Jump to content

Game #19 Habs vs Pens Nov 18 7:00


DON

Recommended Posts

This photo says a lot about the Habs season

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Definitely a season to unload contracts on aging veterans. Petry, Gally, Chiarot, whoever.

 

That we do not have a bumper crop of young talent in the system to replace them means this will likely result in years of suckage, but at least we can use it to restock the talent pool.

We have Major suckage right now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Just the ones that would improve the team.

and overpriced on-the-decline Gallagher or cement-hands Lehkonen or eternal-#7 Kulak will not fetch much 

The problem is their value gets lower every day.  I just don't see it going up.  Getting anything for most of the players now is better than what we have.  Plus it sheds salary and lets us see our prospects.  I'm not suggesting throwing our players to the wolves, but let's go young.  As far as I'm concerned nobody above 22 years of age is untouchable (so born 98 or earlier). 

 

Seriously where is the value in any of the veterans.

 

1. There is much suckage

2. There are badly beaten players (gallagher, etc - it is a long list)

3. There seems to be no effort

4. Back to all that suckage

 

I'd completely blow it up.

 

Young players, picks and prospects.  It worked in '86...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, hockeyrealist said:

These comments all come from an earlier post saying it was time to move 26, 8, 58 (Savard) and 44.   Kulak, Niku and Wideman are not worth building around so future d would only retain Romy, Norlinder from current team.

Add Guhle, Harris and bring in two decent players to round out the 6.

Finding "two decent players" for D has been a challenge for a number of years now, there really aren't all that many options. That's how we ended up with guys like Chiarot, Wideman and Savard.

 

Keeping guys like Kulak and Niku (for now) would give us a reasonably (and still young) mobile defence for the next few years, while our newly-drafted D prospects develop. If they develop faster, then we bring them up.

 

Of course this greatly depends on what interest Bergevin gets in our D corps and who is left after that fire sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, titanfan said:

We have Major suckage right now!

 

True, but the complication is that several key players are WAY underperforming. Anderson, Toffoli, and Petry are prime examples. Gallagher is also way below his career norms, but in his case I fear it is likely because of permanent decline by a damaged player. Meanwhile, we have significant injuries. Put it all together, and it is possible to argue that the team is better than it's been showing. And this means that an alternative narrative to "blowing it up" is possible: a narrative that says, "this year is a wash, we need to regroup, make a few changes, and come back with everyone playing the way they can, and we'll be fine." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

... Put it all together, and it is possible to argue that the team is better than it's been showing. And this means that an alternative narrative to "blowing it up" is possible: a narrative that says, "this year is a wash, we need to regroup, make a few changes, and come back with everyone playing the way they can, and we'll be fine." 

 

It is an argument that could be made ... I think it is best to treat Weber as "retired"/gone (if a miracle happens wonderful, but unlikely) ... even if Price makes a complete comeback (not expecting as good as the great 14/15 & 16/16 seasons, but as good as the VERY solid 13/14 and 16/17 seasons) and the other injured/slumping players manage to return to at least their career norms, I don't know that it would yield any more than what's become the traditional "chase a wildcard spot" season ... that is not good enough IMO ... the supposed quality/depth of the 2022 and 2023 drafts is an opportunity best not wasted, again IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GHT120 said:

 

It is an argument that could be made ... I think it is best to treat Weber as "retired"/gone (if a miracle happens wonderful, but unlikely) ... even if Price makes a complete comeback (not expecting as good as the great 14/15 & 16/16 seasons, but as good as the VERY solid 13/14 and 16/17 seasons) and the other injured/slumping players manage to return to at least their career norms, I don't know that it would yield any more than what's become the traditional "chase a wildcard spot" season ... that is not good enough IMO ... the supposed quality/depth of the 2022 and 2023 drafts is an opportunity best not wasted, again IMO.

 

I agree. Even with players like Toffoli, Petry and Gallagher playing better we might be good enough to just fall short of a playoff spot. It is a valid argument by CC  but I don't want to be good enough to  just be a marginal contender.  It was a fun magical run last year that perhaps got our hopes up more than it should. Time to think of what this team will be like 3-5 years down the road and plan accordingly. I am not talking about getting rid of all the veterans willy nilly.  I think it is more like being strategic when you have the right dance partner and the suitors will show up at the trade deadline or when they have an injury that needs a replacement. It might turn out to be a good thing in the long run that they have a bad year this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I agree. Even with players like Toffoli, Petry and Gallagher playing better we might be good enough to just fall short of a playoff spot. It is a valid argument by CC  but I don't want to be good enough to  just be a marginal contender.  It was a fun magical run last year that perhaps got our hopes up more than it should. Time to think of what this team will be like 3-5 years down the road and plan accordingly. I am not talking about getting rid of all the veterans willy nilly.  I think it is more like being strategic when you have the right dance partner and the suitors will show up at the trade deadline or when they have an injury that needs a replacement. It might turn out to be a good thing in the long run that they have a bad year this year. 

Agreed.

last years success was based on a unique opportunity with the Canadian division not having any solid true contender team - every team had some sort of a hole. Ben if everyone performs; we are at best a marginal bubble team, that probably misses the playoffs. No way we are top 4 in our division, and I can’t see us getting a wild car d spot in the tough Eastern Conference. 

We need to cancel as the next two drafts to stock up, and need a change in the leadership - both MB amd his Dumbell buddy should be gone. with no real 2nd line centre and basically dman better suited for #4, 5; and 6 roles, we need to rebuild: we have some good pieces on the wing to go along with Suzuki, but that’s about it. 
 

this year we should be moving players that fall in the following categories:

1) clearly in decline- Gallagher and Petry. If we can get quality picks and/or prospects, We should be even be willing to eat a chunk of Perry’s salary, depending on the return. Gallagher’s contract is o long to do the same.

2) UFA’s that may bring a high return - Chiarot and Lekhonan

3) make a decision on moving at least one of the following three forwards - Taffoli, Drouin, or Anderson.  Balancing which players will help the progression of young players with the return they bring. You definitely don’t want to move all 3.

4) move either Edmondson, or Savard if they bring a good return - I honestly doubt Savard is moveable without retaining at least 50% of his salary.

 

the core of this team rests with Suzuki, Caufield, And depth guys like Evans and hopefully Poehling.

 

On D, you pray Romanov is at least a 2nd pairing l, and Guhle and Norlinder are legit players. 
 

I think we are screwed in goal, because Price is unmovable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Agreed.

last years success was based on a unique opportunity with the Canadian division not having any solid true contender team - every team had some sort of a hole. Ben if everyone performs; we are at best a marginal bubble team, that probably misses the playoffs. No way we are top 4 in our division, and I can’t see us getting a wild car d spot in the tough Eastern Conference. 

We need to cancel as the next two drafts to stock up, and need a change in the leadership - both MB amd his Dumbell buddy should be gone. with no real 2nd line centre and basically dman better suited for #4, 5; and 6 roles, we need to rebuild: we have some good pieces on the wing to go along with Suzuki, but that’s about it. 
 

this year we should be moving players that fall in the following categories:

1) clearly in decline- Gallagher and Petry. If we can get quality picks and/or prospects, We should be even be willing to eat a chunk of Perry’s salary, depending on the return. Gallagher’s contract is o long to do the same.

2) UFA’s that may bring a high return - Chiarot and Lekhonan

3) make a decision on moving at least one of the following three forwards - Taffoli, Drouin, or Anderson.  Balancing which players will help the progression of young players with the return they bring. You definitely don’t want to move all 3.

4) move either Edmondson, or Savard if they bring a good return - I honestly doubt Savard is moveable without retaining at least 50% of his salary.

 

the core of this team rests with Suzuki, Caufield, And depth guys like Evans and hopefully Poehling.

 

On D, you pray Romanov is at least a 2nd pairing l, and Guhle and Norlinder are legit players. 
 

I think we are screwed in goal, because Price is unmovable.

