[News] Feaster and Weisbrod relieved of duties. Burke will hire a new GM

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

There's a pervasive meme around here that the Flames prioritized "Doing Iginla Right" rather than maximizing his value to explain why the Pittsburg trade debacle happened.

Could it be that maybe we were just being fanciful and revisionist to try to justify Feaster's bad handling of that situation?

Iginla had a full NTC, he controlled his destiny. Yes he gave the Flames a list of teams that he was willing to go to, but he didn't give up his NTC to any team on the list. He had final say on which team he would go to.

You can argue that the Flames could have gotten more from Pittsburgh, but at the end of the day Iginla forced them to trade him only to Pittsburgh.

[Tinordi]

Cammalleri for Bourque was not a good trade. Or more specifically, a 2nd for Ramo was a bad trade.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

The most interesting comment Burke made was about not getting full value in trades. Very revealing.

Not sure what it reveals. That was common knowledge

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by timbit

Because they are...compared to most contending teams and also a lot of the bottom feeders.

The problem is that a lot of people are comparing the cupboard to previous iterations of the Flames, which was the worst in the NHL.

fair enough. I'd think being middle of the pack (i think flames should be in the top10 prospect pool talk) after only 1 rebuild draft/year is just fine. You have to think after this deadline and upcoming draft there is an inevitable opportunity to inject even more valued youth, further cementing the flames as a very strong cupboard/prospect-pool.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

There's a pervasive meme around here that the Flames prioritized "Doing Iginla Right" rather than maximizing his value to explain why the Pittsburg trade debacle happened.

Could it be that maybe we were just being fanciful and revisionist to try to justify Feaster's bad handling of that situation?

Because Burke said in his recommendation to management that trade values were a problem and was a reason to let Feaster go. It would be fairly two-faced to fire Feaster for not getting full value for Iginla if the organization wanted to "Do Him Right."

There should have never been a situation where Boston told the players they had been traded for Iginla. If Iginla was not going to accept a trade to Boston then Feaster should have known that before he made the trade.

[-TC-]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

why did dregger just say our cupboards are still thin/bare??

because he has no clue about what's happening in Calgary

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Iginla had a full NTC, he controlled his destiny. Yes he gave the Flames a list of teams that he was willing to go to, but he didn't give up his NTC to any team on the list. He had final say on which team he would go to.

You can argue that the Flames could have gotten more from Pittsburgh, but at the end of the day Iginla forced them to trade him only to Pittsburgh.

Not wanting to flog a dead horse and a well worn argument but just to counter this argument, many posters and pundits have repeatedly said that the process is to get a player to submit a list of teams they will waive their NTC for in writing and to sign off on it thus giving the GM flexibility to get the best deal. That we didn't do this maybe was a mistake by the GM and not the organization prioritizing doing Iginla right.

[troutman]

This franchise can't be competitive for 2-3 years. If this move is about trying to win games now, I am perplexed.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

It sounds like Burke might be using ricardodw as his CP posting name.

There was very little chance of Gaudreau reaching his potential on this small soft team. Likely Feaster was saying he would like to hang on to Stempniak and Stajan and re-sign Cammalleri as a UFA.

There is room for 3 small players on this team Brodie, Hudler and Gaudreau or Baertschi or Backlund.

Between the lines he has already told Baertschi and Backlund that if they want to be Flames they have to play bigger.

Please tell me you did not ise yourself in the third person.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

To me, this stinks of status quo "make the playoffs and who knows what happens" mediocrity. This move is way more about the direction of the team than it is about whether or not Jay should be fired.

How exactly does this move stink of any of this? Did you even watch the press conference?

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by Husky

My guess is Burke is okay with Gadreau but not okay with Backlund, Baertschi. I am guessing they are moved out and so is a guy like Kris Russel. And he wasn't a fan of getting guys like Cundari either.

Interesting to hear him only mention Monahan as the only future player.

Backlund finishes his checks - but Big Joe is the same kind of player - younger bigger cheaper. Might not need both.

Sven is terrible w/o the puck. I'll watch him tonight to see if the message sunk in today. He never finishes checks.

Russell is one of our highest rated d-man statistically, and could catch a good return imo - way better than a 4th.

