02-04-2024, 08:05 PM
|
#1761
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamesfan05
That doesn’t make any sense
They are bad contracts moving forward. The best thing you can say is they don’t matter. What did Stajan and Glencross do btw
|
Huberdeau and Kadri probably make three times what Stajan and Glencross did as well. Hefty to price to pay for some supposed intangibles.
|
|
|
02-04-2024, 08:28 PM
|
#1762
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy
Yeah, when you draft a future Norris winner in the third round but he refuses to sign with you that's some bad luck.
When you draft a consensus future #1C 4th overall and he doesn't even become a legit 2nd line C in his time with you, that's some bad luck.
When your current #1C can't stay healthy right when your team is reaching contender status that is also some bad luck.
The Flames still managed a 114 point season despite all these things happening. Fox would have been in Norris contention while still on an ELC during the 114 point season.
|
I can argue the reverse actually. Tre was quite lucky in CGY. Here are some unexpected/fortunate events:
1. Gio becoming a Norris level D at his age. Playing at a very high level into his late 30s
2. Tkachuk falling down to the #6 pick
3. Gaudreau a 4th round pick made by the previous management turning into a star
4. The Islanders/Bruins missing on the 1st rounders Tre traded
5. Being able to sign Markstrom and Tanev to relatively cheap deals due to COVid and the flat cap
6. Gaudreau not wanting to miss any NHL games due to contract dispute and being lowballed with the Gio cap
7. Having Backlund(24) - a great 2C in the league, and Brodie(23) -2/3D in the system for their prime years at decent cap hits
8. Having the play in round in a year where it looked like the Flames were going to end up on the outside looking in
9. Having Flames games postponed due to COVid instead of the Flames playing short handed, like a lot of teams had to. It gave the team enough time to regroup that season and win the division.
10. The Flames were lucky that they ended up facing VAN in the playoffs in 2015. I think they were the perfect matchup, and the only one we could've won that year.
11. Losing no one to the VGK extension draft. Losing 37 year old Gio and his $7M cap hit to SEA instead of Kylington.
That's why I think luck balances out. For the most part Tre built average teams. His teams were always supposed to be atop the league in defense on paper, but rarely lived up to it.
Last edited by gvitaly; 02-04-2024 at 08:30 PM.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to gvitaly For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-04-2024, 08:52 PM
|
#1763
|
Franchise Player
|
The Islanders didn't miss with their pick from the Flames. They took Noah Dobson.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-04-2024, 09:21 PM
|
#1764
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackey
Huberdeau and Kadri probably make three times what Stajan and Glencross did as well. Hefty to price to pay for some supposed intangibles.
|
well if those guys scored over 100 points they would have gotten bigger contracts too. It kinda sucks but in the NHL you are paid for what you have done not what you are currently doing.
__________________
GFG
|
|
|
02-04-2024, 09:42 PM
|
#1765
|
Scoring Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo
|
Ya you can see how this guy scored 40, the speed with that consistency and accuracy is pretty wild. Easily the Flames best shooter
|
|
|
02-04-2024, 09:45 PM
|
#1766
|
Franchise Player
|
Flames starting to accumulate some forwards with wicked shots.
Sharangovich
Kuzmenko
Coronato
The latter two being righties is a bonus IMO
|
|
|
02-04-2024, 10:00 PM
|
#1767
|
Franchise Player
|
Is Treliving an idiotic buffoon, or was he a genius who had unforeseen and unfortunate luck?
Truth is most likely in the middle.
I see people building up stories around each move that he made. If you liked him, you are probably building a positive spin with every move. If you disliked him, you are doing the opposite.
Sometimes it is just easier to take a step back and look at the entire picture. When Treliving was hired, what was his priority? It wasn't to trade player A, waive player B, and draft player C. That's looking too closely. Take a step back, and you realize that Treliving was hired to build a contender. This team was in a rebuild, he was hired, and the goal was to become a contender. That's why this team entered into a rebuild - it became impossible to win a cup (or even just win many games) with the team as constructed.
