If Gretzky started playing in todays NHL

Infinite Vision*

Guest
Ovechkin scored his most goals with a 69 pts Backstrom, and less goals with a 100pts Backstrom.

The fact is there can only be one player that drives offense, and that player can't really do much better. It is actually a rare situation where elite level players production is effected by other players

Glad you brought that up, Ovechkin had 42 goals and 49 assists in the first 51 games last year before the suspensions, olympics, etc. and hasn't been the same since.

So 91 pts in 51 games with Backstrom is very comparable to 76 points in 43 games with Jagr, especially when Jagr had 77 points in those same 43 games, and Backstrom wasn't remotely close to Ovechkin at that point.
 

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
Ovechkin scored his most goals with a 69 pts Backstrom, and less goals with a 100pts Backstrom.

The fact is there can only be one player that drives offense, and that player can't really do much better. It is actually a rare situation where elite level players production is effected by other players

This is correct.
 

Jedi Pengu*

Guest
It's past your bedtime. Semenov eh? If you are going to make an argument, at least get the name right. :laugh:

Semenko, sorry. I was in a rant. Past my bedtime?? Good one Carl. I'm really sick of hearing about Gretzky. Someone said he'd be like Henrik Sedin, EXACTLY!!
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
quibbles:

Mario's 1992/1993 is really comparable to anything Gretzky did. 160 points in 60 games is insane... if he played a full 84 games, I see no reason why he would not have smashed 215 out of the record books.

according to the math, mario was on pace for 213 points if he'd been playing the same 80 game season wayne did. 224 points over that year's freak 84 game schedule, so yeah he was on pace to break the record. but not exactly an even playing field, was it?

69 goals in 60 games... 91 assists... Gretzky won the Art Ross the next season with 38 goals, and 130 points in 81 games. Mario's monster seasons 87/88, 88/89, 92/93 95/96, all compare with Gretzky's best seasons. and only in 95/96 did he have a supporting line up, that can be compared to Wayne's Oilers.

not sure why gretzky's post-prime, post-suter hit art ross season is relevant here. i will say, though, that none of mario's penguins teams can be compared to gretzky's oilers. more on that below.

So basically, assuming that modern health tech, could have helped Lemieux play more than 1,200 had he been born 20 years later

i'm not a doctor, but i really don't know whether modern medicine could have done much about either mario's or wayne's back woes. you hear about things like microfacture surgery to fix blown knees, but how do you keep a guy with a degenerative back condition like mario healthy? or once wayne was hit, you can do things to help him rehab, but i don't see how he could ever get back to the same level.

When did Lemieux have a higher PPG than Gretzky? Gretzky had a higher PPG at every comparable stage of their respective careers, and he finished with a higher PPG.

technically, when mario retired, wayne had the higher PPG. when wayne retired, mario had the higher PPG. when mario retired for the second time, wayne was on top again.

Why only compare the teams in the 80s? Lemieux's Penguins were almost as stacked as the Oilers for a few seasons in the early 90s.

people say this a lot, but really think about those oilers teams for a second. they had messier, coffey, and kurri. the pens had an older and less productive coffey, who was only there for half of the franchise's three year peak, and no one else that is in the same stratosphere as messier or even kurri (accounting, obviously, for jagr's age during the stacked years). the pens were very good and very deep, but their high end after mario can't compare with gretzky's oilers.
 

Silver

Registered User
Mar 23, 2002
5,058
0
California
Visit site
If Gretzky broke into the league today, he'd be the same size as Crosby.

Laughable testing and "good eating"=plenty of size and strength. There would be no worries there.
 

finchster

Registered User
Jul 12, 2006
10,632
2,121
Antalya
All players production is affected by other players to some degree.
Cue the Rob Brown/Bob Errey argument that conveniently ignores Coffey.

The best players drive the offense, as the driver they are producing as many points as possible. Some players might get caught up in that elite player’s production, but the best players are playing at such a level it is hard to do any better with their talent level. I think there could be a minor deviation, but nothing major.

Good players are affected more so than elite players, but elite players like Crosby, Gretzky, Lemieux generally are producing as much as their talent allows.

