Whats the over/under on Wideman's suspension length?
- geta02it

I bet he gets 10 and appeals it down to 7

not saying thats what I think he should get but so maybe people without a clue are up in arms and the NHL is all about trying to control their image

Rumours based off speculation require someone moving forward and saying it's fact.

I have several good pieces of reasoning as well as some testimony. This is a thread discussing Russell's value this year and what can be projected as his potential impact with a new team.

I'm fine with discussing speculation but if you're just gonna pop in, drop no opinion other than telling me im being a douchebag for speculating on why he's playing poorly this year. Well sir, you can GFY on this beautiful Friday.
- fry

Yea, youre right. Rumor and speculation NEVER become believed as truth and fact until some respectable source comes out and says so.

And right back at ya' my friend, a big ol GFY!

I bet he gets 10 and appeals it down to 7

not saying thats why I think he should get so maybe people without a clue are up in arms and the NHL is all about trying to control their image
- flashfire

I'd say 10... Its All-Star weekend and the NHL wants the optics to be just so...
So does this mean we get a call-up? And who?

Off to Lake Louise mo-fo's... GFY all!

Russell's contract is a prime example of how the Flames can leverage the tax advantage that the 2 Alberta teams hold over the rest of the league. Since players are only subject to 38.5% tax on their salary when playing in Alberta versus a league average of 45.3% and the highest being in Montreal at 54%, there is a distinct advantage for the Flames and Treliving when trying to manage the cap. In Russell signed a $4,000,000 per year deal in Montreal, he would see $1,840,000 after taxes. If he signs a $3,000,000 per year deal in Calgary, he would see $1,845,000 after taxes. With the league average at 45.3% tax, a $4,000,000 deal would net him $2,188,000, so to equal that in Calgary, he would need to sign for $3,557,725 per year. This is amplified by the current exchange rate with the Loonie being worth about $0.70 American. With players being paid in American dollars, or the equivalent in Canadian currency, the $2,188,000 goes a lot further when it's worth $3,125,715 where you live.

The question I have on Russell is as follows :

Where do you slot him amongst Smid, Wideman, and Englland?

Smid - $3,500,000
Wideman - $5,250,000
Englland - $2,916,666

Certainly, Russell is worth more than Smid and Englland. (They are certainly both overpaid, but he's worth more than either)Russell isn't worth what a Wideman is getting, hell, Wideman isn't worth what Wideman is getting.

Regardless, Russell should be considered for keeping if he'll sign in that range.

The tax benefits and proximity to his home should tip the scale in this regard.

Russell's contract is a prime example of how the Flames can leverage the tax advantage that the 2 Alberta teams hold over the rest of the league. Since players are only subject to 38.5% tax on their salary when playing in Alberta versus a league average of 45.3% and the highest being in Montreal at 54%, there is a distinct advantage for the Flames and Treliving when trying to manage the cap. In Russell signed a $4,000,000 per year deal in Montreal, he would see $1,840,000 after taxes. If he signs a $3,000,000 per year deal in Calgary, he would see $1,845,000 after taxes. With the league average at 45.3% tax, a $4,000,000 deal would net him $2,188,000, so to equal that in Calgary, he would need to sign for $3,557,725 per year. This is amplified by the current exchange rate with the Loonie being worth about $0.70 American. With players being paid in American dollars, or the equivalent in Canadian currency, the $2,188,000 goes a lot further when it's worth $3,125,715 where you live.

The question I have on Russell is as follows :

Where do you slot him amongst Smid, Wideman, and Englland?

Smid - $3,500,000
Wideman - $5,250,000
Englland - $2,916,666

Certainly, Russell is worth more than Smid and Englland. (They are certainly both overpaid, but he's worth more than either)Russell isn't worth what a Wideman is getting, hell, Wideman isn't worth what Wideman is getting.

Regardless, Russell should be considered for keeping if he'll sign in that range.

