Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 08-13-2019, 12:11 PM   #41
Superfraggle
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Calgary, for now
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
people pay to read this garbage?
The Athletic puts out a lot of good stuff. Agreed that this particular article is absolute garbage. You can't look at the player in isolation, as others have stated. At the start of last year, you have penciled in:

Giordano - L
Brodie - R
Hanifin - L
Hamonic - R
Stone - R
Kulak - L
Andersson - R
Valimaki - L
Kylington - L

So, without a crystal ball to anticipate the injuries to Stone and Valimaki, you expect Kylington to start in the AHL, but if you think Valimaki is ready then somebody else has to move in order to keep it down to 7 defensemen in the NHL. That's either Stone or Kulak.

It's great in retrospect to say that Stone should have gotten the boot ahead of Kulak but at that point he was already a stronger defenseman, who was considered to have a higher upside. Plus a right-hand shot, whereas Kulak, Valimaki, and Kylington are all left.

Holding 8 healthy d-men on the NHL roster is not a good long-term plan, as there isn't enough ice-time to go around. Moving Kulak made sense in the context of the time whether or not you believe they were doing him a solid.
Superfraggle is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Superfraggle For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:12 PM   #42
TheScorpion
First round-bust
 
TheScorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Ottawa
Exp:
Default

I think it was more because they had no room for him. Even today, Kulak would have but a faint hope of cracking the lineup. Had Valimaki not been injured again, Kulak would still be the #7 and perhaps even the #8.

He's not a great defenseman by any stretch and was only given so much responsibility in Montreal due to a lack of any better options. Sure, maybe the Flames could've gotten more for him, but they had little leverage at the time, and Kulak had never been very impressive in Calgary to merit any decent return. He was a slightly-above-replacement-level player.

This isn't a great article, and I'm not a huge fan of how Wilson has given a complete handwave to the return, without so much as even researching it -- he says Valiev is unlikely to ever play an NHL game when, in fact, he's already played 12.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Staples, Edmonton Journal
Holland made transactions which have been a net positive for the Oilers, including his massive, massive, massive Grade A trade of Milan Lucic to the Calgary Flames for James Neal.
TheScorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 12:13 PM   #43
Rando
Scoring Winger
 
Rando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken View Post
Trading away a guy for peanuts because you don't like him isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for the deal either, btw.
Sure but let's be factual about it. They traded a guy away for peanuts who was worth peanuts. Kulak was free for any team a month prior and only returned anything in a trade because Montreal wanted to unload a couple contracts as well.

Fully aware some of you thrive in the mud, live for hindsight but let's not overstate Brett Kulak, at best he's still a marginal NHL player who would be in a battle to make the Flames roster after the Stone buy-out and Valimaki injury.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken View Post
i should've kept my big mouth shut
Rando is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Rando For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:15 PM   #44
blender
Powerplay Quarterback
 
blender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kamloops
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM View Post
Right, but if the regret is not keeping Kulak, he'd be looking for that kind of contract now, right?

That said, I'd trade Frolik for a depth guy making that much, but not on a three year term.
Definitely a possibility, no doubt. But you still have Kulak for last year and you get to make a decision after that season.
blender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 12:19 PM   #45
TheScorpion
First round-bust
 
TheScorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Ottawa
Exp:
Default

If the Flames would have kept Kulak, we'd be all up in arms about how Kylington or Valimaki lost a whole year of development and how the Flames have no room in the organization for them. It's a circular argument of disingenuity. Sometimes, hard choices need to be made, choices that sometimes leave good players behind, but there are only so many spots on the roster for defensemen.

Keeping six NHL-calibre left-handed defensemen is not good asset management in any world.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Staples, Edmonton Journal
Holland made transactions which have been a net positive for the Oilers, including his massive, massive, massive Grade A trade of Milan Lucic to the Calgary Flames for James Neal.
TheScorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to TheScorpion For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:19 PM   #46
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blender View Post
Definitely a possibility, no doubt. But you still have Kulak for last year and you get to make a decision after that season.
I don't think Kulak was needed last year.
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 12:29 PM   #47
Redrum
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Redrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Exp:
Default

He managed to make a turd of a defensive lineup in Montreal. Wouldn't have made it here last year and even with the unforeseen injury he would be on the fringe here this year with not much future. Summer time article I guess.
Redrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 12:34 PM   #48
Flash Walken
Franchise Player
 
Flash Walken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Exp:
Default

The point is Stone was a potential buyout candidate 1 year into his contract and the Flames had no space for Kulak because they had clogged up the lineup with a body who was worse than Kulak but paid 4 times as much.

