McKenzie: Kris Russell will look for 'at least' 5-years, $27.5 million on next contract

Ari Yanover
February 10 2016 04:00PM

February is behind only July when it comes to the best months to follow free agents. July, of course, is when unrestricted free agents get signed, but February is the last month before the trade deadline: a time most prime to trade those expiring contracts, whether you're trying to acquire assets for the future or build up for a playoff run.

In lieu of the impending frenzy of trades hopefully coming our way, Bob McKenzie has chimed in with some thoughts on a couple of impending UFA defencemen, including the Flames' very own Kris Russell.

The main takeaway? Russell is going to cash in. Big.

From McKenzie:

Were Russell to go to July 1, is there any doubt he’s going to get at least, emphasis on at least, a five-year offer for $5.5 million? And he may well be looking for more than that, both in term and dollars.

While last season's free agent frenzy didn't yield that many huge contracts - Michael Frolik's $21.5 million deal was one of the bigger ones - typically, when free agency opens, NHL teams go nuts. Considering Russell will be 29 years old come July, and he's come into his own playing top four minutes the past few seasons, it's possible he could garner that kind of contract from a team.

The Flames may want to keep him, but even if he wasn't looking at a potential $5.5 annual average value, it simply doesn't make sense for them. This is a rebuilding team that needs to maximize its assets, and if Russell has that much interest surrounding him, the Flames need to capitalize on that. If he's that widely valued around the NHL, he should fetch a decent return: and that return may be more helpful to the Flames' rebuild than Russell will as he enters his 30s.

That high of a cap hit poses some major problems, though. If Russell is going to cost that much, the Flames need to destroy all thoughts of keeping him and run as far away as they can.

This is similar to the Andrew MacDonald situation. MacDonald was 27 years old when he was approaching free agency, and had been playing top four minutes with the New York Islanders for quite a few seasons. He was the NHL's shot blocking leader, having stopped 242 attempts with his body in 2013-14. He only carried a cap hit of $550,000 when the Islanders traded him to the Philadelphia Flyers; the Flyers then re-signed him to a six-year, $30 million contract.

Just over a season into that contract, MacDonald is in the AHL.

Russell will be 28. He carries a modest cap hit of $2.6 million, and was the NHL's top shot blocker last season (and is second in the NHL at the time of writing).

We can't really compare MacDonald and Russell this season, because MacDonald has only played one NHL game. But last season, when Russell truly broke out as a shot blocker and further established himself as a top four defender, MacDonald played 58 games.

Here's how the two looked in 2014-15:


Points CF% rel ZSO% rel SCA60
Kris Russell 34 -2.42 +8.09 33.34
Andrew MacDonald 12 -1.24 +3.17 26.31

Russell has a definite leg up on MacDonald in points, but that's where it ends. Even when playing in a much more sheltered role, pucks still went against him much more often than they went against MacDonald, including dangerous pucks in the form of scoring chances against.

And remember that MacDonald is the one who got sent down to the AHL this season, while Russell is looking at a massive deal. And it's not like last season was a one-off for Russell: he's on pace for 23 points this season, has a -5.99 CF% rel, a +0.03 ZSO% rel - though he was much more sheltered prior to Dennis Wideman's suspension - and his SCA60 is 31.37, the worst on the Flames.

It took the Flyers a little over a year to regret the contract they signed MacDonald to. It looks like Russell could trend in the same direction, and the Flames don't want to be in the same position. They already have nearly $12 million tied up in their cap between Wideman, Ladislav Smid, and Deryk Engelland until next season. The Flyers have $4.05 million of their cap taken up by MacDonald playing in the AHL.

If Russell ends up with $5.5 million per, and the Flames were to somehow fit him under the cap - which, considering the impending raises for Mark Giordano, Johnny Gaudreau, and Sean Monahan, would already be difficult as is - then his cap hit would fall in between Dougie Hamilton and T.J. Brodie's.

