From Bountiful to Ponoka

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Aaronp18 » Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:58 pm

That is why you need and assistant like Gilman. He's the guy that defines the deals, dots the "I's" and crosses the "T's".

Oh and knows the CBA terms, doesn't just look them up online on a need to know basis.

The teams in Alberta are a never-ending source of entertainment from a management standpoint.
User avatar
Aaronp18
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:36 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby ukcanuck » Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:12 pm

Royal Dude


I got one word for you one ...


Feaster
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Topper » Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:30 pm

Fifty Fifty wrote:What I don't understand is how Iginla knew of the Pittsburgh offer. If the deal was to bring offer Calgary could "live with" then Feaster should not have put anything before Iginla until he had the deal he wanted and simply presented the Boston deal as the one he could live with. That the Pittsburgh offer was disclosed suggests that Iginla had made the disclosure of all offers a requirement and that should have told Feaster that Iginla intended to reserve some discretion. Telling that to Boston would have weakened Feaster's hand in levering the best possible deal out of them so he probably gave them the impression that his decision was final and thought/hoped he could sell Iginla on it.

or Al Jolson was communicating via talking drum.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 4272
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby ODB » Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:36 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:By the way, speaking of Luongo, this is exactly what his agent has said to MG all along. When you get offers you can live with come to us and we will decide if we want to waive to any of those destinations. So if MG was ever unclear now is a good time to get clarity.

I get what you're saying HW but Lou and Iggy are not the same thing. GMMG could approach Lou and say X team made the best offer. Lou can't really say no, I perfer Florida so I want to go there. Lou is not an UFA... GMMG can simply say it's X or you continue to ride the pine. Iggy had to be moved now or you lose him for nothing in 20 games.
BTW, NOT A FLAME ... JUST AN OBSERVATION ... :P
User avatar
ODB
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:13 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby $lacker » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:10 pm

I have to believe that Feaster knew all along that Pittsburgh was Jarome's preferred destination. If anything I think Feaster was using Boston's offer to get Pittsburgh to up the ante, and once they agreed to match Boston's 1st rd pick Feaster switched horses. His loyalty was always going to be to Jarome.
User avatar
$lacker
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Reefer2 » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:32 pm

Late to show but is the deal from Pitts not actually better than the deal from Boston (with the confirmed 1st rounder)
User avatar
Reefer2
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Tiger » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:35 pm

Hockey Widow said:
I love Iginla and even more so after Linden's last game and he lead the Flames back on the ice to shake Trevor's hand. I thought that was pure class. I would love to see what Iginla could do playing the right side with the twins. I think he would be dynamite and I also think he would bring some toughness to that line and not let them get bitch slapped. And the price is one we could have afforded but from what I know now he would not have agreed to waive to come to Vancouver so Mg had no chance to get him at that price. [b]If he was moving he wanted to move for a chance at the cup.[/b]


So you don't think Vancouver has a chance for the cup this year? OK you have "inside information" but reality is the team is short 1 good center ( Iginla ) and help on the PP ( Iginla ) and can use help on D.. ( no faith that Gillis can trade Lou and/or Ballard for a #6 Dman?) ..If we don't have a contender this year we are truly far worse than I thought..
I wonder if Gillis even gave it a shot?
" If you cant beat them in the alley - you can't beat them on the ice
User avatar
Tiger
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 7:09 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Reefer2 » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:46 pm

Iginla is RW but does not have a bad faceoff %.

Also Vancouver did not seem to be on Iginla's list.
User avatar
Reefer2
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Hockey Widow » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:51 pm

Fifty Fifty wrote:What I don't understand is how Iginla knew of the Pittsburgh offer. If the deal was to bring offer Calgary could "live with" then Feaster should not have put anything before Iginla until he had the deal he wanted and simply presented the Boston deal as the one he could live with. That the Pittsburgh offer was disclosed suggests that Iginla had made the disclosure of all offers a requirement and that should have told Feaster that Iginla intended to reserve some discretion. Telling that to Boston would have weakened Feaster's hand in levering the best possible deal out of them so he probably gave them the impression that his decision was final and thought/hoped he could sell Iginla on it.



Because Feaster and the Flames took the list Iginla provided and assumed he had pre approved a trade to any of the teams on that list. Iginla and his agent said no, those were the only teams they would consider waiving to go to and asked Feaster to see what those teams would offer up. There were three offers the Flames could live with. LA, Boston and Pittsburg. Because they assumed they had the green light to approve a trade to the team they thought presented the best offer they told Boston they had a deal and then presented it to Iginla and his agent.

Iginla knew that LA and Pittsburg had made offers, Feaster had said as much. Iginla right off said he would not waive to go to LA. That left two teams. Feaster advised that he had already accepted the Boston offer and Iginla's camp countered but that was contingent upon Iginla signing his waiver. The simple answer, yes, yes it was contingent upon Iginla agreeing to go there.

So Iginla and his agent say they prefer Pittsburg and asked if that was an offer the Flames could live with. Feaster preferred the Boston offer but said yes, he could live with the Pittsburg offer. Iginla exercised his right to waive to the team he wanted to go to.

Had the Pens not made an offer Fester could live with he would have told Iginla that and Iginla would be a Bruin. I doubt he would have insisted on going to Pittsburg if they offered up a 2nd round pick. He understood that Calgary needed a decent return.

The only thing Feaster could have done is lie to Iginla. He wasn't about to do that. Perhaps in retrospect had the Flames understood that Iginla had not pre approved the teams the Flames may have been able to just present the Bruins offer and say the other teams did not make us an offer that we felt was a good enough return. But having identical offers, 2 unproven prospects and a 1st it is kind of hard for Feaster to say they out right reject the Pens offer.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2979
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Hockey Widow » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:53 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:
Fifty Fifty wrote:What I don't understand is how Iginla knew of the Pittsburgh offer. If the deal was to bring offer Calgary could "live with" then Feaster should not have put anything before Iginla until he had the deal he wanted and simply presented the Boston deal as the one he could live with. That the Pittsburgh offer was disclosed suggests that Iginla had made the disclosure of all offers a requirement and that should have told Feaster that Iginla intended to reserve some discretion. Telling that to Boston would have weakened Feaster's hand in levering the best possible deal out of them so he probably gave them the impression that his decision was final and thought/hoped he could sell Iginla on it.



Because Feaster and the Flames took the list Iginla provided and assumed he had pre approved a trade to any of the teams on that list. Iginla and his agent said no, those were the only teams they would consider waiving to go to and asked Feaster to see what those teams would offer up. There were three offers the Flames could live with. LA, Boston and Pittsburg. Because they assumed they had the green light to approve a trade to the team they thought presented the best offer they told Boston they had a deal and then presented it to Iginla and his agent.

Iginla knew that LA and Pittsburg had made offers, Feaster had said as much. Iginla right off said he would not waive to go to LA. That left two teams. Feaster advised that he had already accepted the Boston offer and Iginla's camp countered but that was contingent upon Iginla signing his waiver. The simple answer, yes, yes it was contingent upon Iginla agreeing to go there.

So Iginla and his agent say they prefer Pittsburg and asked if that was an offer the Flames could live with. Feaster preferred the Boston offer but said yes, he could live with the Pittsburg offer. Iginla exercised his right to waive to the team he wanted to go to.

Had the Pens not made an offer Fester could live with he would have told Iginla that and Iginla would be a Bruin. I doubt he would have insisted on going to Pittsburg if they offered up a 2nd round pick. He understood that Calgary needed a decent return.

The only thing Feaster could have done is lie to Iginla. He wasn't about to do that. Perhaps in retrospect had the Flames understood that Iginla had not pre approved the teams the Flames may have been able to just present the Bruins offer and say the other teams did not make us an offer that we felt was a good enough return. But having identical offers, 2 unproven prospects and a 1st it is kind of hard for Feaster to say they out right reject the Pens offer.



He did not leave Boston with the impression they were getting Iginla. He flat out told them they had a deal, Boston won the sweeps and got the player. That is far more than leaving an impression. The breakdown was when he told Iginla he had been traded to the Bruins and the Iginla camp said hold on where there any other offers from he teams on the list. Then it all unravelled.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2979
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Hockey Widow » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:55 pm

Reefer2 wrote:Late to show but is the deal from Pitts not actually better than the deal from Boston (with the confirmed 1st rounder)



They were identical offers. Two prospects and a confirmed 1st, no conditional first.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2979
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Hockey Widow » Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:00 pm

$lacker wrote:I have to believe that Feaster knew all along that Pittsburgh was Jarome's preferred destination. If anything I think Feaster was using Boston's offer to get Pittsburgh to up the ante, and once they agreed to match Boston's 1st rd pick Feaster switched horses. His loyalty was always going to be to Jarome.


Feaster fucked up. Plain and simple. Again, the Flames understood that the list provided were for teams that Iginla had pre approved a trade to and that the Flames had the green light to go ahead and make a deal with any of those teams on the list. That turned out to be wrong. Feaster had already told Boston, done deal, no posturing or attempting to up the anti. He thought he had the green light to make the deal.

There was no way he was going to lie to Iginla. He had to table all three offers. He made it clear he preferred the Boston offer and in fact told Iginla he had already told Boston the deal was done. I am sure he tried his best to persuade Iginla to go to Boston but I bet he respected him enough to stop the persuasive attempts when they started to become more.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2979
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Hockey Widow » Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:01 pm

Tiger wrote:Hockey Widow said:
I love Iginla and even more so after Linden's last game and he lead the Flames back on the ice to shake Trevor's hand. I thought that was pure class. I would love to see what Iginla could do playing the right side with the twins. I think he would be dynamite and I also think he would bring some toughness to that line and not let them get bitch slapped. And the price is one we could have afforded but from what I know now he would not have agreed to waive to come to Vancouver so Mg had no chance to get him at that price. [b]If he was moving he wanted to move for a chance at the cup.[/b]


So you don't think Vancouver has a chance for the cup this year? OK you have "inside information" but reality is the team is short 1 good center ( Iginla ) and help on the PP ( Iginla ) and can use help on D.. ( no faith that Gillis can trade Lou and/or Ballard for a #6 Dman?) ..If we don't have a contender this year we are truly far worse than I thought..
I wonder if Gillis even gave it a shot?

I have no inside information on who will win the cup. My point is Iginla chose to go where HE felt there was a chance to win a cup. No, MG had no shot. Vancouver was not on the list.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2979
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Reefer2 » Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:03 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:
Reefer2 wrote:Late to show but is the deal from Pitts not actually better than the deal from Boston (with the confirmed 1st rounder)



They were identical offers. Two prospects and a confirmed 1st, no conditional first.



Thought the Boston 1st was based upon Iginla signing an extension?

Back to Bountiful - wow their recent group of posts are funny. Maybe it is the age thing but I could care less who we trade, if it made the team better I am all for it. They are crying and wanting to "puke" etc, you can really see their age coming through.
User avatar
Reefer2
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Postby Hockey Widow » Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:05 pm

Reefer2 wrote:
Hockey Widow wrote:
Reefer2 wrote:Late to show but is the deal from Pitts not actually better than the deal from Boston (with the confirmed 1st rounder)



They were identical offers. Two prospects and a confirmed 1st, no conditional first.



Thought the Boston 1st was based upon Iginla signing an extension?

Back to Bountiful - wow their recent group of posts are funny. Maybe it is the age thing but I could care less who we trade, if it made the team better I am all for it. They are crying and wanting to "puke" etc, you can really see their age coming through.



Boston confirmed in their presser today their offer was for the two players held out of their respective line ups and a 1st, no conditional. That was media rumour started by TSN. What was conditional was Iginla agreeing to waive. So the trade was agreed upon conditional upon Iginla agreeing to waive to go to Boston.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2979
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Cornuck, Google Adsense [Bot], Lancer, Meds, MSNbot Media, ukcanuck and 5 guests