The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to mxt's comment:

    49-North  -  He did the honorable thing with Jerome? He should have reached out to Iginla BEFORE informing PC we had a deal. How honorable was it when he didn't return PC's attempt to communicate after the deal was supposedly done and all players involved were told that they were not playing? Feaster has his faults allright... like being an idiot.  Between this and the O'Reilly situation, you gotta think that all other GM's are shaking their heads at him as well.




    He should have had Iginla sign an addendum that said , "Whereas Player has an Agreement with Team granting Player right of refusal to trades involving Player.  NOW THEREFORE: Player hereby agrees to ammend the right of refusal clause to exclude teams x,y,z.

    Defintions / legal jargon....done"

    It wasnt slimy on Feaster's part, it was complete incompetence.  Legal experience/competence is key for a GM, and Feaster shows that he just doesnt have any.  I love that PC is a former lawyer and agent.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Don-Bruino. Show Don-Bruino's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    In response to Don-Bruino's comment:

     

    The point of my dissertation are two fold:

    1. To point out the incompetence of Flame onwership (who have let the tail -Iginla- wag the dog for so long, allowing their team to be run into the ground). Feaster had nothing to do with this. He made the best deal available believing the NMC waiver had be signed. Afterall, he went through the exact same thing a few years back with Brad Richards.

    2. To point out the "me, me, me" players that too many members of this board rave about at this time of year. Urging PC  to get them or he's an idiot. This year it's Jarome Iginla, last year it was Rick Nash and in 2011 it was Ilya Kovalchuk.

    All three players who contributed greatly in running their teams to the ground and now are off to green pastures to ruin the landscape there.

    I have no problem with Jarome wanting to do his thing, wherever he wants - but not in Boston.

    I look forward to meeting up with him the Conference Final (if the Penguins make it).

     




     

    I wasn't aware of the hi-lited.  Wouldn't over seeing the signed waiver be Feasters direct responsibility?



    In any organization it would be, except Calgary.

    This episode and the O'Reilly fiasco were all handled by the Execs.

    Feaster is being a good sport and absorbing all the bullets. Why do you think PC never said one disparaging word against him at his press conference? He knows.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kennedy97. Show Kennedy97's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

     

    In response to mxt's comment:

     

    49-North  -  He did the honorable thing with Jerome? He should have reached out to Iginla BEFORE informing PC we had a deal. How honorable was it when he didn't return PC's attempt to communicate after the deal was supposedly done and all players involved were told that they were not playing? Feaster has his faults allright... like being an idiot.  Between this and the O'Reilly situation, you gotta think that all other GM's are shaking their heads at him as well.

     




    He should have had Iginla sign an addendum that said , "Whereas Player has an Agreement with Team granting Player right of refusal to trades involving Player.  NOW THEREFORE: Player hereby agrees to ammend the right of refusal clause to exclude teams x,y,z.

     

    Defintions / legal jargon....done"

    It wasnt slimy on Feaster's part, it was complete incompetence.  Legal experience/competence is key for a GM, and Feaster shows that he just doesnt have any.  I love that PC is a former lawyer and agent.

     




    Drew, in his interview with King yesterday McCown asked in any future deals of this type would King be inclined to get the player's choices as an addendum to their no-movement clause.  King said he would. 

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Don-Bruino's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     

    In response to Don-Bruino's comment:

     

    The point of my dissertation are two fold:

    1. To point out the incompetence of Flame onwership (who have let the tail -Iginla- wag the dog for so long, allowing their team to be run into the ground). Feaster had nothing to do with this. He made the best deal available believing the NMC waiver had be signed. Afterall, he went through the exact same thing a few years back with Brad Richards.

    2. To point out the "me, me, me" players that too many members of this board rave about at this time of year. Urging PC  to get them or he's an idiot. This year it's Jarome Iginla, last year it was Rick Nash and in 2011 it was Ilya Kovalchuk.

    All three players who contributed greatly in running their teams to the ground and now are off to green pastures to ruin the landscape there.

    I have no problem with Jarome wanting to do his thing, wherever he wants - but not in Boston.

