Smid thinks he is ready. UPD: Hopes to be cleared for mid October

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Parallex

That's not possible. If he was a possession blackhole that means the Flames were giving up way more shot attempts they they were taking... I don't think you can call yourself "reasonably good defensively" if the other team is constantly allowed to fire rubber in the direction of your goalie when you're on the ice.

That said as the HERO chart demonstrated 2010-2012 Smid was a legitimate #4 d-man so if we could get that Smid back then it'd be a real boon (both in play and in terms of trade value).

He can block shots, doesn't screw up in the d-zone terribly often and can clear the front of the net. But you can't rely on him to move the puck that well as he's mostly limited to chipping the puck off the glass or boards.

Russell also had pretty bad possession stats but was decent enough in his own zone, would you say he wasn't good defensively? Just a matter of perspective. A positive corsi (aka Oilers) stat isn't always going to indicate 'better' defensive play.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Russell also had pretty bad possession stats but was decent enough in his own zone, would you say he wasn't good defensively?

I would say that without the offensive component to his game Kris Russell wouldn't be an NHL defenseman. I don't think all that highly of his game with regards to suppressing the opposition and I think peception of him will decline this year when Hamilton eats into his ice-time.

That said I prefer him to Smid and Engelland, so that's something.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I would say that without the offensive component to his game Kris Russell wouldn't be an NHL defenseman. I don't think all that highly of his game with regards to suppressing the opposition and I think peception of him will decline this year when Hamilton eats into his ice-time.

That said I prefer him to Smid and Engelland, so that's something.

So setting an NHL record for blocked shots doesn't qualify him to be an NHL d-man, it's purely his offense?

Really?

QUITE the ridiculous comment.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/k...block-leaders/

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

So setting an NHL record for blocked shots doesn't qualify him to be an NHL d-man

Chris Butler was 2nd in the league in blocked shots one year (the next year he was shuttling between the AHL and NHL)... I wouldn't use that as a measure of defensive aptitude.

I don't hate Kris Russell, I think he's a perfectly servicable bottom-pairing defenseman who can contribute on the 2nd unit PP (but probably won't this year because we've got Hamilton or Wideman to fill that spot).

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Chris Butler was 2nd in the league in blocked shots one year (the next year he was shuttling between the AHL and NHL)... I wouldn't use that as a measure of defensive aptitude.

I don't hate Kris Russell, I think he's a perfectly servicable bottom-pairing defenseman who can contribute on the 2nd unit PP (but probably won't this year because we've got Hamilton or Wideman to fill that spot).

That is a horrible comparison.

Russell is very responsible in his own end. You honestly sound like a pure-stat guy who judges players on their stats and not their play.

I don't recall ever this season wishing Russell would make less mistakes in his own end or be smarter or whatever. Always hustling, and making high percentage plays defensively.

He is a top 4 guy on any NHL team.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I would say that without the offensive component to his game Kris Russell wouldn't be an NHL defenseman.

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Russell is very responsible in his own end.

...

He is a top 4 guy on any NHL team.

The answer is... somewhere in the middle.

[Gaskal]

Russell has stepped up big this season. However, with Gio-Brodie-Hamilton we're among those elite-level bluelines like Keith/Seabrook/Hjalmarsson and Pietrangelo/Bouw/Shattenkirk. On a contender-level blueline, Russell is a serviceable #4 and a very good #5 defenceman.

Kris is someone who could really flourish given some easier zone starts and minutes. Sure, he's shown he can handle it, but ideally you want someone that has lower shot suppression like he does starting off in the o-zone. On a fully stocked blueline, I'd be looking to give him the exact same deployments and minutes as we did Schlemko towards the end of the season - who drove possession extremely well with his limited minutes and cushier starts. Plus, Russell and Engelland did enjoy some chemistry together playing preseason IIRC.



Gio and Brodie were positive corsi players even after being thrown into the d-zone vs the highest competition. Dougie can pretty much be counted as another Gio in terms of pure possession/minutes/deployment.

Wideman and Russell ended up in the red due to having to step up to take Gio/Brodie's minutes, while Brodie held down the second pairing all by himself. Those two held down the fort admirably down the stretch, but their possession stats tanked because of it. I think Gio hadn't gotten injured and those two were still playing 2nd pairing minutes, they could've at least broke even.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Wideman and Russell ended up in the red due to having to step up to take Gio/Brodie's minutes, while Brodie held down the second pairing all by himself.

Not quite.

Hartley used the Engelland/Brodie pairing the way he used the Giordano/Brodie pairing - exclusively starting in the D-zone against high level of competition. You could probably browse around War-on-ice and put together a chart for it, but basically Brodie was still our #1D. That's why you see Brodie even further left of Giordano, albeit a little bit lower on the Y-axis, and Engelland higher/more left than any of the other bottom pair guys.

[Gaskal]

Yes, but minutes played are also a big factor; Shattenkirk attests to this.

"Personally, my minutes have gone up this year from 20 to 22, and even that little difference is noticeable. I definitely feel it after games. Adding another seven minutes onto that is almost unthinkable."

With Gio out, that's a massive workload that has to be replaced. The man was already playing 25+min a night. Hartley had Wideman and Russell eating up a lot more minutes than they'd been playing and it definitely affects their on-ice performance. If Ryan van Asten hadn't done such a great job conditioning the team, we might not have made it in.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Yes, but minutes played are also a big factor; Shattenkirk attests to this.

With Gio out, that's a massive workload that has to be replaced. The man was already playing 25+min a night. Hartley had Wideman and Russell eating up a lot more minutes than they'd been playing and it definitely affects their on-ice performance. If Ryan van Asten hadn't done such a great job conditioning the team, we might not have made it in.

To add to that, you could tell by the Anaheim series the defense was barely holding together when it came to defending the zone. It was bad enough that the Ducks were the biggest and baddest team when it came to physically punishing and making you work for the puck but the gas tank was running on magic fumes by then.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Anduril

To add to that, you could tell by the Anaheim series the defense was barely holding together when it came to defending the zone. It was bad enough that the Ducks were the biggest and baddest team when it came to physically punishing and making you work for the puck but the gas tank was running on magic fumes by then.

And as Quick pointed out, Perry and Getzlaf spend so much time being the net it gets exhausting for the defense to constantly grind on the boards

[TjRhythmic]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Yes, but minutes played are also a big factor; Shattenkirk attests to this.

With Gio out, that's a massive workload that has to be replaced. The man was already playing 25+min a night. Hartley had Wideman and Russell eating up a lot more minutes than they'd been playing and it definitely affects their on-ice performance. If Ryan van Asten hadn't done such a great job conditioning the team, we might not have made it in.

That's the biggest reason I'm excited for this next season. No more are your pairings going to be 30-25-5 in a game. You could essentially break it out evenly 20-20-20 now, and with the conditioning of the team that is going to be a very fast third period team.

I'm comparing it to the years Nash played with the Suns and all they did was run run run. With this defense essentially being the point guard they are just going to push push and push... Calgary might even be a better third period team then they were last year

[Enoch Root]

Maybe not 20-20-20, but something like 23-21-16 or 22-20-18.

Whatever it shakes out as, that 3 or 4 fewer minutes per night for Giordano, Brodie, Russell and Wideman will be MASSIVE down the stretch and into the playoffs.

Anaheim is a really good, and very punishing team. I take nothing away from them in that regard. But I think sometimes people underestimate just how spent and beaten up the Flames D was by the time they got to the Ducks.

Russell was done. Brodie was all but done (and nursing a sore ankle)

Its no different than playing Kipper 75 games - you cant expect to win in the playoffs if you spent all your chips just getting there.

The depth that the Flames now have at D will pay huge dividends down the stretch and hopefully mush further.

[ricardodw]

Looking at this whole thread and I am surprised that no one else has yet identified the negative impact of getting a 6/7 Dman back into the salary cap for the next 2 years.... especially when the other 6/7 guy is carrying a cap hit of 2.9M

Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO

Updated for the Byron signing.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

Great work by InCoGnEto... nobody has yet filled the gap left by Cap Geek

If Smid is cleared to play then this means that Hudler and Russell are in their farewell as a Flame tour. 2016-17 InCoGnEto has the Flames dropping their Goalie cap hit from 7.9M to 4M and the cap going up 5% to 74.9 .... neither very likely to happen...


With Smid replacing Wotherspoon and adding 2M to the cap the Flame committed 2015-16 cap without Hudler and Russell is 71.9M ... above the 2014-15 cap allowed.