In 9 full seasons, did he do that? Let's look at the successes:
2 - that's the number of playoff rounds won in 9 years
2 - that's the total number of games that were won in the 2nd rounds
5 - number of seasons out of 9 that the Flames made the playoffs
2 - number of consecutive seasons that the Flames made the playoffs in his tenure
0 - never made it to the third round
0 - never made it to the finals
0 - number of cups won
Ok, the last 3 numbers were for emphasis. If the goal was to build a contender, then there isn't much of an argument to be had in Treliving accomplishing the goal that he was hired to do. Blame it on bad luck or bad decisions. Don't blame it on a bad location - other Canadian teams made it to the finals during his tenure, and others to the third round.
The 'consistent' number also speaks volumes for me. If you are building a contender, one of the steps in that direction is to consistently make the playoffs, right? A good example is Colorado - consistent playoff team from 2018 through last year, winning the cup in 2022.
The argument that can be made is that the Flames looked like Contenders in 2022 with Darryl Sutter as coach, and were just as impressive in 2019 being the western conference champs and having the 2nd best overall record in the NHL. However, that's regular season, and while that's fun, it doesn't mean too much. I am sure the San Jose Sharks would have loved to exchange 5 elite regular seasons for just one single cup.
Did Treliving make moves that I agree with? Absolutely he did. Furthermore, he made moves that I agreed with that worked, he made moves that I agreed with that didn't work. He also made moves that I disagreed with that worked, and moves that I disagreed with that didn't work. It doesn't matter what I agree with or not - I am not the GM. I don't have a bunch of advisors, scouts, assistant GMs, advanced in-house metrics, an analytics team, etc., to help base my own decisions on. He needed to be better than me, or anyone else reading this. It does not matter if you agreed with what he did or you didn't, and what each individual outcome per every decision was. All that matters was success in the playoffs.
He was hired to build a contender, right? So step back and answer these questions:
1) Did this team win a cup? Did it at least contend for the cup?
2) Did this team get close? Go on a playoff run (achieve 3rd round)?
3) Was this team at least a consistent playoff team?
I answered no to these 3 questions, and I that's why I was relived when it was announced that Treliving left the organization. He didn't accomplish what he was hired to do, and at the time I believe he was the 4th longest tenured GM in the league. He had plenty of time.
Now, where are the Flames trending? Did he step away even though this team was on the cusp of winning it? No, the Flames have had to enter a 'retool' - whatever that looks like, and for however long it lasts.
Finally, did he leave the team in a better spot or a worse spot than when he first took over?
I would argue worse. The Flames had some very good pieces in the organization when he took over - Backlund, Gaudreau, Giordano, Ferland, Monahan, Bennett, Brodie... that's a really good nucleus to build around. How many bad contracts were on the team? Zero. There were no long-term big money deals on the books when he took over. Now I look at the team. Certainly there are good pieces - Zary, Pospisil, Coronato, Hanifin, Andersson, Weegar... but there doesn't seem to be any high-end talent to build around, and there are some long-term contracts on the books. I would argue that it looks worse now considering the pipeline of talent, and the contracts are worse.
No, he wasn't an idiot. We wasn't incompetent, or embarrassing, and he didn't plunge the Flames into some abyss that will take a decade to get out of. He is none of the things that people who vehemently dislike him seem to intent on convincing everyone else about. However, I don't think that he was necessarily a good GM either. Flames never got any closer to winning the cup in his 8th year than they were in his 1st year, and the wheels fell off last season. Flames are certainly in a worse spot right now than they were when he first took over, and i really don't see an argument against that, though I am open to one.
