Todd Cordell: Defending the line could again be an issue for Calgary's 2nd pairing

read this yesterday?

Kulak cleared waivers

I see Kulak clears waivers. Probably only reason this was done by Tre is because Kulaks camp were probably stuck on at least a 2-3 year deal, I doubt the $$$ difference was the issue & need to put him on waivers. With Valamki & Kyllington ready & chomping at the gate, Tre wanted to ensure he has the leverage to just do 1 year.
I dont get why Stone hasnt moved yet. Wish Hanifin deal gets done soon. If he gets a bridge I suspect Stone stays but if Hanifin gets a longer term deal, Stone's 3.5 mill needs to go. I see him blocking Andersson spot in the lineup as well. Its pi$$ing me off.

I’m pretty shocked Kulak cleared. Young NHL talent with some decent upside.

I see Kulak clears waivers. Probably only reason this was done by Tre is because Kulaks camp were probably stuck on at least a 2-3 year deal, I doubt the $$$ difference was the issue & need to put him on waivers. With Valamki & Kyllington ready & chomping at the gate, Tre wanted to ensure he has the leverage to just do 1 year.
I dont get why Stone hasnt moved yet. Wish Hanifin deal gets done soon. If he gets a bridge I suspect Stone stays but if Hanifin gets a longer term deal, Stone's 3.5 mill needs to go. I see him blocking Andersson spot in the lineup as well. Its pi$$ing me off.
- Kevin R

I would want to give Kulak a 2 year deal. It would give CGY flexibility next summer if they feel one of Kylington or Valimaki is ready for sure next year. You can always trade him, waive him again or even buy him out. His contract won’t be too big to do either. And if he takes a big step forward, a decent trade would be nice.
I doubt Stone gets moved now. We won’t need the cap space this year and he would be a decent guy as the #7 D. Insurance in case Rasmus has some hiccups throughout this season.

I see Kulak clears waivers. Probably only reason this was done by Tre is because Kulaks camp were probably stuck on at least a 2-3 year deal, I doubt the $$$ difference was the issue & need to put him on waivers. With Valamki & Kyllington ready & chomping at the gate, Tre wanted to ensure he has the leverage to just do 1 year.
I dont get why Stone hasnt moved yet. Wish Hanifin deal gets done soon. If he gets a bridge I suspect Stone stays but if Hanifin gets a longer term deal, Stone's 3.5 mill needs to go. I see him blocking Andersson spot in the lineup as well. Its pi$$ing me off.
- Kevin R

Stones not going anywhere this year and thats not a bad thing, im definitely not a fan of him but he is a decent vet and him paired with valimaki/andersson should be the third pairing to start the season. I think i would be more uneasy with a Valimaki-Andersson pairing to start the season.

Atleast go to the trade deadline and if those two player out play him then make them the third pairing going forward and sit him on the bench for playoff depth.

It also gives Tre an easier time trying to trade him next off season with 1 year remaining instead of buying him out and making him count against the cap for another year.

Getting rid of Brouwer should be the main thing for Tre to do after all the RFA's are signed.

Stones not going anywhere this year and thats not a bad thing, im definitely not a fan of him but he is a decent vet and him paired with valimaki/andersson should be the third pairing to start the season. I think i would be more uneasy with a Valimaki-Andersson pairing to start the season.

Atleast go to the trade deadline and if those two player out play him then make them the third pairing going forward and sit him on the bench for playoff depth.

It also gives Tre an easier time trying to trade him next off season with 1 year remaining instead of buying him out and making him count against the cap for another year.

Getting rid of Brouwer should be the main thing for Tre to do after all the RFA's are signed.

I'm not buying this argument any more. Stone played 3rd pairing minutes with Kulak (it's not like Kulak is an anchor out there) and we got sweet (frank) all out of Stone all year long.

I was ready for a Kulak-Anderson pairing last year, I definitely don't want to see him in the AHL again next year. I accepted the argument that having Stone at #5 was good for the kids development & "SHOULD" have given us the best top 5 in the league. That never happened, even with Stone playing against lesser competition every night.

