Five things: How much wronger could things go?

Ryan Lambert
March 28 2013 11:31AM

1. Iginlawatch reaches its logically insane conclusion

The clock was still ticking (as of this writing, anyhow) on the looming Jarome Iginla trade that seemed to have grown inevitable even as everyone is still sitting around looking for reasons that it won't happen. And then it really, finally, actually happened, and I had to go back and change everything.

I loved the reports that the price was too high. Classic stuff of the teams playing the media against each other. Calgary wanted Malcolm Subban. Well Calgary couldn't have Malcolm Subban. But like they really wanted him and stuff. No for real though, back off on Subban or this wasn't happening. Please? No. Okay I guess.

It went like that. It reached a head yesterday when Peter friggin' Chiarelli went on the radio and said, "Look dudes seriously I'm not trading Malcolm Subban for anyone. Period." And people still didn't believe him. The Bruins are still desperate for goals, even if Milan Lucic did score a vintage Milan Lucic goal the other night and then they pumped five past Petr Budaj in a loss, and even if it seems likely that the offense might be starting to turn around, it certainly doesn't hurt to have Jarome Iginla kicking around on the roster just to make sure the pucks keep going past the guy with the big pads and the funny stick (not that it helped Calgary).

This was always going to happen. The media was already working glowing quotes about his reputation and ability out of current Bruins — "Lucic sez the B's would LOVE a guy like Iginla on the roster!!!!!" — and the arguments in favor of the move had been loud, while those against it the kind of meek "yes, but" logic-based malarkey that so often gets shouted down in this town. The Boston media gets needlessly hysterical about everything, and most seemed willing to twist a broken bottle in someone's face to get Calgary's captain on board. Leadership and all that.

Meanwhile, the man himself and his long-time team were both throwing gasoline on the fire by refusing to comment in any way, on or off the record, on the situation. This was classic "We're going to trade our captain" stuff, and it seems they're just trying to boost the market while softening the blow at the same time.

Not that it ended up working. Because the Flames ended up sending him, instead, to Pittsburgh for two good but not great college players and a first-round pick. Guess that thing about a roster player was a load of crap after all. God damn, Feaster.

I always thought they would trade him, personally, but their not doing so would have been no surprise at all. It's the Flames we're talking about. I don't expect them to handle anything correctly these days. That they did this time, two years too late at least, is some small consolation.

2. The Kiprusoff situation

Lots being made of Nick Kypreos's report that Miikka Kiprusoff told the Flames he won't report if he's traded because of his family. Is it noble, or at least understandable, that he would feel that way? Sure. Does this say to me that he's going to retire like 20 minutes after the season's over? You bet it does.

This was my immediate thought on the matter; if he won't go now for family reasons and doesn't have much of a financial incentive to stick around next season ($1.5 million? Peanuts.), then he's got some seats booked on the first flight to Finland on April 27. That was backed up by Mike Keenan's comments about the understanding between team and netminder that he would never play the last season of this contract — which is as interesting as it is clearly-cap-circumventing — and certainly speak to just how little appetite both sides likely have to run this particular race for 82 more games next season.

Fortunately, this is all stuff we probably won't have to worry about because no one on earth is dumb enough to trade for Miikka Kiprusoff circa 2013. Except maybe Dave Nonis.

3. A road woes whoa

So the loss in Chicago was the Flames' 10th straight on the road, which is notable and bad and speaks to just how abject this team is in pretty much all facets. They've been outscored 40-15 in those games, which is just... wow. Giving up four goals a game, okay sure this is a bad defensive team. But only scoring 1.5? That wasn't something I think most people foresaw for any stretch of the season beyond a game or two.

And moreover, look who they're giving up scads of goals against. Five each against Nashville and Columbus, two of the worst attacks in the league, four against Dallas which isn't much better. Five against Colorado. Four against Phoenix. What's even happening? Okay sure they only allowed two to Chicago, but that was all luck; they only mustered 16 shots in 60 minutes, which I don't have to tell you is embarrassing.

The thing with the Flames, too, is they're so bad that they're not even interesting-bad. They're brutal-to-watch bad. I just wish the season was over already.

4. Feaster (and everyone else) blows another one

One great way to make a team less bad to watch is to, like, get good players. At least that's how I feel. That is not, however, how the Calgary Flames or any of the other 28 teams that are not the Carolina Hurricanes feel.

No one bothered to claim Good Forward Jussi Jokinen off waivers for free, and, as someone who I forget who it was pointed out on Twitter, one of them will soon give up actual assets to acquire Ryane Clowe and all sorts of other appreciably worse forwards within the next few days. The Flames doing this in particular is dumb because they just did that thing of wasting a pick to acquire a guy who notably sucks (Brian McGrattan) already and apparently learned nothing.

