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

Recommended Posts

So sick of rehashing this subject but it is not the first time the Habs have done stuff like this. a case could be made that the Chelios trade for Savard in which we also had to give up a second round pick was far worse! perhaps we should all keep going back in time to vent about all the dumb moves our team made if it make folks feel better? it is simple with the benefit of hindsight to see which moves were bad and which ones were good MB made the deal because i am sure he felt in some idiotic way he was helping the team. I like Webber i also like Subban they are totally different players at slightly different points in there careers the big problem for me was after the trade was made a good GM would have known he was giving up speed and offensive talent for more of a stay at home guy and would have found a compliment to play with him not trade the one young guy in Segachev we may have had to play with him for an unproven but talented winger he wanted to convert into a #1 center instead of actually getting a real center! all the while leaving one whole wing of our d with pluggers on it. he is going to need to hit a grand slam in the off season to not look like the worst gm in our history after taking a good young team with talent and turning it into a disjointed mess!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, caperns61 said:

Bad down the middle is an issue you say, but trading Eller for two seconds was a good trade, that confuses me. Especially when we only have one centerman who is even capable of playing at the NHL , Danualt. I get Eller is not that number one guy but him and Danault could be quite capable of handling the middle two slots behind a number one like Tavares

Subban was a brutal trade just like Roy was just like Chelios was. All done by managers with to big an ego and putting themselves above the need of a team. That's it, that's the only reason.

I wish people would cut the crap about Subban not being liked. So what, who cares if he was or not. He was an elite defenseman. Who defended everyone of his teammates every single time he was in the eye of the media hurricane ...That's is a team player period period period. Its not a popularity contest.

Just because certain players could not adjust to his personality, that is their problem,  those players should have been moved not an elite puck moving deeman who you just signed.

1. Vanek was a steal, but hardly helped when he was moved to the 4th line by therrien.

2. Rads, used the habs as a spring board back to the NHL. I good move would be to have kept him. Which would not have cost us any players and allows your best players to slide down the lineup.

3. Phewt see above

4. Good trade yes

5. Good pick up yes

Subban is enough to have a GM fired in the NHL, especially now that the team has spiralled out of control. 

By centers, I mean a #1 and a #2 center. 

When Eller was traded, we had a glut of #3 and #4 centers, with none of them properly projected to become a #1 or #2 center.  We had the illusion of 4 centers, with the reality being we had zero #1 centers, barely a #2 center, and a glut of lower tier centers.

To get two second round picks for a serviceable third line center like Eller seemed like MB slightly exceeded FMV.

To then turn those picks around essentially and get Shaw and sign Shaw seemed brutal to me.  He effectively traded Eller for Shaw, which I didn't like at the time, and still don't.

Trading Subban at the time was the right move, but the Subban trade return was bad.  When you think of the possible returns we could have gotten, what a waste.  I believe at the time he was our #2 asset, behind Price, and he was the most fun player to watch from a fan's perspective on pretty much every night.

Subban was not liked in the room by the majority of his Montreal teammates in his last year with Montreal.  Why does this matter?  Probably for team chemistry in MB's eyes.  Given PK's near-Norris like play on the ice, in the regular season and playoffs when we made them, it speaks volumes that MB still traded him.  Also, when you look at the trade's return, Weber, he's pretty much the opposite of PK in the locker room.  This is not conjecture, this is what I hear from NHL/AHL players/management when I take them fishing.  So again, it speaks to the point that MB values team chemistry, and replaced a problem child with a respected man mountain.  Talent went down, chemistry went up and mediocrity continued.  Rearranging the seats on the titanic still ends in the ship sinking.