 

I like your plan. Especially (1). Both of those guys need to go, and contracts notwithstanding, I believe they could attract interest at the deadline. There is a mythology around Gallagher, analogous to what there was around Weber, which may throw sand in some old-school GMs’ faces. And Petry could genuinely make a difference to a contender.

 

Choosing which of Anderson, Toffoli, or Drouin to trade is an interesting dilemma.

 

On (4): not sure I’d move Edmundson. He is an affordable minutes eater, a stabilizing influence in a rebuilding environment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Choosing which of Anderson, Toffoli, or Drouin to trade is an interesting dilemma.

 

On (4): not sure I’d move Edmundson. He is an affordable minutes eater, a stabilizing influence in a rebuilding environment. 

Toffoli is the oldest of the three but really it's a question of what you get in return.

 

I, too, would keep Edmundson. Solid, affordable and only 28. Chiarot is a pending UFA, so he should be gone at the deadline unless they plan on extending him. And that really depends on what they want our D to look like in the years to come.

 

Retaining some salary for Savard (or Gallagher) should not be a problem if we are shipping out a lot of our top players anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

...

this year we should be moving players that fall in the following categories:

1) clearly in decline- Gallagher and Petry. If we can get quality picks and/or prospects, We should be even be willing to eat a chunk of Perry’s salary, depending on the return. Gallagher’s contract is o long to do the same.

2) UFA’s that may bring a high return - Chiarot and Lekhonan

3) make a decision on moving at least one of the following three forwards - Taffoli, Drouin, or Anderson.  Balancing which players will help the progression of young players with the return they bring. You definitely don’t want to move all 3.

4) move either Edmondson, or Savard if they bring a good return - I honestly doubt Savard is moveable without retaining at least 50% of his salary.

...

I think we are screwed in goal, because Price is unmovable.

Totally agree with 1 and 2 ... I'm OK with 3 ... and the debates about return versus rebuild value will be a hoot ... but I agree with TCC about 4 ... If Petry goes (good move for a rebuild, be it this season/summer or next season) then Edmundson is a solid veteran to anchor the defence, emotionally if not elite talent-wise.

 

But IMO the potential for moving Price depends entirely on how he plays when he returns ... if he plays like PRICE then with the right AAV retained he is tradeable ... Habs will have to be careful about salary/AAV retained in all decisions ... not only from a "dead cap space" perspective but also because they can only have three "salary retentions" on the book each season ... so if they were to move Price this summer one of those slots would be tied up for the next four seasons ... THIS SEASON, they could use any or all of those slots to make Chiarot, Kulak and Lehkonen less cap-impactful for Amy team acquiring them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Price -he was available for free to the Kraken after a spectacular playoff run, and they still didn’t take him.

 

Even if we take back some salary, I’m not sure any team is going to be interested in four seasons of a 34-year old, often-injured goalie (whom we now know has addiction issues to boot, sorry to be so blunt) and whose regular seasons have been erratic over the past 3-4 years. At best, it would be a question of trading horrible contracts, which hardly puts the Habs in better shape. So my guess is that Habs29 is right. Price will be a Hab until he’s done.

 

And maybe that’s OK. Let him retire a Hab, hang #31 from the rafters as our greatest player since the dynasty era, it’s a nice story, move along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Re: Price -he was available for free to the Kraken after a spectacular playoff run, and they still didn’t take him.

 

 

Agreed, I don't think Price is going anywhere, no one is taking on that contract and if you have to  take on a chunk of his contract than you might as well keep him.  I agree with most of the other moves suggested, we have to keep one of the veteran defencemen to help out the kids coming up. I don't think Savard is untradeable, 3.5m/year is not a bad contract and he might fit in real well on a disciplined cup contender where he only has to worry about his job.  But the length of the contract might worry some teams. 

