Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

The Draft


maas_art
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, maas_art said:

Sorry - I should have said "Completely ineffective as a #1c"  -  i do think he was a totally effective exploitation centre. If we had had a true #1 and a solid #3 checking guy, DD would have been ideal as a #2 centre who you would put out in a completely offensive role. 

Agreed... too bad it didn't turnout that way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

For me, the draft remains down to 4 players for the Habs right now, assuming Dahlin goes #1:

1. Svechnikov, if the Canes pass on him, is the choice.

2. Next BPA is Zadina, who is likely the best and right choice.

3. Kotkaniemi is interesting though, because he's a center and because he's younger than a lot of the other guys and his development has really accelerated in the past few months. It's theoretically possible to project he becomes better, and MB alluded to trying to project who was going to be the best player in 3-5 years as opposed to taking the guy everyone has ranked as the best now (maybe a hint they're looking at Kotkaniemi and his late ascent).

4. Quinn Hughes is probably the best D man outside of Dahlin and could also be a game changer if we're sold on wanting a D man, although I don't think he matches the three guys I have listed above.

That being said, I thought it would be interesting to look back at the ISS rankings of players and see how lower-projected centers did compared to wingers ranked ahead of them in recent years. This year, Kotkaniemi is not even the top-ranked center; Veleno's at 10, Hayton at 12, Kupari at 15, and Kotkaniemi at 16.

In 2017, ISS had Patrick, Hischier, and Vilardi ranked 1-2-3, all as centers. They had Glass and Mittelstadt 6 and 7, just behind winger Owen Tippett at 5. Poehling was 15, Elias Pettersson was 20, and Robert Thomas was 21, with winger Eeli Tolvanen at 16. So a difficult comparison for this year's draft because there were a lot of highly-ranked centers and not as many elite wingers. Pettersson was really the center who got scooped up above where the ISS saw him at #5, and after his season in Europe, that looks like a good call going against the rankings.

In 2016, Matthews-Laine was a no-brainer at the top. The big comparison here to this year was Columbus going off the board and taking center PL Dubois (5th ranked by ISS) over Puljujarvi (3rd ranked) and Matthew Tkachuk (4th ranked). Could be very akin to Kotkaniemi vs. Zadina and Brady Tkachuk, albeit I think Zadina is a better goal-scorer than Puljujarvi. Clayton Keller was also picked above his ranking (chosen 7th, ISS ranked 12th) and seems to be a decent choice as well.

In 2015, NJ went off the board with center Pavel Zacha at #6, which currently seems like a weaker choice than many of the players who went right after him (Provorov, Werenski, Debrusk, etc.). Conversely, Matt Barzal was ranked #8 by ISS and slid to the Isles at 16, and he might just be the steal of the draft.

in 2014, the Oilers bypassed RW/C William Nylander among others and took Leon Draisaitl (ISS rank 6) at #3, which was a pretty good move.

And in 2013, the Panthers surprised by taking center Alex Barkov #2 (ranked 5th) ahead of 3rd ranked Jonathan Drouin (a, cough cough, winger) and 4th ranked Valeri Nichushkin, the latter of whom also fell behind centers Elias Lindholm and Sean Monahan.

All that to say that there is definitely precedent for lower-ranked centers being chosen ahead of higher ranked wingers, and in the large majority of those cases, the choices seem to have worked out pretty well. Pettersson looks like he could be a stellar selection. Dubois, Draisaitl, Barkov, and Monahan were easily worth their draft slots in retrospect. Zacha was not, but Zacha wasn't even ranked in the top 30 by the ISS, so he was a lot more of a stretch. I don't trust Marc Bergevin's judgment, what with his McCarron pick forced on Trevor Timmins and some of his other choices, but if Timmins feels Kotkaniemi is the guy with the best upside, I can get on board with that choice. I definitely see the Habs

1. Keeping the pick, if you believe what MB said recently

2. At least thinking about a center, which if they do, will be a choice between Kotkaniemi and Veleno (I don't think Hayton is in the conversation) and more likely the former.

