Goaltending

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

If Brodie is traded I don't think it is out of the question that we may see Valimaki and Kylington round out the D with Kulak. From what I hear Valimaki is a solid player that has some maturity to him. Kylington although 21 he has 3 years in the A and should be well prepared to contribute. This would be the season to get them in there to gain some experience.

 

I cringe at the thought of Kulak as a second pair though.  So, will the two rookies be okay in the second pair?  I doubt it.

 

Kulak is a good bottom pair guy and I think thats all we should expect. 

[kehatch]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I cringe at the thought of Kulak as a second pair though.  So, will the two rookies be okay in the second pair?  I doubt it.

 

Kulak is a good bottom pair guy and I think thats all we should expect. 

 

You never know. Him and Hamonic actually looked pretty good together in limited time. I am not a big fan of rolling the dice usually, but the Flames have a lot of guys potentially capable of play on that 4/5 spot. 

 

My best guess is they keep Brodie, but it is almost a coin flip they trade him for a first + instead. If they do that, the Flames have the depth to cover the spot (probably). 

[The_People1]

7 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

You never know. Him and Hamonic actually looked pretty good together in limited time. I am not a big fan of rolling the dice usually, but the Flames have a lot of guys potentially capable of play on that 4/5 spot. 

 

My best guess is they keep Brodie, but it is almost a coin flip they trade him for a first + instead. If they do that, the Flames have the depth to cover the spot (probably). 

 

I thought Kulak - Hamonic was a pretty good bottom pair lol.  But okay, fair enough.  Kulak showed us he belongs in the NHL which is much more than what Valimaki and Kylington have shown us.  If Kulak has to play top 4, then I think he will fake it till he makes it.

[conundrumed]

We should probably turn a more discerning eye on Kulak.

Here's a 4th rounder that just made the team and played his rookie season as a 23yo dman.

Honestly, he almost made the team at 22.

As he puts another year or 2 behind him, I honestly think we won't be talking about a bottom pairing guy.

He's met every challenge so far.

With Valimaki and Kylington coming up, we shouldn't lose sight that they are still behind Kulak.

He may well be able to step into Brodie's seat next season.

My own thoughts are Kulak's ceiling was agreed upon a few years back. I think we lose sight of how young he is, and how far he's come as a 4th rd pick.

So our expectations have always been low and remain that way.

He's a great skater with a good shot, just spent a year in the NHL. He'll be cleaning up what works and what doesn't.

I'm a big fan of the kid personally, and I think he's only getting better.

As a dman, I assume he'll fully be playing his best hockey from 26 to 30+ish.

He's still a year away at least, and already in the NHL.

Honestly I think the kid is the forgotten one in terms of who will be improving.

Improving from a #5Dman will be very nice.

Not bad for a 4th rder.

[robrob74]

7 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

We should probably turn a more discerning eye on Kulak.

Here's a 4th rounder that just made the team and played his rookie season as a 23yo dman.

Honestly, he almost made the team at 22.

As he puts another year or 2 behind him, I honestly think we won't be talking about a bottom pairing guy.

He's met every challenge so far.

With Valimaki and Kylington coming up, we shouldn't lose sight that they are still behind Kulak.

He may well be able to step into Brodie's seat next season.

My own thoughts are Kulak's ceiling was agreed upon a few years back. I think we lose sight of how young he is, and how far he's come as a 4th rd pick.

So our expectations have always been low and remain that way.

He's a great skater with a good shot, just spent a year in the NHL. He'll be cleaning up what works and what doesn't.

I'm a big fan of the kid personally, and I think he's only getting better.

As a dman, I assume he'll fully be playing his best hockey from 26 to 30+ish.

He's still a year away at least, and already in the NHL.

Honestly I think the kid is the forgotten one in terms of who will be improving.

Improving from a #5Dman will be very nice.

Not bad for a 4th rder.

 

What  did everyone think of Giordano when he started playing? What was his ceiling? 

 

Of course he isn’t him, but patience in some instances wreak the biggest rewards. 

[conundrumed]

4 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

What  did everyone think of Giordano when he started playing? What was his ceiling? 

 

Of course he isn’t him, but patience in some instances wreak the biggest rewards. 

Isn't he?

He's 24, and Gio's understudy.

We have no expectation of Kulak to ever be more than a bottom pairing.

I'm raising the bar, he can be a solid top 3 imho.

If he were a forward, we'd have all sorts of expectation.

Dmen are typically a couple years behind.

He isn't.

If I'm a GM, I'll give you a 3rd-4th for Stone.

A 2nd for Kulak.

And I wouldn't do Kulak for a 2nd.

A young dman with a year under his belt?

That starts at Robert Thomas or Boris Katchouk for me or I hang up.