The tax benefits and proximity to his home should tip the scale in this regard.
- InSutterWeTrust

Good post. Crazy that the Stars' and Florida teams' players get no taxation.

Correct me if I'm wrong here: Isn't the NDP modifying our tax structure in the near future?

oh why did you this, everyone here has a hard on for russell, OG is gonna be so mad that you sugggested trading his love russell and his great leadership
now everyone will accuse todd of wanting to "give up" and be like the oilers...
- Bigern4MVP

It's not "giving up" like the Oilers, it's making moves for the future instead of the playoffs. This team clearly isn't ready to contend so they need to keep stock piling pick and prospects. Plus there are dmen in the system already that can do the same if not better than Russel for less money. He is really bad at moving the puck up the ice (hence why he has so many blocked shots) he always just banks it off the boards to nobody.

It's not "giving up" like the Oilers, it's making moves for the future instead of the playoffs. This team clearly isn't ready to contend so they need to keep stock piling pick and prospects. Plus there are dmen in the system already that can do the same if not better than Russel for less money. He is really bad at moving the puck up the ice (hence why he has so many blocked shots) he always just banks it off the boards to nobody.
- The_Janitor

tell the other goofs here that, especially OG and fry

tell the other goofs here that, especially OG and fry
- Bigern4MVP

It was mostly meant for them. I never thought Russel was even that good in the playoffs last year.

It was mostly meant for them. I never thought Russel was even that good in the playoffs last year.
- The_Janitor

Guess you didn't watch any games.

Russel is a talented D man, good skater, but he's undersized. He gets pushed around in a tough playoff series. I'd only want him on the third pair, if at all.

Whats the over/under on Wideman's suspension length?
- geta02it

I'd say the over/under should be around 3.5. It's either that he convinces them and gets a game or two or he doesn't and gets at least 10.

Guess you didn't watch any games.
- Kevin R

C'mon man. He and Wideman stepped up no doubt, as did Engelland. But they still got beat up possession wise. Russell is ideal for 3rd pairing and then stepping into a 2nd line roll when injuries occur. Not from 2nd to 1st. He's got the heart of a lion but his skill level is not suited as a $4mil/yr, 2nd line D man.

C'mon man. He and Wideman stepped up no doubt, as did Engelland. But they still got beat up possession wise. Russell is ideal for 3rd pairing and then stepping into a 2nd line roll when injuries occur. Not from 2nd to 1st. He's got the heart of a lion but his skill level is not suited as a $4mil/yr, 2nd line D man.
- TandA4Flames

He didn't seem to step up as much as people like to say. Wideman and Engelland did more. I don't hate Russel I think he's good for a third pairing but he's just not worth the money that's he's going to get.

Good post. Crazy that the Stars' and Florida teams' players get no taxation.

Correct me if I'm wrong here: Isn't the NDP modifying our tax structure in the near future?
- fry

Nashville also shares the same benefit that the Florida teams and Dallas have. Their tax rate is 40.5%.

The NDP have fu@#ed that little bonus for the US with the new tax structure. However, the Alberta teams will be impacted by about 5% which still leaves them well below the league average, and only marginally above these other 4 teams. The new Alberta player tax rate will be about 43.4%.
Vancouver and Arizona come in the next slots at 45%.

There is still a significant advantage over most of the league.

Russell's contract is a prime example of how the Flames can leverage the tax advantage that the 2 Alberta teams hold over the rest of the league. Since players are only subject to 38.5% tax on their salary when playing in Alberta versus a league average of 45.3% and the highest being in Montreal at 54%, there is a distinct advantage for the Flames and Treliving when trying to manage the cap. In Russell signed a $4,000,000 per year deal in Montreal, he would see $1,840,000 after taxes. If he signs a $3,000,000 per year deal in Calgary, he would see $1,845,000 after taxes. With the league average at 45.3% tax, a $4,000,000 deal would net him $2,188,000, so to equal that in Calgary, he would need to sign for $3,557,725 per year. This is amplified by the current exchange rate with the Loonie being worth about $0.70 American. With players being paid in American dollars, or the equivalent in Canadian currency, the $2,188,000 goes a lot further when it's worth $3,125,715 where you live.

