Confirmed with Link: Habs sign Brett Kulak for 3 years 1.85AAV

[Mrb1p]

The future is uncertain, it is. But perhaps you should read this:

Brett Kulak was quietly great, now it’s time to pay him what he’s worth

I don't need to read anything, Ive seen what he brought throughout the year.

It could be a good gamble if he improves though, but at twenty-six...

 

[Mrb1p]

Funny how most teams have between 3 and 5 20+ goals scorer, if any depth player that gets a lot of ice time can do it how is it possible that only 2 teams have all 6 players of their 2 first lines with 20+ goals

0 ARI
1 ANA
2 LA NJ
3 BUF DAL MIN MTL NAS NYI NYR STL VAN
4 BOS CAR CHI COL DET EDM OTT PIT
5 CGY CBS FLO PHI SJ TB VGK WPG
6
7 TOR WSH

20 goals is not something easy, Cizikas, Chiasson and Coleman are the only 3 players that got 20 goals this year that are clearly not top 6 foward

Boyle, McCann, Richardson, Rust, Sorenson, Filpulla, Vesey, Hinostroza, Virtanen, Kassian, Martinook, Sissons, Iafallo, Bonino all got more than fifteen and theyre all pretty much bottom 6'er.. A lot of them career fourth liners. (Boyle, McCann, Richardson, Iafallo, Martinook, Hinostroza...)

 

[Mrb1p]

Jeeze, I gotta go back to school. The math they taught me is outdated. Here I was thinking 20 = 20 but now I read that they've gone and changed it on me. 20=14=12 and even equals 10.

Here let me help you...
12 goals in 52 games, gives you .23 goals a game, if you use that and multiply it by 82 games, you get 19 apples !
So it's more like 20=19=16.

 

[mariolemieux66]

3 years at 1.85 a year is a good contract even if Kulak doesn't improve. He showed more than Mete.

 

[LaP]

Jeeze, I gotta go back to school. The math they taught me is outdated. Here I was thinking 20 = 20 but now I read that they've gone and changed it on me. 20=14=12 and even equals 10.

I don't know where you learned math but 20 in 82 is not the same as 20 in 50. I hate. In fact I despise when people compare the stats of a guy who played 82 games to a guy who played 60 games. It drives me crazy.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Benn certainly is better than Kulak. Im not even sure you have the cognitive capacities to remember these things anymore.

You are the last person on this board who should hurl that stone.

 

[Mrb1p]

You are the last person on this board who should hurl that stone.

I mean, I'm not the one that remembers Kulak as a top four defenseman ? He's a 7th D and anyone that thinks otherwise has serious problems.

Also, forming my own opinion and not agreeing with a hivemind doesn't make my opinion wrong, critical thinking, it's so important.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I mean, I'm not the one that remembers Kulak as a top four defenseman ? He's a 7th D and anyone that thinks otherwise has serious problems.

Also, forming my own opinion and not agreeing with a hivemind doesn't make my opinion wrong, critical thinking, it's so important.

Kulak played 2nd pairing with Petry while Benn was with Folin on the 3rd pairing. Try not to let the facts get in the way of your witch hunt. Calling Kulak a 7th D is plain obtuse and intellectually dishonest.

Furthermore, you preaching critical thinking to me is like the pope preaching critical thinking to Sam Harris.........

 

[Mrb1p]

Kulak played 2nd pairing with Petry while Benn was with Folin on the 3rd pairing. Try not to let the facts get in the way of your witch hunt. Calling Kulak a 7th D is plain obtuse and intellectually dishonest.

Furthermore, you preaching critical thinking to me is like the pope preaching critical thinking to Sam Harris.........

Damn, you must think highly of the Pope

 

[Stoneburg]

I don't need to read anything, Ive seen what he brought throughout the year.

It could be a good gamble if he improves though, but at twenty-six...

It is possible that he develops simply for the fact that he hasn't played much at the NHL level. You may be right, I may be crazy, hey those are lyrics to a song!

The author of the article uses analytics to show Kulak elevated the play of all of his partners. I know he made some glaring mistakes, but we both agree it is possible he improves.

 

[the valiant effort]

In evaluation of a player, there is no reason to harp on “mistakes”, only tendencies. Kulak never tended to make mistakes.

 

[euhchepas]

Boyle, McCann, Richardson, Rust, Sorenson, Filpulla, Vesey, Hinostroza, Virtanen, Kassian, Martinook, Sissons, Iafallo, Bonino all got more than fifteen and theyre all pretty much bottom 6'er.. A lot of them career fourth liners. (Boyle, McCann, Richardson, Iafallo, Martinook, Hinostroza...)

Boyle plays the PP and gets almost half of his production there, not a typical 4th liner

Yes bottom 6 players can sometimes put in 15 goals but pretty much never 20

Byron is a 20 goals player they aren't. 3.4M is actually below market value for 20 goals, most 20 goals players are paid close to 4M.

