What will Sam Bennett get?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

You think Bennett wouldn't accept a 6 year contract under 5M but think he should accept a 2 year contract for 2M a year?

Year 1: 2
Year 2: 2
Year 3: 6.5
Year 4: 6.5
Year 5: 6.5
Year 6: 6.5
AAV: 5M

He'd have to make at least 6.5M a year to make up the difference if he signed a bridge contract for 2M a year. Those include mostly RFA years, and he'd be a UFA at 28. You're right that Bennett won't get a long term contract worth 5M, but that's because it's Treliving who won't put it on the table. His agent would have to make a blood sacrifice to Satan to even have this contract considered.

If the Flames wanted to pay Bennett $5M per it is not a 6 year deal being tabled. To me it would have to be 8 years. Max UFA years bought to overpay him more than twice what he deserves per season.

I think Bennett should be looking for a 1-2 year deal between 2-3M per. He will be an rfa again at 23/24 and should be able to sign a monster contract at that time.

The McDavid extension impacted RFA deals imo. That is why you hear about Johannsen pushing for $8.5M coming off a 60pt season. Draisaitl rumors are anywhere from 7-9M per.

Last summer Gaudreau, Monahan, Schiefele, Mackinnon all signed between 6-7M.

There are rumors offer sheets will inevitably become common as the UFA pool is thin and teams face a cap crunch. In 2 years if wouldn't shock me to see both Bennett and Tkachuk demand contracts that would make them the highest paid Flames

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

It wouldn't shock me if a 2 year deal isn't even on the table from the Flames side. It makes very little sense from a cap management point of view.

I see this deal as being 3 years or longer, which means yes - the cap hit may be slightly higher based on what he did last year, but likely a steal going forward.

I honestly don't see why Bennett would sing a long term deal at a steal for the flames. I can see the value from the flames point of view, but not from bennetts.
it's been argued that he's the most talented player on the team and could be the most dedicated to get better.

why wouldn't bet on himself and push for a 2 year bridge deal and then make significantly higher coin after that time when he breaks out?

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I honestly don't see why Bennett would sing a long term deal at a steal for the flames. I can see the value from the flames point of view, but not from bennetts.
it's been argued that he's the most talented player on the team and could be the most dedicated to get better.

why wouldn't bet on himself and push for a 2 year bridge deal and then make significantly higher coin after that time when he breaks out?

I wouldn't call 3 years a long deal, it's just a slightly longer bridge - but yes, you likely need to pay a bit extra to get that 3rd year.

If you want to go longer than that, like say - a 5 year deal, then the whole idea is you overpay early ("overpay" based on last year's performance) to underpay later. It balances out.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

If you want to go longer than that, like say - a 5 year deal

There's no way he should be getting a 5 year deal. It would bring him to UFA.

1-3, 7-8 are probably the only years being considered at all in my opinion, with very likely a bridge contract ending up being signed.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by bax

Of course. When you were arguing the Flames shouldn't be paying for potential I thought your argument was that the Flames wouldn't touch a long term deal for Bennett, which I don't think would be the case.

There is obviously risk for both sides, but 28-30 million in guaranteed money isn't anything to turn your nose at. Some players would prefer to just get that stability. Arvidsson just did it.

I don't disagree with your points but both Josi and Ardvisson are were not top 5 picks. They also had far more impressive seasons prior to getting paid than Bennett did.

The reason I don't think the Flames would take the risk eithernis not to set a precedent with prospects. Johnny and Monahan earned their extensions based off their play prior to the extensions coupled with their potential. I already feel the Flames made a mistake holding Gaudreau to the Gio cap and not spending a few more bucks to buy the next 2 years of free agency.

I can't see Treliving paying Bennett $5M a year based off what he has done to date. As a Flames fan and a big supporter of Bennett an 8 year $40M deal would be excellent from my perspective. I just don't see the organization considering it as it would set a standard with future RFA's that they should be paid on potential and not what they have accomplished.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I wouldn't call 3 years a long deal, it's just a slightly longer bridge - but yes, you likely need to pay a bit extra to get that 3rd year.

If you want to go longer than that, like say - a 5 year deal, then the whole idea is you overpay early ("overpay" based on last year's performance) to underpay later. It balances out.

if Bennett does break out and get at least one 70 point season, then he'd be in line to make 7 million a year. or more.
if he signed for 5 per year, he'd lose out on a fair bit of cash.

gaudreau got 6.75 with no leverage. a strong two way centre who can get 70 points the way contracts are going? he has some serious earning potential that he'd be silly to give up.

