[Rumour] Iginla Trade Talk: Iginla scratched from CGY Vs. COL

[RedMileDJ]

At first I was OK with the idea of Iginla being traded. I mean, it could be good for both him and the Flames. I love the guy and want to see him win a cup, if that's his goal. As for the Flames, I would love for them to get some good picks and players from a trade.

But now I have a feeling that he won't be traded. He'll end up re-signing or end up walking at the end of the season.

...and I'm OK with this. I'm good with any of the outcomes. I'll support the Flames and Iginla no matter what happens.

Sure makes things entertaining.

[Max Cow Disease]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Honestly? I'm fine with that. Iginla means more to this team and to this city than practically any individual player to any team in the past two decades. If the Flames can't hit a home run by trading him, then I can't see how simply moving him for ANYTHING is justifiable given everything that he has meant for the Flames. The only reason the team is considering this is as a way to kick-start a rebuild, and if they can't get the pieces to do it, then what would be the point?

Yes, he may leave as a free agent, and that is unfortunate. Yes, the team is heading into uncharted lottery-pick territory, and could be terrible for a long time. If the return is indeed lower than what is being reported, then trading Iginla does not really make much difference one way or the other. But is all of this really worth the anger and consternation? Get a grip people. It's a game.

I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. Although I think that the guys on 960 are right to say that any return -should he be moved- will be viewed as underwhelming regardless, I've said before that moving Iggy out for some sad-sack, soggy batch of quail turd would go down in the annals of Flames history as one of the franchise's most mighty disasters.

That said, if they can't find a suitor, I sure hope he loves this place enough to re-sign.

[Regorium]

Can't believe so many people are incredibly emotional about Iginla and aren't logical/rational.

We needed to have traded him years ago. I'm glad that he managed to hold on to his value with solid play so that trading him this year will still get us something good, but it was such a risk.

Holding on to him, and having yet another 9th place finish and him leaving in free agency is probably the worst possible outcome.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Regorium

...Holding on to him, and having yet another 9th place finish and him leaving in free agency is probably the worst possible outcome.

Clearly it is. But again, if this happens it is not something that should lead to mass pandemonium.

[FlameZilla]

Duhatschek weighs in on Iggy-Gate, 2013 edition

https://twitter.com/eduhatschek/stat...85058994339840

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Clearly it is. But again, if this happens it is not something that should lead to mass pandemonium.

Completely disagree. Not receiving any assets for him would be a disaster. This is not hyperbole. It would be another sign of how poorly this team is run. Any asset is better than no asset, that is the foundation good teams are built on. Iginla simply has no more value to this team, aside from sentimental value, which in this case should mean nothing. With that in mind, it is absolutely imperative the team receive something, anything, in return.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Honestly? I'm fine with that. Iginla means more to this team and to this city than practically any individual player to any team in the past two decades. If the Flames can't hit a home run by trading him, then I can't see how simply moving him for ANYTHING is justifiable given everything that he has meant for the Flames. The only reason the team is considering this is as a way to kick-start a rebuild, and if they can't get the pieces to do it, then what would be the point?

Yes, he may leave as a free agent, and that is unfortunate. Yes, the team is heading into uncharted lottery-pick territory, and could be terrible for a long time. If the return is indeed lower than what is being reported, then trading Iginla does not really make much difference one way or the other. But is all of this really worth the anger and consternation? Get a grip people. It's a game.

If he had another year on his contract, I could buy what you are saying. A couple months of Iggy is worth about nothing to this team though. Even if it's a first round pick and nothing else, that trade needs to be made because it will make a difference. Keeping him because he might sign in the summer is irresponsible. Sign him now if that's what they want.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

Duhatschek weighs in on Iggy-Gate, 2013 edition

https://twitter.com/eduhatschek/stat...85058994339840

I don't think you can compare Iggy's situation to the Nieuwendyk trade. Nieuwendyk was 29 at the time, the Stars knew that Joe would be huge factor for the Stars for at least another 5 years. Iginla is 35, and although I'm sure he can still get you 25-30 goals and 60-65 points in the right environment, teams won't fork out for him what we got for Nieuwendyk back then IMO. We won't get an impact player like Iginla this time ... you have to settle for a bit less. A good prospect (who f.e. can play 2nd line in the future), a project and a late 1st would be fine for me. If the Bruins give up something like Spooner, Grzelcyk and their 1st, I'd be all over it.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

Completely disagree. Not receiving any assets for him would be a disaster. This is not hyperbole. It would be another sign of how poorly this team is run. Any asset is better than no asset, that is the foundation good teams are built on. Iginla simply has no more value to this team, aside from sentimental value, which in this case should mean nothing. With that in mind, it is absolutely imperative the team receive something, anything, in return.