A good argument could be made that we have 4 defensman in the system who could bring more to the team on a nightly basis than Stone (Anderson, Valimaki, Kylington and Kulak).

If we can take advantage of the situation in Ottawa AND rid ourselves of Stone, pull the damn trigger!

I expect, given the current cap hit we carry, and with the need to sign Tckachuk and likely Bennett next summer, Brouwer will be bout our our next summer if he can’t be traded. Stone will likely get traded next summer too.

I'm not buying this argument any more. Stone played 3rd pairing minutes with Kulak (it's not like Kulak is an anchor out there) and we got sweet (frank) all out of Stone all year long.

I was ready for a Kulak-Anderson pairing last year, I definitely don't want to see him in the AHL again next year. I accepted the argument that having Stone at #5 was good for the kids development & "SHOULD" have given us the best top 5 in the league. That never happened, even with Stone playing against lesser competition every night.

A good argument could be made that we have 4 defensman in the system who could bring more to the team on a nightly basis than Stone (Anderson, Valimaki, Kylington and Kulak).

If we can take advantage of the situation in Ottawa AND rid ourselves of Stone, pull the damn trigger!
- Saskabush

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.

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

I guess my only point about Stone is that he is a RH D & so is Andersson. Hamonic & Brodie on the right side already & Gio & Hanifin on the left side. Not sure spotting Stone in the press box as the #7 is the answer, you are wasting cap & devaluing him even more. Just saying. Also, it makes signing Hanifin to a long term deal very difficult having Stone here.

I would want to give Kulak a 2 year deal. It would give CGY flexibility next summer if they feel one of Kylington or Valimaki is ready for sure next year. You can always trade him, waive him again or even buy him out. His contract won’t be too big to do either. And if he takes a big step forward, a decent trade would be nice.
I doubt Stone gets moved now. We won’t need the cap space this year and he would be a decent guy as the #7 D. Insurance in case Rasmus has some hiccups throughout this season.
- TandA4Flames

With Peters & Huska coaching, I think there is a good chance they wont be afraid to pair a few young guys in that 5-6 position as develop them here on the fly.

It’ll be exciting to watch Noah Dobson and Ruslan Ishakov vs Travis Hamonic and see who really won that trade over the next 6-7 years. I definitely think Hanifin and Lindholm for Hamilton is a steal for the Flames.

I guess my only point about Stone is that he is a RH D & so is Andersson. Hamonic & Brodie on the right side already & Gio & Hanifin on the left side. Not sure spotting Stone in the press box as the #7 is the answer, you are wasting cap & devaluing him even more. Just saying. Also, it makes signing Hanifin to a long term deal very difficult having Stone here.
- Kevin R

How does it make signing hanifin to a long term deal VERY difficult? hes most likely getting a bridge deal and if he does get a long term deal it wont be over 4 Mil. Next year with Smith off the books and Stone and Brouwer with only 1 year left which makes it easier to trade or buyout them out next year you will easily have money left to fit his contract in and give Tkachuk a hefty raise.

Go through Cap Friendly and throw things around and you will see its not as difficult as you think.

Stone is absolute trash, he shouldn't play a single game. Kulak Andersson and Valimaki are all better options than him. Unfortunately since he's the vet he'll continue to block our younger more talented players from making the lineup until his contract is up

Stone is absolute trash, he shouldn't play a single game. Kulak Andersson and Valimaki are all better options than him. Unfortunately since he's the vet he'll continue to block our younger more talented players from making the lineup until his contract is up
- FLAM3SFAN

Kulak doesnt belong in the same conversation as Valimaki/andersson or even Kylington.

How does it make signing hanifin to a long term deal VERY difficult? hes most likely getting a bridge deal and if he does get a long term deal it wont be over 4 Mil. Next year with Smith off the books and Stone and Brouwer with only 1 year left which makes it easier to trade or buyout them out next year you will easily have money left to fit his contract in and give Tkachuk a hefty raise.

