Five things: What a team

Ryan Lambert
March 28 2012 09:08AM

1. False hope

Watching the Flames' pretty impressive comeback win over Dallas on Sunday was frustrating.

Not that they didn't play well or anything like that, but I was annoyed — who me? no way. — with all of it for two reasons. The first should be pretty clear: Where was this team against Edmonton or Columbus or Minnesota or, to a lesser extent, Colorado? Like, this was a really nice game for the team against one of the hottest teams in the West, and oh by the way the Pacific is super-duper tight, so if anything, the Stars had about 10,000 times more to play for than the Oil, 'Jackets, Wild, and Avs. Let's not act like this five-game losing streak did anything to make the Flames hungrier down the stretch or anything else. It basically screwed them, not that they weren't already.

And the other thing that's annoying about is that it allows the "Well they still might make it" crowd to keep on blathering on that they still might make it. Mathematically, yes. A meteor could hit the rinks of every team ahead of them and rain fiery death on all teams involved, allowing the Flames to forfeit-win their way into the playoffs and everyone would be pretty happy. Jay Feaster and the upper-upper management types will be pleased, in particular, because it will have vindicated the whole "going for it" thing that I'm so fixated upon due to it having been ludicrous.

The fact of the matter is the Flames need to win out to even have a shot of making it at this point and... oh what's that? They have to play Vancouver twice? Yeah. Forget it. Probably should have just won against Edmonton and a very banged-up Minnesota to get those four points, eh?

And this isn't even one of those "Well hey jeez Brent Sutter should have gone to Iginla in the shootout" things, because getting worked up over those relatively niggling details — particularly because while Jarome Iginla is many things, "good at the shootout" sure isn't one of them — seems an utter waste of time. The issue shouldn't be who did and didn't go in the shootout. The issue should be why the Flames were in the shootout against the goddamn Wild when they had a two-goal lead.

It's all just so insipid and really, it's being parroted from the team itself because that's the kind of garbage they have to say to keep people even remotely interested in yet another fruitless throwaway season that was, in retrospect, pretty terrible. Sutter and Feaster kicking garbage cans and yelling swear words in front of the press was a particularly nice touch, though. Really got everyone good and focused on something that wasn't the team losing to crap teams for a minute.

2. Can we stop praising performances now?

This is associated with above, but here we go.

Headline in the Herald yesterday morning was something like, "Comeau and Co. pick good time to break slump."

Yeah, hmm, I'm gonna go ahead and disagree. A good time would have been two weeks ago. A great time would have been a month ago. Six goals in five games against some pretty bad teams, then five goals in one game against a pretty good one. That's not a good time to break the slump, that's an annoying time to do it.

At this point, really, what does scoring five against Dallas matter? What would scoring nine have mattered? If doesn't help unless you can go back and apply the extra goals to previous losses to smooth out your goal differential across a few games. 

3. More on Gaudreau and Arnold

Well Flames prospects Johnny Gaudreau and Billy Arnold keep contributing for the Boston College Eagles en route to what appears to be a very likely national title.

BC shutout both Air Force and Minnesota-Duluth in college hockey's "regional" portion of the 16-team tournament. Now, granted, they were the No. 1 seed in the whole thing and they've won 17 games in a row, but this Eagles team, man. Wow.

Shutting out Air Force in a 2-0 win doesn't seem that impressive, but Air Force was at the very least able to get BC out of its comfort zone with a very strong defensive game. They lost anyway. The real test was always going to be Duluth, and that's where the Flames picks shined.

Gaudreau had a goal and an assist in that one, and Arnold not only had the team's second goal — in the course of 1:16 early in the second period, mind you — but also played a huge role in establishing the tone of the game. In the very first shift of the game, the puck got forced behind the Duluth net, and while linemate Paul Carey followed in hot pursuit, he ran into a Duluth defenseman and the puck got lost in their feet and sticks. So what does Arnold do? Comes in at about 200 miles an hour and just drills the UMD kid so hard his helmet pops off.

Why was that important? Because Duluth plays a physical, up-tempo game, and had the best offense in the nation this season. And Arnold's shift said that BC was more than willing to play physical as well. Over the course of the game, that eagerness to hit, coupled with BC shutting the door quite effectively at the back, actually led to some frustration that undid UMD's chances even further because they were goaded into some pretty dumbass penalties in the final period when the game was still somewhat close.

They're probably gonna win the national title, as a freshman and sophomore. Which, you know, is really a good way to get things going as a hockey player.

4. What does it mean?

Saw a tweet the other day, don't remember who by, and it said something along the lines of, "Iginla and Kiprusoff are the last remaining relics of this era of mediocrity, so trade them." That got me thinking.

Is that how some people really feel about them? That they're at least symbolically responsible for this disastrous last three seasons and are the only reasons management is keeping the team together? If so, that's interesting, and maybe a little encouraging.

As you're all well aware by now (I would hope), I favor the blowing-it-up approach to dealing with this aging, ineffective roster. And if some people, even if it's just a vocal minority, start voicing opinions

Again, I don't recall who the tweet was by and cannot find it again for the life of me, but if there's a decent number of Flames fans, even a vocal minority, campaigning for the team to trade its two remaining older assets with any amount of value, that might be the snowflake that starts the avalanche.

What all this losing means for their legacies is something we can discuss later if I remember, which I probably won't.

5. Howdy pardners!

Season's over, and I feel like I really earned the Iggy pic this week.

686dfac3780611cb7acad6ce5166c6c1
Yer ol' buddy Lambert is handsome and great and everyone loves him. Also you can visit his regular blog at The Two-Line Pass or follow him on Twitter. Lucky you!
Avatar
#1 walkinvisible
March 28 2012, 09:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

what the hell kind of grandma's-ashes-on-the-mantel kind of trophy is that ?!?

Avatar
#2 Kent Wilson
March 28 2012, 09:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@walkinvisible

It's the "bean pot".

Avatar
#3 Robert Vollman
March 28 2012, 09:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
walkinvisible wrote:

what the hell kind of grandma's-ashes-on-the-mantel kind of trophy is that ?!?

This trophy is MUCH better.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/157327/WORST-TROPHY-EVER.jpg

Avatar
#4 T&A4Flames
March 28 2012, 10:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Robert Vollman wrote:

This trophy is MUCH better.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/157327/WORST-TROPHY-EVER.jpg

Ha...ha...hahahahahahahahahaha!!! Oh my god, that IS the worst trophy. I think I would throw the match and declare myself the winner by finishing as runner up... sans trophy.

Avatar
#5 Kevin R
March 28 2012, 10:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Well I'll be the first voice in your avalanche of change. I would not be opposed to moving at least one of Kipper or Iggy at the draft this year, providing the return is reasonable & non- Phaneufish(we have enough spare parts). My ratioanle is as follows:

1/Kipper should get a 1st rounder(late or if he can con Burke to give us Toronto's with Kadri I would finally endorse a trade with the Leafs) There will be teams looking for a goalie to get them there, I think Washington, Chicago, Toronto,(forget Oilers),Tampa, Columbus(dont think I could do that to Kipper). I want to see Leiland Irving play 40-50 games next year. He's our own 1st rounder & it's time to put the bright lights on the dance floor. He no longer belongs in the AHL. I would then sign a cheap, maybe Vokoun for 1-1.5 mill to ride shotgun if Ramos cant be here next year.

2/ Iggy. Unless we can get a Kipper like return, Iggy's value will probably be equal or if not higher at the trade deadline where the 7.0mill contract wont impact the return as much. The only way I dont trade Iggy is if he gives us a kick ass deal on an extension & agrees to change his role on the team. I dont think thats an option, lets let him move on & win a cup with a real good team he can push over the hump.

3/ If Ken King & Owners think that will hurt the gate and buying jersey's, just remind them of how electric this city got with arrival of Barchee & if we can score another up and comer in trading our old stars, think of all the new Jerseys in the Dome that are yearning to worship new hockey Gods.. Couple of 1st rounders this year, couple of 1st rounders next year & be sure to chose wisely. I would almost advocate trading 2 firstrounders for a top 5 pick to take the risk out of picking.

Iggy & Kipper will be dear to my Flames heart just like Nieuy & Chopper & Sutes & Gilmour. May result in another missed playoffs, but maybe we'll see some great hockey in Oct & Nov. for a change. We have some pretty good supporting veterans to move forward with in Tanguay & Cammi & GlenX.

Just my opinion.

Avatar
#6 Ravage
March 28 2012, 10:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Mr. Lambert,

As someone who is at the Saddledome and talks to a lot of those in attendance, I can confirm that it is the vocal minority wanting to ship out Iginla and Kipper while they still maintain top value. I am in agreement with you and the minority. The thing to keep in mind is that overall a vast majority of people who follow this team are not as invested in it to the same degree as we tend to be. Yes, they go to the games and watch on TV...but I can tell you alot of them don't worry or pay attention to the finer points of the game that ultimately result in wins or losses.

They identify the stars or have a favorite player because of how he looks, or the position he plays or because he lives in their neighborhood etc... Things like corsi, +/-, SH% are foreign languages to them. This fact is not lost on Management as they still shove merchandise and advertising propaganda down the publics throat with anything they can put #12 & #34's face and number on.

I was calm this morning and after reading your rant I suddenly couldn't help but start with my own. You have an intersting effect on people Mr. Lambert...and on this topic as well as others on your post I give you my full support.

Avatar
#7 jeremywilhelm
March 28 2012, 10:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

That was my tweet.