 

I still think Petry has value, teams saw what he did last year when the team played much better. He still has some real good years left, he might be fantastic on the right team.   I am not so sure about Gallagher, I was worried about the length of the contract when they signed him, 6.5M/year for a winger who has to play physical to be successful for the next 5 years is not attractive unless someone like Benning thinks his leadership is what the Canucks need.  Toffoli can be a difference maker for a playoff team, his contract is attractive and all those years will be in his peak years.  The Habs will have some options. Playoff contenders, especially those with injuries will come calling.  A lot of pressure on Colorado and Toronto this year.  Edmonton is also in win now mode, would love to pry Philip Broberg  from them.  A lot of legitimate contenders although I don't think Carolina and the Habs will be dance partners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Agreed.

last years success was based on a unique opportunity with the Canadian division not having any solid true contender team - every team had some sort of a hole. Ben if everyone performs; we are at best a marginal bubble team, that probably misses the playoffs. No way we are top 4 in our division, and I can’t see us getting a wild car d spot in the tough Eastern Conference. 

We need to cancel as the next two drafts to stock up, and need a change in the leadership - both MB amd his Dumbell buddy should be gone. with no real 2nd line centre and basically dman better suited for #4, 5; and 6 roles, we need to rebuild: we have some good pieces on the wing to go along with Suzuki, but that’s about it. 
 

this year we should be moving players that fall in the following categories:

1) clearly in decline- Gallagher and Petry. If we can get quality picks and/or prospects, We should be even be willing to eat a chunk of Perry’s salary, depending on the return. Gallagher’s contract is o long to do the same.

2) UFA’s that may bring a high return - Chiarot and Lekhonan

3) make a decision on moving at least one of the following three forwards - Taffoli, Drouin, or Anderson.  Balancing which players will help the progression of young players with the return they bring. You definitely don’t want to move all 3.

4) move either Edmondson, or Savard if they bring a good return - I honestly doubt Savard is moveable without retaining at least 50% of his salary.

 

the core of this team rests with Suzuki, Caufield, And depth guys like Evans and hopefully Poehling.

 

On D, you pray Romanov is at least a 2nd pairing l, and Guhle and Norlinder are legit players. 
 

I think we are screwed in goal, because Price is unmovable.

I posted something similar a few days ago, so certainly I agree with most of your points

 
but there are a few details I would like to discuss 

 

Petry would look great on a cup contender. A much better version of Savard last year and one that performs well on a good team. We are stuck with Gallagher

 

Lehkonen will not bring back much; a 4th liner without size and who can’t score. He is Tom Kostopoulos 2.0

 

Toffoli should be moved, getting a Charley(?) Coyle type of return. I do not think the Habs would get a better return for Drouin compared to what he brings but I would

move him if the return had MB-magic sprinkled on it. Anderson stays, he is a better version of Armia on a 3rd line 

 

finally, we are stuck with Savard unless Brooks is better. The decision on which défensemen to trade had to be made kn LDs but that also means trading Petry.

 

Recap:

Petry, Chiarot, Toffoli should be traded.

 

my wish list, a prospect or young veteran projecting to be a solid 2C to push Dvorak to 3C

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I posted something similar a few days ago, so certainly I agree with most of your points

 
but there are a few details I would like to discuss 

 

Petry would look great on a cup contender. A much better version of Savard last year and one that performs well on a good team. We are stuck with Gallagher

 

Lehkonen will not bring back much; a 4th liner without size and who can’t score. He is Tom Kostopoulos 2.0

 

Toffoli should be moved, getting a Charley(?) Coyle type of return. I do not think the Habs would get a better return for Drouin compared to what he brings but I would

move him if the return had MB-magic sprinkled on it. Anderson stays, he is a better version of Armia on a 3rd line 

 

finally, we are stuck with Savard unless Brooks is better. The decision on which défensemen to trade had to be made kn LDs but that also means trading Petry.

 

Recap:

Petry, Chiarot, Toffoli should be traded.

 

my wish list, a prospect or young veteran projecting to be a solid 2C to push Dvorak to 3C

 

 

 

I think most here agree that some sort of rebuild needs to take place, that is painfully obvious as we are a long way from 1 trade making this team a cup contender. 

