For them to buy it out within the window, it'd have to be a Skinner level bad deal first two years on the contract. After that he's over 25 and its a typical NHL buyout.
What's funny is, I do really like Samuelsson. I just see nothing but risk here.
Is it the end of the world he ends up being a bottom pairing NHL d-man making 4.2 M per? No.
The issue is if he ends up being a borderline NHL d-man at 4.2 and we want to spend near the cap later.
But liking the player and liking the upside doesn't change the fact this is a dumb deal.
We don't have enough game tape to show he's a top 4 NHL d-man. We have an extra season before the contract starts in which he can get injured. The rushing to sign him to a 7 year deal is what is mystifying. Barring him finding some offensive gear he hasn't had at any level of hockey, he's isn't going to get some massive deal off his ELC. This isn't a franchise center that you have to keep happy.
it's the same issue with the tage thompson contract. It's taking on risk and term when you don't have to.
IMHO, there are two cases where you should extend before the contract is over:
Pending UFA you want to keep long term. That should be sorted the offseason before the avoid drama and distraction. Get it done or move them along.
Franchise level RFA. That is a core building block, a elite level d-man, a franchise level NHL center.
With Thompson, you could make the arguement he's a core piece at least even though I think you'd like to see him repeat that production before going long term. There is risk there.
But to give a 7 year deal to a guy with less than 60 NHL games under their belt is ramping up the risk factor for minimal long term gain.