If Brodie or Hamonic flop again and the kids look alright then they could always end up being moved and that would clear up a good deal of space .
- shayne

They'd need to move them plus the bad contracts unless you don't think Hanifin and Tkachuk are going to get paid, Bennett's going to be due for a decent raise after this year, and they're also going to need to pay a goalie next year. The way it is now, Bennett and Smith are the only two contracts over a million expiring next year.

As soon as they gave ridiculous money to Neal, it pretty much signified they're done bringing in pieces for a while.

Please can we get someone in Calgary to write these blogs?. Or at least a fan of the team. It's embarrassing to have Todd give his thoughts...stat, stat, Brouwer sucks, blah blah.
I guess it's Hockeybuzz so who cares but it would be nice to have someone who actually knew something.

Your making it seem like Ottawa has offered us something for Stone already, if this is the case it would have been done. Our two bottom d pairings were awful last year and that could be coaching or pairings or whatever but if no ones offering anything for Stone than see if he has a bounce back year with a new coach and better team.

I also dont get why everyone has this stiffy for keeping Kulak. You have three young Dmen that offer much more skill and Offensive upside so pairing Stone with a guy like Kulak whos steady but offers nothing offensivley is going to be much different than pairing Stone with a guy like Valimaki or Andersson who take more risks up ice. Having Stone as the stay at home D while these young guys feel out the NHL isnt the worst thing.

And it doesnt effect our cap situation so who cares.
- shayne

So you're saying keep Stone at 3.5 and let Kulak at 900 walk? How does that make sense? Kulaks already better than Stone.
I do agree that #1 should be finding a way to rid themselves of Brouwer.

So you're saying keep Stone at 3.5 and let Kulak at 900 walk? How does that make sense? Kulaks already better than Stone.
I do agree that #1 should be finding a way to rid themselves of Brouwer.
- K-man25

What team were you watching last year? Yeah, Stone didn't have the greatest year, but Kulak was pretty much invisible. Why does everyone all of a sudden think Kulak is better than Stone and has some hidden untapped potential?

Stone is better offensively, better defensively, is a decent penalty killer, is far more physical, and is a right handed shot.

What does Kulak excel at? The Flames were willing to give him up for nothing, and none of the 30 other teams wanted him for free. There's not a single team out there that sees this upside everyone wants to bring up. It's probably a safe bet that you're not a better judge of talent than every GM and scouting staff in the league.

I believe the 71% refers to the percentile rank among all tracked defencemen, and that blue is good, red is bad. It does not mean that he allows entries 71% of the time, but rather that Brodie is better than 71% of the defencemen tracked.
- jexponent3

But look at Giordano - his PossEntry % allowed is 28%....the point being made is the complement, Brodie enters offensively well, but he's weaker defensively
Is Giordano one of the worst for entries allowed?!

What team were you watching last year? Yeah, Stone didn't have the greatest year, but Kulak was pretty much invisible. Why does everyone all of a sudden think Kulak is better than Stone and has some hidden untapped potential?

Stone is better offensively, better defensively, is a decent penalty killer, is far more physical, and is a right handed shot.

What does Kulak excel at? The Flames were willing to give him up for nothing, and none of the 30 other teams wanted him for free. There's not a single team out there that sees this upside everyone wants to bring up. It's probably a safe bet that you're not a better judge of talent than every GM and scouting staff in the league.
- Hunkulese

Or maybe none of the 30 other teams want to go to arbitration with a player they know nothing about. Tre put Kulak on waivers when he did because he knew nobody was going to risk arbitration with him. His hearing is Monday. If you were any other GM in the League, would you reslly ne confident you could get him signed at the number you want before then?

Not wanting to go to arbitration =/= no one sees the upside.

Nobody's saying Kulak is going to be an elite defenseman in the NHL. But he was fine as a 5/6 guy who's going to be a lot cheaper than Stone is, not to mention younger and he still has room to grow.

What team were you watching last year? Yeah, Stone didn't have the greatest year, but Kulak was pretty much invisible. Why does everyone all of a sudden think Kulak is better than Stone and has some hidden untapped potential?

Stone is better offensively, better defensively, is a decent penalty killer, is far more physical, and is a right handed shot.

What does Kulak excel at? The Flames were willing to give him up for nothing, and none of the 30 other teams wanted him for free. There's not a single team out there that sees this upside everyone wants to bring up. It's probably a safe bet that you're not a better judge of talent than every GM and scouting staff in the league.
- Hunkulese

Go back to defending Brouwers value to the team.

Or maybe none of the 30 other teams want to go to arbitration with a player they know nothing about. Tre put Kulak on waivers when he did because he knew nobody was going to risk arbitration with him. His hearing is Monday. If you were any other GM in the League, would you reslly ne confident you could get him signed at the number you want before then?