And then to give him away because you didn't like that he asked for a bunch of money which turned about to be 10% of the buyout cap for stone, and that he now looks to be worth...

And then to trade a 4th round pick like 6 months later to get that depth back that you traded for peanuts.

It's just effing terrible roster throughput.

Imagine this is your Calendar year:

Sign kulak for 850k, trade him for nothing (the trade cost the flames about 100k in real cash), trade a middle pick for Fantenberg, buy out Stone.

So at this point you've moved Kulak, a 4th, a 3rd and a 5th to have a million dollar buyout against your cap for 2 years.

Valimaki's injury doesn't matter. Kent is completely correct in his article. Losing an above replacement level asset for nothing because you soured the relationship with him is terrible asset management and betrays a philosophical approach that is at odds with building a successful franchise over the long term.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoJetsGo View Post
How does the number of playoff games the Bruins won *this last season* have anything to do with their number of draft picks in the last three calendar years?
Flash Walken is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Flash Walken For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:39 PM   #49
agulati
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

We don't know if there were other reasons though. Could have been chemistry issues, or Kulak not feeling that he was getting a fair shot in Calgary (correctly or wrongly) I don't think Kulak would have had as solid a season in Calgary as he had in Montreal.

We shouldn't forget, Kulak started last season not in Montreal but in the minors. He only got a chance when there was an injury opening up a spot on the blueline. There was no guarantee the season would have gone the same way if the injury hadn't happened in Montreal either.
agulati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 12:39 PM   #50
Toonage
Taking a while to get to 5000
 
Toonage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mass_nerder View Post
Curious if this was publicized somewhere/inside knowledge, or if this is just speculation.
Speculation, but its from all that was publicized and I couldn't see it any other way. From the timing of Treliving's comments on players wanting more when they didn't earn it, the multiple waiver filings, the fact that it went to arbitration, the comments following the trade etc.
Toonage is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Toonage For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:40 PM   #51
TheScorpion
First round-bust
 
TheScorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Ottawa
Exp:
Default

Eh, I don't think anybody was looking at buying out Stone after 2017-18, and besides, his play has absolutely nothing to do with Kulak's progression unless the Flames were intent on shoving him over to his off-side.

Both Stone and Kulak had fine but unremarkable analytics in 2017-18. Kulak flourished with an increased role that he was literally never going to get here (never in a million years), and Stone no longer has a contract for exactly one reason: his injury.

This is a hilariously minute issue to be so angry about, Flash. The Flames got two seasons' worth of good hockey out of Stone and cleared out an excess player in Kulak that they were never going to use. It's not a big deal.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Staples, Edmonton Journal
Holland made transactions which have been a net positive for the Oilers, including his massive, massive, massive Grade A trade of Milan Lucic to the Calgary Flames for James Neal.
TheScorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TheScorpion For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:42 PM   #52
Jacks
Franchise Player
 
Jacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

People sure get defensive at any criticism of Treliving. If Kulak was waiver fodder anyway then there is no harm in sending him down as a depth replacement. If he gets claimed we don't have to take on 2 useless players and I think we get some waiver cash?
If he was playing on the farm last year he wouldn't have signed for 3yrs @ $1.85 either so we'd most likely still have him as a cheap injury callup. It was a bad move, it didn't make a lot of sense at the time either, admitting that doesn't mean Treliving is a bad GM.
Jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jacks For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:42 PM   #53
Rando
Scoring Winger
 
Rando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion View Post
If the Flames would have kept Kulak, we'd be all up in arms about
I can't be the only one still chuckling at the "No wonder the Flames have the worst prospects" post despite this being a thread about a player the Flames drafted and developed because three other players they drafted and developed pushed him down the depth chart.

Some posters here just thrive in the mud.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken View Post
i should've kept my big mouth shut
Rando is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Rando For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:44 PM   #54
Superfraggle
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Calgary, for now
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken View Post
Sign kulak for 850k, trade him for nothing (the trade cost the flames about 100k in real cash)
How do you figure this? Taormina and Valiev spent the year in the minors and had 2-way contracts.