    I look forward to meeting up with him the Conference Final (if the Penguins make it).

     




     

    I wasn't aware of the hi-lited.  Wouldn't over seeing the signed waiver be Feasters direct responsibility?

     



    In any organization it would be, except Calgary.

     

    This episode and the O'Reilly fiasco were all handled by the Execs.

    Feaster is being a good sport and absorbing all the bullets. Why do you think PC never said one disparaging word against him at his press conference? He knows.




     I think Calgary, for whatever reason, was desperate to get rid of Iginla.  They made it clear they're not interested in resigning him, and I don't believe there's any love lost between him, or the club.

    There were obviously some handshake type, agreements in principle.  The first one, was Iginla's list of teams.

    I think all of the niceties bandied about in the ensuing press conferences can easily be explained.  I really believe(based on PC's demeaner) Feaster was acting in good faith.  When told of his move, Iginla hid behind the unsigned legalities and balked.  This sent Feaster into full blown panic.  At that point, I believe the entire Calgary executive group, did everything they could to change Iginla's mind, and when they couldn't, went to great lenghts to explain, and profusely apologize to the Bruins.  I'd even bet the owners had a chat.  After that excercise, they had to go into spin control, and their only explanation for accepting an inferior package,  was to suggest their own warmth and charity was the motivator.  That's much easier than admitting they got outmaneuvered.

    Just a theory.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from wallydouglas. Show wallydouglas's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Kennedy97's comment:

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.




    His potential destination was boston pittsburg LA and chicago. hes the one that submitted the teams lol.

    With reagrds to PC handling this respectfully towards Feaster, thats why hes a respected GM.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    This is my take on this debacle...

    1. The player provided a list of teams he would accept a trade to, once this was established the Calgary organization now just needed to find the best deal possible for their franchise with one of those teams.
    2. The fact that Calgary organization ACCEPTED THE BRUINS TRADE OFFER with the Bruins organziation should have been final. There should have been no need to go back to the player again for his approval...this is where Calgary screwed up.
    3. This acceptance and follow-up where Iginla and the two B's players were scratched from games is further indication that a deal had been struck.
    4. The fact that the Flames ended up accepting a lesser deal from Pittsburgh is a slap in the face to the Calgary fans, who expected the best return they could get for their esteemed former player...the key word here now is "former". I have not seen the Calgary fan reaction but I would think they'd be upset witrh Feaster...I would if Chiarelli pulled a stunt like this.
    5. This trade fallout for the B's continues since now other teams see what they were willing to send to acquire Iginla and now may ask for similar return for a potentially lesser player. This is the biggest concern I have now for the B's to get somebody on the team to replace the duds on the roster, who I will not name but everybody knows.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrrandShore. Show OrrandShore's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    Flames managment is incompetent, unprofessional and in general "dumb as a post".  Their word is worthless.

    What really surprises me is that we have two management teams and neither one took the time to inquire as to the status of the "no trade clause" and a possible signed waiver for the teams Ignlia said he would accept.  Simply incomprehensible, especially by Chiarelli, who is by far a very smart and shrewd GM.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrrandShore. Show OrrandShore's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    FACT: Flames put Ignlia on the trade block.

    FACT:  Ignlia said he will accept trade to Boston or Pittsburgh or whoever.

    -----At this point in the process, he could/should have said, "I will only accept trade to Pitt".

    ----But, he did not and this misconstrued thought by Ignlia has now caused an embarassing contractural situation for the NHL.

    FACT: This also says something about the character of Ignlia and it is not complimentary.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Don-Bruino. Show Don-Bruino's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     I think Calgary, for whatever reason, was desperate to get rid of Iginla.  They made it clear they're not interested in resigning him, and I don't believe there's any love lost between him, or the club.

    There were obviously some handshake type, agreements in principle.  The first one, was Iginla's list of teams.