[dino7c]

70 points is a long way from 26

[3rd Degree]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

if Bennett does break out and get at least one 70 point season, then he'd be in line to make 7 million a year. or more.
if he signed for 5 per year, he'd lose out on a fair bit of cash.

gaudreau got 6.75 with no leverage. a strong two way centre who can get 70 points the way contracts are going? he has some serious earning potential that he'd be silly to give up.

What if he doesn't reach his potential or gets severely injured and never has a 70 point season? He would have given up over 30 million dollars. Is the risk worth the reward? I think a long term deal makes the most sense for both sides, the only issue is the aav . A 7-8 year deal worth around 4.5M would be fair. You can massage the term and the aav but I think this is a reasonable ballpark. It's win win. The team gets long term cost certainty while taking on the risk that Bennett doesn't reach his potential and Bennett gets set for life while mitigating the risk of injury or not reaching his potential. Using the slow start to his career to lower his cap hit long term is good business in a cap system. It could be called a front diving contract. Wasting two cheap years on a bridge deal when they don't need the cap space and forgoing the benefit of using them to drive his cap hit down long term makes no sense to me. If the flames BELIEVE IN BENNETT, sign him long term now. It's likely Tkachuk will command a MASSIVE contract in two years. Getting Bennett locked up cheap will help to offset Tkachuk's price.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

if Bennett does break out and get at least one 70 point season, then he'd be in line to make 7 million a year. or more.
if he signed for 5 per year, he'd lose out on a fair bit of cash.

gaudreau got 6.75 with no leverage. a strong two way centre who can get 70 points the way contracts are going? he has some serious earning potential that he'd be silly to give up.

I like the optimism, but Bennett is neither a strong two-way center or a 70 point one. Hell, he's not even a center. He could be, sure, I guess, but right now he's coming off a 26 point season.

Sure, if he believes in himself it might be best to take a two-year bridge contract and I wouldn't blame him. I also wouldn't blame Flames management if they didn't want to risk a huge contract on such an unproven commodity, so I do believe bridge makes most sense. But Bennett turning down a long-term ~30-40M type of contract could easily end up being the biggest mistake of his life even if he ends up being a respectable 50 point player. Forget about busting or injuries.

There's also the fact that a long-term contract in that ~7 year range would allow him to enter unrestricted free agency in his prime. He would be in the best scenario for a huge contract at that point, so a long-term contract wouldn't even be betting against himself. It would provide security for now, allow the Flames to bring in better players to surround him, and allow him to enter UFA in an absolute fantastic position as a 28 year old, prime for that actual huge contract if he does end up hitting the peak you are suggestion.

[Cgycowboy]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I like the optimism, but Bennett is neither a strong two-way center or a 70 point one. Hell, he's not even a center. He could be, sure, I guess, but right now he's coming off a 26 point season.

Sure, if he believes in himself it might be best to take a two-year bridge contract and I wouldn't blame him. I also wouldn't blame Flames management if they didn't want to risk a huge contract on such an unproven commodity, so I do believe bridge makes most sense. But Bennett turning down a long-term ~30-40M type of contract could easily end up being the biggest mistake of his life even if he ends up being a respectable 50 point player. Forget about busting or injuries.

There's also the fact that a long-term contract in that ~7 year range would allow him to enter unrestricted free agency in his prime. He would be in the best scenario for a huge contract at that point, so a long-term contract wouldn't even be betting against himself. It would provide security for now, allow the Flames to bring in better players to surround him, and allow him to enter UFA in an absolute fantastic position as a 28 year old, prime for that actual huge contract if he does end up hitting the peak you are suggestion.

Couldn't have said this better. Also didn't want to type that much

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

if Bennett does break out and get at least one 70 point season, then he'd be in line to make 7 million a year. or more.
if he signed for 5 per year, he'd lose out on a fair bit of cash.

gaudreau got 6.75 with no leverage. a strong two way centre who can get 70 points the way contracts are going? he has some serious earning potential that he'd be silly to give up.

Gaudreau had 3x the points that Bennett had, so he had way more leverage than Bennett.

[Samonadreau]

It's early yet so no need to worry too much but I wonder where both sides are for ask/offer. You would think if they were both interested in a.bridge it would be close or done by now. Obviously not that simple but I think there are enough comparables to come to terms at a 2 or 3 year deal. It could even be that - one side is at 2 years the other at 3.

Hopefully we see something soon.