Glad you brought that up, Ovechkin had 42 goals and 49 assists in the first 51 games last year before the suspensions, olympics, etc. and hasn't been the same since.

So 91 pts in 51 games with Backstrom is very comparable to 76 points in 43 games with Jagr, especially when Jagr had 77 points in those same 43 games, and Backstrom wasn't remotely close to Ovechkin at that point.

Not sure what your point is, but Backstrom kept scoring at the same levels he did before the Olympics. Backstrom scored 25 points in 20 games which is 102/103 points in a season, right around where he ended up. If line mates effected production with elite players, Backstrom should have slowed down, but Backstrom kept scoring at the same rate regardless of what Ovechkin was doing.

Again elite players will score around the same number of points regardless of who is on their line.
 

LeBlondeDemon10

Registered User
Jul 10, 2010
3,729
375
Canada
I don't know if this has been mentioned but one has to ask the question of whether the writer means the 5'11" 160 pound Gretzky or a Gretzky who had been trained in a more recent era.

IMO in this era, Gretzky would be more like 5'11" 185" with a muscular build and playing a more physical game. However, that would not detract from his god given gifts of seeing the ice, going to a place before the puck arrives and his beautiful passing skills. It is these skills that separated him from his peers in the era he played and would separate him from his peers in any era.

Another thing to consider is that if Gretzky played in today's era, he would have the advantage of the 2 line pass, which did not exist in his era. I can only imagine how he would use this to his advantage. In his era he was so open at times that it was astounding. And he wasn't a cherry picker. He just had such amazing anticipation. Enough to separate him from his peers every year by 80 or so points in his prime.

Imagine. I could only imagine and probably would not get it right. Gretzky's imagination separated him from every other player. What many do not realize is that Gretzky was a visionary. He saw and did things on the ice that nobody had done before. He would be like this in any era. Imagine if Thomas Edison had been born today. Or Leonardo Da Vinci. Or Einstein. Like Gretzky, they are all pioneers. So I would suggest to everyone that disses Gretzky that they drop their predictions because Gretzky and only Gretzky could have the imagination to carve up today's NHL like he did in his day.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,519
3,357
Good players are affected more so than elite players, but elite players like Crosby, Gretzky, Lemieux generally are producing as much as their talent allows.
.

I'll fight this crazy groupthink on the HOH board forever.

You can't convince me that Kevin Stevens isn't going to convert more plays by Lemieux into goals (resulting in assists for Lemieux) than Bill Berg.

Similarly, you can't convince me that having Paul Coffey head manning the puck out of the Penguins zone wouldn't result in more chances and goals by Lemieux and his linemates than Brad Marsh attempting the same.

If you think you have an example demonstrating otherwise I can guarantee you another factor (or factors) are making up for it.

Anyone who has played a competitive sport at any level knows you benefit from playing with better players.
 

Trottier

Very Random
Feb 27, 2002
29,232
14
San Diego
Visit site
What would his stats look like, what would his ending career stats look like?

Several Stanley Cups.

Just like before.

The stat (priority) that matters most to him, no doubt.

He was an impact player of epic porportion who LED Cup winners.

He'd be same circa 2011, unlike any other current player.

The game and civilization :laugh: has not evolved nearly as much as the "Born Yesterday" crew would love for us to believe. In fact, it's changed very little. (Sorry, Generation Nu NHL - your era is not that important, unique or superior than any other prior. Deal with it. :) )
 

finchster

Registered User
Jul 12, 2006
10,632
2,121
Antalya
I'll fight this crazy groupthink on the HOH board forever.

You can't convince me that Kevin Stevens isn't going to convert more plays by Lemieux into goals (resulting in assists for Lemieux) than Bill Berg.

Similarly, you can't convince me that having Paul Coffey head manning the puck out of the Penguins zone wouldn't result in more chances and goals by Lemieux and his linemates than Brad Marsh attempting the same.

If you think you have an example demonstrating otherwise I can guarantee you another factor (or factors) are making up for it.

Anyone who has played a competitive sport at any level knows you benefit from playing with better players.

You can’t score on every play, there is only so much offense that is possible to produce in any given game or season. There are only 60-65 minutes in a game and only so many plays in a player’s ice time that can be offensive plays or scoring chances. It isn’t endless the amount of offense you can create, there are limits for every line up and it revolves around your best player.

