Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

lol

 

"Minnesota of the North"     that's a new one :)

 

IMHO, our chances of getting Wright or Bedard increase if we bring Eichel here.  Just as was the case for Buffalo.   These next two drafts are strong, I'm not even sure that Bedard is the best player in them, and he is looking to be very generational.   

 

I agree with you that we won't tank by choice.   After a certain point though, it's no longer a choice.

 

Eichel is not the Hall of 1st overall picks.

Being funny, Hall was in Buffalo and they did end up with 1st overall.

EDM, NJ, now Buffalo reaping the rewards for signing Hall.

Now that BOS has him, we should trade for their 1st rounder.

 

Our chances of getting Eichel and a 1st overall in 2022 are nil if you haven't fifured it out.

2022 CGY pick involved in any Eichel trade.

A lotto pick goes to BUFF.

 

Let's assume for a moment that Tkachuk and 1st (lotto protected) are part of the deal, and we only add prospects to it.

That means we have effectively given up one player that can be a difference maker but a lot of times is not.

Our worst showing in the last 10 drafts has been 4th overall, when we had Berra and Ramo in nets.

2016 we managed 6th worst with Ramo and Hiller (and Ortio) again in nets.

 

I get you have little faith in the team, but be real.

An epic collapse is possible with Eichel if he doesn;t play and they have complete goaltending failure and they fail to do anything to deal with it.

Last overall at Christmas and no sign of Eichel playing means we make drastic changes and use LTIR to the max.

Staying worst is just about impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would argue that with Eichel there is no proof that we become a contender anyways.

 

If we did trade away Mony or Tkachuk along with Dube who can actually say we are better from what we have actually seen of Eichel. He has not ever been a superstar in by opinion. He is Buffalos best player but is he going to move the needle that much if he plays equal to his history? Do not use the fact that he "could" be better. speak from facts proven not dreams.

I would think we would be better if the trading of Mony or Tkachuk brought us a top line RWer. Or even a middle 6 Rw and a top 4 Dman right shot preferably Ok so say we trade Tkachuk + for Tarasenko and Parayko and a conditional pick if Tkachuk resigns. I think this makes us better than Losing one of Mony or Tkachuk and only getting Eichel back. We would also still have the cap left to sign or players that need contract now with money left over for TDL additions if wanted. 

This also frees up cap for STL to get there players signed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, FlameFan4Life said:

 

Money does matter. After signing Zadorove at close to 4 mil a year, Dube at probably 2 mil, and Valamaki at close to 2 mil we are left with maybe 4 Million in cap space. The only way we can do an Eichel trade is for cap to go out. The only player that makes sense to Buffalo would be Mony who has 2 years left. Tkachuk would be a one year rental and TDL asset but he never resigns in Buffalo so his value may be over rated to Buffalo.

 

Also I agree Buffalo wants to tank for another first overall that is making Eichel for picks and prospects only make more sense. Losing Eichel and getting only worse for this season is worth more to Buffalo that a NHLer in return. A player makes them less likely to get first overall again which will be a shinny new franchise player to build around.

 

Just get Eichel now and deal with the cap later.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, FlameFan4Life said:

I would argue that with Eichel there is no proof that we become a contender anyways.

 

For sures.  It depends on who we trade away.

 

But at the same time, there is proof we are not a contender right now.  In fact, there is proof we are not even a playoff team at the moment.  We have to do something big to change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

For sures.  It depends on who we trade away.

 

But at the same time, there is proof we are not a contender right now.  In fact, there is proof we are not even a playoff team at the moment.  We have to do something big to change that.

 

Top 3 in the Pacific.  Not exactly a stretch for us.

Vegas lost an All Star goalie and did a lot of risky moves.

EDM signed older/uselss players and banking on Hyman.

VAN what the heck are they doing?

California teams - are they even relevant?

Seattle, the luck of Vegas is covered in rain.

 

Yes, we are unfinished.

Need top 6 players.

Maybe need to get rid of someone.

Not speculated to be top in the Pacific like last year, so it must be likely to happen now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Top 3 in the Pacific.  Not exactly a stretch for us.

Vegas lost an All Star goalie and did a lot of risky moves.

EDM signed older/uselss players and banking on Hyman.

VAN what the heck are they doing?

California teams - are they even relevant?

Seattle, the luck of Vegas is covered in rain.

 

Yes, we are unfinished.

Need top 6 players.

Maybe need to get rid of someone.

Not speculated to be top in the Pacific like last year, so it must be likely to happen now.

 

Proof was in the past, not this coming season.  This season,

 

VGK still the team to beat.

 

EDM was better than us last year.  McDavid and Drasaitl entering their primes.  You've got to think Puljujarvi and Yamamoto will be even better.  They didn't improve enough to be Cup contenders but should be second in the division.

 

VAN did well to dump cap and land OEL.  They will regret OEL in about 3 years but he will pay immediate dividends.  Garland was a great add as well.  He's a pesky forward like Mangiapane.  It comes down to Demko's progression and if he's good this year then the Canucks are #3 in the division.

 

LAK did some things that could work.  We're also expecting Byfield and Turcotte to play this season and both are Calder candidates.  LAK could surprise.

 

SEA... Who knows.  They have decent D and G plus hard working forwards.  We shouldn't be surprised if they make the playoffs even if it's highly unlikely they repeat VGK's fairy tale inaugural success.  SEA could challenge for #3 in the division.

 

SJ and ANA are going to be pretty bad.

 

If we don't add Eichel, then I think we will struggle to finish #3.  Same team same results, pretty much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Flames will be a good regular season team this season, even if no further changes are made. 

 

Sutter is getting the team from the get go, and almost all of the off season changes compliment his style of game. Those changes also add size, effort, and defense up front. Things this team needed. 

 

Three out if four of our top scorers had down seasons, and none are at an age where regression should be expected. I think Tkachuk, Monahan, and Gaudreau are going to rebound a bit. 

 

We have a number of young players whose trajectory suggest they should take another step this season. Mangiapane, Valamki, and Andersson top the list. 

 

There are a number of young guys who may make the team and who could make a difference. Phillips and Gawden are waiver eligible so I expect to see them. Pelletier and Zary could be ready. I think Mackay is ready. Vladar could be a dark horse.

 

Really, the only step backwards is the loss of Gio and potential regression to Lucic, Tanev, etc. Losing Gio isn't insignificant, but I think we can compensate due to some of the above. 

 

My concerns with the team are post season. Our core consistently under peforms in the post season, and we lack the centre and D depths even if the core shows up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, FlameFan4Life said:

I do not see a world where any of our existing players will waive to go to Buffalo. To me the price to get Eichel is to high considering he may miss some or all of next year, or possibly not every play for us, and it would take alot of futures from us to get this done. On top of that, without salary going out we will need to make multiple moves to fit the cap hit. 

 

It just doesn't sound like in the end we come out of this any better.

With Zadorov's next contract plus the Dube and Valamaki raises we will need to take a flyer price tag on someone just to be cap compliant.

 

No one is reporting this and I don't even think this is a valid risk. No team is going to trade the type of return its going to take for a player who may not ever play.

 

There is no doubt in my mind the Flames have already looked into the medical situation and if they are still interested it means they've assessed the risk and are comfortable with it. Based on most of the info out there it sure seems like the "risks" in all of this are getting blown way out of proportion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Proof was in the past, not this coming season.  This season,

 

VGK still the team to beat.

 

EDM was better than us last year.  McDavid and Drasaitl entering their primes.  You've got to think Puljujarvi and Yamamoto will be even better.  They didn't improve enough to be Cup contenders but should be second in the division.

 

VAN did well to dump cap and land OEL.  They will regret OEL in about 3 years but he will pay immediate dividends.  Garland was a great add as well.  He's a pesky forward like Mangiapane.  It comes down to Demko's progression and if he's good this year then the Canucks are #3 in the division.

 

LAK did some things that could work.  We're also expecting Byfield and Turcotte to play this season and both are Calder candidates.  LAK could surprise.

 

SEA... Who knows.  They have decent D and G plus hard working forwards.  We shouldn't be surprised if they make the playoffs even if it's highly unlikely they repeat VGK's fairy tale inaugural success.  SEA could challenge for #3 in the division.

 

SJ and ANA are going to be pretty bad.

 

If we don't add Eichel, then I think we will struggle to finish #3.  Same team same results, pretty much.

 

Fair points, but I don't see everything that VGK did to be positive.

As much as Lehner is a workhorse, MAF was key to their success; Brossoit is better than a Subban, but not close to MAF.

EDM, for all their signings, degraded the part of their team that was the most exposed; defense.

They did nothing to change goaltending, and are banking on Smith being a .920 goalie or better and Koskinen being .915.

A short season, yes that is realistic, but not 82 games.

Poolparty was getting top PP minutes last year, and that will go to Hyman.

I almost expect a return to McD-Draisaitl within the first 20 games, with Hyman on wing.

If that happens, the depth becomes suspect.

 

The rest of the division is up in the air.

Without Eichel, we improve somewhere else.

I don't see us going backwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

No one is reporting this and I don't even think this is a valid risk. No team is going to trade the type of return its going to take for a player who may not ever play.

 

There is no doubt in my mind the Flames have already looked into the medical situation and if they are still interested it means they've assessed the risk and are comfortable with it. Based on most of the info out there it sure seems like the "risks" in all of this are getting blown way out of proportion. 

 

The limited reporting about the available options should not be taken as gospel.

The agent wants it to look like their surgery is the one that has him playing by the start of TC.

And that the team's version will delay him by months.

The team talks about a new surgery as if it's never been done.

 

The truth is somewhere between the two sides, but I don't feel it's as dire as either side would have it.

As you said, no team takes on a big risk.

The sides negotiating any deal for the player are the hold ups here.

We heard a lot more about this than Hamilton's trade which we heard nothing.

And we aren't even sure if we are in heavy discussions or just waiting for the crazy price to drop.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Eichel is not the Hall of 1st overall picks.

Being funny, Hall was in Buffalo and they did end up with 1st overall.

EDM, NJ, now Buffalo reaping the rewards for signing Hall.

Now that BOS has him, we should trade for their 1st rounder.

 

Our chances of getting Eichel and a 1st overall in 2022 are nil if you haven't fifured it out.

2022 CGY pick involved in any Eichel trade.

A lotto pick goes to BUFF.

 

Let's assume for a moment that Tkachuk and 1st (lotto protected) are part of the deal, and we only add prospects to it.

That means we have effectively given up one player that can be a difference maker but a lot of times is not.

Our worst showing in the last 10 drafts has been 4th overall, when we had Berra and Ramo in nets.

2016 we managed 6th worst with Ramo and Hiller (and Ortio) again in nets.

 

I get you have little faith in the team, but be real.

An epic collapse is possible with Eichel if he doesn;t play and they have complete goaltending failure and they fail to do anything to deal with it.

Last overall at Christmas and no sign of Eichel playing means we make drastic changes and use LTIR to the max.

Staying worst is just about impossible.

 

We don't have to stay worst to rebuild, we just need to drop maybe 4-5 spots in the draft to get top 10 picks.   top 5 would be better of course.

 

It was a miracle we did as well as we did to end up with 12th overall, most of the year we were pegged for about 6-8th overall.

 

Did we get better or worse this offseason?    Pretty clear we got worse and we still have key players to try and retain.  So, I'm "being real".   You don't lose your best defenceman and captain for nothing and make up for it with a handful of low talent bad FA contracts.   We would have to give up more players for Eichel, they won't do it just for our picks.   It wouldn't be an improvement.   But, for sure, it's highly unlikely and the moves we've already made are tell tale signs it's not seriously on the table so, sure, it's mostly a moot point but it's a hot topic here so I thought I'd chip in lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Just get Eichel now and deal with the cap later.  