20 goals 20 assits is top 6 production on 25 teams in the league. Byron is a top 6 player, not a great one, a low end one but at 3.4M he's underpaid.

 

[Walrus26]

Benn has pretty much been the perfect 3rd pair D all the times hes been here, and hes exceeded some of that a few times.

What does Kulak do? Lose his coverage and rim the puck? Hes Alzner bad.

All the professional talent evaluators employed by the Habs, along with probably 95% of the amateurs who make up the HF, think the opposite to you.

Kulak is turning into a genuine steal in a return vs acquisition cost context. I'm pleased we've resigned him, especially on this reasonable deal.

 

[DAChampion]

All the professional talent evaluators employed by the Habs, along with probably 95% of the amateurs who make up the HF, think the opposite to you.

.

Irrelevant point, and not necessarily accurate regardless.

For all you know, Habs brass debated Kulak, internally, at length.

 

[Habs Icing]

Here let me help you...
12 goals in 52 games, gives you .23 goals a game, if you use that and multiply it by 82 games, you get 19 apples !
So it's more like 20=19=16.

Make believe

 

[Habs Icing]

I don't know where you learned math but 20 in 82 is not the same as 20 in 50. I hate. In fact I despise when people compare the stats of a guy who played 82 games to a guy who played 60 games. It drives me crazy.

And None of the players he mentioned scored 20 goals in 50 games. Go back and read his post. He pro-rated all those numbers. What's your freaking point?

 

[FrankMTL]

I posted in another thread that I wouldn't pay him more than 3.5 combined over two years. I guess I won't complain for $100k per year with an extra year. He turned 25 in January, so we will basically have him between the ages of 25 and 28. Those should be his prime years. Hopefully he can prove to us that last year wasn't a fluke and that he can continue to develop.

 

[BLONG7]

So, this is the end of Mike Reilly?

 

[Lshap]

Now if MB could ever get us scoring and size

Barely started reading this thread, but it begins and ends with this. Bergevin has succeeded with plenty of small details; now he desperately needs to build towards a bigger picture.

I like Kulak. Good signing. Now stop worrying about the curtains and fix the frikkin walls.

 

[Sterling Archer]

So, this is the end of Mike Reilly?

I hope so

 

[WG]

The future is uncertain, it is. But perhaps you should read this:

Brett Kulak was quietly great, now it’s time to pay him what he’s worth

Setting aside Kulak's underlying numbers (which were good) over a 57-game sample size (which gives reason for pause), the Evolving Hockey website's 'predictions' for expected salary seem way out of whack with the realities of salary cap management. From a Montreal perspective, their models predicted 3.7M for Kulak on a long term deal, about 2.6M for Weal, and 4.3M for Lekhonen.

I haven't read into their methodology, but I'm guessing the model assigns some sort of value above replacement and then just gives a dollar figure for every extra percentage point. Looking at the contract predictions for the Habs players, it seems the model makes no account for the fact that these are all average/fungible players and their contract demands would have to be tempered by the fact that they could be replaced reasonably easily.

I can just imagine the reaction here if after two years of running 10M under the cap, Bergy 'fixed' that by signing two bottom 6ers and a bottom pair D for 10M combined.

As for Kulak, I think the contract is fine. Term and AAV are good. He's tradeable if the team acquires or develops better alternatives. Given his fairly thin resume, I'd hate to take good results from 57 games and find out partway into a long term 3+M contract that it was a fluke. My only concern is that at some point, the team needs to give roster spots to guys who are or could become better than back-of-the-roster types. Resigning Kulak doesn't change the fact that the D still needs one or two legit top 4 additions.

 

[Schwang]

Kulak played 2nd pairing with Petry while Benn was with Folin on the 3rd pairing. Try not to let the facts get in the way of your witch hunt. Calling Kulak a 7th D is plain obtuse and intellectually dishonest.

Furthermore, you preaching critical thinking to me is like the pope preaching critical thinking to Sam Harris.........

Agreed. Kulak is much better than a 7th (so far). I think some people think that every team has 6 number 1 defencemen in their lineup and that’s what they expect the Habs to have.

 

[Saku K]

My predictions and hopes was that he was going to get 1.8 over 2-3 years. I'm pretty happy with this contract where almost everything went well for Kulak. I was a big fan of his performance but the question mark remains whether he can continue on what he build on the course of his 57 games or will he fall back down the lineup. He's paid to be a 5th defenseman but proved he could fill in as a 4th without stuggling with the additional ice time and responsabilities 5-on-5 on a short period of time. Solid all around defenseman, does not struggle or excel in any particular areas of the game. I'd say his best asset was steadiness in his game as you always know what you get with this defenseman. Still, it remains to be seen which way his career will go, it was only 57 games on a season where almost everything went well for him and the team.

 

[FF de Mars]

yeah imagine that 700k per year albatross if we have to buy him out or whatever nickels it is.

1% or something of your mass is significant,

 

[Pierre Dagenais]

1% or something of your mass is significant,

Not really but OK