    I think all of the niceties bandied about in the ensuing press conferences can easily be explained.  I really believe(based on PC's demeaner) Feaster was acting in good faith.  When told of his move, Iginla hid behind the unsigned legalities and balked.  This sent Feaster into full blown panic.  At that point, I believe the entire Calgary executive group, did everything they could to change Iginla's mind, and when they couldn't, went to great lenghts to explain, and profusely apologize to the Bruins.  I'd even bet the owners had a chat.  After that excercise, they had to go into spin control, and their only explanation for accepting an inferior package,  was to suggest their own warmth and charity was the motivator.  That's much easier than admitting they got outmaneuvered.

    Just a theory.



    I think your theory is quite accurate and I'd be willing to bet on it.

    It went something like this:

    Jay: Jarome you are not playing tonight. We've just accepted Boston trade offer for you.

    Jarome: Hey, that's OK. When is their next game? Oh, wait...Sidney's calling on my cell. Hey, Sid. I'm on my to Boston....................say what? You guys are trying to get me too? Jay, did they make an offer?

    Jay: Yes. They did. But we like the Boston offer. It's better for the team.

    Jarome: I want to go to Pittsburgh! Sid wants me in Pittsburgh. I'm not signing anything to go anywhere but Pittsburgh.

    Jay: But, you've already waived your NMC. And agreed to BOS, PITT, LA and CHI.

    Jarome: I agreed but I never signed.

    Jay: You never what? A-G-N-E-S!!!! (secretary) GET ME KEN ON THE LINE!

    Agnes:  Ken King on the line for you Mr. Feaster.

    Jay: Ken, you don't have a waiver signed by Jarome. You told me he did. He always hangs out with you. What are you doing to me?

    Ken: Well, no. But, Jarome is a gentleman, he'll honour his word. He's a great hockey player and a great citizen of Calgary. He'll do what's best for the Flames. He's my buddy.

    Jarome: Tell Ken I will not go anywhere except Pittsburgh, or I stay here.

    Ken: Jay, did I hear what I just heard.

    Jay: Yes. Now what. Peter has both guys we're getting scratched already. One of them he's already signed to a new contract for us.

    Ken: Both of you come to my office immediately. If Peter calls don't answer.

    Jarome: I want to go to Pittsburgh. Just Pittsburgh.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Kennedy97's comment:

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.



    I don't either Kennedy, however Feaster had no business telling the Bruins the deal was done, Which he obvisiously did or the B's wouldn't have made the changes in the lineup that they did against a rivial where the game had an impact like first place in the divison. I don't blame Iggy at all- I think he's earned that right to make this decision, but I don't agree with giving him the power to make a decision for the future of the team. That's like allowing the lead developer of XBOX leaving to work for Sony Playstation & telling them who to hire & fire before he leaves. IF Iginla changed his mind against Boston AFTER PC thought the deal was done. He should've held everything back & told Iginla that he's going to have to wait until the Pens sweeten the deal, because he's still more obligated to the Flames regardless of what Jarome has done. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Don-Bruino. Show Don-Bruino's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:

    In response to Kennedy97's comment:

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.

    I don't either Kennedy, however Feaster had no business telling the Bruins the deal was done, Which he obvisiously did or the B's wouldn't have made the changes in the lineup that they did against a rivial where the game had an impact like first place in the divison. I don't blame Iggy at all- I think he's earned that right to make this decision, but I don't agree with giving him the power to make a decision for the future of the team. That's like allowing the lead developer of XBOX leaving to work for Sony Playstation & telling them who to hire & fire before he leaves. IF Iginla changed his mind against Boston AFTER PC thought the deal was done. He should've held everything back & told Iginla that he's going to have to wait until the Pens sweeten the deal, because he's still more obligated to the Flames regardless of what Jarome has done. 

     




    No-one is denying Jarome has the right to go wherever he sees fit.

    The Flames went about it the wrong way. No signed waiver and not letting anyone know about.

    The way it played out, it made everyone - themselves and Jarome - like bad. And left a bad taste in the mouth of many hockey people and fans.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Don-Bruino's comment:

    I think your theory is quite accurate and I'd be willing to bet on it.

    It went something like this:

    Jay: Jarome you are not playing tonight. We've just accepted Boston trade offer for you.

    Jarome: Hey, that's OK. When is their next game? Oh, wait...Sidney's calling on my cell. Hey, Sid. I'm on my to Boston....................say what? You guys are trying to get me too? Jay, did they make an offer?