Elite players drive the offense and are involved in nearly every play while they are on the ice. Being this driving force and involved in the vast majority of offensive plays allows this elite player to score X number of points. This is what makes individual players elite, being the focal point of the team’s offense and scoring at high levels whist not hurting your team in the process. Individual offensive production isn’t multiplied by X number of good players, better players create a better team, but not necessarily better individual offensive totals.

Examples of players who had great chemistry and led to better point production do exist, but it is the minority not the majority. What is generally true is when you put two elite players together their individual production stays the same or suffers. Now player X is seeing less of the puck, not necessarily involved in every offensive play and isn’t asked to lead the team offensively as often as they did.

Take the Canada cup in 87 for example when Gretzky and Lemieux played together, did we see them destroy their NHL totals? They averaged similar point totals they scored in NHL at that time, only Gretzky’s goal total suffered and Lemieux’s assist total suffered. Lemieux and Gretzky preformed at such a high level in their prime, it is almost impossible to believe they could have produced more given the natural restraints of the game.

What about in basketball? If you put two 30ppg scorers together, do they continue to score 30ppg each or do they end up scoring around 25ppg each? Other team member’s offensive totals become lower because they aren’t getting the same opportunities and chances they once did because those chances are now occupied by someone else. Team scoring would go up, but individual totals would not. (I hope this is the only time I compare hockey to basketball :D )

Good players can see improvements in their individual point totals with line mates and good chemistry, but elite players, players whom the offense of a team is centered around will produce as much as his talent will let him.
 
Last edited:

shazariahl

Registered User
Apr 7, 2009
2,030
59
Gretzky would have trouble outscoring Crosby in this era for two reasons....

1) he's a pipsqueak. Yes, no clutching & grabbing now, but Gretzky was never a physical specimen either.
2) Also, he wouldn't have the 80s Oilers as a support cast due to the cap. Lemieux would destroy the rest of the league now. Hell, he was practically doing it when he came back after the first retirement & his prime was over. A Lemieux in his prime would just lay waste to everyone. And yes, his shootout percentage would be over 90%.....

1. Gretzky played against bigger and stronger players his whole life. When he was 6 he played in a league of 10-12 year olds. When he was 10, he played against 14-16 yr olds. When he was 14 he played against adults. When he was 17, he signed in the WHA playing professional hockey. He was always smaller than everyone else, but he was still better. His physical size didn't hurt him in an era of clutching and grabbing and hooking and holding, why would it hurt him now, when the rules are designed specifically for guys like him?

2. Even with that 80's cast, Gretzky was outscoring his teammates by a mile. His 92 goal, 212 point season Gretzky had over double anyone else on his team. Here were their scoring leader:
Gretzky 92 G, 120 A, 212 pts. +/- of +81
Anderson 38G, 67 A, 105 pts. +/- of + 46
Coffey 29 G, 60 A, 89 pts. +/- of +35
Messier 50 G, 38 A, 88 pts. +/- of +21
Kurri 32 G, 54 A, 86 pts. +/- of +38

Those were their top 5 scorers, in order. So only 1 of them even broke 100 points, the others didn't even break 90 points. Gretzky had 92 goals, and 120 assists. Each of those guys are in the HHoF, yet Gretzky scored more goals than any of them had points, except Anderson, and had more assists than Anderson had points even. The fact that his team was full of HoF players and he was outscoring even them by that much is even more impressive than what Lemieux did with a bunch of bums, IMO. Any great player on a team can make those around them better. I've never seen a player who outscored a team of HOF players by over double their production.

Still think Lemieux would be the better of the two, if they both joined the league as 18 year olds today.


Mario Lemieux would have scored 120 points this season as a rookie I bet. He joined the league when there were a lot A LOT of 100+ point scorers... how many are around today?

Gretzky would be a 170-180 pt guy on his best seasons, maybe crack 190.

But Lemieux would be the only one with the chance to crack 200 in the NHL right now. He's just built for the game much better (sans health problems) Gretzky would definitely have been motivated to put on some muscle. He's still taller than crosby, if even by a hair!

who knows, Maybe Wayne could still crack 200 today, but I think Lemieux would be better able to crack 200, and especially do it again. He's the only other guy to come close... and 199 is just insane.

I also don't think Wayne would have a sure shot at most goals in one season, Mario scored 85, Brett Hull scored 86... If Mario was able to do 85 today, Wayne doing 92, just flat out seems improbable, and way too fluky.

Lemieux didn't even score 120 points as a rookie back in the high-scoring 80's, he only had 107 points. He also didn't ever crack 200 in his entire career, so I don't see how he'd "be better able to crack 200, and especially do it again" when he never did it the first time, when scoring was much easier. I agree that Wayne wouldn't be a sure-shot for most goals in a season, but despite Lemieux's goal scoring expertise, he was behind Wayne in goals at every stage of their careers. Wayne reached 300 in less game, 400 in less games, 500, 600, and 700 all in less games. Lemieux did close the gap considerably as time went on, but that was mostly because Gretzky's goal scoring fell off with his back injury and arthritic shoulder.

I'm not saying Gretzky would for sure outscore Lemieux, but let's face it - he has the most with 92, and then the 2nd most with 87, in a season where he missed 6 games (he was on pace for 94). Lemieux isn't even 3rd- Brett Hull had 86, leaving Lemieux in 4th with 85.

And for the record, neither Lemieux of Gretzky would crack 200 in today's NHL. But I feel pretty confident that Gretzky would be the better and more durable player today, just like he was his entire career.

Wayne Gretzky was a great player that's for sure, buts his stats were completely over blown by playing in the Western Conference against teams that played little to no defense. Having a second line as good as the first in Edmonchuk prevented teams from keying on Gretz...The NHL as a whole was a very old league and with that comes old legs...In todays NHL 'tenders wear enough equipment to have covered two in the 1980's and early '90's... If Gretzky was a rookie in todays NHL he'd have 15 goals no more no less...His skills would transcend but by his third or fourth season he would have been concussed...because some steroid puke would have decked him...On the anniversary of his 50 B-day happy B-day Wayne, your were good but not the best...

This makes no sense. For one, its been proven on this board time and again that Gretzky's scoring levels were almost identical regardless of which conferance his opponants were in. Considering he has numerous records for Cup finals series (including most points in a cup finals and most assists in a cup finals) its not like other teams were able to stop him really, regardless of what conference they were from.

And did you even watch the Oilers? Teams keyed in on Gretzky constantly. No one sent their best checkers against Messier or Anderson, it was Gretzky's line everyone was always worried about. If anything, this helped Messier and Anderson get the production they did, because teams were too busy trying (and failing) to stop Gretzky from lighting them up for 200+ points a year. And 15 goals as a rookie, no more no less? How does the only player to ever score 90+ goals in a season suddenly start producing at a lower rate than guys like Taylor Hall or Eberle, both of whom will pass 15 goals this season.

How do you know how long he would go before being concussed? That's just a stupid statement. Gretzky was the best player at avoiding contact that I've ever seen in my life. He also avoided high-risk areas like the boards and corners for the most part. As I mentioned earlier, since he used to play against people litterally twice his size as a child and as a youth, I highly doubt players who have on average 20 lbs on him were going to be any more trouble today than they were then. Seriously, give your head a shake.

how does that even make sense? Lemieux had a higher PPG than Gretzky, and played through how many injuries? Plus he's 6'4 235, while Wayne is 6' and would have been lucky to bulk up to 200lbs. he might have had the better vision, but I think Mario would have dominated todays NHL no differently then when he started playing... Gretzky would have dominated in a different fashion than he did in the 80's.

Gretzky was on the stacked oilers and had multiple body guards. I'm not saying Gretzky wouldn't win multiple Art Rosses, but if him and Mario joined the league as 18 year olds at the same time, Mario would win more scoring titles... if they both had healthy careers, and both were both on comparable teams in terms of offence. If Mario had Jagr and Francis in the 1988 season... smashing 200 would have happened, and he might have beat 215.

Lemieux was definitely better than Gretzky when healthy. Gretzky had more assists, but I think he also had better teammates in the 80's than Mario did.

Mario's 1992/1993 is really comparable to anything Gretzky did. 160 points in 60 games is insane... if he played a full 84 games, I see no reason why he would not have smashed 215 out of the record books.

