10 comparables and benchmarks to help determine what Elias Pettersson’s next contract will look like

Photo credit:© Perry Nelson-USA TODAY Sports

3 years ago

The biggest topic of conversation off the ice for the Vancouver Canucks for the next year will center around their two most important players: Elias Pettersson and Quinn Hughes. The two crucial pieces will be due for their second contracts, which in turn, could shape the next decade for the Vancouver Canucks.

With the amount of importance on those two signings, I thought it would be fun to explore what they could be in line to make (believe it or not I don’t have any influence over these decisions) both term and dollars wise. In this article, I’ll only be looking at Pettersson, but I will have a similar piece out for Hughes in the coming days.

I will be looking at some contracts that star centers have signed in the past decade, and how that relates to what Pettersson will be making. The issue with this exercise is that there are never really direct comparables for a given player, especially when they play at the level of Pettersson. With that in mind, I will begrudgingly be using math to try to figure this out, along with a long list of players that may be a little bit better or worse than Pettersson, though generally in the same tier.

I’ll have a few requirements when seeking comparables:

The player must have been drafted in any draft from 2008 onwards. This way, their second contract came in the last decade.
The player must have been selected within the top 10 picks in their draft year. This rule is a little more arbitrary, but the thought behind it is that a player selected within that range is expected to make an impact during their entry-level contract.
The player must have produced at a high level throughout at least two of their three ELC seasons, as Pettersson has.
The comparable player must play the same position as the player they are being compared to. Pettersson will only be compared to centers.
I will only be looking at their second contracts. Some players may have signed extremely team-friendly deals, others may have gotten over-paid. All of that will balance out.
I will only be referencing stats from their ELCs, and directly referencing the year prior to when the comparable player signed their deal when looking at advanced stats.

You will see a lot of top 3 picks on this list as Pettersson has shown that’s the company he should be keeping, and with the benefit of hindsight, he more than likely would’ve been picked earlier in the draft.

Elias Pettersson

The big difference between the Pettersson and Hughes negotiations is that Pettersson will have an extra NHL season under his belt due to Hughes playing a handful of games at the end of the 2018-19 season. This will give Pettersson an extra year to show that what he’s done to this point in his career can continue to progress moving forward.

I’ll put Pettersson’s stats here before diving into the players I will be comparing him to.

Pettersson’s numbers speak for themselves. He’s cemented himself as a number one center for the Canucks and should be able to continue producing at an elite level for the team moving forward.

While passing the eye test and producing points-wise, Pettersson is also a bit of an analytics darling. He not only creates solid chances for his team but plays defence at an elite level for someone his age. This will more than likely factor into his next contract.

With all that in mind, let’s take a look at some contracts the Canucks, and Pettersson’s camp, may be referencing at the negotiating table.

Nico Hischier – 1^st Overall, 2017

Where better to start than the player selected first overall in Pettersson’s draft year? Hischier signed a 7-year extension early last season, locking him up until 2027. The contract carries an annual average value of $7.25 million.

Hischier’s traditional stats to this point haven’t been what you would expect from a first overall selection, but they haven’t been all that poor, either. On top of that, Hischier has battled the injury bug the past couple of seasons.

Pettersson definitely makes a bigger impact on both ends of the ice to this point of their career, creating more chances in the offensive end while also being solid defensively. So, the Hischier contract may be more of an example of what Pettersson will surpass. Here are Hischier’s advanced stats from 2018-19, the year prior to him signing his extension.

Hischier’s percent of cap when signing his second contract – 8.9%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 7 years at 7.25 million

Auston Matthews – 1^st overall, 2016

Matthews has obviously gotten a lot of attention just based on the level of the player he is and the market he plays in. He signed a 5-year extension with an AAV of $11.634 million in February of 2019, a contract that is widely known to be bringing him to his UFA years in 2024.

Matthews has been one of the most elite goal-scorers in his short time in the NHL, including scoring 37 goals in 2018-19, the year he signed the extension. Goal-scoring is not an element of the game that Pettersson struggles in, but it is hard to deny that Matthews excels in that category a bit more.

Matthews wasn’t as solid defensively as Pettersson when Matthews signed his extension, though the Maple Leafs haven’t been known for their sound defensive play in the past few years. Matthews makes up for that with his contributions in the offensive zone. I think I’d give Matthews the edge offensively over Pettersson, though Pettersson’s defensive upside balances them out a bit.