3. Entertaining the idea of Tkachuk and maybe Hughes or Boqvist but hopefully passing on Tkachuk. I think what you see is what you get there. Not a bad player by any means, but I'd rather have a guy who can play like Hossa, Bondra, Toews, etc. than a guy who can play like Lucic or Matthew Tkachuk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

in 2014, the Oilers bypassed RW/C William Nylander among others and took Leon Draisaitl (ISS rank 6) at #3, which was a pretty good move.

 

A very good move. In the case of Draisaitl, bigger is better between 2 comparable picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on how it plays out i would get a center with our first round pick we are really quite flush on wing and unless there is a real big surprise the good dman will be gone by #3 i don't have an issue picking from players in the the top 5-6 as we are threadbare at center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Habs have a tool to help determine character and gritt

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/news/trevor-timmins---nhl-scouting-combine/c-298899976

A number of the players coming out of interviews have indicated the Habs have really stressed character and getting to know the players as people in their interviews. For better or for worse, the MB focus on character seems only to have intensified.

The important point from this article, however, is that TT and MB have both emphasized the need for speed and for players who may not be the best this coming year but who will be the best for a decade... the feeling I get from this is that they're leaning more and more to a player like Kotkaniemi over Zadina. He fills the position of greatest need, his progression is on the up and up, and he's displayed "character" and performed at his best on the biggest stage he's played on.

Personally, I'm not against Kotkaniemi, and the more I think about it, the more I can get on board with it. I also wonder if Koivu has weighed in with any insight on him to help us out, or maybe even Lehkonen, but we've had some success with the high-profile Finns we've drafted. According to Brian Wilde and others on twitter, the Habs were also one of three teams to take Kotkaniemi out for a dinner, along with the Hawks and Wings. I don't see Kotkaniemi getting by the Hawks at #8 at the lowest, so I don't think trading for the #10 or 11 pick is going to give us a crack at him. Either we take him at 3 or trade down but stay in the top 5-6 and take him or we try to acquire a second pick in the top 7... all of the maneuvering options come with the risk that you just flat out lose him though. At 3, we're a lock to get either Svechnikov or Kotkaniemi/Zadina, whoever we want, so for a team that's fuddled around with trying to find a 1C for 2-3 decades, if you think JK is the guy, I think you just take him at 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Habs have a tool to help determine character and gritt

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/news/trevor-timmins---nhl-scouting-combine/c-298899976

Insert your own punchline here:

                   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 At 3, we're a lock to get either Svechnikov or Kotkaniemi/Zadina, whoever we want, so for a team that's fuddled around with trying to find a 1C for 2-3 decades, if you think JK is the guy, I think you just take him at 3.

He's 17, the Habs better be sure that this kid can turn inti the # 1 C they are looking for because if they pick him and 2, 3, 4 or whatever amount of years down the line he doesn't develop into a stud # 1 C they can look back at this draft and say they blew it .

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2018/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Jesperi-Kotkaniemi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

He's 17, the Habs better be sure that this kid can turn inti the # 1 C they are looking for because if they pick him and 2, 3, 4 or whatever amount of years down the line he doesn't develop into a stud # 1 C they can look back at this draft and say they blew it .

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2018/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Jesperi-Kotkaniemi

Sure, that's the easy way out, but on the other hand, what if he ends up being Toews or Backstrom or Henrik Sedin and you passed on him?

Zadina is more of a sure thing in my view. The question is whether you want the guy who's got an 80% chance of being a top 6 winger or a guy who's got a 60% chance of being a top 6 center? I can't answer that question. I think they're both intriguing options. I'd put my faith in Timmins to get the answer to that right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

. I'd put my faith in Timmins to get the answer to that right.

