Eh, 15 games + playoff of Kaberle still landed a pretty good package. His cap hit is big but he'd be a valuable leader/top line player.
Colborne is a nice player, but he is not a future franchise guy. And Boston's first was the last pick in the first round. If Calgary got a package like that for Iginla, our fan base would be furious.
My point is that IF Iginla is moved, based on history, everyone will expect that the key piece coming back is going to replace Iginla. I have a hard time believing any sane GM would give that up for potentially only 1 year of Iginla. I think Boston and St. Louis would be the most likely destinations if a trade were to happen. I'd want Caron and Spooner from the B's, and Stewart and Rattie from the Blues. We would be lucky to get a 2nd with either of those deals.
Colborne is a nice player, but he is not a future franchise guy. And Boston's first was the last pick in the first round. If Calgary got a package like that for Iginla, our fan base would be furious.
My point is that IF Iginla is moved, based on history, everyone will expect that the key piece coming back is going to replace Iginla. I have a hard time believing any sane GM would give that up for potentially only 1 year of Iginla. I think Boston and St. Louis would be the most likely destinations if a trade were to happen. I'd want Caron and Spooner from the B's, and Stewart and Rattie from the Blues. We would be lucky to get a 2nd with either of those deals.
This is the biggest stumbling block for iginla as we go into next season - whether the plan is to keep him or trade him.
Simple solution: get an extension done as soon as possible. If they could get him into a 3 year extension in the $12 - $15m range, that would accomplish two things:
1) it avoids the 'what if he walks at the end of the year' issue, and
2) it makes him far more attractive as a potential trade candidate.
Colborne is a nice player, but he is not a future franchise guy. And Boston's first was the last pick in the first round. If Calgary got a package like that for Iginla, our fan base would be furious.
My point is that IF Iginla is moved, based on history, everyone will expect that the key piece coming back is going to replace Iginla. I have a hard time believing any sane GM would give that up for potentially only 1 year of Iginla. I think Boston and St. Louis would be the most likely destinations if a trade were to happen. I'd want Caron and Spooner from the B's, and Stewart and Rattie from the Blues. We would be lucky to get a 2nd with either of those deals.
Not trying to compare the package for Kaberle to what could potentially be offered for Iginla. Rather my point was that package for Kaberle was pretty good and most Leafs fans are happy with Colborne and whatever Burke did to get Biggs and Percy. All for a few games and a post season of Kaberle.
I think there are teams that would definitely pay more than what Boston gave up in the form of a better prospect or additional high end draft picks.
I think there are teams that would definitely pay more than what Boston gave up in the form of a better prospect or additional high end draft picks.
I agree on this, however that package would still fall short of what our fanbase would be expecting. Colborne projects to be a 2nd line centre. The expectation of moving Iginla from our fans would be a franchise player in return, I just don't see any deal like that happening.
you=fail...Take a look at the stats at the very least. Guerin was never as good as Iginla is now.
Biggest facepalm of the year.
Take a look at the statistical path of their careers. Iginla's is going to be higher, but they are on a similar path.
The only thing facepalmable around her are you blind homers refrusing to acknowledge just how bad our team, how bad our vets are, and how bad our future looks.
Lol I was just in a GM game a few days ago as the Calgary GM and managed to trade Iggy to the Blues, here was the deal:
To
Jarome Iginla
Ryan Howse
CGY 3rd Round Pick 2012
To
Chris Stewart
Ty Rattie
Ian Cole
STL 1st Round Pick 2012
Think STL would do this in real life?
You know, given the disappointment that Stewart was in STL this year, this trade actually may not be all that far off. Getting Cole may be a bit of a stretch, but I don't think its all that bad.
The Blues actually do not need any forward prospects, and although Rattie is very good, he is expendable to them for right price. I think Iggy for Stewart, Rattie and a 2nd would be close.
With the firing of Sutter I think Iggy is staying put. Another year where they will change up the UFA's and tell us how much better we'll be. It's another year of retool and win with Iggy.
Take a look at the statistical path of their careers. Iginla's is going to be higher, but they are on a similar path.
