Choose one

[Merrrlin]

Choose one asset. Years of control, Annual Salary listed.

Click to read more...

 

[Dominance]

I’ll actually go Point. 10 years at 4M is utterly ridiculous for an above-average 1C.

 

[The Moose is Loose]

I think anyone choosing anyone but Point is pretty damn biased. Maybe Tkachuk.

But that cheap of an AAV should always win

 

[Isaac Nootin]

Anything Pastrnak and below is insane value.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

Petterson, Aho, and Point are the most intriguing options to me. Can’t go wrong with any of those choices.

Took Petterson because I’m a believer in his upside, but that Point contract would be amazing value for a long time.

 

[bobholly39]

I actually voted McDavid.

My thought process is - I get him for 2 years, and optimistically am confident to be able to re-sign him long-term. Without more specific reasons to believe he won't be re-signing, that's my answer and i'm willing to take the risk he may leave/and or I have to pay him a lot to re-sign in 2 years.

In terms of best value - any of Matthews, EP or Point are absolutely terrific for length vs AAV. I consider Matthews will be ~ to Dra/Mack for career, but you get 3 years more at lower $$. I have EP slightly behind - but again, 1 extra year. And - I have Point below Matthews - but the 10 years is crazy.

Still - I'd still go McDavid, unless I knew i for sure lose him after 2 years.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Pettersson, Point, Matthews and McDavid would be tough to choose between.
I went Pettersson because he has an extra year over Matthews and I think they end up close in terms of value as players but I flip flopped between EP and McDavid a bit.

 

[Trap Jesus]

I think you can narrow it down to any one of Matthews, Pettersson, Aho or Point. I don't think any of the first few guys gives you THAT much of a leg up relative to the others to justify them hitting UFA that much sooner, and I don't think the impact of the last 2 guys matches what the others bring. Even if you retain McD/MacK/Drai, the AAV is going through the roof.

I like Pettersson's overall game. I really like Point too, but I think Pettersson has much more upside and 8 vs. 10 years isn't the end of the world.

 

[Merrrlin]

I actually voted McDavid.

My thought process is - I get him for 2 years, and optimistically am confident to be able to re-sign him long-term. Without more specific reasons to believe he won't be re-signing, that's my answer and i'm willing to take the risk he may leave/and or I have to pay him a lot to re-sign in 2 years.

In terms of best value - any of Matthews, EP or Point are absolutely terrific for length vs AAV. I consider Matthews will be ~ to Dra/Mack for career, but you get 3 years more at lower $$. I have EP slightly behind - but again, 1 extra year. And - I have Point below Matthews - but the 10 years is crazy.

Still - I'd still go McDavid, unless I knew i for sure lose him after 2 years.

I was hoping someone would make this argument. No reasons he won't sign, you would just have to imagine in the scenario of an average (no drama, etc) organization, with a pending UFA. For those same reasons, it's hard to look past Mackinnon as well, despite the uncertianty. If I am trying to win a cup, 2 years of McDavid/4 of Mack might still be worth the risk of missing out on the bargains below.

 

[Merrrlin]

I think you can narrow it down to any one of Matthews, Pettersson, Aho or Point. I don't think any of the first few guys gives you THAT much of a leg up relative to the others to justify them hitting UFA that much sooner, and I don't think the impact of the last 2 guys matches what the others bring. Even if you retain McD/MacK/Drai, the AAV is going through the roof.

I like Pettersson's overall game. I really like Point too, but I think Pettersson has much more upside and 8 vs. 10 years isn't the end of the world.

I'd have Pastrnak right there.

Also, it'd be hard to turn down Tkachuk for 11 years when he's produced almost as well as some of those guys while also playing his style of game.

Thought Konecny on that ludicrous salary and term might still nab a few votes.

 

[bobholly39]

I was hoping someone would make this argument. No reasons he won't sign, you would just have to imagine in the scenario of an average (no drama, etc) organization, with a pending UFA. For those same reasons, it's hard to look past Mackinnon as well, despite the uncertianty. If I am trying to win a cup, 2 years of McDavid/4 of Mack might still be worth the risk of missing out on the bargains below.

I wouldn't put Mack up on the same pedestal. He's certainly the second best player listed here today (let's say him or Drai) - but for me, Matthews will be similar tier as him - and I expect EP to be quite close too. So 7 years of Matthews for me is much better than 4 of Mack, same for EP, even though Mack is the better player today. McDavid is the only game changer because he's a tier above all else - so it depends how confident you are in re-signing him.

If my team was neutral trading for one of these players at that value - I pick McDavid. So if both McDavid and Matthews had those contracts - and my team was offered the player in trade for 2 1st round picks - i'd choose McDavid, unless he had specifically said he'll likely not re-sign. i'd just pay to re-sign him, as needed.

Also - looking at this from a different angle. I wonder if having someone like Point, Matthews or EP paid so little for so many years is even a good thing. Imagine Point 10 years 4M$ per. Would he even be motivated to play his best? He'd have the worst contract in the league by far, and it would probably create some really negative dynamics between him and team. If we take that aspect into account, some of these longer deals could end up being a negative.

 

[jetsforever]

Matthews is a great deal

 

[Fear]

I went with Matthews because I see him as the longest term for a guy who can be the best player on a championship team. Maaaaybe Petersson

Point, Koneckny, Aho, Tkachuk are insane value but you still need to find a better player somewhere, with Matthews and above you only need to find complementary stars.

 

[leafsfan5]

This was a great poll

I went Matthews but options like Pettersson and Point are great as well

 

[Fisticuffer]

Tough choice between Point and Matthews.

 

[al secord]

I took Matthews. But i also traded Dermott and Bracco for 8 years of Pettersson.

 

[BruinsBtn]

Konecny should have some more votes. I get picking a #1 centre but a top-line winger for $2/year for his entire career is insane.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

I didn't pick Point because I don't think his ceiling is as high as the others. Pettersson is better than Aho with the puck but Aho is better without the puck. Aho is the best defensively of the bunch.

 

[lauraP]

For me petey / matthews for 5

 

[CraigsList]

Easily Point for me.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Pettersson. The gap between McDavid and Pettersson aren't those contracts.

 

[SimpleJack]

A legit 1C for just 4mil locked down for essentially his entire career?

Point is the smartest option here

 

[Dekes For Days]

This is pretty easily Matthews.

McDavid, Mackinnon, and Draisaitl have a significant discrepancy in years and AAV. Pastrnak is less years, and is much more reliant on linemates and advantageous conditions to produce. