Bob Mckenzie: Flames could have had Nyquist and Tatar for Bouwmeester

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Holland was willing to give up Nyquist and wasn't willing to give up a 1st. Period

You can try to spin it all you want, but I am of the opinion that he would look a little further out than his ability to get Nyquist into the lineup at that point in time

I'm sure Holland would have done a deal of a 1st for Bouwmeester, but not a combination of top prospect + first rounder.

The problem is, in my opinion, the Flames tried to have their cake and eat it too. Wanted that 1st rounder, but also needed warm bodies, any bodies, for the system. Holland was willing to give to get, and I think if you look at that roster, you can see why. They are STILL lacking a top pairing defender, and it's a critical weakness for their roster.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Keeping in mind also, that he had already invested 4 years of development into Nyquist

Again, give to get. The hole in their lineup isn't up front, it's on the backend. If I know that, Ken Holland and Mike Babcock know it too. Nyquist and Tatar/Kindl/Andersson is better value than 1st plus Cundari and Berra, but it didn't tickle Calgary's fancy, who were looking for first rounders and college prospects.

At the time I was advocating getting nothing in return but picks or elite prospects. Getting a mix of late firsts and warm bodies is sort of the antithesis of both these strategies.

I like to think I would have done Bouwmeester for Nyquist and Tatar/Kindl/Andersson, but in a vacuum, I can't say for certain if I would have. Were the options between St. Louis and Detroit's offers, I'm pretty confident I would have went with Detroit's.

[Enoch Root]

There were reports that he actually stated that he wouldn't give up the 1st.

Nyquist was on the table, the 1st was not

[tvp2003]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Is Mackenzie saying Tatar/Nyquist for Bouwmeester AND another player?

or

Is MacKenzie saying Tatar/Nyquist for Bouwmeester OR another player?

I don't think anyone knows, which makes this whole discussion quite speculative IMO.

However, feel free to tar and feather based on whatever scenario you think supports your position

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There were reports that he actually stated that he wouldn't give up the 1st.

Nyquist was on the table, the 1st was not

Do you have a point or is this just tautological?

[1_Flames_Fan]

I have a hard time believing we could have had both guys for Bouwmeester but I guess it is possible. I know at the time the Flames had their hearts set on a first round pick, but even then Nyquist and Tatar were both pretty much blue chip prospects. I'll choose not to believe this until there is 100% confirmation from someone. Either way, its done now and I like how the team looks going forward but those 2 guys would have been awesome to have.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I'm sure Holland would have done a deal of a 1st for Bouwmeester, but not a combination of top prospect + first rounder.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There were reports that he actually stated that he wouldn't give up the 1st.

Nyquist was on the table, the 1st was not

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Do you have a point or is this just tautological?

Pretty straight-forward

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Pretty straight-forward

So your point is that Nyquist was in play and the 1st wasn't. Okay... /CaptainObvious

[getbak]

Has anyone actually listened to what was said?

Here's the entire segment from TSN Radio in Toronto yesterday: http://www2.tsn.ca/window/podcastcentre/#id=30764

Near the end of the segment (I can't get the player to fast-forward or jump to a time, so you have to listen to the whole thing), it's actually Dave Hodge who brings it up, and he says that he heard the Wings were offering Nyquist and Tatar for Iginla. Then, McKenzie says that he had heard that it was Bouwmeester, or possibly someone else that Detroit was after.


After listening to it, I'd say it doesn't sound like he's overly confident about what exactly the final offer from the Wings was, or who would have been going back the other way.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

If we held on to Jaybo and he still played well in Calgary to make Team Canada, we could've gotten a 1st, Rattie and + this year.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that this was even remotely possible.

The market at the deadline was depressed as all hell this year, the lack of cap space and the fact that he wouldn't have the extra year on his deal argues that we would probably be less likely to get this year what we did from the Blues last year.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The market at the deadline was depressed as all hell this year...

The one year Flames are selling. It's like the hockey gods are against us!

[868904]

Nyquist is the better asset than the 1st rounder.

He was NHL ready, and developed in arguably the best development system in the league. Prospects that you can get from the Red Wings have value added.

I love the Poirier pick, but Feaster messed up here.

Tatar easily has more value than Berra and Cundari.

Berra is associated with having the value of a 2nd rounder, but that is only because Burke was able to get that out of the Avs. Most people though we were only getting a 7th rounder!

Cundari will probably be in the KHL soon.

Glad Feaster is gone.

[gargamel]

While, with the benefit of hindsight, it sounds like the Detroit offer was better, you can't judge Feaster without knowing whether the reports were true that Detroit was insisting that we retain salary but the Flames weren't willing to.

Just because Burke says that the Flames' owners have authorized him to retain salary doesn't mean that they'd given Feaster that same green light. Maybe that was one of Burke's conditions for taking the job. Or maybe ownership feels differently now that our payroll is among the lowest in the league. Or maybe Feaster really did have that option available to him. None of us know which of those scenarios is true, so turning this into "evidence" that Feaster sucked is unfair. Though that's never stopped some of you before, so carry on I guess.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by gargamel

While, with the benefit of hindsight, it sounds like the Detroit offer was better, you can't judge Feaster without knowing whether the reports were true that Detroit was insisting that we retain salary but the Flames weren't willing to.

