If Dallas and Colorado were to meet in the playoffs...

[Samonadreau]

Dallas. This should even be in question.

[sun]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

But he didn't. Colorado wasn't a top team; it was a team that had one good season and then lost a key piece. It would have been foolish to assume that his chances of winning the Cup were maximized by signing in Colorado, and most of us don't believe that Iginla is a fool.

Are we arguing semantics? They were a top three team in the league. Who said anything about "maximized"?

[Hockey_Ninja]

If only Iggy signed with a more likeable team.

[doctajones428]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Seems like I'm the only one that would rather see iggy win the cup than get the pick. As nice as it would be to get that first round pick... I would much rather Iggy get his name on the cup.

That being said... If Dallas and Colorado meet in a series it will be a win-win situation in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately it's only a win win if it was the conference finals. They could very well meet in the first round and that would be a disaster.

I'd rather we get the pick AND Iggy's shot at the cup

[saskflames69]

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

If only Iggy signed with a more likeable team.

Iggy should've went to the Capitals. Imagine him, Ovechkin and Backstrom on a line together. We'd be all over that team this year

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by sun

Are we arguing semantics?

No, we're arguing substance – though you seem to be trying to take refuge in semantic hairsplitting. Like this, f'rinstance:

They were a top three team in the league.

They were a top-three team once. It was obvious to nearly everyone in the business that they got there largely by luck and were most unlikely to repeat it.

Who said anything about "maximized"?

If you have a goal that you honestly are trying to pursue, you choose your actions in such a way as to maximize your chances of success. Is this concept new to you?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

Ok Scorpion, I defended you before for silly threads but this is a completely pointless waste of a thread.

You're right, only 57 other posters were interested in the thread before you got here

Originally Posted by Yamer

To the extent that Feaster had a trade in place with Boston for (arguably) a much better return (at least at the time).

Boston and Pittsburgh were the only 2 teams Iggy exempted from his NMC. I've been informed that the Boston players were already told they were on their way to Calgary.

Feaster came to Iggy to let him know he had honored his wishes. Iggy nixed it, said he would only go to Pittsburgh, and Feaster had to go back to Pittsburgh with his tail between his legs and settle for whatever the Pens were willing to part with. A b-level and c-level prospect and a late 1st rounder.

It was totally within Iggy's right to do so, but he could have been more honest with his management group and enabled them to get the best return possible for a team he was as loyal to as to sign a NMC.

So many people talk like they KNOW what happened, when it's all speculation.

It seems more plausible to me that Feaster told Iggy about both trades, but that they preferred the return from Boston. And even then we don't know exactly how this was presented. Iggy made the decision he felt was best for himself, and his chances of winning a cup. A lot of people would slag a guy for not doing his absolute best to win (though I acknowledge the margin between Boston and Pitt was pretty narrow).

Iginla didn't owe the Flames anything based on the contract both parties signed. There are two possible scenarios that got them to the situation: Iginla insisted he would have final say right before officially waiving, as a condition for waiving at all, or Feaster just didn't think things through well enough when not getting it in writing sooner.

We might not have liked it, but no one could have blamed Iggy for wanting to stay here with his family and waiting until the summer to make his move. It's happened before; see Sundin, Mats.

The Boston players being told anything before the ink was dry speaks to Chiarelli's incompetence, and Feaster's to some extent too for telling him it was a done deal before it was.

[FlamesAddiction]

Improving Flames assets >>>> Individual milestones for Colorado Avalanche players

[Lanny_McDonald]

@powederjunkie

Well, we did have the two GMs in the deal basically say the same thing about how the deal went down, and they were consistent in their takes, so maybe it is you that is just refusing to accept what went down? I don't think there is much speculation left here. Iginla provided the Flames a list, per his agent, and then reneged at the last second. I think fans may have been okay with that had Iginla not signed with the Bruins a few months later. Spin it all you want but Iginla ####ed the Flames on his way out the door.

[sun]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

They were a top-three team once.

Ah perfect, we agree. Cheers.

Originally Posted by Jay Random

If you have a goal that you honestly are trying to pursue, you choose your actions in such a way as to maximize your chances of success. Is this concept new to you?

Let me know Iginla's list of goals and get back to me. People have more than one goal in life. Is this concept new to you?

Iginla signed with a non-dynastic team for decent money for a three-year term. Therefore he doesn't truly want a cup and isn't honestly pursuing one. How absurd. What a myopic view of life you guys have.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

^No one said he doesn't want a cup. He just wants money more IMO.

[devo22]

I also think term was a big factor. After going from Calgary to Pittsburgh to Boston within a few months, I'm sure he and his family valued some stability ... and I doubt that many teams offered 3 years at decent money, given that he's closer to 40 than 30.

[Roof-Daddy]

Iggy signed for a year in Boston, a true Cup contender at the time.
Then he signed with a young upstart Avalanche team that had just won their very tough division.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by New Era

@powederjunkie

Well, we did have the two GMs in the deal basically say the same thing about how the deal went down, and they were consistent in their takes, so maybe it is you that is just refusing to accept what went down? I don't think there is much speculation left here. Iginla provided the Flames a list, per his agent, and then reneged at the last second. I think fans may have been okay with that had Iginla not signed with the Bruins a few months later. Spin it all you want but Iginla ####ed the Flames on his way out the door.

Their stories may be consistent, and in the end they just demonstrate that Iginla acted in his own self-interest with the leverage he had available to him. If he verbally told Feaster the Bruins trade was good to go and then changed his mind before putting pen to paper that would be one thing, but the only goof here is Feaster telling Chiarelli it was a done deal, when it obviously wasn't.

