Quoting: BOLTLOVER1
Prefer 8 year 10M deal .. settle for 5 for 9.5 .. if he takes less than 9 his agent should be SHOT .. injuries happen in this sport.. bridges are good in theory until they crash on people below.. if I Point .. ZERO chance of me caving and take it to at least December or demand trade
I would love a long-term deal as well, but we don't have the cap for that. With performance bonuses, we have pretty much under $7.5m. Point at eight years would be $9.5m, I would assume. It would be hard for him to argue for more because team comparables tend to be valued more than outside comparables, especially when it's pretty widely regarded that outside comparables like Marner were overpaid, and Point is by no means more valuable than a Hart-winner with multiple 100+ point seasons or Vezina-winner and two-time finalist. My guess for what Point would sign for is in the universe of $9.5 x 7-8, $8.5 x 6, $8 x 5, neither side wants 4, and for 1-3 it would be significantly less (probably ~$6.5m) with a backloaded contract so that his next QO has to be massive, guaranteeing that he will, eventually, make money. If we find teams to take Condon and Rutta, then we can probably get the long-term deal and I would love to see that, but who on earth wants to be dedicating over $1m of cap to an AHL backup goalie?
Maybe you would hold out if you were Point, but McAvoy and Werenski, two of the five most recent RFAs to sign, agreed to that style of a heavily discounted bridge deal and are now guaranteed $7.3m and $7m on their next contract, which, for them, is more than what they would have gotten right now long-term. Some hockey players just want the stability of a guaranteed long-term contract, but it's obviously not unheard of to do things the way BriseBois is pressuring Point right now.