Avatar
#8 kittensandcookies
March 28 2012, 11:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Kevin R

Kipper will not get a first. We'll be lucky to get a 2nd. A third is more realistic, but still quite optimistic. I don't you realize just how many goalies are out there.

Iginla also how low trade value. He's a perennial also-ran.

Avatar
#9 Monaertchi
March 28 2012, 11:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I've been in favour of trading Iggy for the last 3 seasons. Strike while the iron is hot, as they say. We're not winning with him, so we might as well get some value out of him. It's the best thing for the team in my opinion - assuming Feast doesn't get Fleeced.

@kittens

You can call him an also-ran, be still scores goals. I think that on a team where he isn't the be-all-and-end-all he might actually flourish once again. As such, he might not have "low" trade value... yet. His value has got to be getting less every year.

I'm not as in favour of trading Kipper because I don't think we have a #1 NHL quality 'tender to take his place next season. Perhaps if we signed one, or got one included in a trade. But, like you said, his value probably isn't very high and so the chances of getting good value in the return AND an NHL calibre goalie have got to be pretty slim.

Avatar
#10 Kevin R
March 28 2012, 11:21AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
kittensandcookies wrote:

Kipper will not get a first. We'll be lucky to get a 2nd. A third is more realistic, but still quite optimistic. I don't you realize just how many goalies are out there.

Iginla also how low trade value. He's a perennial also-ran.

Well I guess you must be an expert on player value & you must have very solid foundation of knowledge supporting your evaluations. Yoa are probably also an Oiler fan, which also confirms your affirmations. I hear a circus is coming to a town near you, more opportunity to practise your skills.

Avatar
#11 Justin Azevedo
March 28 2012, 11:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
kittensandcookies wrote:

Kipper will not get a first. We'll be lucky to get a 2nd. A third is more realistic, but still quite optimistic. I don't you realize just how many goalies are out there.

Iginla also how low trade value. He's a perennial also-ran.

uh...based on what? you realize paul gaustad got a first rounder like a month ago, right?

Avatar
#12 Ravage
March 28 2012, 11:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
kittensandcookies wrote:

Kipper will not get a first. We'll be lucky to get a 2nd. A third is more realistic, but still quite optimistic. I don't you realize just how many goalies are out there.

Iginla also how low trade value. He's a perennial also-ran.

I'm with Kevin R on this one.

Did you see what guys were going for at the trade deadline? I realize at that time of the year almost everyone overpays, but don't think for a second a lot of teams wanting to win right now wouldn't be willing to part with multiple picks or prospects to get Kipper or Iggy. Offer Kiprusoff to Toronto and I bet we could get a 1st rounder and 3rd rounder or even their 1st rounder plus Luke Schenn. The only problem Calgary has right now is if we trade #34...who's our starter? Irving shows signs but I can't see him being our #1 goalie next season.

Avatar
#13 wawful
March 28 2012, 11:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

The decision to ship out Iginla or Kiprusoff comes down to one thing only:

Price.

Don't kid yourselves folks. Nobody is going to pay what you guys think the Flames could get for Kiprusoff and Iginla.

First up: Kipper
-----------------

He's a very entertaining goalie whose acrobatic play has always made for great highlight footage, but he's not elite. The league average sv% has slowly crept up from 0.901 to 0.914 since the lockout. As a result, Kipper has had an above average Sv% in just 2 of the last 5 seasons. He's an above average goalie in a hot year, but he's actually been slightly below league average over the last 5 years.

The good news is that, with Irving and Ramo waiting in the wings, the Flames could probably trade Kipper without suffering much, if at all. However, the fan-reaction would likely be overwhelmingly negative if Kipper were traded this summer. Irving needs to get enough starts to win over the crowd before the Flames ownership is likely to let Kiprusoff go. Look for Irving to get more starts early next season and, if he proves worthy, perhaps we'll see Kipper moved as early as mid-season. Don't expect a whole lot back in return though.

Next: Iginla
------------
Yes, he's starting to struggle in a #1 line role. Yes, he's still the Flames #1 scorer and point leader. As bad as the Flames may look now, they'd look a lot worse without Iginla. Quite simply, even if he has to be used in a more sheltered role, the team has nobody to replace him right now. Baertschi might one day do the job, but probably not for a couple of years, and possibly not at all.

If the Flames trade Iginla, they need to get scoring talent back. Nobody trades proven young talent for old talent unless the young talent is substantially less impressive than the old talent. So an Iginla trade would either net an inferior player or a huge question mark that could easily wind up as a bust.

Put simply, this is not a trade the team should make unless the playoffs are out of reach, and that's before you consider all the intangibles like fan reaction, mentorship, etc..

The Price is Right:
------------------

The above being said, if some other team was willing to trade pieces well above the value of Iginla or Kipper, Feaster would be a fool not to pull the trigger. That sort of trade requires a lot of luck to get and we shouldn't count on it happening. Realistically, while moving Kipper and Iginla may become smart in the not-to-distant future, the return isn't very likely to be high enough to "rejuvenate the franchise", as some people are clearly hoping.