You also have to look at a hypothetical trade from this perspective

We lose Iginla

We get a Prospect/pick package and 7 million dollars in cap space.

I know that it's an indirect asset, but an asset nonetheless. With that cap space you can go out and sign a guy like Filpulla or Bozak or Stalberg or any of the other 2nd line calibre players out there and have space left over. That enables you to get additional assets even though it's not directly related.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

Iginla simply has no more value to this team, aside from sentimental value, which in this case should mean nothing. With that in mind, it is absolutely imperative the team receive something, anything, in return.

This is sports. It is an entirely emotional enterprise. Sentimental value means a lot.

[Petert]

Go ahead and cheer for this fantastic "new-era".
Last time I remember having a "new-era", I was watching a first line of Nazarov-Shantz-V.Bure.

Please do, Feaster!
I beg you to trade away Kipper and Iggy!
Just so we can draft another Dingman with all these first round picks we are getting back!
Absolutely building up tons of reputations for this franchise with this whole disappearing act, what a clown that Darryl guy was!

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Cube Inmate

In 100 years, we're all dead. I hope to enjoy another Stanley cup before it's my time. Iginla's 30 goals and 70 points have zero value if they don't contribute to a cup, which they won't.

You've gotten no joy or entertainment out of watching this team for the past two decades? The Stanley Cup is the ultimate goal, but if you can't get something out of the wins and performances along the journey, then why bother watching?

I enjoy watching Iginla play for the Calgary Flames. If he's leaving as a free agent, then I understand that we need to see if we can get some quality assets back, but if we can't, I'd rather that we keep him for now. The opportunity to see Iginla wear the flaming C for another month is worth more to me than a few late round picks and junk prospects.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

You also have to look at a hypothetical trade from this perspective

We lose Iginla

We get a Prospect/pick package and 7 million dollars in cap space.

I know that it's an indirect asset, but an asset nonetheless. With that cap space you can go out and sign a guy like Filpulla or Bozak or Stalberg or any of the other 2nd line calibre players out there and have space left over. That enables you to get additional assets even though it's not directly related.

agreed. Though it remains to be seen how good the UFA class will really be ... I still hope they go after Filppula if he goes to UFA, but history indicates that most of the desirable upcoming UFAs will sign an extension before that.

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

You also have to look at a hypothetical trade from this perspective

We lose Iginla

We get a Prospect/pick package and 7 million dollars in cap space.

I know that it's an indirect asset, but an asset nonetheless. With that cap space you can go out and sign a guy like Filpulla or Bozak or Stalberg or any of the other 2nd line calibre players out there and have space left over. That enables you to get additional assets even though it's not directly related.

They'll get 7m in cap space this summer regardless

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by calgARI

They'll get 7m in cap space this summer regardless

Not if they re-sign him.

[nemanja2306]

Originally Posted by devo22

I don't think you can compare Iggy's situation to the Nieuwendyk trade. Nieuwendyk was 29 at the time, the Stars knew that Joe would be huge factor for the Stars for at least another 5 years. Iginla is 35, and although I'm sure he can still get you 25-30 goals and 60-65 points in the right environment, teams won't fork out for him what we got for Nieuwendyk back then IMO. We won't get an impact player like Iginla this time ... you have to settle for a bit less. A good prospect (who f.e. can play 2nd line in the future), a project and a late 1st would be fine for me. If the Bruins give up something like Spooner, Grzelcyk and their 1st, I'd be all over it.

I disagree. Iginla with Crosby/Malkin/Bergeron/Kopitar/Richards is a guaranteed 30 goals. Last year he had 32 and his best center was Olli Jokinen. I'm going to go further than that and say, in a full season Iginla, with one of the above, is fully capable of netting 35-40 goals and is good for at least 70 points.

On teams like LA, Boston, Pittsburgh he won't be THE go to guy, teams won't just focus on him like they do here. IMO, the reason why his production is declining here is because of age. He's not capable of playing the same style he played 5-10 years ago. He's clearly lost a step. But on those teams he won't need to play like that. He's still got his skills (shot power, accuracy, vision, smarts...) that got him 500 goals and 1000+ points. His problem here is that physically he's not the same player he once was and because of that he can't play like he used to. He can't carry the team on his back. On the Pens/Boston/LA....he won't need to. He's gonna have a lot more "easy" goals than in Calgary.

