Deep thoughts III

Robin Brownlee
November 21 2008 12:03PM

"A lot of previous years, I'm trying to generate optimism and enthusiasm, but this year I'm probably more interested in quelling it a little bit."

"I can't remember a period over the last 15 years where we've been so excited . . . this is the best chance we've had in a long time to win the division . . . it's a very achievable goal. Young players have developed. Now we have lots of depth at virtually every position . . . we have a real good chance to do some great things this year."

So, was that a meteor in the sky Thursday or Craig MacTavish's lofty pre-season expectations hurtling to the muskeg on fire like a burnt weenie at a barbecue gone wrong after watching his Oilers get outclassed -- forget the 4-3 score -- by the Detroit Red Wings at Rexall Place? And, who says MacT has lost the dressing room? We're only 20 games into the season and the players have jumped onside with their coach in putting an end to talk this team has the combination of physical talent AND mental make-up to be a real contender in the Western Conference.

Consider it quelled.

HERE WE ARE

At 9-9-2 through 20 games, the Oilers are right about where I thought they'd be in terms of record and the standings when I looked at them in pre-season. Given their schedule -- 14 of 20 games on the road so far -- and line-up changes, I didn't expect anything more at this point, although most fans were more optimistic.

How the Oilers got here, though, is surprising. After a misleading 4-0 start and with parade route planners looking down their noses at doomsayers who didn't see a Northwest Division title in the cards, the Oilers had a chance to not only survive the schedule-maker's handiwork, but hit the quarter-pole smelling like roses. But noooooooo.

With five days before they face Los Angeles, the stench wafting through Rexall Place has everybody checking the bottom of their shoes, expecting to have to scrape something off. With MacTavish sounding more frustrated by the day and having called out individual players -- hello, Dustin Penner, Shawn Horcoff and Mathieu Garon -- and his team in general for lack of jam and gamesmanship, I'm guessing that aroma is also filling the nostrils of Kevin Lowe and Steve Tambellini.

Something has to happen before the Kings come calling Wednesday. Doesn't it?

THE OBVIOUS

- This team, as MacTavish alluded to Thursday night, is way too soft and too easy to play against. Being a nasty bunch of SOBs isn't a matter of size, it's a state of mind, so there's no excuses, even with smaller players in the line-up. The next time Ales Hemsky gets planted into the end boards, a response, like maybe a punch in the mouth, might be an idea. Stink-eyes and name-calling doesn't get it done.

Then, there's the concept of actually initiating that kind of stuff instead of just reacting. No? More guys need to show some brass, and they need to do so before Steve MacIntyre's broken face heals.

- Please, pick two goaltenders and stick with them. Decide which one is your starter and which is your back-up. Garon and Dwayne Roloson. Jeff Deslauriers and Garon. Roloson and Deslauriers. Flip a coin. Pick a pair. Three's a crowd. It's not stop-the-presses stuff.

- There's no excuse, none, for the way the Oilers have started too many games and Thursday's loss was a prime example. Spot the Cup champs a 3-0 lead? What could go wrong? The Oilers have been outscored 18-10 in first periods. Brutal. Wake up.

- Outside of Hemsky, there isn't a top-six forward playing well enough to merit top-six minutes. That's five guys, with Shawn Horcoff, Sam Gagner and Penner being the most obvious, getting sugar time without earning it most nights. Either the situation changes or the personnel does.

JUST ASKING

- Given pre-season expectations and that Daryl Katz is now endorsing the cheques, what's the over/under on MacTavish's tenure if the Oilers don't start to climb above the .500 mark and stay there? And, no, 2007 doesn't count as a prediction.

- Bizarre as it sounds, is it too much to ask that defencemen, well, play defence? That right wingers play right wing instead of left wing or center? I know Laddy Smid longs for the Art Ross Trophy, but, like my mom used to say, "There's a place for everything and everything in its place."

- Not that it had any impact whatsoever, but whose idea was it to claim Jesse Boulerice off waivers in the first place? No, really. Was this a collaborative brain cramp or somebody's singular epiphany? Who?

- Just a thought, but with all the concern about a tough schedule to start the season, is anybody else concerned the Oilers have blown off too many of the few games they've had at home? Fellas, 2-2-2?

- Penalty killing. When does that start?

-- Listen to Robin Brownlee every Thursday from 4 to 6 p.m. on Just A Game with Jason Gregor on Team 1260

Aceb4a1816f5fa09879a023b07d1a9b4
A sports writer since 1983, including stints at The Edmonton Journal and The Sun 1989-2007, I happily co-host the Jason Gregor Show on TSN 1260 twice a week and write when so inclined. Have the best damn lawn on the internet. Most important, I am Sam's dad. Follow me on Twitter at Robin_Brownlee. Or don't.
Avatar
#51 Tyler
November 22 2008, 02:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

It isn’t an insult to Horcoff’s ability as a player to suggest that he hasn’t played that well this season. Or atleast as well as he is capable of.

I don't disagree with the idea that there's nothing wrong with saying he hasn't played up to his usual level, I just have a hard time reconciling it with what the numbers say about him. There seems to be a disconnect between what the numbers tell us that he's done this year (yes, yes, I know he hasn't piled up the points this quarter; I'm talking about the stuff like SF/SA, where his shifts start and end) and what the perception is. I have a hard time believing that, if he'd had a some more bounces, a lot of the heat would dissipate.

Guy with the list of centres above -

I won't trouble you with numbers from a spreadsheet. Obviously it's preferable to just say "You're wrong".

With that said, I'll give you most of those. I'm not buying Marleau, Carter, Kopitar, Sakic (obviously the far better player for career but now is what matters) and Jokinen. I've got doubts about guys like Savard and some others. A bunch of those guys on that list, I tend to think are awfully overrated - I don't know that the difference between Horcoff and them matches the salary. He doesn't match most of them in offence but then a bunch of them don't have his defensive game.

Lecavalier is an example. Obviously a brilliant offensive player. The problem is, he gives it all back. Is a team any better off having a guy who scores 95 points if he gives it all back in the other end of the ice? All other things being equal, a guy who is, for example, EV+ 60 EV- 60 and a guy who is EV+ 30 and EV- 30 make the same contribution to winning hockey games; the guy who's on the ice for so many more goals for costs more money.

Avatar
#52 Jonathan Willis
November 22 2008, 02:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

That's a funny list, Braden. I'll agree with Tyler above, and then point out that a +35/-30 player does more to help his team win than a +60/-60 player and is paid much, much less.

This argument has gone back and forth, over and over for the past year and probably longer, and I'm not going to re-argue it.

Let's take a look at Getzlaf - Here is his matchup from last night in St. Louis. The three forwards who he played the most against were B.J. Crombeen (picked up off waivers from Dallas last week), Yan Stastny (9 career points) and Jay McClement (4 assists and no goals in 17 games this year). This despite the fact that Andy Murray, the Blues coach, had last change and therefore the advantage in the matchups.

Why, you ask? Because if he isn't playing fodder at evens, he gets killed. He's a powerplay point producer, and he's got a nasty edge, which makes fans happy, but coaches treat him like he's a liability at even strength.

Now, there's a place for a guy like that. But he isn't remotely close to being a complete player, and his coach and pretty much every other coach (going by who they play against him) know it.

Avatar
#53 Braden
November 22 2008, 03:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Tyler - I left off a bunch of guys like Andy McDonald, Mikko Koivu, Henrik Sedin, Mike Ribeiro, Saku Koivu, Daymond Langkow, Jonathan Toews, Chris Drury, Scott Gomez ect off my list. Most off these guys have had careers on par or better than Horcoff. Depending on who you ask Horcoff could be all the way out of the top 30. Bottom line is he's not in the top 15 so clearly 1st line center is a weakness compared to other clubs.

I don't get how you don't give the nod to Sakic because it's "now that matters", yet Horcoff is on pace of around 35-40 points "right now".

Tampa had no goalie, no defense, and the the division he plays in is known for being a run and gun type game. Not really surprising that Lecavalier bled goals.

Are you actually suggesting that this is a better team with Horcoff than Lecavalier?

Avatar
#54 Braden
November 22 2008, 03:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Jonathan Willis - Who Murray matches up against who doesn't tell me anything at all. When was the last time Murray even made the playoffs? Now your asknig me to judge my opinion of a player based on who Murray plays against who? Every GM in the league would take Getzlaf over Horcoff and that's not even a knock on Horc.

Avatar
#55 Braden
November 22 2008, 03:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

"I’ll agree with Tyler above, and then point out that a +35/-30 player does more to help his team win than a +60/-60 player and is paid much, much less."

And using this logic, then the low event Marc Pouliot does more to help this team win than Horc because he's paid much, much less.

Avatar
#56 Jonathan Willis
November 22 2008, 03:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Braden - it isn't just Murray. It's everybody. Next time Anaheim plays Detroit, watch who Babcock runs at Getzlaf. It won't be either of the top two lines; it might be Kris Draper. Getzlaf looks good because Sami Pahlsson does a hell of a job on the heavy lifting - when the Ducks did their Cup run, the difficulty of minutes went Pahlsson - McDonald - Getzlaf. Because Getzlaf is a powerplay specialist and a guy who eats up the softies - not a guy who can carry a mail. He can help you win, but he doesn't carry the mail.

When Pouliot puts up the same numbers vs. the same opposition as Horcoff, than we can argue he's in the same range. He doesn't.

Basically, it works like this. Fans hype guys like Lecavalier and Kovalchuk, but they always give as much back as they generate. Barring a major change in their styles, they'll never even deserve to be mentioned alongside the Zetterbergs, Iginlas, etc. of the world, because they aren't complete players.

Horcoff's a lower-tier guy, but during the playoff run, he was taking on the bad guys, and Peca was helping, while the Stoll line tried to make hay against the softies. For all the potential of the Samsonov - Stoll - Hemsky line, they weren't winning series; series were won because Horcoff, Smyth and whoever outplayed Thornton while Peca and co. outplayed Marleau.

There is a huge difference between a player being successful against top opposition, and being successful against the waiver wire fodder of the world. The latter player can be useful; the former wins you games.

Avatar
#57 pDan
November 22 2008, 03:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RobinB seems to be an imbittered has-been. Tough words for bagged milk.

Avatar
#58 Chris.
November 22 2008, 03:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

+30/-30...+60/-60...Be damned! It matters when you score. Does anyone care about Horcoffs PP goal last Columbus game? If I'm down by two with 7min left to play in a critical divisional game I would rather send Lecavlier over the boards than Horcoff any day of the week! Plus/minus stuff is an overrated stat- otherwise we would all be in love with Penner right now!

Avatar
#59 Braden
November 22 2008, 04:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Jonathan - No team has more points in the last 3 years than the Ducks so what opposing coaches are doing, well, isn't exactly working.

When Getzlaf finishes the year with 35 goals 100 points and +15 who gives a flying f who he plays against.

Thanks for the SCF rehash but if I was looking for a feel good story I would call Dan Tencer or rent Rudi.

You also forgot to mention how MacTavish outcoached Bobcock - Tencer's favorite part.

If you're looking to find out what kind of player Shawn Horcoff is, the answer isn't on a spreadsheet or from a fan who runs an Oiler's blog. Go ask someone who doesn't cheer for the Oilers, a NW team or the Ducks and you will find a more accurate diagnosis than any emotionally invested Oiler fan or number on a computer screen ever could.

Avatar
#60 Chris.
November 22 2008, 04:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

MacT likes to go on about net offence. What you generate vs what you give up. Well MacT... How do you rate a player like Pouliot who gives you virtually nothing on a nightly basis? People don't drive for hundreds of kilometers or pay hundreds of dollars a ticket to watch Pouliot! C'mon Katz! You promised us some fun!

Avatar
#61 Mie
November 22 2008, 05:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Braden,

Well said regarding Horcoff.