    Jay: Yes. They did. But we like the Boston offer. It's better for the team.

    Jarome: I want to go to Pittsburgh! Sid wants me in Pittsburgh. I'm not signing anything to go anywhere but Pittsburgh.

    Jay: But, you've already waived your NMC. And agreed to BOS, PITT, LA and CHI.

    Jarome: I agreed but I never signed.

    Jay: You never what? A-G-N-E-S!!!! (secretary) GET ME KEN ON THE LINE!

    Agnes:  Ken King on the line for you Mr. Feaster.

    Jay: Ken, you don't have a waiver signed by Jarome. You told me he did. He always hangs out with you. What are you doing to me?

    Ken: Well, no. But, Jarome is a gentleman, he'll honour his word. He's a great hockey player and a great citizen of Calgary. He'll do what's best for the Flames. He's my buddy.

    Jarome: Tell Ken I will not go anywhere except Pittsburgh, or I stay here.

    Ken: Jay, did I hear what I just heard.

    Jay: Yes. Now what. Peter has both guys we're getting scratched already. One of them he's already signed to a new contract for us.

    Ken: Both of you come to my office immediately. If Peter calls don't answer.

    Jarome: I want to go to Pittsburgh. Just Pittsburgh.

     



    Don, I think you depiction of the conversation might be really close to reality, but let's not stop it there...here's more:

    Jay: OK Jarome, you're making me look like a damn idiot but you've forced my hand.

    Jay: Hey Ray, just letting you know we are accepting your offer and congratulation on acquiring Iginla. Can't talk further I need to call Boston.

    Jay: Hey Peter, sorry for not getting back to you tonight but you probably realize something came up.

    Peter: I had my suspicions...so what's going on?

    Jay: Although I confirmed your offer earlier today, the player decided he wanted to go to Pittsburgh, so our deal is off! Sorry!

    Peter: Sorry my azz, we had an agreement and you told me the player would waive his no-trade to come here...what bullcrap are you pulling here? I f**king scratched two players from the line-up because you told me we had a deal.

    Jay: What can I say Peter, the deal is off!

    Peter: Kiss my azz mothfarmer...CLICK!

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    If the Pens deal turns out worse for the Flames than the potential B's deal, then that's not Iggy's fault, it's Feaster's.  And for anyone to be saying that any deal which involves prospects is "good" or "bad" is just plain crazy. 

    For the Flames, they knew that they wouldn't be re-signing Iggy next season.  So it's a matter of getting some assets now, or getting nothing come July 1st.  Yes, I agree with many that the deal should have been made much earlier (last season's trade deadline, perhaps), and that by waiting this long, they reduced their bargaining strength, and ended up accepting a less-than-optimal deal.  But that sits with Feaster, not with Iggy, who's been a model player for a franchise which has done little to provide him with support.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to 49-North's comment:

     

    If the Pens deal turns out worse for the Flames than the potential B's deal, then that's not Iggy's fault, it's Feaster's.  And for anyone to be saying that any deal which involves prospects is "good" or "bad" is just plain crazy. 

    For the Flames, they knew that they wouldn't be re-signing Iggy next season.  So it's a matter of getting some assets now, or getting nothing come July 1st.  Yes, I agree with many that the deal should have been made much earlier (last season's trade deadline, perhaps), and that by waiting this long, they reduced their bargaining strength, and ended up accepting a less-than-optimal deal.  But that sits with Feaster, not with Iggy, who's been a model player for a franchise which has done little to provide him with support.

     

     



    Why? Are all prospects equal in value? Why bother having an actual draft then? Instead, the teams could just pull the name of a random 18 year old player out of a hat. You know, because it's "crazy" to consider that there are good and bad prospects.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

     

    Why? Are all prospects equal in value? Why bother having an actual draft then? Instead, the teams could just pull the name of a random 18 year old player out of a hat. You know, because it's "crazy" to consider that there are good and bad prospects.

     



    For some teams that may actually be an improvement. Have you seen CGY's draft record over the past 20 years?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to 49-North's comment:

     

     And for anyone to be saying that any deal which involves prospects is "good" or "bad" is just plain crazy. 

     

     

     



    Seems like a logical statement.

    How about a trade with Vancouver ? The Bruins will take Brendan Gaunce and Nicklas Jensen. The Canucks can have back Tyler Randell and Lane MacDermid. All prospects.

    You can decide 5 years after the trade is done whether it's good or bad.


     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Kennedy97's comment:

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.



    Guys do this all the time -- they give a list of teams they would accept a trade to.  Then they sit back and let the GM try to get the best deal.  Bourque just talked about this.  He gave the Bruins 3 or 4 teams and he admitted favoring the Flyers.  But Colorado was on the list and when they made the best offer, the Bruins informed Bourque he was going to one of his listed teams -- the Avs.  No opportunity to be fastasy GM and review the offers.

    Again, I don't blame Iginla much at all.  This is Feaster being a buffoon.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to 49-North's comment:

    If the Pens deal turns out worse for the Flames than the potential B's deal, then that's not Iggy's fault, it's Feaster's.  And for anyone to be saying that any deal which involves prospects is "good" or "bad" is just plain crazy. 

     



    ??  I think this happens in pretty much every deal for prospects, right?

    There's a reason Koko was requested and Alden Hirschfeld wasn't, and it has to do with judging whether the prospects are good or not.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:



    Seems like a logical statement.

    How about a trade with Vancouver ? The Bruins will take Brendan Gaunce and Nicklas Jensen. The Canucks can have back Tyler Randell and Lane MacDermid. All prospects.

    You can decide 5 years after the trade is done whether it's good or bad.


     



    AHHHHHH what does someone from the left coast know (except for SanDawg) !  they're oblivious of anything east of Saskatchewan

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to Kennedy97's comment:

     

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.

     



    Guys do this all the time -- they give a list of teams they would accept a trade to.  Then they sit back and let the GM try to get the best deal.  Bourque just talked about this.  He gave the Bruins 3 or 4 teams and he admitted favoring the Flyers.  But Colorado was on the list and when they made the best offer, the Bruins informed Bourque he was going to one of his listed teams -- the Avs.  No opportunity to be fastasy GM and review the offers.

     

    Again, I don't blame Iginla much at all.  This is Feaster being a buffoon.




    Disagree Bud.  I don't know if Bourque had to accept the Colorado deal.  Assume he had no choice.  Obviously Iginla had options, looks like they were mere technicalities, but he elected to hold them over the Flames in the end. 

    Although it's rampantly speculated here, there's no reason to believe the Pens offer came in after the Bruins.  Everything suggests the ballots were in, the Flames made their decision, informed the Bruins, and when they got around to telling Jerome, he reneged.

    Mistake, incompetence, call it what you want.  Feaster played by the rules Iggy gave him.  He got caught for not having those rules notorized.  Iginla is as crooked as Feaster is stupid on this one. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

    In response to Kennedy97's comment:

     

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.

     



    Guys do this all the time -- they give a list of teams they would accept a trade to.  Then they sit back and let the GM try to get the best deal.  Bourque just talked about this.  He gave the Bruins 3 or 4 teams and he admitted favoring the Flyers.  But Colorado was on the list and when they made the best offer, the Bruins informed Bourque he was going to one of his listed teams -- the Avs.  No opportunity to be fastasy GM and review the offers.

     

    Again, I don't blame Iginla much at all.  This is Feaster being a buffoon.

     




     

    Disagree Bud.  I don't know if Bourque had to accept the Colorado deal.  Assume he had no choice.  Obviously Iginla had options, looks like they were mere technicalities, but he elected to hold them over the Flames in the end. 

    Although it's rampantly speculated here, there's no reason to believe the Pens offer came in after the Bruins.  Everything suggests the ballots were in, the Flames made their decision, informed the Bruins, and when they got around to telling Jerome, he reneged.

    Mistake, incompetence, call it what you want.  Feaster played by the rules Iggy gave him.  He got caught for not having those rules notorized.  Iginla is as crooked as Feaster is stupid on this one. 



