For the record, I've been arguing Wilson's point here today, but ultimately agree that the loss of Kulak was not a huge deal in the grand scheme of things. But it is a very valid topic to discuss because it speaks to the greater issue of prospect and salary management in the cap era. I believe that Wilson raises a very pertinent and interesting point about how a team could choose to evaluate a fringe player with his concept of identifying low-downside players. Granted, not every player is going to be amenable to being buried on the depth chart when they think they should be in the show, but that's not news and shouldn't be a big factor in a team's planning their roster.
Ultimately I think Kulak was a good example of the type of player that has no real down side. I also think that if you look at the bigger picture of how Treliving has operated at the margins of the roster that there is something to be questioned about his decisions.
By and large I feel Flames management is doing an acceptable job, but the default to aging veterans at the expense of cap dollars and draft picks is a fair criticism.
|