[Rumour] Flames still trying to re-sign Russell

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The bottom line is that Hartly better get used to icing younger players in his bottom pairings going forward as next season will be the last that guys like Wideman, Engelland and Smid will be options for him.

I'm honestly so excited for this to happen. Same with the forwards, no more Bollig, Raymond, Stajan...

[saillias]

I've been waiting for 10 years. But the org always has different plans such as Vandermeer, Sarich, Staios, O'Brien, Engelland, and so on.

[theTrumanShow]

Have we traded him for the Capitals 1st yet?

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by saillias

I've been waiting for 10 years. But the org always has different plans such as Vandermeer, Sarich, Staios, O'Brien, Engelland, and so on.

Yeah, I was just thinking that. I'm not confident that all those guys won't get re-signed.

[heep223]

I don't think any of our younger players would be an improvement on any of those guys right now. It sounds great but it'd probably mean sewering the season and possibly rushing prospects when they're not ready.

Exception for me would be Nakladal, he should get a shot.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

These are fair points, but you have to realize that the lack of size is also prominent among the forward ranks. Most times when he gets pinned it's because he's forwarded the puck to the forward along the boards, and they can't get the puck out, so it goes back down deep. He battles for the puck again, often wins, or blocks a shot resulting in a turnover, and then he pushes the puck up the boards again.

Whenever I see trends in the team getting pinned deep, it's usually because the same forwards are on the ice. The biggest culprits for failing to clear the zone are Raymond, Granlund, and Gaudreau, mostly because of their lack of size. Colborne is the rare big man who has trouble clearing the zone. Even Bollig isn't too terrible at it.

I disagree. The problem is twofold.

1) Entering the zone in the first place is way too easy against Russell. His lax gap control gives his opponent way too much space to make plays instead of turn the puck over. Truth is in Hartley's deployment Russell starts in the offensive zone most of the time and yet the play always goes the other way. This is a problem in my opinion as Russell is not a big time point producing offensive Dman.

2) Russell rushes pucks up right into the opposition without taking any look at what the best play will be. He's an inaccurate passer who often misses his man on the breakout or wires it along the board impatiently while our forwards are not near the boards. Part of that has to do with his size - he's a walking target with the puck, but most of it is just his decision-making with zero pressure.

Seeing Kulak's breakout and gap control in October was refreshing because he was playing things with a lot more patience and poise than Russell or Wideman. Even Engelland was looking like a great player on that pairing, something that blew my mind. And more recently, I've been noticing that Smid's breakout is a little bit cleaner than Russell's.

[Monahan For Mayor]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I disagree. The problem is twofold.

1) Entering the zone in the first place is way too easy against Russell. His lax gap control gives his opponent way too much space to make plays instead of turn the puck over. Truth is in Hartley's deployment Russell starts in the offensive zone most of the time and yet the play always goes the other way. This is a problem in my opinion as Russell is not a big time point producing offensive Dman.

2) Russell rushes pucks up right into the opposition without taking any look at what the best play will be. He's an inaccurate passer who often misses his man on the breakout or wires it along the board impatiently while our forwards are not near the boards. Part of that has to do with his size - he's a walking target with the puck, but most of it is just his decision-making with zero pressure.

Seeing Kulak's breakout and gap control in October was refreshing because he was playing things with a lot more patience and poise than Russell or Wideman. Even Engelland was looking like a great player on that pairing, something that blew my mind. And more recently, I've been noticing that Smid's breakout is a little bit cleaner than Russell's.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by heep223

I don't think any of our younger players would be an improvement on any of those guys right now. It sounds great but it'd probably mean sewering the season and possibly rushing prospects when they're not ready.

Disagree. We've got three top pairing calibre NHL defensemen taking on the hardest minutes. Good teams are successful in playing young prospects in a sheltered NHL role. CHicago has two rookies in its top 6 D in Erik Gustafsson (23YO) and Trevor Van Riemsdyk (24YO) to go with their big three of Keith/Seabrook/Hjalmarsson. They even traded away their equivalent of Dennis Wideman in Trevor Daley and got better as a result even though the replacement was basically a Smid/Engelland type #6D in Scuderi.

