HFBoards

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

Feaster: Short term moves?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-02-2011, 12:24 PM
  #1
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Formerly MVW
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 50
Feaster: Short term moves?

With multiple media reports out that have Feaster on record saying that he will not be trading away any of the core players (and these players being Iginla, Bouwmeester, Giordano, Kipper and Regehr), what if any moves in the short term could be expected. Despite recent contract signings, with a new GM in place there is no loyality to past relations because this GM is somewhat free to put his own stamp on the team. So if no one from the core that Feaster named is going to be traded in the immediate future, what players could be moved?

The players that could be moved are:

Forwards:

Mikael Backlund, Rene Bourque, Craig Conroy, Curtis Glencross, Niklas Hagman, Raitis Ivanans, Tim Jackman, Olli Jokinen, Tom Kostopoulos, Ales Kotalik, Brendan Morrison, David Moss, Matt Stajan, Alex Tanguay

Defence:

Anton Babchuk, Adam Pardy, Cory Sarich, Steve Staios

Personally, I think that Stajan, Moss, Hagman and Sarich are the most likely to be the first to go. What are your thoughts?

Johnny Hoxville is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 12:46 PM
  #2
Lunatik*
 
Lunatik*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lethbridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,918
vCash: 500
I think any player recently signed to a long term extention is going to be considered part of the core... so scratch Stajan and Bourque from that list...

I think Sarich due to his chemistry with Giordano is too valuable to trade while trying to make a playoff push (which htey are trying to do)...

I think we shouldn't **** with whats working... leave Moss, Jackman and Kostopoulos alone and together as a line for this year and next year... even if rebuilding next year they would set an example...

I think Glencross is as good as gone... we can expect at least a 3rd in return maybe a 2nd...

I think Hagman is our most marketable player that is tradable... I think he will fetch a 2nd for sure and maybe a prospect as well...

Lunatik* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 01:06 PM
  #3
StreakingRed
**Rebuild Ahead**
 
StreakingRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 10,849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatik View Post
I think Glencross is as good as gone...

I hope not. I really want to see Glencross re-signed.

StreakingRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 01:23 PM
  #4
Lunatik*
 
Lunatik*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lethbridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StreakingRed View Post
I hope not. I really want to see Glencross re-signed.
he won't re-sign... not after being a healthy scratch and being then complaining about it in the paper... and even if he would... if we can get a 2nd round pick for a 3rd liner... send him on this way

Lunatik* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 01:47 PM
  #5
StreakingRed
**Rebuild Ahead**
 
StreakingRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 10,849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatik View Post
he won't re-sign... not after being a healthy scratch and being then complaining about it in the paper...

He was a healthy scratch, he damn well better of been pissed off about that. I'd be far more concerned if he were fine with it.

Jackman is also a player I hope we re-sign.

StreakingRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 01:51 PM
  #6
Lunatik*
 
Lunatik*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lethbridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StreakingRed View Post
He was a healthy scratch, he damn well better of been pissed off about that. I'd be far more concerned if he were fine with it.

Jackman is also a player I hope we re-sign.
being pissed off is fine... but you don't need to spout off in the papers... also Glencross is going to want to sign somewhere he can get top 6 time... and if we want to win... we don't want him in the top 6

Lunatik* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 02:00 PM
  #7
StreakingRed
**Rebuild Ahead**
 
StreakingRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 10,849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatik View Post
being pissed off is fine... but you don't need to spout off in the papers...

Fair enough, but I don't have a problem with some honesty once in a while from these players. He was asked how he felt about being sat, and he answered truthfully.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatik View Post
... also Glencross is going to want to sign somewhere he can get top 6 time... and if we want to win... we don't want him in the top 6

Why do you say that? How do you know that's necessarily what he wants?

I agree with you on Glencross in the top 6, though. Glencross is at his best in a bottom 6 role. When he plays in the top 6, he seems to think he's a scorer and avoids his gritty play more, which is what makes him effective.

StreakingRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 02:09 PM
  #8
Lunatik*
 
Lunatik*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lethbridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StreakingRed View Post
Fair enough, but I don't have a problem with some honesty once in a while from these players. He was asked how he felt about being sat, and he answered truthfully.
See to me other than being angry I think it was a load of ****... he claimed he didn't know why he was scratched... so either he is lying or stupid... because it was crystal clear why he was sat

Quote:
Originally Posted by StreakingRed View Post
Why do you say that? How do you know that's necessarily what he wants?

I agree with you on Glencross in the top 6, though. Glencross is at his best in a bottom 6 role. When he plays in the top 6, he seems to think he's a scorer and avoids his gritty play more, which is what makes him effective.
he has said in the past he wants an opportunity to play in the top 6... he seems to think he is good enough... he's going to leave for a chance to play more minutes like Nystrom did

Lunatik* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 02:30 PM
  #9
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Formerly MVW
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatik View Post
I think any player recently signed to a long term extention is going to be considered part of the core... so scratch Stajan and Bourque from that list...

I think Sarich due to his chemistry with Giordano is too valuable to trade while trying to make a playoff push (which htey are trying to do)...

I think we shouldn't **** with whats working... leave Moss, Jackman and Kostopoulos alone and together as a line for this year and next year... even if rebuilding next year they would set an example...

I think Glencross is as good as gone... we can expect at least a 3rd in return maybe a 2nd...

I think Hagman is our most marketable player that is tradable... I think he will fetch a 2nd for sure and maybe a prospect as well...
The thing is, Feaster was also on record saying that currently we do not have a 2nd or 3rd round pick in next years draft and that he would like try to and aquire picks in those rounds. So while I'll agree that Hagman and Glencross could likely be on their way out sooner than later, I think that there are a number a players in our bottom 6 that could be moved.

And I would put Stajan in that catergory for the simple reason that an evaluation process of the players is currently being done and Stajan has been underperforming to the organizations expectations of him. I do agree that his recent extension makes it somewhat more unlikely that he gets moved, but that was Sutter that signed him to it and not Feaster. Feaster has no loyality to Stajan whatsoever, and he has already been in B. Sutter's dog house. If Feaster tries to go for the playoffs this year, I would not at all be surprised to see Stajan go in a package that was something for a Riberio, Pavelski, Zajac type of centre. Also with Jokinen's recent emergence, I think Stajan could definitely be in play.

Johnny Hoxville is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 02:33 PM
  #10
tfong
Registered User
 
tfong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,150
vCash: 500
Tangs needs to be moved! He could fetch us a nice bunch of picks (early 1st possibly?) Glencross and Morrison too could fetch us a nice return at the deadline.

tfong is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 02:57 PM
  #11
Calculon
unholy acting talent
 
Calculon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,683
vCash: 50
I would hope Stajan, Hagman, Staois, Glencross and Morrison are moved at the deadline or earlier. Kotalik and maybe Babchuk too, if Feaster can find a taker for the former and if the latter isn't going to be re-signed. Stajan has been abysmal without Iginla or Tanguay on his line and I see no reason to keep a guy like him just because he signed an extension eight or nine months ago. There's no chance Glencross comes back next season, given that he'll be looking for 2M+ on his next contract plus a chance at more ice time and the Flames can't give him that. Hagman should bring back a decent return while Staois and Morrison are UFA's that won't be back next season. No sense in keeping them if Flames aren't in the playoffs by the deadline.

Tanguay on the other hand, is someone I really hope re-signs, especially if Iginla doesn't get traded.

Calculon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 02:58 PM
  #12
slappipappi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tfong View Post
Tangs needs to be moved! He could fetch us a nice bunch of picks (early 1st possibly?) Glencross and Morrison too could fetch us a nice return at the deadline.
Since only contenders will be trading for guys like Tanguay, there will not be any early first involved.

slappipappi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 03:01 PM
  #13
slappipappi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calculon View Post
Stajan has been abysmal without Iginla or Tanguay on his line and I see no reason to keep a guy like him just because he signed an extension eight or nine months ago.
One reason may be the fact that he's owed $3.5M per season over the next 3+ seasons, has 2 goals, is on pace for about a 5 goal, 40 point pace while getting premium ice time, has a no trade contract, and why would anyone want to trade for that?