There's a difference between UFA and RFA contracts, as UFAs tend to command more. Russell's next deal will come with him as a UFA, and Brodie's was signed as an RFA. But would you pay Russell more than the $4.65 million Brodie currently sits at? The Flames didn't miss a beat when Russell had to miss three games earlier in the season; they played approximately as well as a group of headless chickens without Brodie. 

If Russell is going to command as much as McKenzie estimates, then he has to go. He should go, regardless, for the sake of the rebuild - but the Flames really, really don't need to be the next Flyers.

F0c4c8e806b29606c84e319f03049d40
Ari first fell in love with the Flames during the city-wide madness that was 2004. She enjoys thinking about the Flames, writing about the Flames, (Alexander) Hamilton, and dogs. You can find 140-character versions of her yelling at @thirtyfourseven.
Avatar
#51 coachedpotatoe
February 11 2016, 07:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
8
props
Christian Roatis wrote:

At those numbers, a "hometown discount" would probably mean 4 million which would be equally as devastating. Deadline bait.

You are absolutely right. Paying a 5/6 defenseman $4m plus (almost as much as Brodie) is silly. The Flames are already paying our 5-7th defensemen way too much(ranging from almost $3m to over $5M). Better to give the prospects a look and develop them; who knows what kind of gold we might find there. Brodie developed playing with better players, he now needs to be part of player development.

Avatar
#52 Jeff In Lethbridge
February 11 2016, 07:49AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
7
props

the question is whether he is a strong/capable 2nd pairing guy... if so, he should get compensated accordingly at @ 4+ mil per.

However, in my opinion he is a 3rd pairing guy.... which puts the compensation at @ 1-2 mil per. the problem is, who is the flames #4 guy, assuming gio/brodie/hamilton are top 3. if they insist on him being a second pairing, they will pay him accordingly. what we need is a legit 2nd pairing or use prospects to fill the #4, #5, & #6 spots...

EDIT: OK, why the 2/1 trash ratio? do the trashes suggest you agree that he is not a 2nd pairing?

Avatar
#53 vowswithin
February 11 2016, 08:04AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
20
props

@Oil City Roller

By all means you are welcome to all the Russell you want!

We will even waive the rival tax and give him to you for 2 seconds, you know since hes a "Good player"

Avatar
#54 Parallex
February 11 2016, 08:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
16
props

@Jeff In Lethbridge

That's pretty much the thing... he's played as a 2nd pairing guy but he's not a legit 2nd pairing guy and he shouldn't be paid as such.

My price point on Russell is pretty much at or below what he makes now. Anything else and he just contributes to the #1 issue plaguing the roster right now... the misallocation of resources towards depth. Right now we are paying 4th line/3rd pairing/Spares/Backup around 23M dollars. IMO that's at least double what it should be.

I feel like while Treliving passed the "smartly add" test he's badly flunking the "smartly subtract" test.

Avatar
#55 Brick
February 11 2016, 09:09AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
13
props

1. Sell Russell to the highest bidder for draft pick(s). 2. Go after Travis Hamonic.

Avatar
#56 Brick
February 11 2016, 09:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
11
props

Flames' Russell is not a shutdown defenceman

http://www.tsn.ca/flames-russell-is-not-a-shutdown-defenceman-1.436533

Avatar
#57 Kevin R
February 11 2016, 09:55AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
9
props
supra steve wrote:

Some years the prices paid for this type of rental are obscene. Let's hope this is one of those years. How can BT not be going into the trade deadline thinking that a late first round pick (at minimum) could be a real possibility? Will be an interesting TDL again this year.

I totally agree that BT extracts a late 1st rounder for Russell. Lots of Russell hate, I don't mind the guy, especially between 2.5 -3.0 mill. He's a decent 4-5 option, unfortunately being utilized by Hartley at #3 minutes. If he was utilized properly, I think maybe the comments would be a little more positive. & here's the thing, all the criticism because he's one of the best shot blockers in the league but GM's & hockey analysts covet that skill. I would think shot blocking would be a huge quality on the PK when possession isn't such a factor. This is more of a pricing of his overall game. Flames (Hartley) have really hooped the team because if the inappropriate use & high TOI has inflated his value but the underlying stats don't support his overall game to justify that kind of TOI per game. But he is getting it consistently, last year, playoffs & all this year. Those minutes & shot blocking skills will net you a late 1st rounder at the TDL. Flames simply cannot afford Russell for what he can get in the open market, thanks Bob. Especially with Wideman & Smid still under contract next year. Russell is gone, all this talk of contract talks is posturing.

