Connor McDavid Contract Extension Does NHL, Players No Favors

The potential free agency bonanza around the Edmonton Oilers’ Connor McDavid was put on ice for another couple of years this week when the NHL superstar agreed to a two-year extension.

From the standpoint of keeping the small-market Oilers relevant, it certainly does the trick. At just $12.5 million per year, the deal allows the team the flexibility to potentially surround McDavid with enough talent to win a Stanley Cup (the team has lost the last two Finals).

In locking himself up below market value, though – the Minnesota Wild’s Kiril Kaprisov recently signed a deal worth $17 million per year – McDavid not only hampers his own earning potential, but the earning potential of the league’s other young stars, and the NHL’s ability to generate intrigue on a free agency chase (even if he’d ultimately just resign with the Oilers).

Player Empowerment And The NHL

The NHL’s salary cap, while up significantly from last season, is still just $95.5 million per team; a number well below that of the NFL and NBA, without any of the NBA’s cap workarounds for player retention.

Inherently, that number does tamp down NHL player salaries on their own. Yet, that shouldn’t take away from the league’s top talents earning what they’re worth for their teams, either. Just 20 players are making over $10 million per year this season in the NHL. By comparison, 172 players are making over $10 million in the NBA.

For as much as the cap factors in there ($10 million is 10.5% of a given team’s salary), these salaries are also artificially held down by deals like McDavid’s – especially coming on the heels of Kaprisov’s, immediately undoing the progress such a deal provides for.

Star players also don’t move around in the NHL as much as they do in other leagues, further undermining players’ leverage (while McDavid also undermined his own here). Of the 12 players named to the first and second NHL All-Star teams at the conclusion of last season, 11 were with the team that drafted them.

The idea that Kaprisov could be interested in the big-market New York Rangers before his extension with the Wild was an effective bargaining chip. Ultimately, though, that’s all it was. But the league loses out on wider fan interest by not having the larger threat of player movement, as other leagues (especially the NBA) have. Partly because the players themselves are removing their own mechanisms for larger paydays that spur more movement by default.

Would-Be McDavid Sweepstakes

According to SporTrac right now, 21 teams have at least $25 million in salary cap space going into next offseason, in part due to the hope that a McDavid sweepstakes could occur – prior to him signing his short-term extension.

Considering the limited fervor around NHL free agency most years, just the idea of the pursuit could’ve sparked weeks of rumor mill reports, offseason coverage and excitement that would’ve given the league an extra jolt.

The same thing could happen at the end of this extension in 2028, too. But even if he was going to stay with Edmonton, the league and McDavid’s fellow players all benefit from the idea that he could go elsewhere as a point of intrigue.

And as the league comes up on the end of its current U.S. TV rights deal (concludes when McDavid’s new contract does, in 2028), generating increased audience interest in 2026 is more valuable than it is in 2028, when the ink’s already dry on a new media contract.

Bigger Market Benefit?

The NHL also sits in a precarious spot around its smaller and non-U.S. markets, much as the NBA does.

On the one hand, having star players in smaller and/or Canadian markets helps the overall product, since it doesn’t concentrate fan interest and competitiveness on a handful of large U.S. cities. However, lacking those players in big markets also hurts, since the NHL potentially loses would-be casual viewers in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and Los Angeles (among other markets) if their team isn’t competing at the top of the league.

Being able to sell big-market team success is beneficial when it comes to TV negotiations. Having a large collection of small-market teams is less so. It’s why the Rangers and Chicago Blackhawks both have 15-plus games on U.S. national TV this season, despite missing the playoffs last year. All while the Ottawa Senators and Winnipeg Jets, which both made the postseason, have zero.

McDavid’s Oilers are on TV 16 times, so the team’s success as a result of his play is being recognized. But fans ultimately want to see him play. And they’d arguably want to see him even more if he was playing on a big market team, which would also open up new marketing opportunities to make him a more recognizable face within the U.S. sports landscape.

Ultimately, McDavid doesn’t need to play elsewhere to help himself, the league or his fellow players. If his Oilers win several Cups with him at the helm, a rising tide potentially lifts all boats.

However, the best possible outcome for the NHL (not the team owners, mind you) and NHLPA is almost certainly him maximizing his value with a hefty contract, no matter which team signs him to it.