Trade Iginla...the times, they are a' changing
by LawrenceS on Mar 31, 2010 12:47 AM PDT
Email
PrintCall me a fatalist, if you will, for feeling that the fate of the Flames is already determined to be on the golfcourse...but I'm in looking forward mode. Never shy to step into controversy, or as some might feel, neck deep in my own bullsh*t, I'm of the opinion the the 2010/2011 Calgary Flames should be an Iginla-less team.
Now, it's been long the observation of the frequent contributors to this blog that Iginla seems to be a little Schizo these past two - three years. Some days the Jarome of old (usually beating the heads in of the lesser likes of the league) and with increasing frequency - Jarmoe - his evil alter ego. If you have a hard time remembering Jarmoe, just think of most games against Vancouver, Detroit, or any of the elite teams in the league. At this point, I would even be willing to accept Jarome on some nights and Jarmore on others, but I seem to see the worst of him with growing frequency.
Now, I'm not going to go into rehashing too many of the details of the Jarome/Jarmoe puzzle as it's been well documented, but I would like to address the 'change of times' we are witnessing with the Calgary Flames. In the 2012/2013 season, the league will be facing the last year of Iginla's current contract. Yet, who do we have signed until 2015/16? - Rene Bourque and when I think of Iginla's future it's Bourque instead who interests me the most.
Rene Bourque, is in my mind, the core of the Calgary Flames heading into next season. Around him you can add Kiprusoff, Bouwmeester, and Regehr. Beyond that, Giordano, who is in need of a new contract. It can be easily debated that considering both finances and performance, these players are not even the compliments to the solid core that we once thought we had. Jarome Iginla doesn't make matters any more stable in my mind either.
Consider this. Rene Bourque makes 20 million dollars through 2015/16 at a cap hit of 3.333 million bucks and he's 28 years old. He's a player on the rise, increasing his role and responsibility each of the last two years with the Flames. His average ice-time has gone up from 15:16/game (with Chi) to 16:05/game to 18:14/game. He has set career bests in points and goals in each of the last two years. His zone start is pretty much the same as Iginla's (52.9 vs 51.8) so the advanced stats are a pretty fair comparision:
Bourque: CorsiRel: + 2.8, CorsiRelQoC: 1.287, SAON/60: 24.8, Pts/60: 2.52, TOI/60: 13.72
Iginla: CorsiRel: -4.0, CorsiRelQoC: 0.870, SAON/60: 28.0, Pts/60: 2.25, TOI/60: 16.37
Bourque's advanced stats are significantly superior to Iginla's and his basic counting stats at 24G 30A and 54Pts in 67 games line up quite nicely against Iginla's 32G, 37A, 69Pts in 76. Had Bourque played 76 games this year, he would have ~ 61pts, only 9 less than Iginla all for less than half the cap hit per year going forward. In fact, you could almost buy two MORE Bourque's and a league minimum player next year for one Iginla. The lower number of games played does highlight Bourque tendancy for injury, the one big knock against him...but if you had two of him (or equivalent difference makers), or even three? As well, Jarome may play nearly every game for the Flames in a season, but you'd be kidding yourself to think he's not a liability in a quarter of them, and perhaps not even a difference maker in half.
You can take the comparison further by noting that Bourque almost has double the goals, and the counting numbers of Langkow (if the same # of games are played) for 3/4 the cap hit.
It's true that the Flames have more pressing cap concerns/needs than Iginla. Think Staios, Kotalik, Sarich etc., but Iginla's stardom may provide ways out, with a two-player package being a possibility. It will be tough to move those players on their own merits.
It's my opinion that the value of Iginla is no longer relative to his contract, and the divide is only growing. He's an aging player in decline and although the prospect of having two or three Rene Bourque's seems not only unrealistic, but also unlikely, the man has been locked up at extremely good value for 6 more years, and if it were possible, I wouldn't hesitate to make that exchange. It's time to start building around Bourque, and to turn Iginla's high market value into good returns, and a couple of compliments for Bourque, for a younger, faster more competitive playoff team next year.
154 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
For the first time ever Lawrence we’re on something close to the same page, you should check out my thoughts on Iggy as a leader on the ice here: http://4thlineblog.com/2010/03/29/oh-captain-no-captain/
I don’t go so far as to suggest trading him, but it might not be a bad idea to send him to a real cup contender so he can win before his career is really shot. The Ray Bourque treatment, you know?
Who has Iginla played with this season, exactly? And on how many other teams would those players be first liners? Iggy’s QualComp is #1 on the Flames this year. And I’ve said this before-the day Iggy is no longer a Flame, I am no longer a Flames fan.
I think I’m in the minority here when I say Iggy is still the best player the Flames have-it’s just his decline is so great when compared to the 03/04/05 Iggy because he was so good. Besides, who do you get back for Iggy? It’s either going to be too little for the Flames or too much for the other team to give up. Bottom line, if he leaves town before the age of 35, 17th is going to be a charred mess. I don’t think I’m stretching when I say no one, in all of history, has meant more to the city of Calgary and the entire Flames franchise then the man that wears the #12. He single handedly saved the team.
I am seriously actually welling up at the thought that he may wear another jersey.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
Who has Iginla played with this season, exactly? And on how many other teams would those players be first liners? Iggy’s QualComp is #1 on the Flames this year.
He hasn’t played much with Bourque, and the difference in quality comp is not that vast. Especially considering the paycheck. You’re right, Iginla is seeing the toughest competition of the forwards at .077, and Bourque is second at .068, but Iginla’s is likely more due to reputation that to effect. It’s his reputation that I think we should capitalize on while it’s still high.
I never imagined the day I would suggest this either, but you can only look at a ‘train wreck in slow motion’ (the team) for so long, before you say that you’ve seen enough and turn away.
Jarome is the reason when, in search of a somewhat local team I could cheer for when I realized how much I hated the Canucks, I became a Flames fan (where I grew up, the Blazers were the closest thing we had to pro hockey). I can see all the rational reasons that moving him might make sense, but I still don’t want it to happen.
And am I wrong in thinking he’s got an NMC? I have a hard time imagining him agreeing to a trade, at least until next next he’s in the last year of his contract and still seeking Stanley…
Certainly the NMC is something to consider, but with this conversation, I’m postponing the reasoning behind that detail, and assuming ‘if’ the option existed for the team.
With that said, IMHO, it’s pretty much now or never. Cause I can’t imagine that he would re-sign for more with his next contract, so at that point, his value may be more inline. Trading him in his last year, or as a favour, to get him a cup for example, means squat to me. I want ‘return on investment’ to make the team better and nothing more…like with Fleury or Nieuwendyk before him.
I think I’m with Justin on this one. I can’t bear to imagine Iginla wearing another team’s colours, never mind hoisting the Stanley Cup with a different logo on his chest. If the Flames manage to acquire or develop some talented players who are able to play on the first line and go up against tough competition, I don’t see any reason why Jarome can’t stick around and continue to be effective in a lesser role with the team. Maybe that’s just wishful thinking on my part, but that would be my ideal solution.
Matchsticks & Gasoline
Why is it that people keep saying the Flames need to trade their 7 million dollar franchise captain when there is a nearly 7 million dollar defenseman sitting around? JBo is good, and that’s fine. He is not 7 million dollars good, he is not the face of the franchise, and if GMs are on his jock as much as Flames fans have been, then he would net a great return as well.