Go through Cap Friendly and throw things around and you will see its not as difficult as you think.
- shayne

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.

I’m pretty shocked Kulak cleared. Young NHL talent with some decent upside.
- TandA4Flames

Who exactly needs a 6th/7th defender who is just good enough to not be in the AHL. All teams are loaded with guys like that. I'm shocked at the number of people that watched Kulak last year and thought he was anything more than meh.

What's his upside? 5th on the depth chart? There's no reason to expect his career to be any better than Adam Pardy's.

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

-They're trying to trade away a generational talent at the moment, maybe have some patience with some of the other moves they'll need to make?

-We may very well have to keep Stone, but it sounds like you would want to keep him around even if we were to get an offer. Why? Call me crazy, but I would like to try this radical new thing where we ice the best team possible. Stone doesn't make the cut IMO. People put way too much value in "experience".

-We insulated our young players with vets last year too and it didn't help us out at all. Our young players ended up being our best players on the team and the vets we kept around (Stone, Bartkowski, Brouwer, Stajan, etc.) performed worse than some of our replacement players in Stockton.

-We would rather keep Kulak because he is younger, cheaper and arguably a better dman than Stone.

-Stone is Russell 2.0. He got the "defensive defenseman" label by constantly playing in his own end, just like Russell.

He's just a little bigger & meaner and has a harder shot.

Am I reading those charts right?
Is TJ Brodie THAT bad at allowing zone entries? 71%??????

-They're trying to trade away a generational talent at the moment, maybe have some patience with some of the other moves they'll need to make?

-We may very well have to keep Stone, but it sounds like you would want to keep him around even if we were to get an offer. Why? Call me crazy, but I would like to try this radical new thing where we ice the best team possible. Stone doesn't make the cut IMO. People put way too much value in "experience".

-We insulated our young players with vets last year too and it didn't help us out at all. Our young players ended up being our best players on the team and the vets we kept around (Stone, Bartkowski, Brouwer, Stajan, etc.) performed worse than some of our replacement players in Stockton.

-We would rather keep Kulak because he is younger, cheaper and arguably a better dman than Stone.

-Stone is Russell 2.0. He got the "defensive defenseman" label by constantly playing in his own end, just like Russell.

He's just a little bigger & meaner and has a harder shot.
- Saskabush

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?

-They're trying to trade away a generational talent at the moment, maybe have some patience with some of the other moves they'll need to make?

-We may very well have to keep Stone, but it sounds like you would want to keep him around even if we were to get an offer. Why? Call me crazy, but I would like to try this radical new thing where we ice the best team possible. Stone doesn't make the cut IMO. People put way too much value in "experience".

-We insulated our young players with vets last year too and it didn't help us out at all. Our young players ended up being our best players on the team and the vets we kept around (Stone, Bartkowski, Brouwer, Stajan, etc.) performed worse than some of our replacement players in Stockton.

-We would rather keep Kulak because he is younger, cheaper and arguably a better dman than Stone.

-Stone is Russell 2.0. He got the "defensive defenseman" label by constantly playing in his own end, just like Russell.

He's just a little bigger & meaner and has a harder shot.
- Saskabush

You need to scroll up and read, I don’t like stone either. If Ottawa wanted him that bad then he would be there already. There’s also no point in giving him up for pennies when you could use him as depth. If Andersson and Valimaki do push for spots then you will have 3 dmen 21 and under and 2 of them who have basically no experience.

I want Andersson and Valimaki to play as much as any other flames fan but they also need to show they are ready. It doesn’t hurt keeping stone around for one year and see if he could bounce back. We don’t need cap space that bad yet and if his brother only signs a one year then he’s a UFA next year and maybe he would come to Calgary to play with his bro.

We wouldn’t be able to afford the other Stone now.

Am I reading those charts right?
Is TJ Brodie THAT bad at allowing zone entries? 71%??????
- cpltanto

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.

We wouldn’t be able to afford the other Stone now.
- TandA4Flames

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 .