[monkeypunk]

Laughton didn’t do a single thing that every other 4th line guy couldn’t do. You can pick those guys up for $2M – $3M on July 16th. It was a terrible overpay.

~Wedgie

I’m not judging the trade until this upcoming season is done. Laughton has long been touted as a leader who leads by example and off the ice. Tortorella has nothing but good things to say about him, and he’s not typically the complimenting type. Whether he never found his footing here or his role or his linemates, I don’t know – but I’d like to give him another year before that 1st rounder is considered a waste of a pick. At this point if we’re spending draft picks, I like the idea of paying to acquire term and retention.

For two months of O’Reilly and Acciari they gave up a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, Gaudette and Abramov; for eleven games of Foligno they gave up a 1st and 2 4ths.

I’m not saying that makes the Laughton look any better right now – a bad trade is a bad trade, even if there are worse ones – but I am saying that Laughton still has time here to make that trade worthwhile.

[monkeypunk]

Thing is, trying to trade Marner only after his no-trade clause kicked in was a waste of time. I don’t blame Tre for it, it’s all on Shanahan, but once he was stuck with him, I guess he did overpay on the short term trades to make sure he’d have one last chance at winning with the “core 4”.

I did like the Carlo trade though, that’s a useful player moving forward regardless of the cost.
~Scabeh

I didn’t really mind either one, to be honest. They got 50% retention on Laughton, got him for two years and they gave up a late 1st – which I know does have value. You get, typically, about a 60% hit rate on late first round picks. There’s a 20% and 15% hit rate on 4th and 6th round picks. Granted the quality of the player and their ceilings are typically quite different. The best 6th round pick in recent memory was Connor Brown. Holmberg was down in that 6th/7th round area, too – but if contrast that with Easton Cowan, taken 27th, you’re getting a very different calibre of player.

Frankly I didn’t think – and still don’t think – that Laughton was a problem in the playoffs. Saddling him and Lorentz with Jarnkrok, who was bloody awful, was a problem. Taking your less talented players and handicapping them sure isn’t going to help. That said, and being honest, if you’re paying a 1st rounder, you want a guy who is contributing more than Laughton did. Hopefully the second year at $1.5m makes that payment worth it. Frankly, given how badly he struggled, you wonder if putting McMann down on the 4th line with Laughton and Lorentz wouldn’t have created a better cycle and potentially generated some offense. Lord knows McMann wasn’t doing anything anywhere else.

The Carlo trade, similar to you, I like. You get him for 2 more years, he’s retained to a shade under $3.5m and you’re giving up a pretty solid prospect in Minten, a 1st and a 4th. It seems like fair value.

[monkeypunk]

I did like the trade proposal I saw the other day.
Karlson for Kampf + 2025 2nd rnd pick (FLA) + 3rd rnd pick either 2025 (COL) or 2026 (Leafs).
This would mean Marner is gone.
I’d like the to go after Tanev but he will cost at least 3~4M on a 4 year deal.
kinda expensive for a bottom 6 player.
I’d definitely would bring back Lorentz. 2yrs @ 900K per
~dmnted

I am of the opinion that Tanev is a $2m / year guy. 6 years ago, Rutherford got a hard-on for a 14 goal guy who played 14 minutes / night and overpaid him @ $3.5m. He’s a phenomenal worker and he’s tenacious and he’s exactly what any bottom-6 would want – but he had 10 goals and 12 assists in a full season and turns 34 at the end of this year. You’re buying his twilight years and those should be discounted, I would imagine.

[monkeypunk]

Marchand on the Leafs…. Are you trying to make me hate the Leafs more?

~Scabeh

You definitely would. What them go full bastard and sign Cousins, too. Just throw their hat in the “Someone’s always gonna be suspended!” ring.

But I look at Edmonton and I think it’s been guys like Keith and Perry who showed the team what it really took to win. Guys who have been there and done it before lead the way. The Leafs need that from someone – or someones. In their past they’ve had Hainsey and I guess Muzzin who were sort of their guys who’d been there and could lead that way. The other guys they had to lead them – Thornton, Marleau, Spezza, Simmonds, Foligno – they’d all won nothing. I suppose they had O’Reilly as well, but I never got the feeling they put him a leadership role as much as they should have.

[monkeypunk]

The question is who on that list changes the “DNA” of the group AND makes us better. Because Tree needs to do both. I don’t envy him.

