Player Discussion: Brayden Point - Part 3

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,664
18,987
We'd have to give up a first at minimum. And I'd pay it without hesitation.

I don't see it happening, even with JBB in charge I don't see him altering too much from Yzerman's playbook and pure rentals are at the top of that list.

We have no chance at re-signing Hall, it'll be more than a first when a piece like Hall goes up for grabs and with big contracts coming in we need to preserve our cupboards moreso than ever.
 

CupsOverCash

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
16,531
7,297
I don't think JBB would have an issue with using the remaining cap considering we could still ice a full 23 man roster without casualty but he would definitely want more term on the deal which is completely unlikely from Point. Both sides seem to be in agreement of a bridge deal, 3 years looks to be the number. I think anyone thinking JBB won't budge on his 5.7m x 3 offer or that Point's side is being "greedy" is silly too, it's basic negotiation, a high ask and a low ball, neither side fully expects to get their ask but you wait till one side blinks to see who comes out marginally on top.

Point's side would be using market comparable and leveraging the remaining caphit arguing they'd still be under market value signing 25m~ for 3 years (8.4m) which is the most they could get in the current situation. JBB's 17m for 3 years (5.7m) is a low ball to counter the high ask. I don't think it's an offer he actually think's Point would take but you don't want to look stupid by being taken to the cleaners by an RFA bridge deal like Dubas. I think what likely happens is likely the middle point of both which would be 7.1m x 3 years but personally I see JBB caving to Point and we see something like 7.5m x 3 years.

Thats probably what ends up happening. On the report about the offer being 5.7X3 in June, it said they thought that it got raised to 7X3. I think it will end up somewhere in that range. 7-7.5, not in line with the guys of his comparables unfortunately but he would be right there with the big 3 here.
 

CupsOverCash

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
16,531
7,297
Deadline space is going to be really important. If the Devils don't make the playoffs, Hall might be had as a rental if he won't re-sign. Imagine adding Hall to this team? But we'd need like 6 in deadline space (a few ways we can get there). Could be other potential guys available at the deadline to that we'd want as rentals, but just throwing it out there.

Adding Hall to this team would be unreal. NJ is a team Im curious to see if they make the playoffs after the moves they made. I dont know if adding Subban, Simmonds and Gusev will be enough for a playoff berth but they should definitely not be a lottery team.
 

CupsOverCash

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
16,531
7,297
Wing Alex Killorn said a few teammates have kept in touch with Point throughout the process.

“He’s not on his cell phone as much as a lot of other guys — he lives more of a simple lifestyle,” Killorn said. “We know he wants to be here. It’s not about a situation of him not wanting to be here. It’s about him getting a higher number, the right number for the team.”

While Point mulls the Lightning’s three-year, $5.7 million annual average offer (which likely isn’t enough), the Lightning have shifted to an interesting Plan B. Anthony Cirelli has been centering the top line with Steven Stamkos on his wing, including in Tuesday’s 3-0 loss to Carolina in the preseason opener.

“I think Cirelli is a great guy to step up,” said Killorn, who played with Stamkos and Cirelli before leaving with a minor undisclosed injury. “He was starting to show his offensive potential, and you could see he got more comfortable. That just came with time.”
 

HoseEmDown

Registered User
Mar 25, 2012
17,538
3,754
Tell me how Marner doesn't deserve that contract based on everything else the leafs or the market has done in recent years? The basis for his contract was the easiest out of the 3 leafs players because he has the most tangible results.

6.5m is an absolute underpayment coming off a 40 goal 90 point season.

Prior to this season Point put up 0.71 ppg which averages 58 points a season. He put up 0.33 gpg which averages 27 a season. 6.5m is an overpayment on a 27g 58p player, 5.7 is more than generous considering he's an RFA. Why are we just dismissing what he did his first two seasons and just focusing on last year? You can't just call him a 40g 90p forward and that 6.5 is an underpayment. For his career he's a 0.40 gpg which is a 33g a year, 0.86 ppg which is 71p a year. 6.5m is not an absolute underpayment on a RFA with those numbers. Again we can't just go off last year only.
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,664
18,987
Prior to this season Point put up 0.71 ppg which averages 58 points a season. He put up 0.33 gpg which averages 27 a season. 6.5m is an overpayment on a 27g 58p player, 5.7 is more than generous considering he's an RFA. Why are we just dismissing what he did his first two seasons and just focusing on last year? You can't just call him a 40g 90p forward and that 6.5 is an underpayment. For his career he's a 0.40 gpg which is a 33g a year, 0.86 ppg which is 71p a year. 6.5m is not an absolute underpayment on a RFA with those numbers. Again we can't just go off last year only.

This is backwards thinking, there is significantly more value in recent production especially in young players with upwards trajectory. If you're going in with the argument that Points next 3 years should be valued on him being a 58 point player, they'd hang up and laugh. If you really believe 5.8 is generous, I assume you don't think the Lightning should match a 7m offersheet? I mean if 7m for 58 points seems like an overpayment based on what you've presented, then we should be looking for options elsewhere as that kind of production is a dime a dozen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DominicBoltsFan

CupsOverCash

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
16,531
7,297
I didn't see that. Where was it said?

I saw it in an Atlantic article where it was either Lebrun or Smith talking about Points 5.7 offer and it said right after said they thought it could have been raised to 7. Couldn't tell you which one as I saw it a few days ago. I dont have a subscription i just had a free article.
 

Byrddog

Lifer
Nov 23, 2007
7,534
845
This is backwards thinking, there is significantly more value in recent production especially in young players with upwards trajectory. If you're going in with the argument that Points next 3 years should be valued on him being a 58 point player, they'd hang up and laugh. If you really believe 5.8 is generous, I assume you don't think the Lightning should match a 7m offersheet? I mean if 7m for 58 points seems like an overpayment based on what you've presented, then we should be looking for options elsewhere as that kind of production is a dime a dozen.
Good points. A three year deal almost assures you that Point will not have another contract here after the bridge. By that time he could well garner 10 mil + with Kuch Stammer and Vasi already accounting for 27.5 mil in cap if Point were to get that 10 after the bridge you are looking at 37.5 in four players in a league where the cap going up is no guarantee. If point were to sign a long term deal at 8 mil that is still 35.5 for four players numbers that will not work out long term. What will happen you will have a one line team filled out with Ceddy Paquett's because the blueline salary is depressed right now with redemption projects and ELC's.
 

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
47,896
24,221
NB
Good points. A three year deal almost assures you that Point will not have another contract here after the bridge. By that time he could well garner 10 mil + with Kuch Stammer and Vasi already accounting for 27.5 mil in cap if Point were to get that 10 after the bridge you are looking at 37.5 in four players in a league where the cap going up is no guarantee. If point were to sign a long term deal at 8 mil that is still 35.5 for four players numbers that will not work out long term. What will happen you will have a one line team filled out with Ceddy Paquett's because the blueline salary is depressed right now with redemption projects and ELC's.

Point's not signing long-term for 8. He's above that paygrade now. Even without the Marner contract, he'd be above 8 on a long-term deal.

Bridging Point does not assure that he doesn't sign here after. He's the last core piece we'll be signing for a while. Maaaybe Sergachev will grow into a core player, but for the foreseeable future, it's: Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, and Point. Probably McDonagh too. And Vasy.

His next contract, in 2022, will be about percentage of cap hit rather than straight dollars. If he keeps playing this well, it'll be something like 11%. If the cap goes up enough that could be crazy high. If it stagnates, it could be as low as 9.5. The TV deal should push the cap up though, and Point will get a percentage similar to Stamkos and Kuch at the time of their signings.
 

Byrddog

Lifer
Nov 23, 2007
7,534
845
Point's not signing long-term for 8. He's above that paygrade now. Even without the Marner contract, he'd be above 8 on a long-term deal.

Bridging Point does not assure that he doesn't sign here after. He's the last core piece we'll be signing for a while. Maaaybe Sergachev will grow into a core player, but for the foreseeable future, it's: Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, and Point. Probably McDonagh too. And Vasy.

