DangerDave
Mete's Shot
Fair enough. I don't see a problem with the Kulak contract in and of itself. It'll never be an anchor of a contract by itself at 1.8M. The real problem is that we have 3 of these type of guys when 1 would have sufficed.and that's fine but it's risky to give him 3 years based off what half a good season or so. He was good in Laval as well but my point is more that they didn't need to do it, just sign him to the one year deal and if he has an even better year then it's going to cost you more but then the player is happy because he gets more money and they still could have given him a short term contract as he would still be an RFA so unless he has a really good year and holds out he's going to sign it most likely as long as the money is right.
It's simple though, you sign him and he plays well, you look smart, you sign to 3 years and he struggles and you look stupid and fans bring up Alzner and shake there head and say we need to be better.
Except none of us can know that, only that our luck with these moves has not been good these past few years. McCarron was crushing it in his rookie year in the AHL at almost a ppg, gets called up for a few games and NEVER has looked as good. I know people will just say it's because he sucks but he certainly wasn't sucking to start his AHL career. It's impossible for any of us to know what goes in a players head and how things impact their confidence, which imo confidence is a huge thing as the mental part of the game is much bigger then many around here admit to or understand imo.
some thought the leafs would take him but I don't know how they could fit him under the cap without making another move.
Not sure if you've been watching the habs lately but he's been paired with Petry again and has looked really good again. Why the coach ever split them up I'm not sure but it's working really well right now.