Kulak On Waivers

[TheIronMaiden]

On the bright side, I have a reason to check cp tomorrow morning, and we have something to discuss today.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

OK, this post made no sense.

It makes complete sense if your humour organ is working.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Not surprised. If he's claimed, it's really not a huge deal. Rather they lose him than Stone because at the end of the day, he barely beat out guys like Jyrki Jokipakka and Matt Bartkowski for his role, he really isn't that great.

Even if a rookie passes him and he falls to 7D next year, I'd much rather have him in the pressbox than Prout. If/when injuries hit throughout the year, it's nice having depth and guys with some NHL experience. Losing him on waivers would leave us quite thin on D. Not the end of the world but I'm certainly hoping we keep him as he looked rather serviceable last year.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Cap management has shifted to the bottom half of the roster in recent seasons

I disagree with this. This isn't cap management, it's budget management.

Kulak, statistically, doesn't have much going for him in an arbitration case. Lowest TOI out of all NHL regular defenders, 8 points, a minus player. Start looking at RFA comparables for him and I doubt you'll find anyone making much more than 750K.

The one thing he did have going for him was 71 games played, enough for an arbitrator to see that as an "NHL player" and potentially give him a one-way contract. Something I don't think the team wants to do.

[Robbob]

For some reason I thought this thread was a bump from a previous season. I don't expect him to be picked up as I doubt a team is willing to take on an arb case...unless *tinfoil hat time* this is part of a master scheme to get a team that does have an arb case to open up a buyout window for the team so they can buyout a contract. For that help, the trade for Brouwer costs the flames a little less. No idea if this is even remotely possible.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by DJones

Hope this isn't another Byron and Schlemko mistake

What was the Schlemko mistake?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by heep223

Now obviously there are other considerations but it's not even close on-ice.

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.

[Reggie Dunlop]

What the Fata?

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

What was the Schlemko mistake?

Not re-signing him (or Diaz, for that matter). I actually agree with this one. That pairing was money.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by DJones

Hope this isn't another Byron and Schlemko mistake

I hope it's not another Stralman mistake.

[Locke]

It makes sense to a degree, when you look at who is in the pipe for that position theres lots of competition that are likely equally as good but are younger and cheaper and right now we've got a logjam of guys looking to make the jump and nab that spot.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Dan403

If there was a pick to be had, do you not think Tre would have made the trade? Kulak just isn't that good.

Not necessarily, if they think he'll clear waivers and want to keep him they may not have even looked for a trade partner. Kulak isn't bad, he's actually pretty solid depth of the type all teams should want to have in their system. If he was on the bottom pairing on opening night, that would give me no major concerns. If he's in the press box, also just fine.

[AC]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Not re-signing him (or Diaz, for that matter). I actually agree with this one. That pairing was money.

From an older thread:
https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...9&postcount=29

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Schlemko already stated he wasn't going to sign here with the logjam we had on D. He also said the Flames tried to move a d-man to fit him in but couldn't do it.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Disappointing to see on one hand, but encouraging on an other. They obviously see him as a guy they want to keep, but only on their terms. Makes sense.

[theTrumanShow]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Treveling is banking that Kulak will not be picked up, and will use it as a reality check for Kulak that he is asking too much money. I do not expect him to be picked up.

Boom, exactly. good read on situation.

[Jiggy]

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.

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

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by DJones

Hope this isn't another Byron and Schlemko mistake

I don't understand the love fest some people have for Byron.

He never showed he was going to be a 20 goal scorer for the team when he was playing here.

[heep223]

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.

Fair enough. Maybe it’s closer than I stated. Note though that neither are in a point scoring role. Also I don’t agree with a previous poster that Kulak is physical and solid with the puck. He’s neither IMO. He’s alright, I don’t hate him, just think that Stone has an edge in most categories.

[savardandjokinen]

Honestly, this doesn’t bother me.

Stone is the perfect player to mentor an Andersson or a Valimaki, and Kulak was holding a spot

[Incogneto]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Slack channel

I would give my left pinky finger to have access to this....