~fifty mission cap

I’ve said this recently, and I believe it – I don’t think you replace Marner. The point here is that this is a team that loses too many 50/50 battles for pucks. They lose on the boards. Those lose in front of their net. They lose in front of the opposition’s net. The DNA here, in my opinion, is that there’s too much soft and not enough compete.

Now if I had my way we’d be moving on from Marner, Robertson, Jarnkrok, Kampf and Patches. If they could get Rielly to waive, I’d do that, too – but replacing him would be difficult, because no matter how lousy he is at defense, you still need some puck movement and skating up the ice.

The guys *I’d* want to target are Bennett, Marchand, Suter, Tanev; I’d see it as Knies-Matthews-Domi; Tavares/Marchand-Bennett-Nylander; Tavares/Marchand-Suter-McMann; Lorentz-Laughton-Tanev. There’s still pop in the top-6, but you add compete and more 50/50 puck battles won and the bottom-6 gains some offensive traction on the 3rd line with defensive awareness and lots of puck battle in that mix. There are a lot of names in the bottom-6 mix which can help a team – Smith is a favourite of mine; I like Roslovic and I appreciate the speed of Mangiapane or Granlund. There are ways to remake parts of this team in ways that compliment the key pieces. Marchand is a guy that I would absolutely target because you need a voice that knows how to win and what it takes to win and can still lead by example. He’d be my #1 target if I were Treliving.

Does that change the “DNA”? I don’t know – but they need less passivity, and they’re just carrying too much of it with both Mitch and Willy.

[monkeypunk]

then why would he take a discount knowing the market is thin? out of the goodness of his heart? many teams will be calling his agent for his services.

~Yes its me 2050

Specifically because he does want to be here. It was reported that as long as the offer is in the ballpark they can work to get it to where it’s fair. If the Leafs come in at $1m or Tavares comes in at $8m, then they probably don’t get something done – but the general feeling was that something centered around a $4-5m AAV as a starting point would be good. People will talk him at $2m which is preposterous and some will talk about him at $7.5m – which is probably where the market would value him (from Stamkos setting the bar).

[monkeypunk]

If #1 happens, the Leafs are fucked. You can play “money puck” with depth. You can’t replace Marner. Matthews gets worse, Knies gets worse, the PP gets worse. I’ve been asking this question for weeks, can anybody name the team that lost their #1 point scorer as a UFA and won a Cup after? Has that ever happened? Is that common? I think we just witnessed what happens when you try to win a Cup with a team like Carolina because that’s what happens when you try to replace a star (Rantanen) with spare parts and go up against Florida.

I’m not choosing to get rid of Marner, I’m of the opinion that he has no interest in returning and I’m further of the opinion that the Leafs have little interest in him taking up nearly 15% of the cap. The problem isn’t solely Marner, it’s general construction when you have too many guys providing too few 50/50 wins – Marner, Matthews, Nylander, Domi, Tavares, Rielly, Robertson, Holmberg – and the guys they were paying specifically to win those types of battles in Kampf and Jarnkrok – all lost way more than they won.

You continue to be of the opinion that an NMC isn’t an obstacle but it can be. That list of assumptions is based on logical expectation – Rielly, Nylander and Matthews all have NMCs. Would it be preferable to trade Nylander and keep Marner? Maybe – but it would be difficult, probably not return a fair return, and continue to keep too much high end imbalance against the cap. At some point it’s not about 1 player. It’s about reconstructing the team to win more of those battles. So if you need top-end talent to go and you need to throw out some of the low-end guys who also aren’t cutting it and you end up losing Marner, Tavares, Robertson, Holmberg, Jarnkrok and Kampf and bring in guys who win pucks – like Marchand, Smith, Bennett, Tanev and Suter – you’re better off for it. If Tavares is affordable, he presents decent offense – especially if he has someone on his line who can provide physicality and win pucks – so I don’t discount him returning, because he has value.

If #2 happens, the Leafs are extra fucked. Tavares is not worth a dime more than 2 million. Why? Because he’s so useless defensively, you’d need to spend another 5+ million to put him with players that compensate for his defensive ineptitude.