Ah but the argument was that he was signed for another $3 million next season. Wow. Great. The Flames will still be bad and nowhere near the playoffs, and will also have a useful forward who can help to drive possession and maybe make them not the least aesthetically pleasing team I've ever seen in my life. Plus maybe they'd win a shootout every once in a while. I don't know. It all seems dumb as hell to me. But then this is, again, the Flames we're talking about. I don't know what else I ever expected.

5. You knew this was coming

For the very very very last time.

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
#51 Avalain
March 28 2013, 01:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
FireOnIce wrote:

Wow, Peter Chiarelli is absolutely lambasting Feaster. No one will ever deal with the Flames again, as it appears the Bruins were told definitively that they 'won' Iginla and would get him at NOON YESTERDAY. Before ANY of this was reported. Also, he said it was an UNCONDITIONAL FIRST ROUND PICK. Flames got hosed.

Feaster is a slimy bastard who is destroying this franchise.

And I fully expect the league to investigate Calgary for Kipper's contract, given the way things are going. I can't believe Keenan was being paid by the Flames (for his coaching contract) AND STILL TALKING SH!T ALL OVER TV ABOUT US! You got your money, bug off you whiny prick.

Did you listen to the Feaster presser? He mentioned that he had multiple offers, then he took them to Iginla and Iginla told him which one he was willing to waive his NTC for. How is that Feasters fault?

Avatar
#52 the-wolf
March 28 2013, 01:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
BurningSensation wrote:

Is their a part of 'No Movement Clause' you don't understand? Iggy was clear he wanted to be a Flame as long as possible. Ownership was clear that they wanted him to be a Flame as long as possible. You can 'woulda shoulda coulda' all you want, he wasn't getting traded last year unless mgt decided to burn him publicly - and they were never going to do that. Period.

Iginla was Calgary's Yzerman. Remind me again what the return for dealing Yzerman was?

You don't get it. That's exactly what people are lamenting. Ownership's refusal to move off that stance. Obviously you can't change the past. But had they, plenty of guys waive them.

Heck, Iginla said he'd waive it last summer. A lot better than waiting until 4 weeks before deadline. Get your facts straight. Again, people are lamenting Edward's not allowing it.

And how is that "burning" him publicly?

And Iginla is not Yzerman. Or Sakic. And the Flames are not the Wings or the Avs of that era.

Man, amazing how people emotionally attach themselves to celebrities as though they're closer relatives or something.

Avatar
#53 everton fc
March 28 2013, 02:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
BurningSensation wrote:

+1

Feaster wasn't handcuffed when he re-signed Babchuk. Or Sarich. Or Modin, for that matter. He's got a track record of poor moves. He's not the ideal man for a rebuild in this league. That's my feeling.

Fair enough on Jackman. But it's one less contract, as well. Gaudreau was a 4th round pick, was he not?

True, hindsight is indeed 20/20. Fans like me will always be critics. I'd rather have John Davidson (or Jason Botterill, my new Desbiens!) making the moves. That's my over-arching point.

Avatar
#54 lionlager
March 28 2013, 02:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

If they ever needed a window to get rid of Feaster, now they have it... Did Iggy have to move? Unfortunately yes. Will Feaster be hung for it? Probably. Is that unfair? Yes, but his record isn't exactly glowing. Feaster keeps publicly roasted and it must be getting pretty embarrassing for the owners. I know it is for us fans.

Avatar
#55 shutout
March 28 2013, 02:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
BurningSensation wrote:

Is their a part of 'No Movement Clause' you don't understand? Iggy was clear he wanted to be a Flame as long as possible. Ownership was clear that they wanted him to be a Flame as long as possible. You can 'woulda shoulda coulda' all you want, he wasn't getting traded last year unless mgt decided to burn him publicly - and they were never going to do that. Period.

Iginla was Calgary's Yzerman. Remind me again what the return for dealing Yzerman was?

The return for Steve Yzerman was 3 Stanley Cups.

The return for Joe Sakic was 2 Stanley Cups.

Jarome Iginla was not going to bring a Stanley Cup to Calgary. At least that much was evident 3 years ago. At the point in time when you recognize that that the current core is not going to advance you to the end goal then you should have the brains and balls to recognize it and make the proper deals to address it.

NMC is a very simple thing to get around if you respect and communicate with the player. I fully believe that three years ago we would have been able to move Iginla to one of the top contending teams and he would have went along with it once it was explained that the team needed to start rebuilding. Nothing in Iginla's character would indicate that he would have just said NO, I am staying here.

