHL, I doubt that will be a factor. However I just checked hockeydb and saw that he played nearly 50 games last year including playoffs and I didn't notice any real difference in his play from game one to the last game of the season. I know that he will be expected to play more this season, but I just don't see that being a big issue.
its not like he played 50 games straight. he had a pretty sizable break while recovering from his ankle injury, and he still fell apart/got torn apart in the finals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
People also seem to ignore the fact that he played very few top offenses and/or elite teams in the regular season (which surely inflated his stats) and the only time he faced a scary good offense in the post-season he got torn to shreds.
yeah, thats highly concerning.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 02:33 PM
  #45
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,863
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Let me start by saying that I DO NOT think that Michael Leighton is a great goalie and have not once said anything about him being anything other than a solid, average goalie ON THIS TEAM. That being said...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
...And? You might be the only person here that would miss him.

You just said yourself how idiotic Homer was by saying that he moved on before free agency even started. Meaning that he didn't even try to sign someone else during free agency. He also went for the worst option available despite the fact that there was an over-saturated market filled with better goalies.

There's no way you can legitimately rationalize this.
I wasn't saying that I would be mad if Leighton went and Turco was signed. If you included the next sentence as part of that portion of what I said it would make more sense as to what I was saying. Homer pretty much made up his mind that he wanted Turco, Nabakov, or Leighton. Turco and Nabakov turned him down. He went with his third choice. ON THIS TEAM Leighton will do just as good a job as any of the other choices.



Quote:
And somehow that's okay with you. If it is okay with you then there's obviously no point in me discussing this with you.
He proved last year that he can play for this team. His numbers were solid. Doesn't matter why or how, they were solid numbers. If they are not, tell me what is. I have asked several people on this board to tell me what his numbers were if they were not solid and no one has responded. Not his numbers on Carolina. Not just in the Finals. His overall numbers. Please tell me what you would characterize them as.

[qupte]So, in reality, he can't sign Niemi or Theodore because he won't. So there's two legitimate starters much better then Leighton (one of which clearly outplayed him in the SCF to win the Cup) and Homer isn't even going to entertain the idea of trying to get one of them.

Once again, I'm not sure how you can sit there and not see anything wrong with that.[/quote]

Niemi did not so clearly outplay him. In game two he stole the game. Yes. 100% true. But other than that both goalies were categorically bad across the board.


Quote:
And there wasn't any other competent goalies (that were better then Leighton in fact) out there at reasonable prices? Let's looks at the list.

Chris Mason: Has three, arguably four, seasons of starter play in his resume, two or three of which he's had good stats in. Ended up signing for only 300k more then Leighton on a much worse team with no shot at the Cup.

Antti Niemi: Clearly outplayed and beat Leighton in the SCF for the Cup and is still unsigned. He was awarded about 1.2 mil more then Leighton has in arbitration. It's likely that Niemi would be willing to sign for much less then that considering the fact that he still doesn't have a team.

Jose Theodore: Has an established resume of being a starter in this league and has won a Hart. Probably willing to sign dirt cheap (probably cheaper then Leighton) considering that he's still unsigned and no team looks to have any interest in him right now.

Dan Ellis: Has an established record of being a backup in this league (which is still better then Leighton's resume) and he signed for 50k less then Leighton on a non-contender.

Marty Turco: Has a very large record of being an established starter. Ended up signing for 250k less on a former SC winning team that just gutted their depth.

Martin Biron: Has a record being both a starter and backup in this league. Ended up signing for 675k less then Leighton on a likely non-playoff team as a backup.

That's probably not even all of the goalies that were available. Still, out of those six goalies, two are still unsigned and three signed for less then Leighton.
As I said later, they are all just about the same as Leighton. Yes, they would be upgrades, but not so drastic that having Dan Ellis would change the season or anything like that. Turco and Nabakov are the only goalies on the market that would have had the chance to make a serious upgrade.



Quote:
If you want to ignore all the established evidence that points to Leighton being an NHL scrub and not a legitimate starting goalie then that's all on you to be quite honest.
Yes, his career stats are not good. I agree. And yes, he doesn't have the superstar skills. But on this team, he will play well enough to win, and in the end that is all that matters.



Quote:
I can sure as hell blame Homer for completely giving up and, in the end, practically not even trying to sign a goalie (other then Leighton obviously).
But he did. He offered Turco and Nabby contracts. They turned him down. He went with Leighton. See birds, hands.



Quote:
What? Where did I say I was mad that Homer low-balled Turco? You're just making up crap now.