I'm sure many don't agree, but Kulak is a keeper for me, and well into great development into a solid NHLer.

He'll have a long career.

[MAC331]

10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I cringe at the thought of Kulak as a second pair though.  So, will the two rookies be okay in the second pair?  I doubt it.

 

Kulak is a good bottom pair guy and I think thats all we should expect. 

Why do you doubt it you haven't even seen them play ? Look around there is starting to be a number of 1st year defensemen coming into the league. Valimaki is said to have a mature approach to the game and is skilled. I say maybe we have a look.

[MAC331]

7 hours ago, conundrumed said:

We should probably turn a more discerning eye on Kulak.

Here's a 4th rounder that just made the team and played his rookie season as a 23yo dman.

Honestly, he almost made the team at 22.

As he puts another year or 2 behind him, I honestly think we won't be talking about a bottom pairing guy.

He's met every challenge so far.

With Valimaki and Kylington coming up, we shouldn't lose sight that they are still behind Kulak.

He may well be able to step into Brodie's seat next season.

My own thoughts are Kulak's ceiling was agreed upon a few years back. I think we lose sight of how young he is, and how far he's come as a 4th rd pick.

So our expectations have always been low and remain that way.

He's a great skater with a good shot, just spent a year in the NHL. He'll be cleaning up what works and what doesn't.

I'm a big fan of the kid personally, and I think he's only getting better.

As a dman, I assume he'll fully be playing his best hockey from 26 to 30+ish.

He's still a year away at least, and already in the NHL.

Honestly I think the kid is the forgotten one in terms of who will be improving.

Improving from a #5Dman will be very nice.

Not bad for a 4th rder.

Geez I hate labelling players best to worse with numbers, all we want is the best 19  on the ice. Brodie was a 4th rounder so will Kulak be as good as Brodie ??? Fact is no one knows until you give the player the chance to show their talents. We all know Andersson, Kulak, Kylington and Valimaki have to grow into the positions over the next few seasons.

I don't think Kulak has been lost on anyone that pays attention.

[Khrox]

Yeah. Kulak reminds me of Chris Butler in one way. I feel like Butler was a good 3rd pairing guy because while he didn't stand out, he didn't make a lot of big mistakes either. Kulak reminds me of that, he plays his game, he doesn't make a lot of mistakes. Except I see him being more skilled. Would I say top 3? Maybe not yet, but I could see him as our #4 D by the end of this upcoming season, or by the beginning of the season after. I do feel he is definitely on the rise and better as a number 5. For a rookie, as a defenseman, I never really felt worried when he was on the ice, which is usually a good sign for both someone that young, and someone who plays D.

[420since1974]

Kulak was a lot more poised than I had expected him to be in his first full season.

To me, he did not look out of place at all on the third pairing.

It would not surprise me if he ended up becoming a solid, second pairing NHL defence-man in a few years.

[conundrumed]

7 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Geez I hate labelling players best to worse with numbers, all we want is the best 19  on the ice. Brodie was a 4th rounder so will Kulak be as good as Brodie ??? Fact is no one knows until you give the player the chance to show their talents. We all know Andersson, Kulak, Kylington and Valimaki have to grow into the positions over the next few seasons.

I don't think Kulak has been lost on anyone that pays attention.

Yeah but it kind of helps get the point across. For dmen, it simply implies what kind of icetime they're getting.

With Kulak maturing, I hope to see him getting more comfortable and therefore a bigger workload.

Being paired with Stone was an anchor yet I thought he had a solid first season.

He passed the eye test for me quite well, a good defensive dman, can skate, good zone exits, very sound positionally, low turnovers, good 1-on-1.

He won't knock your socks off at any one thing, but he's pretty much good at everything.

[Cowtownguy]

Kulak is generally a solid defenceman. He can eat up quite a few minutes and doesn't scare a person. It looks to me like he has worked on and addressed any problem areas he has had. You need guys like that because they play well for relatively few dollars.

[cross16]

I like Kulak, but i'm not sure there is more upside there. I like his skating and I generally like his ability to be in the right position. He is pretty safe but can still go for a skate up the ice when he needs to. However, I find he isn't great at moving the puck up the ice, passing is avg, and once in the O-Zone he doesn't have a lot of good natural instincts to get involved in the play. Now I will give him that the Flames played a pretty conservative system in the O-zone last year, especially with their D, but I also have not seen that much out of him as he has progressed. You don't see much offence from Kulak at any level. I think if you want to move up into a top 4 in today game you need to be able to move the puck and generate offense, or you better be a top end defensive dman with some punch. I'm not sure I see either in Kulak. 

 

In a pinch i'm fine with it, but he strikes me as the type of dman you like in your bottom pair but if they were to move up you wouldn't like. I think the Chris Butler comparison is a good one. 

 

[Cowtownguy]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

I like Kulak, but i'm not sure there is more upside there. I like his skating and I generally like his ability to be in the right position. He is pretty safe but can still go for a skate up the ice when he needs to. However, I find he isn't great at moving the puck up the ice, passing is avg, and once in the O-Zone he doesn't have a lot of good natural instincts to get involved in the play. Now I will give him that the Flames played a pretty conservative system in the O-zone last year, especially with their D, but I also have not seen that much out of him as he has progressed. You don't see much offence from Kulak at any level. I think if you want to move up into a top 4 in today game you need to be able to move the puck and generate offense, or you better be a top end defensive dman with some punch. I'm not sure I see either in Kulak. 

 

In a pinch i'm fine with it, but he strikes me as the type of dman you like in your bottom pair but if they were to move up you wouldn't like. I think the Chris Butler comparison is a good one. 

 

I agree with your post for the most part. I am not sure that he compares with Butler though. Butler shares the inability to make a solid first pass, but he also was less reliable in the defensive zone IMO. Butler scared me at times, whereas Kulak just bores me. A boring defenceman is not necessarily a bad thing.

[conundrumed]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

I like Kulak, but i'm not sure there is more upside there. I like his skating and I generally like his ability to be in the right position. He is pretty safe but can still go for a skate up the ice when he needs to. However, I find he isn't great at moving the puck up the ice, passing is avg, and once in the O-Zone he doesn't have a lot of good natural instincts to get involved in the play. Now I will give him that the Flames played a pretty conservative system in the O-zone last year, especially with their D, but I also have not seen that much out of him as he has progressed. You don't see much offence from Kulak at any level. I think if you want to move up into a top 4 in today game you need to be able to move the puck and generate offense, or you better be a top end defensive dman with some punch. I'm not sure I see either in Kulak. 

 

In a pinch i'm fine with it, but he strikes me as the type of dman you like in your bottom pair but if they were to move up you wouldn't like. I think the Chris Butler comparison is a good one. 

 

Can't remember where I was reading it but Kulak hopes to spend a lot of time this offseason on his shot.

I don't really agree there isn't much more upside there. I think a lot of his improvement wil be mental. As a rookie dman I think you spend a lot of time worried about mistakes. As he gets more comfortable, he's going to learn what he can and can't do, and gain more familiarity with opposition players and how to stop them.

Pairing with Stone was a pretty tough ask for a rook, but he came through at a respectable -3.

I see a lot of good in him, he's been defying the odds and has forced his way onto the roster because of hard work.

He'll keep that up, just who he is.

He's a safe bet as a solid 3LD, I see more there, simply because of the work he's put in, and will continue to put in.

The fundamentals of playing D are there, he knows positioning. Now it's just a question of expanding on it.

[JTech780]

My biggest issue with Kulak throughout his development has always been his hockey IQ, admittedly it wasn't as big of an issue this past year, but he still has trouble reading the play. I think his skating ability helps him cover up some of those issues, but they are there. 

 

I think the biggest factor for him is that Valimaki and Kylington will most likely pass him on the depth chart in the next couple of seasons. 

 

I like Kulak, I just wouldn't want him playing top 4 minutes here for a prolonged period of time. I think you would start to see the blemishes in his game show up more.

[conundrumed]

23 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

My biggest issue with Kulak throughout his development has always been his hockey IQ, admittedly it wasn't as big of an issue this past year, but he still has trouble reading the play. I think his skating ability helps him cover up some of those issues, but they are there. 

 

I think the biggest factor for him is that Valimaki and Kylington will most likely pass him on the depth chart in the next couple of seasons. 

 

I like Kulak, I just wouldn't want him playing top 4 minutes here for a prolonged period of time. I think you would start to see the blemishes in his game show up more.

It'll be interesting to see this offseason, he might be one that gets very close to, if not in front of, an arbitrator.

I think he'll be wanting, maybe, 2 at $2 per, 2 for $5 total, not sure. 1 year deal, hard to say. He's climbing out of the ranks of cheap, though.

[JTech780]

21 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

It'll be interesting to see this offseason, he might be one that gets very close to, if not in front of, an arbitrator.

I think he'll be wanting, maybe, 2 at $2 per, 2 for $5 total, not sure. 1 year deal, hard to say. He's climbing out of the ranks of cheap, though.

 

He only has 1 full year in the NHL and averaged under 13 mins a game and put up 8 points, I think we can get him signed for right around $1m per, there is no way he gets close to $2m, if that's what he wants, then we take him to arbitration and he wouldn't get that in arbitration and if he does I would walk away, he is pretty easily replaceable.

