Iggie to Pittsburgh, NOT Boston

[hockey216]

until you realize thats part of sports you wont understand. I do agree he is being un ethical, but thats just part of all sports. That will never change

Look he has right to go wherever he wants. I never had problem with borque leaving, lebron, etc. Players can do whatever. i understand. But you have to be up front with people. you don't make a finalized deal with someone, then reneg. That is unethical. Jerome should have said he wanted pit from beginning, and told them up front that he would refuse to go to boston. He agreed to waive no trade clause for boston the whole time, then after deal done, all of a sudden refused. Don't agree to boston, and then wait until AFTER DEAL FINALIZED to say "oh wait i had a change of heart." You had weeks to pull that shit. And you wait until after the deal was finalized? What a jerk. I hope Chara and Lucic punch his lights out and teach him a lesson not to mess with boston.

[ChicagoBlackhawk]

Look he has right to go wherever he wants. I never had problem with borque leaving, lebron, etc. Players can do whatever. i understand. But you don't make a finalized deal with someone, then reneg. That is unethical. Jerome should have said he wanted pit from beginning, and told them up front that he would refuse to go to boston. Don't agree to boston, and then wait until AFTER DEAL FINALIZED to say "oh wait i had a change of heart." You had weeks to pull that shit. And you wait until after the deal was finalized? What a scum bag. I hope Chara and Lucic punch his fkking lights out and teach him a lesson not to fkk with boston.

couldn't have been that final now could it?

[hockey216]

couldn't have been that final now could it?

Feaster (Calgary GM) called boston GM Chiarelli yesterday at 12noon and informed them that they had an agreement, and that the trade was done. Both teams scratched their players from lineup last night.

was negotiating with bos for a while. Calgary already got approval from owners, coach, etc. Everything was finalized. Calgary GM Feaster called Chiarelli at 12noon yesterday and told him that they accepted, and that the deal was done.

If you're gonna back out, don't wait until AFTER THE DEAL IS FINALIZED. Back out before trade is finalized. What a scum bag. He had weeks to pull that shit, and then he waits until after both teams made the trade final? That is unethical.

[ChicagoBlackhawk]

Feaster (Calgary GM) called boston GM Chiarelli yesterday at 12noon and informed them that they accepted offer, and that the deal was done. Both teams scratched their players from lineup last night. was negotiating with bos for a while. Already got approval from owners, coach, etc. on both sides. Everything was finalized. Calgary GM Feaster called Chiarelli at 12noon yesterday and told him that they accepted, and deal was done.

If you're gonna back out, don't wait until AFTER THE DEAL IS DONE. Back out before trade is finalized. What a scum bag. He had weeks to pull that shit, and then he waits until after the deal was finalized? unbelievable.

its not a deal until its a deal bud

[hockey216]

its not a deal until its a deal bud

it was a deal. they agreed yesterday at 12noon and had a verbal contract. It wasn't a "ok yea we are most likely going to agree" type of conversation. It was a "We have an agreement. deal is done. Iginla is flying to boston tomorrow."

only thing left was to sign the dotted line. they made agreement that trade was finalized. said they were going to.then iginla pulled that shit after two clubs finalized agreement.

If Iginla said "only pittsburgh" 2 weeks ago, i have no problem. but don't say you're ok with boston all along, then wait until after both clubs finalize the deal to pull this shit out of the blue.

[ChicagoBlackhawk]

it was a deal. they agreed yesterday at 12noon and had a verbal contract. It wasn't a "ok yea we are most likely going to agree" type of conversation. It was a "We have an agreement. deal is done."

only thing left was to sign the dotted line. they made agreement that trade was finalized. said they were going to.then iginla pulled that shit after two clubs finalized agreement.

If Iginla said "only pittsburgh" 2 weeks ago, i have no problem. but don't say you're ok with boston all along, then wait until after both clubs finalize the deal to pull this shit out of the blue.

I would say thats the biggest thing left not the only thing left. its the only part that matters. A verbal agreement is still not valid in any court so it means absolutely nothing.

[hockey216]

I would say thats the biggest thing left not the only thing left. its the only part that matters. A verbal agreement is still not valid in any court so it means absolutely nothing.

actually verbal agreements are valid contracts and can hold up in court. once you verbally agree, courts recognize a contract. Courts obviously honor written agreements more than verbal because there's less room for other party to say, "I never agreed to that." Written contracts have more clarity because you know verbatum what was agreed to, rather than 2 parties arguing over their memory of what was said. So, obviously courts respect written agreements more because of the clarity in the evidence. Written agreements have more evidence attached. but nonetheless, a verbal agreement is still a valid contract. A written agreement is the same thing as a verbal one ("I agree to x"). only difference is a written agreement is a verbal agreement that has a record/more evidence attached.