The question I have on Russell is as follows :

Where do you slot him amongst Smid, Wideman, and Englland?

Smid - $3,500,000
Wideman - $5,250,000
Englland - $2,916,666

Certainly, Russell is worth more than Smid and Englland. (They are certainly both overpaid, but he's worth more than either)Russell isn't worth what a Wideman is getting, hell, Wideman isn't worth what Wideman is getting.

Regardless, Russell should be considered for keeping if he'll sign in that range.

The tax benefits and proximity to his home should tip the scale in this regard.
- InSutterWeTrust

honestly I think you are way over thinking that. IF players were so focused on that, don't you think Russell would rather take his money and live in a city with a lower cost of living that edmonton vs Calgary. No one is picking a team based on Taxes and Cost of living as the deciding factor

NHL players are not hedge fund investments, they want to win and have a role on a team they feel conformable in, any other tax benefits etc are just bonuses for them.

He didn't seem to step up as much as people like to say. Wideman and Engelland did more. I don't hate Russel I think he's good for a third pairing but he's just not worth the money that's he's going to get.
- The_Janitor

exactly, he's a good 5/6 dman for a million a year, except the flames are using him as their number 3!!!! dman and he's gonna want 4mil+

would much rather get rid of him and call up nakladal

Good post. Crazy that the Stars' and Florida teams' players get no taxation.

Correct me if I'm wrong here: Isn't the NDP modifying our tax structure in the near future?
- fry

Now try NY taxes!

exactly, he's a good 5/6 dman for a million a year, except the flames are using him as their number 3!!!! dman and he's gonna want 4mil+

would much rather get rid of him and call up nakladal
- Bigern4MVP

I hope its Nakladal that gets the call. We need to see what we have in him before the end of the year. I wouldn't be surprised if he went back to Czech because he didn't get to play much in the chell.

Kylington posted an interesting pic on instagram of him in a flames uniform and the caption is "showtime" I wonder if he was told he's getting called up. Seems odd if he did already.

C'mon man. He and Wideman stepped up no doubt, as did Engelland. But they still got beat up possession wise. Russell is ideal for 3rd pairing and then stepping into a 2nd line roll when injuries occur. Not from 2nd to 1st. He's got the heart of a lion but his skill level is not suited as a $4mil/yr, 2nd line D man.
- TandA4Flames

(frank) you guys are something else on here. You trash a guy & say he did nothing & he's worth less money than what Bollig & Colborne make (BigErn) & he did diddly in the playoffs but he only had 7 points in 11 playoff games last year & one of his two goals was a game winner in game one in Vancouver. Yeah Ok. He's trash. & you experts all figure he is at best a bottom pairing dman even though GM's that make more money in 1 year than any of you will in the next 20 will offer him a contract in the 4.0 mill per year range, but of course you guys know way more. Last year he was a + 18 played more minutes than most dmen that are paid in that 4-5 mill salary range. He had a +12 playing 43 games in St Louis 2 years before that. The guy is going to get $3-$4.0 mill per, he is more than capable of playing second pairing on several teams, & if he's a bottom pairing guy, then you have a pretty darn good blue line. I'm sorry, as much as everyone of the experts on here thing Nakladal & Kulak are so much better, maybe take a look at how many actual NHL games make up the sample size of work that these bold statements & player judgements are based on.

You know I am in the trade Russell camp as well, but for totally different reasons. In a cap world you can only allocate so much money to your 6 man blue line. We can't afford him.