Avatar
#14 Tach
March 28 2012, 11:46AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I find the assessment of this season as a "fruitless throwaway" to be curious compared to your continued advocacy of the blow it up method of rebuilding. That "theory" basically advocates throwing away multiple seasons, forcing your fans to watch a completely uncompetitive product, with merely the hope that at some point in the future the team will be better. I guess you might describe the acquisition of talent via early draft picks as "fruitful" but that just leaves you an Alexandre Daigle, Pavel Brendl or Taylor Hall shoulder injury short of rendering those seasons "fruitless".

I am happy to take the seasons of at least marginal competitiveness and bet that a mid round pick can land a Claude Giroux, Jordan Eberle or Erik Karlssson. Too many teams have pursued the stockpile high draft picks plan to no avail to convince me it is ever worth it.

That being said, I have long been on the trade Kiprusoff wagon. I think Iginla is too unlikely to bring back enough value at his age and actual salary (remember Kiprusoff gets cheap to non-cap teams after this year) versus what you get. Whatever else he gives back at the other end, he scored another 30 goals this year. If Calgary had traded Kiprusoff for a legitmate heavy hitter up front who was 22-26, I think we would all be thinking much differently about Iginla scoring his 30+ goals in a secondary role. Like a Teemu Selanne.

Avatar
#15 Tach
March 28 2012, 11:50AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@Ravage

Did anyone see Brian Elliott as the best goalie in the league this year? Boston was ready to ship out Tim Thomas before last season. Ryan Miller was a pariah in Buffalo 30 games ago.

Goaltending is ephemeral and fleeting. Paying great gobs of money for it is unlikely to bring long term success.

Avatar
#16 RexLibris
March 28 2012, 11:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Kevin R

Okay, I'm not actually suggesting this as a reasonable trade idea, but when I read about trading Kiprusoff my mind first went to finding an older backup goaltender who could mentor Irving while he gets his 40 to 50 games in the NHL. Then I naturally went to thinking about Feaster making that deal, and how he loves to bring in his old Lightning players and....

Yeah...

Khabibulin.

Man would that be a kick in the bits if Feaster offered up a pick (any pick, you name one) for Khabibulin at the draft.

Sorry to bring it up, but if it did happen you have to know that I'd be in serious danger of dying from laughter.

Anyway, I'm writing up a reply to your trade idea, but I wanted to get this one out of the way first.

One note: the Flames likely could land a few extra first round picks this year as the draft has been undervalued by many teams (considered somewhat weak) and there are several teams holding multiple picks which could be more willingly moved.

Avatar
#17 RexLibris
March 28 2012, 12:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@wawful

I agree.

Specifically on Iginla and the rate-of-return, as well as the expectation that his departure will bring in a rejuvenation of the team. His arrival was in a different era when older players had higher value than youth because the team trading away youth felt they could simply purchase it back from the small-market team prior to free-agency. That strategy is out the window now and every team values youth (except, seemingly, Feaster and company).

Thus, the trade of Iginla will bring in an assortment of assets likely only one of which will become a player of near-comparable quality but without any guarantees whatsoever that any of them will propel this franchise with glory into it's next phase of existence.

Avatar
#18 RexLibris
March 28 2012, 12:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Tach

"Did anyone see Brian Elliott as the best goalie in the league this year?"

I did. But I think it was my medication.

Avatar
#19 T&A4Flames
March 28 2012, 12:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
kittensandcookies wrote:

Kipper will not get a first. We'll be lucky to get a 2nd. A third is more realistic, but still quite optimistic. I don't you realize just how many goalies are out there.

Iginla also how low trade value. He's a perennial also-ran.

You must be an Oilers faithful... seriously. Kipper gets a 1st + a good prospect from a team looking for a goalie to put them over the top. No, a team like the Oilers is not going to give much if anything because they are not in a position to benefit from the next 2 years with Kipper. Someone that needs that last piece to get to the playoffs (Toronto) or to win it all in the 2 years (Washington) would give a good return.

Avatar
#20 T&A4Flames
March 28 2012, 12:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
wawful wrote:

The decision to ship out Iginla or Kiprusoff comes down to one thing only:

Price.

Don't kid yourselves folks. Nobody is going to pay what you guys think the Flames could get for Kiprusoff and Iginla.

First up: Kipper
-----------------

He's a very entertaining goalie whose acrobatic play has always made for great highlight footage, but he's not elite. The league average sv% has slowly crept up from 0.901 to 0.914 since the lockout. As a result, Kipper has had an above average Sv% in just 2 of the last 5 seasons. He's an above average goalie in a hot year, but he's actually been slightly below league average over the last 5 years.