His next contract, in 2022, will be about percentage of cap hit rather than straight dollars. If he keeps playing this well, it'll be something like 11%. If the cap goes up enough that could be crazy high. If it stagnates, it could be as low as 9.5. The TV deal should push the cap up though, and Point will get a percentage similar to Stamkos and Kuch at the time of their signings.
I follow what you are pointing out but the numbers when combined with those already signed will not work. The team cap can not afford a 11% signing in three years and keep any resemblance of the defense McDonagh and Hedman are the only two signed thru that point. Currently after those two the highest defensemans salary is 1.75 mil. The defense portion of the cap will have to increase. At the current cap most teams are struggling to fit in three salaries above 8 mil we have three now and Hedman pushing that mark. Now U really think Point wants to play here long term or he would have signed an offer sheet. My point at the 8 mil would required him to make a concession for the team players are known to do that usually over shorter term but Point has to understand that if he wishes to stay here there is a number he can not exceed. a 64 mil contract sets him up for the rest of his life At age 23. After the contract he will have probably one more contract for three years taking him to 34 that contract would be say 9 mil giving him a lifetime earning from hockey of right at 77 million dollars. So and kids he has will never have to work either. This is the NHL not the NFL or MLB there is so many dollars to go around. And while he is a upper tier player he must understand where he fits into the organization $ wise if he wants to play here. Otherwise he could bridge and cash in in New Jersey or Arizona or Perhaps Vancouver where they will have the cap in three years without leaving holes elsewhere The Defense in Tampa is where the shortage will be.

Reguardless the guy deserves to be paid now rather than later if the bridge deal was the only thing on the table it would be done. IMO if he is not signed by Friday I doubt he will be signed before Dec 1st. After which he will not be able to play this season. If his agent has this much influence on him I can see him setting out a year. If the season starts without him he has little incentive to sign quickly and if he waits until November to sign and accepts a bridge then what has he gained? As I said before sign him and waive players to get under the cap then make the decision who to move when the time comes to give the defensemen raises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lurch

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
47,896
24,221
NB
I follow what you are pointing out but the numbers when combined with those already signed will not work. The team cap can not afford a 11% signing in three years and keep any resemblance of the defense McDonagh and Hedman are the only two signed thru that point.

Stamkos is no longer making 11%. Kucherov and Vasy won't be making 11% by 2022. Point will get something in that range because that's the low end for a star player. But, with the new TV deal, the cap could be up significantly be then. And if it's not, Point gets 9 - 9.5, which really isn't that much more than he's likely to sign on a bridge deal.

Currently after those two the highest defensemans salary is 1.75 mil. The defense portion of the cap will have to increase. At the current cap most teams are struggling to fit in three salaries above 8 mil we have three now and Hedman pushing that mark.

That's actually pretty low, considering the quality. Both Hedman and McDonagh outplayed their contracts last year.

Even so, as the cap rises, their percentage gets lower, opening up money. The year we really have to worry about losing players is next year. But it's also important to remember that every year, money comes off the books. And, every year, more NTCs loosen, and become moveable. Next year it's Killorn. Then it's Johnson and Palat. We won't always be in a position where we can't free up money.


Now U really think Point wants to play here long term or he would have signed an offer sheet. My point at the 8 mil would required him to make a concession for the team players are known to do that usually over shorter term but Point has to understand that if he wishes to stay here there is a number he can not exceed. a 64 mil contract sets him up for the rest of his life At age 23.

It also leaves tens of millions on the table. That's not an easy thing to do, regardless how much money they're talking. We can fit Point under the cap, short-term now, long-term later. It's impossible to know exactly where the cap will be, but if Point keeps playing like he did last year, he'll be a 26 year-old 1C, and Stamkos by then will be 32. Keeping Point will be Priority #1, unless some other magical prospect pops up between now and then.

After the contract he will have probably one more contract for three years taking him to 34 that contract would be say 9 mil giving him a lifetime earning from hockey of right at 77 million dollars. So and kids he has will never have to work either. This is the NHL not the NFL or MLB there is so many dollars to go around. And while he is a upper tier player he must understand where he fits into the organization $ wise if he wants to play here. Otherwise he could bridge and cash in in New Jersey or Arizona or Perhaps Vancouver where they will have the cap in three years without leaving holes elsewhere The Defense in Tampa is where the shortage will be.

Part of the beauty of a 3 year deal is he'll still be an RFA. But Stamkos's contract will be in it's last couple of years by then, and he's unlikely to be the #1C, and even more unlikely to get another raise when the current contract expires. Point's main value is he gives us a #1C beyond Stamkos's prime, which extends our window.