This is where a Sam Bennett comes in. Yeah, Tavares does suck defensively – but most of it comes from having him not play centre. Put him on the wing where he can perform a decent role and give him someone who will win pucks and be physical and both he and Nylander would benefit. It’s like having Pacioretty on steroids.

Does he want to come here? Word is that Bennett has only two destinations in mind – Florida and Toronto. So yeah, there’s a chance. Similarly with Marchand – he wants an east coast contender, so he can play at a high level and be near family. Toronto, Florida and Tampa would all fit that bill nicely for him.

#3 is an overpayment. Leafs can’t afford to give him that much, that soon. Give me a 3 year bridge deal. If he proves he’s worth big money, give him Domi’s cap hit when his contract expires.

#4 is also an overpayment. The home town kids have to stay at league minimum. Lorentz was offensively useless in the playoffs. Leafs need to keep these 4th liners under 1 million.

Knies is coming in over $7m and has earned it. $7.5m is the new $6.4m and a 22 year old who just put him 29 goals and 58 points fits into that range. Keller signed for $7.2m coming in with worse numbers – and that equates to $8.4m in a $95.5m cap world.

Lorentz played for $775k last year but he did leave money on the table and while I suspect he’d do so again, he’s a very effective bottom-6 player who can PK very well – among leaf penalty killing forwards, he led the team in both GA/60 and xGA/60. He deserves a raise and he’s a player the team would do well to keep.

#5 absolutely.

#6 hopefully. Perfect example why you can’t give Lorentz 1+ million.

Not really since Kampf played 1 atrocious game, and Lorentz played all 13, and was still the top guy in xGA/60 on the PK. You need role players and you need guys who win battles – Lorentz is both.

Again, I’m sorry, but this is a sad sack of shit of a team with most of the same guys who were big contributors to the reasons this team did not succeed.

McMann had 0 playoff goals. Domi had some great moments in the playoffs but absolutely sucks defensively. He can’t play center. Much less, a shutdown center on the 3rd line.

The 4th line is more of the same garbage. I’ll give Lorentz and Laughton another chance (gave up a 1st rounder and a top prospect for him so we’re stuck with him), but Jarnkrok has done nothing but proven he is completely useless in the playoffs. Another guy with 0 goals, no size, not enough hitting, not good enough when the games matter. Absolute zero interest in bringing him back at 2+ AAV to play as a 4th liner. Send him to Columbus or some place where they’ll be happy just to make the playoffs.

At the end of the day, my post was basically about what you have. If I was remaking the lines, and going with a combination of what I’d like to do combined with the challenges I think they face (like losing Marner), I’d probably think this way:

Knies – Matthews – Domi
Tavares – Bennett – Nylander
Marchand – Faksa/Suter – McMann
Lorentz – Laughton – Tanev

Your top-3 lines all have size, board battle, shooting, net presence and passing. The 4th line is an energy puck hound line. As I said, I want more compete and I want a metric fuckton more 50/50 wins.

[monkeypunk]

The suit looks good, but the hat and shades are cringey cheese

~PDO Speedwagon

Is everyone blind? He looks like Duckie from 16 Candles.

[monkeypunk]

I agree he is dramatic at times, but I have no doubt the leafs were gauging interest in MArner and I have no doubt our core 3 arent as driven as other stars around the league.

~Fakepartofme

I think we know what we see with our eyes and how we feel about it. Here’s the thing I’d have to question – Berube is a take-no-shit coach. He will call out a floater, especially if he needs those buttons pushed. Why didn’t he? He actually doubled down on how much he thought they cared and tried.

I think it’s less about their drive and desire and more about needing an instructor to show them the way. Think about who led these guys? Marleau and Thornton were the shepherds to success. Two guys who won absolutely nothing in the NHL; they did win gold medals in the World Championships or the Olympics, but were largely contributors, not leaders (Thornton did lead Canada to the World Championship gold in the lockout year and led Davos to the Spengler cup in the same year) – and when playing against real NHL peers in the toughest of competition, neither were truly prominent.

Even Tavares, on the Island, had a couple of years of broken down Doug Weight as his mentor, but Weight was largely injured and they didn’t make the playoffs in those years either.

You need someone to show you how and lead the way. Have they really had that? Because if we shouldn’t question their desire and effort, then that has to be it, doesn’t it?