The good news is that, with Irving and Ramo waiting in the wings, the Flames could probably trade Kipper without suffering much, if at all. However, the fan-reaction would likely be overwhelmingly negative if Kipper were traded this summer. Irving needs to get enough starts to win over the crowd before the Flames ownership is likely to let Kiprusoff go. Look for Irving to get more starts early next season and, if he proves worthy, perhaps we'll see Kipper moved as early as mid-season. Don't expect a whole lot back in return though.

Next: Iginla
------------
Yes, he's starting to struggle in a #1 line role. Yes, he's still the Flames #1 scorer and point leader. As bad as the Flames may look now, they'd look a lot worse without Iginla. Quite simply, even if he has to be used in a more sheltered role, the team has nobody to replace him right now. Baertschi might one day do the job, but probably not for a couple of years, and possibly not at all.

If the Flames trade Iginla, they need to get scoring talent back. Nobody trades proven young talent for old talent unless the young talent is substantially less impressive than the old talent. So an Iginla trade would either net an inferior player or a huge question mark that could easily wind up as a bust.

Put simply, this is not a trade the team should make unless the playoffs are out of reach, and that's before you consider all the intangibles like fan reaction, mentorship, etc..

The Price is Right:
------------------

The above being said, if some other team was willing to trade pieces well above the value of Iginla or Kipper, Feaster would be a fool not to pull the trigger. That sort of trade requires a lot of luck to get and we shouldn't count on it happening. Realistically, while moving Kipper and Iginla may become smart in the not-to-distant future, the return isn't very likely to be high enough to "rejuvenate the franchise", as some people are clearly hoping.

I disagree with, totally. Kipper is constantly praised by analysts because his numbers don't tell the story in this case. Kippers biggest asset is his ability to make that awe inspiring save at key moments that can turn the tide of game. That's a huge thing for a contender.

As for Iggy, I partially agree that he only gets traded at the deadline if the Flames are out. He's still a 30 goal scorer and gets hot in the final months of the season. Again, for a contender, that's huge. And the Flames don't have to get a scorer in return. They could get solid young Dman to solidify there back end and draft potential scorers; something like the Johnson for Carter deal.

Avatar
#21 John Deere Green
March 28 2012, 12:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I was reading on another website about the question to trade Iginla and/or Kiprusoff. The guy (sorry don't remember name, specifics) made some good points about the Flames quest in building a new rink. If you don't have the "god" Iginla or Kipper when you decide to fill the seats in the new rink, what happens? Or, maybe when the building announcement is made, then maybe the Flames will decide to re-vamp their team to be ready for a long cup run in a new building.

I on the other hand, hope Iginla is gone before game 1 of the 2012/13 season. I believe that a couple of young guys and some prospects is what this team needs. This last week, I have found myself doing anything but watching Flames hockey. Total apathy. There needs to be some youthful enthusiasm injected into this team and the city. Look what happened when Bartschi (sp?) was here for a short time.

Avatar
#22 suba steve
March 28 2012, 12:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Tach wrote:

I find the assessment of this season as a "fruitless throwaway" to be curious compared to your continued advocacy of the blow it up method of rebuilding. That "theory" basically advocates throwing away multiple seasons, forcing your fans to watch a completely uncompetitive product, with merely the hope that at some point in the future the team will be better. I guess you might describe the acquisition of talent via early draft picks as "fruitful" but that just leaves you an Alexandre Daigle, Pavel Brendl or Taylor Hall shoulder injury short of rendering those seasons "fruitless".

I am happy to take the seasons of at least marginal competitiveness and bet that a mid round pick can land a Claude Giroux, Jordan Eberle or Erik Karlssson. Too many teams have pursued the stockpile high draft picks plan to no avail to convince me it is ever worth it.

That being said, I have long been on the trade Kiprusoff wagon. I think Iginla is too unlikely to bring back enough value at his age and actual salary (remember Kiprusoff gets cheap to non-cap teams after this year) versus what you get. Whatever else he gives back at the other end, he scored another 30 goals this year. If Calgary had traded Kiprusoff for a legitmate heavy hitter up front who was 22-26, I think we would all be thinking much differently about Iginla scoring his 30+ goals in a secondary role. Like a Teemu Selanne.

The Flames have been picking mid to late in the first round for much of the last 10 years. They seemed to have hit solid triples (if not home runs) in 2003 (#9-Phaneuf) and in 2011 (#13-Sven). Other substantial assets include Erixon and Backlund. Other then that, not much to show for the rest of the decade. This is not a good drafting record.

For every Eberle/Giroux/Karlsson grabbed in the mid-late first round there are a bunch of Chucko/Nystrom/Pelech players taken, and the Flames do tend to pick these players more often then not.

In Eberle & Karlsson's draft class the top 5 was: Stamkos, Doughty, Bogosian, Pieterangelo, L. Schenn.