69 goals in 60 games... 91 assists... Gretzky won the Art Ross the next season with 38 goals, and 130 points in 81 games. Mario's monster seasons 87/88, 88/89, 92/93 95/96, all compare with Gretzky's best seasons. and only in 95/96 did he have a supporting line up, that can be compared to Wayne's Oilers.

So basically, assuming that modern health tech, could have helped Lemieux play more than 1,200 had he been born 20 years later... I think he would have dominated the league, and been a firm #1 player, with Gretzky at # 2.

bring Bobby Orr into the discussion, and who the **** knows :laugh:

Lemieux DID NOT have a higher PPG. He has 1.88 PPG, Gretzky has 1.92 despite playing over 500 more games. I agree that Lemieux had some seasons where he looked like he could threaten Gretzky's records, but really he never even came close. Even his 199 point season is 16 back of Gretzky's record, and Gretzky had 3 other seasons that beat Lemieux's best as well. When Gretzky is 1, 2, 3, and 4 in finishes, and then Lemieux is 5, then Gretzky 6th again, it should be obvious he dominated Lemieux in points finishes. Lemieux had a few seasons where he looked on pace to threaten, but he could never stay healthy enough to make a run at any thing.

You do have a good point about surrounding cast - Gretzky clearly had the advantage there. However, I already addressed that in part earlier in this post. And that being said, while Gretzky certainly had better teammates overall, he also never played with a 5 time Art trophy winner like Jagr either. I feel pretty confident in saying that Jagr was a more talented offensive player than anyone Gretzky ever played with on a regular line (mostly Kurri, Tikannen, Lumley, Semenko, etc. Gretzky had his share of superstars, but he also spent a lot of time with only 1 winger and some random idiot who may or may not have known how to skate).

Anyways, sorry for the length of this post, just thought I'd address some of the stuff I was seeing in this thread.
 

blogofmike

Registered User
Dec 16, 2010
2,178
926
If he started playing today, we'd all be lucky enough to witness something special.

Although if Paul Coffey came with him, this would be the last season before the NHL eliminated the two line pass.
 

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
30,844
13,628
Patrick Kane is about the same size of gretzky and plays the game about the closest way that Gretzky did in a ''style' sense.Gretzky would destroy the league as his hockey IQ was infinitely better than Kane , Lemieux would probably be the best player in today's league though.If you can't hook him , you can't stop him , he doesn't even need his hockey IQ that much but he still has it on top of everything else.Also a much better finisher than Gretzky and no goalie for any era can stop this guy.With Gretzky I'm not as sure but you can never know for sure , the holes are getting smaller , but we can't say Gretzky couldn't find a way to put it through it.He did what he had to do with the opening he saw , maybe he could find a new way to score.

People always trying to ''box'' players that thought outside the box.Doesn't work that way.It's impossible to know , and while fun to discuss , we don't know what he could acheive , but we can guess he would be more than any player playing today.The only thing for sure is he would be leading the league in scoring , that I think we can agree on.He was a better player than Crosby.

I think in a sense , Crosby , despite having accomplished so much and dominate the league , disapointed if we talk in a generationnal way.In his defense , he was starting to hit a good momentum , the kind of momentum we were used to see from the greatests like 99 and 66 , but he got hurt , and the league has to do somethign about this , commotions are getting really annoying because it hurt the player's numbers of game as well has his mental after that.All that to protect useless or ''good'' players.We need to protect history , not the salary of ordinary players.
 
Last edited:

nik jr

Registered User
Sep 25, 2005
10,798
7
Still think he could hit 200 points if he was in his prime. The way the rules have changed, the lack of clutch and grab, no red line, more PPs...yeah. Gretzky would have a field day.
imo, all of those are more than canceled out by the large improvements in team D, goaltending and bigger goaltending equipment.

I'll fight this crazy groupthink on the HOH board forever.

You can't convince me that Kevin Stevens isn't going to convert more plays by Lemieux into goals (resulting in assists for Lemieux) than Bill Berg.

Similarly, you can't convince me that having Paul Coffey head manning the puck out of the Penguins zone wouldn't result in more chances and goals by Lemieux and his linemates than Brad Marsh attempting the same.