Originally Posted by heep223

Gio definitely does it. Watch for it over the next few games. You're right Hamilton less so, and Brodie just skates it out.

I think that generally it's a system issue.

I've watched Gio paired with Sarich, Brodie, Bouwmeester, and Wideman and I've never seen him make a consistently poor breakout pass. Chipping the puck along the boards is not a bad play, but there has to be a target, which Gio always finds. For Russell and Engelland it's generally less about finding a target and more of just a panic-release. Gio is always patient with the puck, even though sometimes he's going to turn it over through the middle like Justin Schultz, that's because he's trying to read the forecheck.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by 868904

Any one know what the deal is with buyouts? I remember ready earlier in the year Duhatschek was saying the Flames have been trying to trade Wideman since last year and if they can't, they will buy him out next year.

How does that work? Is there cap penalties?

For older players it's 2/3 remaining salary spread out over twice the remaining term. So using Wideman... that would be 3.5M spread out over two years (1.75M Cap Hit)

[heep223]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Disagree. We've got three top pairing calibre NHL defensemen taking on the hardest minutes. Good teams are successful in playing young prospects in a sheltered NHL role. CHicago has two rookies in its top 6 D in Erik Gustafsson (23YO) and Trevor Van Riemsdyk (24YO) to go with their big three of Keith/Seabrook/Hjalmarsson. They even traded away their equivalent of Dennis Wideman in Trevor Daley and got better as a result even though the replacement was basically a Smid/Engelland type #6D in Scuderi.

But those guys are good. Our guys aren't. Wotherspoon doesn't look like he's going to be an NHLer. Kulak isn't ready. Younger prospects like Kyllington and Andersson have high end potential and look fantastic but not ready. Hickey not ready. Morrison doesn't look very good/not ready.

Who could the Flames call up?

Nakladal is the only one IMO and he may be able to play 3rd pairing minutes, but he's a complete wildcard. Sieloff?

Of course this is all my own opinion. The idea of trading away vets that you don't like and replacing them with younger players sounds great. But if those players suck, that's even worse. Furthermore you may ruin any potential they did still have.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by heep223

Who could the Flames call up?

Kulak looked capable of handling 3rd pairing minutes when he was up and Nakladal appears to be doing very well in the AHL.

[Flame19,289]

The trade rumors involving Travis Hamonic have been put on hold with his recent injury, along with the injury to Johnny Boychuk.

But when Hamonic and Boychuk are healthy after the All-Star break, if the Flames are indeed in the mix for Hamonic's services, they are going to need to send an NHL-ready D-man back to Brooklyn. Involving Kris Russell in a potential deal would make a lot more sense if he were signed to a fair contract extension rather than about to hit the UFA market.

Not that I necessarily think that is the driving force behind the contract extension talks... But it would certainly give the Flames more leverage in any potential trade talks.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by heep223

But those guys are good. Our guys aren't. Wotherspoon doesn't look like he's going to be an NHLer. Kulak isn't ready. Younger prospects like Kyllington and Andersson have high end potential and look fantastic but not ready. Hickey not ready. Morrison doesn't look very good/not ready.

Who could the Flames call up?

Nakladal is the only one IMO and he may be able to play 3rd pairing minutes, but he's a complete wildcard. Sieloff?

Of course this is all my own opinion. The idea of trading away vets that you don't like and replacing them with younger players sounds great. But if those players suck, that's even worse. Furthermore you may ruin any potential they did still have.

Here's the thing. Russell isn't good anyways. These other guys may not be good but its not like you're replacing a good player. You already have Smid sitting out and so its not like you'd be relying on some guy to come in and soak up 20 minutes.

[IgiTang]

I thought Kulak looked real good when he was up to start the season. Has his game fallen off? I havnt seen him play in Stockton.