The only thing facepalmable around her are you blind homers refrusing to acknowledge just how bad our team, how bad our vets are, and how bad our future looks.
Your point is still meaningless as Iggy will likely provide solid second line production until he retires at 40. So what would be so horrible about keeping him? He's not the best defensive forward in the NHL?
You just don't get it. He is a legend and one of the best captains in the league. If he stays until he retires he'll still help us by putting up 60-70 point seasons, and providing solid leadership for a team who is getting younger. There is nothing wrong with that...I repeat, nothing wrong with Iggy staying till he retires. If the flames draft well and keep rolling out Bartschi types then we'll be able to supplement Iggy's point regression over time.
quite whining like an emo, prepubescent, vampire wannabe.
I want to trade Iggy too, but I also realize that if we keep him he'll be the furthest thing from being "the problem" with this team.
If you want to look at logical ways to fix this team then look no further to our FO% and our borderline NHL backend.
Given that Stewart was a healthy scratch for the Blues on Saturday against the Sharks and that he's a RFA after this season, I do think he could be available. At the same time, I'm not sure if the Flames should pursue him given his lackadaisical play and attitude.
Your point is still meaningless as Iggy will likely provide solid second line production until he retires at 40. So what would be so horrible about keeping him? He's not the best defensive forward in the NHL?
Is that a guarantee? No, it isn't. The only way that happens is if he is still give top minutes and top PP time. If the Flames are still feeding Iginla top time in all situations the team is going to be pretty bad.
Quote:
You just don't get it. He is a legend and one of the best captains in the league.
Yeah, no on both accounts. He's a legend in the minds of certain Flames fans. There are others who believe he's great player, but just another player who will wear the Flames jersey. He's been a great hockey player for the Flames, but far from legendary. He's not above the team and should not be put above the team. That is exactly what a select group of fans are expecting the team to do.
I don't know where Iginla get's this rep as being a great leader? We got to the Stanley Cup finals once, in a magical run where a lot of good things fell into place. After that, then what? Shouldn't a great leader have a string of successes to fall back on? I don't think Iginla even rates as one of the best captains in Flames history. He's definitely behind McDonald and I'd take Risebrough and Nieuwendyk a head of Iginla for leadership as well. Great player? Yes. Great captain? Not really.
Quote:
If he stays until he retires he'll still help us by putting up 60-70 point seasons, and providing solid leadership for a team who is getting younger. There is nothing wrong with that...I repeat, nothing wrong with Iggy staying till he retires.
Sure, there's nothing wrong with that, if you don't take into consideration the lost assets this talent starved organization could use. If Iginla could return a young player like a Brayden Schenn, who would be a cornerstone player for a decade or more, that is a much better thing than having Iginla play out his string in Calgary. If he returns a couple of draft picks along with that player, then you may be better off as well. The goals is all about the team getting better, not keeping Jarome Iginla happy.
Quote:
If the flames draft well and keep rolling out Bartschi types then we'll be able to supplement Iggy's point regression over time.
You're relying on a lot of ifs. If Iginla continues to score 60-70 points. If the Flames continue to add Bartschi types. If he'll even stay. I prefer to work with things I know that will happen and go from there. I know Iginla will continue to get old. I know Iginla's game will continue to deteriorate. I know Iginla will retire in the near future. I know these things because they are as sure as death and taxes. No one escapes the ravages of time. It is best to prepare for the Iginla-less Calgary Flames, and it is best to do it on conditions that best meet the team's long term competitiveness goals.
I also know the Flames do not have a great track record when it comes to drafting. I also know the Flames have moved a number of high picks that are going to negatively affect the potential for building through the draft for the next two seasons. So I know the Flames are behind the eight ball when it comes to the young players that will be coming into the organization through the draft. The best chance of recouping those top picks is to move our most valuable assets. That includes Iginla, Kiprusoff and Bouwmeester.
Quote:
quite whining like an emo, prepubescent, vampire wannabe.
That's so adorable. Lame, but adorable.
Quote:
I want to trade Iggy too, but I also realize that if we keep him he'll be the furthest thing from being "the problem" with this team.