(frank) you guys are something else on here. You trash a guy & say he did nothing & he's worth less money than what Bollig & Colborne make (BigErn) & he did diddly in the playoffs but he only had 7 points in 11 playoff games last year & one of his two goals was a game winner in game one in Vancouver. Yeah Ok. He's trash. & you experts all figure he is at best a bottom pairing dman even though GM's that make more money in 1 year than any of you will in the next 20 will offer him a contract in the 4.0 mill per year range, but of course you guys know way more. Last year he was a + 18 played more minutes than most dmen that are paid in that 4-5 mill salary range. He had a +12 playing 43 games in St Louis 2 years before that. The guy is going to get $3-$4.0 mill per, he is more than capable of playing second pairing on several teams, & if he's a bottom pairing guy, then you have a pretty darn good blue line. I'm sorry, as much as everyone of the experts on here thing Nakladal & Kulak are so much better, maybe take a look at how many actual NHL games make up the sample size of work that these bold statements & player judgements are based on.

You know I am in the trade Russell camp as well, but for totally different reasons. In a cap world you can only allocate so much money to your 6 man blue line. We can't afford him.
- Kevin R

I definitely don't think he's trash. Didn't mean to portray that message. I just think that the points he got in the playoffs covered up his defensive woes and that 4+ million would be better spent somewhere else. I'd be more comfortable extending his contract with the same money he's making now but that's just not going to happen.

(frank) you guys are something else on here. You trash a guy & say he did nothing & he's worth less money than what Bollig & Colborne make (BigErn) & he did diddly in the playoffs but he only had 7 points in 11 playoff games last year & one of his two goals was a game winner in game one in Vancouver. Yeah Ok. He's trash. & you experts all figure he is at best a bottom pairing dman even though GM's that make more money in 1 year than any of you will in the next 20 will offer him a contract in the 4.0 mill per year range, but of course you guys know way more. Last year he was a + 18 played more minutes than most dmen that are paid in that 4-5 mill salary range. He had a +12 playing 43 games in St Louis 2 years before that. The guy is going to get $3-$4.0 mill per, he is more than capable of playing second pairing on several teams, & if he's a bottom pairing guy, then you have a pretty darn good blue line. I'm sorry, as much as everyone of the experts on here thing Nakladal & Kulak are so much better, maybe take a look at how many actual NHL games make up the sample size of work that these bold statements & player judgements are based on.

You know I am in the trade Russell camp as well, but for totally different reasons. In a cap world you can only allocate so much money to your 6 man blue line. We can't afford him.
- Kevin R

You are jumping to a lot of conclusions here. Nobody called him "trash." I certainly didn't. Nobody said he's worth less than Bollig or Colborne. I like Russell, I've said it many times, I just don't like him as a $4mil, #4D man for us. If we can move Wideman, Smid and/or Engelland and sign him for >$3.25 then sure, I'm on board. He was a +18 last year...because he was on a pairing with a guy that scored a poop ton of goals and rode high shooting % like the rest of the team. With other teams he was playing very sheltered minutes. He's not terrible, but he's not what we should aspire to as an ideal #4. Certainly not at $4mil +. His value still seems to be high with other GM's, so that's just one more big reason to trade him for a good return now.

(frank) you guys are something else on here. You trash a guy & say he did nothing & he's worth less money than what Bollig & Colborne make (BigErn) & he did diddly in the playoffs but he only had 7 points in 11 playoff games last year & one of his two goals was a game winner in game one in Vancouver. Yeah Ok. He's trash. & you experts all figure he is at best a bottom pairing dman even though GM's that make more money in 1 year than any of you will in the next 20 will offer him a contract in the 4.0 mill per year range, but of course you guys know way more. Last year he was a + 18 played more minutes than most dmen that are paid in that 4-5 mill salary range. He had a +12 playing 43 games in St Louis 2 years before that. The guy is going to get $3-$4.0 mill per, he is more than capable of playing second pairing on several teams, & if he's a bottom pairing guy, then you have a pretty darn good blue line. I'm sorry, as much as everyone of the experts on here thing Nakladal & Kulak are so much better, maybe take a look at how many actual NHL games make up the sample size of work that these bold statements & player judgements are based on.