 

While I don't agree with you that an Eichel trade would be beneficial even in the short term (see Buffalo), if I put myself into the perspective that he is the key, then...yeah.  Totally agree.    You get Eichel now and deal with the cap later.  100%

 

So here's the thing.   Suppose the trade makes sense and we're gunning for the cup and we think Eichel's getting us there.

 

It's still not going to happen because the Flames aren't actually that ambitious.    IMHO they are not overly concerned with the cup, and they didn't bring Sutter here to win the cup.    They brought him here to make the playoffs because they feel he'll grind it out of the players.

 

They Will...Not....take risk.   They would much prefer the middle-lane.  They'll draft lower talent low risk players ahead of BPA, they'll trade for low risk players and give up talent to get them, they'll sign and pay too much for low risk players rather than risking cap space on talent.   In the case of Eichel, I happen to agree with them.   In many other areas I don't.  But either way I just don't see it happening.   It's just another reason we need a shake up high up.

 

IMHO we're going to have great opportunities, better opportunities than Eichel in these next two drafts.   Feels inevitable at this point, the only remaining unknown is if we'll have management capable of handling it well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

We don't have to stay worst to rebuild, we just need to drop maybe 4-5 spots in the draft to get top 10 picks.   top 5 would be better of course.

 

It was a miracle we did as well as we did to end up with 12th overall, most of the year we were pegged for about 6-8th overall.

 

Did we get better or worse this offseason?    Pretty clear we got worse and we still have key players to try and retain.  So, I'm "being real".   You don't lose your best defenceman and captain for nothing and make up for it with a handful of low talent bad FA contracts.   We would have to give up more players for Eichel, they won't do it just for our picks.   It wouldn't be an improvement.   But, for sure, it's highly unlikely and the moves we've already made are tell tale signs it's not seriously on the table so, sure, it's mostly a moot point but it's a hot topic here so I thought I'd chip in lol.

 

Overall, the entire league did the big reset.

We lost an expensive but good player that may see his game drop to replacement level.

 

We went 3-3-1 in January.

7-7-1 in February

7-8-0 in March

6-6-0 in April

4-3-0 in May.

 

How is that bottom 6?  That's closer to playoff bubble.  We ended up at 13th and were in that range the entire year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

They Will...Not....take risk.   They would much prefer the middle-lane.  They'll draft lower talent low risk players ahead of BPA, they'll trade for low risk players and give up talent to get them, they'll sign and pay too much for low risk players rather than risking cap space on talent.   In the case of Eichel, I happen to agree with them.   In many other areas I don't.  But either way I just don't see it happening.   It's just another reason we need a shake up high up.

 

 

They draft all over the risk spectrum.

Potato, Zary and Pelletier were BPA at the time.

Poirier and Francis are big swings.

The big Swede is not a safe pick, but one they felt was BPA.

Your argument is that their BPA is not the same as your "consensus" BPA picks available at the time.

 

They traded Hamilton for a need.

And got two players that are neither low risk nor average.

Hamonic traded for to fix a need.

The signing of Tanev.

Makar and Ellis were not options.

 

We haven't won any of the big trades because of a number of factors.

One, we couldn't get the deal for Stone without being sure we could sign him.

Others have fallen through that may have been big deals, but two teams needed to agree to it.

Do you throw in a 1st to win that trade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

No one is reporting this and I don't even think this is a valid risk. No team is going to trade the type of return its going to take for a player who may not ever play.

 

There is no doubt in my mind the Flames have already looked into the medical situation and if they are still interested it means they've assessed the risk and are comfortable with it. Based on most of the info out there it sure seems like the "risks" in all of this are getting blown way out of proportion. 


they are reporting 6 weeks to 4 months… depending on what surgery he gets, and possibly longer depending on rehab. However long that’ll take. Maybe it is the 4 months for the longer recovery… so he’s probably going to miss some of the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Overall, the entire league did the big reset.

