I've seen a lot of people writing Kulak off - and I get it since he cleared waivers before arbitration, and Valimaki is a first round pick. But I'd like to make a case that Kulak should not only make the team, but play the season among our top six defensemen:
1) Kulak maybe hasn't been great in preseason, but people tend to have a short memory. He had a poor preseason in 17-18 only to play 71 steady games for us. More importantly, he's had a pair of pretty strong preseasons in both 2015-16 and 2016-17. Remember this, from back when he was only twenty one?
https://calgaryherald.com/sports/hoc...-season-finale
He was more aggressively up in the play then, than he's been now - which might be a sign of Gulutzan's effect on his game more than anything else. It should also be a reason to be measured about Valimaki's preseason, as Kulak didn't spend much of 2015-16 in the NHL (even though he should have, but I digress). All it takes in the NHL is one game where you cough up the puck against forechecking pressure and you could get sent down.
2) Kulak's offensive production isn't necessarily "bad". Yes, he wasn't featured on a power play unit (and probably rightfully so), but of the 208 defensemen to log 1000+ five on five minutes throughout the last two seasons, his 0.56 points/60 minutes ranks 152nd. In a similar range or trailing him are names like
Travis Hamonic (150th)
Adam Larsson (151st)
Brian Dumoulin (153rd)
Michael Stone (175th)
Brandon Montour (162nd)
Jay Bouwmeester (166th)
And I don't think the Flames were all that offensively lucky the last year in particular where he logged most of his ice time, so it's possible he could have been more productive on a more productive team.
3) And on that note, the consensus is that Valimaki has more upside than Kulak. Well, sure.
But defense is a complicated position to prognosticate. Just look at a guy like Nate Schmidt - during his 23 year old season he was still splitting time in the AHL, and after being pidgeonholed as a bottom pair defenseman in Washington, found himself as Vegas' best defenseman last year. Speaking of Washington, look at Michal Kempny, a guy who Chicago didn't think deserved to play as a regular in their top six, yet he was playing top four minutes on the Cup Champs. These kinds of examples are of course cherry-picked, but you can go around the league and find these kind of stories because that's the nature of the defense position.
Saying Kulak tops out as a bottom pair defenseman at this point - when he is coming off his 23/24 year old season - is premature. Every team that goes deep almost invariably has a guy on their blueline top four who took a slower, steadier path... Anton Stralman, Brian Dumoulin, the two guys mentioned earlier, Justin Braun... even our team has Giordano who was hardly a finished product at Kulak's age. I think Kulak has real upside and giving up on him now would not be prudent. Even if it looks like there are more dynamic prospects behind him.
4) Kulak outperformed Stone by a significant margin last year. To me it was kind of obvious just from watching, but the numbers bear it out too:
Now it's obvious Stone needs a puck moving partner, and maybe Valimaki
can be that guy. But it's also possible that Stone's inability to exit his zone acts against Valimaki and causes the kid to lose confidence and reign his game in. This is a kid who's still 19 as of today, and you can seriously damage a player's development if they spend all their NHL time covering for others. We've already done it to Bennett, who nowadays seems to resemble a Lance Bouma in terms of just making safe bottom-of-lineup player plays and peeling off for a line change. I want Valimaki to succeed as much as the next guy, and it's possible Stone's inability to move the puck could be more toxic for his development than it seems. Maybe not, of course... but if Kulak doesn't make the team, the above is one of only three likely pairings. The other two have their own issues:
Stone-Andersson or Andersson-Stone - you've got a RHS playing his off-side. This is probably going to end badly. Even if the handedness proves to be not a problem, the poor skating of the pair could be one. I'd rather not repeat that ugly Wideman-Engelland pair from a few years ago just to force this pair.
Valimaki-Andersson - This is two rookies on the same pair. Maybe it could work, but it's also got a lot of potential to backfire. I'm not opposed to trying it later in the season, maybe January or February, but I don't think it's responsible to start the season like this.
Kulak can not only play the left side if paired with Andersson, but those two have actually played together before in Stockton. He also has more experience playing the right side than Stone or Andersson do playing the left - he played on the right for a huge chunk of his junior career in Vancouver, and spent a lot of time in Stockton on the right as well. I forget who it was (Treliving?) but they basically said the key to playing your off-side is being able to skate, which also disqualifies Stone, Prout, and Andersson as guys you'd want on their offside. If Andersson makes the team, Kulak is the ideal partner for him as he brings a bit of experience, skating, and allows Andersson to play his own game comfortably.
5) Kulak-Stone was not a bad pair by any means last season, despite Stone's aformentioned shortcomings. Even in terms of goals, they were break-even at 5-on-5 and in terms of shot attempts and scoring chances, they were on the right side of 50%. This was a solid pair, and solid is not a bad thing from your third pair.
6) Valimaki
probably will pass Kulak at
some point, but even
if he is marginally better this year, it's doubtful he will make enough of an impact to be worth burning an ELC year. If our window is Gaudreau's contract, keeping Valimaki on his ELC through '22 lines up with the end of Gaudreau's contract. Of course you burn ELC years on impact players - but is a third pairing defenseman an impact player, regardless of upside? The only scenario I can see that being the case is if you have a Sergachyev type talent on your third pair and I don't believe Valimaki is in that supremely dynamic tier. In fact, out of all the prospects we've had, I think only Fox had that kind of elite level of difference-making play to his game.
7) Kulak might have cleared waivers before arbitration - but he might not clear waivers tomorrow. An arbitration case is not something a team would have wanted to take on but right now he's under contract. Losing him to waivers could be the biggest mistake since we lost Byron to waivers.