Not wanting to go to arbitration =/= no one sees the upside.

Nobody's saying Kulak is going to be an elite defenseman in the NHL. But he was fine as a 5/6 guy who's going to be a lot cheaper than Stone is, not to mention younger and he still has room to grow.
- Helios

If a team thought Kulak could be a useful member of their team, it would be easy to get Kulak signed before arbitration. He's not looking for a 5 year 20 million dollar or even 10 million dollar deal. Arbitration isn't going to award him much more than a million per season, if they even give him that much, and he knows it.

He wants to play in the NHL and knows it's not looking great for that right now. He would likely have accepted any reasonable offer. He's a fringe NHLer who could disappear into nothingness if he's not playing in the NHL next year. And if he has an agent telling him he's worth 3 million a year and the arbitrator somehow agrees, you just say nope. There was zero risk for any team that claimed him.

I think it would be wise to get Hanifin locked up for 6-7 years but no way in Gods green earth will you get him under 4mill long term. It will need to be a Dougie type of deal we did where it will be around 5.5-5.75 mill per. Risky, absolutely but could be a steal in 2 years time if Hanifin progresses as we hope. Minute you put 3.5-4.0 mill numbers on the table, max. term his agent will allow him to take will be 3 years on a bridge deal. Then you could be looking at $7.0 to 8.0 mill per.
- Kevin R

Just as a guide Dumba just got 6 mil for 5 yrs and he's 2 1/2 yrs older than Noah... they were picked in just about the same spot in their respective drafts .. and their 1st 3yrs were pretty similar for G & A ...
Now Matt has really come into his own and is really good D man and looks to stay that way for some time. Do Flames take the risk of short deal w/ Noah and then have to pony up or try to lock him now into long term???

Just as a guide Dumba just got 6 mil for 5 yrs and he's 2 1/2 yrs older than Noah... they were picked in just about the same spot in their respective drafts .. and their 1st 3yrs were pretty similar for G & A ...
Now Matt has really come into his own and is really good D man and looks to stay that way for some time. Do Flames take the risk of short deal w/ Noah and then have to pony up or try to lock him now into long term???
- dozerD10

Actually if you look at Hanifin's stats in his first 3 years compared to Dumba's, Hanifins is significantly better & Dumba played on a much better team. In fact, Hanifins stats are very similar to Hamiltons first 3 years & when Flames traded for him gave him a 6 year deal at 5.75mill. per. If you could get Hanifin inked for 6 or 7 & the closer you could get that number to 5.0 (even $5.25 mill per) that could start to look good in a few years. I think Dumba's deal can help sell a longer term deal at less than what we gave Dougie.

What team were you watching last year? Yeah, Stone didn't have the greatest year, but Kulak was pretty much invisible. Why does everyone all of a sudden think Kulak is better than Stone and has some hidden untapped potential?

Stone is better offensively, better defensively, is a decent penalty killer, is far more physical, and is a right handed shot.

What does Kulak excel at? The Flames were willing to give him up for nothing, and none of the 30 other teams wanted him for free. There's not a single team out there that sees this upside everyone wants to bring up. It's probably a safe bet that you're not a better judge of talent than every GM and scouting staff in the league.
- Hunkulese

You always see the extreme negative in everything. There is nothing wrong with being a steady, unspectacular Dman, especially when it’s your 1st year in the league.
Kulak is young and still has lots of room to grow. But if you don’t see the tools he has to potentially become a lot better than your negativity, as usual, blinds you. He’s an excellent skater for starters which is a huge advantage for a Dman.
Maybe he doesn't become anything more, but keeping him around as a #6 D would be wise if he gets signed for cheap. You need guys like that.

Just as a guide Dumba just got 6 mil for 5 yrs and he's 2 1/2 yrs older than Noah... they were picked in just about the same spot in their respective drafts .. and their 1st 3yrs were pretty similar for G & A ...
Now Matt has really come into his own and is really good D man and looks to stay that way for some time. Do Flames take the risk of short deal w/ Noah and then have to pony up or try to lock him now into long term???
- dozerD10

Matt Dumba also just put up back to back career years. Good on him heading into a contract year like that, but I doubt Hanifin will put up 50 pts anytime soon.

Matt Dumba also just put up back to back career years. Good on him heading into a contract year like that, but I doubt Hanifin will put up 50 pts anytime soon.
- InSutterWeTrust

Huh??? Dumba had a career season last year with 50 points & then 34 year before & 16 year before that. Hanifin had 32, 29 & 22 points. Hanifin absolutely has a chance to hit 40+ points if he gets PP time like Peters had hinted at.

