McKenzie: Is there any doubt Russell would at least get 5 yrs x $5.5 million as UFA?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Blocking shots is like killing cockroaches-if you do it once or twice, you're alright. If you're doing it all the time, you have a problem.

Not the best analogy. Shots on goal are a normal part of every hockey game. Cockroaches are not a normal part of every house.

The plain fact of the matter is that Russell blocks shots because he's not big enough or strong enough to muscle the puck away from opposing forwards. His best bet for preventing shots on goal is to let the opponent take the shot and try to block it. At his size, if he tried to play defence in the normal way, he'd have been lunch meat years ago.

It just happens that he is good enough and relentless enough at shot-blocking to partly make up for his deficiencies. So far as it goes, that is a good thing. But the pooh-bahs of so-called advanced stats have got it in their heads that there is only one way to play defence effectively, and that is to suppress shot attempts. Their metrics were never designed to account for the idea that someone might block shots as a matter of strategy. Some of them actually seem to believe a defenceman who blocks shots is automatically worse than one who never tries.

[united]

Jared Spurgeon and Ryan Ellis do just fine blocking significantly fewer shots than Kris Russell does.

[Jay Random]

Spurgeon is significantly helped by having Suter as a defence partner. Ellis I'll give you.

[DJones]

Am I the only one that has missed Russell the last two games?

Looking back a few posts, I'd just like to say that I think we have our top 3 at a bargain. Sure Chicago's looks great from a cap perspective but Keiths contract is impossible to duplicate and I would take Gio's over Seabrooks any day of the week.

Nashville has the best contracts. Josi and Ellis are absolute steals at their cap hit. But other than them I like ours. In 4 years it will look even better even with Gio dropping to #3

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by DJones

Am I the only one that has missed Russell the last two games?

Looking back a few posts, I'd just like to say that I think we have our top 3 at a bargain. Sure Chicago's looks great from a cap perspective but Keiths contract is impossible to duplicate and I would take Gio's over Seabrooks any day of the week.

Nashville has the best contracts. Josi and Ellis are absolute steals at their cap hit. But other than them I like ours. In 4 years it will look even better even with Gio dropping to #3

If you missed him it's because Smid is/was getting more ice time and he's not very good and Nakladal is a raw rookie playing in his first few games. Outside of that I'm not missing him all that much. Russell isn't as bad as Smid or a raw rookie but the issue at hand is how much term and money do you want to sink into a guy that is just better than Smid or a raw rookie? He's looking for Brodie money and that's just a bad idea for the Flames to consider.

Also a few mistakes aside Nakladal hasn't looked all that bad and I like his size and physical game over Russell's no contact, using his body as a meat shield approach in his own end.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

If you missed him it's because Smid is/was getting more ice time and he's not very good and Nakladal is a raw rookie playing in his first few games. Outside of that I'm not kidding him all that much. Russell isn't as bad as Smid or a raw rookie but the issue at hand is how much term and money do you want to sink into a guy that is just better than Smid or a raw rookie. He's looking for Brodie money and that's just a bad idea for the Flames to consider.

I think the 5.5 is a joke. Don't see anyone giving him that. Anything under 4 and I would like him back.

I know it's apples to oranges but I kind of see Russell as a Frolik type player. And Frolik we probably overpaid half a million in order to get him.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Not the best analogy. Shots on goal are a normal part of every hockey game. Cockroaches are not a normal part of every house.

The plain fact of the matter is that Russell blocks shots because he's not big enough or strong enough to muscle the puck away from opposing forwards. His best bet for preventing shots on goal is to let the opponent take the shot and try to block it. At his size, if he tried to play defence in the normal way, he'd have been lunch meat years ago.

It just happens that he is good enough and relentless enough at shot-blocking to partly make up for his deficiencies. So far as it goes, that is a good thing. But the pooh-bahs of so-called advanced stats have got it in their heads that there is only one way to play defence effectively, and that is to suppress shot attempts. Their metrics were never designed to account for the idea that someone might block shots as a matter of strategy. Some of them actually seem to believe a defenceman who blocks shots is automatically worse than one who never tries.

No one said blocking shots is bad. Giordano blocks shots. Brodie Blocks shots. Duncan Keith blocks shots.

But Russell alllows way more shots to go unblocked (miss/crossbar/goal/shot) than his block totals might fool you into thinking. His block totals don't produce positive results.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

No one said blocking shots is bad. Giordano blocks shots. Brodie Blocks shots. Duncan Keith blocks shots.

But Russell alllows way more shots to go unblocked (miss/crossbar/goal/shot) than his block totals might fool you into thinking. His block totals don't produce positive results.

How many is 'way more'? It'd be interesting if there is an actual number on that. My sense is Russell gives up 2-3 more chances a game because of his size and either losing a battle or thinking he's about to and rushing a clear. To your point that may mean an extra block or two, but I don't think blocks are really the story.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

How many is 'way more'? It'd be interesting if there is an actual number on that. My sense is Russell gives up 2-3 more chances a game because of his size and either losing a battle or thinking he's about to and rushing a clear. To your point that may mean an extra block or two, but I don't think blocks are really the story.

Fenwick is a measure of unblocked shot attempts (uSAT). Basically if you or a teammate blocked a shot attempt, you won't get punished by Fenwick. If you failed to block a shot attempt, you recorded a Fenwick event against.

Kris Russell's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 44.67
TJ Brodie's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 38.46
Duncan Keith's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 38.54

So, on average, our goalies see 16% more puck (whether it misses, hits them, goes into the net, or hits iron) when Russell is on the ice than with Brodie on the ice.

But there's some context missing to that, and that's the fact that Keith/Brodie are regularily matched up against top lines that are going to "get theirs" no matter what. Smaller guys like Russell generally see middle pair competition. And yeah, they're smaller so they're at a disadvantage. But are they all at a disadvantage?

Russell = 44.67
Krug = 40.92
Spurgeon = 40.29
Vatanen = 39.12
Stralman = 35.13
Ellis = 32.76

I selected these guys because they're all smaller middle-pair defensemen (Former Flame Anton Stralman plays top pair with Hedman and Spurgeon does too with Suter). You can see that some of them post better stats than even Brodie/Keith but we'll chalk that down to things like deployment/competition. However. Russell. Gets. Killed.

In a stat that's supposed to favor shot blockers. If Russell were a better puck mover with tighter gap control, he would block less shots even at his current size, because he would have the puck more often.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Fenwick is a measure of unblocked shot attempts (uSAT). Basically if you or a teammate blocked a shot attempt, you won't get punished by Fenwick. If you failed to block a shot attempt, you recorded a Fenwick event against.

Kris Russell's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 44.67
TJ Brodie's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 38.46
Duncan Keith's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 38.54

So, on average, our goalies see 16% more puck (whether it misses, hits them, goes into the net, or hits iron) when Russell is on the ice than with Brodie on the ice.

But there's some context missing to that, and that's the fact that Keith/Brodie are regularily matched up against top lines that are going to "get theirs" no matter what. Smaller guys like Russell generally see middle pair competition. And yeah, they're smaller so they're at a disadvantage. But are they all at a disadvantage?

Russell = 44.67
Krug = 40.92
Spurgeon = 40.29
Vatanen = 39.12
Stralman = 35.13
Ellis = 32.76

I selected these guys because they're all smaller middle-pair defensemen (Former Flame Anton Stralman plays top pair with Hedman and Spurgeon does too with Suter). You can see that some of them post better stats than even Brodie/Keith but we'll chalk that down to things like deployment/competition. However. Russell. Gets. Killed.

In a stat that's supposed to favor shot blockers. If Russell were a better puck mover with tighter gap control, he would block less shots even at his current size, because he would have the puck more often.

How can you put so much faith in a number that has Ellis as far ahead of Brodie as Brodie is to Russell?

[codynw]

Originally Posted by DJones

How can you put so much faith in a number that has Ellis as far ahead of Brodie as Brodie is to Russell?

Because of this (from the post you replied to).

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

But there's some context missing to that, and that's the fact that Keith/Brodie are regularily matched up against top lines

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by DJones

How can you put so much faith in a number that has Ellis as far ahead of Brodie as Brodie is to Russell?

Because both face a very different quality of competition?

[saillias]

edit: n/m like 15 people posted the same thing first.

[DJones]

There are so many variables that it all becomes useless to me.

Russell has more points is an obvious one. How many other those attempts converted to actual shots and then goals?

Just looked at Ellis, he hardly plays short handed and uSAT is an all scenario stat. If that number isn't 5 on 5 and special teams deployment are significantly different then the whole thing becomes meaningless.

Nashville as a team has a 6 point uSAT edge on Calgary as a whole. If it's not relative then the whole thing is a waste of time.

Just looked and Russel has a .020 advantage for SV% 5 on 5 then Ellis. So is that luck then? I can never tell what is supposed to be luck and what is supposed to be skill. With our goalies that seems like a huge accomplishment.

[DJones]

Russel has 9 PP TGA in 94:06 minutes on short handed.

Brodie and Giordano probably have that many against them in the last 5 games. Hamilton has 3 against him in 19:05 minutes.

He is a great penalty killer, and if that isn't a good judge of a defensemens value then I don't know what to say. Apparently my eyes are deceiving me.

[Ashasx]

That number would be ES 5 on 5

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by DJones

I know it's apples to oranges but I kind of see Russell as a Frolik type player. And Frolik we probably overpaid half a million in order to get him.

in advanced stat terms, Frolik and Russell aren't apples and oranges...more like apples and old, botulism tainted can of beans.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

That number would be ES 5 on 5

Is it?

On NHL.com they just have it sorted by Ahead, Behind and Tied. And Close but not sure what that means

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack

in advanced stat terms, Frolik and Russell aren't apples and oranges...more like apples and old, botulism tainted can of beans.

Yea, I wouldn't be surprised if one of the major reasons behind the Frolik signing was the fact that he'd help with the team's mediocre possession stats.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Fenwick is a measure of unblocked shot attempts (uSAT). Basically if you or a teammate blocked a shot attempt, you won't get punished by Fenwick. If you failed to block a shot attempt, you recorded a Fenwick event against.

Kris Russell's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 44.67
TJ Brodie's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 38.46
Duncan Keith's Fenwick Against Per 60 = 38.54

So, on average, our goalies see 16% more puck (whether it misses, hits them, goes into the net, or hits iron) when Russell is on the ice than with Brodie on the ice.

Thanks for doing that. I don't draw quite the same conclusion though.

Russell v Gio or Brodie means something. Similar ice time, same team.

Russell v the rest... Meh. Cross team things like how the goalies cough up rebounds and forwards support and coaching styles all matter.

So if I am reading that right Russel gives up 2-3 more shots a game than brodie, assuming they both play 20-25 mins or so. It's more, and obviously consistent over time, but I don't know that it's holy #### lose my mind this is the worst d man ever kinda more.