[Signing] Iginla to Colorado (3yrs, $5.3mil AAV)

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

Iggy has never been considered fast, and he's probably lost a step (speed wise) in the last few seasons.
How is he going to keep up with Mackinnon, who is probably one of the fastest player in the NHL, and Landeskog, who is a pretty quick skater as well.

If they build a proper system, he doesn't need to. Let the kids rush with the puck while Iginla puts on his invisibility cloak to move into prime scoring positions or muck for pucks in the corners.

[nik-]

Iggy will be the infantry to that line's Blitzkreig.

[IgiTang]

McKinnon or Landeskog bring puck into zone, pass around, or skate around other team, pass to Iginla on the short side for the one timer. Bang... Right?

Where do I remember seeing this strategy? ... hrmmmm

[GreenLantern]

Crazy to think how talented their top 4 forwards are, and they were all born in the 90's.

I feel old.

[Flash Walken]

How long until Iggy gets paired up with Tanguay?

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Hackey

I'll spell as many names wrong as I want.

Why can't I thank this post?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Why can't I thank this post?

Because posts older than 30 days old are usually best left forgotten.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Tiger

The whole point is the wording was not strict in the temporary CBA, therefore you had a chance to take advantage of unclear language in the CBA, and by clarifying it you would close a loophole and it is never a possibility

Thank you thank you thank you.
This is exactly it.

[GreenLantern2814]

Edit wrong thread.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by nik-

I would think the whole point would be you should clarify instead of gambling with a potentially HUGE loss. Just because Feaster thought he was smarter than everyone, doesn't mean he was.

If it's debatable and subject to interpretation, which it was, there is no way the Flames would have lost the pick(s) and O'Reilly.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Because posts older than 30 days old are usually best left forgotten.

But I just saw it now and loved it

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

If it's debatable and subject to interpretation, which it was, there is no way the Flames would have lost the pick(s) and O'Reilly.

If I ever tried that kind of logic, I would be fired and pretty much blacklisted from the company and probably the entire industry. I can't believe people actually believe this to be true.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

If I ever tried that kind of logic, I would be fired and pretty much blacklisted from the company and probably the entire industry. I can't believe people actually believe this to be true.

You're clearly not in law.
And, admittedly, this would not work in all areas.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Tiger
The whole point is the wording was not strict in the temporary CBA, therefore you had a chance to take advantage of unclear language in the CBA, and by clarifying it you would close a loophole and it is never a possibility

The main word here is chance.

[ForeverFlameFan]

I don't think Iginla will have that great of a season. I just don't think the Avs are a good fit.

[codynw]

As long as he is put in a position to succeed (top 6 RW with powerplay time) I see no reason to believe he'll score less than 60 points.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

If it's debatable and subject to interpretation, which it was, there is no way the Flames would have lost the pick(s) and O'Reilly.

A lot of things are subject to interpretation, but the problem is you are going against the league's interpretation. It didn't stop New Jersey from being fined and punished for cap circumvention. Had Colorado not matched, NHL would have enforced their own interpretation and the whole matter will likely be resolved by an independent arbitrator just like NJ's cap circumvention case. The picks and O'Reilly were at risk.

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

You're clearly not in law.
And, admittedly, this would not work in all areas.

Feaster was acting in the capacity of manager and not a lawyer. And even if he was acting in the capacity of a lawyer, it will depend on the end result and whether he advised his clients or bosses of the risk. If he's right, nothing may come out of it but his bosses might still fire him if he didn't advise them of the risks. If he's wrong, Feaster may win the potential malpractice suit against him, but his clients acting upon his advice will likely fire him for putting their assets unnecessarily at risk as it ended up costing them dearly. If Feaster works for wealthy clients word can spread and he's likely going to lose a lot of clients. If he was working as an in house counsel he may be hard for him to work for another big corporation.

[Vulcan]

To me it looked like Feaster got caught with his pants down and didn't know O'Reilly had played those extra games or didn't know the rules that pertained to those regulations. This is the best guess because a number of other people and GMs were in the dark as well. When he came on screen saying he disagreed with the NHLs interpretation, it was just a face saving manoeuvre to cover up his lack of knowledge.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

You're clearly not in law.
And, admittedly, this would not work in all areas.

Can other lawyers comment, is it common practise to purposely try and challenge the law and potential loose wording (or pending contracts) prior to a legal event taking place, for marginal gains ... when there is a option of doing your due dillegence to clearify potential mis-understandings without it affecting your legal position?

[stemit14]

Iginla will fit right in with any linemates. Every year we go through this same thing and people say this is the year iginla will fade but he still puts up 30+ goals. The guy's a beast with a nose for the net and he's an awesome competitor. I watched every bruins game this year and he is still dominant along the boards and deadly with his one-timer.

As for fitting in with the speed of mackinnon and landeskog... I would use bill guerin as an example. He was a great fit with Crosby for years including on their cup run in '09. Mackinnon and Crosby play a very similar game that's built on speed and power along with great vision with the puck. Iginla has always been much better than guerin in every way so I think he will be more than fine playing with mackinnon. And before anyone tries to say iginla didn't work with Crosby... I'll counter with what iginla did for Crosby on one of the biggest goals in hockey history and he barely got any time at all to develop chemistry with Crosby both when he played for the pens and when they were on team canada. Oh... And iginla lead the Canadian team in goals while playing with Crosby.