Various Feaster quotes:

"I approached Jarome and had a number of conversations with him about where we are and where we want to go moving forward," said Feaster, describing the process that ended with a "yea" or "nay" from Iginla. "In the final analysis we had offers from three different clubs. The player in this particular case has a no-trade/no-move clause, so the player was also a part of the process. We worked with the player, and we concluded a deal this evening with the Pittsburgh Penguins."


"I had a number of conversations with Jarome and asked him to submit a list of teams. He provided a list of teams." We had offers from 3 different clubs. In this case (Jarome) had a NMC and we worked with the player. (Jarome)." ~ Jay Feaster

In terms of the actual trade itself… we were talking to the teams (Jarome) put on his list and then once we had offers, and we had multiple offers, then we went about the process of working with (Jarome)… ~ Jay Feaster


We had multiple offers and again at the end of the day it is a process of working with (Jarome) and he has a role to play… and ultimately (Jarome) has a role to play in where he waives too… ~ Jay Feaster


“We were talking to the teams the player had put on his list. Once we had offers from teams – and we had multiple offers – we then went about the process of working with the player. The player still has to agree to waive the no-trade, no-move.

“So ultimately it all came together in the game tonight … In this instance, the deal we consummated, this is where the player was prepared to waive for.”

Sureloss paraphrase:

Feaster says on TSN he thought there was 4 destinations for Iginla.

Feaster says Iginla rejected Boston.

Iginla's agent told Feaster you may have a deal with Boston but you don't have a deal with us.

King (paraphrase post on CP)

King also made the comment to McCowan on primetime sports that if he could have done it again, he would make Iginla sign a waiver. This was a few days after the trade.

Chiarelli:

“We relied on the fact that we had a deal,” Chiarelli told reporters, according to the Boston Globe. “Now, these things happen all the time, more than you know, about deals going south for whatever reason. We believed we had a deal. We operated on the premise that we had a deal. When things were silent, in my experience, when things go silent, things are usually going screwy from your end. And it was.”

Iginla:

“I talked to Jay and wanted it to be a mutual thing that they were happy with the deal they got,” Iginla explained. “If I was going to leave here, I wanted the best opportunity to try to win.

We don't know the initial conversation when getting Iginla's list of teams. Obviously that list was in pencil, and Iginla was going to have the final say at the end of the day. Could the Flames have been more aggressive up front with Iginla and removed any future uncertainty? Of course, though Iginla would still have been within his rights to refuse to waive his airtight NTC without having final say. The Flames could have made the final year of his contract a limited NTC clause when they signed it, but they didn't.

Iginla acted in his own self-interest. If you think that is screwing the Flames, then fair enough. The closest to screwing the Flames Iginla could have come is going the Mats Sundin route, and even then I wouldn't fault him one bit (I might question his desire to win a cup vs. his dedication to his family, but even then I wouldn't question his integrity as a person whichever side he came down on).

Iginla didn't owe the Flames anything more, and the Flames didn't owe him anything more. Both parties fulfilled the contracts they signed. Would it have been nice if Iginla wasn't a part of the country club culture that developed? Of course. That would be my only gripe with Iginla, IMO it is ridiculous to be upset with him regarding the trade.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

These arguments are silly. Both stances on this are perfectly legitimate. Iginla was entitled to do what he did (or else he wouldn't have been able to do it) and it's also fair to suggest that the Flames probably felt like Iginla made it tough on them when he left. Every opinion that incorporates something within those realms is legit.

I am a huge Iggy fan, still am, my favourite Flame of all time, but I am very disappointed in how he handled that last transaction, and for two reasons:

One, he damaged our return on a trade (though he was entitled to do so) and two, he did so for no benefit to himself. Trying to figure out which of the top 3 or 4 contenders is the most likely to win is literally impossible, not to mention, he seemed to actually pick a team he wasn't best suited for, thus lowering his odds. Basically, I feel he f'd himself and us going out the door, and that's annoying.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

“I talked to Jay and wanted it to be a mutual thing that they were happy with the deal they got,” Iginla explained. “If I was going to leave here, I wanted the best opportunity to try to win."

He screwed us by vetoing the better trade and screwed himself by vetoing going to the better team who made the cup finals. Makes his decision look petty and stupid all around. And then he goes and signs with the fricken Bruins a couple months after vetoing the trade to them making his decision to veto the trade look even more stupid. Very frustrating as a Flames fan.

[bax]

I don't understand why people get so hung up on having to take the Pitts deal instead of the Boston one.

Big whoop, we missed out on a 7th Dman and a career AHL player

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by bax

I don't understand why people get so hung up on having to take the Pitts deal instead of the Boston one.

Big whoop, we missed out on a 7th Dman and a career AHL player

Feaster let a player dictate where he was traded...and then the guy signs with the team Calgary wanted to trade him to a couple months later. Forget Dallas I hope the Avs miss the playoffs...ninth place sounds about right

[bax]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Feaster let a player dictate where he was traded...and then the guy signs with the team Calgary wanted to trade him to a couple months later. Forget Dallas I hope the Avs miss the playoffs...ninth place sounds about right

I still don't see the big deal?

The flames are most likely in the same spot they are today whether iggy goes to Boston or Pitts. It's on feaster more than iggy

[doctajones428]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

You're right, only 57 other posters were interested in the thread before you got here

So? The question has such an obvious answer that it wasn't even worth asking. Anyone could have told you that atleast 95% of the forum would rather have the pick.

It's no different than if he asked "Do you cheer for David Jones or the 1st?" and he would have got absolutely roasted for it