If you want to look at logical ways to fix this team then look no further to our FO% and our borderline NHL backend.
And how do you think you fix those things? I wasn't aware top line centers who are dominant in the face off circle grow on trees? Quick, call Feaster and give him the location to that orchard will you, he needs to get pickin'. Bottom line is that you only get players that fit those needs by drafting them or giving up something of value. As I've been saying we have three assets that fit that need and they have been mentioned. Also, nothing as far as leadership on this team changes until Iginla is dealt, so I think the imperative is to move him first and foremost, if it is at all possible.
Now excuse me. I'll let you get back to your regularly scheduled guzzling of the kool aid and I'll get back to listening to 30 Seconds to Mars and reading Twilight.
Iginla could return a young player like a Brayden Schenn, who would be a cornerstone player for a decade or more,
You're relying on a lot of ifs. If Iginla continues to score 60-70 points. If the Flames continue to add Bartschi types. If he'll even stay. I prefer to work with things I know that will happen and go from there.
Is that a guarantee? No, it isn't. The only way that happens is if he is still give top minutes and top PP time. If the Flames are still feeding Iginla top time in all situations the team is going to be pretty bad.
Yeah, no on both accounts. He's a legend in the minds of certain Flames fans. There are others who believe he's great player, but just another player who will wear the Flames jersey. He's been a great hockey player for the Flames, but far from legendary. He's not above the team and should not be put above the team. That is exactly what a select group of fans are expecting the team to do.
I don't know where Iginla get's this rep as being a great leader? We got to the Stanley Cup finals once, in a magical run where a lot of good things fell into place. After that, then what? Shouldn't a great leader have a string of successes to fall back on? I don't think Iginla even rates as one of the best captains in Flames history. He's definitely behind McDonald and I'd take Risebrough and Nieuwendyk a head of Iginla for leadership as well. Great player? Yes. Great captain? Not really.
Sure, there's nothing wrong with that, if you don't take into consideration the lost assets this talent starved organization could use. If Iginla could return a young player like a Brayden Schenn, who would be a cornerstone player for a decade or more, that is a much better thing than having Iginla play out his string in Calgary. If he returns a couple of draft picks along with that player, then you may be better off as well. The goals is all about the team getting better, not keeping Jarome Iginla happy.
You're relying on a lot of ifs. If Iginla continues to score 60-70 points. If the Flames continue to add Bartschi types. If he'll even stay. I prefer to work with things I know that will happen and go from there. I know Iginla will continue to get old. I know Iginla's game will continue to deteriorate. I know Iginla will retire in the near future. I know these things because they are as sure as death and taxes. No one escapes the ravages of time. It is best to prepare for the Iginla-less Calgary Flames, and it is best to do it on conditions that best meet the team's long term competitiveness goals.
I also know the Flames do not have a great track record when it comes to drafting. I also know the Flames have moved a number of high picks that are going to negatively affect the potential for building through the draft for the next two seasons. So I know the Flames are behind the eight ball when it comes to the young players that will be coming into the organization through the draft. The best chance of recouping those top picks is to move our most valuable assets. That includes Iginla, Kiprusoff and Bouwmeester.
That's so adorable. Lame, but adorable.
And how do you think you fix those things? I wasn't aware top line centers who are dominant in the face off circle grow on trees? Quick, call Feaster and give him the location to that orchard will you, he needs to get pickin'. Bottom line is that you only get players that fit those needs by drafting them or giving up something of value. As I've been saying we have three assets that fit that need and they have been mentioned. Also, nothing as far as leadership on this team changes until Iginla is dealt, so I think the imperative is to move him first and foremost, if it is at all possible.
Now excuse me. I'll let you get back to your regularly scheduled guzzling of the kool aid and I'll get back to listening to 30 Seconds to Mars and reading Twilight.
Your Iginla hate is hilarious...If he can score 30+ goals a year, then why shouldn't he continue to get 1st line PP time. Only a fool would not see that Iginla is in great shape, and will likely put up decent numbers until he inches close to retirement. In fact I would say that is more guaranteed then any kind of potential star return you would get by trading Iginla.
If you traded Iggy for Schenn there is no guarantee that he will become half the player Iggy is now and will most likely be for the next 5 years. It's a gamble I would take, but I can also see that there is another side of reason.
I also said that I think trading Iggy is the best idea. Why? Because keeping an aging star is pointless when your team is nowhere near SC contention. So everything you are saying is understood. The difference is that you make the situation seem completly black and white, which it is not. If we keep Iggy, it does not mean this organization cannot have a bright future at the same time. There are other ways to bring in good young talent. Plus we as fans get to see Iggy retire here and it also gives our organization a great rep with players around the league.
Where our argument stems from is how sad your leadership ramble is...If you don't get why he's a great leader then I cannot really argue with you anymore.
1) 30+ goals for over a decade on a team with no other top end talent during that time.
2) Will fight anyone, and stick up for any teammate. Never dives and almost never throws a cheap shot.
3) respected league wide and is known by many NHL peers as being one of the best captains in the league.
4) represented canada more then once with a letter on his chest.
5) Threw a borderline NHL playoff team on his back and marched to game 7 of the stanley cup finals. Had a fight in each round and won each fight.
6) NHL First All-Star Team (2002, 2008, 2009)
Maurice "Rocket" Richard Trophy (2002)
Art Ross Trophy (2002)
Lester B. Pearson Award (2002) NHL Second All-Star Team (2004) NHL Foundation Award (2004)
King Clancy Memorial Trophy (2004)
Maurice "Rocket" Richard Trophy (2004) Mark Messier NHL Leadership Award (2009)
This list could keep going, but what's the point. You fail to even realize that iggy has a had a lot of success with this organization. Cups are not won by a captain, instead great teams win cups (go figure). Most fans agree with me, because they know I'm right. I'm not a genius, rather this issue is black and white. Most people can see that, why can't you?
The only person relying on a lot of "If's" is you. Iginla is more likely to stay a better player and an even better captain until he retires, then any player we would get in reutrn for trading him.
Your Iginla hate is hilarious...If he can score 30+ goals a year, then why shouldn't he continue to get 1st line PP time. Only a fool would not see that Iginla is in great shape, and will likely put up decent numbers until he inches close to retirement. In fact I would say that is more guaranteed then any kind of potential star return you would get by trading Iginla.
You're Iginla adoration is funny. Again, a big IF he can score 30+ goals a year. It is very unlikely for that to happen. How do I know this? Because every single player in the history of the game has seen their production drop as they age. Even the greatest players in the game saw their numbers drop by a substantial margin. It's just being realistic, especially when you consider the supporting cast around him.
Quote:
If you traded Iggy for Schenn there is no guarantee that he will become half the player Iggy is now and will most likely be for the next 5 years. It's a gamble I would take, but I can also see that there is another side of reason.
Iginla is half the player you make him out to be. But that is not the issue here. You're not trading Iginla for what he is right now, you're trading him for what he is going to be over the next four or five years. That's what you don't seem to be able to understand. Iginla will be done in four or five years, and each year take smaller steps backwards. If you can turn that into a player that will be around long after Iginla is gone, and is taking steps forward each year, you do it. That unknown may be part of the core in five years. Iginla definitely will not.
[/QUOTE
I also said that I think trading Iggy is the best idea. Why? Because keeping an aging star is pointless when your team is nowhere near SC contention. So everything you are saying is understood. The difference is that you make the situation seem completly black and white, which it is not. If we keep Iggy, it does not mean this organization cannot have a bright future at the same time. There are other ways to bring in good young talent. Plus we as fans get to see Iggy retire here and it also gives our organization a great rep with players around the league.[/QUOTE]
The potential for that future is greatly diminished if you don't do everything in your power to bring in quality players and prospects. Just like Feaster was a fool for not turning his expiring contracts into draft picks he would be a fool for not trying to improve this team by selling off diminishing assets that will not help this team be a contender.
I don't know why people think there is some exclusivity with Iginla retiring a Flame and playing his days out here. Iginla can be traded away and then resigned for his swan song season. I don't see the value of sentimentality and holding on to a player to watch his skills fade away to nothing.
Quote:
Where our argument stems from is how sad your leadership ramble is...If you don't get why he's a great leader then I cannot really argue with you anymore.
What has the team won with Iginla as the leader? Has the team performed to expectations or underachieved? Has the team shown signs of harmony or signs of discontent under his leadership? Has there been stability at all?
Quote:
1) 30+ goals for over a decade on a team with no other top end talent during that time.
2) Will fight anyone, and stick up for any teammate. Never dives and almost never throws a cheap shot.
3) respected league wide and is known by many NHL peers as being one of the best captains in the league.
4) represented canada more then once with a letter on his chest.
5) Threw a borderline NHL playoff team on his back and marched to game 7 of the stanley cup finals. Had a fight in each round and won each fight.
6) NHL First All-Star Team (2002, 2008, 2009)
Maurice "Rocket" Richard Trophy (2002)
Art Ross Trophy (2002)
Lester B. Pearson Award (2002) NHL Second All-Star Team (2004) NHL Foundation Award (2004)
King Clancy Memorial Trophy (2004)
Maurice "Rocket" Richard Trophy (2004) Mark Messier NHL Leadership Award (2009)
These are all great things, but for the most part are completely irrelevant. Most of these are not measures of leadership. They're also irrelevant moving forward. All we care about Iginla is what he will do for us moving forward, not what he has done for us in the past.
Quote:
This list could keep going, but what's the point. You fail to even realize that iggy has a had a lot of success with this organization. Cups are not won by a captain, instead great teams win cups (go figure). Most fans agree with me, because they know I'm right. I'm not a genius, rather this issue is black and white. Most people can see that, why can't you?
Iginla has had a lot of personal success as a Flame but has not managed to make his team to be better. Great teams are normally lead by great captains, and the Flames missed their chance to be a great team while their captain was garnering all those personal accolades. Coincidence? Maybe. Maybe not. Think of all the years the team struggled to find talent that could play with Iginla. Great player make players around them better, not have a carousel of bodies coming and going in search of that right line mate and center. This is obvious as well, but you seem incapable of seeing that. Maybe its because you care way too much about the player and not enough about the team?
Quote:
The only person relying on a lot of "If's" is you. Iginla is more likely to stay a better player and an even better captain until he retires, then any player we would get in reutrn for trading him.
Yeah, count the number of ifs in my post and yours. Tell me who is relying on nothing but a hope and prayer in this conversation. There are a half dozen young players on the Flyers who will be the better player than Iginla in three or four years. Iginla's production will decline and these other young players will be on the up tick, part of what looks to be a powerhouse team. The players are going in different directions. It's sort of like saying that in three or four years Bartschi will not be the better player than Iginla. If the Flames have any hope of getting better Bartschi has to be better than Iginla. Those same kids on the Flyers are just as highly regarded as Bartschi, some of them more so. That should tell you something about the situation the Flames find themselves in. A team solidly in the post season has what appears to be a brilliant future a head of them because they were not afraid to sell off pieces that no longer fit. On the other side of the coin is a team on the downswing, missing the playoffs for the third year in a row and has really little in the shape of can't miss prospects. They are that way because they are afraid to sell off those pieces that don't fit anymore. But hey, it shouldn't take a genius to see the writing on the wall, right?
So mr. CGYPUKSUX, what do you suggest Feaster does with Iginla? By reading your posts a trading him is what your waiting for to happen. What kind of package do you suggest they look for?
What about Bouwmeester and Kiprusoff? The market for Kiprusoff isn't that large in my mind. Let's say Toronto, Washington, Tampa Bay, Flordia maybe Edmonton are interested. The return can't be that large for him.
I really can't see the return for JayBlow being that good either. If Feaster is going to move him, then he is obviously going to be taking money back on a terrible contract not to mention probably an underachiever.
Bouwmeester is the type if defenceman that would be a great piece to a strong defensive core. Unfortunately we don't have that strong defensive core since Regehr left.