I think I would rather talk about Conroy, and why I feel confident about him being the GM of this team, and how well I think he did on this Lindholm trade. That's the more important conversation to be had. As for Treliving, I don't wish him bad luck, though I certainly hope the Leafs never achieve any success, and it's because I hate the Leafs. If Treliving trades with Conroy, I hope he massively loses every deal. I don't wish him to lose his job, I don't wish upon him some horrible outcome. I don't really care one way or the other with how much success he has with whatever team he manages. Maybe one day I will look at him like I did with David Poile when he retired. For now, all I wish is for Conroy to take this team where Treliving couldn't, and that's the Stanley Cup Final one day.
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-04-2024, 11:17 PM
|
#1768
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Dallas
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe
Is Treliving an idiotic buffoon, or was he a genius who had unforeseen and unfortunate luck?
Truth is most likely in the middle.
I see people building up stories around each move that he made. If you liked him, you are probably building a positive spin with every move. If you disliked him, you are doing the opposite.
Sometimes it is just easier to take a step back and look at the entire picture. When Treliving was hired, what was his priority? It wasn't to trade player A, waive player B, and draft player C. That's looking too closely. Take a step back, and you realize that Treliving was hired to build a contender. This team was in a rebuild, he was hired, and the goal was to become a contender. That's why this team entered into a rebuild - it became impossible to win a cup (or even just win many games) with the team as constructed.
In 9 full seasons, did he do that? Let's look at the successes:
2 - that's the number of playoff rounds won in 9 years
2 - that's the total number of games that were won in the 2nd rounds
5 - number of seasons out of 9 that the Flames made the playoffs
2 - number of consecutive seasons that the Flames made the playoffs in his tenure
0 - never made it to the third round
0 - never made it to the finals
0 - number of cups won
Ok, the last 3 numbers were for emphasis. If the goal was to build a contender, then there isn't much of an argument to be had in Treliving accomplishing the goal that he was hired to do. Blame it on bad luck or bad decisions. Don't blame it on a bad location - other Canadian teams made it to the finals during his tenure, and others to the third round.
The 'consistent' number also speaks volumes for me. If you are building a contender, one of the steps in that direction is to consistently make the playoffs, right? A good example is Colorado - consistent playoff team from 2018 through last year, winning the cup in 2022.
The argument that can be made is that the Flames looked like Contenders in 2022 with Darryl Sutter as coach, and were just as impressive in 2019 being the western conference champs and having the 2nd best overall record in the NHL. However, that's regular season, and while that's fun, it doesn't mean too much. I am sure the San Jose Sharks would have loved to exchange 5 elite regular seasons for just one single cup.
Did Treliving make moves that I agree with? Absolutely he did. Furthermore, he made moves that I agreed with that worked, he made moves that I agreed with that didn't work. He also made moves that I disagreed with that worked, and moves that I disagreed with that didn't work. It doesn't matter what I agree with or not - I am not the GM. I don't have a bunch of advisors, scouts, assistant GMs, advanced in-house metrics, an analytics team, etc., to help base my own decisions on. He needed to be better than me, or anyone else reading this. It does not matter if you agreed with what he did or you didn't, and what each individual outcome per every decision was. All that matters was success in the playoffs.
He was hired to build a contender, right? So step back and answer these questions:
1) Did this team win a cup? Did it at least contend for the cup?
2) Did this team get close? Go on a playoff run (achieve 3rd round)?
3) Was this team at least a consistent playoff team?
I answered no to these 3 questions, and I that's why I was relived when it was announced that Treliving left the organization. He didn't accomplish what he was hired to do, and at the time I believe he was the 4th longest tenured GM in the league. He had plenty of time.
Now, where are the Flames trending? Did he step away even though this team was on the cusp of winning it? No, the Flames have had to enter a 'retool' - whatever that looks like, and for however long it lasts.
Finally, did he leave the team in a better spot or a worse spot than when he first took over?
I would argue worse. The Flames had some very good pieces in the organization when he took over - Backlund, Gaudreau, Giordano, Ferland, Monahan, Bennett, Brodie... that's a really good nucleus to build around. How many bad contracts were on the team? Zero. There were no long-term big money deals on the books when he took over. Now I look at the team. Certainly there are good pieces - Zary, Pospisil, Coronato, Hanifin, Andersson, Weegar... but there doesn't seem to be any high-end talent to build around, and there are some long-term contracts on the books. I would argue that it looks worse now considering the pipeline of talent, and the contracts are worse.