The roster 2016-17 is short 2 players.

If nobody will pick up Raymond.... since he is making more than 900k his cap stays with the Flames.

There is a lot of Cp people that simply say get rid of Raymond/Smid/Engelland/ Bollig.... that has not been happening. For example when the Flames had a lot of cap room they did not make one cap space for asset trade.


Even for the 2015-16 season the addition of Smid move the Flames right up to the cap level. Which of the 17 listed forward get sent back to the AHL?

Maybe Ferland won't sign for less than a one-way 900K. That way his cap stays with the Flames when he get sent down.

It sure gets a lot more difficult for "Nothing given , everything earned" when contracts make you play Mason Raymond over someone you have to bury to save cap space.


PS. If I was the Canucks I sure would be willing to give Ferland a 1.8M *3 years one way deal and give up a 3rd round pick.

If Ferland signs an offer sheet with anyone for 1.2M the Flames get nothing.

Of course they would match but then they have one less roster option.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Looking at this whole thread and I am surprised that no one else has yet identified the negative impact of getting a 6/7 Dman back into the salary cap for the next 2 years.... especially when the other 6/7 guy is carrying a cap hit of 2.9M



Great work by InCoGnEto... nobody has yet filled the gap left by Cap Geek

If Smid is cleared to play then this means that Hudler and Russell are in their farewell as a Flame tour. 2016-17 InCoGnEto has the Flames dropping their Goalie cap hit from 7.9M to 4M and the cap going up 5% to 74.9 .... neither very likely to happen...


With Smid replacing Wotherspoon and adding 2M to the cap the Flame committed 2015-16 cap without Hudler and Russell is 71.9M ... above the 2014-15 cap allowed.

The roster 2016-17 is short 2 players.

If nobody will pick up Raymond.... since he is making more than 900k his cap stays with the Flames.

There is a lot of Cp people that simply say get rid of Raymond/Smid/Engelland/ Bollig.... that has not been happening. For example when the Flames had a lot of cap room they did not make one cap space for asset trade.


Even for the 2015-16 season the addition of Smid move the Flames right up to the cap level. Which of the 17 listed forward get sent back to the AHL?

Maybe Ferland won't sign for less than a one-way 900K. That way his cap stays with the Flames when he get sent down.

It sure gets a lot more difficult for "Nothing given , everything earned" when contracts make you play Mason Raymond over someone you have to bury to save cap space.


PS. If I was the Canucks I sure would be willing to give Ferland a 1.8M *3 years one way deal and give up a 3rd round pick.

If Ferland signs an offer sheet with anyone for 1.2M the Flames get nothing.

Of course they would match but then they have one less roster option.

Because the negative impact is largely in your head.

You referred to InCoGnEtO's spreadsheet as if it is fact.

Maybe you don't understand what an assumption is. But here are a few of the assumptions that you consider to be truths that get you to your conclusions:

Monahan $6M
Gaudreau $6M
Colborne $3M
Granlund $1.5M
Wotherspoon $1.5M
Ortio $3M

I will take the under on every single one of them.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

If Smid is healthy but can't return to form and remains a 3.5m 6/7 Dman, I highly doubt BT is just going to sit around and let him and Engelland be the reason he can't sign an important piece that he wants to sign. There are options, you don't have to wait until a semi-bad contract expires to get rid of it. I suspect if Smid becomes an anchor, he would be bought out before BT let his salary dictate the moves he's going to make. $1.16m against the cap for 4 years isn't ideal but it is an option. Same with Engelland/Raymond... these guys aren't going to be the reason we don't sign Hudler or Russell, they're just not. Good managers find creative ways to fix minor problems (and they are minor problems), they don't just lay down and let them play out in such a way that they hurt the organization.

BT really only needs to create roughly 3m-4m in cap space to sign both players as they already make $6.6m combined. Realistically, the most they would sign for would be 6m for Hudler and 4.5m for Russell but I really think they will be had for less when it's all said and done. I see Hudler at $5m-5.5m and Russell at around 4m, it really is going to come down to how much both players want to be here rather than what Smid and Engelland make. I could see the argument if both players were on ELCs but they already make a decent chuck of coin, giving them each an extra $1.25m-1.5m is not going to be a problem if that's what BT wants to do. The term both players will want will likely be the major sticking point in negotiations I would think, especially with Hudler.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Because the negative impact is largely in your head.

You referred to InCoGnEtO's spreadsheet as if it is fact.

Maybe you don't understand what an assumption is. But here are a few of the assumptions that you consider to be truths that get you to your conclusions:

Monahan $6M
Gaudreau $6M
Colborne $3M
Granlund $1.5M
Wotherspoon $1.5M
Ortio $3M

I will take the under on every single one of them.

Johnny and Sean might be around 6m especially given the salary structure that's in place right now. It really depends what they do next season. If they even just repeat their 14/15 performances, they are getting what Hamilton got at the bare minimum, likely a bit more for hopefully a couple extra years.

The other 4 at a combined 9m is not happening, no way, no how. If Colborne doesn't develop further, they likely go with Shore or Arnold before even qualifying him IMO. Ortio isn't going to to get the starts to get 3m, though we will need a goalie so we might need to spend a little here. That's okay though because Ramo/Hiller's combined 8.3m(!) can cover that and create space somewhere else as well (Johnny/Monahan). Granlund and Wotherspoon are both in tough to even make the team, much less get huge raises.

As long as BT can make one of Stajan, Raymond, Smid or Engellend disappear, we are fine unless the cap drops. If he can make two of them go... we are laughing. Jones' 4m is expiring too, there's plenty of room for BT to do what he wants.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

That is a horrible comparison.

Russell is very responsible in his own end. You honestly sound like a pure-stat guy who judges players on their stats and not their play.

I don't recall ever this season wishing Russell would make less mistakes in his own end or be smarter or whatever. Always hustling, and making high percentage plays defensively.

He is a top 4 guy on any NHL team.

Russell is a 3rd pairing D on a contending team. If he is playing higher up the roster, your team is not going to win the Stanley Cup. He's a good puck mover, skates well, and he doesn't make boneheaded mistakes a la Butler.

He has physical limitations. Russell was not able to contain Getzlaf and Perry, and I can't see that changing without a dangerous level of PED use.

With that said, he is more than a match for most bottom six forwards in the NHL. Every team needs a guy on the 3rd pairing that can move up the roster for a few weeks and hold the fort.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Because the negative impact is largely in your head.

You referred to InCoGnEtO's spreadsheet as if it is fact.

Maybe you don't understand what an assumption is. But here are a few of the assumptions that you consider to be truths that get you to your conclusions:

Monahan $6M
Gaudreau $6M
Colborne $3M
Granlund $1.5M
Wotherspoon $1.5M
Ortio $3M

I will take the under on every single one of them.

I only added 2M replacing Wotherspoon with Smid. ... I don't think Ortio will be on the Flames next year... certainly not for 3M .... the 3.8 M goal tender place holder would put the Flames in 29th spot as far as Goal tender cap.... Buffalo is #30 ... not the standard the Flames want to keep up to.

With Hiller already committed and paid for the Flames felt is necessary to bring back Ramo at 3.8M.

Over or under on the Flames spending 4M next year on goalies?


The Flames just gave Hamilton 5.75 for 6 years ..... there is no way that they would have traded Monahan or Gaudreau for Hamilton even up.

Everyone was raving about the magic that Trevling did getting Hamilton for 5.75 x 6 ...

Contract wise Gaudreau and Monahan will be in the same position in June 2016 as Hamilton was this year..... except they will have a far better track record ...

If Monahan and Gaudreau don't get more than Hamilton it will mean that the Flames will be looking at a top 10 draft pick as their play will have fallen way off of expectations.

[Enoch Root]

It is impossible to guess who will still be around a year from now, but we can look at it in the aggregate to get an idea.

Some of the contracts/players that are probably not in the long term plans include:

Raymond $3.15M (final year)
Bollig $1.25M (final year)
Smid $3.5M (final year)
Engelland $2.9M (final year)
Wideman $5.25M (final season)

I think the chances of all 3 of those defensemen being on the roster in 16/17 is virtually zero.

And I would go on to say that they are probably ALL gone by, if not the 1617 trade deadline, then after that season.

I would think that if Hudler and Russell are signed (I think they both will) that they will both be less than the $6M and $4.5M mentioned above.