 

I agree that we are stuck with Gallagher,  Petry could be fantastic on a cup contender if they can fit in his contract.  The 2 easiest to trade and and which could bring a good return are Toffoli and Chiarot. 

 

I disagree about Lehkonen, he may not bring a great return but an excellent 3rd line player on a contender which he showed in the playoffs last year, also scored a really big goal.  He is somewhat lost on a bad Habs team this year. He would skate circles around the plodding (but hard working) Tom Kostopoulos. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I think most here agree that some sort of rebuild needs to take place, that is painfully obvious as we are a long way from 1 trade making this team a cup contender. 

 

I agree that we are stuck with Gallagher,  Petry could be fantastic on a cup contender if they can fit in his contract.  The 2 easiest to trade and and which could bring a good return are Toffoli and Chiarot. 

 

I disagree about Lehkonen, he may not bring a great return but an excellent 3rd line player on a contender which he showed in the playoffs last year, also scored a really big goal.  He is somewhat lost on a bad Habs team this year. He would skate circles around the plodding (but hard working) Tom Kostopoulos. 

I can see someone offering up a 2nd for Lekhonan. The question is, he has a good work ethic, and is a responsible player. Do you want to give that up on rebuilding team?

 

its one thing to trade older guys who looked washed up, and may not even be around when the next round of prospects come in, and another to trade a guy that can insulate younger players and provide a good example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I can see someone offering up a 2nd for Lekhonan. The question is, he has a good work ethic, and is a responsible player. Do you want to give that up on rebuilding team?

 

its one thing to trade older guys who looked washed up, and may not even be around when the next round of prospects come in, and another to trade a guy that can insulate younger players and provide a good example.

***IF*** they are looking rebuild/re-tool then sometimes you have to trade the guys that might be nice to have around but can get you a useful return ... work ethic and responsible play can be found in lower tier free agents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I can see someone offering up a 2nd for Lekhonan. The question is, he has a good work ethic, and is a responsible player. Do you want to give that up on rebuilding team?

 

its one thing to trade older guys who looked washed up, and may not even be around when the next round of prospects come in, and another to trade a guy that can insulate younger players and provide a good example.

 

There is a lot to like about Lehkonen and is one player I would be happy to keep assuming we can sign him to a reasonable contract.  Anything less than a 2nd round pick and I would prefer to keep him. 

 

Totally agree with your second point, you need to keep some good veterans to show young guys the right way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

There is a lot to like about Lehkonen and is one player I would be happy to keep assuming we can sign him to a reasonable contract.  Anything less than a 2nd round pick and I would prefer to keep him.

 

He's owed a $2.3M qualifying offer this summer.  That's a pretty high price tag for a fourth liner with limited production especially with the Habs basically not having enough cap room to keep the current roster together let alone try to improve it.  He's heading towards non-tender territory in which case Montreal should simply take whatever best deal they're offered by the deadline knowing there's a good chance he'll be released for nothing in the summer. 

 

I like Lehkonen and I'd be happy if he took a pay cut to stick around but I don't know why he'd willingly do that so he's almost in must-trade territory for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

He's owed a $2.3M qualifying offer this summer.  That's a pretty high price tag for a fourth liner with limited production especially with the Habs basically not having enough cap room to keep the current roster together let alone try to improve it.  He's heading towards non-tender territory in which case Montreal should simply take whatever best deal they're offered by the deadline knowing there's a good chance he'll be released for nothing in the summer. 

 

I like Lehkonen and I'd be happy if he took a pay cut to stick around but I don't know why he'd willingly do that so he's almost in must-trade territory for me.

 

I see Lehkonen as a 3rd liner who is a good skater, a good team guy  and very responsible defensively. If you look at his career stats it averages out to about 14 goals/82 games almost identical to a guy we traded Sergachev for and nobody calls him a 4th liner and he makes a lot more than 2.3 million/year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

He's owed a $2.3M qualifying offer this summer.  That's a pretty high price tag for a fourth liner with limited production especially with the Habs basically not having enough cap room to keep the current roster together let alone try to improve it.  He's heading towards non-tender territory in which case Montreal should simply take whatever best deal they're offered by the deadline knowing there's a good chance he'll be released for nothing in the summer. 