I'm mad that Homer completely gave up on signing him after making on low-ball offer before free agency even started.
Ok maybe not mad about the lowball, but you brought up several times so I just figured that you were not happy about it. I am sorry for misinterpreting. But it seems that you are calling his initial offer low-ball and mad that he didn't later offer less and sign him. So I was just a little confused.

Quote:
Of course I would be mad if he overpaid Turco. In other news, the sky is blue. What's your point?
See above

Quote:
Yeah, except that you're, once again, convienantly ignoring the fact that there were many other options besides Turco and Leighton.

Going by simple math and common sense, every analyst (amateur or professional) predicted and knew that there would be goalies left out in the wind without a job. Look what happened. Niemi and Theodore are still free agents and Nabokov went to the KHL.
Niemi and Theodore are not such great upgrades. See above.


Quote:
And somehow you're fine with that.
Yes. Perhaps I am wrong, but again, this team is very stacked defensively, moreso than last season and he played fine behind that defense last year so I don't see why with a better defense he would play worse.



Quote:
So, because Homer wasn't smart enough to let Turco actually test the market in free agency before offering him another contract, that means he should move on? Not that Homer is a ******? Okay then.
Birds, hands.

Quote:
It actually was about as close as a guarantee as you can get in free agency.

Like I've said many times before, it was painfully obvious that there were more goalies then jobs available. Meaning that lots of goalies would be willing to sign for cheap and a couple would be left without a job at all.

Meaning that a guy like Turco or Nabokov would have to lower their asking price eventually. Which they did since Turco signed for 1.3 mil and Nabokov went to the KHL.
That was all speculation at the time. There is no such thing as a guarantee. Birds. Hands.



Quote:
Except that that doesn't really apply to this situation at all.
Except it does. Homer didn't want to not have a goalie so he signed Leighton. He isn't the best, but he is better than none.



Quote:
I'd be absolutely fine with it since that means we could sign Theodore or Niemi and possibly even sign Leighton (assuming no one signed him) as our backup instead of Boucher and to a much cheaper contract.
I meant that as if other goalies signed. Obviously I know you wouldn't care if we signed a different goalie.

Quote:
So, you're saying that our GM failing to upgrade in a position of weakness in a market over-saturated with better goaltenders isn't "stupid as to garner all this attention".

I wonder what our GM has to do for you to actually think that it's stupid enough to discuss.

Also, frankly, I have to lol at you not thinking that all of these guys available aren't upgrades over a Leighton/Boucher tandem.

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that whoever we could have signed (Theodore, Turco, Niemi, whoever) didn't have to necessarily replace Leighton. Most of us are and were fine with keeping Leighton in as a backup. What most of us actually wanted was for Leighton to replace Boucher and for an upgrade to take the starter's spot.
I never said they weren't upgrades, they just weren't necessary upgrades. Leighton will do just as well as all the goalies available except Turco and Nabby. I WANTED TURCO OR NABAKOV! They didn't sign. Leighton will be fine. Ellis, Mason, Theodore, Niemi, may have slightly better seasons, but not the difference between a Cup and no Cup.

[qupte]...Let me get this straight. You admit all of these guys are have better stats, skills, and resumes then Leighton yet you say that they're not significant upgrades and nothing to get upset about. That makes zero sense.

Of course there's no ****ing guarantee that Mason or Ellis or whomever would get us a Cup. Thanks for stating the ****ing obvious. There's never a guarantee with anything in life, let alone hockey. However, a GMs job is to attempt to improve the team by all means possible, which is what signing a guy like Mason would have done. So, in other words, our GM failed at his job.[/quote]

People can be better but not significant upgrades. It isn't a difficult concept. They are better. Is our season ruined because Dan Ellis is not the goalie here? Absolutely not.



Quote:
He was obviously going to get a raise, but he was getting payed peanuts before so he should have been only getting around 1 mil in the end.

The guy hasn't even established that he's a legitimate NHL goalie in his career, let alone a starter. SCF appearance or not (which he was horrific in anyway), you don't sign guys that might be scrubs to that kind of contract and to be your starter.
$1.5 is not that much different than $1 million. Sure, maybe it is a slight overpayment, perhaps I will agree on that, but again, not such a "disaster" as people would like to call it.



Quote:
Uh...not really. Nabokov, Niemi, and Theodore all haven't been or weren't signed to NHL contracts so far. If those guys can't find a job in such an over-saturated market then there's no way in hell that a borderline scrub like Leighton is getting signed.