Or even Regehr. His name still carries a ton of weight, and while he’s cheaper than Iggy or JBo, he certainly doesn’t seem to be in the ‘trending upward’ category of playing ability.
by SmellOfVictory on Mar 29, 2010 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions
It's a matter of leverage
Jarome Iginla’s reputation is worth much more than his play. MUCH much more. He is a defensive liability and an inconsistent contributor. His play is slipping every year and his value is not there. However, other teams seem to hold him in very high regard, especially with the recent Olympic success…so, you trade him when his value is very high (now) and ‘steal’ the deal. Joe Nieuwendyk anyone? How did we get Iginla? Exactly. The time is now to do the same thing again.
Both Jbo and Regehr have a value that is LESS than their name. You likely don’t improve by trading either of them, especially after this year.
We traded Joe Nieuwendyk because he was a stuck up asshole who held out on us, not because his trade value was high.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
If that’s true, that’s not what giving up Jarome Iginla + Cory Millen tells me. Especially when Iginla, your first round pick, was by all signs ready to break into the league in a big way the following season.
And that’s what he did…scoring 50 pts.
One player may mean less to the Flames than to the rest of the league. That’s how you win trades, and that’s my point with Iggy.
That trade worked out to be Iginla for Nieuwendyk. Millen had less impact on the Flames then a Anders Eriksson shot.
Even if that was the reason, Nieuwendyk was better then both of those players at the time, as well as for a couple years after. He also helped bring them a cup.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, Wrong again. Millen was an effective forth liner getting 10+ goals and 30 some points in one season IIRC.
Iginla outscored Nieuwendyk basically every season following the trade. The Flames had Nieu. while he was elite and following the trade he continued his precipitous decline into “old-agedom”. While we on the other hand, developed a super-star.
This is classic “how-to-win-a-trade” behavior.
Not exactly good, either. Like I said, his impact was not exactly high.
You discount the fact Nieuwendyk was hampered by injuries during his time in Dallas, set off by a cheap shot from Ricci. If you look at the PPG, Joe’s was still higher then Iggy’s.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Damn, you got me there. I wish we could have kept an older injured Nieu, because of his PPG, than have gotten Iginla and Millen.
Imagine all the cups we would have won!
He was injured because of a cheap shot while he was in Dallas, and he still had more counting number production per game then Iggy did.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions
You gotta check numbers before just replying. He played 64 and 46 games his last two seasons with the Flames.
Look, is simple. You trade a player on decline who was once a superstar in the league, still has good years ahead of him, and good leadership skills for a cheaper, healthier, superstar-to-be.
That’s how you improve your team. Plain and simple.
No reason why it shouldn’t be the objective with Iggy.
Maybe we should have kept Fleury instead of taking Regehr as well? Nope, sorry, same deal there as well.
One of those seasons was a lock out year, the other year he was recovering from off season surgery unrelated to the back problems he had in Dallas.
For every example you have of a star player being shipped out for a good return, there is also a trade where the return was awful. The Gilmour trade, the Hull trade, etc. That’s why it shouldn’t be the objective-you have no idea if what you get back will be of the same caliber.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Lawrence, you failed to to into account that Bourque got to play with Langkow for the majority of the year, and Iginla got a combo of Jokinen (YUCK) and Stajan. That will have a huge effect on the underlying numbers, not to mention that Iginla normally does face off against other teams top defencemen (Qcomp isn’t the most precise statistic I hate to say, it’s a function of corsi and +/-, which are situation stats, or in other words, are effected by how their coaches deploy them).
I didn’t fail to take that into account. Bourque’s numbers indicate to me that HE is driving the bus, not Langkow. In fact, I’ve been shooting holes in Langkow all season. He’s nowhere near the value Bourque is… Lanks faces easier competition, produces about 60% the counting numbers, and makes 1.5 times the cap hit next year. Don’t even consider their value equivalent with Bourque’s current pay scale.
Dude don’t take much stock into those QComp/QTeam numbers when making an argument…. When Dion got traded to Toronto, I remember Leaf fans pointed out that he played with the worst teammates based on his Qteam number, although his primary partner all year was Reggie (who in fact, is the #2 defenceman on the team). Plus, I wasn’t even making a comparison between Langkow and Bourque. I won’t argue that Bourque is the better player at this point (although he does have a bad penalty differential, which has a surprisingly big toll on a teams win total), but he has been put into better situations then Iginla this year.
From a business standpoint I think trying to trade Jarome Iginla would be a really stupid idea. I’m not sure exactly how much money they’d lose but I’m pretty damn sure it’s more then he makes. I might do it if I could get Taylor Hall since I think he has star quality and you can spin it right
Iginla to the Oilers for Eberle and Hall. lol
They can have Staios back, too.
by SmellOfVictory on Mar 29, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Nobody is saying trade Jarome for a bag of used pucks and Anders Eriksson. If it were up to me, I’d want a first, a solid prospect, and a legit top liner.
I’d love to see Iggy hoist the Cup someday, but realistically, unless we get a new GM who understands how to fleece and not get fleeced, that’s not happening anytime soon with most prospects being years away. I love me some Mitch Wahl, but he’s not stepping into the NHL and picking up 80 points next year.
In fact, I’d rather see Iggy raise a cup with another franchise than not at all, so long as that franchise isn’t the Canucks or the Oilers.
Nobody is saying “get rid of Jarmoe!!” We’re saying, let him compete for the Cup, trade him and give him a farewell ceremony, etc., etc. We could gain more than we’d lose. Provided it’s not Darryl that makes the trade.
fascinating read guys.
Amazing to a Canuck fan to hear the suggestion of trading Jarome.
The numbers sound interesting, but Iggy is a shooter.
We’ll take him to put on the PP and maybe 1st line…He can play with the Twins.
Shit, Burrows has 35 already, playing with those two. Imagine what Iggy would get!
Tho’…there is no way in heck that the Flames would ever trade him to us. My bet would be an Eastern team.
Maybe the Leafs? Only if Burkie promises to give Sutter the negatives and the remaining copies of the obviously very embarrassing photos of him he must have! ( just joking guys…sorry… ;-)
In all seriousness, I would keep him if I was you guys, and get him a true #1 centre. Iggy is always the guy this Canucks fan worries about when the two teams play. Even if he has had a bad year or two.
"I’m not asking for first-line money or top six money," Burrows said. "I don’t think it changes anything. I still consider myself a checker. That’s what I think I am first. That’s how I want to be paid. "If I can generate offence once in a while, I think it’s a plus for the team." Alex Burrows...Mar/09
So basically, something along the lines of the Devils in the Kovalchuk trade, where you get a 1st rounder, a solid prospect (who is also a cheapshot artist) and a top liner (Bergfors can only play on a top 6 line, he was useless when he wasn’t playing with Parise and Zajac/Rolston and Elias). And a Salary dump will be coming your way as well
Cheers, Complaints, homerism and bashing of mediocre pop musicians in 140 Characters
"DO NOT get stuck behind Kyle Wellwood in the buffet line. This isn't really etiquette, but it will prevent you from starving to death"- Down Goes Brown on Etiquette for Jason Spezza's wedding
by Kevin Sellathamby on Apr 1, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I would expect more then that since he isn’t a UFA.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Apr 1, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Yea true. Just using that trade as an example
Cheers, Complaints, homerism and bashing of mediocre pop musicians in 140 Characters
"DO NOT get stuck behind Kyle Wellwood in the buffet line. This isn't really etiquette, but it will prevent you from starving to death"- Down Goes Brown on Etiquette for Jason Spezza's wedding
by Kevin Sellathamby on Apr 1, 2010 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions
I am one that has been saying
for a couple years that as each year passes, Jarome erodes in quality and has one less shot at a cup. I would learn to live with him in a different team’s colours if it meant he would get a Stanley Cup out of it… maybe even it had to be the Canucks or the Oilers (nah, I don’t think I could forgive that). Still, dude deserves a shot at a cup again, and Calgary is not looking like the place to have it (as galling as that is to say).
Frankly, trading Iginla at this point would be an asinine decision, imnsho.
Trading him because you think Rene Bourque can be your core guy is even sillier in my mind. I love Bourque, but he is a support player, not a lead player. He takes far too many lazy penalties for my liking, and he’s had plenty of games where he was a non-factor himself. And yes, Bourque’s had easier opposition while playing with better linemates for most of the season. I’m sorry, but he is not a player you focus your team around.
The idea that Iggy should be traded so he can have a chance at a Cup has merit, but not at 32. Not for a couple years yet.
Don’t forget he is injured frequently. Even if it is by cheap shots, Iggy has missed a total of 42 games his entire career! Over 13 seasons! How many games has Bork missed in the past 2? He is unreliable as a “#1 on the team” guy.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions
As I said in the post.
We already have one Rene Bourque.
If we were inexplicably able to trade 1 Jarome Iginla for 2 more Bourque value players and a pick for example or a 500k player, the Math works out.
So, that’s 3 Rene Bourque’s and an extra IN and one Iginla OUT. That sounds like a pretty darn good vision to me.
Two questions I guess.
1. How many teams have “two Rene Bourques” available?
2. If Iginla really is as bad as many here have made him out to be, who the hell would give up two Bourque’s for him?
This is all notwithstanding two facts: 1. Iginla has an NMC, and 2. there is very little doubt that this organization loves Iginla. He’s not going anywhere until he decides otherwise.
Check and Mate.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
You’re taking the “twp Rene Bourque’s” far to literally, and I’ll give you the benefit you’re not actually that unintelligent.
That’s only a matter of dollars and value.
I’m not literally saying that Iginla should be traded for “two Rene Bourques, the CN tower and a Partridge in a pear tree”
And, yes you are right about the NMC, it doesn’t mean he’s not leaving ever, it just means he’s deciding, so why bring it up so often? It’s a consideration, and we’re all aware of it. But, he can move, if the deal is there, and everyone agrees.
and everyone agrees.
Even dollar/value wise, which players would you be targeting that would make the team better now? Would the other team even make that trade? You would need 3 parties to agree to it instead of the regular two, which is hard enough as it is.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
No, I get the figurative nature of your comment, I just don’t see it as feasible.
We’re not getting two Bourque-types in a trade for Iginla. As I said below, we’re getting picks and prospects, and we’re going into a full rebuild. As well intentioned as your suggestions are, they are definitely in the realm of short-term planning, and that rarely succeeds. Trading Iginla is the harbinger of a much longer plan, and one that does not see this franchise enjoying any success on the ice in year one of that plan.
I think it’s entirely feasible to get a Matt Duschene, Niklas Backstrom TYPE player for Iginla. I see Iginla demanding the same type of deal that brought him here, and maybe even more. A Rookie-prospect (top 12 pick) a serviceable player in the line-up today, and perhaps a little more.
So, a lot of upside and a bunch of money saved.
That money could then be used to bulk up the top line with Bourque.
Not Going Anywhere
Iggy’s popularity with fans and ownership will ensure that he is going to stay through the end of his contract – maybe traded in the last year to a contender. The core group near Iggy’s age – Langkow; Kipper; Regehr and Sarich are the ones that should be moved, because clearly this group is not winning a Cup and hanging on to them any longer will result in diminishing returns going forward. In other words trade them while they still have value.
Langkow – might be difficult to move at his current salary, but for next year isn’t Backlund #2 behind Stajan ? Get a 2nd rounder for him
Kipper Wait for the team whose goaltending lets them down in the playoffs and jump on them on June 10. Say Chicago for Skille and Beach ? Might have to take Huet in return if they add a second rounder too.
Regehr - Could fetch a first rounder. He’s an old 30 – trading for Staios fills the gap until Pelech or Seabrook fill the breach.
Sarich Won’t get as much for him – likely only to fetch a 3rd round pick because of his high cap number.
Others to consider – Glencross is Bourque -lite and frankly I think he is at his high water mark – his low contract might make him worth a 2nd rounder also. Resign Higgins at the same level ($1.2) to replace.
Kotalik and Moss are virtually worthless on the trade market so you have to hope they bounce back or you play out the string next year for a high pick.
Sign White and Nystrom – get Gio locked up long term; stay off the FA market and tank for a year for a good draft position next year
-I wouldn’t say Moss has zero trade value-he is a 20 goal scorer who was hurt this year. He’s also young and has a large defensive upside. That’s pretty easy to parlay into a 2nd rounder.
-If you are going to trade Kipper, you need a #1 goalie and a first rounder at the very least back.
-Lanks is still the best centre we have, so I see no reason for him to go before Iggy does. (which is to say neither go at all.)
-Sarich is #3 to move in my mind, behind Kotalik and Staios. And when I say move, I mean demotion, waivers, or trades.
-Higgins won’t sign for that little. 1.75 at the very least, in my mind.
-Mickis isn’t ready to be a #2 centre. He has done excellent work so far, but you are crazy if you think he is better then Lanks or Stajan at this point. I would be completely happy if next year the 3rd line was Dawes-Mickis-Moss.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Moss has value to the team – just no trade value because of his production this year – I’d rather keep him than trade him because I beleive he will bounce back and play to his contract value.
Trading Kipper is an asset management thing – after 3 years of declining performance – this year he bounced back, which was great but not enough to get us where we wanted to be ( not his fault). He might repeat next year, but then again he might not, so I say trade him while he has value. I proposed Chicago for Skille and Beach – who were both first round picks.
Langkow may be the best all round centre we have but the team is still not good enough ; and at 33 years and 2 more years at $4.5, this team needs to get younger now. his production will not go up next year.
Sarich actually would be my #1 to move – but as I said you are not going to get anything for him.
Higgins point production leaves him little bargaining power in a tight cap world.
I don’t think Backlund is better than Langkow at this point, I just think that at 1/3 of the cap number of Langkow he provides better value and I think if you move Langkow for younger assets you are better going forward – not next year maybe – but the cupboard needs to be restocked.
-I agree that the cupboard needs to be restocked. I just think that moving our #1 centre is a bad idea. So what if his counting numbers stay the same? He drives possession better then anyone else on the team, is excellent defensively, and is a Corsi monster.
-Just because you are a first round pick, it doesn’t mean you will be a legit NHLer. See: Chucko, Kris. Skille and Beach are not good enough prospects to justify moving Kipper to Chi town, and even if they were, the ‘Hawks would have to dump a ton of salary, and taking Huet back would be the single stupidest thing any GM could do. Even dumber then trading for Staios.
-Value has to be thrown out the window at some point. There is no evidence whatsoever that Lankgow’s contract is hindering the Flames from making a move, ergo, there should not be concern over his contract.