Just because Burke says that the Flames' owners have authorized him to retain salary doesn't mean that they'd given Feaster that same green light. Maybe that was one of Burke's conditions for taking the job. Or maybe ownership feels differently now that our payroll is among the lowest in the league. Or maybe Feaster really did have that option available to him. None of us know which of those scenarios is true, so turning this into "evidence" that Feaster sucked is unfair. Though that's never stopped some of you before, so carry on I guess.

Feaster and Burke have said in separate occasions that ownership is willing to spend money in any scenario if it makes the flames better. I highly doubt for one week they went back on their word. Feaster said he did not want to retain salary so he could use the cap space with buy outs and teams needing cap space during the summer. His theory failed.

Glad he is gone. I'm not even sure Feaster would have taken the 2nd for Berra.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Feaster and Burke have said in separate occasions that ownership is willing to spend money in any scenario if it makes the flames better. I highly doubt for one week they went back on their word. Feaster said he did not want to retain salary so he could use the cap space with buy outs and teams needing cap space during the summer. His theory failed.

Did Feaster really say that the owners were willing to retain salary in trades? I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I just don't remember it happening and it would have gone against a lot of rumors that were circulating during his tenure. I know he said the owners were willing to spend to bring in talent, but that's different than basically giving money to another owner. I always thought that his comments about using the cap space to take bad contracts in exchange for picks were just positive spin because it sounds better than "look at how much money I saved for my boss," but I really would be curious if you have any evidence that retaining salary was an option before we were a cap floor team.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by getbak

Has anyone actually listened to what was said?

Here's the entire segment from TSN Radio in Toronto yesterday: http://www2.tsn.ca/window/podcastcentre/#id=30764

Near the end of the segment (I can't get the player to fast-forward or jump to a time, so you have to listen to the whole thing), it's actually Dave Hodge who brings it up, and he says that he heard the Wings were offering Nyquist and Tatar for Iginla. Then, McKenzie says that he had heard that it was Bouwmeester, or possibly someone else that Detroit was after.


After listening to it, I'd say it doesn't sound like he's overly confident about what exactly the final offer from the Wings was, or who would have been going back the other way.

So what you are saying is that Feaster could have maybe got Bobby Ryan and a 1st for Bouw? The ridiculous overreaction on this board to two reporters randomly speculating on what they heard from someone who heard from someone about what the Flames could have got for Bouw is pretty funny.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that this was even remotely possible.

The market at the deadline was depressed as all hell this year, the lack of cap space and the fact that he wouldn't have the extra year on his deal argues that we would probably be less likely to get this year what we did from the Blues last year.

It was a bad market this year, for one dimensional goal scoring wingers no doubt. We don't know what the market was for a 20+ minute a night defenceman as none were traded. Infact wouldn't that suggest that that they would have been very valuable? We don't know. But the counter-factual to your argument is equally valid.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by 868904

Nyquist is the better asset than the 1st rounder.

He was NHL ready, and developed in arguably the best development system in the league. Prospects that you can get from the Red Wings have value added.

I love the Poirier pick, but Feaster messed up here.

Tatar easily has more value than Berra and Cundari.

Berra is associated with having the value of a 2nd rounder, but that is only because Burke was able to get that out of the Avs. Most people though we were only getting a 7th rounder!

Cundari will probably be in the KHL soon.

Glad Feaster is gone.

This sums up the whole scenario perfectly.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

It was a bad market this year, for one dimensional goal scoring wingers no doubt. We don't know what the market was for a 20+ minute a night defenceman as none were traded. Infact wouldn't that suggest that that they would have been very valuable? We don't know. But the counter-factual to your argument is equally valid.

You're kidding yourself if you think the Blues would have effectively given up twice this year what they did last for Bouwmeester. You can claim "equally valid" all you want, but the counter-factual is outright deluded.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by getbak

Has anyone actually listened to what was said?

Here's the entire segment from TSN Radio in Toronto yesterday: http://www2.tsn.ca/window/podcastcentre/#id=30764

Near the end of the segment (I can't get the player to fast-forward or jump to a time, so you have to listen to the whole thing), it's actually Dave Hodge who brings it up, and he says that he heard the Wings were offering Nyquist and Tatar for Iginla. Then, McKenzie says that he had heard that it was Bouwmeester, or possibly someone else that Detroit was after.


After listening to it, I'd say it doesn't sound like he's overly confident about what exactly the final offer from the Wings was, or who would have been going back the other way.

This exactly! this is all about unconfirmed rumours and hindsight. Maybe we should go back even further and talk about how someone heard that Giroux could have been had for Dion Phaneuf?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

You're kidding yourself if you think the Blues would have effectively given up twice this year what they did last for Bouwmeester. You can claim "equally valid" all you want, but the counter-factual is outright deluded.

I don't think you have any basis to make that claim. If a 24+ minute a night defenceman was offered up to the market this year there most likely could have been a number of teams interested and willing to pony up more than a 1st a bunch of junk. Pittsburg, Columbus, Toronto, Boston (who lost Seidenberg). Perfectly defensible to say that Bouwmeester would have returned as much or potentially more (what with a weaker draft class this year) than last year.

The laws of supply and demand seem to be lost on your argument. There were lots of scoring wingers and back up quality goalies floating around. There were zero top minute defencemen.