Rumor: Kulak or Soucy : Oilers are kicking tires rumour

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,323
26,035
East Coast
To be honest, I think the Habs might value him with us vs adding a 3rd rounder which we have lots of. Basically, if you trade Kulak, you have to sign someone to replace him and the 3rd rounder is a shot at a grade B prospect?

Something tells me that Hughes would only move him for a 2nd. Otherwise, they have plans to keep him around during the rebuild years. Not sure it's worth moving him for a 3rd rounder. Unless he wants a raise which I doubt cause he's more of a journeyman 3rd pairing guy now.

Even if others move him to a depth role, there is still value in keeping him around due to injuries. 6 D plus 2 extra is the usual norm.
 

26Mats

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
32,217
24,696
An inexpensive stop gap D to fill in until some kids are ready.
A 3rd for an experienced NHL D is not good personel management. I keep Kulak

I do wonder about UFA stop gaps thisboffseason, depending on how many vet D's we move.
We absolutely can't rush the kids: Guhle, Harris, Norlinder, Xhekaj, Fairbrother, Strubble. So imo we need 7 D on top of that list ready to go...

I also wonder just how inexpensive Kulak will be after seeing what offers are out there on the open market...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tyson

MasterD

Giggidy Giggidy Goo
Jul 1, 2004
5,625
5,004
Edmundson and Romanov is decent veteran presence.

Harris will sign, and we also have Wideman

Kulak goes IMO (as long as Petry is still a Hab)
Romanov is not veteran presence at all. A good player, but not a veteran and definitely not a leader at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beer and Chips

Number 57

Registered User
Dec 21, 2004
11,656
2,284
Montreal
To be honest, I think the Habs might value him with us vs adding a 3rd rounder which we have lots of. Basically, if you trade Kulak, you have to sign someone to replace him and the 3rd rounder is a shot at a grade B prospect?

Something tells me that Hughes would only move him for a 2nd. Otherwise, they have plans to keep him around during the rebuild years. Not sure it's worth moving him for a 3rd rounder. Unless he wants a raise which I doubt cause he's more of a journeyman 3rd pairing guy now.

Even if others move him to a depth role, there is still value in keeping him around due to injuries. 6 D plus 2 extra is the usual norm.

You have Petry-Savard-Edmundson-Romanov already with Schuneman making noise and possibly some youngsters like Harris/Guhle. Not to mention Clague, Wideman and Niku.

You can also easily sign a D in free agency, including Chiarot and Kulak who could come back

I would move Kulak for a 3rd
 

Kairi Zaide

Unforgiven
Aug 11, 2009
104,901
12,291
Quebec City
If we can move him for a 3rd or better, I'd say go for it. If not, I would honestly try to keep him and re-sign him for 2 years at about the same amount.

Romanov - Kulak >>> Romanov - Kulak, and that's been the case since last season honestly. They play so well together and I think Kulak being able to cover for Romanov's weaknesses allows him to play more freely; i.e. it's great for his development.
 

Miller Time

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
23,071
15,421
You have Harris penciled in when we don't even know if he signs or is good enough. You need veteran depth.

True...
But veteran depth is relatively easy to find.

No point committing to keeping Kulak, or any other depth veteran, unless they are signing league minimum type deals bc they want to stay rather than test the market.

Too many bigger salary roster spots to address first, keeping flexibility to fill those first is far more important than paying a ufa premium to keep a guy like kulak at Ufa market price...

Not to mention the bet value of adding assets and clearing out space to evaluate other Ds in the last few weeks of a non playoff year.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad