Kulak On Waivers

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Kulak...
GP: 71
Goals: 2
Assists: 6
Corsi For: 51.6
Corsi Relative: -2.8

Stone...
GP: 82
Goals: 3
Assists: 7
Corsi For: 49.5
Corsi Relative: -5.2


Now YMMV but if it were "not even close on-ice" I think we'd see better outputs from Stone. That's not the case.

This is a classic example of advanced stats not telling the story.

Watching that pairing last season in their own end, and it's very clear to me at least who the better defender is and it's not Kulak.

Stone actually has the ability to handle the big forwards in the West and battle down low, in front of the net. Kulak has blah attributes across the board. Passable as a #6 but certainly doesn't give me confidence when he's on the ice.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Muta

I would be flabbergasted if he wasn't snapped up.

I just wanted to use the word flabbergasted.

Ok, but would you be gobsmacked?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Jiggy

Stone can actually box guys out and clear the front of the net.

Whatever your perceived evaluation of skills are (believe me I could just as easily compile a list of skills that I think Kulak supersedes Stone at) the fact is he doesn't produce any better outputs because of it.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Jiggy

Stone can actually box guys out and clear the front of the net. He does small things really well where Kulak does not.

It is a difficult stat to track, but I agree. In terms of hits Stone had 106 where as Kulak had 45. Stones ability to staple players to the boards the allow wingers or centres to pick up the puck is an asset. No knock again Kulak, they are simply different players. IMO the Flames have a more players who play Kulak's style, than ones who play Stone's.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

This is a classic example of advanced stats not telling the story.

... advanced stats like goals, assists, and games played?

[Oling_Roachinen]

If they are willing to risk losing Kulak it's because they are considering starting Prout on the roster. And while Prout may not be an upgrade on Kulak in an actual defensive position what he does provide far more of than Kulak is toughness.

Which makes sense if the team is looking at playing Mangiapane, Foo, Klimchuk over the likes of yesteryears Ferland, Brouwer, Glass, Hathaway, Stewart.

Carolina under Peters last year had the least majors while the Flames had the second most. Could be a pretty quick cultural shift, but Prout does provide a little bit of deterrent against the big mean teams when needed.

Giordano-Brodie
Hanifin-Hamonic
Valimaki/Anderson-Stone
Prout

I could live with that.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Parallex

... advanced stats like goals, assists, and games played?

Stone wasn't in an offensive role on the club last year. And I do think GG's system stagnated his shot from being used a bit more on the rush, so I'm curious to see how that's utilized under Peters.

He was obviously utilized prominently on the PK, a lot more than he was the PP. Again, I'm far more comfortable sending Stone out on a PK than I am Kulak. And so were the coaches.

[GranteedEV]

This is a very dumb move, even if I like Kylington and Valimaki.



I think Kulak will get claimed and he will continue developing into a very solid NHL defenseman, maybe even have a Michal Kempny type breakout with an expanded role.Waiving him is just poor asset management. He was pretty blatantly our fifth best defenseman last year, whether that was on the third pair covering for Stone's one dimensional play or even when promoted to the second pair with Hamonic after Brodie got hurt.

[Toonage]

Someone picking him up would pretty much be ensuring they are paying him the max amount. Not only would Treliving's plan to devalue the player backfire but it would do so to the detriment of the team picking him up. That team still has to go through the hearing and loses any leverage. So unless they want Brett Kulak at $1M or so for 2 years he'll clear.

[SuperMatt18]

Yeah - I don't like it either but I'm guessing they also think he's going to clear waivers - I doubt teams want to pick up a player with an upcoming arbitration case - and then once he clears his ask in arbitration will go down.

My guess is he's asking for $2M plus and this is a move by the Flames to knock that down.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

OK, this post made no sense.

I think it was sarcasm...

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Someone picking him up would pretty much be ensuring they are paying him the max amount. Not only would Treliving's plan to devalue the player backfire but it would do so to the detriment of the team picking him up. That team still has to go through the hearing and loses any leverage. So unless they want Brett Kulak at $1M or so for 2 years he'll clear.

1 year... team get's to pick the one or two year term. He probably will clear but moreso because teams won't want to spend the HR to build a last minute arb case when they have their own pre-existing ones to prepare for.

[metroneck]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Only that he please don't end up in Edmonton

Edmonton already has 5 Kulak's...

[Locke]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

Stone wasn't in an offensive role on the club last year. And I do think GG's system stagnated his shot from being used a bit more on the rush, so I'm curious to see how that's utilized under Peters.

He was obviously utilized prominently on the PK, a lot more than he was the PP. Again, I'm far more comfortable sending Stone out on a PK than I am Kulak. And so were the coaches.

Yes, but its been conclusively proven that the coaches couldnt find their own asses with both hands and a map, so I wouldnt put a lot of stock in their opinions.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

A team with bad defence and lots of cap space.

No they won't. Kulak is a dime a dozen player, every team has a couple of Kulak level D men kicking around. He is a decent #6.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Someone picking him up would pretty much be ensuring they are paying him the max amount. Not only would Treliving's plan to devalue the player backfire but it would do so to the detriment of the team picking him up. That team still has to go through the hearing and loses any leverage. So unless they want Brett Kulak at $1M or so for 2 years he'll clear.

IMO at least one team with roster and salary flexibility looking for shoring up their roster with a solid left side Dman - Toronto, Buffalo, Montreal, Vancouver, L.A., NYI, NYR, NJD, WPG - is willing to pay the $75-300K over the max buryable salary to take that flyer. This isn't an arbitration case where Kulak could expect huge salary even if he won due to his ATOI. At this point Kulak's biggest leverage over a team is that he has upside that was underutilized last year - which is virtually inadmissable in arbitration.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

This is a very dumb move, even if I like Kylington and Valimaki.
....He was pretty blatantly our fifth best defenseman last year

Fifth?

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Kulak outplayed Stone all year.

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I realize the popular opinion would follow that Hamilton > Stone but I actually think Stone is a better player.

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Honestly I am unconvinced Hamonic is even better than Kulak.

Ergo, Kulak=Hamonic>Stone>Hamilton

I'd like to see your rankings.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Fifth?



Ergo, Kulak=Hamonic>Stone>Hamilton

I'd like to see your rankings.

Uh one of those Stones is Mark Stone, a right wing forward


If you actually care, I would rank our handful of pro defensemen available last year as follows:

Giordano (obviously)
Brodie (Not necessarily last year but in aggregate)
Hamilton
Hamonic
Kulak (Not convinced Kulak is worse than Hamonic, but we'll give Hamonic the edge for being more "proven" in tougher minutes)
(Kylington)
Andersson
Stone
(Healey)
(Prout)

I don't think especially highly of Michael Stone even if I consider him an NHLer.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Makes a lot more sense ha. But I don't think Mark Stone>Dougie Hamilton is that much of an unpopular opinion so never even thought of that :P
.
Still have him over Stone and, possibly, Hamonic. I think you overrated him greatly.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Uh one of those Stones is Mark Stone, a right wing forward

Eagerly awaiting the Jim Benning "There are TWO" meme...