Kulak made $900k whether in the NHL or AHL
Taormina made $350k in the AHL
Valiev made $80k in the AHL

Looks like cash savings of $470k to me?

Last edited by Superfraggle; 08-13-2019 at 12:46 PM. Reason: Made the mistake of trusting the $850k figure quoted. He actually made $900k
Superfraggle is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Superfraggle For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 12:45 PM   #55
tkflames
First Line Centre
 
tkflames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Exp:
Default

I think this retrospective articles are really easy to write without context. The reality was that Kulak was going to be the #7 again in the Flames rotation. For his career, this means that he likely never would have become in the Flames rotation what he is now in Montreal (and had the potential to lose 1-2 more development years). Who signs him this offseason if he was the Flames #7 or #8 last season? Sometimes, the right thing to do is giving one of your employees an opportunity to flourish elsewhere, rather than holding them down for only a minor benefit to yourself.
__________________
Go Flames Go
tkflames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 12:56 PM   #56
HighLifeMan
Scoring Winger
 
HighLifeMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Exp:
Default

Silly article. It was not a miscalculation.. Kulak would not have received the opportunities that he has gotten in Montreal here and as such would not be the player he is today if he was to stay here as the #6/7 dmen. Montreal due to a blatant lack of talent and depth on the left side had the ability to give Kulak the minutes needed to develop and hone his game at the NHL level. Treliving did Kulak a solid. That's it, no need to look any deeper into this than that.

Montreal LHD depth last year
Jordie Benn
Victor Mete
Mike Reilly
David Schlemko

Calgary's LHD depth last year
Mark Giordano
Noah Hanifin
Jusso Valimaki
Oliver Kylington
HighLifeMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 01:00 PM   #57
ResAlien
Lifetime In Suspension
 
ResAlien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Exp:
Default

I get that it’s the boring part of summer but I’m going to have a hard time getting worked up about not having a JAG who spent some time in the top 4 for a non playoff team. Oh no how will the organization ever recover.
ResAlien is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 01:13 PM   #58
Resolute 14
One of many who is too boring; thinks that there should be rules regarding grammar in custom user titles, and also makes moderators wonder if there is a charachter limit here. I mean come on- you would think that would be a limitation in the software
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

I love that the stat pack image that Kent uses to argue that the only Flames defenceman "with a better statistical profile" than Kulak last year was Giordano explicitly uses an eight game sample.

That, friends, is what we call massaging data to support the desired conclusion. Something that is horrendously common with hockey's analytics community.

Not to mention that, as others note, keeping Kulak meant Valimaki gets blocked. Kent did not consider that at all, and as a consequence, creates an immediate error in his "no downside" narrative.

I would also very much like Kent to substantiate his claim that Treliving reacted "harshly" to Kulak's arbitration ask.

Frankly, this article does not get written if Valimaki doesn't tear his ACL. This piece is entirely reactionary, and it's a really self-serving attempt at an 'I told you so' from Kent.
__________________

Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
Old 08-13-2019, 01:20 PM   #59
dino7c
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacks View Post
People sure get defensive at any criticism of Treliving. If Kulak was waiver fodder anyway then there is no harm in sending him down as a depth replacement. If he gets claimed we don't have to take on 2 useless players and I think we get some waiver cash?
If he was playing on the farm last year he wouldn't have signed for 3yrs @ $1.85 either so we'd most likely still have him as a cheap injury callup. It was a bad move, it didn't make a lot of sense at the time either, admitting that doesn't mean Treliving is a bad GM.
Its just so insignificant it seems like a ridiculous article...they are painting it like a huge mistake or something.

GM got rid of him and then his team was 2nd overall. Kulak doesn't crack this lineup without major injuries.

Vegas took a UFA that was gonna sign with them anyway instead of Kulak...what a massive mistake for them I guess
__________________
#MakeTheFlamesGreatAgain
dino7c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2019, 01:34 PM   #60
Erick Estrada
Franchise Player
 
Erick Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
Exp:
Default

What’s up with Wilson anyway? It’s clear from his articles he’s very biased towards players he likes and doesn’t and I have to assume Kulak is a guy he liked. It’s like he’s trying to fill the Bruce Dowbiggin void of Flames articles with subtle negative slants at the GM and organization.
Erick Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:06 AM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016