We lost an expensive but good player that may see his game drop to replacement level.

 

We went 3-3-1 in January.

7-7-1 in February

7-8-0 in March

6-6-0 in April

4-3-0 in May.

 

How is that bottom 6?  That's closer to playoff bubble.  We ended up at 13th and were in that range the entire year.

 

Ah you're right, my memory has failed me.    I think I must have been doing something with games in hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


they are reporting 6 weeks to 4 months… depending on what surgery he gets, and possibly longer depending on rehab. However long that’ll take. Maybe it is the 4 months for the longer recovery… so he’s probably going to miss some of the season. 

 

While true, there is a huge gap between maybe going to miss some of the season to he may never play again. That is the piece that no one is reporting.

 

He's still skating and working towards the season. 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

While true, there is a huge gap between maybe going to miss some of the season to he may never play again. That is the piece that no one is reporting.

 

He's still skating and working towards the season. 

 

 


I just didn’t know what part you were mentioning… I guess the fear is what kind of player he will be.

 

we would need a Gary Roberts to rehab him

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

While true, there is a huge gap between maybe going to miss some of the season to he may never play again. That is the piece that no one is reporting.

 

He's still skating and working towards the season. 

 

 

It’s a neck disc issue, that’s always a huge risk, heck it’s a disc replacement, for that matter, you don’t need someone to report what you can look up or use common sense on:

 

https://www.spine.md/insights/articles/addressing-misinformation-artificial-disc-replacement-surgery/

 

now having said that, theses surgeries have come along way but it’s still risky up from 69.something to 81. Something successful rates…that’s still almost 20% risk which if your gonna be giving up pretty much 2 high first round picks and a prospect or something like that for a 19. Something % that he fully recovers??? And now having said that, that’s full recover rate, there are higher risks that he only partially recovers…etc…

 

anyway, him and Stl’s Terensenko (sp?) are hard no’s unless it’s a heck of

a deal your crazy spend too much on those huge risk areas…

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, MP5029 said:

It’s a neck disc issue, that’s always a huge risk, heck it’s a disc replacement, for that matter, you don’t need someone to report what you can look up or use common sense on:

 

https://www.spine.md/insights/articles/addressing-misinformation-artificial-disc-replacement-surgery/

 

now having said that, theses surgeries have come along way but it’s still risky up from 69.something to 81. Something successful rates…that’s still almost 20% risk which if your gonna be giving up pretty much 2 high first round picks and a prospect or something like that for a 19. Something % that he fully recovers??? And now having said that, that’s full recover rate, there are higher risks that he only partially recovers…etc…

 

anyway, him and Stl’s Terensenko (sp?) are hard no’s unless it’s a heck of

a deal your crazy spend too much on those huge risk areas…

 

 

 

Everyone has different risk tolerances and i'm not trying to be an advocate that he will be fine or pretend i'm a doctor I have no idea about the surgery or the risks. Totally get that people see "neck" and say No, i'm certainly not going to change anyone's mind as I don't know enough. 

 

My point is only that if the Flames, or any team, want to trade for Eichel they will do a medical evaluation of it using their own team and determine the risks and if it's deemed to risky they won't make the trade. To talk in hyperbole that they may wind up sending out all these assets and get nothing for them makes no sense to me.

 

They, or any other team in the NHL, will only make the deal if they are comfortable with those risk and I think they have access to much better information than us. For me, it makes sense to trust them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

IMHO we're going to have great opportunities, better opportunities than Eichel in these next two drafts.   Feels inevitable at this point, the only remaining unknown is if we'll have management capable of handling it well

 

 

No one wants to tank for a top pick.  Okay then, the alternative is trade 4 1st round picks for a #1 Center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Everyone has different risk tolerances and i'm not trying to be an advocate that he will be fine or pretend i'm a doctor I have no idea about the surgery or the risks. Totally get that people see "neck" and say No, i'm certainly not going to change anyone's mind as I don't know enough. 