Somehow MB got on a life raft.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ramcharger440 said:

So sick of rehashing this subject but it is not the first time the Habs have done stuff like this. a case could be made that the Chelios trade for Savard in which we also had to give up a second round pick was far worse! perhaps we should all keep going back in time to vent about all the dumb moves our team made if it make folks feel better? it is simple with the benefit of hindsight to see which moves were bad and which ones were good MB made the deal because i am sure he felt in some idiotic way he was helping the team. I like Webber i also like Subban they are totally different players at slightly different points in there careers the big problem for me was after the trade was made a good GM would have known he was giving up speed and offensive talent for more of a stay at home guy and would have found a compliment to play with him not trade the one young guy in Segachev we may have had to play with him for an unproven but talented winger he wanted to convert into a #1 center instead of actually getting a real center! all the while leaving one whole wing of our d with pluggers on it. he is going to need to hit a grand slam in the off season to not look like the worst gm in our history after taking a good young team with talent and turning it into a disjointed mess!

Sure, we could easily bash other trades too. The differences:

- You could argue Chelios for Savard was to pick up a different type of player or player of a different position

- We won the Cup with Savard, which makes it harder to bash management afterwards. I've always said that if the Habs won a Cup with Weber, we'd have nothing to complain about.

- Subban and Weber are still playing. Bergevin is still the GM. So the trade's repercussions are still being felt, and the guy who made the bad decision is still in charge. People will be angry until that is rectified.

 

But yes, the Chelios-Savard trade was bad and the Roy trade was bad and the Langway trade was bad and the Sergachev trade might be bad and the Halak-Price fiasco brought just as much anger and venting at the time... just none of those issues are meeting the criteria I mentioned above, and that's why Subban-Weber remains a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe our team's strategy was built around Price, with the coaching philosophy to limit the opportunities against, and win games 2-1 as a defensive team.

With this as the guiding principle of the team, PK's talent and heart to win would often pop out of the box and create two friction points: the first with coaches and management that didn't like that he wouldn't stick to the plan, and the second with his teammates that felt like PK thought he was special and didn't have to stick to the plan.  After enough time, these friction points created a fire.  Which unfortunately led to a fire sale.   

When it worked, PK was right, when it didn't work the coaches were right.  As fans, it looked like it worked far more than it didn't, making PK a fan favourite and on an offensively challenged team like Montreal, this was a godsend.  Finally, something exciting other than Price's amazing saves.

My understanding is the national team passed on PK not because of his persona, but because they have the offensive talent to win...they don't need end to end rushes from their D to compensate for a lack of offensive talent.  Unlike us.  And now we have neither which I think is actually getting us closer to finally getting some top centers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Windoe said:

I believe our team's strategy was built around Price, with the coaching philosophy to limit the opportunities against, and win games 2-1 as a defensive team..

It didn't work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The worst trade in Habs history:

Rod Langway, Brian Engblom, Doug Jarvis and another player I forget who it was for Rick Green and Ryan Walter.

The second worst: Doug Harvey for Lou Fontinato.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be a really pervasive idea that Subban needed to be traded and it was just the return that was bad. I don't really get it, if the Penguins traded Malkin it would still be bad even if they got Seguin in return. Trading players who are in the top handful at their position basically means you'll always lose the trade, with Subban the Habs had one of the 4 best defensemen alive, even if they got high end prospects and picks instead of Weber the odds aren't great any of those guys become one of the 4 best defensemen in the world.

I'm not in the room so I can't sit here and say I know Subban's a great guy, but we're also taking a bunch of rumours (that people like Bergevin would very much like to be considered gospel) at face value about a guy who at worst seems to be a bit cocky and understand how marketing works. From some pretty reputable hockey guys (Marek and Friedman on a recent 31 thoughts podcast) they mentioned guys seemed to dislike that Subban had his own side deals and marketing stuff set up apart from the team. All I can say to that is that anyone on the Montreal Canadiens is insane to not be doing that themselves, they could be printing money. 

I don't pretend I'd be a great GM of an NHL team but I think one of my rules of roster construction would be to never trade away a player that's top 5 in their position unless they're like 38 years old or they've done something genuinely awful. In a league where Patrick Kane is still allowed to be one of the faces of the league, players are assaulting women every summer, and rampant coke/mdma problems are an open secret I have a hard time believing PK Subban was genuinely a guy that was so awful he needed to be traded. I can totally imagine how he would rub people the wrong way. He's my favourite player in the league by far, but I could also easily imagine myself finding him annoying as a teammate. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't be able to put that aside to play with one of the best players in the game. I've put up with people I don't get along with at work for far less than what NHL players make. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Noob616 said:

There seems to be a really pervasive idea that Subban needed to be traded and it was just the return that was bad. I don't really get it, if the Penguins traded Malkin it would still be bad even if they got Seguin in return. Trading players who are in the top handful at their position basically means you'll always lose the trade, with Subban the Habs had one of the 4 best defensemen alive, even if they got high end prospects and picks instead of Weber the odds aren't great any of those guys become one of the 4 best defensemen in the world.