[heep223]

I think Kulak started off pretty well on his recall, but tailed off to the point where he was becoming a real liability out there. Maybe you give him another shot but it's far from a slam dunk, at a key point in the season.

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Here's the thing. Russell isn't good anyways. These other guys may not be good but its not like you're replacing a good player. You already have Smid sitting out and so its not like you'd be relying on some guy to come in and soak up 20 minutes.

Russell plays 20 minutes per night for the team. Including key PK minutes. If Russell wasn't good, wouldn't he be playing 8 mins on the third pairing and Wideman would move up (who has been quite bad). Is Hartley really that blind? If so, that's hugely concerning. Why would Hartley be playing him in a top 4 role if he wasn't good? Why would Treliving be trying to re-sign him?

Anyways it's a matter of opinion, but my point being that it's not so simple as just "move the vets, bring up the kids" - especially on D. Our prospect depth is pretty weak right now IMO when you really take a look at it.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by heep223

But those guys are good. Our guys aren't. Wotherspoon doesn't look like he's going to be an NHLer. Kulak isn't ready. Younger prospects like Kyllington and Andersson have high end potential and look fantastic but not ready. Hickey not ready. Morrison doesn't look very good/not ready.

I think Kulak will be fine with an opportunity in the NHL. Growing pains, sure, but nothing totally disasterous like you appear to be worried about. Chicago had growing pains with those guys you say are good.

There's a difference between throwing a not-ready player to the wolves in a top 3 role and sheltering them in a bottom 3 role. Especially when we're still stuck with vets to pair them with. We've already seen a Wotherspoon-Smid pairing be more competent two years ago than a Smid-Engelland bottom pair and we've already seen a Kulak-Engelland pairing be better than a Wideman-Engelland pairing. At some point you have to throw the kid into the deep-end of the pool and see how they respond before you draw conclusions of whether they are ready.

And Hamilton can more than carry a middle pairing, you could pair him with Smid, Wideman, Kulak and you'll see the same results you see with Russell. If anything a Kulak-Hamilton pairing has potential to be much, much better than Russell-Hamilton and take this team a step forward.

[SuperMatt18]

Russell is a weird case because when you watch him, he doesn't look that bad.

He is mobile, plays hard, blocks lots of shots, and never really stands out in a bad way.

You dig deeper though and realize he was chasing the puck all game, had a hard time clearing the zone, doesn't make great break out passes, and isn't big enough to play a strong game in the corners.

He passes the initial smell test, and his determination and heart is something coaches love, but he really struggles at keeping the puck out of his own zone.

[Monahan For Mayor]

Originally Posted by heep223

I think Kulak started off pretty well on his recall, but tailed off to the point where he was becoming a real liability out there. Maybe you give him another shot but it's far from a slam dunk, at a key point in the season.



Russell plays 20 minutes per night for the team. Including key PK minutes. If Russell wasn't good, wouldn't he be playing 8 mins on the third pairing and Wideman would move up (who has been quite bad). Is Hartley really that blind? If so, that's hugely concerning. Why would Hartley be playing him in a top 4 role if he wasn't good? Why would Treliving be trying to re-sign him?

Anyways it's a matter of opinion, but my point being that it's not so simple as just "move the vets, bring up the kids" - especially on D. Our prospect depth is pretty weak right now IMO when you really take a look at it.

Paints a picture. Advanced stats aren't the be all end all, but these numbers are horrible. He gets top minutes but can't produce, suppress shots, or gets shots on net. This is not the sign of a good Dman.

[heep223]

What would Sieloff or Kulak's advanced stats look like in the NHL I wonder?

[saillias]

Originally Posted by heep223

What would Sieloff or Kulak's advanced stats look like in the NHL I wonder?

In a tiny sample size Kulak is above 50%. https://public.tableau.com/profile/s...es-/Dashboard1

That said, neither Sieloff or Kulak are the best or even one of the three best D-men in Stockton anyway.