Avatar
#58 Rock
February 11 2016, 09:55AM
Trash it!
37
trashes
Props
4
props

They need to sign him to a contract as long as Hamilton so he can keep covering up the poor defensive play of Hamilton. i probably will get banned from flames nation for this comment

Avatar
#59 Baalzamon
February 11 2016, 10:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Burnward wrote:

Well, this is exciting. 5 million plus defenseman should be worth a fair penny this year.

(insert Mr. Burns GIF here)

Avatar
#60 vowswithin
February 11 2016, 10:48AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props
Brick wrote:

Flames' Russell is not a shutdown defenceman

http://www.tsn.ca/flames-russell-is-not-a-shutdown-defenceman-1.436533

Standing ovation

Avatar
#61 Johnny Goooooooaldreau
February 11 2016, 10:48AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
3
props

That's why the "advanced" stats are iffy.

Avatar
#62 piscera.infada
February 11 2016, 11:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
11
props

@Johnny Goooooooaldreau

Why? The Andrew MacDonald comparable is eerily fitting. He was one of the top deadline rentals that year, at roughly the same age as Russell. They were both widely acclaimed for "playing the game the right way", they both blocked a ton of shots. The Islander's received a second and third round pick through trade. MacDonald was signed to a 6-year, 5 million per deal. MacDonald is now in the AHL.

Immediately following the trade, Mark Streit said the following:

"He's a good all-around defenseman," "He plays really well defensively, blocks a lot of shots and has a really good first pass, and obviously got some offense as well. It's a really good mix and he's a great guy in the room too. He wants to win and he competes every night. As I said before he's going to make our team better."

Does that sound familiar?

Avatar
#63 wot96
February 11 2016, 11:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props

So, ideally, what we want is a shut down defender that may not get much offence, prevents shots so he doesn't need to block shots to play either as a number 4 or a number 5/6 but preferably the former. Sounds a bit like Spoon.

In any event, how are we going to figure that out if we aren't going to bother playing the young players/prospects (or Nak because we might as well just trade him now as I seriously doubt he will re-sign with this club)?

Avatar
#64 Jeff In Lethbridge
February 11 2016, 12:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props
piscera.infada wrote:

Why? The Andrew MacDonald comparable is eerily fitting. He was one of the top deadline rentals that year, at roughly the same age as Russell. They were both widely acclaimed for "playing the game the right way", they both blocked a ton of shots. The Islander's received a second and third round pick through trade. MacDonald was signed to a 6-year, 5 million per deal. MacDonald is now in the AHL.

Immediately following the trade, Mark Streit said the following:

"He's a good all-around defenseman," "He plays really well defensively, blocks a lot of shots and has a really good first pass, and obviously got some offense as well. It's a really good mix and he's a great guy in the room too. He wants to win and he competes every night. As I said before he's going to make our team better."

Does that sound familiar?

bingo!

Avatar
#65 Jeff In Lethbridge
February 11 2016, 12:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props
Brick wrote:

Flames' Russell is not a shutdown defenceman

http://www.tsn.ca/flames-russell-is-not-a-shutdown-defenceman-1.436533

good catch on the related article-

and passes the smell test as very accurate. I don't know what the team is focusing on - maybe his attitude, leadership and dressing room intangibles... even his shot blocking prowess has been suspect lately as he has on several occasions lately dropped to early and the apposing player simply skated around him for an easy shot at the goal.

Avatar
#66 the-wolf
February 11 2016, 12:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
12
props
vowswithin wrote:

Standing ovation

Aaaaaasggghhhh!!!!!!!!! Treliving needs to move him before this stuff gets out there! It's one thing for us to know and post it on FN, but this is TSN! That article could be sitting in every GMs inbox by now. What a disaster! Hopefully, hubris and old school thinking on the part of some GM saves the day.