Jonathon I really wonder how many games you actually watch, rather than just compile some stupid spreadsheet against opposition. You said Babcock plays Draper against Getzlaf...guess what. Draper is a defensive specialist so he will shut him down.

To even try and argue that Horcoff is better than Getzlaf is the dumbest thing I have heard. Try to base your opinion, just once, on something other than "soft minutes". It is old, and frankly you losing respect by the minute.

You have never spoken to one hockey person in your life I believe, and it shows the more you write. Your stat crap is limited to a few of you who just regurgitate what each other says.

Horcoff over Getzlaf...PLEASE..by far most asinine arguement ever. And I'm a fan of Horcoff.

Avatar
#62 Chris.
November 22 2008, 05:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Most people use statistics the way a drunk uses a lamp post, more for support than enlightenment. You can twist numbers anyway you want Willis but you must be drunk if you believe Horcoff is as good a player as Getzlaf.

Avatar
#63 RobinB
November 22 2008, 05:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

pDan: You sound like an ignorant never-was.

Don't jump in with such a stupid statement when you "don't get it." We've been back and forth like this is 20 comments spanning seven or eight items over the past month. I no more want to maim poor baggedmilk than he wants to hug me. In fact, baggedmilk just asked me to be his buddy on Facebook, and I'm sure he would confirm that. I said, No way," and thumbed him in the eye (JUST JOKING HERE).

Avatar
#64 Jonathan Willis
November 22 2008, 08:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

+30/-30…+60/-60…Be damned! It matters when you score. Does anyone care about Horcoffs PP goal last Columbus game? If I’m down by two with 7min left to play in a critical divisional game I would rather send Lecavlier over the boards than Horcoff any day of the week!

Agreed, because Lecavalier's offensive game is way past Horcoff's. That said, with a one-goal lead, I think it's equally clear that Horcoff's a better guy to have on the ice than Lecavalier. It isn't a coincidence that when Tampa Bay won the cup they had a decent checking line and a two-way player in Brad Richards; it isn't that Lecavalier's a bad player, but because he isn't a complete player, he needs other guys to handle the tough minutes to experience success on a team level.

Thanks for the SCF rehash but if I was looking for a feel good story I would call Dan Tencer or rent Rudi.

Well, if you think it was a "feel good story", you obviously didn't catch the point.

Jonathon I really wonder how many games you actually watch

Have you ever watched a game to look for who plays against who? Because that's what that spreadsheet shows - it shows that when the opposing toughs come on, Carlyle gets Getzlaf off the ice in a hurry. I'm assuming you don't catch a lot of Anaheim games because it's so obvious as to be farcical.

Horcoff over Getzlaf…PLEASE..by far most asinine arguement ever.

Read what I wrote, bright eyes. I didn't say Horcoff was a better player, I said he was a more complete player. This isn't EA Sports where you can toss out an 89 and an 86 and say the 89 is better. Real life doesn't work that way.

To quote what I said, which seems to be confusing people:

Because Getzlaf is a powerplay specialist and a guy who eats up the softies - not a guy who can carry a mail. He can help you win, but he doesn’t carry the mail. Horcoff can carry the mail, but if you run him at Zetterberg/Iginla/etc. every night without a guy like Getzlaf to outscore the light-weights, the team will lose. They're different types of players - and it's a team sport - the team needs different types of players. It isn't about one being better than the other, although all other things being equal, the complete player is better every time. In this case all other things are not equal.

Reading comprehension, lads. Finish English 10, come back, try again.

Avatar
#65 Jonathan Willis
November 22 2008, 08:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

To recap:

Jonathan: Getzlaf isn't a complete player. He's got a high-end offensive game, but his coach shelters him. Using the Oilers SCF run as an example, some guys score against soft minutes, while other guys try to play top-end opponenents to a standstill.

Braden: I'm too stupid to understand that the SCF Run example was an illustration of a point. Numbers don't provide answers. Stanley Cup winning coach Mike Babcock is worse than MacTavish. Duck's fans are smart - turn to them for player evaluations.

Mie: Jonathon, have you ever watched a hockey game? Geez, you're dumb. I bet you've never even talked to a hockey person. Numbers scare me.

Avatar
#66 Jonathan Willis
November 22 2008, 10:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Going back to Getzlaf, the game before the STL game was against Washington. Here's who played against Getzlaf, in order of ice-time:

1. Eric Fehr 2. Thomas Fleischmann 3. Tyler Sloan 4. Brooks Laich 5. Jeff Schultz 6. John Erskine 7. Tom Poti 8. Milan Jurcina 9. Boyd Gordon 10. David Steckel 11. Matt Bradley 12. Alexander Ovechkin

He's a useful player, but he isn't remotely a complete one. Given that Ovechkin played the most of any Washington forward, the implications here should be obvious - Ryan Getzlaf has inflated points totals because he plays gravy minutes with Perry and Selanne against low-tier opponents. It's in his favour that he takes full advantage of this matchup, but it doesn't make him a complete player by any stretch.

Avatar
#67 Travis Dakin
November 22 2008, 11:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

And that my friends, is having your ass handed to you in a debate. Well played Willis.

Avatar
#68 Braden
November 23 2008, 01:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Jessica Fletcher - Marc Pouliot is more of a complete player than Pat Kane. Who cares. Getzlaf is one of the best players in the world.

Horcoff has zero physical game so is he really a "complete" player?

Mike Richards brings a physical game. Brenden Morrow brings a physical game. Ryan Kesler brings a physical game. Mike Fisher brings a physical game

Horcoff?

Not so much.

He's a decent stopgap until Lowe brings in an impact player like Getzlaf to help Hemsky lead us out of mediocrity.

Avatar
#69 Jonathan Willis
November 23 2008, 08:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

He’s a decent stopgap until Lowe brings in an impact player like Getzlaf to help Hemsky lead us out of mediocrity.

Do you think that's the plan? Or do you think that the plan is to run Gagner, Horcoff and Brodziak/Pouliot down the middle?

That's why this year (Although this team should make some noise) is more of a development year than anything else. Gagner and Cogliano both are going to be very good players, and either of them should be able to fill the outscoring light-weights role in the next year or two. That leaves Horcoff in the Brad Richards role, and Brodziak or Pouliot or a vet third liner to handle checking duties.

Avatar
#70 Jonathan Willis
November 23 2008, 09:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Horcoff has zero physical game so is he really a “complete” player?

Depends on your definition of "complete" I suppose. Is Nik Lidstrom a "complete" player, despite his lack of physical game? Scott Niedermayer? Henrik Zetterberg? Patrice Bergeron? Paul Stastny? Joe Sakic?

What about guys like Modano or Yzerman in their primes? Sidney Crosby?

Obviously, we're talking guys with much greather high-end skillsets, but is it really neccessary to have a dominant physical game to be a complete player?

By my definition, a complete player is one who can play in all three zones and in any situation; players who are balanced and not a liability to their team in any facet of their game. Horcoff's no shrinking violet; he's shown his character again and again, blocking shots and taking hits to make plays, going into the corners where stuff gets nasty. A complete player, in other words.

Avatar
#71 RobinB
November 23 2008, 09:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Braden: Horcoff is as complete a player as you'll find. He's very well-rounded in all aspects. You're really reaching to suggest lack of a dominant physical component -- while he doesn't overpower anybody, he doesn't avoid traffic -- to his game makes him incomplete.

Avatar
#72 Cooper
November 23 2008, 11:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

CONFUSED! 1) Why has MacT not tried Cogliano on the 1st line yet?

2) Suprised Mact want toughness when he handcuffed Laraque when he was here and benched Torres when he 'pole-axed' someone in Detroit?

Avatar
#73 Cooper
November 23 2008, 11:05AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Horcoff= most turn aways during a game! Does he ever finish a check?

