A couple things to consider.
Bunting's extension could easily come prior to Matthews extension, as Bunting can resign at the current moment whereas Matthews will have to wait until the offseason to even begin negotiating an extension. So the idea that "if Matty does not leave a penny on the table, why would/should Bunts" may not even be a factor if Bunts signs beforehand. By a recent report tweet from Pierre LeBrun, the Maple Leafs seem to be trying to do just that:
secondly, Michael Bunting, Although a LW1 on our team, is not an LW1 in all situations around the league. He will be paid accordingly as a result. Certainly he most likely could get more money away from Toronto. But that cannot be what we chase. If he is unwilling to sign a team friendly deal, we need to move on. I am sure we can find another player who would be more then willing to play with Auston/Mitch/Willy on that left side.
For the record, I would have no problem with Bunting doing that. He's earned the right to explore free agency should he choose. But similar to Hyman, we have to have a number that makes sense for us near and far. As a complimentary player to our core, albeit very important complementary player, Bunting is expendable.
Just as much as it stung when Hyms left, it will sting to see Bunts go. But that's just business. If he cannot take a team friendly deal he unfortunately has to go. If he wants to be a Leaf, and by all accounts he does, I don't see how he wouldn't be open minded to a team friendly deal with term. This was a guy who was in the AHL as recent as 2 years ago. Anything under 4AAV makes sense to me TBH. But like I said, I suspect 7 x 3.5AAV personally.
Maybe I am naïve, but Bunts is no where near the caliber of player Hyman is currently and was when Zach entered UFA. Their contracts shouldn't be anywhere close to the same IMO