He had negative trade value.

We are stuck with him until he either starts producing or we accept another long term expensive contract of a player who is equally unproductive.

slappipappi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 03:23 PM
  #14
WebSlinger
Registered User
 
WebSlinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 31
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slappipappi View Post
One reason may be the fact that he's owed $3.5M per season over the next 3+ seasons, has 2 goals, is on pace for about a 5 goal, 40 point pace while getting premium ice time, has a no trade contract, and why would anyone want to trade for that?

He had negative trade value.

We are stuck with him until he either starts producing or we accept another long term expensive contract of a player who is equally unproductive.
Why you gotta drop facts like that? It makes me cringe and throw up in my mouth a little.

Bourque needs to go... His value may still be quite high to a number of teams. Sure, he may be able to pound home goals in streaks, but he's a johnny-on-the-spot goal scorer and I really don't think his play will improve. Package him up with Sarich for a skilled center.

WebSlinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 05:33 PM
  #15
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Formerly MVW
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 50
If this team is going for a playoff spot, no way does Tanguay get traded. He's been our second most productive forward. If Stajan got traded, I would not lose an ounce of sleep over it. I like the idea of packaging him with someone else to unload him. I think something like Stajan and Sarich to Buffalo is doable, not too sure what the return would be (maybe Stafford as someone else proposed on the main board and a 2nd round draft pick). I would much rather have Backlund getting his minutes, there would not be a big drop in production there anyways and we would be developing him accordingly.

Also, I would be all over trading Bourque to B's for Wheeler and Colborne. And I'm pretty sure Boston would do that trade too. Bourque is good, but he is inconsistent and injury prone and he is an excellent asset to move in a trade. In Wheeler we would get a young, speedy scoring winger that this organization could move forward with for years. And Colborne is a someone who has #1 or 2 centre potential.

Johnny Hoxville is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 05:38 PM
  #16
slappipappi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WebSlinger View Post
Why you gotta drop facts like that? It makes me cringe and throw up in my mouth a little.

Bourque needs to go... His value may still be quite high to a number of teams. Sure, he may be able to pound home goals in streaks, but he's a johnny-on-the-spot goal scorer and I really don't think his play will improve. Package him up with Sarich for a skilled center.
Sarich and Bourque combined make about $7M. Who would want to pay that so that Calgary could get a #1 centre. Much less give up anything for it.

Guys like Bourque and Sarich are available for free at UFA time. They aren't worth anything on the open market. Teams would shy away from the 5+ years left on Bourque's contract, plus his inconsistent play (which is a career trend).

Plus they have NTC's, of course.

slappipappi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 05:41 PM
  #17
slappipappi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
Also, I would be all over trading Bourque to B's for Wheeler and Colborne. And I'm pretty sure Boston would do that trade too. Bourque is good, but he is inconsistent and injury prone and he is an excellent asset to move in a trade. In Wheeler we would get a young, speedy scoring winger that this organization could move forward with for years. And Colborne is a someone who has #1 or 2 centre potential.
Why would Boston move a young forward with #1 centre potential, along with another skilled winger, for a player that is "inconsistent and injury prone" and who has a NTC and is still owed a lot of money over 5+ years?

slappipappi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 05:51 PM
  #18
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Formerly MVW
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by slappipappi View Post
Why would Boston move a young forward with #1 centre potential, along with another skilled winger, for a player that is "inconsistent and injury prone" and who has a NTC and is still owed a lot of money over 5+ years?
Because Boston already has centre's coming out of their a** and Bourque fills a need on their roster to help them win a Cup this year. They have Savard, Kreji, Bergeron, Seguin and Marchand who are all ahead on the depth charts over Colborne who is currently being used a winger on their farm team. Bourque is an upgrade over Wheeler at the moment, so Colborne (who is definitely expendable) is the extra compensation to make up the gap. Its fair value both ways, and would benefit both teams.

Plus as I mentioned earlier, Bourque has lots of trade value. Lots of teams would love to have him. He would fit in perfectly on Boston or Pittsburg and both teams would probably give us a nice return for him.