Avatar
#74 Rick
November 23 2008, 11:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Tyler Says: November 22nd, 2008 at 2:03 pm It isn’t an insult to Horcoff’s ability as a player to suggest that he hasn’t played that well this season. Or atleast as well as he is capable of.

I don’t disagree with the idea that there’s nothing wrong with saying he hasn’t played up to his usual level, I just have a hard time reconciling it with what the numbers say about him. There seems to be a disconnect between what the numbers tell us that he’s done this year (yes, yes, I know he hasn’t piled up the points this quarter; I’m talking about the stuff like SF/SA, where his shifts start and end) and what the perception is. I have a hard time believing that, if he’d had a some more bounces, a lot of the heat would dissipate.

....

Not playing as well as he is capable of does not mean that he isn't doing anything right. It just means he isn't playing as well as he is capable of.

You suggest that for Horcoff it almost boils down to puck luck for him. That the numbers show that he is doing better than the traditional stats indicate.

I think the stats you list (pts VS outshooting and where the shifts start/end) merry up they way I would expect them to at this point.

What the outshooting stats and shift ending stats don't tell you is how they ended or what kind of shots are being taken. Horcoff has done alright in moving the puck up the ice and generating a few shots, the problem is they aren't resulting in the quality chances he has been involved in when looking back.

In other words, he is doing fine in some respects but not so much in others. As such his game most definately is open for some critisism.

Avatar
#75 Braden
November 23 2008, 12:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RobinB - I think you're confusing "complete player" with "2-way forward".

Alexander Ovechkin is the most "complete" player in the league.

Horcoff is a better 2-way player than Getzlaf.

Getzlaf is more of a complete player than Horcoff.

That's the way I see it. If you disagree that's fine.

Avatar
#76 RobinB
November 23 2008, 03:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Braden: I do disagree and, like you said, that's fine. I'm not that worried about making you see things my way.

As for being "confused," I'd like to think that after 25 years of being paid to cover hockey, I'm not that easily thrown off what's what and that I know the difference between a complete player and a two-way player. But thanks for the tip and the benefit of all of your experience.

Avatar
#77 Mie
November 23 2008, 11:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

"Depends on your definition of “complete” I suppose. Is Nik Lidstrom a “complete” player, despite his lack of physical game? Scott Niedermayer? Henrik Zetterberg? Patrice Bergeron? Paul Stastny? Joe Sakic?

What about guys like Modano or Yzerman in their primes? Sidney Crosby?"

Great comparison Willis...Yeah I would put Horcoff in the same category as all these sure fire Hall-of-Famers (Stastny and Bergeron not included).

When you are that great, it doesn't matter if you are physical. At least compare him to players he deserves to be in the same breath as.

As for your stats against Washington, with Carlyle having last change why would be go power on power, when he gets a better matchup going against lesser lights. That is good coaching, not a sign that Getzlaf is a liability.

And in the World Championships, wasn't it Getzlaf on the top line, facing the opposing teams top D-pair every game, and geez he did pretty good there. But I guess Hitchcock was so worried about his defensive play that he got him soft minutes.

Getslaf is tougher, scores more, changes the momentum of the game more often and is far from this PP softie that you claim.

Last year Getzlaf scored a whopping 4 goals on the PP out of his 24. This year he has 2 on the PP out of 8. Sure looks like he only scores with the extra man.

And compare his PP points to other top scorers, and he isn't any more of a PP scorer than them. Datsyuk had 40, Zetterberg 36, Malkin 40, Getzlaf 36.

But I guess you and Travis are the only ones who can use stats to back their point. Keep bringing up any stat you want, but 30 out of 30 GMs will take Getzlaf, and every Oiler would take him to. Not a knock on Horc, just that Getzlaf will give your team a better chance to win any night of the year.

Avatar
#78 Chris.
November 24 2008, 08:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Let's stock the team entirely with "complete players". Then we can "roll four lines" and "play for 60 minutes" at "both ends of the ice."

MacT.

Avatar
#79 David S
November 24 2008, 01:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I'd be happy if we could role one line that would play for 60 minutes.

Comments are closed for this article.