Yup . And to be honest I don't think the Habs haven't done well at " projecting ". Now that they have a # 3 pick sometimes I think its better for them to take the best player available , regardless of position , and hope that player can step I n NOW and help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Yup . And to be honest I don't think the Habs haven't done well at " projecting ". Now that they have a # 3 pick sometimes I think its better for them to take the best player available , regardless of position , and hope that player can step I n NOW and help

Thats my issue. When have they projected anything right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Yup . And to be honest I don't think the Habs haven't done well at " projecting ". Now that they have a # 3 pick sometimes I think its better for them to take the best player available , regardless of position , and hope that player can step I n NOW and help

I've always been a proponent of taking BPA, and up until this point, I've been on the Svechnikov or Zadina bandwagon. But I can see the argument for Kotkaniemi too. I wouldn't take Veleno or Hayton or Kupari. I wouldn't take the lesser player just because they're a center. The difference with Kotkaniemi is the following:

1. He's 17 and a younger player than most of the draft class.

2. He played most of his league season as a winger, in his opinion because he was younger. Yet in the junior tournament, he was able to play center and excelled there. He says center is his natural position, so would his league numbers have been better if he was played in his natural position?

3. His progression has been a little bit later than other prospects, maybe in large part because of the above two factors, but he's clearly the player whose stock rose the most in the last two months of play. I don't think anyone's debating the fact Zadina is more NHL-ready and the better/safer player right now. But if the course of Kotkaniemi's progression follows what he's done lately, then he could be the better player in 2 years or 3 years. It's a projection, which it's why it's hard. Do you take the guy who likely has the higher ceiling and is a safer bet to be a top 6 forward? Or do you take the guy with maybe the higher ceiling because he's got more room to grow and can fill a more important position on the ice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, habsisme said:

Thats my issue. When have they projected anything right?

Every team misses on draft picks. In fact, all teams miss on more non-1st rounders than they hit. But here are some of the highlights from Timmins:

- I'd say Galchenyuk was a very good pick. Outside of Forsberg, he's the best pick in his draft year, probably.

-  Gallagher was a steal in the 5th round, as was Hudon.

- The 2007 draft, where they grabbed McDonagh, Pacioretty, and Subban with their first three picks might be one of the best drafts ever put together by any team, considering the spots they were drafted in.

- Lehkonen was a really good pick. Mete looks solid. Poehling is promising, as is Juulsen. A lot of scouts seem to think Brook and Ikonen could be steals where we got them.

- Price was a guy a lot of people thought was a mistake, but he's perhaps the 2nd best player in his draft after Crosby.

 

It's easy to talk about the reaches for McCarron and Tinordi and Fucale, but there have been good picks too, and Timmins' record in the top 5 (Galchenyuk and Price) suggests he got a top 2-3 player in the draft each time, so we can argue about whether the pick was perfect, but they were still excellent and far from being misses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Regis22 said:

Habs have a tool to help determine character and gritt

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/news/trevor-timmins---nhl-scouting-combine/c-298899976

Poppycock. Good coaches are supposed groom good young players into good young NHLers. Good coaches are supposed to groom teens into good, young men. And if you can't tell how a young player plays the game you're in the wrong business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Every team misses on draft picks. In fact, all teams miss on more non-1st rounders than they hit. But here are some of the highlights from Timmins:

- I'd say Galchenyuk was a very good pick. Outside of Forsberg, he's the best pick in his draft year, probably.

-  Gallagher was a steal in the 5th round, as was Hudon.

- The 2007 draft, where they grabbed McDonagh, Pacioretty, and Subban with their first three picks might be one of the best drafts ever put together by any team, considering the spots they were drafted in.

- Lehkonen was a really good pick. Mete looks solid. Poehling is promising, as is Juulsen. A lot of scouts seem to think Brook and Ikonen could be steals where we got them.

- Price was a guy a lot of people thought was a mistake, but he's perhaps the 2nd best player in his draft after Crosby.

 

It's easy to talk about the reaches for McCarron and Tinordi and Fucale, but there have been good picks too, and Timmins' record in the top 5 (Galchenyuk and Price) suggests he got a top 2-3 player in the draft each time, so we can argue about whether the pick was perfect, but they were still excellent and far from being misses.

