I'm hoping for an 8 year deal, 6-6.5 ish would be my guess.

It’s possible, looking at his draft class, he’d definitely come in under the Sanderson 8 year cap hit.
The upside I see in a short term deal is it sets the standard (and ceiling) the rest of our young D.
An 8 year deal, with the correspondingly higher cap hit, could end up being inflationary for the cap hit of the bridge deals for the rest.
My guess is Hughes and Gorton take the bridge option, thinking about how it affects the rest of the team more than Guhle specifically.
Hughes did have his client Matheson sign an 8 year deal at a reasonable cap hit coming out of entry level.
But now he’s on the other side of the negotiating table, focused on team first, not player.
Peak earnings years are way earlier for forwards than for D.
Better to keep the cap hits for D low while he still can, while they’re still learning and developing.

My guess is closer to the Sanderson deal 8 years x 7-7.5 mil is where it ends up.

Sanderson will be if not already a #1 defenseman while Guhle is a #3 with #2 potential.
6M or 6.5M is better

IMO they should sign him long terms, 8 years deal around 6-6.5M ish. He is our best young defenseman right now and the only one who proved he can play in the NHL against other teams top line. Every other defenseman should signed bridge deals (Xhekaj/Barron this year) then Struble. Lane Hutson & David Reinbacher are the type of dman who could get long terms deal after their ELC

If we land Macklin Celebrini, we shouldn’t be signing Guentzel this offseason (and Crosby the next one)

Maintain the course

Idk I'm on the other side I guess. Lock him up for 8 years at 6-6.5 before the cap goes up and he asks for more later. 6/6.5 will look like a steal for Guhle come 2026/2027 imo and will age tremendously from there.

He probably signs at that same cap hit you guys are suggesting on a long term deal after the bridge. There’s no rush. And it sets good precedent for everyone else. Team first.

Gotta think the precedent was set with Suzuki and Caufield. Young core players will be locked up long term at reasonable cap hits. Signing someone who has a shot to wear a letter eventually to a long term deal now is still a team first approach. We're not pinched for money.

No reason to bridge Guhle …

Re: “precedent”, forwards and defensemen are different animals. So, no, one is not a precedent for the other.
With that said, I’m sure there’s a price where Hughes prefers to go long term.
I just don’t envision Guhle’s agent agreeing to the number, because his client almost certainly gets paid more in total by taking a bridge now.
But Guhle is the client, so it’s his decision. Hughes was able to get Matheson to agree that 8 years was in his best interest, so maybe he can convince both Guhle and his agent?

“No reason”….so simple minded, unable to see multiple sides…

Yeah there’s a lot of reasons why not bridge him
There’s no reason not to give him 8 years
It’s pretty obvious, do they see Kaiden Guhle has their future top pairing dman. If yes, give him 8 years. If not, bridge him but if they keep playing Matheson 25 min, we won’t know after Guhle bridge deal if he is a top pairing dman