I don't know if I explained myself very well.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Honestly? I'm fine with that. Iginla means more to this team and to this city than practically any individual player to any team in the past two decades. If the Flames can't hit a home run by trading him, then I can't see how simply moving him for ANYTHING is justifiable given everything that he has meant for the Flames. The only reason the team is considering this is as a way to kick-start a rebuild, and if they can't get the pieces to do it, then what would be the point?

Yes, he may leave as a free agent, and that is unfortunate. Yes, the team is heading into uncharted lottery-pick territory, and could be terrible for a long time. If the return is indeed lower than what is being reported, then trading Iginla does not really make much difference one way or the other. But is all of this really worth the anger and consternation? Get a grip people. It's a game.

I understand this logic but I don't agree with it at all. If Iginla had told Feaster that he isn't going to re-sign with the Flames next season (unless the Flames miraculously makes a deep playoff run or wins the Cup or something) and the team has little chance of making the playoffs (the reason why an Iginla trade is discussed in the first place), then YOU GET WHAT YOU CAN FOR IGINLA! It's like an owner refusing to sell a piece in the last day of a going out of business sale even though the price offered is better than what he can get from a liquidator or on ebay because the piece has symbolic value. NO! You get what you can. Every little bit helps.

Do you really think that losing Iginla for "less than a home-run" is more "justifiable" than losing Iginla for nothing? There's going to be anger and consternation if Iginla is traded for "less than a home-run" and there's going to be anger and consternation if Iginla leaves and the Flames get nothing in return. But the anger will be directed at Flames management and ownership not because they failed to "trade Iginla for a home-run" but for not having traded Iginla sooner and or putting the team in this position in the first place. I think most of us have long realized that Iginla's value might not be as great as most of us want it to be.

Take the Kovalchuk trade. It was a poor deal for the Thrashers from the start and its only justification was that Kovalchuk wasn't going to re-sign. But anger wasn't directed at the deal itself, but at management for putting together crappy Thrasher teams in the first place. Today the Jets have Byfuglien (Chicago's 1st round pick), Cormier, and Chicago's 2nd and 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft to show for the trade. Ya maybe the Flames won't get anything back that will by itself "kick-start a rebuild", but certainly pieces of value can be gained if Iginla is to be traded by the deadline.

[nemanja2306]

Originally Posted by FAN

I understand this logic but I don't agree with it at all. If Iginla had told Feaster that he isn't going to re-sign with the Flames next season (unless the Flames miraculously makes a deep playoff run or wins the Cup or something) and the team has little chance of making the playoffs (the reason why an Iginla trade is discussed in the first place), then YOU GET WHAT YOU CAN FOR IGINLA! It's like an owner refusing to sell a piece in the last day of a going out of business sale even though the price offered is better than what he can get from a liquidator or on ebay because the piece has symbolic value. NO! You get what you can. Every little bit helps.

Do you really think that losing Iginla for "less than a home-run" is more "justifiable" than losing Iginla for nothing? There's going to be anger and consternation if Iginla is traded for "less than a home-run" and there's going to be anger and consternation if Iginla leaves and the Flames get nothing in return. But the anger will be directed at Flames management and ownership not because they failed to "trade Iginla for a home-run" but for not having traded Iginla sooner and or putting the team in this position in the first place. I think most of us have long realized that Iginla's value might not be as great as most of us want it to be.

Take the Kovalchuk trade. It was a poor deal for the Thrashers from the start and its only justification was that Kovalchuk wasn't going to re-sign. But anger wasn't directed at the deal itself, but at management for putting together crappy Thrasher teams in the first place. Today the Jets have Byfuglien (Chicago's 1st round pick), Cormier, and Chicago's 2nd and 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft to show for the trade. Ya maybe the Flames won't get anything back that will by itself "kick-start a rebuild", but certainly pieces of value can be gained if Iginla is to be traded by the deadline.

It all depends on Iginla wanting to re-sign here. If we can't get a lot for him and we KNOW he doesn't want to re-sign, then, yes, you trade him. But if you can't get a lot for him, and he wants to re-sign, then you keep him.

[Caged Great]

Well, if the Flames are going to trade him, it would make the most sense to do it this morning. That way you can have the good bye press conference at home and all of that without any further risk of him getting injured.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

Well, if the Flames are going to trade him, it would make the most sense to do it this morning. That way you can have the good bye press conference at home and all of that without any further risk of him getting injured.

for me, the perfect day to it was after the St Louis game. Ending his Flames career with a GWG at home would have been perfect.