You always see the extreme negative in everything. There is nothing wrong with being a steady, unspectacular Dman, especially when it’s your 1st year in the league.
Kulak is young and still has lots of room to grow. But if you don’t see the tools he has to potentially become a lot better than your negativity, as usual, blinds you. He’s an excellent skater for starters which is a huge advantage for a Dman.
Maybe he doesn't become anything more, but keeping him around as a #6 D would be wise if he gets signed for cheap. You need guys like that.
- TandA4Flames

So you're constantly saying Stone is garbage. Positive take.

Saying Stone is more useful to the team than Kulak and I'm being blinded by my negativity? I guess it's all a conspiracy and the 31 teams that don't want Kulak are all blinded by negativity.

So you're constantly saying Stone is garbage. Positive take.

Saying Stone is more useful to the team than Kulak and I'm being blinded by my negativity? I guess it's all a conspiracy and the 31 teams that don't want Kulak are all blinded by negativity.
- Hunkulese

Kulak at $1M as a 6 or Stone at $3.5M as a 5?

Stone isn't garbage, he's also not spectacular, nor is Kulak. That's what 5/6s generally are. Both h e the ability to play a stable game in the 4 role if need be, that's really about it.

It's interesting how much value (or perception) can change on a player. Last year Stone didn't look great. Previously we praised him and said he was a #3-4 d-man playing on the 3rd line and that made our defense maybe the best top 5 in the league...alot of ppl thought it was a great signing for 3 years...

Given he's an experienced vet, I would give him some leeway to see if he has a bounceback year same with Brodie...maybe the new coach and system will be better
Not saying I wouldn't trade him if possible, but at this point, what is his value?
- cpltanto

I wasn’t a fan of the re-signing and I thought we’d be better off going with the kids;, but I thought he would do better as a #5 (nobody I take seriously thought stone was a 3-4).

I’m just saying—if the gong show in Ottawa presents ourselves with an opportunity to get some assets for Stone we should jump on it.

Kulak at $1M as a 6 or Stone at $3.5M as a 5?

Stone isn't garbage, he's also not spectacular, nor is Kulak. That's what 5/6s generally are. Both h e the ability to play a stable game in the 4 role if need be, that's really about it.
- rmull905

Stone's contract is reasonable for what he brings. The Flames just put themselves in a pickle by trading known contracts for unknown contracts and overpaying Neal. Kulak's biggest problem is he's redundant. Sure, he's young and cheap, but they have three younger cheaper guys ready to go who probably all have a higher upside. He's a left-handed shot. The Flames are packed with left-handed shots. What's Kulak bring to a team except being an unremarkable guy who can be a decent 6?

People like to bring up that the Flames need to get more physical and get harder to play against. Stone was the most physical defenceman last year and everyone they'd replace him with is much softer than he is. Stone led the defence in hits, more than twice as many as Kulak. Stone was second on the team in blocked shots, more than three times as many as Kulak. Stone's a decent penalty killer. None of the guys they're bringing in should really be penalty killing next year. Stone's a veteran presence in the dressing room. We're not in the dressing room, so no one can really say if that's a thing or not. He's a right-handed shot. I'd rather see Andersson and Valimaki on the team, but for all the reasons, Stone is probably the right choice to keep in the lineup. Add to that that Prout is likely going to be the 7th defenceman, and signed to a cheaper contract, there's really no spot for Kulak.

So you're constantly saying Stone is garbage. Positive take.

Saying Stone is more useful to the team than Kulak and I'm being blinded by my negativity? I guess it's all a conspiracy and the 31 teams that don't want Kulak are all blinded by negativity.
- Hunkulese

Actually, I’ve never said said Stone is garbage. You must be thinking of someone else. I have said he should be traded because a cheaper player in Andersson is ready and he has a higher upside. But with Hamilton being moved out and our right shooting D not as deep, I doubt Stone gets moved this year. Treliving likes his safety nets.
Nice try though, Hunk.

Stone's contract is reasonable for what he brings. The Flames just put themselves in a pickle by trading known contracts for unknown contracts and overpaying Neal. Kulak's biggest problem is he's redundant. Sure, he's young and cheap, but they have three younger cheaper guys ready to go who probably all have a higher upside. He's a left-handed shot. The Flames are packed with left-handed shots. What's Kulak bring to a team except being an unremarkable guy who can be a decent 6?