[Wyguy]

I see Bennett making about the max I would give him right now, 2.55m per year. I would love to see him slide up to right wing of the first line so that we can slide Jank into Bennetts spot, but I don't see them doing that. My main reason for that is because we already have a solid first line centre, and our 3M line is doing very well, so that means that Bennett won't get as many chances or time playing third line, so if we move him up to 1st line as a winger, he gets much more time and then I expect him to get 65+ points, if he doesn't get that then we should look at a trade before his value plummets.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Wyguy

I see Bennett making about the max I would give him right now, 2.55m per year. I would love to see him slide up to right wing of the first line so that we can slide Jank into Bennetts spot, but I don't see them doing that. My main reason for that is because we already have a solid first line centre, and our 3M line is doing very well, so that means that Bennett won't get as many chances or time playing third line, so if we move him up to 1st line as a winger, he gets much more time and then I expect him to get 65+ points, if he doesn't get that then we should look at a trade before his value plummets.

Strictly speaking Monahan hasn't proven he is on the level of Seguin, Scheifele, Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Stamkos, RyJo, Eichel, Matthews, etc to the point where we should give up trying to develop someone who could well be better than him in that role. Bailing on Bennett so soon would be foolish given how middling Monahan is relative to the competition. It's possible Monahan elevates his game to the levels of the above guys, but just as possible Bennett overtakes him as he finds his strength and offensive confidence.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Strictly speaking Monahan hasn't proven he is on the level of Seguin, Scheifele, Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Stamkos, RyJo, Eichel, Matthews, etc to the point where we should give up trying to develop someone who could well be better than him in that role. Bailing on Bennett so soon would be foolish given how middling Monahan is relative to the competition. It's possible Monahan elevates his game to the levels of the above guys, but just as possible Bennett overtakes him as he finds his strength and offensive confidence.

Monahan ain't flashy, won't wow you wtih speed/dekes/etc (like a seguin, getzlaf, etc), won't wow you in the ability to seemingly take a team on his shoulders (toews, kopitar, getzlaf), but here's a list of the top centers in the league point wise over the last 3 seasons:

1. Crosby (108,150,258)
2. Backstrom (61, 173, 234)
3. Tavares (99, 123, 222)
4. Seguin (96,126, 222)
5. Pavelski (104,112, 216)
6. Getlaf (53, 153, 206)
7. Malkin (88,112,200)
8. Giroux (61,137,198)
9. Thornton (42,155,197)
10. Scheifele (76, 116, 192)
11. Johansen (54, 138,192)
12. Carter (84, 106,190)
13. Kopitar (53, 137, 190)
14. Monahan (85,98, 183)
15. Toews (77, 105, 182)
16. Sedin (44,134, 178)
17. Bergeron (76, 100, 176)
18. Spezza (65, 110, 175)
19. Kuznetsov (50, 123, 173)
20. O'Reilly (58, 112, 170)


He's right up there with the Kopitars, toews, and in the top 14 Centers in points in the leauge. If we look at goals, he's got the 7th heighest total among this list over the last 3 years.

As far as i'm concerned, a "bonafide #1C" is not the biggest gap on this team. Having a solid scoring 1-2 punch from C is what is needed, amongst other things (starting goaltending, some physical presence that can contribute, etc). Monahan is just fine as our #1 Center.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Strictly speaking Monahan hasn't proven he is on the level of Seguin, Scheifele, Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Stamkos, RyJo, Eichel, Matthews, etc to the point where we should give up trying to develop someone who could well be better than him in that role. Bailing on Bennett so soon would be foolish given how middling Monahan is relative to the competition. It's possible Monahan elevates his game to the levels of the above guys, but just as possible Bennett overtakes him as he finds his strength and offensive confidence.

"Middling."

[TheScorpion]

I mean, he sorta is in the middle of that picture, Textcritic.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

...If we look at goals, he's got the 7th heighest total among this list over the last 3 years...

Sixth highest goal-scoring total.

[the2bears]

Is "middling" a type of "halfling"? LotR reference?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

It's early yet so no need to worry too much but I wonder where both sides are for ask/offer. You would think if they were both interested in a.bridge it would be close or done by now. Obviously not that simple but I think there are enough comparables to come to terms at a 2 or 3 year deal. It could even be that - one side is at 2 years the other at 3.

Hopefully we see something soon.

It's not early though.

Yes there is plenty of time to get a deal done, but at this point it's looking very much like it will come down to a pressure point before anything happens.

Someone needs to blink first and knowing the way Treliving operates, it isn't likely to be the Flames.

Look at it this way;

They have had 104 days to get a deal done since the season ended.

They have 43 days (IIRC) before training camp starts.