-Point production isn’t everything, and you forget there are 28 other teams that would be competing for Higgins’ services. With a contract that small, someone will always make an offer.
-Bottom line with Kipper-I see nothing that points to declining play next year. He had one “bad” season, where he still managed to win 45 games. From my point of view, there is no way the guy in the crease replacing him is going to be as good as he is, which makes the team worse.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions
Also, I would be way excited for Kipper for Skille+Beach, since Beach and Wahl are on the same line on the Chiefs and would hopefully carry that chemistry into their pro years.
And yeah, Kipper’s replacement likely won’t be as good, but we’re not competing for a cup next year, so we just need average goaltending. Besides, won’t Ellis be a FA this year? Probably be cheap too.
Ellis is a FA.
I’m always of the opinion you should never make your team worse. By getting rid of Kipper or Iggy or whomever, you do exactly that unless you get quality players back. That is also the reason I don’t like prospects who are anything other then top level-there is just too much chance in how they will develop, who they will play with, if they wind up fitting your needs, etc. If you are going to trade X, then get NHL players back who equal X. If I were GM, the only way I would have prospects come in to my system would be from the draft and from college. That way I can mold them the way they need to be to help my team the most.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions
I meant the NHL team, not the “Franchise” when talking about not making the team worse, btw.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions
See that's where we disagree
Iggy’s pay is waaaaay over-value. 7 mil for career lows (going back 10 years!), a couple of fights and a pretty smile? You trade him and get back two-way difference makers, who are younger, and faster… and the team is better, without a doubt.
Trading Kipper would be like trying to get water that’s coming into the hull of a sinking ship, out through a hole you’ve drilled in the other side.
For me it’s this: Trade Iggy and these things happen:
-The Flames have no defined on or off ice leader
-A large percentage of the fanbase is unhappy and angry towards the franchise
-The team goes into full on rebuild mode and there is no reason for Kipper or Reggie to stick around.
All of this makes the team just as bad as they were in the 90’s, even if the return is good.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Again, the team was bad in the 90’s cause we couldn’t afford to keep all the talent we won the cup with. So we lost a ton of talent and missed the playoffs.
We’re barely a playoff team over the last three seasons, and this year not. We’re going down, not up. The Flames cannot afford TO keep Iginla in my mind.
^^ “A study in Mediocrity” ^ while only 3% actually feel Iginla is still elite.
No, that’s not the reason at all. We could afford to keep talent, it’s just the ownership and GM’s traded said talent away. You can’t seriously say the Flames couldn’t afford to keep talent and then sign Jarome to a 7 million dollar contract at the very lowest point of the franchise’s history! That’s asinine.
Just because someone is in favor of trading Iggy does not mean they don’t think he is an elite player. I voted for the 4th option, but I believe the 3rd is true. Also, that “Study of Mediocrity” has been brought on by the very people who would be negotiating the deal to ship him out of town.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, but these will not work
First, trading Iggy in the last year of his contract is ridiculous. We’d get less in return for him, for what? a favour. The Flames are not in the business of winning their ex-players Stanley Cups, or winning other teams Stanley Cups. They are in the business of WINNING themselves. If Iggy goes (as unlikely as it is) it’s got to be when he’s playing his worst relative to when we can get the most for him. I think that is now.
Langkow, Regehr and Sarich are all coming off arguably their worst years and they don’t have the reputation or recent Olympic performance to skew opinion. If you trade Lanks now, you’ll get nothing for him. He’s worth more to the team staying…same with Regehr. Sraich is a different story.
That brings us to Kipper. Trading Kipper, next year is insane. We have NO leverage. I’m going to say that again. We have NO leverage. We don’t have a capable BACK-UP let alone someone who is pushing for Kipper’s job. His contract is in-line with league value (albeit slightly high) and his last two years have read: Poor, Poorer, Elite, thanks to Mike. No one, including half the people on this blog expect Kipper to be spectacular going forward…so let me ask you this. Would you trade FOR him? Doubt it. So what would you give up? little to Nothing. PLUS, league-wide, the value of goalies is at it’s lowest in decades. The ‘market’ is saturated and there is little confidence in it anyway. Trading an elite goalie right now is silly. HELL, even teams with three goalies couldn’t move one, and if Price can’t be traded these days, or Philly isn’t willing to part with anyone significant for a goalie…then no one is offering squat.
If you trade Kipper I doubt you get more than a late round pick, a back-up and a third of fourth liner – at most. How the hell does that improve the team?
Dance partner
The key to any of these trades is to find a partner whose needs align with what we have on offer for 30+ year old veterans. Which is why I picked Chicago as the destination for Kipper, because they see elite goaltending as their only hole and chose their top 2 forward propects. Maybe Washington loses early again and they get desperate. As Kenny Rogers said " You got to know when to fold em" – this group of veterans have had their chance and the time is now to rebuild. You can argue that Langkow, Sarich, Regehr all had down years and will bounce back – so what we can finish 8th or 9th again ? Iggy will not be traded; ergo someone else must go.
I feel like I have to put this out there:
Iggy has a NMC, so he is not going anywhere.
Can you even remember the last time a player who didn’t want to go waived their NMC/NTC? Neither can I.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:14 AM PDT reply actions
I would consider moving Iggy in the final year of his contract IF the Flames aren’t contenders in three seasons.
And what could we get for an aging Iginla not a whole hell of a lot. He’s a Flame for life and I’m just fine with that.
GO FLAMES GO!!!
Exactly. I’m sure many people here think the price tag he has is much too high, but tbh, the Flames are paying him for wearing the jersey right now. Anything he does on the ice is just gravy.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions
Short of absolute trade robbery, I see no way the Flames are fully Cup ready 3 years from now. I love Iggy, but he’s more valuable as a trade asset than a player to us. We’re not competing this year, or next, or probably the year after. Ergo he’s more valuable to secure someone who can compete in 3-4 years rather than right now.
Did we see Phoenix coming ?
Anything is possible. They could contend next year, or they could pull an Edmonton. The guys acquired this year have been brutally snakebit, specifically Bouw, Hagman and Higgins; Kotalik to a lesser extent – they should have had way more goals. My read though if we hang on to Langkow, Glencross and Iggy isany gains made by the former group will be offset by the latter; ergo trade the vets except for Iggy who won’t be moved ( though we said that about Phaneuf didn’t we ?)
If it was 1st, Quality Prospect and a roster player for Iginla then I would do it be we know in today’s NHL no team in the right mind would do that.
GO FLAMES GO!!!
Iggy’s value both to the team and on the market is decreasing. I think this summer would be a great time to trade him, if the Flames could. Get while the getting is good.
There would be an uproar in the city, but that would subside with a good season and deep run in the playoffs.
Alternatively, the Flames need to get rid of some salaries. Sarich, Kotalik, Staios, one of the other new forwards, and Conny is about ready to retire to TSN. It would be nice if the Flames could parlay those guys into a high first rounder and good first line centre to play with Iggy.
I don’t think either of those scenarios is going to happen though.
There would be an uproar in the city, but that would subside with a good season and deep run in the playoffs
Neither of which could conceivably happen as a result of such a trade.