Johnny Hoxville is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 06:11 PM
  #19
slappipappi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
Plus as I mentioned earlier, Bourque has lots of trade value. Lots of teams would love to have him. He would fit in perfectly on Boston or Pittsburg and both teams would probably give us a nice return for him.
He's a 20-25 per year goalcorer if you give him lots of premium ice time and PP time, who's signed for 5+ years at $3.333M, and has a NTC. He's also 29 years old and has likely peaked, so the inconsistent play and injuries are going nowhere.

Sorry, but that adds up to a contract not many teams would want, much less give up a "nice return" for him.

Bourque could be moved for a similiar type contract value.

slappipappi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 06:20 PM
  #20
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Formerly MVW
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by slappipappi View Post
He's a 20-25 per year goalcorer if you give him lots of premium ice time and PP time, who's signed for 5+ years at $3.333M, and has a NTC. He's also 29 years old and has likely peaked, so the inconsistent play and injuries are going nowhere.

Sorry, but that adds up to a contract not many teams would want, much less give up a "nice return" for him.

Bourque could be moved for a similiar type contract value.
I completely disagree. If Bourque were on a good team with a centre like a Savard, he's a easily a 30+ goal guy, and then suddenly his contract is the bargain of the century being that he is signed long term for his prime years. Hell put him with Crosby, he is arguably a 40+ goal guy. Bourque is big, fast, has a great shot, physical and can kill penalities. Not many forwards in the NHL can do all that at his price tag. His contract is easily one of the better ones on the Flames. I also think that his recent lack of production has more to do with that he has absolutely no one to play with and having Stajan or Jokinen as his centre. I think with the exception of Iggy, Regehr and Bouw, that Bourque has the most return value in a trade. Put this guy with a good centre and he would flourish, and I do not think he has peeked yet either.

Johnny Hoxville is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2011, 06:25 PM
  #21
Lunatik*
 
Lunatik*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lethbridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
I completely disagree. If Bourque were on a good team with a centre like a Savard, he's a easily a 30+ goal guy, and then suddenly his contract is the bargain of the century being that he is signed long term for his prime years. Hell put him with Crosby, he is arguably a 40+ goal guy. Bourque is big, fast, has a great shot, physical and can kill penalities. Not many forwards in the NHL can do all that at his price tag. His contract is easily one of the better ones on the Flames. I also think that his recent lack of production has more to do with that he has absolutely no one to play with and having Stajan or Jokinen as his centre. I think with the exception of Iggy, Regehr and Bouw, that Bourque has the most return value in a trade. Put this guy with a good centre and he would flourish, and I do not think he has peeked yet either.
why do you keep arguing with him?... have you not noticed that every single post that poster makes is insulting the Flames?... you could give an argument that would sway the Supreme Court into overturning a decision and that guy would still be trashing the Flames... please I beg of you to stop replying to him and maybe he will just finally go away because he isn't a flames fan

Lunatik* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2011, 08:10 PM
  #22
Doyle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,151
vCash: 500
Excellent analysis of the situation at NHL Hot Stove:

http://nhlhotstove.com/the-coming-of-jay-feaster/

Doyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2011, 02:24 AM
  #23
Nachoman AlfieSavage*
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eating nachos up top
Posts: 2,245
vCash: 500
The simple fact of the matter is that whether or not the Flames make the playoffs this year is irrelevant. It does not matter one bit. What matters is that their star players, have huge contracts and are aging to the point where their numbers are beginning to decline. On top of this Calgary has one of the weakest prospect pools in the NHL, and virtually no young talent outside of Borque, Gio and Backlund (2 of them arent will be vets by the time this team is competitive again). Continuing on is the stupidest thing a gm could possibly do at the moment. I dont get what King is doing here, does he realize that if his team doesnt trade away this core now while they have value, that his team is going to be bottom feeders for years and years to come?