 

I like Lehkonen and I'd be happy if he took a pay cut to stick around but I don't know why he'd willingly do that so he's almost in must-trade territory for me.

He may not be a fourth-liner if Molson decides to rebuild and we have a fire sale on our better forwards next year. And in that scenario, the cap hit won't matter so much, either.

 

Basically, if we trade away (say) Petry, Chiarot, Gallagher and Toffoli, all of a sudden we have about $20M of cap space to work with (not sure how they would deal with an ongoing Weber LTIR in that scenario).

 

And we do need penalty killers, too. If we have no Danault, Byron or Lehkonen, that's three of the main PK guys from last year gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

I see Lehkonen as a 3rd liner who is a good skater, a good team guy  and very responsible defensively. If you look at his career stats it averages out to about 14 goals/82 games almost identical to a guy we traded Sergachev for and nobody calls him a 4th liner and he makes a lot more than 2.3 million/year. 

 

Those career stats are skewed by his earlier offensive success though.  Lately, he has been a good defensive player who can't score to save his life.  He was a healthy scratch at times last season and if this forward lineup actually was to get fully healthy, I'm not sure he wouldn't be the odd one out again.

 

14 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

He may not be a fourth-liner if Molson decides to rebuild and we have a fire sale on our better forwards next year. And in that scenario, the cap hit won't matter so much, either.

 

Basically, if we trade away (say) Petry, Chiarot, Gallagher and Toffoli, all of a sudden we have about $20M of cap space to work with (not sure how they would deal with an ongoing Weber LTIR in that scenario).

 

And we do need penalty killers, too. If we have no Danault, Byron or Lehkonen, that's three of the main PK guys from last year gone.

 

I don't see anywhere near that type of fire sale happening in-season where it's tougher than ever to move money.  The type of sale happening over the next few months will probably be limited to expiring contracts.  At that point, Montreal's leverage in moving Lehkonen is basically gone as they'll be boxed into either qualifying him at what looks like an above-market rate unless he starts scoring again or let him go for free.

 

As for the penalty killing situation, there's still Dvorak, Evans, and Suzuki as centres with Byron (when healthy) and Toffoli (if he's still there) as wingers.  Plus, it stands to reason that they'd bring in a lower-cost defensive replacement, perhaps into one of Paquette or Perreault's spots for next season.  Chances are they'd be taking players back in those trades as well, probably one or two that can kill penalties.

 

I like Lehkonen but as basically a defence-only forward, he's getting too much for that role, even if he was to move up to the third line in your scenario.  He needs to score or be replaced with someone who fills the defensive element at closer to half the cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Byron is surely not more cost-effective than Lehkonen ... but, in any case, it all depends on how much of a rebuild (if any) Molson decides to do.

 

If it were me doing the rebuild, I would be looking to keep a core of players in their mid-20s (or younger) who can still be effective in, say, three years, and who fit into the vision of what the team should be at that point. And trade others for prospects or picks. In that scenario, the cap would not be a real constraint for the next few years. But the odds are that whatever Molson decides is not exactly something any of us could foresee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

Byron is surely not more cost-effective than Lehkonen ...

 

You're absolutely right.  But I don't think they can move Byron for any sort of viable return; I'd be asking for a sweetener if I was another team (retention or a pick).  I don't see that happening with Lehkonen. 

 

Unless they really start cutting long-term salaries, they can't afford both of them next season.  Is it worth losing cap space or another asset to get rid of Byron to keep Lehkonen on an above-market contract (which could be for one year or longer) or is it better to get an asset for Lehkonen and keep Byron on his above-market contract for next year (and let his contract run out to get the cap space a year from now)?  I don't think Lehkonen is part of a longer-term post-rebuild core so I'd go with the second scenario being more beneficial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...