Trading Iginla means one thing, and one thing only: full rebuild. In this hypothetical, Iginla goes to a team looking to make a run. Teams like that don’t send top players, they send prospects and picks. And if you are dumping Iginla, you might as well cast off Regehr and Kiprusoff as well. And none of these guys get dealt for players that make you a winner in 2010-11.
There is no great season and long playoff run at the end of the “trade Iginla” tunnel. Only the uncertain future that comes with the arrival of a bunch of unknowns.
Frankly, this organization is not ready for a full rebuild. Nor should they be. We can all be panicky idiots as fans, but the organization has to think longer term.
Trading Iginla would be thinking about the future, as opposed to being stuck in the "win-now with experience approach the Sutters have employed with so little success.
At the same time, it doesn’t have to be “full-rebuild” You’re building a strawman with ideas like “full-rebuild, NMC, through out the baby with the bath water”
I talking about Iginla’s identifiable value vs his pay. If it’s out of whack, and we have serious reason to believe the that will only grow, it’s the pertinent and responsible thing to consider moving him for better value going forward.
There is no need to ‘cast-off’ anyone, because their pay vs value is not way out of whack like Iggy.
You don’t fire your whole department because one person is falling behind in their duties. You fire them.
There is no need to ‘cast-off’ anyone, because their pay vs value is not way out of whack like Iggy.
Sarich’s is, Kotalik’s is, Staio’s is…
Well, those guys yeah. I was responding to the strawman…
If you trade Iginla then you might as well cast-off Kipper and Regehr as well.
So unless you are being sarcastic here, you are advocating that all three will go?
I don’t want to put words in your mouth, so tell me if I’m wrong.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Ah, ok.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed
But you get nothing in return. Staios cheaper than Sarich or Regehr and only signed for one more so his isn’t that bad.
dude, we know this… and it’s been covered already. We’re dealing with the ‘if’. Lots of players waive their NMC. Who knows, maybe you need to say it over and over to feel more secure?
Like I said, name one other then Kotalik who waived their NTC without stating they wanted out first.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I love all the usage of the word “ergo” lately.
If the Flames did manage to shed some salary by trading/demoting some or all of Sarich/Kotalik/Staios, which seems highly unlikely even with a new GM running the show, and lose a few players to free agency, I doubt that would leave enough cap space to sign a “first line centre” (because it’s sure as hell not Matt Stajan), replace Sarich with a cheap UFA or up-and-coming prospect, AND re-sign or replace guys like White, Higgins, and Nystrom, which looks, to me at least, like we’re probably going to get worse next year rather than better.
Maybe trading Iggy now so that he doesn’t have to suffer through another playoff drought makes sense, but if you want to trade him to a team that’s ready to win so he can get a Cup, you’re probably not going to get as much back in return. Going back to the NMC point, the last thing we want to happen with Iggy is Sundin-esque saga where he doesn’t want to leave and is essentially run out of town. Who knows what the Leafs could have gotten for Sundin had he agreed to waive his NMC, but whatever the package would have been, it’s unlikely that it would have made them into a more competitive team. That’s the issue with trading Iginla.
(I apologize for the run-on sentences)
Excellent comparison. At this point, the reason he would move is because he deserves a cup. How many cup contenders are willing to move “two Rene Bourques” for Iggy? Like Res said, how many teams even have that?
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh my god dude. This conversation is about moving money and value out for different money and value in. Is it too difficult to comprehend that doesn’t all have to come in the same trade?
The basic concept is the money for Iggy is too high, and the value too low.
Whereas, to another team, the value may be perceived as high and the money available. Acquire the best you can for Iggy and then if there is money remaining…go out and acquire another two-way value player.
It’s not that tough of a concept.
Is it too difficult to comprehend that doesn’t all have to come in the same trade?
It is difficult, because this is the first time you have brought up multiple trades.
You are talking about moving Iggy. The assumed deal would have the same amount of “perceived” quality coming back.
I think you are assuming that there would be enough salary left on the cap and enough quality left on the market to justify the trade. In reality, there isn’t. There is 2 other bona-fide first liners on this team, and even that can be argued. How do you expect the team to compete with two second lines? Because you sure as hell are not getting a first liner in today’s NHL for less then 4.5 mil.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions
That’s funny, we have Rene Bourque for 3.3 million and I’m arguing he’s a better value player than Iginla AND a bona fide first liner.
Who does Phoenix have for more than 4.5million?…oh Doan by 50,000 dollars. Next?
The idea that you have to spend like crazy is the old NHL. With the cap, you need value, and Phoenix is a perfect example of that. Their three highest paid forwards are 4.5, 3, and 1.8 mil.
Oh, but they are not competitive are they?…what’s that? they are 4 points out of first in the West?
You fail to mention many of them are on entry level deals and 14 of them are free agents this year.
Like I said, 2 arguable first liners. Even if you bring in the 3.5 million dollar saviour, you have negated all the cap space that you got for Iggy for a minimal skill increase.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Also, their 3 highest paid players are actually 4.5, 3 and 2.8.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Even if you bring in the 3.5 million dollar saviour, you have negated all the cap space that you got for Iggy for a minimal skill increase.
huh? You could get two players to play with Bourque at 3.5 each. So a whole top line for 500-600k less than our classic:
4th liner (Boyd, Nystrom etc) – 3.5 mil. Centre – Iggy
And if those two forwards can play a two-way game and score 55-60pts between them, you’re a heck of a lot better off. That’s 110pts and a reliable two-way line.
That would be a DREAM compared to the above Iggy scenario.
So then who would you suggest? Because in the free agent market, I’m not seeing these guys.
I was assuming that the players you got back for Iggy were around 2 million in salary, and then a 3.5 mil free agent pickup. I just don’t see a situation where that all happens and you have an increase in skill.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions
or the goaltending
If you can get prospects and players by trading Kipper and you get an FA goalie to fill the gap at less than 5.8 M; you are ahead if you can move the team up from 26th in the league in goal scoring. Someone brought up Ellis – he’s not as good as Kipper but if you can get him for $3M, maybe not next year does he outperform Mikka, but perhaps in the 2 years following he does AND we have the prospects contributing as well.
I maintain that of the veterans, Kipper and Regehr would get the most return on the trade market. Iggy and Langkow are probably “over the curve” in value meaning their salary exceeds their production therefore their trade value is depressed. Glenncross on the other hand is under the curve – his production is good for the $1.2 he is paid, and although he is not as good a player as Langkow – he is a better value and would get the same on the trade market (low 2nd rounder). Another guy way under the curve is Gio – but I would not advocate trading him unless it was part of a killer deal for Brad Richards or Vinny Lecavelier !!
This team was a consensus pick to win the division this year. Yeah, it turned into a disaster but I honestly don’t get how everyone seems to think they know the future. I’ve mentioned it before, but this team reminds me of the 91-92 Flames. Veteran core that just underachieved like mad to miss the playoffs. The team went on to make the playoffs the next four seasons and won two division titles.
Hard decisions have to be made, absolutely. I think Sarich is as good as gone, and someone like Pelech is coming up to take his place. I’d like to see Staios gone with Pardy back in the lineup. Kotalik if anyone will take him (doubtful). Sutter replaces Conroy on the roster.
We’ve been through this “first line centre” junk for years. It was that mentality that led to the Jokinen trade and all of the problems that followed. Stajan and Langkow as my top two centres is fine by me, though I wouldn’t be surprised if the team asks Langkow if he is willing to move on.