In Giroux's: E. Johnson, J Staal, Toews, N. Backstrom, Kessel.

I personally like the odds of hitting a home run with a lottery pick better then hoping to score the next Giroux at #22 overall, especially since we may well have hit our homerun last summer with Sven. Lightning can strike twice, but history dictates it usually does not, not in Calgary anyway.

Avatar
#23 theartfuldodger
March 28 2012, 12:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Goalies...highest commodity and perhaps most important player. Trading legitimate top 10 goalies is plain stupid!

Avatar
#24 Justin Azevedo
March 28 2012, 12:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@theartfuldodger

when's the last time kipper was a "top-10" goalie? 05-06?

Avatar
#25 Justin Azevedo
March 28 2012, 12:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@suba steve

in a roundabout sort of way, your last paragraph pretty much perfectly explains the confirmation bias present whenever the draft is talked about.

kudos.

Avatar
#26 JF
March 28 2012, 01:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'd be willing to ship out Kipper... I think his reputation exceeds his actual skill so we could potentially ship him out for a decent return (and I DO think Kipper would fetch a decent enough futures based return based on the afor mentioned reputation) without sacrificing too much off the roster.

I don't think we'd be able to say the same with Iggy so I'm in favor of keeping him and hopefully we'll get a coach that will have the brains to use him (along with the rest of the roster)properly.

Avatar
#27 Vintage Flame
March 28 2012, 02:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@John Deere Green

was reading on another website about the question to trade Iginla and/or Kiprusoff. The guy (sorry don't remember name, specifics) made some good points about the Flames quest in building a new rink. If you don't have the "god" Iginla or Kipper when you decide to fill the seats in the new rink, what happens? Or, maybe when the building announcement is made, then maybe the Flames will decide to re-vamp their team to be ready for a long cup run in a new building.

I don't think one has anything to do with the other. The Flames ownership are not going to base their decision on a new arena on Jarome Iginla still being here or not. That issue has more to do with the fact that they don't want to spend their own money and are looking for contributions from both levels of government.

That being said, It's not likely that the government contributions would be based on whether Iggy was still a Flame. Fans can say all they want that they would not buy tix if the Flames trade Iggy, but the fact remains that they are flat out lying. People said the same thing during the lock-out and yet they still came back. The Flames need to realize that a lot of fans are posturing and even if Iggy was traded, they are still going to come back. If they did give up their seats, they would be replaced by people that are happy that the Flames are finally making big changes.

Avatar
#28 Kevin R
March 28 2012, 03:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I would also put Chicago in the category of being in the Kipper market & because of his declining salary versus cap hit, Tampa Bay. Value at the draft is way bigger for Kipper than Iggy. Iggy's value is at the trade deadline as a rental. And that would be a very sought after rental indeed. When there is only 2 & a half months left on his contract, his 7.0 mill salary hit is insignificant.

As for Iggy filling a new building, even if they got the funding and approvals for the new building, Iggy would be really almost retiring by the the time they smack the grand opening champayne bottle on the doors.

So what if we only get late or mid first rounders with decent prospects. Isnt that the whole point of a rebuild, is you're gonna suck for a year or 2 while you establish your future stars & young players. Might even get lucky like Ottawa & if you have the right veteran mix & goaltending, you sneak into the playoffs early in the rebuild. Rare but possible.

Avatar
#29 Tach
March 28 2012, 03:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Justin Azevedo wrote:

in a roundabout sort of way, your last paragraph pretty much perfectly explains the confirmation bias present whenever the draft is talked about.

kudos.

I don't know if that's fair to Steve. A lottery pick is, ceteris paribus, more likely to be a better player than a player drafted later in teh first round. That's not confirmation bias, that's a fact and if you have a study showing that player's in the latter part of the first round do, on average, turn out better than lottery picks I would find that amazing.

What I found most curious about Steve's comment is that it illustrated my point exactly. Assume, just for argument's sake, that Baertschi becomes a 30 goal, tough minute, top-6 forward. A Kopitar or Giroux, who can push Iginla into the secondary scoring role that I think many of us agree he ought to be in. In that case, why would we have tanked for 3-4 years in order to get a player to do the same thing?

That is not to say mortgage the future for the present and trade away all your first round draft picks to scrape in every year. But why tank it for a top first rounder when the process of tanking it will leave you with a team that will be unable to make use of the talents of your shiny new bauble?

Avatar
#30 the-wolf
March 28 2012, 04:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Not sure how Oiler fans can look at what Penner got and then say Iginla would get nothing in return.

A look at a lot of the deadline trades would show that he would bring back something of value.

One will never know with 100% certainty, but it seemed very likely that Iginla could've brought back Schenn last year. Not so bad, IMO.

There's always a GM who will overpay in order to put his team over the hump. Competitiveness and pressure to win do strange things to GMs. Look what Burke paid for Kessel. That was in the new CBA era, btw.