    Yeah, I'm not suggesting that the Pens offer came in after the Bruins offer, one way or the other.  What I'm saying is that it isn't neceessarily the norm for a NMC to include the right of the player to review the final offers and make the GM's decision for him.  Most times you hear of a player offering a list of teams he'll accept and that's the end of it.  That's what happened with Bourque.  That's what happened with Forsberg.  That is, I believe, the norm.  What seems irregular in this case is for Feaster to review the offers with Iginla, after already working within the confines of his very short list of acceptable teams.  

    I think (my opinion only here) that a better GM says "I'll work with your three teams to accomodate you, but after the offers come in, I'm taking the best one."  

    Of course maybe Iginla listed just Pittsburgh from day one, but that wasn't we've been told.  Perhaps the whole thing was a big ruse.  Who knows?  I still say Feaster looks like a fool.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

    In response to Kennedy97's comment:

     

    I don't see Iginla or any player signing any addendum before he knows the potential destination, as he'd lose all of his bargaining position to control his destiny.

     



    Guys do this all the time -- they give a list of teams they would accept a trade to.  Then they sit back and let the GM try to get the best deal.  Bourque just talked about this.  He gave the Bruins 3 or 4 teams and he admitted favoring the Flyers.  But Colorado was on the list and when they made the best offer, the Bruins informed Bourque he was going to one of his listed teams -- the Avs.  No opportunity to be fastasy GM and review the offers.

     

    Again, I don't blame Iginla much at all.  This is Feaster being a buffoon.

     




     

    Disagree Bud.  I don't know if Bourque had to accept the Colorado deal.  Assume he had no choice.  Obviously Iginla had options, looks like they were mere technicalities, but he elected to hold them over the Flames in the end. 

    Although it's rampantly speculated here, there's no reason to believe the Pens offer came in after the Bruins.  Everything suggests the ballots were in, the Flames made their decision, informed the Bruins, and when they got around to telling Jerome, he reneged.

    Mistake, incompetence, call it what you want.  Feaster played by the rules Iggy gave him.  He got caught for not having those rules notorized.  Iginla is as crooked as Feaster is stupid on this one. 

    [/QUOTE

    You may disagree Steve, but you'd be 100 % wrong. Bourque was given a choice of teams by Harry (this was awesome of Sinden to do as well, because Bouque didn't have a NTC) Bourque chosed his teams, but he told Harry he really wanted to try and stay in the East to be close to his family. Philly was the front runner for him. Then CO. sweetened their deal a bit more and Sinden came back and told Bourque that he was going to Denver with Anderchuk. Bourque was upset at first until Patrick Roy called him and he and Joe Sakic talked to Ray. Then he was good with it. How do I know this for sure? The head trainer of the Avalanche is close peraonal friend of mine and when they won the cup in 01', my buddy knowing how badly I wanted a cup for Ray, I was calling my buddy constantly leaving voice mails cheering the Av's on. After it happened my buddy got Bourque to call me thanking me for my support. I asked Ray how the trade went down. That's what he told me personally. 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

     



    Seems like a logical statement.

    How about a trade with Vancouver ? The Bruins will take Brendan Gaunce and Nicklas Jensen. The Canucks can have back Tyler Randell and Lane MacDermid. All prospects.

    You can decide 5 years after the trade is done whether it's good or bad.


     

     



    AHHHHHH what does someone from the left coast know (except for SanDawg) !  they're oblivious of anything east of Saskatchewan

     



    They know a lot about rioting, diving and biting too apparently. 

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: The Iginla Saga: What Really Happened.

    Perhaps I should clarify.

    What I MEANT to say was that it's crazy for anyone to JUDGE any trade involving prospects right away.  That's why they're called prospects.  There are early bloomers and late bloomers.  There are 1st round picks who turn out to be superstars, and others who turn out to be busts.  There are 4th round picks who have long, productive careers, and others who never see an NHL rink. 

    For Feaster to get two prospects and a 1st rounder for a guy who would likely only have played 16 more games for the Flames, and then left without compensation, may turn out to be a good deal for them -- only time will tell.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share