There are changes about to happen, and I think an influx of younger talent. With Backlund on full time, Sutter, Pelech and maybe another guy, we’ll be entering 2010-11 with a relatively large group of young, enthusiastic kids and guys who have only been here a couple months in stajan, Hagman, etc. Hopefully between this, and the humbling effect of being kicked out of the playoffs on the existing core, we’ll see a team much more dedicated to Sutter’s system next year.
And, to that point, I would not be surprised if the Sutters remain through the off-season. With little room to maneuver against the cap and no draft picks, I see no reason to set up a new management structure that can’t do much right now. Let the team start next season under this regime, but if the same problems persist into next year, I could see them removed by Christmas, and possibly with the full rebuild happening then.
Sarich
I don’t see Sarich going anywhere, he’d only get you a 3rd round pick, there will be FA defensemen available cheaper. Regehr on the other hand would fetch a decent return. Same logic applies to we are stuck with Kotalik, but you might get trade value out of Glencross.
Staios is relatively good value
He’s not Regehr – but he is half the price – so why not parlay Reggie in to a top prospect.
Proof in the puddin
It’s like the stock market – don’t fall in love with your stocks. Sell high ! I love the compete level of Langkow, Regehr, Kipper, Glencross et al – but what do we have to show for it ? Not very much. THN has Flames prospects rated 26th, we need to restock. You are not going to restock trying to trade/ release or buy out Kotalik or Staios
If you sell high, you never win. You will never have the assets to make the deep run because you would be in a perpetual state of rebuilding.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed – you don’t sell high if you are winning ! The problem is that for the last 6 years built around a core of Iggy, Reghr, Langkow and Kipper, you haven’ t won diddlly and their prime years are just about over. Do you advocate hanging on to all these guys until they are 35 or 36 and are still big cap hits ? You sell just before the decline and build value.
The last 6 years also haven’t been the core’s fault. I see no reason to screw with it.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Your best players need to be your best players. Who are you blaming then? You are way too attached to these guys. This was the last year for those 4 to do something together – time to move on. Iggy will stay for PR reasons – the others should be used to rebuild. You disagree I know; but that’s OK I guess.
I’m blaming guys like Bryan Marchment and Anders Eriksson and Cory Sarich and Steve Staios and on and on. Guys who were brought in, given roles bigger then they should have, and cost the team.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions
so...
The way forward is what ? Hope that the core 4 are better next year ? They are all on the wrong side of 30.
Do you think you can Buy out Sarich and Kotalik and replace with Pelech and Sutter ? Your cap hit is exactly the same then and you haven’t improved the team. Those guys will get you nothing in a trade that will improve the team either short term or long term. You have to resign White; and get Gio under contract, You are up against the cap with 4 of your 5 highest paid players over 30, you can’t blame the spare parts; or you are just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic !
Disagree. If you replace Sarich and Kotalik with Pelech and Sutter, you have much more cap flexibility, and you have gotten rid of two anchors. You don’t have to buy them out-you can bury salary in the minors as well. If you do that, the loss of skill is negligible at best and you have that extra room for Gio and White.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions
except
I cant see ownership agreeing to bury 6.6 million in the minors. I’d rather trade marketable commodities for prospects and draft picks – play out the string on unmarketable contracts to secure a lottery pick in the draft. You don’t think Edmonton is stoked on getting Hall or Seguin ? Short term pain for long term gain.
The alternative is more middle of the road mediocrity.
Those guys will get you nothing in a trade that will improve the team either short term or long term
.
Cap space.
I was serious yesterday when I said I’d trade them for 7th round picks.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 30, 2010 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Prarie Stew is right on with the ‘big idea’ of selling while the selling is good for your core 4 players who are likely in decline.
I argue for that to be Iggy because of the return he will demand.
I argue that shouldn’t be Kipper because he’ll get us nothing in return …guaran..freekin…teed. Like I said, no one flinched at Price, who’s cheap, young and has his whole career ahead of him. And if Philly is willing to stick with Boucher, over a trade, then goalies are worth Squat.
Amen P.S. we cannot just keep re-arranging deck chairs on the titanic.
However, PR….schmeee R. I don’t give a crap about PR. Iggy can go as easily as any franchise player, and he should.
The PR is one aspect on not moving Iggy but I think the other is that I think he will return less than Kipper – but that’s where you and I differ Lawerence. Teams like Chicago, Washington and even San Jose are not going to look to an aging power forward to put them over the top if they do not win this year. They will fail because of goaltending. A year ago you might not have got much for Kipper, but his performance this year ( top 5 in sv % as opposed to 30th) might get GM’s salivating. Price may have not got much interest because the jury is still out on him – can you say Raycroft ? Jim Carey ? Dipietro ? . Kipper much more proven.
I can tell you this: There is no way in hell that Kipper get more in a trade than Iggy.
No way.
Period.
I’m not saying Kipper couldn’t be traded to a team needing a goalie, but it’s unlikely. The Flyers offered Carcillo/Giroux and a pick for Price, from what I heard. Look, I’m a big defender of Kipper, and I hold him in high regard, but as for trades, goalies rarely get anything in return, and are often traded for other goalies.
Think of this: Luongo AND Krajicek went for Bert, Auld and Allen.
That’s a backup goalie, a 3/4 defender and a serial killer reclamation project sparkle pants player. for LUONGO…who at the time could make a compelling case for best goalie in the league.
You trade Kipper to Chicago…you’d be offered Huet and Sopel
You trade Kipper to Wash…you’d be offered Theo and a third rounder.
You trade Kipper to SJ…..ha! yeah right.
to Philly…it would be Leighton and Carcillo/Giroux.
Would you make any of those trades? not likely
I think Kipper has fairly high value right now, and would comand a lot more then Price.
And you realize that Mike Keenan did the Luongo trade? Nuff’ said.
Sure…I didn’t say that, but all that value will be eaten by the goalie who comes back in the deal…why can’t we get our minds around that?
We can’t trade Kipper and not get a goalie back.
Another team can’t acquire Kipper, without likely dropping one of their over-priced ones.
What goalies could we trade for that are better than Kipper? NONE. Cause then that team DOESN’T NEED a goalie!!!
So we get shittier goalie back, with whip cream and a cherry on top.
That my friends is stupidity 101.
Be different if we had a number two guy pushing Kipper out….but we don’t. Now do we have a prospect other than Irving….and….umm…where…umm..
No I would not make those trades, I do think that there might be a GM that would offer more when his guy goes .883 in the playoffs.
Luongo trade is bad example, you need to take out the high and the low score and as trades go ; that one was Leeman-esque
by PrairieStew on Mar 30, 2010 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I bet Kipper could be traded to Philly for JVR
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 30, 2010 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Wasn’t Richards traded to Dallas for Smith?
by SmellOfVictory on Mar 30, 2010 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Staios is relatively good value
Dude are you serious? He was the LVP this year on the 30th ranked NHL team. The underlying stats don’t lie.
He’s an NHL defenesman with only 1 year left on a below average contract. Better value than Sarich based on annual hit and the fact that Sarich is under contract for a whole ’nother year of declining performance.
by PrairieStew on Mar 30, 2010 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions
How is he a good player? Explain to me. Have you been watching game tape? I don’t nor do I have time to. I look at the numbers and come to the result that Staios = SHIT. I then look at that cap-hit and realize Staios = SHITTIER. I then compare Staios to similar players (Erickson, Warrener (the latter years), Zyzuin) and…
/ Breaks computer
// Sets house on fire
you boys ever hear of sweat equity?