[monkeypunk]

So many unknowns, but let’s take certain assumptions as reality:

1. Marner is gone.
2. They resign Tavares for about $5.5m
3. They resign Knies for about $7.5m
4. They resign Lorentz for about $1.35m
5. I think they will trade Robertson
6. Getting into only 1 game in the playoffs, they are going to trade Kampf
7. Reaves remains in the minors and they can resign Holmberg for anything under $1.1m and he becomes a no risk asset. Same with Pacioretty, but I think he could be done.

That puts $16.25m on the table and leaves 9 forwards signed (@ 47.95m), that looks something like this:

Knies – Matthews – 1RW
Tavares – 2C – Nylander
McMann – Domi – 3RW
Lorentz – Laughton – Jarnkrok

And the standard 6 D (24.827m):

McCabe – Tanev
Rielly – Carlo
OEL – Benoit

With Stolarz and Woll (6.167m) and another $300k in dead cap from burying Benning and Reaves.

Is Easton Cowan ready ($905k)? Steeves (Group 6, so they could resign him for probably $875k)? Do they go after Bennett as a 2C? Ehlers to compliment Matthews and Knies? Do they promote Domi and bump up Laughton to go for an affordable 4C? What is the 3rd line’s identity? Guys like Marchand, Tanev or Rielly Smith bring levels of compete we haven’t seen consistently.

Personally I’d probably still aim for Bennett as the 2C ($7.5m), Tanev ($2m) and Smith ($2.5m). I’m also a really big fan of Pius Suter, who is what we really wanted David Kampf to be.

You’re gonna miss Marner, but instead of leaning into trying to rebuild a Marner in the aggregate (to use my fancy Moneyball words), you change the dynamic to make the bottom 6 even tougher and better. Round it out and toughen it up.

[monkeypunk]

Apparently Shanahan nixed the below deal of dubas’.

To Toronto:
Brandon Hagel
Marc-André Fleury (extended)

To Chicago:
Matthew Knies (rights)
Petr Mrázek
2022 Toronto 1st (top 10 protected) (Rinzel)
2023 Toronto 1st (top 10 protected) (Cowan. Nadeau?
~Fakepartofme

This was reported but it was debunked by Friedman. Apparently Chicago pitched that and Dubas, as was his job, took the offer to Shanahan but he told him he was rejecting it – which Shanahan agreed with. The idea that Dubas was accepting it I think was pushed by the media that either wanted to hate him or that wanted to make the Leafs look better for firing him.

It’s not like, in Toronto where the media outlets also own the major sports teams, the press can’t be controlled to make the owners look better.

[monkeypunk]

The last several Cup winners were heavy teams or teams that played a heavy game. Lost in all the talk of Ducherov and elite skill, the Lightning had Maroon, Goodrow, and Schenn to talk trash and start lawnmowers. They also had several guys like Palat and Gourde who were not “tough guys”, but possessed a good mix of skill and grit.

Look at every recent Cup winner and you’ll find a similar mixture of skill and sandpaper.

The Leafs have some big bodies, but many of them are shrinking violets. Somebody like Gourde has more piss in his pinky finger than Marner, Matthews, and Nylander have in their entire bodies.

Using the Lightning again as an example : Stamkos had elite skill but would also punch you in the face. Ducherov is dirty as fuck. Even the Lightning’s Lady Byng candidate (Point) started a lawnmower this year.

I can guarantee if Bennett had concussed Vasilevskiy, there would have been a line brawl and Bennett would have been targeted for the rest of the series.

I’m not saying toughness is the primary reason for the Leafs’ lack of playoff success, but it’s certainly a factor.
~PDO Speedwagon

Ottawa plays a relatively heavy game, but they aren’t on you all the time like Florida is. Florida does a great job of taking away time and space and the results do speak for themselves:

Senators (Toronto outscored Ottawa 12-8 at 5v5; 6-3 on the PP, allowed 2 SHG, and the leafs had 1 ENG to Ottawa’s 2).

In the series, Toronto had a 35.3% PP and an 80% PK

Knies-Matthews-Marner in 73 minutes of 5v5 were 4-1 with an xG of 2.9 – 2.1
Jarnkrok-Laughton-Lorentz in 54 minutes of 5v5 were 1 – 1 with an xG of 1.3 – 1.2
Nylander-Tavares-Holmberg in 39 minutes of 5v5 were 2 – 0 with an xG of 1 – 0.9
Pacioretty-Tavares-Nylander in 11 minutes of 5v5 were 1-0 with an xG of 0.5 – 0.5
Pacioretty-Domi-McMann in 21 minutes of 5v5 were 0 – 2 with an xG of 0.4 – 1.7
Robertson-Domi-McMann in 11 minutes of 5v5 were 1 – 1 with an xG of 0.2 – 0.2

Panthers (Florida outscored Toronto 20-15 at 5v5; 4-2 on the PP, and had 2 EN goals)

In the series, Toronto had a 10% PP and an 82.6% PK

Knies-Matthews-Marner in 72 minutes of 5v5 were 6 – 5 with an xG of 2.5 – 2.1
Jarnkrok-Laughton-Lorentz in 45 minutes of 5v5 were 0 – 2 with an xG of 1.2 – 1.9
Pacioretty-Tavares-Nylander in 42 minutes of 5v5 were 5 – 2 with an xG of 1.5 – 2
Nylander-Tavares-Holmberg in 26 minutes of 5v5 were 0 – 3 with an xG of 1.3 – 1.6
McMann-Domi-Holmberg in 20 minutes of 5v5 were 0-1 with an xG of 0.4 – 0.5

Florida’s pressure limited Toronto’s power play, which is all too often methodical with the puck rather than urgent. They don’t give you time to setup and find your lane. You have to make it and you have to plan it and you have to know in advance what you’re doing – or make it happen by just jamming the net and getting off shots from the point. The adjustments against Florida – having Marner at the top of the umbrella against them probably wasn’t to their advantage because he’s not quick with the puck and Florida’s pressure isn’t something he reacts well to. Also he doesn’t have a big shot. You want a shot you can get through to the net and maybe have traffic screen, deflect, tip or rebound it’s way in. Their PK is designed to stop cross-crease passes and block shots – but you can’t block them all.

It’s not just the toughness, it’s the pace. The toughness adds to it – I think the reason Holmberg was so bloody awful in the series was the physicality laid against him. He didn’t withstand that pressure and no matter where he was, he was a weak link. I also didn’t think Jarnkrok or Laughton handled the pace and pressure very well. Laughton is fine with physicality, but he’s not the quickest with the puck.

Ultimately, replacing Marner with a Bennett doesn’t really solve for that – it probably makes you even slower with the puck, but more physical. They need to upgrade the bottom-6 and find a way to improve their puck speed in the top-6.

• This reply was modified 4 months, 2 weeks ago by monkeypunk.

[monkeypunk]

I think Gourde resigns in Tampa. The local Tampa media seems convinced of it.

I don’t think Bennett goes to Toronto. And, honestly, the guy is a POS. I’m not sure I’d want him.

Marchand is too old and is a cheapshot-artist coward. I wouldn’t want him at league minimum.

I’d try putting Domi back with Matthews.

Keep Patches if he doesn’t retire.

Rielly isn’t going anywhere, but Marner is.

I bet Tavares stays, but wouldn’t be totally shocked if he tested free agency first.

That’s all I got for now.

PS – has anyone checked the annual Leafs prediction thread back on HB for accuracy? I feel like we need to move that tradition over here.
~PDO Speedwagon

Don’t take anything I was saying or anything I’m about to say here as advocation – more as suggestions on players.

I think if Bennett is available, the Leafs would be interested and I have no idea about how he’d feel about playing near home.

Gourde – I’d imagine if they want him to stay, he stays. I was more commenting on how he was often heard in rumours with the Leafs and where’s there’s smoke, there’s fire . .

With regards to Marchand – look, Corey Perry is an asset and Marchand is far better and younger. I’d take him in a heartbeat whether he’s a total douchebag on the ice or not. Marchand did grow up a Leaf fan, but I suspect that ship has long since sailed, so I doubt there’s any nostalgic reason for him to want to play here, but the Leafs are still a top-tier team in the league.

I don’t know. I loved the timeliness of Patches’ goals, but I’m not sure if it was mostly luck or not.

[monkeypunk]

IF you had a choice between either Marner or Nylander with no salary or contract info on the table and were just picking the player you thought was the ‘best’ player I can understand the thought process behind Marner over Nylander for sure – nobody sane can deny Marner is a better overall contributor to a team since he plays so well defensively. It’s about what your team has already and what your team needs I guess but I do see your point and could agree with it if the ‘other factors’ aren’t considered like salary expectations, contract, mental toughness, ability to deliver in high pressure situations etc.

It’s all but written in the stars, Marner will leave and much like Kadri win a cup somewhere else and good for him but you can’t equate that to ‘if the Leafs kept him it would mean he could have done it here’ IMO.

Same as Kadri was not the player here he has been since leaving, nor Hyman etc. Some players need to go to a new team to grow and thrive, especially those who play for their ‘hometown team’ from the minute they get into the league until they leave or sometimes just where they are drafted to and start to learn how to be a pro vs a new team (i.e. Sam Bennett who never got more than 18 goals in Calgary & was a minus player every year and is now a guaranteed 20 or 25 goal scorer and a + player year over year in Florida). Coaches, systems, pressure from location, age, maturity etc. all play such big factors into a players performance.

If (when) Marner goes I want to see Willy at least start on L1 with Matthews, IMO he deserves it and if he’s better suited to line 2 because they can find an equal or better RW for L1 then that’s fine.

Agreed 2LW has been a revolving door of failure for the most part, they need to solidify that spot once and for all and if you don’t get a hard nosed L2 Centre it needs to be a 2LW with bite, snarl or whatever you want to call it who can score and grind. A tough thing to find for sure – essentially you want another Knies.

Reilly I agree with you fully on. I’d love to move on from him but I think the Leafs are stuck with him but I’m also not sure they can change him into what we all want him to be sadly.
~Cush29

Willy deserves it, certainly – but it does beg the question – were Matthews healthy, would having a 50 goal scorer on line 1 and a 40 goal scorer on line 2 not be a pretty sweet problem to have?

I think it comes down to who they get and who does what. I don’t think this happens by any stretch (because (1) I think those players could be resigned yet, and (2) I think their combined salary would exceed the $14m we can’t spend already) but if you had a Bennett and an Ehlers, you would benefit by having Knies-Matthews-Ehlers and Tavares-Bennett-Nylander from line chemistry in that you’re getting physicality, speed, distribution and shooting spread out. If you swapped out Ehlers for Boeser in that make believe equation, you’d probably swap Nylander and Boeser because Nylander is still a better distributor and Boeser is more of a strict shooter.

Now realistically none of that happens and you’re really looking at guys in the range of Marchand, Gourde, Smith, Mantha or Tanev to try and round out the bottom-6 with a resigned Lorentz and Laughton and bumping Domi up into a top-6 role. If you could mash that in with a Bennett signing, you might not miss Marner _that_ much. Easton Cowan could be ready to move up, but I think he probably should get a spin in the AHL first; he has the feel of a guy who needs to be top-9 to be successful. I guess it would depend on who we have and where as to what opportunities present themselves.

I do expect the Leafs to land Brandon Tanev and they have often been discussed with Gourde, so we’ll see what happens!

[monkeypunk]

I never mentioned Marner specifically, I don’t want to upset any specific poster here……. ????

That being said I agree with you in his own mind he’s already at the club, grinding on a new team and his Leaf wedding ring is sitting at home on the dresser.
~Cush29

As much as I struggle with it on either end of the logical scale in that, largely for their versatility, I would rather have Marner than Nylander – and they are compared here because of the salary issues – but the fact is that Marner checked out before that series was over and game 7’s response from the hometown put a lid on it. Adjustments are so hard to make mid-series with players, but you can’t help but wonder if Domi swapping with Marner would’ve helped in any capacity. I think no matter who was up there Matthews not finishing on his chances severely limited the top line.

Let’s face it the 2LW was an achillies heel for this team. Holmberg was -6 at 5v5 in that series. That’s double the next closest (Tavares, Laughton, Lorentz and Carlo were all -3) and it’s been one because they don’t have the money to put it there. They need a 2C and then to move JT to the wing. They also will need a top-6 RW; I do think that because he’s a shooter, they could keep Nylander and Matthews apart and find a different RW.

Rielly may suck defensively, but he was only -1 and was on for more goals for than any other player on the team. I want him gone more than I want to keep him, but he’s not absent when the playoffs arrive. He’s just not physical. He’s never changing, but god I wish he could just put his body in front of the other team’s players rather than only his stick.

• This reply was modified 4 months, 2 weeks ago by monkeypunk.

[Author]

Posts