Did Kris Russell overplay his hand in free agency? - Page 28 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

SebC · 09-26-2016, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I love how Treliving does not manage with sentimentality as one of his operating principles.

Kris Russell, while a warrior and a legit bright spot for the franchise during a tumultuous period, was never-the-less a mediocre player and not a part of the plans for the franchise.

We should be replacing players like him, not bringing them back.

Sometimes objectivity means sticking with a mediocre option, because all the other options are worse.

Vinny01 · 09-26-2016, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Did he? I heard him this morning and it seemed like it was still pure speculation - and not something sourced.

I caught a comment from Pinder where he said it was a matter of time. I didn't catch the conversation with he and Boomer so probably speculation more than anything but pretty persistent from the morning show

kyuss275 · 09-26-2016, 10:30 AM

Russell need to fire his agent. He has been getting bad advice from him the whole off season. First he tells his client a number that was unabtainable for July 1st . 2nd if anybody should be in a camp on day one it should be Russell. He should forget about this years one year deal that he will recieve from a team and be concentrating on getting a good deal next off season. No matter where he signs he is going to have to learn a new system. The longer he waits the more behind he is going to be for the season.

I'll say it again ... I don't believe the flames rumours with Russell. Wideman can't be traded and i think it's a slap in the face to Wootherspoon, Culkin and Kulak to bring Russell in now giving them no shot at making the team.

JerryUnderscore · 09-26-2016, 10:59 AM

I guess the question to answer is, "Do the Flames think Russell will be better under Gulutzan than he was under Hartley?"

Although however they answer that, maybe the better question is "Is Russell better than Nakladal?"

Why sign Russell when Nad is still available?

Toonage · 09-26-2016, 11:00 AM

Pinder during his interview with Haynes this morning:

"We're also sort of, of the opinion here on the morning show that Kris Russell signing with the Flames is an inevitability of sorts"

Samonadreau · 09-26-2016, 11:05 AM

If they are moving towards being a better possession team with a better possession system why bring back Russell? Just move on already.

Firebot · 09-26-2016, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Russell need to fire his agent. He has been getting bad advice from him the whole off season. First he tells his client a number that was unabtainable for July 1st . 2nd if anybody should be in a camp on day one it should be Russell. He should forget about this years one year deal that he will recieve from a team and be concentrating on getting a good deal next off season. No matter where he signs he is going to have to learn a new system. The longer he waits the more behind he is going to be for the season.

I'll say it again ... I don't believe the flames rumours with Russell. Wideman can't be traded and i think it's a slap in the face to Wootherspoon, Culkin and Kulak to bring Russell in now giving them no shot at making the team.

Most of it has to fall on Russell himself though. This was supposed to be the big payday contract, but he had a fairly poor year last year. For whatever reason, either himself or his agent fed the belief that because of his great 2014-15 season, that he should still be paid top 3 Defenseman dollars on a big contract (which is why he got traded in the first place). He was in fact poised to get an overpaid contract, just not for the term he wished. He got greedy in a buyer's market, and now is sitting on the sidelines because no one has the cap space anymore or has found alternate solutions. He should have fired his agent once July 1 passed by and nothing happened, but he didn't. Now here we sit in training camp, Russell still without a contract despite him being a potential top 4 in a lot of teams.

Ozy_Flame · 09-26-2016, 11:09 AM

If he signs back here . . . . That Dallas trade has to be one of the most lopsided trades in NHL history.

FlamesAddiction · 09-26-2016, 11:11 AM

Russell on a cheap contract is a great asset (as the trade deadline cost last season shows).

Roof-Daddy · 09-26-2016, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

If he signs back here . . . . That Dallas trade has to be one of the most lopsided trades in NHL history.

That's really going to depend a lot more on the long term out look Jokipakka, Pollock and Dube than it will on re-signing Russell or not.

IMO

Vinny01 · 09-26-2016, 11:14 AM

I have no problem bringing Russell back for a short term deal under $3M. The 5x5 that was his rumored ask was something to steer well clear of

Ozy_Flame · 09-26-2016, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

That's really going to depend a lot more on the long term out look Jokipakka, Pollock and Dube than it will on re-signing Russell or not.

IMO

The fact that we got those three, plus possibly Russell back, and Dallas has nothing to show for it means we are in pole position for the win.

Samonadreau · 09-26-2016, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

The fact that we got those three, plus possibly Russell back, and Dallas has nothing to show for it means we are in pole position for the win.

There is a big difference between winning the trade and one of the most lopsided trades in NHL history.

I agree it's a no Brainer we destroyed Dallas in the trade though

Roof-Daddy · 09-26-2016, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

The fact that we got those three, plus possibly Russell back, and Dallas has nothing to show for it means we are in pole position for the win.

For the win? I agree

For the most lopsided trade in NHL history? A long ways to go before that statement can/should be made IMO

Ozy_Flame · 09-26-2016, 11:19 AM

I don't really differentiate the two in this scenario. But that's cool, to each their own.

Robbob · 09-26-2016, 11:36 AM

One thing about UFA is you get 100% choice. To me it looks like he put a pretty big ask out there to see if anyone would bite. No one did, so he is leaving money on the table to probably be in a more comfortable situation (family/friends).

Bingo · 09-26-2016, 12:02 PM

I like Russell, I really do. And if there are injuries it will be a great add for sure.

But adding anyone pretty much means Wotherspoon doesn't have a spot and with that he's exposed on waivers and could be gone.

Now that's not necessarily a bad thing if they're not that high on him, but the developmental side of me would like to see some roster progression from the blueline (or overall that aren't top 10 picks) and this just seems to make that difficult.

nik- · 09-26-2016, 12:08 PM

Yeah, I'm not keen on bringing Russell back at all at this point to be honest.

He doesn't belong on the second pairing, and we can move youth onto the bottom pairing.

Ashasx · 09-26-2016, 12:14 PM

Personally I think the Russell trade looks better for us if we don't bring him back.

Robbob · 09-26-2016, 12:26 PM

I'm getting the sense that the organization isn't high on Wotherspoon at all. Maybe they see Russell as the stop gap with Kylington taking over next year. Only thing that would make this better is if we signed Russell and traded him again at the deadline.