Had we won a Stanley Cup with Iginla than I would have been more than willing to let him retire with his legacy as a Flame. That and the fact that Detroit was able to draft Datsyuk and Zetterberg also makes it much easier to hold onto Yzerman. If we had drafted Mike Green and James Neil instead of Chucko and Pelech and had gotten a proper return for Phaneuf we would probably still be competitive and then we could keep Iginla.

You have to look at things within the proper context. And hero worship has no place in running a professional hockey team.

Avatar
#56 BurningSensation
March 28 2013, 02:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

You don't get it. That's exactly what people are lamenting. Ownership's refusal to move off that stance. Obviously you can't change the past. But had they, plenty of guys waive them.

Heck, Iginla said he'd waive it last summer. A lot better than waiting until 4 weeks before deadline. Get your facts straight. Again, people are lamenting Edward's not allowing it.

And how is that "burning" him publicly?

And Iginla is not Yzerman. Or Sakic. And the Flames are not the Wings or the Avs of that era.

Man, amazing how people emotionally attach themselves to celebrities as though they're closer relatives or something.

The right time to trade Iginla was immediately after the cup run. Maximum return.

The Flames and Iggy wanted to stick together, we gave him a no-trade, ownership wanted him to stay. For us to trade him last year would have meant asking Iggy to do something that he had said he didn't want to do, and that management had said they wouldn't do.

You arm chair GMs who figure everybody should drop their lives and waive their (earned) NMC's just to satisfy you really take the cake. And yes, he was our 'Yzerman', the guy everybody associated with the team, community and city, the guy who had played his entire career for one sweater, and who had bleed for the fans of that city. Yzerman wasn't traded because the team was loyal to him, and he to them.

No different than Iginla.

Avatar
#57 kittensandcookies
March 28 2013, 02:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

RE: Burke.

Yeah, hold onto your hats. Apparently KK did have a chat with Burke about the GM job a couple of weeks ago.

Avatar
#58 everton fc
March 28 2013, 02:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
kittensandcookies wrote:

RE: Burke.

Yeah, hold onto your hats. Apparently KK did have a chat with Burke about the GM job a couple of weeks ago.

And Rex was only kidding (I think!)

I may start pulling for the Jackets if Burke comes here!!

Avatar
#59 shutout
March 28 2013, 02:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
TheoForever wrote:

So much poison and viciousness towards Feaster. We have a GM who has been consistently handcuffed by Sutter moves. The only real blunder he has made was that he didn’t know the consequences of the ROR move. Iginla trade can still turnout better than it looks. If Feaster can sign the d-man he just went to see or snag Drew LeBlanc.

No one gets on a higher horse then Lambert although he knows as much as horsesass. All that talk what we could have gotten for whomever. Someone, brings up Jackman and what we could have gotten, are you kidding? If memory serves correctly the return was supposed to be a 4th round pick.

Easy to criticize but hard to build something and hindsight is 20/20.

So it was Sutter's fault that we traded Regehr for Butler and an AHL player?

Sutter's fault that we traded Kotalik and a 2nd round pick for cap space instead of burying him in the minors?

Sutter's fault that we signed Babchuk and Sarich to 2 year deals when they were barely servicable NHL players last year?

I agree that the Feast had no chance with this trade. The organization put itself in a situation where they left its future up to one player to determine the direction. Iginla really only had one place that he wanted to play and the Bruins were used to get the return to a somewhat reasonable level.

Avatar
#60 CM
March 28 2013, 02:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
everton fc wrote:

Feaster's move for O'Reilly... Never forget this, either.

If Chiarelli is correct... We are going to live through some dark times, as fans.

As for Keenan... Perhaps he feels he got screwed (by Feaster) and is simpyl giving it back. Piling on. And so on. He did coach our last playoff squad. As noted on another post, a lockerroom with a few more winners than our current ensemble of also-rans and expansion-calibre players.

I just read where Chiarelli is quoted. He holds Feaster blameless and admits it was Jarome's decision. And that these deals go sideways all the time.

Am I happy, no, but let's not overreact. I might have handled it differently. I might have said Jarome, we have reached a deal with one of the 4 teams on your list. Congrats, you are going to Boston.

Instead it seems like Feaster said Jarome, here are 3 deals. We like the Boston one the best. Jarome then says I want to go to Pittsburgh.

As an aside, I glad I saw a few of his old highlights as it reminded me why I thought so highly of him. I must admit that the last few years were mixed with admiration and resentment.

I miss the old Jarome, but I have been missing him for a few years now.

