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

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Very classy press conference by Chiarelli.

He didn't slight the Flames or Feaster once, and made it clear it was a player decision.

Agreed. Chiarelli's PC was nothing like CaptainCrunch said it was... no drama, nothing shady or anything between either Feaster or Chiarelli. Very respectful and understanding, not an ounce of bitterness.

Also saw Iginla's farewell... dude's a pro. Proud he was a Flame, hope to see him back one day.

[Canada 02]

Penguins at Bruins, April 19th

[868904]

I wish Don Meehan was the GM of the FLames, that guy always gets what's best for his clients.

[tripin_billie]

How I feel without Iggy on the Flames...

[browna]

I still think after listening to that, that Iginla made sure from Feaster and the Flames that the two offers from Pit and BOS were relativlely close (really, the 1st rounders being the same, and two guys years away from being ready), and acceptable to the Flames as a return.

With that out of the equation he picked Pittsburgh, which was his right.

As I said in another thread, I'm more confident that a unknowing Iginla picked the best offer for the Flames in the long run, then the one Feaster and co. actually preferred.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by valo403

Which opens you up to the risk that Iginla says 'well in that case I'll just play out the year here' and you wind up with nothing. What's his loss?

Feaster tells Iginla that Flames will only accept Boston's offer and not Pens' offer.

Iginla's options:

1. Play the rest of the season for Boston with a chance to win the cup or at least put on a strong run.

2. Play the rest of the season in Calgary with zero chance of playoffs.

In either case he will be UFA after the season and can sign with Pens.

It's obvious, Iginla would take Boston's offer. IMO, Feaster could have played harder here. TO answer your direct question, Iginla's loss would be spending one more spring on a non-playoff team (and he only has so many years left in him).

[Hustle]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Feaster tells Iginla that Flames will only accept Boston's offer and not Pens' offer.

Iginla's options:

1. Play the rest of the season for Boston with a chance to win the cup or at least put on a strong run.

2. Play the rest of the season in Calgary with zero chance of playoffs.

In either case he will be UFA after the season and can sign with Pens. It' obvious, Iginla would take Boston's offer. IMO, Feaster could have played harder here.

I'd bet if Feaster did that Meehan squeals to the media thus completely blacklisting teh organization amongst the players. You can play hardball with players during negotations... but this wasn't a normal trade as much as people might have wanted it to be.

It's not Iginla's fault that management didn't surround him with talent and took forever to finally man-up and start this rebuild... but make no mistake - Iggy was driving this trade. You try to bully him and the incremental gain you might have gotten in that Boston deal isn't worth the external issues you ruin into from a PR/reputation standpoint amongst iggy's peers.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Hustle

I'd bet if Feaster did that Meehan squeals to the media thus completely blacklisting teh organization amongst the players. You can play hardball with players during negotations... but this wasn't a normal trade as much as people might have wanted it to be.

It's not Iginla's fault that management didn't surround him with talent and took forever to finally man-up and start this rebuild... but make no mistake - Iggy was driving this trade. You try to bully him and the incremental gain you might have gotten in that Boston deal isn't worth the external issues you ruin into from a PR/reputation standpoint amongst iggy's peers.

Would it be really a foul play by Feaster? It's perfectly his right to decline Pitt's offer. Iginla has an NMC clause, not "I can trade myself whereever I want" clause.

[Hustle]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Would it be really a foul play by Feaster? It's perfectly his right to decline Pitt's offer. Iginla has an NMC clause, not "I can trade myself whereever I want" clause.

I actually agree with you that this is a business and the business move is exactly what you're saying. 99% of the time this would have been teh right play.... this was that other 1% IMO.

People always wonder why Detroit, Pittsburgh (now) always are able to get guys under contract cheap and they are desired places to play. Yes they are great teams now but management treats those players well and the players now it. It's about building a reputation and aura around your club... and I don't think that strong-arming the greatest player this franchise has ever had into a trade really accomplishes that.

Nevermind the fact that Meehan is a sly agent and would have made sure his client got what he wanted at the end of the day...Flames reputation or not.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Feaster tells Iginla that Flames will only accept Boston's offer and not Pens' offer.

Iginla's options:

1. Play the rest of the season for Boston with a chance to win the cup or at least put on a strong run.

2. Play the rest of the season in Calgary with zero chance of playoffs.

In either case he will be UFA after the season and can sign with Pens.