GMs also like to keep other teams from getting said player. If Calgary actually put Jarome out there, there would be multiple offers. 'Substantial' is a subjective term, but to say Iginla gets nothing back is silly IMO.

Teams won't trade a young guy who is 'established' or a player at the level of a Malkin for an Iginla, but they will trade potential for a sure thing. Or what they believe to be a sure thing.

And that's the rub coming back, potential can be a bust. Just like Iginla could've been a bust, just like Todd Harvey (who Dallas supposedly would not trade) was a bust and just like Dallas probably would not have made the Iginla trade after the WJC.

There's always risk, get over it. But right now, the potential of a solid prospect or even a decently high first round pick is better than what we currently have going on.

Why? Because this team is in no position to have Jarome as a 30 goal, 2nd line, 'complimentary,' 'piece-of-the-puzzle' player. It'd be nice if we had that team, but we don't.

The Flames need to start a rebuild, one that goes beyond depth players. Iginla staying does not further that.

Avatar
#31 Graham
March 28 2012, 04:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Ownweship ian'r going to trade Iggy, so that leaves Kipper. Feaster learned in a previous position, that a number 1 goalie is extremely hard to replace.... so that makes trading Kipper iffy. Add in the fact that this season would have been a disaster without Kipper, I doubt we will trade either of them.

Add in the likely resigning of Jokinen and several other of the UFA's, the off season may not herald the huge changes that everyone expects.

Avatar
#32 suba steve
March 28 2012, 04:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Tach wrote:

I don't know if that's fair to Steve. A lottery pick is, ceteris paribus, more likely to be a better player than a player drafted later in teh first round. That's not confirmation bias, that's a fact and if you have a study showing that player's in the latter part of the first round do, on average, turn out better than lottery picks I would find that amazing.

What I found most curious about Steve's comment is that it illustrated my point exactly. Assume, just for argument's sake, that Baertschi becomes a 30 goal, tough minute, top-6 forward. A Kopitar or Giroux, who can push Iginla into the secondary scoring role that I think many of us agree he ought to be in. In that case, why would we have tanked for 3-4 years in order to get a player to do the same thing?

That is not to say mortgage the future for the present and trade away all your first round draft picks to scrape in every year. But why tank it for a top first rounder when the process of tanking it will leave you with a team that will be unable to make use of the talents of your shiny new bauble?

Sven has a bright future, but under no cicumstances do I want him playing first line minutes any time soon. He is a strong possibility to fill this role eventually, but not yet. Giroux is 5 years older and was allowed to mature into that type of role. By the time Sven has the type of maturity that Giroux currently has, Iggy is what--39yr old. This is why I want Iggy shopped, by the time we can build a contender, Iggy is collecting his pension. No cup parade will be planned in Calgary while Iggy is still playing. Dealing him gets us what we need, assets for the future. That's what I think anyway. Thanks for sharing your thoughts as well.

Avatar
#33 suba steve
March 28 2012, 04:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Graham wrote:

Ownweship ian'r going to trade Iggy, so that leaves Kipper. Feaster learned in a previous position, that a number 1 goalie is extremely hard to replace.... so that makes trading Kipper iffy. Add in the fact that this season would have been a disaster without Kipper, I doubt we will trade either of them.

Add in the likely resigning of Jokinen and several other of the UFA's, the off season may not herald the huge changes that everyone expects.

I was thinking this year was a disaster with Kipper. He is still world class, but if he has been the difference between us missing the playoffs and drafting 11th-14th; or us missing the playoffs and drafting 3rd-7th--I would choose the latter. This is exactly why many are considering this a wasted year.

Avatar
#34 JAMES AND GARY
March 28 2012, 08:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

WAWFUL WROTE:

"Baertschi might one day do the job, but probably not for a couple of years, and possibly not at all."

Avatar
#35 JAMES AND GARY
March 28 2012, 08:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

oh the banter!

mighty sven 5ft6in power forward lol lol lol

Avatar
#36 dougtheslug
March 28 2012, 09:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Not sure how Oiler fans can look at what Penner got and then say Iginla would get nothing in return.

A look at a lot of the deadline trades would show that he would bring back something of value.

One will never know with 100% certainty, but it seemed very likely that Iginla could've brought back Schenn last year. Not so bad, IMO.

There's always a GM who will overpay in order to put his team over the hump. Competitiveness and pressure to win do strange things to GMs. Look what Burke paid for Kessel. That was in the new CBA era, btw.

GMs also like to keep other teams from getting said player. If Calgary actually put Jarome out there, there would be multiple offers. 'Substantial' is a subjective term, but to say Iginla gets nothing back is silly IMO.

Teams won't trade a young guy who is 'established' or a player at the level of a Malkin for an Iginla, but they will trade potential for a sure thing. Or what they believe to be a sure thing.