Because I know the owners have. Also, remember that story about Jarome getting sued by Hammer Homes? Ill walk you through this slowly. To get sued by a builder means the house was built. Ergo: Jarome isn’t waiving his no trade if he just built a multimillion dollar home in the city.
People, this guy has been a horse his whole career, and he has one bad season and your ready to get rid of the guy? We knew this was a possibility when he signed the extension, and I am pretty sure nobody here was like ‘fuck why did we sign one of the best players in the league to a multi year extension’ at the time. These contracts are a risk and if we signed Jarome for 5 years and got 3 good ones out of it, we should be happy.
It isnt Jaromes fault he had to play under playfair and keenan for the end of his prime years. It isnt Jaromes fault what happened with the capspace at the end of the season last year. We may have missed the window. Darn. Clear cap room and sign another stud, but this guy isn’t getting traded.
Also, Who knows if the rumours are true about the Dion thing, but you hear a lot about how Jarome threw his weight around, and the owners (if it is true) chose him over the 23 year old guy with 15 years of hockey left.
Anyways, back to your hypotheticals. Some of them were fun.
Furthermore, I think Peter Loubardias should be fired.
‘cause of his house? dome….have another. You think anyone gives a sweet shit about Iggy’s house? Players have houses all over the place. Wasn’t Theo Fleury living in Phoenix for years? He never even played for Phoenix.
Listen, I get the idea…NMC, it complicates things, house, kids, family, blah, blah, blah.
We’ve got these players signed to contract with a NMC…if you seriously are hell bent on beating this horse to death:
Iggy
Jbo
Kipper
Regehr
Lanks
Kotalik
Stajan (modified)
Bourque (modified)
So the same situation everybody is crying on about with Iggy pretty much applies to all those other players as well. You think we’re going to get any better suddenly after four consecutive years of being “under-achievers” with the same 8 No-movement players next year? What suddenly the fourth line is going to save us? Forget it. Someone(s) need to go…and if anyone of those 8 can say no, then we’re talking at the same level for all of them.
So, it should be Iggy. Relative to dollars, he’s the poorest performer on the list who will get any kind of return. Kotalik, is a non-factor…cause he won’t get us an 8th rounder. Goalies aren’t worth their value right now, Regehr is in “poor season/sell low” mode…which won’t help us. Jbo is young and worth the risk, Lanks is high value in no-trade-value areas. Stajan and Bourque are here to stay.
That only leaves Iggy. Under-performing, over-paid, highly desired/respected.
Relative to dollars, he’s the poorest performer on the list
Which is why he shouldn’t be the guy traded because he won’t get you much. A little more than Atlanta got for Kovy – maybe. I guess what we are both saying is that the GM – whoever that is had better explore all possibilities
I cannot believe you honestly think Iginla would not demand a massive return. Not sure how you validate that decision.
If he didn’t get a good return, I wouldn’t trade him either, because that’s pointless, but we know people around the league would look at name, goals, and leadership. Iggy has all of that. We just get to see him float around playing shitty-ass defense all season, and then run straight up the boards face-first into traffic over and over again. So we know his weaknesses.
based on your comment !
You said relative to dollars he is the poorest perfomer on the list. I agree with you. So would 29 other GM’s. That combined with the fact that ownership wants a player to retire in Flame togs with 500 g and 1000 pts means that before they agreed to move him you’d have to way overpay !
by PrairieStew on Mar 30, 2010 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions
The house comment is valid. I’m sure you don’t give a shit about his house, but I’m willing to bet his wife does. The point here is this: Iggy is possibly the least likely person of all the players you mentioned with NMC’s to agree to a move. He isn’t in the same situation as players like Kotalik and Stajan who haven’t had time to settle in. Yes, technically if everything else was equal then we’re talking the same level for all of them. But everything else is not equal. I know you’re talking business, and from a pure business sense you are likely right about trading Iginla. However the NMC makes a trade dependent on the whims of a player. So yes, YOU may not care about some guys house, but chances are he does and the NMC means he gets to decide if he wants to go or not.
Fire the other Peter
30 years of P maher showing off his encyclopedic knowledge of the players instead of following the play is just irritating. Follow the play – you are the PLAY BY PLAY announcer, not the color guy !!!!
Dude...
Peter Maher is a Calgarian Institution. Does Pita Pit on 17th Ave decorate their windows with SKEEEYORES decal during the playoffs? FUCK NO. It’s all about Maher’s “YEAAAAAAAAH BABY!”
Look at some of the classic trademark phrases uttered in sports commentary history:
Down Goes Frazier -Howard Cossell
There Goes The Population In Pominville -Rick Jeanneret
Do You Believe In Miracles? -Al Michaels
“It’s a chicken, stuffed in a duck, stuffed in a turkey!” (No video) -John Madden
TELL ME THAT “YOU CAN PUT IT IN THE WIN COLUMN” DOESN’T BELONG THERE.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 30, 2010 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions
great lines yes
still a bad play by play guy. Too often you can’t tell whether the play is on or not cause he is rambling on about something. I think it came from almost 20 years of carrying his color guy Doug Barkley who never had anything colorful to say except " i tell you what Peter, he sure did…"
by PrairieStew on Mar 30, 2010 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions
You’re going to get yourself hurt if you keep badmouthing Elmer Fudd Peter Maher like that
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 30, 2010 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions
shhhh I’m huntin for a wabbit. huhuhuhuhuh
by PrairieStew on Mar 30, 2010 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
If the Flames are even going to consider trading Iginla, Daz should not be in charge of doing it. Case in point, the Dion Phaneuf trade. This guy has already screwed up one trade of a somewhat elite player which could yield a high return (like a 1st rounder for ex) so I don’t think he should be entrusted in trading away someone such as Jarome. Honestly, Daz couldn’t even find a suitable trading partner for Dion yet alone (and as we have since observed) suitable parts in return. The more times goes by the more I just get upset he made the deal with the Maple Leafs. There had to of been a better team to deal Dion to. Leading up to that trade, Burke was trying to make any deal for almost anyone and no team would deal with him since the Leafs had NOTHING to give back. Yet someone how Daz manages to trade Dion Phaneuf to them. All I’m getting at is IF a trade involving Jarome is considered the GM making that trade needs to be someone other than Daz.
"Where do you go from here, Dion?" "I go to Toronto."
Spreading that Calgary Flames, Montreal Expos, The U, and Orlando Magic love.
In all fairness though, Phaneuf really hasn’t done squat with the Leafs so far either. He has yet to score a goal with them, and has like 7 assists in what…20+ games? I don’t think the return the Flames got back was that bad, but it probably could have been better, for sure. I still hate the Jokinen/Kotalik trade more.
Actually, it’s funny you say this because I think the main reason that Jarome would not be traded is because of the situation Sutter is in. He’s on such shaky ground with the team, with management, with a post-season miss likely…that if he traded Jarome, he may get shot.
With that said, could you imagine that Sutter is fired and the first thing the new GM does is come in and trade Iginla? Disaster.
However, that doesn’t change my mind at all that if I was the GM of this team, and the deal was there, I wouldn’t hesitate to walk over to Jarome’s house and start telling him pretty convincingly that the grass is greener over there for him, and better here for the new guys, the team and the fans.
Either that, or I’d being trying pretty hard to get him to renegotiate that contract of his.
Speaking of which, if Turek had renegotiated in the Salary cap era, what would have happened? Is this the unknown loop-hole of the future?
You can’t renegotiate post lockout.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 31, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions
I’d be interested in what you would say to him that would convince him to uproot his family to go to another market.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 31, 2010 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Why does his whole family have to move? I don’t get that. In fact, many hockey players just have a small apartment in the city they play in and go to their real home frequently.
He just strikes me as the kind of guy that would have his family around.
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Apr 1, 2010 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
disaster
I’m sure if Daz wanted a mulligan it would be thte deadline deal of last year. Everything about Jokinen has been a disaster – he just didn’t get it done, and if he had never been acquired, you’d still have Lombo, Prust , the pick AND Cammaleri. Instead you have Kotalik and his $3 million anchor for next year, and an injured Higgins who despite his effort level couldn’t score on an empty net from 5 feet with a snow shovel.
As far as what they got for Phaneuf, Stajan is decent value, Hagman another guy who gets chances but can’t score, White is good value and Mayers has been great – a significant upgrade over McGrattan, awesome on faceoffs great work with Nystrom etc.
rumour was that cammy wanted out. but yeah —-darryl does not understand player-for-player trades. i don’t think he’s ever had a good one. player-for-draft pick, yes.
by walkinvisible on Mar 31, 2010 9:04 AM PDT up reply actions
Yup cammy was disliked by guys like Glencross due to his Ontarioized attitude of entitlement and superiority
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 31, 2010 10:07 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
lol! rec’d
The 4th Line Blog
Go Flames Go
by Justin Azevedo on Mar 31, 2010 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions
Wouldn’t shovel horses**t with GlenX in the Chuckwagon barn huh ?
by PrairieStew on Mar 31, 2010 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions
Langkow for Gauthier and Saprykin. Absolute theft and one of the best trades he ever pulled.
Of course, he duped one of the worst GM’s this league has ever seen in Mike Barnett*, so it’s not that big an accomplishment.
*(not coincidentally, Barnett is now a “senior advisor” to Glen Sather in New York. Don’t you love how the NHL finds endless ways to employ even it’s most incompetent members?)
by Kent Wilson on Mar 31, 2010 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yep – that was a good one.
Incompetent leaders – aren’t John Ferguson Jr and Craig Button working for someone ?
by PrairieStew on Mar 31, 2010 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions
Holy Crap! 135 comments.
Come on….let’s get it to 189, so we can really kick the crap out of the 63 comments I got for the Kipper Fanpost.
Do it, or I swear I’ll write a fanpost as to why I think Kotalik should be given the “C” (ha!)
Someone must have made some decent trades
In an ideal world you would draft and keep 2 quality players every year. You wouldn’t have to make trades or expensive forays in to the FA market. You would have 2 20 yr olds 2 at 21 etc up to 32 years old. You’d think it should be easy enough to get 2 NHL players out of the 7 you draft annually. If we go back 2007 to 1996 – here is what the Flames draft record line up would look like :
Anderson
McIlhinney
Morris Phanuef
Pardy Frogren
Foster Lydman
Nystrom Stoll Kobasew
Prust Lombardi Moss
Brigley Begin Moen
Saprykin Boyd Fata
Pretty bleak huh .That’s the best there is – and really you can’t have both Lombo and Stoll, because both of them were drafted and reentered the draft – Calgary couldn’t sign Stoll, and Edmonton Lombardi and they were picked by the other guys the 2nd time around. Only Phanuef approaching All Star level. 3 guys that were just a cup of coffee. 2 or 3 more marginals, Not a single first line forward. Only one guy ( Morris approaching 800 games) will likely play 1000. Some GM along the way (Coates, Button or Daz) has clearly made the team better through trades.
By comparison lets look at Flames All Draft team 1978-1987 (coincides with Cup year 89)
Riggin
Vernon
Macinnis Suter
Konroyd Reinhart
Marsh Glynn
Roberts Nieuwendyk Hull
Makarov Quinn Fleury
Berezan Bradley Loob
Hrdina Peplinski Matteau
Ranheim Hunter
3 HOF’s – should be 2 more; some outstanding role guys – 7 guys with 1000 games etc …
What an amazing contrast – a smaller talent pool to find players from 79-87 ( way less US and European scouting) and way more competition for guys to lose their jobs (only 21 teams vs 30 now) and the 80’s group just kicks the current crop all over in terms of career success.
I guess my point is you can trade like crazy, but success at the draft table is absolutely critical.
and for fun the intervening years of 88-95
9 years only but it’e easy to see why the team struggled through the 90’s. Only 2 decent players here but with limitations. A whole bunch of plumbers
Kidd
Muzzatti
Svehla Gauthier
Allison Bouchard
Titov Reichel Clark
Manderville Stillman Hoglund
Kruse Murray McCarthy
Dingman Wilm
I think I fall into the “don’t trade Iggy” camp. Were his last two seasons fantastic? No, but still been decent. Were they $6-7M decent? Maybe not, but the preceeding years certainly were.
I just have a hard time believing that anything we could get back for Iggy would put the Flames over the top in the short run. The biggest problem with the Flames is their sketchy drafting record. When you look at today’s best teams, they are largely the result of good drafting (along with several years as bottom-dwellers to obtain those high picks).
short term ?
Any trade at this point is about long term whether it involves Iggy or any of the other vets over 30. The question to be answered is does ownership have the stomach for short term pain – a couple of years without playoff aspirations to build back up with younger players.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Northwest Standings
Flames Schedule
Next 5 Games
@
Anaheim
|
Mon 02/06 | 7:00 PM PST |
|
@
San Jose
|
Wed 02/08 | 7:00 PM PST |
|
@
Phoenix
|
Thu 02/09 | 6:00 PM PST |
|
Vancouver
|
Sat 02/11 | 7:00 PM PST |
|
Toronto
|
Tue 02/14 | 6:00 PM PST |
Last 5 Games
|
Chicago
|
Fri 02/03 | W 3 - 1 |
|
Detroit
|
Tue 01/31 | L 1 - 3 |
|
San Jose
|
Tue 01/24 | L 0 - 1 |
|
@
Edmonton
|
Sat 01/21 | W 6 - 2 |
|
@
Los Angeles
|
Thu 01/19 | SO - W 2 - 1 |
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Friday’s Three Stars: Brassard wins it for Blue Jackets in overtime; Halak blanks Kings
- Puck Previews: Blues host Kings in first game after break; Blackhawks’ road struggles
- Best barometer of the St. Louis Blues’ success? Gifts from political lobbyists
- ‘Scott Gomez Can’t Put Anything In’: The ‘Hey Jude’ of Scott Gomez protest songs (Video)
- Puck Headlines: Jimmy Howard’s injury; top 50 players; drinking beer out of hockey skate (yuck)
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- WHL Roundup: A look at Friday's games
- Gabriel and Leipsic two goals each as the Winterhawks defeat the Silvertips 7-3
- Feser solidifies Americans win with two empty-net goals against the Thunderbirds
- Holberg scores winner in shootout as the Chiefs beat the Royals 6-5
- Brown makes 26 saves to lead the Rockets over the Cougars 2-1
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