No, he wasn't an idiot. We wasn't incompetent, or embarrassing, and he didn't plunge the Flames into some abyss that will take a decade to get out of. He is none of the things that people who vehemently dislike him seem to intent on convincing everyone else about. However, I don't think that he was necessarily a good GM either. Flames never got any closer to winning the cup in his 8th year than they were in his 1st year, and the wheels fell off last season. Flames are certainly in a worse spot right now than they were when he first took over, and i really don't see an argument against that, though I am open to one.
I think I would rather talk about Conroy, and why I feel confident about him being the GM of this team, and how well I think he did on this Lindholm trade. That's the more important conversation to be had. As for Treliving, I don't wish him bad luck, though I certainly hope the Leafs never achieve any success, and it's because I hate the Leafs. If Treliving trades with Conroy, I hope he massively loses every deal. I don't wish him to lose his job, I don't wish upon him some horrible outcome. I don't really care one way or the other with how much success he has with whatever team he manages. Maybe one day I will look at him like I did with David Poile when he retired. For now, all I wish is for Conroy to take this team where Treliving couldn't, and that's the Stanley Cup Final one day.
|
You wrote one real good paragraph. The one compares the team at the beginning and the end of Treliving’s tenure. It says it all.
In between was also very underwhelming btw
|
|
|
02-04-2024, 11:25 PM
|
#1769
|
Backup Goalie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Exp:  
|
Is there even any point in tanking next year? We don't have a first round pick. That is concerning...any thoughts of how we get that back so we pick in the top 10?
|
|
|
02-04-2024, 11:39 PM
|
#1770
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
1) Did this team win a cup? Did it at least contend for the cup?
2) Did this team get close? Go on a playoff run (achieve 3rd round)?
3) Was this team at least a consistent playoff team?
Now, where are the Flames trending? Did he step away even though this team was on the cusp of winning it? No, the Flames have had to enter a 'retool' - whatever that looks like, and for however long it lasts.
Finally, did he leave the team in a better spot or a worse spot than when he first took over?
|
1) No
2) No
3) No
Flames have trended down the last few years. It seems like Conroy is slowly shifting that. Since Conroy took over I can finally see a tiny glimmer of light at the end of this long dark tunnel.
It's hard to say if we're in a better or worse spot then we were.
When he took over we already had an arguably elite young winger (Gaudreau), a young top 6 center (Monahan), a Norris winning defense (Gio) in the system and we were walking into a top 4 pick. We also had a full prospect pool with 5 1st round picks in the 3 previous years.
We could have comparable assets in the system but we won't know for years until they develop. Maybe Wolf wins a vezina and Coronato becomes a consistent 90 point guy.
We definitely didn't have a Huberdeau type contract (worst contract in the league currently. Is there any debate?) and conditions on an upcoming 1st though.
So I would say he left us in a worse position.
Tre was a mediocre to bad GM. I believe his bad moves outweigh his good ones.
Very overrated GM in my opinion. He's polished and well spoken but a poor hockey mind. Had me fooled for a few years.
edit:
In fairness to Tre, he did get us from a "re-whatever" team into playoffs for 5/9 years. Some team struggle to do that.
Last edited by traptor; 02-05-2024 at 12:00 AM.
|
|
|
02-04-2024, 11:47 PM
|
#1771
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMagicMan
Is there even any point in tanking next year? We don't have a first round pick. That is concerning...any thoughts of how we get that back so we pick in the top 10?
|
We go through this daily but the Flames VERY likely have their own pick
Flames had 2 picks for 2025, Montreal only gets one and it will almost certainly be the Panthers pick
__________________
GFG
|
|
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-05-2024, 12:49 AM
|
#1772
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
How was it obvious that the media was biased? Evidence?
|
The overarching media narrative in explaining the team's struggles last season was that the team was in a funk last season because of Sutters negativity, "no fun" demeanor, toxic atmosphere around the team, mean to Huby, disrespectful to players, uncompromising with the system, poor utilization of talent, etc. He kicked players. He was mean to pelts. He made a poop joke. He wouldn't listen to Tre. He was mean to staff members.