Matthews’ percent of cap when signing his second contract – 14.63%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 5 years at 11.92 million

Connor McDavid – 1^st overall, 2015

This is one of the comparisons where it’s pretty hard to see Pettersson matching or surpassing the contract given out. McDavid is arguably the best player in the league, while Pettersson maybe just a tier below that. The reason I bring up this comparison is because they have the same importance to their respective teams. The Oilers won’t succeed without McDavid playing at his best, while the Canucks would more than likely falter without Pettersson.

McDavid signed an 8-year extension back in July of 2018. The deal carries a $12.5 million cap hit.

McDavid’s traditional stats are on another level compared to almost everyone in the league, so it’s not really a fair comparison as Pettersson has yet to surpass 70 points in a season, though obviously a shortened season last year and an injury a year prior does not help.

The edge defensively does go to Pettersson compared to McDavid in 2017-18 ahead of signing his contract, but McDavid’s offensive upside essentially negates any flaws in his own end. As I said, Pettersson doesn’t have much of a case to match McDavid’s contract aside from the similar importance to their respective teams, though the cap has gone up since McDavid signed his deal.

McDavid’s percent of cap when signing his second contract – 16.67%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 8 years at 13.59 million

Jack Eichel – 2^nd overall, 2015

I feel like Eichel is already one of the most underrated players in the NHL, though that is the Buffalo effect, I guess. He’s had some injury troubles, and he did sign his 8-year extension almost a full year prior to McDavid signing his deal. His contract carries a $10 million AAV.

Eichel put up relatively similar numbers to Pettersson through two seasons, which is all the sample size the Sabres had when signing their franchise center.

Pettersson’s advanced stats in his sophomore season were definitely better than Eichel’s in his second NHL campaign, with Pettersson not only creating more chances but also being more effective than Eichel in his own zone. Buffalo hasn’t had much success since Eichel broke into the league though, which may factor into those defensive numbers. The Sabres do need to figure out how to surround their young talent, but that’s besides the point.

Eichel’s percent of cap when signing his second contract – 13.33%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 8 years at 10.86 million

Leon Draisaitl – 3^rd overall, 2014

As opposed to Eichel, I feel like Draisaitl is trending towards the overrated category, but I guess it’s hard to argue with a Hart Trophy winner. Draisaitl signed his 8-year extension with an AAV of $8.5 million in August of 2017.

The first year of Draisaitl’s ELC was split between the AHL and NHL, but the final two years leading into the new contract were where he earned that deal. His final ELC year was a similar points-per-game to Pettersson’s last year, so their point totals are relatively comparable.

Draisaitl’s advanced metrics the season prior to signing his contract extension were pretty similar offensively to Pettersson’s last season, but once again Pettersson was better defensively, which is kind of a theme when comparing him to other elite young centers. This may be a solid comparison if you adjust for the salary cap inflation.

Draisaitl’s percent of cap when signing his second contract – 11.33%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 8 years at 9.23 million

Nathan MacKinnon – 1^st overall, 2013

Nathan MacKinnon is on one of, if not the best contract in the NHL. A big reason for that is his relatively lacklustre start to his career. He was an elite player, but not necessarily what the Avalanche expected when they drafted him 1^st overall. I almost wanted to leave this one out due to just how much of a steal it is, but I have to include contracts from both sides of the overpaid-underpaid spectrum.

MacKinnon signed his 7-year contract extension in 2016. The contract will account for just $6.3 million per year against Colorado’s cap for the next three seasons.

Pettersson’s rookie and sophomore seasons saw him outpace MacKinnon production-wise during his ELC, which is why I say MacKinnon’s first few years were underwhelming compared to the MacKinnon we know now.

MacKinnon’s advanced stats weren’t that crazy either, Pettersson once again had better metrics than MacKinnon both in the offensive and defensive ends.

MacKinnon’s percent of cap when signing his second contract – 8.63%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 7 years at 7.03 million

Aleksander Barkov – 2^nd overall, 2013

Barkov is in a similar category to MacKinnon as at this point in his career as Barkov is probably way underpaid. That being said, he had his own issues throughout his entry-level deal.

Barkov signed a 6-year extension with an AAV of $5.9 million in 2016.

Pettersson has outpaced Barkov points-wise through his first two seasons compared to Barkov’s entrance into the league. Similar to MacKinnon, Barkov has really hit his stride in the past few seasons.