Before Boston's comeback, there was a 44/55 shift where they started with control and no pressure from the Bruins and ended it under siege. IMO that's when the comeback started.

Butler is easily over come and SoB is not smart. Each of them is 50% of a good d-man.

My hope is that Burke is looking to fix that and get guys you can trust with the lead. Maybe he can quick fix before he hires his guy.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Icon

Possible Theory:
- Burke wanted to get a trade done for the rumored-to-be-available E. Kane
- Burke proposes to put Baertschi in the deal - one of Feaster's picks, Feaster doesn't want to give up on him, Feaster's fired.
- Burke proposes to put Gaudreau (or hopefully a lower potential US college kid, but Burke's talk about getting bigger makes me think he might not fit in Burke's Flames) in the deal - one of the kids Weisbrod pushed for to draft, Weisbrod doesn't agree with Burke, Weisbrod's fired.
- sometime in the next 48hrs, trade?

... all speculation of course... I'd just like to see some roster moves continue to keep moving the RB forward.

You don't need any sort of theory. Under Feaster some questionable picks were made during a time when a rebuild should have been happening, and he made bad trades and a couple of near disastrous decisions that he was lucky didn't cost him (Richards signed elsewhere and the Avs matched). There is more than enough known facts to explain the move without having to invent a theory.

[BurningSteel]

What I really care about is what happens to Connie??

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Cammalleri for Bourque was not a good trade. Or more specifically, a 2nd for Ramo was a bad trade.

That … wasn't the trade.

You think the Habs are happy about a few more years of Bourque?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Iginla had a full NTC, he controlled his destiny. Yes he gave the Flames a list of teams that he was willing to go to, but he didn't give up his NTC to any team on the list. He had final say on which team he would go to.

You can argue that the Flames could have gotten more from Pittsburgh, but at the end of the day Iginla forced them to trade him only to Pittsburgh.

I don't think that is true at all. Iginla, presented with the choice, chose Pittsburgh. As I said the last time people were hating on Iginla, I firmly believe that if Feaster went to him and said "Boston was the only deal we found acceptable", Iginla would have been a Bruin last year. Both guys said they wanted a result that both sides were satisfied with. I think both guys are being honest there.

That other people are not satisfied with the deal is certainly an issue, and likely part of the reason why they put Burke in control of the strings.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by AltaGuy

The sacred cows in Edmonton are preventing them from turning good assets into an effective hockey team.

God bless those sacred cows.

[Ozy_Flame]

That Regehr trade was really bone-headed, that was by far his worst. Kotalik/cap issues be damned.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Iginla had a full NTC, he controlled his destiny. Yes he gave the Flames a list of teams that he was willing to go to, but he didn't give up his NTC to any team on the list. He had final say on which team he would go to.

You can argue that the Flames could have gotten more from Pittsburgh, but at the end of the day Iginla forced them to trade him only to Pittsburgh.

You can't even expect to get a good deal from Pittsburgh once they find out thats the only place Iginla will go. But the NMC is the key, as it essentially gives the Flames no leverage in the slightest. Even if they could work out a good trade, Iginla can just apply the NMC. Feaster didn't give Iginla the NMC, so I believe he gets a pass on that one. Getting value for guys with a NMC is next to impossible.

[Stay Golden]

All Burke had to do is say this is say is what you got for return for Regehr. This is what you got in return for Bouwmeester, and this is what you got in return for Iginla and the fact that Feaster wasn't thorough with Iginla's list not being documented properly and it gave that weasel Meehan the out he needed.
Bring up the O'Reilly near debacle and Feaster/Weisbrods fate was sealed.

[Icon]

Originally Posted by ernie

You don't need any sort of theory. Under Feaster some questionable picks were made during a time when a rebuild should have been happening, and he made bad trades and a couple of near disastrous decisions that he was lucky didn't cost him (Richards signed elsewhere and the Avs matched). There is more than enough known facts to explain the move without having to invent a theory.

which is why I included the last line of that post. It's just more fun to think there may be some moves coming soon to keep pushing the rebuild forward instead of plugging along with the same roster until the deadline.

Meh.