Duncan Keith, yo.
- Johnny Wrath

So much this.

FINALLY someone agrees with my theory about how the Flames actually operate. Everyone blames the delayed rebuild on Feaster and sometimes King but I don't understand how Murray Edwards escapes the blame. I mean, it was actually reported that he gave the final greenlight to trade Iggy. The man is far more involved than people realize, I think, and if you don't think the decision to start a rebuild - which involves, in Calgary's case, probably losing money for awhile - isn't one that is reluctantly approved by him I don't think you realize how most sports teams operate. Think about how much money Calgary lost the first time they rebuilt in the 90s, I have a hard time believing that wasn't a factor in the delayed decision. Hell, just look at the Dome nowadays and how many empty seats there are compared to the mid-2000s.

Funny he gets brought up in a Richards discussion because one rumor said that, before the Richards deal, the Kings were willing to offer the same package (Simmonds, Schenn and a 2nd) for him. If only...
- S Kaspar Rollins

LOL, I thought it was common knowledge around here that Edwards blocked that deal.

Funny enough, and I am guilty here, I would expect the building to be more full today than the last couple of "Iggy seasons". The Flames are playing exciting, competitive hockey and I think moving Iggy is a big reason behind that.

The common tactic of playing against Iggy was to avoid firing him up, because once he was angry, he was a terror on the ice. That tells me there is something wrong right away, because if he can't get fired up every night, how is the rest of the team going to? Were they sitting back waiting for Iggy?

Gio brings it every night, and for those suggesting the Flames trade him (other threads), I would counter that by saying he is one of the rare vets you don't want to move (almost) no matter the skill set he brings in return. He gets the team playing hard with him, and has kept them competing until the last shift of the game. Never saw that from Iggy, at least not in his latter years as a Flame.

Every Cup winning team needs, at minimum, an elite top line center, a top 10 d and a decent goalie (or at least one that's decent enough to paper over with the rest of the team). Remove any one and you aren't winning a Cup.

If you have more elite or slightly below elite players obviously your chances go up but those are the basic required elements.
- S Kaspar Rollins

Gonchar a top ten d when they won?
Getzlaf or Macdonald elite when they won?
Hurricanes had no one close top ten on defence when they won.

I agree with essentials of what you're sayin, but just sayin...

I wave my Richard around all the time, where's the update on that?

Gonchar a top ten d when they won?
Getzlaf or Macdonald elite when they won?
Hurricanes had no one close top ten on defence when they won.

I agree with essentials of what you're sayin, but just sayin...
- Ihateallofu

True, there are some exceptions and I agree that the d part is probably the most problematic one to figure out. It's more of a general rule of thumb I think.

Also, Hurricanes in 06 were probably the flukiest Cup win of all time so I don't think they count. You know what I mean.

LOL, I thought it was common knowledge around here that Edwards blocked that deal.

Funny enough, and I am guilty here, I would expect the building to be more full today than the last couple of "Iggy seasons". The Flames are playing exciting, competitive hockey and I think moving Iggy is a big reason behind that.

The common tactic of playing against Iggy was to avoid firing him up, because once he was angry, he was a terror on the ice. That tells me there is something wrong right away, because if he can't get fired up every night, how is the rest of the team going to? Were they sitting back waiting for Iggy?

Gio brings it every night, and for those suggesting the Flames trade him (other threads), I would counter that by saying he is one of the rare vets you don't want to move (almost) no matter the skill set he brings in return. He gets the team playing hard with him, and has kept them competing until the last shift of the game. Never saw that from Iggy, at least not in his latter years as a Flame.
- rmull905

Jesus H Christ there's people around here who think it would be a good idea to trade Giordano? No wonder I never post here anymore unless I'm really bored and/or setting my HBSL roster. The only possible reason that would be a good idea is if extension talks got really bad and I don't see that happening. Even then there's no way I don't see such a trade setting the Flames back 5 years.

Re: Edwards, I admittedly don't post/read forums as much as I used to but every discussion I see of the Feaster years places blame on him alone it seems.

His body is just worn out i think. between his hard style of play in philly and all the drugs he was rumored to be doing
- arichardson22

How true is this?

uh oh

Three teams were most interested in trading for Richards. Yes, Dion Phaneuf had been discussed in talks with the Maple Leafs. However, the Kings were not that interested, despite their need for defense. There were two separate deals on the table from the Leafs at varying points. One involved Phaneuf, the other did not. Obviously, Lombardi was not agreeable to either. Thus, it never came to pass.
One of the other teams involved was the Calgary Flames. There appeared to be a deal in place between the Flames and Kings, until Calgary allegedly changed the parameters of the deal very late in the process. Again, Lombardi was not agreeable to what was presented and no deal was reached. http://mayorsmanor.com/20...-maneuvers-with-richards/

If this is true, my guess is the Flames wanted LA to eat more salary than they were willing to. I hope it isn't true because it means they might claim him...

On second thought I don't really believe this unless Flames were sending another contract (Stajan?) back.

uh oh
One of the other teams involved was the Calgary Flames. There appeared to be a deal in place between the Flames and Kings, until Calgary allegedly changed the parameters of the deal very late in the process. Again, Lombardi was not agreeable to what was presented and no deal was reached. http://mayorsmanor.com/20...-maneuvers-with-richards/

If this is true, my guess is the Flames wanted LA to eat more salary than they were willing to. I hope it isn't true because it means they might claim him...
- S Kaspar Rollins

Only way they would place a claim is on re-entry, there is no way they are claiming with full cap hit. We already have too many centres in the organization, and we have two very capable 3/4 centres in Stajan and Backlund.

Only way they would place a claim is on re-entry, there is no way they are claiming with full cap hit. We already have too many centres in the organization, and we have two very capable 3/4 centres in Stajan and Backlund.
- rmull905

Wouldn't make a difference whether they claimed on re-entry or not, they'd still be on hook for the full cap hit. I agree with you but sometimes teams make real stupid moves. The only way it would have made some sense, roster wise, is if they were sending Stajan the other way and even then it would be bad.

Plus the Flames called up Wolf and Sven today and I don't see them doing that if they were planning something like this.

The Oilers need centres, why not pick Richards? "The contract is huge" is not a valid argument: they are paying more to Nuge, Hall and Eberle who have proven squat. Pick the guy, slot him as number 2 center, he will mentor some of these kids and it's one less piece we are after.
Is he better than lander? Is he better than roy? Is he better than horcoff? Is he better than gagner? If the answer is 3 or more "yes " let's get him and stop female doging about money.
If you want talent and you don't want to pay, the only option is draft. And that has worked REALLY well in edmonton..... Hasn't it?
Claim Richards, claim him now!

who here doesn't like richards?

who here doesn't like richards?
- Flyfreaky

Personally, I love Richards.

who here doesn't like richards?
- Flyfreaky

Apparently in Edmonton they hate him.... Oilers should claim him. Period.

Apparently in Edmonton they hate him.... Oilers should claim him. Period.
- EdEagle

dude, i know for a fact that all oiler fans love richards

The Oilers need centres, why not pick Richards? "The contract is huge" is not a valid argument: they are paying more to Nuge, Hall and Eberle who have proven squat. Pick the guy, slot him as number 2 center, he will mentor some of these kids and it's one less piece we are after.
Is he better than lander? Is he better than roy? Is he better than horcoff? Is he better than gagner? If the answer is 3 or more "yes " let's get him and stop female doging about money.
If you want talent and you don't want to pay, the only option is draft. And that has worked REALLY well in edmonton..... Hasn't it?
Claim Richards, claim him now!
- EdEagle

Hi Cloutier. Haven't seen you around in a while...

Personally, I love Richards.
- eichiefs9

Hi Cloutier. Haven't seen you around in a while...
- Iggysbff

Hi Cloutier. Haven't seen you around in a while...
- Iggysbff

No.... Clouts would be saying how this Richards deal will land us Milan lucic and the number one draft pick from Arizona in a sort of kind if 4 way deal. My imagination isn't that extensive.
I just want the oil to pick a real centre, there's one available!

The Oilers need centres, why not pick Richards? "The contract is huge" is not a valid argument: they are paying more to Nuge, Hall and Eberle who have proven squat. Pick the guy, slot him as number 2 center, he will mentor some of these kids and it's one less piece we are after.
Is he better than lander? Is he better than roy? Is he better than horcoff? Is he better than gagner? If the answer is 3 or more "yes " let's get him and stop female doging about money.
If you want talent and you don't want to pay, the only option is draft. And that has worked REALLY well in edmonton..... Hasn't it?
Claim Richards, claim him now!
- EdEagle

The thing with bad contracts is you're not just talking short term but is this contract going to get in the way when you actually have to spend money to compete. I see the Oilers have far less cap room than I thought right now, so, hmm

If only NHLNumbers projected past 2015 like capgeek did...sigh. Though your "core" is already locked up and it's yet another weak FA crop this year so why not

No.... Clouts would be saying how this Richards deal will land us Milan lucic and the number one draft pick from Arizona in a sort of kind if 4 way deal. My imagination isn't that extensive.
I just want the oil to pick a real centre, there's one available!
- EdEagle

We don't have the cap space. And he's not worth 5.75 mill for another 6 years.

If we could send a couple contracts the other way it might change the convo.

We don't have the cap space. And he's not worth 5.75 mill for another 6 years.

If we could send a couple contracts the other way it might change the convo.
- Iggysbff

I don't see any contracts that go past 2016 that might make it worthwhile.

I don't see any contracts that go past 2016 that might make it worthwhile.
- S Kaspar Rollins

s.weber

Ya, I don't see many teams doing them a favour. I can see a bunch of teams interested in re-entry waivers at half his salary...but not so sure about full. As I write this, I can just feel the Leafs signing the papers.
- Colin Dambrauskas

on wikipedia it says "The 2013 collective bargaining agreement eliminated re-entry waivers"
does that mean the half-salary route no longer applies if they are recalled?

on wikipedia it says "The 2013 collective bargaining agreement eliminated re-entry waivers"
does that mean the half-salary route no longer applies if they are recalled?
- cpltanto

Sigh....for the gazzillionth time....

There are no re entry waivers anymore. Period.