Barkov was signed in January of 2016 (mid-season), so I’ll use that season’s full advanced stats as reference, though technically the Panthers had no idea what would happen in the second half of that season. Barkov struggled to create high danger chances that season and didn’t really make up for it on the defensive side. Pettersson has had a positive impact in all of those categories. Both MacKinnon and Barkov probably aren’t the best comparisons as it’s pretty safe to assume Pettersson will be making more than them even when adjusting for cap increase.

Barkov’s percent of cap when signing his second contract – 8.08%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 6 years at 6.59 million

Tyler Seguin – 2^nd overall, 2010

Remember Taylor vs. Tyler? That was fun. It was also ten years ago, and Tyler Seguin is now on his third contract. This is where my previously outlined rules start to play more of a factor as I am only going to look at the second contract Seguin signed, but will also adjust for today’s cap. The only concern is that every player to this point has had relatively equal importance to their team at the point of signing their second contract, the argument can be made that Seguin did not have that same importance with the Bruins. That being said, he was still drafted second overall and hadn’t done anything to make that seem like a poor selection.

Seguin signed his second contract in September of 2012. It was a six year deal with an AAV of $5.75 million.

Seguin was signed ahead of his third season, so essentially the same sample size as we have for Pettersson at this point in his career. Seguin’s rookie season wasn’t one where he put up astronomical numbers, but he did see quite a rise in his sophomore year. The Bruins were definitely hoping to get him signed before he had a complete breakout year, which the Canucks can’t really do with Pettersson.

Seguin’s advanced stats were actually very impressive in his second season, though he was playing on a team that had just won the Stanley Cup (I’m sorry). These advanced metrics may be the closest to Pettersson’s.

Seguin’s percent of cap when signing his second contract – 9.58%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 6 years at 7.81 million

John Tavares – 1^st overall, 2009

It’s a bit tough comparing Pettersson to 1^st overall picks as they are always expected to do well, and Tavares met that expectation. His second contract was yet another 6-year extension, signed in 2011. It carried an AAV of $5.5 million.

Tavares also signed after two full NHL seasons and didn’t necessarily put up extraordinary numbers through two years, though they were impressive nonetheless. Again, they are comparable to what Pettersson has done.

Tavares’ advanced metrics were good offensively in his second season, but his defensive numbers are nowhere near where Pettersson finished last year. Most of these players were not able to match what Pettersson did defensively through two campaigns.

Tavares’ percent of cap when signing his second contract – 8.55%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 6 years at 6.99 million

Steven Stamkos – 1^st overall, 2008

We finish with another 1^st overall comparison, because Pettersson is playing like he should’ve been selected 1^st overall. Stamkos actually only signed a 5-year extension after his ELC, tied with Matthews for the shortest I will be comparing to. The contract cost the Tampa Bay Lightning a cool $7.5 million against their cap hit.

The Lightning made the mistake of signing Stamkos as late as possible, which allowed him to put up two 90-point seasons, along with back-to-back years with over 40 goals. Pettersson hasn’t matched that offensive production, though again he is as important to the Canucks’ future as Stamkos was to the Lightning at the time.

Looking at the advanced stats, Stamkos in his contract year was probably better than Pettersson this past year, though it was close. On top of that, Stamkos didn’t struggle too much at even strength defensively, though again Pettersson was better in that arena.

Stamkos’ percent of cap when signing his second contract – 11.66%

Today’s equivalent with an 81.5 million dollar cap – 5 years at 9.5 million

The Results

So there it is, the comparables each side of the table can use as Elias Pettersson and the Vancouver Canucks get set to negotiate. I still need to use the power of math though as I try to project the contract we may see when the deal eventually gets signed. I am going to average out all these contracts as if they were signed in present-day with an $81.5 million salary cap, which is why I listed the percentage of cap those players took up when they were signed.

Obviously, some of them are overpaid and some are underpaid. Some players are better than Pettersson, but some were worse at the time of their second contract. Contract structures have changed in the past decade, but we’re also dealing with a flat cap for the first time. The hope is that will all balance out.

With all this in mind, this is what I expect Pettersson to sign at based on those comparables:

7 years at 9.08 Million

This deal takes up 11.14% of the Canucks’ cap as it stays flat at 81.5 million.

If you ask me, this would be a bit of a discount. I’d consider Pettersson worth over 10 million per season, but it does depend on how much a flat cap impacts negotiations between the two sides. I do think we’re in the right ballpark though. Regardless, this is one of two negotiations that will define the new era of Canucks hockey. No pressure, Jim Benning.

Uncategorized