If you think you have an example demonstrating otherwise I can guarantee you another factor (or factors) are making up for it.

Anyone who has played a competitive sport at any level knows you benefit from playing with better players.
agreed

playing with teammates who can get the puck out of the defensive zone quickly and keep it in the offensive zone is a huge advantage. similarly with players who can get the puck off the boards, or players who can finish or pass.
i don't think any F would not prefer cashman and middleton as linemates to ken daneyko and ed giacomin.

i also don't think GM's would pay millions to secondary stars to play with elite players if they make such little difference.


i think it is true, though, that there are diminishing returns in adding more skill on the ice. moving the puck out of the defensive zone and winning loose pucks are not usually considered mostly matters of skill, though.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,519
3,357
You can’t score on every play, there is only so much offense that is possible to produce in any given game or season. There are only 60-65 minutes in a game and only so many plays in a player’s ice time that can be offensive plays or scoring chances. It isn’t endless the amount of offense you can create, there are limits for every line up and it revolves around your best player.

Of course there are limits to the opportunities that are available and diminishing returns set it at some point. And that point might be sooner for an all time great like Lemieux or Gretzky than for an Yzerman or Crosby.

The point being, however, is that better players surrounding the elite player are going to convert more of those chances into results.

It is irrefutable.

I'll pose the same question to you that I always use to beat up on Dark Shadows who also espouses this nonsense theory:

Lemieux scored 199 points with the following primary teammates:

Errey - Lemieux - Brown

Coffey - Zalapski (?)


Are you really going to tell me that he would have produced the same playing primarily with:

Bill Berg - Lemieux - Mike Craig

Brad Marsh - Ken Daneyko


I mean I could see him putting up 150-160 with pylons on his wings but even if you agree with that you're basically admitting that his linemates helped him by around ~20% to get to 199.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,519
3,357
agreed

playing with teammates who can get the puck out of the defensive zone quickly and keep it in the offensive zone is a huge advantage. similarly with players who can get the puck off the boards, or players who can finish or pass.
i don't think any F would not prefer cashman and middleton as linemates to ken daneyko and ed giacomin.

i also don't think GM's would pay millions to secondary stars to play with elite players if they make such little difference.


i think it is true, though, that there are diminishing returns in adding more skill on the ice. moving the puck out of the defensive zone and winning loose pucks are not usually considered mostly matters of skill, though.

Yup, obviously I recognize there is only so much puck to go around but to say that the quality of the surrounding players doesn't matter is complete fantasy.
 

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
I think people are giving Gretzky too much credit. Defensive strategies were worse, the general level of play in the league was worse, and the goalies were worse. I doubt very much that Gretzky could put up more than 130 - 140 a season if that (that's just giving him respect for what he's done...I don't really think he would do any better than Crosby.) I think he would still be a top player with amazing vision...but his size would be a problem too. There are a lot of smart, fast, and big defencemen nowdays and better systems in place to stop scorers.

Mario Lemieux could probably do only slightly better...maybe 140 - 150 a season.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
technically, when mario retired, wayne had the higher PPG. when wayne retired, mario had the higher PPG. when mario retired for the second time, wayne was on top again.

Yes, but Mario was quite a bit younger. After each player's 1st year, 2nd year, 5th year, 10th year, any year, Gretzky was ahead in PPG if you compare them year by year. Even if you only count healthy years for Mario. Someone (I think hockey outsider) compared their careers year by year, and Gretzky was ahead after each one.

people say this a lot, but really think about those oilers teams for a second. they had messier, coffey, and kurri. the pens had an older and less productive coffey, who was only there for half of the franchise's three year peak, and no one else that is in the same stratosphere as messier or even kurri (accounting, obviously, for jagr's age during the stacked years). the pens were very good and very deep, but their high end after mario can't compare with gretzky's oilers.

Messier and Gretzky only played together on the PP, though. I don't think Messier's superiority over Francis as a 2nd line center really helped Gretzky's personal stats, especially since Gretzky was more of an even strength scorer than Lemieux.
 

Infinite Vision*

Guest
Linemates effect everyone's production. If not so many linemates wouldn't always be so high up together in the scoring race.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->