[PuckIt]

actually verbal agreements are valid contracts and can hold up in court. once you verbally agree, courts recognize a contract. Courts obviously honor written agreements more than verbal because there's less room for other party to say, "I never agreed to that." Written contracts have more clarity because you know verbatum what was agreed to, rather than 2 parties arguing over their memory of what was said. So, obviously courts respect written agreements more because of the clarity in the evidence. Written agreements have more evidence attached. but nonetheless, a verbal agreement is still a valid contract. A written agreement is the same thing as a verbal one ("I agree to x"). only difference is a written agreement is a verbal agreement that has a record/more evidence attached.

Only if the verbal statement included enough evidence to constitute consideration. Team, time, years, money, clauses, etc.

Also, Boston here would be th offeree, and in doing so they would specify the manner of acceptance required to constitute a valid acceptance. My guess is it wasn't, "Contract to be accepted by Jarome Iginla stating "sure thing."

[Deuce]

Rental, no way Mario is going to be able to sign him for what he wants. Hope he does well but Mario won't fire sale the up and comers to obtain a 35 year old.

[ChicagoBlackhawk]

Only if the verbal statement included enough evidence to constitute consideration. Team, time, years, money, clauses, etc.

Also, Boston here would be th offeree, and in doing so they would specify the manner of acceptance required to constitute a valid acceptance. My guess is it wasn't, "Contract to be accepted by Jarome Iginla stating "sure thing."

Thanks puckit. Thats what ive been trying to tell him

[PuckIt]

Thanks puckit. Thats what ive been trying to tell him

I was gonna stay out of it until we got all legal and technical. A contract requires a valid offer, acceptance, and consideration. Without all three there is no contract. Courts will hold up verbal agreements in certain situations but this would NOT be one due to the gravity of the deal and the fact that NO ONE in the NHL makes their deals verbally.

[hockey216]

Only if the verbal statement included enough evidence to constitute consideration. Team, time, years, money, clauses, etc.

Also, Boston here would be th offeree, and in doing so they would specify the manner of acceptance required to constitute a valid acceptance. My guess is it wasn't, "Contract to be accepted by Jarome Iginla stating "sure thing."

yea its obviously harder. no doubt. my point wasn't that boston is going to sue calgary or anything. i was arguing that what calgary/jarome did was unethical (finalizing deal, then reneging). He said that agreements don't exist until it's in writing. that's why i responded to that. got sidetracked. but nonetheless, boston isnt gona sue calgary. that wasn't my point. My point was that the trade deal was in place, regardless of it not being signed. It is unethical to back out of a trade after you finalize the agreement. i was commenting on it being unethical to reneg after deal is done. Just because papers weren't signed doesn't mean deal wasn't in place. i'm angry because i feel what jarome did was unethical. i care about the ethics, not the legal implications. nobody is suing anybody. i just feel that despite the documents not being signed, they still had a verbal agreement that the deal was finalized, and reneging is unethical. I'm arguing ethics. It's not like they backed out because they couldn't agree on terms. They backed out because Jarome hit them with a curveball out of the blue and said "i changed my mind fk boston i won't go to them" after he previously agreed. He should have said that a month ago. Too late after 2 clubs finalize the deal. Calgary GM called boston GM and said "Deal is done. Iginla healthy scratched tonight. He's flying to boston tomorrow." Then iginla pulls this last minute BS. He had a whole month to back out, and he waits until after the two clubs finalize the deal? i don't care about whether it was illegal. it was unethical to reneg like that after the deal had been finalized.

[ChicagoBlackhawk]

yea its obviously harder. no doubt. my point wasn't that boston is going to sue calgary or anything. i was arguing that what calgary/jarome did was unethical (finalizing deal, then reneging). He said that it's not because agreements don't exist until it's in writing. that's why i responded to that. got sidetracked. but nonetheless, boston isnt gona sue calgary. that wasn't my point. My point was that the trade deal was in place, regardless of it not being signed. It is unethical to back out of a trade after you finalize the agreement. i was commenting on it being unethical to reneg after deal is done. Just because papers weren't signed doesn't mean deal wasn't in place. i'm angry because i feel what jarome did was unethical. i care about the ethics, not the legal implications. nobody is suing anybody. i just feel that despite the documents not being signed, they still had a verbal agreement that the deal was finalized, and reneging is unethical. I'm arguing ethics. It's not like they backed out because they couldn't agree on terms. They backed out because Jarome hit them with a curveball out of the blue and said "i changed my mind fk boston i won't go to them" after he previously agreed. He should have said that a month ago. Too late after 2 clubs finalize the deal. Calgary GM called boston GM and said "Deal is done. Iginla healthy scratched tonight. He's flying to boston tomorrow." Then iginla pulls this last minute BS. He had a whole month to back out, and he waits until after the two clubs finalize the deal? i don't care about whether it was illegal. it was unethical to reneg like that after the deal had been finalized.