I'm not in the room so I can't sit here and say I know Subban's a great guy, but we're also taking a bunch of rumours (that people like Bergevin would very much like to be considered gospel) at face value about a guy who at worst seems to be a bit cocky and understand how marketing works. From some pretty reputable hockey guys (Marek and Friedman on a recent 31 thoughts podcast) they mentioned guys seemed to dislike that Subban had his own side deals and marketing stuff set up apart from the team. All I can say to that is that anyone on the Montreal Canadiens is insane to not be doing that themselves, they could be printing money. 

I don't pretend I'd be a great GM of an NHL team but I think one of my rules of roster construction would be to never trade away a player that's top 5 in their position unless they're like 38 years old or they've done something genuinely awful. In a league where Patrick Kane is still allowed to be one of the faces of the league, players are assaulting women every summer, and rampant coke/mdma problems are an open secret I have a hard time believing PK Subban was genuinely a guy that was so awful he needed to be traded. I can totally imagine how he would rub people the wrong way. He's my favourite player in the league by far, but I could also easily imagine myself finding him annoying as a teammate. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't be able to put that aside to play with one of the best players in the game. I've put up with people I don't get along with at work for far less than what NHL players make. 

I'm in agreement with pretty much everything you said here.

On the side deals, it's a bit funny, because we know Gallagher didn't appreciate Subban, and he and Galchenyuk had their commercials/ personalized burgers with McDonal's. Pacioretty also had his commercial with McDonald's, and he campaigned for himself for captain as much as Subban did. No one stopped any of these other players for doing charity work or putting their name and face on a project like Subban did, but there seems to have been some spite, at least on the part of management and perhaps a couple of players, for this reason, which is just petty. And that's what it comes down to: it's other people who are jealous or unaccepting, not the actual guy in question who's causing the problem. I'm relatively sure that PK grew up with Big Karl watching his every move and coaching him on how to act publicly. There's a pretty high likelihood that PK also encountered issues where he was harassed for being black in the hockey world. We know it happened from fans and other players (Mike Richards, I'm looking at you) in the NHL level. We've seen it happen to PK, to Wayne Simmonds, and to other lesser-profile guys too. And you can also see that any time PK gets called a name or insulted, he holds his head high, he moves on, and he's never used the fact that he's black as an excuse or a reason for anything. When Therrien called him out in the media, even though it was clear he was being treated unfairly at times, PK always just answered the questions with "I need to be better" and "I appreciate the feedback" and so on. I think he was simply taught to hold his head high, never make excuses, and be a positive role model.

Your point about other players who are allowed to play in the league... Slava Voynov is reportedly going to seek reinstatement and the Kings supposedly want him back. What about Dany Heatley, whose reckless driving killed his teammate and friend? Or Brad Marchand, whose behaviors are disgusting and would get his butt kicked if he tried any of those things without being behind the protection of the NHL rules. Shane Doan and his racist slurs? Even Andrew Shaw and his homophobic ones. The situation is Philadelphia where one player slept with another's wife. That's just the tip of the iceberg. There are tons of questionable personalities and worse in the league, and yet Subban is the guy who's singled out. Again, I think a lot of this comes down to the coach and GM doing everything they can to bring him down and make it acceptable to hate him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/19/2018 at 5:17 PM, jeff33 said:

a top 10 oh my god lol let me assure you on that its 150% NO . If edmonton wanted to give us klefbom right now 1 for 1 I would happily take that. 

