Still costs more than that to dump that terrible Campbell contract. You guys are stuck with him for a couple more seasons

I assume this assumes that Campbell will have a similar or worse year to his season last year. In that case, I'd rather just buyout Campbell and keep the 1st, 2nd, and 6th. Those assets are FAR better spent improving other areas of the roster or helping secure a more sustained period of success.

I don't think any oiler fans have ever agreed with me but,
Kulak is a 3rd pairing d. Most teams prefer to have ELCs instead of 2.5M + player. He also makes serious mistakes. I dont think he has positive value. I think it would cost you to move him.
As for Campbell, well, good luck. If he doesn't improve he's going nowhere

I agree, his buyout honestly isn't terrible.

meh, has been one of our better dman the last 2 playoffs

You're free to hold that position, especially for MTL's specific circumstances, but I don't believe the implication of your statement is accurate. Sure, teams may IDEALLY want to have their bottom-pairing cost as little as possible but most contenders rely on having proven NHL veterans (which Kulak very much has shown himself to be here in EDM) on their 3rd pairing and those usually cost notably more than ELC-level salaries. If we just look at the last few teams in the Cup Finals you see:

Vegas had Whitecloud & Hague at a combined 5mil while Florida had Gudas at 2.5mil
Colorado last year had Erik Johnson at 6mil while Tampa had Rutta at 1.3mil
The year prior had Tampa icing Rutta at 1.3mil (and Savard w/ cap retained) while MTL iced Kulak at 1.85mil

Extend it to the rest of the contenders last year, Tampa had Cole at 3mil, Boston had Forbort at 3mil, LA had Walker at 2.65mil, Dallas had Hakanpaa at 1.5mil, Johnson still had Johnson at 6mil, Carolina had Ghost at 4.5mil, New York had Mikkola at 1.9mil, and so on. Again, teams may prefer an ideal scenario where they can pay as little as possible for their 3rd pairing Dmen but I don't think reality agrees with your assertion that most teams want ELCs on their bottom pairing over proven veteran NHL Dmen.

I also disagree that Kulak is in any way uniquely predisposed to glaring mistakes; he's been nothing but steady and reliable since coming to EDM.

I think you could return a 3rd without the extra 7th imo, MTL isn't the spot for him but he's not awful. 2.75 is a bit rich for his services though, and the extra term behind it might ward off some potentially interested parties.

You’d need to add Browns bonus overages, which could be anywhere from 2.75 - 3.25. Basically just means no room for sprong or running a shortened roster again.

1 Brown would have to have a huge year to justify that.

2 No to Tanev

3 No to Francouz

Not sure why you bolded the fact I'm a Hab fan, but ok.
Your argument for more experienced 3rd pairing D makes sense for sure. I don't think you and I will agree on the quality of Kulak though. I dont remember the specific games, but I do remember he got turned and tripped over himself twice leading to goals last year. He is very bad in front of the net taking the sticks away (like he was in Mtl) and he gets outmuscled more easily compared to others. IMO it's a glaring mistake. Personally I don't think he's good enough but I can see why you would disagree.
A little more context, Mtl has had dmen that are horrible in front of their net. It cost us Price's prime and one of them was even at fault for his serious knee injury that ended his career. I notice that Edm and Mtl have the same weakness in developing their dmen to clear the front of the net.
But like I say, Edm fans don't agree with me ever.

I bolded it to make sure that point wasn't missed as that's an entirely valid view to hold for a rebuilding team filled to the brim with young LD trying to make it in the league. No toxic double-meaning or anything

I don't see Kulak as being uniquely guilty of such mistakes. Does it happen? Absolutely. Does it happen at an irregularly high rate? Not in my extensive viewings of him. There were two or three times in a short span (at the beginning of the season IIRC) where he quite dramatically tripped over himself while pivoting and trying to chase an winger in full flight but those didn't end up being signals of a coming trend, but were instead isolated instances of poor choices/execution leading to dangerous chances/goals. On the whole, he's a genuinely good skater that typically does very well defending off the rush.

As for your comment regarding his net front defense, again I don't see it how you do. I saw approximately average ability in netfront battles. Maybe his time in MTL was different. However, given you employed all of Chiarot, Weber, and Edmundson within the timeframe that Kulak played in MTL, maybe your D corps was simply above average in that respect and, by comparison, he stood out as only average (or perhaps even below average). However, even if I were to accept your assertion that he's bad net front, that's not all there is to defending. Puck retrievals, puck battles on the boards, in-zone positioning, stick positioning (whether in-zone or one the rush), puck transitions, etc are all dimensions of defensive play that matter and Kulak tends to fare well in most of them. In fact, most statistical models and microstat trackers seem to align on Kulak's strengths being in his own end.

Regarding EDM's weakness netfront, I'm not sure how much is inability of EDM's defense and how much is coached. Prior to a change in mid-to-late January, EDM Dmen had quite a tendency to chase opponents behind the net more frequently than many other teams and there seemed to be something about it that was systemic. Swapping Barrie for Ekholm certainly helped, but even just calling up Desharnais made a significant difference so maybe it was a mix of personnel and system.

you realize browns aav is 4 million if he gets his bonsuses right?

So you’re counting the bonus in? That makes more sense.

no I honestly forgot his bonus was against the cap the following year and didn't account for that

Hawks probably decline. Even w/ only 3 years left on his deal, Hawks probably want equivalent of two 1st's to take Campbell. Especially if that '24 1st is a late 1st, which it well might be.