happens all the time in sports. get used to it. I have a feeling you are boston fan and just upset over it. trust me he wont be the difference between boston having a good shot in the post season

[hockey216]

happens all the time in sports. get used to it. I have a feeling you are boston fan and just upset over it. trust me he wont be the difference between boston having a good shot in the post season

obviously im disappointed. had a done deal, and after deal was done, they reneged. unethical to reneg after the deal is already done in a trade. Especially in trade of this magnitude. Negotiations went on for 2 weeks. If iginla wanted to say something, he should have said it during the past 2 weeks. he agreed to boston. deal got done. GM called GM Chiarelli to confirm done deal, player is theirs and off market. both teams scratched players. jarome reneged (pulling the "im not waiving no trade clause" out of the BLUE). He renigged after both GM's, coaches, owners all signed off on it and verbally finalized that it was a done deal. Jerome reneged after deal finalized, not before.

[steviec27]

Bitter. Yawn.

[hockey216]

I was gonna stay out of it until we got all legal and technical. A contract requires a valid offer, acceptance, and consideration. Without all three there is no contract. Courts will hold up verbal agreements in certain situations but this would NOT be one due to the gravity of the deal and the fact that NO ONE in the NHL makes their deals verbally.

Valid offer: bruins submitted valid, formal offer in writing days prior. Calgary GM's, owners, coaches, etc. reviewed it for days. Iginla formally with Calgary organization to waive his no trade clause to be traded to Boston. Had been in verbal negotiations for over 2 weeks. About 3-4 days ago, the official written offer was sent in writing the Calgary. Written offer was: Iginla (Calgary) in exchange for Alexander Khokhlachev, Matt Bartkowski, and 1 firm 1st round 2013 draft pick (Boston).

Acceptence: Calgary GM Feaster called Boston GM Chiarelli on 3/27 at 12:00pm, and stated that the Calgary organization has accepted the offer. They said, "the trade is finalized. Jerome is your player. You are getting the player. He's off the market." They then agreed that both teams scratch the players. He said that he had to work out the legistics of the timing of flying Jerome over, and he may need a few hours space, but it was a done deal. Jarome agreed to waive no trade clause, and the Bruins written offer was accepted on behalf of the entire Calgary organization.

Consideration: Value of one asset (Jerome Iginla) promised to Bruins. Value of 3 assets (Alexander Khokhlachev, Matt Bartkowsk, firm 2013 1st round draft pick) promised in exchange to Calgary. All players both sides scratch players same day. Players fly the next day.

Calgary then breached their contract with the Bruins. Calgary's breach of contract caused the Bruins to suffer damages (loss of Iginla).

you can say what you want about verbal contracts. And to a great extent, i agree with what you're saying in a general sense. verbal agreements are much harder to legally enforce. However, if you have a written offer, explaining all the contract details (as outlined, plus all the others), and then have official verbal confirmation accepting the contract, a valid contract exists. Although verbal, this is still a valid contract. It was a verbal confirmation of a written contract.

Yes tougher to enforce in courts, but it was still a contract. Courts can still rule that verbal contracts are enforceable. Depends extent, clarity, etc. This contract between Bruins and Calgary was crystal clear, in writing, and formally accepted from Calgary via conference call.

people are entitled to have their own opinions. The better, more experienced lawyers usually win these cases. That's why we have judges. That's why we have appeals courts. Different people see things differently. This is my opinion. You are entitled to yours. I hope you have a nice day.

[Mitchell88]

I am a Boston fan also but hey would have been great to get him but he wanted to play with Crosby. I dont want a guy on my home team that doesnt want to be there so fuk him. Crosby wont be able to hide from every hit all year so eventually he will get hit get concussed and this will all be for not. If Pitt doesnt win the cup this year than they are pathetic they are far and away the most talented team in the NHL but anything can happen in playoffs

[ChicagoBlackhawk]

Yawwwwwwwn. So boring. Iginla isnt worth this amount of attention anyways.

[Mitchell88]

Yawwwwwwwn. So boring. Iginla isnt worth this amount of attention anyways.

agree, and the whole thing is over he is a Pen nothing going to change that now. gl today guys

[zandyman]

[k13]

Pittsburgh Penguins vs Chicago Blackhawks <input id="editx" name="C_60" size="4" maxlength="5"> +624

This line became a joke fast. Maybe 1% chance it happens.

[Vegas39]

Pittsburgh Penguins vs Chicago Blackhawks <input id="editx" name="C_60" size="4" maxlength="5"> +624

This line became a joke fast. Maybe 1% chance it happens.

hey k13 any idea what this line was before the trades Pitt made ?

[k13]

hey k13 any idea what this line was before the trades Pitt made ?

It was around +1200 before the trade.

Around +2000 before the Pens "winning streak"

[Vegas39]

Thanks