Ok I'll say it. You all are being very hard on a player I would gladly take back as a bottom pairing dman. In fact we might've seen him here if Johnny would've been signed already.
to be fair many on here hated him as a player when he was here and have been just as hard on the idea of bringing him back. Its not a case of him going to the Oilers and then everyone piling on because of that
The Following User Says Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
Ok I'll say it. You all are being very hard on a player I would gladly take back as a bottom pairing dman. In fact we might've seen him here if Johnny would've been signed already.
I like Russell. He's obviously a good guy and good in the locker room. I just don't think his style of play fits with the style of play this team needs to play to be successful and I really want this team to break it's habit of tying up depth players for too much money and term. For one or two years less than $2 million where he can be in your bottom pairing I would have been fine but this team is up against the cap and simply can't be paying depth (he is a depth player at best on a good team) guys like Russell $3 million or more.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Thank god. The Flames can move on from Russell. Can't wait to see the Flames dominate the Oilers in their own zone when he's on the ice. It will be nice watching his giveaways turn into scoring opportunities for us for a change.
I really want this team to break it's habit of tying up depth players for too much money and term.
This so much.
If you're going to do the term thing for a depth player, it better for be a player whose value exceeds their pay (like Schlemko in San Jose or Kruger in Chicago) not someone whose value will likely struggle to live up to their pay (i.e. most non-core contracts Treliving has signed along with the extension they reportedly offered Russell before he declined).
It's just business, you have to pay your stars and everyone else has to overperform their contract.
On a more positive note,
Still a classic Flames playoff moment.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
Last edited by GranteedEV; 10-07-2016 at 09:21 PM.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to GranteedEV For This Useful Post:
Bob Stauffer @Bob_Stauffer
Russell can help out a little as transition D on 2nd unit PP and is effective PK'er. Am told former Flames teammates wanted him back
Thank god. The Flames can move on from Russell. Can't wait to see the Flames dominate the Oilers in their own zone when he's on the ice. It will be nice watching his giveaways turn into scoring opportunities for us for a change.
i really hope this is the end of the russell saga. i don't think i could handle more russell to calgary speculation next summer (with engelland/smid/wideman coming off the books).
Bob Stauffer @Bob_Stauffer
Russell can help out a little as transition D on 2nd unit PP and is effective PK'er. Am told former Flames teammates wanted him back
Likely true, he seemed to be a well liked team guy. Didn't make the ass puckering play on the ice any easier to bear though.
From what I understand Russell is a good player when he's in the #5/6 spot. If he's playing any higher up the rotation than that, he gets into trouble.
If Edmonton plays him in that bottom rotation then yes, they got better. Of course, for our sake (and for the general hilarity) I hope he's playing top pairing minutes.
__________________
"I’m on a mission to civilize." - Will McAvoy
From what I understand Russell is a good player when he's in the #5/6 spot. If he's playing any higher up the rotation than that, he gets into trouble.
If Edmonton plays him in that bottom rotation then yes, they got better. Of course, for our sake (and for the general hilarity) I hope he's playing top pairing minutes.
I don't think they pay him $3.1 if they're thinking bottom pair.
Bob Stauffer @Bob_Stauffer
Russell can help out a little as transition D on 2nd unit PP and is effective PK'er. Am told former Flames teammates wanted him back
In that case the delay on Johnny has the potential to become an issue, no? You have to think that is what was holding things up on Russell.
From what I understand Russell is a good player when he's in the #5/6 spot. If he's playing any higher up the rotation than that, he gets into trouble.
If Edmonton plays him in that bottom rotation then yes, they got better. Of course, for our sake (and for the general hilarity) I hope he's playing top pairing minutes.
This logic makes no sense. He's better than a large chunk of their current starting D-men. They got better, end of story, doesn't matter where they slot him. If he's the 4th best Dman on their team for example, then tgey better makes sure he plays the 4th most minutes, you don't play weaker players more and somehow it's better for you???
It is fair to say that he's better suited as a 5/6 and that if he slots in higher then that, then it's not a good sign for the Oil, but suggest they should strategize under playing him is redicilous.
In that case the delay on Johnny has the potential to become an issue, no? You have to think that is what was holding things up on Russell.
Could have some dynamics with his team mates I guess if true. Also may have just cost Johnny a very very minor leverage point. Regardless of whether we wanted BT to do this or not, if Russell was a move he wanted to make but need to land the financials on Johnny first, the Oilers beating him to the punch on the trade may hurt Johnny's position a very tiny bit.
You don't materially let a desire to sign Russell impact a deal with your top player, but BT may have been feeling a little pressure to expedite even more prior to Russell signing up north. Now that's off the table, a little less pressure to rush on BTs part might not be best for JGs leverage.