People like to bring up that the Flames need to get more physical and get harder to play against. Stone was the most physical defenceman last year and everyone they'd replace him with is much softer than he is. Stone led the defence in hits, more than twice as many as Kulak. Stone was second on the team in blocked shots, more than three times as many as Kulak. Stone's a decent penalty killer. None of the guys they're bringing in should really be penalty killing next year. Stone's a veteran presence in the dressing room. We're not in the dressing room, so no one can really say if that's a thing or not. He's a right-handed shot. I'd rather see Andersson and Valimaki on the team, but for all the reasons, Stone is probably the right choice to keep in the lineup. Add to that that Prout is likely going to be the 7th defenceman, and signed to a cheaper contract, there's really no spot for Kulak.
- Hunkulese

Flames will be fine. What these moves have done is basically forced Brouwer into a position where he has to vastly improve or he’ll be bought out. If he does improve he’ll get traded. Either way, that $4+ mil will be gone and given to Chuck and Bennett. And although I don’t believe Stone will be moved this summer, he will likely get moved next summer freeing up more $$$.
Redundant or not, you don’t just dump a serviceable Dman for nothing so long as his contract is reasonable and not hurting an ability to sign better players.
Kulak is still young, especially for a D. He can become possibly stop 4 D. I realize you like Stone, but he’s pretty redundant at this point as well. But as someone said, that’s usually what bottom pair D are. Hold their own but at a cheap cap hit.

I realize you like Stone, but he’s pretty redundant at this point as well. But as someone said, that’s usually what bottom pair D are. Hold their own but at a cheap cap hit.
- TandA4Flames

I don't like Stone, but the Flames need him. I'm not sure you know what redundant means. How many physical right-handed penalty killing defencemen do the Flames have? He fills a hole the Flames have. Would you rather see Prout as a full-time guy?

What's your argument for why Kulak should be on the team over Valimaki, Andersson, or even Kylington?

I wasn’t a fan of the re-signing and I thought we’d be better off going with the kids;, but I thought he would do better as a #5 (nobody I take seriously thought stone was a 3-4).

I’m just saying—if the gong show in Ottawa presents ourselves with an opportunity to get some assets for Stone we should jump on it.
- Saskabush

I have no problem keeping Stone around for most of the year. If the kids outplay him then he become s trade bait. If we have to retain 1 mil to get rid of him he suddenly becomes a much better deal. Always teams looking to buff up their D for playoffs.

What ever happened to Wotherspoon?

I have no problem keeping Stone around for most of the year. If the kids outplay him then he become s trade bait. If we have to retain 1 mil to get rid of him he suddenly becomes a much better deal. Always teams looking to buff up their D for playoffs.

What ever happened to Wotherspoon?
- DuranDuran

He signed a 1 year two way deal at $700K with St Louis
Guaranteed $400K if in AHL

I don't like Stone, but the Flames need him. I'm not sure you know what redundant means. How many physical right-handed penalty killing defencemen do the Flames have? He fills a hole the Flames have. Would you rather see Prout as a full-time guy?

What's your argument for why Kulak should be on the team over Valimaki, Andersson, or even Kylington?
- Hunkulese

Experience. Still cheap and being able to have guys like Kylington and Valimaki in the AHL provides us depth. If you dump Kulak, forcing one of those guys into the #6-7 spot, we lose some depth.
As I said, Andersson is ready for full time NHL shifts. He can physical as well. And we don’t need Stone to be killing penalties. We have others that can do that.

I have no problem keeping Stone around for most of the year. If the kids outplay him then he become s trade bait. If we have to retain 1 mil to get rid of him he suddenly becomes a much better deal. Always teams looking to buff up their D for playoffs.

What ever happened to Wotherspoon?
- DuranDuran

Signed with St Louis I believe.

I don't like Stone, but the Flames need him. I'm not sure you know what redundant means. How many physical right-handed penalty killing defencemen do the Flames have? He fills a hole the Flames have. Would you rather see Prout as a full-time guy?

What's your argument for why Kulak should be on the team over Valimaki, Andersson, or even Kylington?
- Hunkulese

We haven't seen any of those guys play significant time in the NHL yet. Everyone, including myself fully expects Andersson to make the team this year, but there's no guarantee he does, and even less guarantee that Valimaki or Kylington do. We know that Kulak can hold his own. We don't know about anyone else.

At the very least, keeping Kulak around ups the competition in training camp. Signing him gives us a better chance of icing the best possible roster. If one of Valimaki or Kylington come in and outplay him for a roster spot, fine. They earned it and we'll figure out what to do with Kulak later. But if they come in and Kulak looks like the best of the 3, then I have no problem with him as our #6.

If those guys make the team then they better earn it. I'm not a fan of giving away roster spots if it means the team on the ice isn't the best one we could have. If everyone legitimately earns their roster spot then we will be much better off than we would be banking on someone to be good enough.