[conundrumed]

38 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

He only has 1 full year in the NHL and averaged under 13 mins a game and put up 8 points, I think we can get him signed for right around $1m per, there is no way he gets close to $2m, if that's what he wants, then we take him to arbitration and he wouldn't get that in arbitration and if he does I would walk away, he is pretty easily replaceable.

By whom? The matter will become even worse if we trade Brodie.

Who is taking those minutes? Vali or Kyl?

Surely you jest. It will be Kulak.

This is kind of what I was getting at in all of my Kulak love.

Everyone has decided what he is. I'm in full disagreement.

Valimaki and Kyl may jump over him in the depth chart, so they better get to work, because he isn't just handing it over on hype and expectation.

Hard work, and he's out ahead on just how hard.

[JTech780]

16 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

By whom? The matter will become even worse if we trade Brodie.

Who is taking those minutes? Vali or Kyl?

Surely you jest. It will be Kulak.

This is kind of what I was getting at in all of my Kulak love.

Everyone has decided what he is. I'm in full disagreement.

Valimaki and Kyl may jump over him in the depth chart, so they better get to work, because he isn't just handing it over on hype and expectation.

Hard work, and he's out ahead on just how hard.

 

I am not looking to replace Kulak, I was just saying that if he is looking for $2m or more on his next contract we can find better options on the UFA market for cheaper.

 

I like Kulak but I haven't see anything from his play that suggests he is much more than a 6th defenseman. I think Valimaki starts pushing him for playing time by the middle of the season.

[conundrumed]

17 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I am not looking to replace Kulak, I was just saying that if he is looking for $2m or more on his next contract we can find better options on the UFA market for cheaper.

 

I like Kulak but I haven't see anything from his play that suggests he is much more than a 6th defenseman. I think Valimaki starts pushing him for playing time by the middle of the season.

Who is our 5th dman, Stone or Kulak?

I'd say Stone is 6th, personally. He's the easily replaceable one with Andersson not at $3.5 per for 2 more.

We're turning into ARI, am I the only one thinking that?

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, JTech780 said:

My biggest issue with Kulak throughout his development has always been his hockey IQ, admittedly it wasn't as big of an issue this past year, but he still has trouble reading the play. I think his skating ability helps him cover up some of those issues, but they are there. 

 

I think the biggest factor for him is that Valimaki and Kylington will most likely pass him on the depth chart in the next couple of seasons. 

 

I like Kulak, I just wouldn't want him playing top 4 minutes here for a prolonged period of time. I think you would start to see the blemishes in his game show up more.

He may very well get past by those two defensemen but give the guy credit for what he has accomplished so far. As long as he keep progressing to be a solid defenseman I don't know what else we should be asking of him.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

By whom? The matter will become even worse if we trade Brodie.

Who is taking those minutes? Vali or Kyl?

Surely you jest. It will be Kulak.

This is kind of what I was getting at in all of my Kulak love.

Everyone has decided what he is. I'm in full disagreement.

Valimaki and Kyl may jump over him in the depth chart, so they better get to work, because he isn't just handing it over on hype and expectation.

Hard work, and he's out ahead on just how hard.

First I think you have to look at the minutes Valimaki and Kylington were logging last season where they played. I understand they both will need to adjust to the faster pace of the NHL but I wouldn't count out their ability to do so either. Kulak has the benefit of this past season now under his belt however I would say he is heads and shoulders above the other two by a lot.

[JTech780]

47 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Who is our 5th dman, Stone or Kulak?

I'd say Stone is 6th, personally. He's the easily replaceable one with Andersson not at $3.5 per for 2 more.

We're turning into ARI, am I the only one thinking that?

 

As it stands right now Stone is the 5th defenseman and the guy I would rather have logging more minutes than Kulak. That being said with the emergence of Andersson, Stone is the more replaceable. I do think that by the end of the year that you will see Andersson taking on more minutes than Kulak.

 

Dont get me wrong Kulak is a fine player and a guy that has proved me wrong up to this point, as I never saw him being a full time NHLer at any point during his development. I am happy to have to him on the team.

[conundrumed]

18 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

First I think you have to look at the minutes Valimaki and Kylington were logging last season where they played. I understand they both will need to adjust to the faster pace of the NHL but I wouldn't count out their ability to do so either. Kulak has the benefit of this past season now under his belt however I would say he is heads and shoulders above the other two by a lot.

That is definitely my argument.

2 seasons ago, I asked him if he should have made the team at 22, he gave me that NHL answer, "I've got to improve my strength and conditioning and learn how to be better defensively".

Last year, wow. Any arguments? Totally cleaned up his D.

This summer?

Don't count the kid out. This is what hard work looks like.

It's what makes a team.