I'm just talking first and second round picks in the last 9 years (don't include 2007). There recent history is horrible. I don't care about guys in the 5th round, thats more luck than scouting or they would have taken him earlier. Timmins or whoever is making the final decision has been GARBAGE, in the last 9 years.

Danny Kristo

Louis Leblanc

Jared Tinordd

Nathan Beaulieu 

Alex Galchenyuk, Sebastian Collberg, Dalton Thrower (I don't count Galchenyuk here, he went exactly where all the scouts projected he'd go. I don't give much credit to scouts)

Michael McCarron, Jacob de la Rose, Zachary Fucale, Artturi Lehkonen (DLR is a role player and Lehkonen might actually be a legit good pick)

 

The most recent are too soon to tell. All of them are still "promising" 

The one defence I have for scouts and timmins or whoever is at fault is that it seems there is almost never a year where they have a first AND a second (unless they have multiple ones) and this patern continues in 14, 15, and 16, with multiple seconds last year and this year. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, habsisme said:

I'm just talking first and second round picks in the last 9 years (don't include 2007). There recent history is horrible. I don't care about guys in the 5th round, thats more luck than scouting or they would have taken him earlier. Timmins or whoever is making the final decision has been GARBAGE, in the last 9 years.

Danny Kristo

Louis Leblanc

Jared Tinordd

Nathan Beaulieu 

Alex Galchenyuk, Sebastian Collberg, Dalton Thrower (I don't count Galchenyuk here, he went exactly where all the scouts projected he'd go. I don't give much credit to scouts)

Michael McCarron, Jacob de la Rose, Zachary Fucale, Artturi Lehkonen (DLR is a role player and Lehkonen might actually be a legit good pick)

 

The most recent are too soon to tell. All of them are still "promising" 

The one defence I have for scouts and timmins or whoever is at fault is that it seems there is almost never a year where they have a first AND a second (unless they have multiple ones) and this patern continues in 14, 15, and 16, with multiple seconds last year and this year. 

 

Well 9 years is a bit of a an arbitrary number... if you're going to include the last 9, why not include 2007 as well or the years before that in which TT was involved? I'll look at 1st rounders only, since that's what we're debating here (as to whether or not TT can nail that #3 pick).

In any case, I'd agree that it's too soon to say enough about Poehling or Juulsen and probably even Scherbak, who hasn't forced my hand enough to say whether he'll make it yet or not. But outside of that group, I'd say

- Hits: Galchenyuk, Sergachev, McDonagh, Pacioretty, Price, A. Kostitsyn

- Busts: McCarron (who, if you believe TT, was a guy MB wanted and overruled TT on), Tinordi, Leblanc, Fischer, Chipchura (who still made a solid NHL career for himself, just wasn't what we envisioned him to be)

So for me, since TT's first draft in 2003, he's about 6 for 11 in 1st rounders. And here, I'm not saying the hits were the best possible picks, just that they were solid NHLers and better-than-average selections. Now look at those draft positions... his hits were picked 3rd, 5th, 9th, 10th, 12th, and 22nd. His "misses" were 17th, 18th, 18th, 20th. 22nd, and 25th. The three guys we're waiting on (Poehling, Juulsen, Scherbak) were also 25th, 26th, and 26th. You don't have to agree with all his choices or love the players he selected, but the most objective way of looking at these picks suggests he did a really good job with his 5 choices in the top 12. In the case of his 3rd and 5th overall choices, he probably got the 2nd best player in the draft each time (i.e. better than the position he selected in). Sergachev at 9 could possibly end up being better than his draft position too, and if you're re-drafting the 2007 1st round, McDonagh and Pacioretty are probably both top 5 picks. And yes, I know some people will say "but we drafted Kostitsyn when we could have drafted Jeff Carter," who was drafted right after him. Sure, but we could also have drafted Hugh Jessiman, who was drafted 12th, or Robert Nilsson or Steve Bernier or Marc-Antoine Pouliot. For most picks, you can find a guy who was drafted later who was better and plenty who would have been worse. At the end of the day, Timmins found us a guy who was a top 6 player, so it is what it is.

With this current #3 pick, I think he can take the obvious, easy route and select a guy like Zadina, who will almost certainly be a solid NHLers and be labeled a "hit" and play 300-500 games or more in the NHL and have at least a couple of 20-goal seasons. If he decides Kotkaniemi or Tkachuk or Hughes or so on is the pick, then he's taking more of a gamble, but history suggests he's been right when picking in the top 12 more often than he's been wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

A number of the players coming out of interviews have indicated the Habs have really stressed character and getting to know the players as people in their interviews. For better or for worse, the MB focus on character seems only to have intensified.

The important point from this article, however, is that TT and MB have both emphasized the need for speed and for players who may not be the best this coming year but who will be the best for a decade... the feeling I get from this is that they're leaning more and more to a player like Kotkaniemi over Zadina. He fills the position of greatest need, his progression is on the up and up, and he's displayed "character" and performed at his best on the biggest stage he's played on.

Personally, I'm not against Kotkaniemi, and the more I think about it, the more I can get on board with it. I also wonder if Koivu has weighed in with any insight on him to help us out, or maybe even Lehkonen, but we've had some success with the high-profile Finns we've drafted. According to Brian Wilde and others on twitter, the Habs were also one of three teams to take Kotkaniemi out for a dinner, along with the Hawks and Wings. I don't see Kotkaniemi getting by the Hawks at #8 at the lowest, so I don't think trading for the #10 or 11 pick is going to give us a crack at him. Either we take him at 3 or trade down but stay in the top 5-6 and take him or we try to acquire a second pick in the top 7... all of the maneuvering options come with the risk that you just flat out lose him though. At 3, we're a lock to get either Svechnikov or Kotkaniemi/Zadina, whoever we want, so for a team that's fuddled around with trying to find a 1C for 2-3 decades, if you think JK is the guy, I think you just take him at 3.

If they genuinely believe Kotkaniemi will be better than Zadina, then i have no problem with the pick. 

Personally im still holding out hope we're trying to get #2 overall and then we can pick Svechnikov and Kotkaniemi ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maas_art said:

If they genuinely believe Kotkaniemi will be better than Zadina, then i have no problem with the pick. 

Personally im still holding out hope we're trying to get #2 overall and then we can pick Svechnikov and Kotkaniemi ;)

Agreed. I'd deal Pacioretty for the #2. I'd deal Weber for the #2. I'd include Price in a trade for the #2 but I'd want more than that. There are definitely ways we can go after that pick, but hard to say whether MB would do it and whether Carolina would accept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Well 9 years is a bit of a an arbitrary number... if you're going to include the last 9, why not include 2007 as well or the years before that in which TT was involved? I'll look at 1st rounders only, since that's what we're debating here (as to whether or not TT can nail that #3 pick).

In any case, I'd agree that it's too soon to say enough about Poehling or Juulsen and probably even Scherbak, who hasn't forced my hand enough to say whether he'll make it yet or not. But outside of that group, I'd say

- Hits: Galchenyuk, Sergachev, McDonagh, Pacioretty, Price, A. Kostitsyn

- Busts: McCarron (who, if you believe TT, was a guy MB wanted and overruled TT on), Tinordi, Leblanc, Fischer, Chipchura (who still made a solid NHL career for himself, just wasn't what we envisioned him to be)

So for me, since TT's first draft in 2003, he's about 6 for 11 in 1st rounders. And here, I'm not saying the hits were the best possible picks, just that they were solid NHLers and better-than-average selections. Now look at those draft positions... his hits were picked 3rd, 5th, 9th, 10th, 12th, and 22nd. His "misses" were 17th, 18th, 18th, 20th. 22nd, and 25th. The three guys we're waiting on (Poehling, Juulsen, Scherbak) were also 25th, 26th, and 26th. You don't have to agree with all his choices or love the players he selected, but the most objective way of looking at these picks suggests he did a really good job with his 5 choices in the top 12. In the case of his 3rd and 5th overall choices, he probably got the 2nd best player in the draft each time (i.e. better than the position he selected in). Sergachev at 9 could possibly end up being better than his draft position too, and if you're re-drafting the 2007 1st round, McDonagh and Pacioretty are probably both top 5 picks. And yes, I know some people will say "but we drafted Kostitsyn when we could have drafted Jeff Carter," who was drafted right after him. Sure, but we could also have drafted Hugh Jessiman, who was drafted 12th, or Robert Nilsson or Steve Bernier or Marc-Antoine Pouliot. For most picks, you can find a guy who was drafted later who was better and plenty who would have been worse. At the end of the day, Timmins found us a guy who was a top 6 player, so it is what it is.

With this current #3 pick, I think he can take the obvious, easy route and select a guy like Zadina, who will almost certainly be a solid NHLers and be labeled a "hit" and play 300-500 games or more in the NHL and have at least a couple of 20-goal seasons. If he decides Kotkaniemi or Tkachuk or Hughes or so on is the pick, then he's taking more of a gamble, but history suggests he's been right when picking in the top 12 more often than he's been wrong.

My point is that it's been mostly busts lately. Our scourting and/or development has been horrible. 

Kostitsyn is a bust, maybe the worst player picked that round and we were 8th overall. But who cares, it was so long ago (2003 draft being the best in the history of the NHL... and we got Kostitsyn) 

I think its hard to give someone praise for picking a good player with a top 10 pick. You MUST hit on those. Its how many times you hit between 10 and 60 that really counts to me. Thats where scouts earn their money to me

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be a mistake to take Kotaniemi at number 3. His skating is awkward  and lumbering for todays game and plus he has played the wing most of the season, so your not even really reaching for a true center. 

When your drafting at # 3 i get taking a risk in the top 5 or 6  Like Columbus opting for Dubois #5  at #3,  or the oiler's taking Draisaitl ranked #5 on the consensus rankings at #3.

But to reach out in the number 3 spot and take a consenus number 10 or 11. I am not sure if that is a great idea.

I am still not even sure i would take him over Veleno. Veleno is an elite skater and one of the fastest i have seen in a straight line. Although Kotaniemi certainly has a a higher ceiling then Veleno i do believe. I would be happy with either if we were picking at number 10 or later...

But we are not were picking at #3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, habsisme said:

My point is that it's been mostly busts lately. Our scourting and/or development has been horrible. 

Kostitsyn is a bust, maybe the worst player picked that round and we were 8th overall. But who cares, it was so long ago (2003 draft being the best in the history of the NHL... and we got Kostitsyn) 

I think its hard to give someone praise for picking a good player with a top 10 pick. You MUST hit on those. Its how many times you hit between 10 and 60 that really counts to me. Thats where scouts earn their money to me

 

But if we're talking about picks "lately" then I think we can agree it's too soon to judge on Poehling, Juulsen, and Scherbak, and Sergachev certainly looks like he could be a star (and certainly an NHL talent). Galchenyuk was also a very good pick, if we go back to 2012. So of the past 6 years, I think there are 3 1st rounders you can't pronounce on yet, two who are clearly NHL-level players near the top of their draft classes, and 1 bust (McCarron). The so-called "failures" are late 1st round picks, where the success rate for all GM's/scouts drops off.

As for Kostitsyn, he was 10th overall in 2003. He was far from being the worst overall player in that draft year. Yes, there were better players picked later, but there were also worse players picked too. AK46 was a highly-touted prospect. At that time, the ISS ranked North American and European prospects separately, and Kostitisyn was 3rd-ranked among European prospects, and the general consensus was that he slid a bit because of concerns over epilepsy. Based purely on talent level, most scouts felt he was a top 5 pick and certainly not a stretch at #10.

Yes, you should get an NHL level player in the top 10, but there are still misses, with players who never amount to anything. Even at #1 overall, look at Patrik Stefan, Rick Dipietro, or Alex Daigle. Timmins has still hit pretty well in the top 10 with Galchenyuk, Price, and Sergachev. I still give him credit for that, and not all those picks were consensus at those spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...