And that's the rub coming back, potential can be a bust. Just like Iginla could've been a bust, just like Todd Harvey (who Dallas supposedly would not trade) was a bust and just like Dallas probably would not have made the Iginla trade after the WJC.

There's always risk, get over it. But right now, the potential of a solid prospect or even a decently high first round pick is better than what we currently have going on.

Why? Because this team is in no position to have Jarome as a 30 goal, 2nd line, 'complimentary,' 'piece-of-the-puzzle' player. It'd be nice if we had that team, but we don't.

The Flames need to start a rebuild, one that goes beyond depth players. Iginla staying does not further that.

Might I remind you that the Oilers, in return for Penner, got Colton Teubert, who is struggling on the farm in OKC, and a first round pick, Oscar Klefbom, who is miles away from being a regular NHL dman. As bad as Penner has been in LA, only optimistic Oiler fans consider that overpayment. Potential unrealized doesn't score goals. Yet.

Avatar
#37 the-wolf
March 29 2012, 07:24AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
dougtheslug wrote:

Might I remind you that the Oilers, in return for Penner, got Colton Teubert, who is struggling on the farm in OKC, and a first round pick, Oscar Klefbom, who is miles away from being a regular NHL dman. As bad as Penner has been in LA, only optimistic Oiler fans consider that overpayment. Potential unrealized doesn't score goals. Yet.

Which sort of makes my point. Klefbom has a ways to go because he plays D. But he's also considered a top prospect around the league and, for what it's worth, THN Future Watch has him as the Oilers top prospect (if memory serves me).

Like I said, there is risk, you're not going to get Couturier. But this idea that no team will pay anything for a perennial 30 goal scorer is just ridiculous.

Unfortunately, we'll probably never know. And I do conced his value drops each year, obviously. Which is why I wanted to move him last season when he got 43, you had to know that wouldn't be repeated.

Avatar
#38 kittensandcookies
March 29 2012, 09:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

LOL at the people who think Kipper will get a 1st.

Look, Kipper MAKES $7MILLION DOLLARS. THAT MEANS THAT THE TEAM HE GOES TO MUST CLEAR $7MILLION OR HAVE THAT MUCH IN CAP SPACE THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO SPEND. You don't get prospects for Kipper - you get someone else's $7million in garbage. Why the flying farking hell do you think Phaneuf's trade assets were so bad? We had to take someone's else's $7million in crap!

Same goes for Iggy.

Here's a question for y'all:

DON'T YOU THINK THEY WOULD'VE TRADED ONE OF THEM IN A HEARTBEAT IF THEY COULD GET AN AWESOME RETURN?

Avatar
#39 suba steve
March 29 2012, 10:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
kittensandcookies wrote:

LOL at the people who think Kipper will get a 1st.

Look, Kipper MAKES $7MILLION DOLLARS. THAT MEANS THAT THE TEAM HE GOES TO MUST CLEAR $7MILLION OR HAVE THAT MUCH IN CAP SPACE THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO SPEND. You don't get prospects for Kipper - you get someone else's $7million in garbage. Why the flying farking hell do you think Phaneuf's trade assets were so bad? We had to take someone's else's $7million in crap!

Same goes for Iggy.

Here's a question for y'all:

DON'T YOU THINK THEY WOULD'VE TRADED ONE OF THEM IN A HEARTBEAT IF THEY COULD GET AN AWESOME RETURN?

Kipper's cap hit is $5,833,333 over the next 2 years. However his actual salary is $5,000,000 for next season and $1,500,000 in 2013-14. Makes him a little more attractive as a tradeable asset, don't you think? $7 million, where the heck did you pull that figure from?--that's alright, I already know what you pulled it out of. This info is easily available on the internet, look into it, it's really neat. Washington tried a cheaper alternative in net this year, how did that work out for them? You talk to people like they are idiots, tells me more about you then it does about us.

Avatar
#40 kittensandcookies
March 29 2012, 10:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Gee, so it's $5.8million. Phew. What a savings!

Why on earth would Washington want him? They don't even have the cap room for him. Who would you want back? Green? And you thought Babchuk was bad defensively...

Avatar
#41 suba steve
March 29 2012, 11:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@kittensandcookies

Since your claim was he would make $7mil/season, I think 6.5mil over 2 seasons vs. 14mil over 2 seasons is actually "what a savings!". As for the cap hit differential--1.2mil/yr pays for a decent 3rd or 4th line player. No, I wouldn't thank you for Green. Wash does however have cap room. UFAs Semin (6.7mil), Vokoun (1.5mil), Wideman (3.9mil) among others and RFA Green (5.25mil). So they have a lot of flexibility if they decided they could use a player like Kipper. They also have 2 first rounders this year, both should be in the first 10-18 choices. Also sourced from the internet, you should really look into it, good source of FACTUAL info. As I said before--"it is neat".

Comments are closed for this article.