That's why I said trade him for Jake Gardiner.  At least we get a 50 point producing left handed shot.  He'd look good I think on a top pairing with Jeff Petry on the right.  You could potentially add a Mike Green on the right side for a second pairing of Mete and Green.  Your 3rd pairing could be: Alzner and Juulsen.  I'm also curious to see if people would be interested in arguably the best d-man not named Rasmus Dahlin, Adam Boqvist @ 3rd OVA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2018 at 3:25 AM, Windoe said:

Deciding to trade PK was not the bad part.  We'd trade anyone if the return was right, and PK's time was up in Montreal.

What made this a bad trade was the return.

MB was so willing to dump his problem child for the likable man mountain that he shot himself in the foot and only got a generous 75% fair market value in return.

But, and this has been my biggest point all along, deciding to trade PK is not the reason MB should be fired, and the return he got is still only one small reason...the biggest reasons MB needs to go, if he doesn't land Tavares are:

1) He hasn't fixed our most glaring need, center.  If he can't get Tavares, or a real #1 center before next year starts, he's had his chance.

2) He's not the right person for the rebuild.

3) He's publicly called his team out for attitude problems.  This did not go over well with the players, but will likely make them more willing to waive their NMCs which could facilitate a trade for a 1C, which may actually be genius, but I have my doubts.

4a) 2 seconds for Shaw and then the Shaw contract

4b) The PK return

In fairness, I have liked:

1) Getting Vanek for the playoffs

2) Getting Radulov, awesome move

3) I liked getting two 2nds for Eller, (didn't like then getting Shaw for two 2nds)

4) Danault trade was solid for us

5) Picking up Byron worked out well for us

PK wasn't a problem child.  He wasn't the problem at all.  He was on more nights than not, part of the solution.  The problem stems from the top and has worked it's way down and taken root within the organization.  It has had 6 seasons (Going on 7) to do so.  MTL is in serious need of an entire full scale reboot and rebuild, starting on the back-end.  Grabbing Adam Boqvist 3rd OVA might not be a bad option for the Habs.  It could make a Weber for Klefbom trade doable with EDM.  You could be looking at a top 6 opening night of:

Klefbom, Boqvist

Mete, Petry

Reilly, Juulsen

 

I'd also like to see MTL take a look at signing guys like: Adam Thilander in North Bay and Olivier Galipeau from the Acadie-Bathurst Titan.  Time to get younger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Sure, we could easily bash other trades too. The differences:

- You could argue Chelios for Savard was to pick up a different type of player or player of a different position

- We won the Cup with Savard, which makes it harder to bash management afterwards. I've always said that if the Habs won a Cup with Weber, we'd have nothing to complain about.

- Subban and Weber are still playing. Bergevin is still the GM. So the trade's repercussions are still being felt, and the guy who made the bad decision is still in charge. People will be angry until that is rectified.

 

But yes, the Chelios-Savard trade was bad and the Roy trade was bad and the Langway trade was bad and the Sergachev trade might be bad and the Halak-Price fiasco brought just as much anger and venting at the time... just none of those issues are meeting the criteria I mentioned above, and that's why Subban-Weber remains a thing.

Because P-K is fine and still having success without us, while we're 6-7 years behind teams like Nashville, Pittsburgh and Tampa, without P-K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it may sounds like whining but I still have to ask.  Assuming we take at face value (which I really don't) that Subban's caused chemistry problems that the team can't play together, at what point does un-quantifiable chemistry problems trump quantifiable production?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Sure, we could easily bash other trades too. The differences:

- You could argue Chelios for Savard was to pick up a different type of player or player of a different position

- We won the Cup with Savard, which makes it harder to bash management afterwards. I've always said that if the Habs won a Cup with Weber, we'd have nothing to complain about.

- Subban and Weber are still playing. Bergevin is still the GM. So the trade's repercussions are still being felt, and the guy who made the bad decision is still in charge. People will be angry until that is rectified.

 

But yes, the Chelios-Savard trade was bad and the Roy trade was bad and the Langway trade was bad and the Sergachev trade might be bad and the Halak-Price fiasco brought just as much anger and venting at the time... just none of those issues are meeting the criteria I mentioned above, and that's why Subban-Weber remains a thing.