Avatar
#67 Jeff In Lethbridge
February 11 2016, 12:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
5
props
wot96 wrote:

So, ideally, what we want is a shut down defender that may not get much offence, prevents shots so he doesn't need to block shots to play either as a number 4 or a number 5/6 but preferably the former. Sounds a bit like Spoon.

In any event, how are we going to figure that out if we aren't going to bother playing the young players/prospects (or Nak because we might as well just trade him now as I seriously doubt he will re-sign with this club)?

ya, it can't be a good optic to bring in prospects and never give them a chance. And Hartley felt he was better off playing Eng/Smid who were getting killed than to give Nak a few more shifts... wow, I'd like to know his reasoning in this!

Avatar
#68 Greatsave
February 11 2016, 02:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
5
props

So I took war-on-ice.com's stats and compiled them for defencemen who've played more than 1000 5v5 minutes since the start of the 2013-14 season, up till the All-Star break this season. That's 216 D-men. Of those, Russell ranked (at 5v5):

32nd-worst in High-Danger Scoring Chances For Per 60.

20th-worst in High-Danger Scoring Chances Against Per 60.

8th-worst in High-Danger Scoring Chances For %.

9th-worst in High-Danger Scoring Chances For % Relative to Team.

4th-worst in Scoring Chances Against Per 60. (Wideman right behind him.)

12th-worst in Scoring Chances For %.

13th-worst in Scoring Chances For % Relative to Team. (Right behind Engelland.)

Absolute worst in Corsi Against Per 60.

13th-worst in Corsi For %.

25th-worst in Corsi For % Relative to Team.

30th-best in Goals For Per 60. Which is offset by...

29th-worst in Goals Against Per 60. These add up to...

15th-highest Goals For and Against Per 60. Which confirms the idea that "Kris Russell is not a shutdown D-man". Too many goals are scored while he's on the ice. And yet somehow, he plays...

9th-highest 5v5 Time-On-Ice Per Game, while riding the...

18th-highest PDO, thanks to the...

2nd-highest On-Ice Shooting %. And yet he is a middling...

121st-best in Goals For %, behind Giordano and Brodie.

Bottom line, those kinds of numbers are not 5.5mill-worthy.

Tangent: If we think that a) he's deployed incorrectly by Hartley, b) Hartley's system is bad for advanced stats (which is fine in a sense; Patrick Roy mentioned not giving two sh*ts about Corsi in Colorado), and c) Russell's developed habits like backing off and blocking shots under Hartley, is it possible that another coach can deploy him correctly and coach the bad habits out of him?

Avatar
#69 Derzie
February 11 2016, 03:44PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
5
props
the-wolf wrote:

Which is exactly why Nakladal was signed. As well, Kulak and Wotherspoon could play third pairing minutes right now IMO. Andersson and Kylington are one to two yea away. Culkin still has lots of potential if he can stay healthy.

Point is, the Flames do not need to hoard veteran D, they need to clear space for youth.

Again, clearing space is the easy part. Where are they coming from? Ras is 1-2 years, Kylington is 2-4 years. Nak is an unknown (thanks Bob), Kulak is a maybe (thanks Bob), Wotherspoon is likely an AHLer (thanks Bob). We need a #4 next year and we don't yet have one. Again, I'm not supporting Russell but I don't support shedding guys without options. That's what the Oilers did and look where they are.

Avatar
#70 Greatsave
February 11 2016, 06:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

After digging through advanced stats looking for comparables from 2013-14 till now, I hate to say it, but if a 35-year-old Francois Beauchemin gets a 3-year, 4.5mill per deal? Anything's possible for Russell.

Mind you though, Beauchemin was pretty much an even-Corsi player on an even-Corsi Ducks team for several years before moving to the Avs where everybody's Corsi numbers are in the gutters, whereas Russell has spent the past few years already in Corsi gutters.

Comments are closed for this article.