[Rumour] Dreger: Flames haven't officially put Russell on the trade market yet

[saillias]

The answer to that question (where do you find another guy who can step into the top 4 for cheaper than 4 mil) is drafting & development.

If you don't trust your scouting staff to find these guys, you need a new scouting staff.

[jlh2640]

Time to trade him, Hudler and Wideman if they have any value at all.

[dissentowner]

I am in the mindset that if you can sign him to a good value contract you do so. If his demands seem to be to high then BT should tell the other teams that he is leaning toward re-signing him but if they make him an offer he can't refuse he would be willing to move him.

[Flash Walken]

Better trade him soon before he gets hurt blocking a shot.

[Red Menace]

Russell would be a very good #5 man, but he is a bit outclassed with all the minutes they give him....they should not pay him more than 3 million..I'd prefer a trade at this point....

[DJones]

Until one of our prospects over takes him who do you guys envision as our #4?

Wideman will be gone next year. Who of our prospects can jump in at #4 and not be a downgrade? They all seem 2 years away at least.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by DJones

See, that's the argument I don't get.

For a #4 he's a great skater, a good passer, and does a good job of keeping it in the offensive zone.

He doesn't take penalties, and he has an A for a reason.

He get's #### on for having bad advanced stats and not being able to get it out of his zone. Frankly as soon as he was away from Wideman I just don't see the trapped in anymore. It seems like he spends a lot of time in the offensive zone with Hamilton.

Where on earth are you going to find another #4 for under 4 M that is better than him?

He gets crapped on because instead of defending he flops in front of the puck, and loses every board battle. It's not the advanced stats that are the problem, it's the fact that the other team always gets lots of good chances when he's on the ice "defending"

[Super-Rye]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I am in the mindset that if you can sign him to a good value contract you do so. If his demands seem to be to high then BT should tell the other teams that he is leaning toward re-signing him but if they make him an offer he can't refuse he would be willing to move him.

Agree with this.

If you can get him on a value deal he either rounds out the top 4 or gives you a more stable bottom pairing. He's not the best defender but he is still a decent all around defender and a heart and soul guy. There's value in having that, as long as the deal makes sense.

However, if they sign Russell then Flames management HAS to move Wideman and either Smid or Engelland before next season starts. Otherwise they will just have far too much money tied into their blueline.

[Harry Lime]

All of these questions would be easier to answer if Hartley would let Nakladal play a couple of games.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by saillias

The answer to that question (where do you find another guy who can step into the top 4 for cheaper than 4 mil) is drafting & development.

If you don't trust your scouting staff to find these guys, you need a new scouting staff.

This. You need a top 4 quality ELC defenseman. Josi, Brodie, Brodin, etc.. etc.. They can be found, and we need them.

Hopefully one or two of our young guys can take a big step in the next season or so.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

All of these questions would be easier to answer if Hartley would let Nakladal play a couple of games.

People had the same concerns about Wotherspoon, Poirier, and Ortio.

Hartley seems to have been right on those three for the time being anyway.

[GioforPM]

Dressing but not really playing Nakladl was one of the few times I've disagreed with Hartley. I'd have been OK with still scratching him because of inexperience/situation, or giving him 10 minutes or so to get his feet wet. But 1:45 strikes me as both wasting a bench spot and showing a lack of confidence and not letting a guy play through some jitters.

It's odd because Grant and Kulak got more time (mind you, when the Flames were playing badly).

[saillias]

Another thing, having a solid #4 is a luxury, not a necessity. Especially when you have a strong 1-3. We don't desperately need to fill this roster spot with a player, and certainly not by overpaying a jumped-up #6 like Russell

[FeyWest]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Dressing but not really playing Nakladl was one of the few times I've disagreed with Hartley. I'd have been OK with still scratching him because of inexperience/situation, or giving him 10 minutes or so to get his feet wet. But 1:45 strikes me as both wasting a bench spot and showing a lack of confidence and not letting a guy play through some jitters.

It's odd because Grant and Kulak got more time (mind you, when the Flames were playing badly).

It's hard to compare Grant as he's a forward and you have a lot more flexibility for easing a guy in on the fourth line. Kulak got more time at the beginning of the year I thought more so because they were still unsure of Smid and Brodie was injured.

In regards, to last night was it more that Hartley wasn't liking the 4th line with Engelland on it in combination to Nakladal's (poetential) uncertainty? Hartley's stuck between a rock and a hard place imho so I can understand his reservations, we also have to remember he's there for practice so maybe he's just not yet better than Smid or Engelland? All we can do is speculate and to me I'm not one to jump down someones throat before I know the facts.

Honestly, this is just another reason though that Russell should be traded, it's the perfect time as there is tons of interest, AND it will create a reason to give Nakladal (Or other Defenders) a chance to play. The transition away from players is the appropriate time to be trying them out as that removes the "Familiarity" of a guy that maybe should be replaced by a new face that could well be better. I think D is the toughest position to develop due to the higher responsibilities and risks associated with making one mistake. Goal is a separate beast in and of itself.

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by DJones

People had the same concerns about Wotherspoon, Poirier, and Ortio.

Hartley seems to have been right on those three for the time being anyway.

You're right Hartley has gotten his hands on 2 of them and has done well in destroying their confidence. He's now working on Nakladal.

As for Russell, he still very much struggles in his own zone. Thats money that should be spent elsewhere. Please trade him.

[cam_wmh]

Do we foresee one of our prospects filling as a second pairing next season?
I don't, they take longer to develop -- into their mid 20's. Maybe in ~3 years.

I'd prefer to keep Russell, and wonder if a $4m x 4yr contract would be realistic. At year 3/4, he can be a 3rd pairing defenseman, and with a reasonably acceptable contract for those final years.

I am though, absolutely of the opinion that Wideman should be dealt.

[FeyWest]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Do we foresee one of our prospects filling as a second pairing next season?
I don't, they take longer to develop -- into their mid 20's. Maybe in ~3 years.

I'd prefer to keep Russell, and wonder if a $4m x 4yr contract would be realistic. At year 3/4, he can be a 3rd pairing defenseman, and with a reasonably acceptable contract for those final years.

I am though, absolutely of the opinion that Wideman should be dealt.

I definitely want to move him at that contract, can't afford that without moving one of Wideman, Smid or Engelland. We have huge contracts to sign next year in Johnny and Monny, remember Gio's new contract kicks in next year too. I like Russell I just wish he was less frustrating as a player, if we can keep him at a similar contract to what he's at now I'm ok with that but I think anything higher we have to move him.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Russell is fine as a #4 d-man and I would like the Flames to re-sign him at around 3 mil. Term isn't a huge concern as he's still fairly young. If he wants more than that, trade him at the deadline and we've turned a 5th round pick into hopefully at least a 2nd round pick.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by FeyWest

It's hard to compare Grant as he's a forward and you have a lot more flexibility for easing a guy in on the fourth line. Kulak got more time at the beginning of the year I thought more so because they were still unsure of Smid and Brodie was injured.

In regards, to last night was it more that Hartley wasn't liking the 4th line with Engelland on it in combination to Nakladal's (poetential) uncertainty? Hartley's stuck between a rock and a hard place imho so I can understand his reservations, we also have to remember he's there for practice so maybe he's just not yet better than Smid or Engelland? All we can do is speculate and to me I'm not one to jump down someones throat before I know the facts.

Honestly, this is just another reason though that Russell should be traded, it's the perfect time as there is tons of interest, AND it will create a reason to give Nakladal (Or other Defenders) a chance to play. The transition away from players is the appropriate time to be trying them out as that removes the "Familiarity" of a guy that maybe should be replaced by a new face that could well be better. I think D is the toughest position to develop due to the higher responsibilities and risks associated with making one mistake. Goal is a separate beast in and of itself.

I agree with most of that and have made a lot of the same arguments (eg. about not giving Sven/Wotherspoon/Wolf/et al minutes and how Hartley saw them in practice). 1:45 just seemed a bit extreme to me.

Not a very big deal though. Nakladl, though potentially useful is not a long term prospect.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Do we foresee one of our prospects filling as a second pairing next season?
I don't, they take longer to develop -- into their mid 20's. Maybe in ~3 years.

I'd prefer to keep Russell, and wonder if a $4m x 4yr contract would be realistic. At year 3/4, he can be a 3rd pairing defenseman, and with a reasonably acceptable contract for those final years.

I am though, absolutely of the opinion that Wideman should be dealt.

I have a feeling 4 x 4m would be acceptable from Russell's camp (or close to). The fact that he's not signed yet says to me the Flames don't view him that highly. I could be way off base and Russell sees himself as a $5m guy but I doubt it.