I don't think we can say this with certainty as of yet. I can see him taking a bridge deal like the rest of his teammates have. Palat and Johnson took bridge deals, Kuch is about to take a bridge deal from the sounds of things.
Economically and from a cap standpoint it makes sense from a team that is good and stays competitive. If he has a successful season and the team goes far again in the playoffs this a great situation for him to be in no?
Look we all know he acted like a brat last year but it sounds like he had some points to why he did what he did but he handled it like a brat. I think he has matured and learned that it wasn't the right way to do things. Coop seemed to learn what he did so I think that relationship is good now.
You know what fixes relationships and builds strong ones? Winning. And for a guy like Jo I think he has a lot of pride being able to be on a winning team and helping that team win.
Like Kuch I bet he does enjoy it here and if the team keeps winning it will help team stay together. They won't want to go elsewhere. But the no instate tax does help guys make up for the change they would get elsewhere. So it kinds of works out in the end.
You could well be right; I just don't see him settling for a Palat/Johnson-like <$4M bridge deal like some of the guys on the Lightning board insist that he'll get. I think that (assuming he stays healthy and this season/postseason continues to build on what he did in the playoffs) he's too good and our cap situation too precarious for some team not to offer him either a more enticing bridge deal or a long term deal in an effort to either steal him away from us or to at least force us to lose somebody important to keep him. In the end I think he'll either be signed long term or at a minimum bridged in the high $5M range like it's looking like Kucherov might be.
Think of it this way: suppose we try to bridge him at $4M x 2 years. Another team could offer him as much as $5.6M x 2 and only give up a first and a third if we didn't match. Even for a highly risk adverse GM that's a pretty safe bet: the odds are very much in favor of Drouin outperforming or at least living up to that contract, if he does you've got an elite player at a reasonable salary for a ridiculously cheap asset cost and another two years of team control remaining once that initial contract ends, and if for some reason he underperforms that deal (say he keeps skating with his head down, gets lit up, and develops severe concussion issues) you're only on the hook for two seasons and only lost a first and a third. Drouin's potential is easily worth that risk (again, assuming he stays healthy and performs at a high level this season/postseason.) Of course the Lightning would match that offer - we aren't going to lose him that cheaply - but it would stress our financial situation further and force us to lose another top six forward, and we wouldn't have the security of having him signed to a long term deal.
That's just if somebody wants to screw with our cap situation with almost no chance of actually stealing Drouin from us, but also very little risk and high potential reward if for some crazy reason we decided not to match. If a team really wants to try to grab him from us they can offer him a long term deal at a price they hope we won't match. As with the previous scenario unless the offer were completely unreasonable we'd likely still match it, but it would once again prevent us from bridging him cheaply and cost us one of our other top six forwards in the process.
So basically I think we're going to be best off signing Drouin to a long term deal if we can at all afford to do so. I simply don't see us bridging him at a level that would allow us to keep all of our top six forwards anyway and rather than pay him in the mid to high $5M range for a couple years I'd rather throw another million in there to get him on a fixed cost long term.