You know I am in the trade Russell camp as well, but for totally different reasons. In a cap world you can only allocate so much money to your 6 man blue line. We can't afford him.
- Kevin R

I think with Russell, it's gonna be "the devil you know". Could the Flames do better in FA, maybe. However, Russell hasn't been terrible this season playing 2nd pair minutes. He definitely isn't an ideal 3/4 but since Hamilton has figured his game out, I don't think defense has been the biggest problem, not from that pairing at least. The Flames just aren't a good team. I get selling high on Russell and not wanting to pay him 4 million a season, but the defense has got to come from somewhere and why not keep a guy who is well-liked in the room and wants to play in Calgary? The thing that would worry me is the term they'd give him. I wouldn't want to see anything more than 3 years. Wideman should be the one moved although with his play, contract, and NMC it's going to be substantially harder.

It'd be ideal if the Flames could move Wideman then bring up Nakladal or Kulak to play third pairing minutes. If Nakladal doesn't get brought up then he's definitely not re-signing with the Flames in my opinion. It'll be another Cervenka (although that probably had more to do with Cervenka not playing as well on NA ice).

(frank) you guys are something else on here. You trash a guy & say he did nothing & he's worth less money than what Bollig & Colborne make (BigErn) & he did diddly in the playoffs but he only had 7 points in 11 playoff games last year & one of his two goals was a game winner in game one in Vancouver. Yeah Ok. He's trash. & you experts all figure he is at best a bottom pairing dman even though GM's that make more money in 1 year than any of you will in the next 20 will offer him a contract in the 4.0 mill per year range, but of course you guys know way more. Last year he was a + 18 played more minutes than most dmen that are paid in that 4-5 mill salary range. He had a +12 playing 43 games in St Louis 2 years before that. The guy is going to get $3-$4.0 mill per, he is more than capable of playing second pairing on several teams, & if he's a bottom pairing guy, then you have a pretty darn good blue line. I'm sorry, as much as everyone of the experts on here thing Nakladal & Kulak are so much better, maybe take a look at how many actual NHL games make up the sample size of work that these bold statements & player judgements are based on.

You know I am in the trade Russell camp as well, but for totally different reasons. In a cap world you can only allocate so much money to your 6 man blue line. We can't afford him.
- Kevin R

well his underlying numbers are awful, if he wanted to stay for around 1-1.5mil then sure but he's gonna want 4mil+ which would be ridiculous paying a 3rd pairing guy 4mil. Plus if he's gone maybe hartley will be forced to actually play dougie

Todd Cordell: The Calgary Flames Should Trade Kris Russell
- ToddCordellCGY

No poop. He's a bottom pair D man that will want top 4 cash and you guys are not maki g the playoffs. No (frank)i g brainer.

I think with Russell, it's gonna be "the devil you know". Could the Flames do better in FA, maybe. However, Russell hasn't been terrible this season playing 2nd pair minutes. He definitely isn't an ideal 3/4 but since Hamilton has figured his game out, I don't think defense has been the biggest problem, not from that pairing at least. The Flames just aren't a good team. I get selling high on Russell and not wanting to pay him 4 million a season, but the defense has got to come from somewhere and why not keep a guy who is well-liked in the room and wants to play in Calgary? The thing that would worry me is the term they'd give him. I wouldn't want to see anything more than 3 years. Wideman should be the one moved although with his play, contract, and NMC it's going to be substantially harder.

It'd be ideal if the Flames could move Wideman then bring up Nakladal or Kulak to play third pairing minutes. If Nakladal doesn't get brought up then he's definitely not re-signing with the Flames in my opinion. It'll be another Cervenka (although that probably had more to do with Cervenka not playing as well on NA ice).
- Ol_Boy_Wop

What ever happened to that Wotherspoon or whatever the (frank)?