 

My point is only that if the Flames, or any team, want to trade for Eichel they will do a medical evaluation of it using their own team and determine the risks and if it's deemed to risky they won't make the trade. To talk in hyperbole that they may wind up sending out all these assets and get nothing for them makes no sense to me.

 

They, or any other team in the NHL, will only make the deal if they are comfortable with those risk and I think they have access to much better information than us. For me, it makes sense to trust them. 

 

The fact that teams are even still talking about the players leads me to believe that risk is only part of the negotiation to lower the cost.

Small field of interested teams, who have no doubt done the calculations and know what it means.

None is giving Buffalo what they asked for, which makes sense.

And Buffalo isn't exactly doing themselves any favor by prolonging it without any movement.

Buyers walk away.

The price is the price is fine, if you are able to not make the deal and be comfortable.

I think they are past that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

 

No one wants to tank for a top pick.  Okay then, the alternative is trade 4 1st round picks for a #1 Center.

 

Yup.

 

I have no problem if the Flames wanted to target the next 2 drafts and rebuild but if they were going to do that that process needed to start already. It hasn't, it likely won't and IMO I see almost no chance the Flames team as constructed being bad enough to win either of the next 2 lotteries. 

 

They are not going to get a player the caliber of Eichel unless they trade for Eichel, IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Everyone has different risk tolerances and i'm not trying to be an advocate that he will be fine or pretend i'm a doctor I have no idea about the surgery or the risks. Totally get that people see "neck" and say No, i'm certainly not going to change anyone's mind as I don't know enough. 

 

My point is only that if the Flames, or any team, want to trade for Eichel they will do a medical evaluation of it using their own team and determine the risks and if it's deemed to risky they won't make the trade. To talk in hyperbole that they may wind up sending out all these assets and get nothing for them makes no sense to me.

 

They, or any other team in the NHL, will only make the deal if they are comfortable with those risk and I think they have access to much better information than us. For me, it makes sense to trust them. 

 

It is a risk though. The reality is that nobody knows how Eichel will recover, not even his own medical team. I don't think it's hyberbole to suggest that as a serious factor. I hear you and agree the Flames will do their own assessment and make a decion based in the data available, but I also appreciate that the data will have a lot of unknowns. 

 

Personally I am fine with the risk. Every transaction is a risk for one reason or another. But I appreciate why some may be reluctant to send arguably our best young player (Tkachuk), top pick, and top prospects for someone that may not be able to play at an elite level anymore. This is a franchise changing move. If it goes right it could nudge us into contender status, but if it goes wrong it's going to hurt a lot down the road. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

It is a risk though. The reality is that nobody knows how Eichel will recover, not even his own medical team. I don't think it's hyberbole to suggest that as a serious factor. I hear you and agree the Flames will do their own assessment and make a decion based in the data available, but I also appreciate that the data will have a lot of unknowns. 

 

Personally I am fine with the risk. Every transaction is a risk for one reason or another. But I appreciate why some may be reluctant to send arguably our best young player (Tkachuk), top pick, and top prospects for someone that may not be able to play at an elite level anymore. This is a franchise changing move. If it goes right it could nudge us into contender status, but if it goes wrong it's going to hurt a lot down the road. 

 

Yup and i'm not suggesting there is no risk here. As you say there is in every transaction and of course it's added when there is an injury, nor do I mind if someone say No thanks based on the injury. To each their own. 

 

I think it's hyperbole to suggest things like he may never play again or he will miss a ton of time when there isn't really much to back that up. if the team is comfortable with the risk, and the price reflects the risk appropriately than I would be fine with it. 

 

The more experts and people that speak on this topic the more downplayed the risk becomes so my main point is I think the risk is being spun out of control based on incomplete information. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...