Waived: Flames waive Brett Kulak

DFF

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
22,275
6,525
True. Probably worth it for a marginal guy like Kulak, but I don’t know if it would be wise for anyone you could potentially want to keep around long term


It's a business, Kulak needs the Flames more than the Flames need Kulak....it's life, some guys are treated better by the boss.

Kulak can fill in an extended time and not hurt your team so he is a good asset to have. I am glad he is still a Flames.
 

Cor

I am a bot
Jun 24, 2012
69,648
35,246
AEF
We’re the asks revealed for this case?

Hard to imagine this was necessary for someone who will likely be making a low salary this season.
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
Can they send him to the minor after training camp without waiving him again?

Not saying they will/should. He is ok as a 6th or 7th dman

Nope. He would need to be waived again during the "Playing Season Waiver Period", which begins 12 days prior to the start of the regular season.
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
Everyone's saying it was to destroy him in arbitration but I thought there was a specific set of criteria that can be used in arbitration and it doesn't appear as if "no other team wanted him on waivers" is on it.


The evidence that can be used in arbitration cases includes:
  • The player's "overall performance" including statistics in all previous seasons
  • Injuries, illnesses, and the number of games played
  • The player's length of service with the team and in the NHL
  • The player's "overall contribution" to the team's success or failure
  • The player's "special qualities of leadership or public appeal"
  • The performance and salary of any player believed to be comparable to the player in the dispute

I suspect that section is more illustrative then all-inclusive and restricting. Section (iii) spells out what isn't allowed. However it doesn't say (ii) are the only allowed topics. This interpretation is supported by the language in (i):

(i) Subject to the limitations set forth in subsection (iii) below, the parties may present whatever witnesses, affidavits, documents and other relevant evidence they choose to present at the hearing. The Salary Arbitrator, on behalf of any party, or on his own behalf, may call witnesses or request documents or other evidence as he deems necessary to resolve the dispute. The Salary Arbitrator in his discretion shall be the judge of the relevancy and materiality of the evidence offered and/or the weight, if any, to attach to any evidence and shall not be bound by any formal legal rules of evidence. All evidence shall be presented in the presence of all the parties, unless a party is in default, having failed to appear for the hearing, or has waived his right to be present. Statistical evidence asserted in a party's affirmative case must be included in such party's brief in order to be admissible.

There's no mention in (iii) of waivers being an inadmissible topic.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,185
8,337
Padded Room
I think they were 2nd or third last? And it's a well known story that Byron hit Montreal management's radar due to a YouTube video.
Montreal was 29th in waiver priority, with only the Rangers picking after them as priority was based on the 2014-15 standings.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->