Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
At some point, the actual dollars matter though. Bennett has not earned a $32 million contract nor should a team make that kind of commitment to him. He is going to get about $5 million.
|
Yes, there is significant risk here both for the team and the player. He could end up being a 4th liner (highly unlikely), or he could end up being a 1C. But when you look at the balance of probabilities, it is much more likely that he will be worth more than $4M in several years. And there's also risk for both sides in signing a shorter contract; if he ends up being a 4th liner after 2 years, it will cost him a lot, and if he ends up being a top 6 C, it will cost the Flames $7-8M/year to renew, with the overall cost of the contracts ending up much higher. I like bridge deals when you don't know what you've got, but I think the Flames have a pretty good idea in this case.
I think it's much more likely that Bennett will be the one avoiding signing a long-term contract, because he (and likely the Flames management, as well) probably believes that he will make great strides in the next two years, garnering a much more lucrative deal next time he signs. In reality, a bridge deal will likely provide much more benefit for the player than for the team.
Just to throw some numbers out to illustrate, say he signs for 2 X 2.5, then the next contract is (for a very conservative estimate, considering typical annual salary escalation) 6 X 6, that's a total of 41M. All of a sudden, 32M doesn't look all that bad.
I honestly think Bennett will in the long run be better than Backlund (who also took a bit more time to develop, but is somewhat less offensively skilled). Who here would complain if we signed Backlund for 4M per year?