It's obvious, Iginla would take Boston's offer. IMO, Feaster could have played harder here. TO answer your direct question, Iginla's loss would be spending one more spring on a non-playoff team (and he only has so many years left in him).

It sure isn't, and he has the cards to call that bluff. Iginla is basically holding A-K suited with the 10, J and Q he needs to complete the royal flush on the table.

'Ok Jay, you go ahead and let me leave for nothing, good luck explaining that one'

[neo45]

As underwhelming as the return for Iginla was, this really isn't the type of trade that can screw the Flames up long term like the Phaneuf trade. So I guess Feaster gets some credit for having Iggy leave on very good terms, god knows Feaster couldn't afford another PR nightmare.

I'm slowly starting to accept the return for Iginla. Still want a new GM though

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by valo403

'Ok Jay, you go ahead and let me leave for nothing, good luck explaining that one'

That's what negotiations are all about.

Jay should respond:

"Ok, you are 35 and you will spend one more spring without a sniff at playoffs, let alone cup run. Good luck signing with Pens next season, who knows, if they will be as dominant anyway."

You are arguing on premise that Feaster would be fired if he let Iginla walk as UFA, but that may very well not be the case. Should owners explicitly support Feaster on the matter and make it clear to Iginla (i.e. they tell him they don't care if Feaster let Iginla walk for nothing), Iginla loses a lot of leverage and Flames could get better return.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Pointman

That's what negotiations are all about.

Jay should respond:

"Ok, you are 35 and you will spend one more spring without a sniff at playoffs, let alone cup run. Good luck signing with Pens next season, who knows, if they will be as dominant anyway."

You are arguing on premise that Feaster would be fired if he let Iginla walk as UFA, but that may very well not be the case. Should owners explicitly support Feaster on the matter and make it clear to Iginla that they will support GM on the issue, Flames could get better return.

A negotiation presumes that both sides have something to leverage, and the Flames simply did not. They either make the trade or they get nothing. There's no consolation prize, there's no fall back plan. They have nothing to use to support making that bluff, and therefore there's no reason for Meehan to believe it.

[OILFAN #81]

Dan Bylsma stated just now that the lines will be:

Kunitz-Crosby-Dupuis
Neal-Malkin-Iginla

[oilboy2]

@JasonGregor: "Spoke with one of the Pens scouts and he said the two prospects they gave up weren't in the Pens top-ten." Yohe #notgoodforcalgary

This should be a lesson to anytime in the league thinking about a rebuild. Don't hold on to your tradeable assets until they are worth nothing. Positive for the flames is there is other assets that can get legit returns

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by valo403

They have nothing to use to support making that bluff

They do. They can let Iginla go to Boston for playoffs and decent chance at Cup (albeit smaller than at Pitts) or force Iginla to spend this spring mired in the bottom of the table. Iginla only has 2-3 years left in him. Losing ANY shot at a Cup run hurts. It IS leverage. Feaster just didn't have balls or felt he had to be nice with Iginla.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

Dan Bylsma stated just now that the lines will be:

Kunitz-Crosby-Dupuis
Neal-Malkin-Iginla

Good god, look at that 2nd line. I would give my left nut for that to be the 1st line of the flames.

[neo45]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

Dan Bylsma stated just now that the lines will be:

Kunitz-Crosby-Dupuis
Neal-Malkin-Iginla

I think that'll change eventually. Neal and Iginla won't mix on a line

[Hemi-Cuda]

I just got this from one of my Boston friends:

So apparently the dude Calgary got from St. Cloud State is a UFA in August...lol...good job Calgary.

Any truth to that or is he full of ####?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Pointman

They do. They can let Iginla go to Boston for playoffs and decent chance at Cup (albeit smaller than at Pitts) or force Iginla to spend this spring mired in the bottom of the table. Iginla only has 2-3 years left in him. Losing ANY shot at a Cup run hurts. It IS leverage. Feaster just didn't have balls or felt he had to be nice with Iginla.

Or he's smart enough to know that a) the bluff wouldn't work, and b) not trading Iginla would be absolutely idiotic.

He would also be poisoning a relationship with an agent who reps a number of high profile players and would establish the franchise as one that is willing to screw over the greatest player in its history. Sounds like a brilliant way to run a team right there.