Even if Leighton was going to be signed by someone, who gives a ****? If someone else wants to overpay him then that's fine by me. Doesn't mean our GM should overpay him as well.
The point is that the two other goalies he wanted turned down offers. Leighton was number three. If he hit free agency, he would have been signed somewhere. Turco already turned down $2mil, Nabby turned down whatever. Leighton they knew they could get for what they wanted. So they did it. If they didn't there's a chance that Turco, Nabby, and Leighton walk.



Quote:
Well, no ****. We're not in the NHL.
But your argument is that Leighton is not an NHL goalie, yet he did it.


Quote:
lol. He backstopped this team? Not Chris Pronger, Kimmo Timonen, Mike Richards, Jeff Carter, Danny Briere, or Claude Giroux right? No, it was definitely the waiver-wire pickup that played 27 regular season games and only one and a half series in the playoffs before the SCF.
Yes he did. Backstopped means to play goal. It is a term used like as if I said, he was in net, or was keeping goal. I didn't mean he carried the team or anything like that. I thought I was pretty clear by talking about how Leighton playing on this team would be ok because the team is so good.


Quote:
You call that impressive? You're also giving Leighton the credit for our victories over Boston and Montreal? Wow.
Three shutouts in the conference finals is impressive no matter who they played and what team you are on. If you are not impressed by that I don't know what to say. Same thing with coming back from 3-0. Don't really know what else I can say about that.



Quote:
Actually, us coming back in Boston had more to with Mike Richards taking out the Bruins best forward and Simon Gagne coming back at the same time and scoring 4 goals and 1 assist, with two of the goals being GWG, in four games. There's also the fact that the team scored 15 goals in four games (almost 4 goals a game).

But, nah, it was all the great Michael Leighton's doing.

I'm sure the team scoring 17 goals in 5 games (more then 3 goals per game) and the Habs having an anemic offense that relied on two players (Gionta and Cammalleri) also had nothing to do with winning the Habs series.

That was definitely all the great Michael Leighton.

Michael Leighton also wasn't obviously a huge cause for our loss in the SCF.
Not saying he was the reason, but he certainly had a hand in it and you absolutely cannot ignore that fact.

Quote:
Yeah, as a backup at a cheaper price.
Well, he is the starter and he got that contract so I guess he'll have to prove it to you this year then if last year didn't prove it.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 02:49 PM
  #46
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Doof Warrior
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 48,541
vCash: 500
leighton played a total of 41 games, if you combine regular season and playoffs. that isnt't close to 50 games, its close to 40. he was pulled in something like (at least) 5 of those games as well.

that doesnt exactly fill me with confidence, and making that a starting goaltender is disconcerting

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 02:52 PM
  #47
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrudez View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
I'm curious if we win our first 3 games (and not just slip by either), would you guys still complain?

Because small sample sizes tell such an incredibly accurate story.


That line was a direct response to that statement. Basically I meant that 3 games would not sway my opinion because I am not a "What have you done for me lately?" fan.

Btw, I am not dismissing this team's potential. I have stated a few times I think they are a good team that should challenge in the East; however, the job Holmgren did this offseason was brutal and arguing otherwise is very difficult.

You are fighting with air. In fact, this whole thread was meant to be a non argumentative thread and rather a place for the vast majority who hated this offseason to come vent and attempt to compile a list of all the things we thought Holmgren did wrong this offseason. Instead of coming in and arguing with us may I suggest that Holmgren supporters attempt to make a similiar thread as this to list this offseason's accomplishments?

I will be very eager to see how long that list is.
Wow, you actually believed that this was a good idea? And you actually thought going into a topic, which we have discussed at length already, consistently and constantly turning it into a debate, would not become a debate again?

Sorry, but not everybody shares your opinion or your pessimism here.

To be honest, I don't think we have made a huge leap forward either. However, I do not believe that was actually necessary. We were a very good team last year, only unfocused a lot of time and that should be taken care off with Laviolette getting a whole season and the team being used to this coach.

Hell, you are even agreeing in your own words here, saying that this is a good team. So how exactly can an off-season be "brutal" or "a disaster" when it resulted in a good team? You aren't exactly making much sense here.

This off-season was a lot more sideways than any other direction, and that includes the projected "downward spiral" I have heard so often from the pessimists on this board. Calling it "a disaster" is definitely not the right way to describe it.

We have not made any tremendous losses from last season, with the exception of Gagne who can be replaced by Zherdev and development of our younger players (Giroux, JVR). The thing we did gain was a solid 3rd pairing defense, which was absolutely necessary seeing our 3rd pairing last year in the playoffs. If we had lost one of the top 4 then, we would have been toast. Not any longer.