Reguardless the guy deserves to be paid now rather than later if the bridge deal was the only thing on the table it would be done. IMO if he is not signed by Friday I doubt he will be signed before Dec 1st. After which he will not be able to play this season. If his agent has this much influence on him I can see him setting out a year. If the season starts without him he has little incentive to sign quickly and if he waits until November to sign and accepts a bridge then what has he gained? As I said before sign him and waive players to get under the cap then make the decision who to move when the time comes to give the defensemen raises.

Friday seems like an arbitrary date. They'll keep hammering away at a deal. It probably gets done.

We don't have the money to sign him long-term. It's just not realistic to ask him to sign through his prime for 2-3m less, per year, than players he might well be better than.

But, if we bridge him now, we should have some money available in 2022. At the very least, it gives us three years to plan a way toward signing Point long-term.
 

Todd1a

Kucherov or prospect
Jun 19, 2014
17,208
3,098
orlando, fl
Point needs to take the bridge deal or we trade him and move on this is getting old. the agent knows it's going to be a 3 year deal counter offer the lightning and lets move on and sign a deal. point is not signing a 5.7 avv 3 year bridge deal! so offer a 6.7 avv 3 year deal sign it and lets move on already! The lightning can move a little higher up but about 1 million over that 5.7 is as far as I'd go by then he needs to sign the deal. JBB and Point get this over with all ready Point want's to be here and the Lightning want him here lets go already.
 

BeingTheThunder

Registered User
Jul 9, 2018
1,884
1,846
www.beingthethunder.com
Point needs to take the bridge deal or we trade him and move on this is getting old. the agent knows it's going to be a 3 year deal counter offer the lightning and lets move on and sign a deal. point is not signing a 5.7 avv 3 year bridge deal! so offer a 6.7 avv 3 year deal sign it and lets move on already! The lightning can move a little higher up but about 1 million over that 5.7 is as far as I'd go by then he needs to sign the deal. JBB and Point get this over with all ready Point want's to be here and the Lightning want him here lets go already.
LMAO Todd your lack of patience means you would make a horrible GM. Just don't have the stomach for negotiations. :laugh:
 

Krewe

Registered User
Mar 12, 2019
1,676
1,917
Jesus some of you guys sound like leaf fans. Oh no, we pay a bunch to 2 top 20 defensemen, three top 20 forwards, and a top 10 goalie, what will we ever do. That's enough to make two good lines and two good pairings with mid-level players to fill in gaps. Sh*t is gonna work out just fine stop worrying. When sergachev inevitably underperforms we can move him just like we did Drouin and some team is gonna overpay for the privilege. 40pt ELC defenseman are attractive on the market. As long as we keep cirelli and cernak (if they can continue to move forward), and a few lesser pieces, then we will be fine for the next 4-5 years at least.
 

BeingTheThunder

Registered User
Jul 9, 2018
1,884
1,846
www.beingthethunder.com
Jesus some of you guys sound like leaf fans. Oh no, we pay a bunch to 2 top 20 defensemen, three top 20 forwards, and a top 10 goalie, what will we ever do. That's enough to make two good lines and two good pairings with mid-level players to fill in gaps. Sh*t is gonna work out just fine stop worrying. When sergachev inevitably underperforms we can move him just like we did Drouin and some team is gonna overpay for the privilege. 40pt ELC defenseman are attractive on the market. As long as we keep cirelli and cernak (if they can continue to move forward), and a few lesser pieces, then we will be fine for the next 4-5 years at least.
You bite your tongue! LOL...I don't know that anyone is really freaking out like that...except maybe Todd...LOL. I agree with what you said. The sky is not falling because Point is not in camp. Frankly, we'd be a great team without him. I think we all recognize that but I think we're all hoping to have a super-team dynasty here. That's what we have at risk.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,053
29,887
I have no problem paying star players.

If anything, it should force some common sense on JBB from giving middle 6 players 5 million dollar contracts. Pay your stars, save on depth.
 

Todd1a

Kucherov or prospect
Jun 19, 2014
17,208
3,098
orlando, fl
LMAO Todd your lack of patience means you would make a horrible GM. Just don't have the stomach for negotiations. :laugh:
Lol when the puck drops in October without point maybe then you worry more! Get the deal done already we all know what it will be 3 years 6-7 per year sign it
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad