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

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Fair comment. And I think you're right. But again, who was directing the overall direction of the team during Feaster's tenure? Doesn't look to me like it was Feaster.

And I don't have any confidence that Burke will be any more enthusiastic about trading for picks. I expect to see our UFAs moved for mainly the kind of half-baked prospects Feaster traded for.



That's because a few days after the trade King knew that Iginla and Meehan ended up playing hardball with the Flames when management thought they were still playing pattycakes. About the only good that came out of that experience was the recognition (hopefully) that you don't ever treat a player like he's bigger than the team. Ever. Because players and their agents sure as heck aren't sentimental about the business of hockey.

To add to that, why would the Flames have ever felt like they owed Iginla a solid? This wasn't like the Alfredsson situation where the player was chronically underpaid over his career with one franchise. Iginla was paid very well and very fair during his tenure here. The Flames franchise owed him nothing. If anything, considering the backflips the franchise made to bring in and keep Iginla's buddies (Tanguay, Bertuzzi), to hiring coaches that would let Iginla play how he wanted (Keenan) to fire coaches that crossed paths with Iginla (Butter), to trade players to try to bring in big names to play with Iginla (Regehr for Richards), it was Iginla's turn to do the organization right. Not the other way around.

[Super Nintendo Chalmers]

Has Burke ever traded a player with a NMC/NTC? I seem to recall him being on record to never ask a player to waive. It would be like asking him to give back salary.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

...the Jankowski thing is looking bad. Very bad. And it's mostly the result of hubris, the feeling that we're smarter than everyone. And that pick should be held to account...

I am so tired of this sentiment because it is a duplicitous indictment. We taunt the Oilers and their fans for following the status quo, and drafting based on the latest write-ups in The Hockey News. We laud teams and scouts for their shrewdness when they draft players who produce ahead of their draft ranking. What is the difference between "feeling that we're smarter than everyone" and "trusting our instincts"? Your charge is equally applied to every scout for every team in the entire NHL. Why? Because they need strength of conviction and a confidence in their instincts to be successful at what they do.

Yes, the Jankowski pick at present doesn't look great, but it is also pretty early to be making these sorts of assessments. He may not pan out, and if he doesn't, that will most definitely reflect poorly on Feaster and his staff, but let's not pretend that this is the result of some imaginary, untoward notion that he thought he was "smarter than everyone".

[cKy]

Originally Posted by Super Nintendo Chalmers

Has Burke ever traded a player with a NMC/NTC? I seem to recall him being on record to never ask a player to waive. It would be like asking him to give back salary.

Kaberle?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

...Ultimately the mistake was they traded him 1-3 years too late. That's why they didn't get value.

And once again, it is impossible to pin this mistake solely on management, since Iginla never had any interest in leaving Calgary before last year.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

If the organization cornered itself in its Iginla dealings because they thought the fans would be upset otherwise, I hope we can disabuse them of that notion so that it doesn't cloud their future decision-making. As a fan, once it was clear that Iginla and the Flames would part, I was only concerned about the Flames.

Unrelated and not to start a beef, but I'm surprised by how little I care about Iginla playing elsewhere. I took the Fleury move hard and followed him despite his leaving. Iggy, not so much. Maybe I'm just getting old and callous.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And once again, it is impossible to pin this mistake solely on management, since Iginla never had any interest in leaving Calgary before last year.

That's a considerable assumption at the same limiting or stifling the speculation that other trade scenarios would have proffered different results.

On the one hand we cannot assume "that things would ever have played out differently under different personnel, or that it would have played out differently two years ago." But we CAN assume Iginla "never had any interest" in leaving?

That's weird. You'd think he would have signed an extension if he had no interest in leaving...

Regehr had no interest in leaving and had a NMC...

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And once again, it is impossible to pin this mistake solely on management, since Iginla never had any interest in leaving Calgary before last year.

Agreed but they also continued to assure him they would add pieces to compete. If they had committed to a re-build earlier, would Iginla wanted to stay?
The team was desperate to get him a ring - a noble gesture but in the long run made less and less sense.
I think they believed if they just got in - and Kipper played out of his mind "anything could happen".
A poor plan to pin hopes on.

[Tinordi]

Yeah I'd love to see something more than wild speculation that Iginla wouldn't have waived his NMC a year or two earlier.

If the organization says to Iginla two years ago at the deadline "We're starting a rebuild. You can choose to be here or we can trade you to a contender." Would Iginla have assuredly not waived his NMC? Fanciful to suggest not, especially as the lynchpin argument of the point you're trying to make.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And once again, it is impossible to pin this mistake solely on management, since Iginla never had any interest in leaving Calgary before last year.

And why is that? I'm sure he wanted to be here, sure, but he was being sold a bill of goods by the management group here.

If management had done a proper assessment of this team a few years ago and told Iginla what the truth of the situation was, chances are this would have played out differently.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Yeah I'd love to see something more than wild speculation that Iginla wouldn't have waived his NMC a year or two earlier.

I think Iginla was just as desperate to win here as the team was to win for him.

Sports doesn't always provide the storybook endings though - and that's what makes it great.

I think it was Brunt on the Fan saying the other day that it really is too bad they didn't win it in 2004 because if they had - #12 would have likely retired here with nothing left to complete on his resume.

[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Yeah I'd love to see something more than wild speculation that Iginla wouldn't have waived his NMC a year or two earlier.

If the organization says to Iginla two years ago at the deadline "We're starting a rebuild. You can choose to be here or we can trade you to a contender." Would Iginla have assuredly not waived his NMC? Fanciful to suggest not, especially as the lynchpin argument of the point you're trying to make.

I can recall an interview 2 seasons ago where Jarome said he would do whatever was best for the Franchise.

It was Feaster's fear of the fanbase that eventually got him fired. Afraid to hurt the fans, he came out that season proud to tell everyone that Jarome would remain a Calgary Flame.

Same way he was afraid to send down Baertschi because of how the optics would be.

-

Judging by Brian Burkes haircut, he has no idea what optics even are.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

If the organization cornered itself in its Iginla dealings because they thought the fans would be upset otherwise, I hope we can disabuse them of that notion so that it doesn't cloud their future decision-making. As a fan, once it was clear that Iginla and the Flames would part, I was only concerned about the Flames.

From what I saw, it was the casual fan and the non-fans like my mother-in-law who were most sad to see Iginla go. Serious fans recognized the necessity of the move. Frankly, I don't know why Flames management should care that much about what people like my mother-in-law feel about the Flames. Maybe it's about securing public goodwill for government funding of an arena?

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

Unrelated and not to start a beef, but I'm surprised by how little I care about Iginla playing elsewhere. I took the Fleury move hard and followed him despite his leaving. Iggy, not so much. Maybe I'm just getting old and callous.

Probably age. I took the Niewendyk trade hard, and followed him for most of the rest of his career. Iginla? For me, the bloom was well off by the time he was moved. And the way he handled the trade fiasco severed any lingering affection for the guy. If the Bruins end up in the finals against a team I don't like, I'll probably cheer for them. That's it.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

And why is that? I'm sure he wanted to be here, sure, but he was being sold a bill of goods by the management group here.

If management had done a proper assessment of this team a few years ago and told Iginla what the truth of the situation was, chances are this would have played out differently.

I think Don Meehan is a smart enough hockey man to properly assess the state of the Flames a few years ago. There wasn't anyone knowledgeable in the NHL who thought the Flames were trending anything but down.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

That's a considerable assumption at the same limiting or stifling the speculation that other trade scenarios would have proffered different results.

On the one hand we cannot assume "that things would ever have played out differently under different personnel, or that it would have played out differently two years ago." But we CAN assume Iginla "never had any interest" in leaving?

That's weird. You'd think he would have signed an extension if he had no interest in leaving...

Regehr had no interest in leaving and had a NMC...

That's fair. But does the possibility that Iginla MIGHT have entertained a trade at an earlier point in time absolve him of any role in the dimished value the Flames received in return? My point would be that he played a part, and that part should be factored into account and not held against management and ownership for some things over which they had limited control.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I think Iginla was just as desperate to win here as the team was to win for him.

Sports doesn't always provide the storybook endings though - and that's what makes it great.

I think it was Brunt on the Fan saying the other day that it really is too bad they didn't win it in 2004 because if they had - #12 would have likely retired here with nothing left to complete on his resume.

And this situation is why you pay your managers the big bucks and why fans buy tickets to the games. Fans are allowed to believe in the storybook ending, are encouraged. But your management has to manage which means you make the right decisions not the popular ones.

The window had slammed shut on Iginla winning the Cup in Calgary by the time we were routed by Chicago. There was no way that any sane manager could have said, "you know what, we're only a piece short of what Chicago has to beat them to come out of the Western Conference."

Should we have started the rebuild then? Probably we should have been seeding the idea of trading Iginla (which most of the national press was doing for us anyway)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

...If management had done a proper assessment of this team a few years ago and told Iginla what the truth of the situation was, chances are this would have played out differently.

One of management's most critical errors was to involve Iginla in the decision making process to the extent that they did. And I distinctly remember several instances over the past several years in which Iginla was insistent about the competitive level of the team. The miscalculation about the team's fortunes was not that of management alone, but in large part a product of management pandering to their star player, creating something like an echo chamber in which they parroted one another's beliefs about a bright future.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

That's fair. But does the possibility that Iginla MIGHT have entertained a trade at an earlier point in time absolve him of any role in the dimished value the Flames received in return? My point would be that he played a part, and that part should be factored into account and not held against management and ownership for some things over which they had limited control.

Hey, you take your lumps if that's the way the story is playing out. If Iginla is being obstructionist and limiting your ability to trade him, say so.

The offseason before he was traded, Iginla and camp made it clear to feaster and camp that he wasn't going to sign an extension during the season. Implicitly, that is an indication Iginla intends to test free agency.

He's stirring the silt in the trade waters.

On the one hand, No, I don't think Iginla doing what's best for Iginla should be held against him. If my employer was acting in such disregard for their own position I would take as much as I could get. That's been the Iginla approach during his tenure with Calgary and I don't fault it substantially. In all of this, he's the smart, rational one, looking out for numero uno.

I get accused of being an Iginla hater, but he gets full marks for this in my mind. He hung that management group with the rope that they gave him. It's not his fault, nor is it a detraction, to do what's best for yourself as your prime earning potential and chances for success are dwindling by, at that point, the hour.

It's 110% on management that they chose, repeatedly, not to insulate and protect themselves.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

From what I saw, it was the casual fan and the non-fans like my mother-in-law who were most sad to see Iginla go. Serious fans recognized the necessity of the move. Frankly, I don't know why Flames management should care that much about what people like my mother-in-law feel about the Flames...

"Tier two" fans?

Seriously, its business. Everyone in the Calgary market is by default a potential customer.

[nik-]

We're doomed to borderline destructive impatience from the top down, aren't we?