Contrary to popular belief, I do not think that the goaltending situation was a necessity to be addressed at all. We have had solid goaltending all year last year and I have the stats to prove that too. We did go to the finals as well and while that goaltending was in a lot of ways also the result of whole team defence and a strong group of defensemen in the top 4, it was very much enough.

The problem the team faced all last year was inconsistency of the forwards, which was also the problem in the finals as the Briere line scored 29 points, and the rest of the forwards combined for only about half of that. Coaching and development, as already mentioned, as well as less personal problems (Hartnell, and speculatively Richards), will hopefully make the team more consistent here.

chaosof99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 03:31 PM
  #48
agrudez*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosof99 View Post
Wow, you actually believed that this was a good idea? And you actually thought going into a topic, which we have discussed at length already, consistently and constantly turning it into a debate, would not become a debate again?

Sorry, but not everybody shares your opinion or your pessimism here.

Nor do you have to, but perhaps it was too optimistic of this pessimist to assume that those who don't share that opinion could read the first paragraph of the thread and contain themselves from starting an argument.

To be honest, I don't think we have made a huge leap forward either. However, I do not believe that was actually necessary. We were a very good team last year, only unfocused a lot of time and that should be taken care off with Laviolette getting a whole season and the team being used to this coach.

Yes, we didn't make a huge leap forward, which would be fine had the opportunity to do so not be so crystal clear. Yes, we made the finals, but yes, we also almost didn't make the playoffs.

Hell, you are even agreeing in your own words here, saying that this is a good team. So how exactly can an off-season be "brutal" or "a disaster" when it resulted in a good team? You aren't exactly making much sense here.

This off-season was a lot more sideways than any other direction, and that includes the projected "downward spiral" I have heard so often from the pessimists on this board. Calling it "a disaster" is definitely not the right way to describe it.

This good team was assembled long before this offseason and this offseason did absolutely nothing to improve it and may in fact have made it take a step backward if Leighton is Leighton. This offseason was a total disaster in the vein that we did not need to take these latteral steps that ****ed our cap situation for the future and instead could have taken steps ahead. The true disaster will be next offseason after what Holmgren did to our cap for the next few years and the circumstances that arise after this season with contracts.

We have not made any tremendous losses from last season, with the exception of Gagne who can be replaced by Zherdev and development of our younger players (Giroux, JVR). The thing we did gain was a solid 3rd pairing defense, which was absolutely necessary seeing our 3rd pairing last year in the playoffs. If we had lost one of the top 4 then, we would have been toast. Not any longer.

Yeah, O'Donnell was a great signing. Meszaros would have been a decent pickup if we had moved Carle or not resigned Coburn at an inflated cap hit, too. Having them all and then ADDING the useless 1.7M cap hit of Walker makes that situation pretty ********.

Contrary to popular belief, I do not think that the goaltending situation was a necessity to be addressed at all. We have had solid goaltending all year last year and I have the stats to prove that too. We did go to the finals as well and while that goaltending was in a lot of ways also the result of whole team defence and a strong group of defensemen in the top 4, it was very much enough.

Let's just hope we play teams with a disorganized offense due to the midseason insertion of a selfish superstar (NJ), a defensive minded team that we can injure their best forward halfway through a series (BOS) or a team of midgets that relied on 3 guys for literally all of their offense (Mon)... because we all know what happens when we face a team with a decent offense and depth... those SCF were fun to watch, weren't they?

The problem the team faced all last year was inconsistency of the forwards, which was also the problem in the finals as the Briere line scored 29 points, and the rest of the forwards combined for only about half of that. Coaching and development, as already mentioned, as well as less personal problems (Hartnell, and speculatively Richards), will hopefully make the team more consistent here.

I agree with the fact that Lavi will be able to shape our forwards up a bit in that respect; however. I don't know if scoring almost 4 goals/game in the SCF as a team was clearly our problem in that series.
Responded in bold.

agrudez* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 03:34 PM
  #49
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
...
I can already tell that this is just going to be one massive circular conversation and that you won't budge even in the face of facts so I'm just gonna give up now.


Last edited by GKJ: 08-26-2010 at 09:18 PM. Reason: keep straight at other poster
Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 03:36 PM
  #50
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Doof Warrior
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 48,541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
Sorry if I sound like Chris Shafer here, but I can already tell that I can't talk to you. I can already tell that this is just going to be one massive circular conversation and that you won't budge even in the face of facts so I'm just gonna give up now.
havent you heard? leighton performed tolerably for about 30 games last season/post-season, that means he's now an NHL-caliber starter who will be our savior in net.

Beef Invictus is online now   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 02:36 AM.

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.