Avatar
#61 TheoForever
March 28 2013, 02:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Nothing wrong with signing Sarich if you look at reasoning. Flames were planning to compete and one could see the team was going to be soft. Sarich brings toughness. Babchuk was resigned to be a powerplay specialist but Brent didn’t want to play him. After that Babchuk is done and we got Wideman. Who plays would be coaching decision in the end. Looking at improvement from Stajan and JBo, Brent was a guy who could beat the life out of anyone. Reagher looks done. Hate to see giving up 2nd rounder to loose Kotalik. Was it Feaster’s choice or Edwards? Knowing Edwards and his view of bottom line,… hmm.

Ohh and one more thing RR had an NTC thanks to DS and Flames had to cut salary.

Avatar
#62 RexLibris
March 28 2013, 03:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Marc wrote:

Ryan

You asked how much wronger could things go? Jason Gregor just posted the following on Oilersnation:

'This morning in the dressing room Jim Matheson and I were discussing the cap situation of the Penguins, when two Oilers players mentioned that Iginla should sign here if Pittsburgh can't afford him. "Get it started," they said with a slight laugh, but both were serious. I doubt it would happen, but wow that would sure ignite some fire into the Battle of Alberta.'

Please no.

Signing Iginla would mean that one of Yakupov or Eberle loses ice time. No thank you. As for the inevitable comment about veteran leadership: how far has that leadership taken the Flames lately?

With all due respect to Iginla, stay out East or sign on the West Coast (L.A.). Don't come back to Alberta until your jersey retirement.

Avatar
#63 RexLibris
March 28 2013, 03:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
everton fc wrote:

And Rex was only kidding (I think!)

I may start pulling for the Jackets if Burke comes here!!

I wasn't. It is the kind of move an ownership group like the Flames would make.

The plus side is that the Flames would probably win a few trades. The down side is that Kent's hair would probably turn grey overnight and you could throw out any possibility of advanced analytics being adopted anytime soon.

It could be worse. They could hire Scott Howson.

Avatar
#64 Derzie
March 28 2013, 03:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

The simple fact that Feaster agreed to a deal with Boston that was a dog when there was better to be had with Pitt is a dismisable offence. There is a full week left until the deadline and it took Iggy to rescue us and salvage a less horrible deal with Pitt. Simply by saying no to Dumb and Dumber. ROR, Kipper, Cervenka, McGrattan, Babchuk, Begin, Conditional firsts, USA focus, dead last or in the vicinity, trading down for a a friend-of-a-friend high school player, offer to Richards, Modin, Chiarelli. With that body of work, how do you think we are doing?

Avatar
#65 Double Dion
March 28 2013, 04:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
BurningSensation wrote:

I'm not buying that Chiarelli's offer of a conditional pick, one decent (if flawed) prospect, and a marginal depth defender was better.

When you are in negotiations you typically don't go out and publicly declare so-and so player off-limits.

You must have missed Chiarelli's presser. He outright said he offered an unconditional 1st, Khokhlachev and Bartowski.

Avatar
#66 the-wolf
March 28 2013, 09:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@BurningSensation

What shutout said. Check and mate. Face it. Your the type of fan who would rather watch iggy score 50 on a playoff-less Flames than watch an iggy-less Flames win a Cup.

Avatar
#67 Kevin R
March 28 2013, 11:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Holy snappers the temperature is warm in here. 1st off, I would like to hear from Feaster if that deal included a 2013 1st or a conditional 2014 1st. If the latter, the right decision was made. If it was a 2013 1st unconditional, I suspect Feaster thought he had a deal with Boston & Iggy played a trump card. Feaster & the Bruins got screwed and our beloved Iggy moves on to the Stanley Cup favorite. Good on Iggy, he probably did it to piss all of us off here at Flames Nation because of those advanced stats we keep bringing up.

We are not about to get another GM before the deadline & moves "HAVE" to be made in the next 6 days. Sorry, whatever everyone thinks, we got Feasty at the helm. Personally, I am comfortable with them at this draft, I like some of the directions we have taken & I would like to hear from the critics when was the last time Flames had 6 prospects at the World Junior Championships. Considering Sven turned pro early, it seems they were Feasters picks & he's been only picking for 2 years. WTF is wrong everyone here. He has made some good contracts signings & some crummy ones. I attribute the crummy one to the fact we were still "going for it" Well with Iggy now gone, that changes today. In the same realm, the trades/UFA signings were based on the same "go for it" mandate that Feaster had been given up to & including the ROR offer sheet. That now ends today. Dont judge Feaster on this Iggy deal, that is not fair. But we can judge him on any trades & signings from her on in. Let us pray the blockages that have lead to poor decisions are now removed and gone to Pittsburg. This should not be judgement week for Feaster, in fact its Easter, a time to pray for a Feaster miracle in the days ahead.

Comments are closed for this article.