In all reality at this point it still isn't "a thing". The only way you could honestly compare now to then is if no other player movements have had happened since "the trade". You can and surmise however you'd like pro or against , but unless the team is exactly the same except the difference of those two players than it's not any where a realistic comparison. How ever Subban has done with Nashville is moot also because that team has had several player changes since that trade. We could go back through every draft to find players that were drafted after players that we had drafted in each round and I'm sure we'd find players that had success that "after the fact we should of drafted" . As they say hind sight is 20-20 , but dwelling in the past wishing what happened never did is the same in life as sports completely defeating. The speculation of Subban being liked ect. doesn't matter now anyway. Also it has been said that his perceived attitude was why he was drafted in the second round not the first. So even with his talent all 30 teams took a pass on him some twice. Also team Canada ect. When things are reported several time over a long time period generally there is a least something to it. He is a fan favorite which makes things harder to believe if there said negative. This doesn't mean it is true and like I said AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS NOW IRELEVANT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

This doesn't mean it is true and like I said AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS NOW IRELEVANT!

Hard disagree. The GM who made that decision is still running the team and hasn't appeared to have altered his decision making process in any fundamental way (and if anything appear to be doubling down on the same flawed decision making process). If we had a new GM and seemed to be gearing towards a rebuild or a new strategy of team building I think fans would be more willing to let it go, but with MB at the helm I think it's more likely the Habs double and triple down on this bad bet and keep throwing good money after bad to try and win with a Price/Weber core. 


In June 2016 the Habs traded away Subban and Eller for Weber and Shaw after a disaster season, and the stated justification for both trades heavily relied on those players being excellent character guys, "hating to lose", and being "players that get you through the playoffs". Then over the next couple seasons the majority of moves the Habs made were to get grittier and defensively minded players instead of skill guys. They let Beaulieu and Markov go, and replaced them with Benn and Alzner. They traded Andrighetto for Martinsen, and traded for King and Ott who are both out of the NHL now. They traded for Deslauriers who was OK in a short term percentage driven stretch, and then handed out a two year extension to a replacement level player. Now after another disastrous season all we've heard about is an "attitude" problem which sounds an awful lot like "character" and "hating to lose". 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2018 at 8:26 PM, BigTed3 said:

Up until the Subban trade, Bergevin made a lot of dumb mistakes as a GM... Bouillon, Murray, Drewiske, Desharnais extension, etc. But the upside was that most of those mistakes were reversible or short-term. We suffered for them, but after a season or two, we moved on and the effects weren't as pronounced in the long-term (albeit I still believe Mouillon slowed down the development of Beaulieu/Tinordi/Pateryn, for example.

With the Subban trade, we gave up one of the most skilled and dominant players in the game, didn't get enough as a return, and shortened our window at the Cup. The repercussions were felt immediately and will last for maybe a decade. If you were a fan of Subban, you understand that we lost a great player. And even if you weren't a fan of Subban, you at least understand that we got older and slower and made that trade turning down other offers that could have set us up beautifully for the future. One rumor was something to the effect of Subban for Draisaitl, RNH, Nurse, and a pick... imagine. Knowing what we know now, despite being a Subban fan, I would make that trade today if we still had PK. The problem is that we got worse in the short-term and made no gains at improving our team in the long run.

As for Weber, Price, and Pacioretty, I think all three are still very good players. Pacioretty remains a bargain on his contract, but the problem is that it just isn't realistic or smart to re-sign him to something like a 6-7 year deal for 7-8M a season. With Carey, the contract is bad and the effort hasn't been consistent. I think he can still be a dominant goalie for the next 5 years, but at what cost against the cap? And Weber's contract is the worst of the three, with the threat of a cap recapture penalty if we trade him but a declining asset if we don't. It's lose lose. With where we are now, the main question remains, "are we a legit contender for a Cup in the next 2 seasons?" Unless we can add Tavares and another top 6 center and a 1 LHD, we just aren't. So if that's the case, the right plan becomes finding players who can help you win the Cup in 3 years or 5 years. Price and Pacioretty and Weber aren't going to be central figures in 5 years. Right now, there are still people who think highly of them and who will give us a return in a trade. That might not be true in 2 years. So you need to deal them while they have value and not wait until it's too late.

I don't understand why there is so much discussion about Tavares. Doesn't Montreal have another player on Tavares' level they have an interest in? Last I saw, Tavares is a good player on a bad team. Why would he be any more of a factor with the Habs than he already is with the Islanders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Larry-Launstein-Jr said:

I don't understand why there is so much discussion about Tavares. Doesn't Montreal have another player on Tavares' level they have an interest in? Last I saw, Tavares is a good player on a bad team. Why would he be any more of a factor with the Habs than he already is with the Islanders?

Tavares is the premiere UFA available this summer, and probably the only game-changer. Tavares and the Isles have been bad of late, but they really lack defence/goaltending. In theory, the Habs feature two players (Weber and Price) at those positions whom Tavares knows well and who could complement him well. The Habs' biggest weakness is top 6 center, so the thought is that the two could be a fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Noob616 said:

The GM who made that decision is still running the team and hasn't appeared to have altered his decision making process in any fundamental way (and if anything appear to be doubling down on the same flawed decision making process). If we had a new GM and seemed to be gearing towards a rebuild or a new strategy of team building I think fans would be more willing to let it go, but with MB at the helm I think it's more likely the Habs double and triple down on this bad bet and keep throwing good money after bad to try and win with a Price/Weber core.

This.   Bad trades from our past like Roy, or Gomez were talked about alot - but once the GMs who made them were replaced, it cooled down quite a bit.  As long as MB is GM this trade will continue to be a point of contention.

IMHO there are only 3 things that could make this change:

1) PK suddenly is terrible & Weber starts putting oil of olay in his water bottle: nigh impossible

2) MB suddenly makes several key moves (signs Tavares & Statsny, trades Patches for a true top pairing LD) and we content.  Quite unlikely.

3)  MB is fired.   The most likely of the 3 but seems like its still probably a year or two away (at least) with Molson & MB's bromance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Windoe said:

I think everyone loved PK except the evil management.  When MB saw a chance to cash in on the Weber sweepstakes he jumped at it.  It was a pure talent trade.

It's not just P-K though.  Put it to you this way, this was our starting 6 before the Subban trade:

Markov, Subban

Beaulieu, Petry

Emelin, Barberio/Pateryn

 

Not bad.  That's our before the 2016 draft 6.  Not great, but not bad.  Now, add to that, that we were able to draft Sergachev 9th ova that year.  Since the Subban trade, all that remains of our top 6 we could've had this year is Jeff Petry.  The following list is what we've received in return for ALL OF THAT DEFENSIVE DEPTH:

Shea Weber

Jonathan Drouin

Jordie Benn

Scott Walford

MB gave up a 27 year old Norris Trophy winner for a 30 year old, 3 time runner up.  Traded a 23 year old Nathan Beaulieu, who had just come off a 28 point year for us in 2016-17 for a guy putting up 30 points a year in the WHL.  He let Barberio go to waivers, Markov to the KHL, Emelin in expansion.  And traded Pateryn for Benn.  This is the 2017-2018 offensive output of the guys we let go of.  I've put them in order of where they could've played in our top 6. I also put Petry in there to show how much it would've improved us to hang on to our talent:

Sergachev (TB:9 g, 40 pts.), Subban (NAS: 16 g, 59 pts)

Markov (KHL:  5 g, 33 pts), Petry (MTL: 12 g, 42 pts)

Barberio (COL: 3 g, 13 pts), Pateryn, (DAL: 1 g, 12 pts)

Beaulieau (BUF: 1g, 8 pts), Emelin, (NAS: 1 g, 9 pts)

That looks like a much better starting six for MTL in 2017-2018.  That looks like a D that could help your forwards generate more offense.  You have enough depth there to lose any one of Emelin, Beaulieu, Pateryn or Barberio in expansion and not be effected.  You could've even traded a couple of those bottom guys away if trades weren't so hard for you.  The bottom line is, any GM who gives up that much talent, for that little in return, should be fired.  No wonder we're picking 3rd this year.

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...