[Trade] Iginla to the Pens for Agostino, Hanowski, 2013 1st

[blankall]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I think you are missing my point. I also think that the Boston deal was bad, but that does not make the Pitt trade good. It just makes it the Pitt deal better than the Boston deal. Neither of the 2 deals should have been on the table when Iggy was making his decission.

We have a GM and ownership group that could not get a guaratnteed 1st from Boston and could not get anything other than "meh" players from Pitt included with a guarantee 1st. By no means did i think they could get a blue chip prospect, but they should have been able to get a better player than the 2 they got.

There is not one media guy that thinks Feaster and Co did not get raped on this deal.

Who says Boston would have ever given up their first for a rental? Boston with 11 poitns in their last 10 games, is floundering. Without Thomas playing out of his mind, who says they are cup contenders.

Also, where's the precedent for the huge return the Flames deserved for a 35 year old rental having a so so season?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I think you are missing my point. I also think that the Boston deal was bad, but that does not make the Pitt trade good. It just makes it the Pitt deal better than the Boston deal. Neither of the 2 deals should have been on the table when Iggy was making his decission.

We have a GM and ownership group that could not get a guaratnteed 1st from Boston and could not get anything other than "meh" players from Pitt included with a guarantee 1st. By no means did i think they could get a blue chip prospect, but they should have been able to get a better player than the 2 they got.

There is not one media guy that thinks Feaster and Co did not get raped on this deal.

Right...and if there is anything last night taught us, its that media guys are to be trusted with what they think things are....should be construed as fact.

Good lord.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

So if they were told at noon (10am our time) that Iggy was theirs, then why did the Flames take so long to scratch Iggy from the game? Sounds like he is exaggerating.

He also is claiming the Bruins and Flames had agreed to scratch the players involved...

The bruins did scratch Kolo and Bart in their AHL games.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by blankall

2 prospects that have a good chance of slipping into Calgary's top 10 prospect pool.

FWIW, their's 7.0C ratings make them 5th and 6th on our charts

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/teams/calgary_flames/

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by valo403

Let me get this straight, you are saying that the Flames should have got a better deal than what anyone was offering? Yeah, that makes sense. Definitely should have told them to pound sand so we could watch Iginla walk for nothing in a couple months. Total no-brainer.

They had a week to go until trade deadline. You don't think the Pitt deal would have still been on the table if they couldn't get more? Same goes with Boston?

Can't believe posters are sticking up for Feaster and ownership on these deals. They have no negotiating skills if that's the best they could muster up.

[neo45]

I'm glad Boston didn't get Iginla, they don't deserve him if they were only willing to give up less than they did for Kaberle

Good luck beating Pitt now...

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Wolven

They should have offered Spooner and not had "conditional" on the first.

what is the source of the 1st being conditional?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

They had a week to go until trade deadline. You don't think the Pitt deal would have still been on the table if they couldn't get more? Same goes with Boston?

Can't believe posters are sticking up for Feaster and ownership on these deals. They have no negotiating skills if that's the best they could muster up.

You're only thinking of one outcome, the other outcome is that they get tired of waiting or won't offer anything more and trade for other players instead.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Right...and if there is anything last night taught us, its that media guys are to be trusted with what they think things are....should be construed as fact.

Good lord.

What does not getting the correct info on a trade have to do with evaluation on players?

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

They had a week to go until trade deadline. You don't think the Pitt deal would have still been on the table if they couldn't get more? Same goes with Boston?

Can't believe posters are sticking up for Feaster and ownership on these deals. They have no negotiating skills if that's the best they could muster up.

Those deals vanish if they move on to other players and get them instead.

Again you have to look at the context of the deal and the restrictions in play.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

He also is claiming the Bruins and Flames had agreed to scratch the players involved...

The bruins did scratch Kolo and Bart in their AHL games.

This part is especially interesting.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

what is the source of the 1st being conditional?

Aaron ward...so it had to be correct....right?

[sureLoss]

Joe Haggerty ‏@HackswithHaggs now Peter Chiarelli asked permission from the Flames to speak with Jarome Iginla yesterday and was rebuffed. #BruinsTalk

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

what is the source of the 1st being conditional?

The TV told me.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

You're only thinking of one outcome, the other outcome is that they get tired of waiting or won't offer anything more and trade for other players instead.

There were 3 teams going for him. Unless all of them had pulled of trades at the same time to go in a different direction, Feaster still had time.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

what is the source of the 1st being conditional?

Bunch of reports during the chaos of last night. Initially the 1st was in there, then mid-way through the game it changed to a conditional 1st based on him re-signing.

Outrage ensued.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

They had a week to go until trade deadline. You don't think the Pitt deal would have still been on the table if they couldn't get more? Same goes with Boston?

Can't believe posters are sticking up for Feaster and ownership on these deals. They have no negotiating skills if that's the best they could muster up.

They. Had. No. Leverage.

Can't believe people can't get that through their heads.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

He also is claiming the Bruins and Flames had agreed to scratch the players involved...

The bruins did scratch Kolo and Bart in their AHL games.

Flames were going to scratch Iggy anyway I'm sure.

I have no doubt that the Flames agreed to their offer, but it was probably more along the lines of "We accept what you are offering us, we will contact Iginla to waive his NTC". Iggy says I want to go to Pittsburgh, so Flames go with that.

[sureLoss]

Bruins confirm the deal on the table:

Boston Bruins ‏@NHLBruins 1m PC: At noon yesterday, "we believed we had a deal." Bart, Koko & a first for Iginla, operated under the assumption that the deal was done^CS

[afc wimbledon]

I don't doubt Iggy would have gone to Boston, I also don't doubt with a little extra pressure (specifically its either you or your direct rival the Pens) the conditional would have been taken off the pick.