Kipper won't agree to be traded - Page 13 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

MrMastodonFarm · 03-26-2013, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

If the flames were vindictive, they could suspend him I guess.

What grounds would the Flames have to currently suspend him?

Saqe · 03-26-2013, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Oh wow, he can't use his millions to move them with him?

I´m guessing you don´t have wife and kids. Did you ever think that it´s not about the money and he just wants to retire?

Hockeyboy2 · 03-26-2013, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

What grounds would the Flames have to currently suspend him?

None.....yep my wife is a lawyer and she just agreed.

Diemenz · 03-26-2013, 07:19 PM

It funny because I bet a large majority of the people who understand are parents. The angry ones? I would bet the majority are not.

I think we should all remember this Rumor is coming from a guy whose only talent was hurting NHL players fists with his face.

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 03-26-2013, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saqe

I´m guessing you don´t have wife and kids. Did you ever think that it´s not about the money and he just wants to retire?

So retire then, I wouldn't have any issue with that. Also, Kipper currently spends about 1/2 his time on the road already, and has millions of dollars which I don't. Kipper has the resources to severly minimise the impacts of this on his family.

Henry Fool · 03-26-2013, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saqe

I´m guessing you don´t wife and kids. Did you ever think that it´s not about the money for him and he just wants to retire?

It's extremely selfish of him not to let the team maximise his value. #### his children, I want that draft pick! So, so selfish of him.

Hockeyboy2 · 03-26-2013, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diemenz

It funny because I bet a large majority of the people who understand are parents. The angry ones? I would bet the majority are not.

I think we should all remember this Rumor is coming from a guy whose only talent was hurting NHL players fists with his face.

Sometimes the guys in the background are the guys who know best.

Yes I do agree with your first statement, although I am not yet a parent.....on a complete sidenote, how do I change my name on here haha!!!! I got this membership in 2004 and I was 16.

BEANZ · 03-26-2013, 07:23 PM

#### I hate this thread!! The speculation and such was interesting to read but every single thing in this thread pisses me off.

The only positive is that this could force the Flames to issue some sort of release.

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 03-26-2013, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diemenz

It funny because I bet a large majority of the people who understand are parents. The angry ones? I would bet the majority are not.

I think we should all remember this Rumor is coming from a guy whose only talent was hurting NHL players fists with his face.

I believe Kipper was also parent when he signed his contract.

Enoch Root · 03-26-2013, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

So retire then, I wouldn't have any issue with that. Also, Kipper currently spends about 1/2 his time on the road already, and has millions of dollars which I don't. Kipper has the resources to severly minimise the impacts of this on his family.

So you have no problems with him retiring - how does that help the Flames? - but you have a problem with him wanting to play for the Flames.

Ok then

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 03-26-2013, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

It's extremely selfish of him not to let the team maximise his value. #### his children, I want that draft pick! So, so selfish of him.

He's currently away from his wife and kids in Chicago right now, and will spend a lot of time on the road for the rest of the year. This argument is such a Red Herring, but way to argue to lowest common denominator.

kyuss275 · 03-26-2013, 07:25 PM

If this is true , then Feaster needs to sit down with him and find out what kipper's plan is for next year. Considering that they are thinking about re-tooling and won't be able to get an asset for him, it could change what they do at the deadline. Not sure why you would re-tool without Kipper with nothing else in the pipeline for years to come?

Do the flames now have no other choice but to trade Iggy to LA for Bernier even if they have to add because of a re-tool and no Kipper?

puckluck2 · 03-26-2013, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

What do they care?

The worst anyone can do is not pay him, and that obviously doesn't matter to kipper.

If the flames were vindictive, they could suspend him I guess.

No they can't. They can either trade him or keep him. If he doesn't report to the other team that's not the Flame's problem.

They can't just suspend him for stating he wouldn't report to another team.

FlamesAddiction · 03-26-2013, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by you got PHANUEFED

so much for him headed to Chi for 1st and Saad.

Yeah, that was never happening.

I think we'd be lucky to get a mid second rounder based on his play and cap hit this season.

PantherExtreme · 03-26-2013, 07:27 PM

Couldnt they send him to abbotsford (or hope someone claims him) thereby forcing retirement?

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 03-26-2013, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So you have no problems with him retiring - how does that help the Flames? - but you have a problem with him wanting to play for the Flames.

Ok then

Because, he'd stop collecting a pay check from the Flames. A pay check that is given out for multiple reasons, one of which is that Kipper has trade value.

I'd still be dissapointed we couldn't get an asset for him, but I'd respect his decision. What I don't respect is him deciding he wants his cake and eat it to. He wants to play, and collect his full pay check, but he doesn't want to fully honor the contract he signed. Sorry, that's not right.

Flash Walken · 03-26-2013, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

What grounds would the Flames have to currently suspend him?

I'm assuming it violates the terms of his contract to refuse a trade without the necessary clause in his contract.

FlamesAddiction · 03-26-2013, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PantherExtreme

Couldnt they send him to abbotsford (or hope someone claims him) thereby forcing retirement?

Good god. The guy doesn't want to be traded. There is no reason to force him into retirement over it.

Diemenz · 03-26-2013, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PantherExtreme

Couldnt they send him to abbotsford (or hope someone claims him) thereby forcing retirement?

Why in the world would they do that?

Henry Fool · 03-26-2013, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

He's currently away from his wife and kids in Chicago right now, and will spend a lot of time on the road for the rest of the year. This argument is such a Red Herring, but way to argue to lowest common denominator.

It's not an argument, I'm just making fun of people like you.