Not once in the 2022-23 season did the media think, "maybe it's that the roster just kind of sucks." The closest the media got was looking at Huby and Markstrom and Kadri and noting a contributing factor of the poor team results were the subpar performance of individual players. Not team construction, but individual players. Not a single person in the media blamed Tre. The quality of the roster wasn't questioned by anyone in the media.
It's wild how this season laid bare that the truth was largely the opposite of the narrative that everyone amplified last year. The truth: the roster isn't good enough to compete, the best players are post-apex, Huby is massively overpaid (it isn't the coach), and the coach wasn't the primary problem with team performance (lack of finishing talent is). Even with Kadri and Markstrom playing substantially better, the team is less competitive than the 2022-23 season (when they missed the playoffs).
Isn't it interesting that the media amplified a fake narrative that just happened to make Tre look as good as possible and pin all the blame on someone else? And that someone else just happened to be the guy Tre was internally feuding with. Maybe the media just got it entirely wrong by mistake. But it reads an awful lot like fake news. Skew the facts to fit a narrative that blames whoever it is that your guy needs to blame.
Isn't it odd that the media constantly reported that "Tre was in on that trade. He works so hard. He was so close." for every big player. "Tre was in on that UFA. He works so hard. He was so close to singing him" for every big UFA. Then Conroy comes out and says "yeah, he didn't really include us in that." So where is that narrative coming from. Who is leaking that "this super hard working GM Treliving was involved with this UFA until the 23 hour." I'm guessing it's Treliving and Maloney.
Who's going to the media with tidbits on the Sutter-Tre feud. Who is telling the media that "Tre wanted to make a coaching change, but ownership wouldn't oblige." It's either Tre, Maloney or Edwards. No one else has that information.
Then the media gets super upset because Tre isn't allowed to sit at the draft table or sign with Toronto or whatever it is. So again, the media amps up pressure on Calgary to allow such things...to Treliving's benefit. Who was leaking that to the press that the flames were being mean to Treliving? Probably Treliving...
IMO it seemed that Tre was constantly leaking things to the media off the record to help shape the narrative and get his way. Let's give it time...maybe the same types of things will happen in Toronto. He'll sign garbage UFAs and do stupid extensions and then get the media to spin it like he's a great, hardworking gm. And then he'll leak to the media when shanahan or ownership won't let him get his way.
|
|
|
02-05-2024, 02:01 AM
|
#1773
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
|
Jurmo will be the next Lydman.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-05-2024, 04:31 AM
|
#1774
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamesfan05
You wrote one real good paragraph. The one compares the team at the beginning and the end of Treliving’s tenure. It says it all.
In between was also very underwhelming btw
|
Jeez, that's unnecessarily rude and disrespectful.
|
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Sandman For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-05-2024, 07:09 AM
|
#1775
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Dallas
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandman
Jeez, that's unnecessarily rude and disrespectful.
|
My comment was on Treliving not about the writer. Sorry if that was a misunderstanding
I really like that summary in that paragraph. And the last sentence was about Treliving time as a Flames
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Flamesfan05 For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-05-2024, 07:57 AM
|
#1776
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamesfan05
You wrote one real good paragraph. The one compares the team at the beginning and the end of Treliving’s tenure. It says it all.
In between was also very underwhelming btw
|
And you'd know because all your stuff is epic!
(honestly who says something like that?)
|
|
|
02-05-2024, 07:59 AM
|
#1777
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamesfan05
My comment was on Treliving not about the writer. Sorry if that was a misunderstanding
I really like that summary in that paragraph. And the last sentence was about Treliving time as a Flames
|
OK phew ...
I took it the other way too.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
|
|
02-05-2024, 08:09 AM
|
#1778
|
Fearmongerer
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
|
Conroy trades Lindholm to Vancouver in a deal reached with Rutherford/Alvinn and we get page after page about....Brad Treliving.
Ugh.
|
|
|
02-05-2024, 08:22 AM
|
#1779
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
Conroy trades Lindholm to Vancouver in a deal reached with Rutherford/Alvinn and we get page after page about....Brad Treliving.
Ugh.
|
Well first we got page after page about the trade, and then when no one had anything else to say about the trade, the discussion shifted to historical matters including Treliving's legacy.
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
|
|
|
02-05-2024, 08:27 AM
|
#1780
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GullFoss
The overarching media narrative in explaining the team's struggles last season was that the team was in a funk last season because of Sutters negativity, "no fun" demeanor, toxic atmosphere around the team, mean to Huby, disrespectful to players, uncompromising with the system, poor utilization of talent, etc. He kicked players. He was mean to pelts. He made a poop joke. He wouldn't listen to Tre. He was mean to staff members.
Not once in the 2022-23 season did the media think, "maybe it's that the roster just kind of sucks." The closest the media got was looking at Huby and Markstrom and Kadri and noting a contributing factor of the poor team results were the subpar performance of individual players. Not team construction, but individual players. Not a single person in the media blamed Tre. The quality of the roster wasn't questioned by anyone in the media.
It's wild how this season laid bare that the truth was largely the opposite of the narrative that everyone amplified last year. The truth: the roster isn't good enough to compete, the best players are post-apex, Huby is massively overpaid (it isn't the coach), and the coach wasn't the primary problem with team performance (lack of finishing talent is). Even with Kadri and Markstrom playing substantially better, the team is less competitive than the 2022-23 season (when they missed the playoffs).
Isn't it interesting that the media amplified a fake narrative that just happened to make Tre look as good as possible and pin all the blame on someone else? And that someone else just happened to be the guy Tre was internally feuding with. Maybe the media just got it entirely wrong by mistake. But it reads an awful lot like fake news. Skew the facts to fit a narrative that blames whoever it is that your guy needs to blame.
Isn't it odd that the media constantly reported that "Tre was in on that trade. He works so hard. He was so close." for every big player. "Tre was in on that UFA. He works so hard. He was so close to singing him" for every big UFA. Then Conroy comes out and says "yeah, he didn't really include us in that." So where is that narrative coming from. Who is leaking that "this super hard working GM Treliving was involved with this UFA until the 23 hour." I'm guessing it's Treliving and Maloney.
Who's going to the media with tidbits on the Sutter-Tre feud. Who is telling the media that "Tre wanted to make a coaching change, but ownership wouldn't oblige." It's either Tre, Maloney or Edwards. No one else has that information.
Then the media gets super upset because Tre isn't allowed to sit at the draft table or sign with Toronto or whatever it is. So again, the media amps up pressure on Calgary to allow such things...to Treliving's benefit. Who was leaking that to the press that the flames were being mean to Treliving? Probably Treliving...
IMO it seemed that Tre was constantly leaking things to the media off the record to help shape the narrative and get his way. Let's give it time...maybe the same types of things will happen in Toronto. He'll sign garbage UFAs and do stupid extensions and then get the media to spin it like he's a great, hardworking gm. And then he'll leak to the media when shanahan or ownership won't let him get his way.
|
Very little of this is true.
Your premise is that the narrative re. Sutter was fake. It wasn't.
Moreover, I think most people have understood that Sutter is a coach that drives results. He was fired because of how he treated people, including non players.
Anyways I would suggest that you are applying a strong amount of bias yourself to create what is largely a imaginary scenario that you just outlined.
Both things can be true:
The roster wasn't good enough
Sutter was justifiably fired, including for reasons beyond on-ice performance.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:07 AM.
|
|