Full rebuild is the only option. Only option. Can Calgary trade a few pieces and try to make the playoffs this year or next? Yes. Not likely to happen, but its possible. But that doesn't address the issue of the aging core and bare prospect cupboard. I just sometimes wonder whether or not it is ownership that are the real idiots in this equation. I guess we will find out over the next couple years. Imo, they have 2 years to strip the team down to the bones and pick up picks and prospects. If they wait longer than that, expect Calgary to be the next Toronto. Start writing letters to Flames ownership.

Nachoman AlfieSavage* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2011, 09:52 AM
  #24
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
If this team is going for a playoff spot, no way does Tanguay get traded. He's been our second most productive forward. If Stajan got traded, I would not lose an ounce of sleep over it. I like the idea of packaging him with someone else to unload him. I think something like Stajan and Sarich to Buffalo is doable, not too sure what the return would be (maybe Stafford as someone else proposed on the main board and a 2nd round draft pick). I would much rather have Backlund getting his minutes, there would not be a big drop in production there anyways and we would be developing him accordingly.

Also, I would be all over trading Bourque to B's for Wheeler and Colborne. And I'm pretty sure Boston would do that trade too. Bourque is good, but he is inconsistent and injury prone and he is an excellent asset to move in a trade. In Wheeler we would get a young, speedy scoring winger that this organization could move forward with for years. And Colborne is a someone who has #1 or 2 centre potential.
I think if I was boston i'd rather look at Tanguay as a rental then adding Bourque's salary long-term.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2011, 03:16 PM
  #25
ArizonaGreenTea
Registered User
 
ArizonaGreenTea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
I completely disagree. If Bourque were on a good team with a centre like a Savard, he's a easily a 30+ goal guy, and then suddenly his contract is the bargain of the century being that he is signed long term for his prime years.
How many good teams with truly great playmaking centers are in the market for a 30 year old player at 3.3 million for 5 more years? Bourque's play might get him a top 2 line role but his contract makes that a necessity, provided he lives up to it. Considering the reputations of the Crosbys, Savards, Thorntons, etc... using these players as the example that will bring up Bourque's play is silly. Considering his level of play and consistency, it's probably better to ask what his level of play will be alongside a Kessler, a Bergeron or a Pavelski.

He will perform well beside them, yes but will he do so for the full length of his contract? Not likely.

Quote:
Hell put him with Crosby, he is arguably a 40+ goal guy.
Why would the Penguins add more salary when they have to worry about the contracts of Fleury, Letang, Malkin and Crosby in the future? It's just 3 million less that can be spread around and not on a player that has close to the reputation of the other four. Locking up players not in their core long term is a bad strategy with the talent they already have.

Quote:
Bourque is big, fast, has a great shot, physical and can kill penalities. Not many forwards in the NHL can do all that at his price tag. His contract is easily one of the better ones on the Flames.
He's also offensively inconsistent, injury prone and locked up for 5.5 more seasons at his salary. The Sarich contract was praised initially too and look at how he's doing now. It might be a matter of perspective but it seems your perspective is that of a person who needs to convince himself that it's a good contract. He's still a good player and the contract would've been good if it was half the length.

Quote:
I think with the exception of Iggy, Regehr and Bouw, that Bourque has the most return value in a trade. Put this guy with a good centre and he would flourish, and I do not think he has peeked yet either.
You might have missed Giordano but it's an oversight. I think Tanguay would get a better return at the deadline. He's the perfect rental in a cap world, cheap so any team could trade for him and not under a long term contract. I think Morrison would also get a bigger return because the contracts are cheap, low risk, high reward. The deadline is more about roster tweaking than long term strategy (that's for moves around June/July) and the short term reward of a good pickup at the deadline is a very enticing prospect to most GMs. The results being that the biggest over-payments occur at the deadline and mostly for contracts with little to nothing left. Bourque, no matter how you spin it, is high risk due to the fact that his contract ends when he's 36, a lot can go wrong in those 5 years and then the team is stuck with a bad contract with no hope of trading the player away.

I would love to keep Bourque, if not for the contract length, and for that same reason I would be surprised and thrilled if Feaster got rid of him without taking something unfavorable in return.

ArizonaGreenTea 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 03:54 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.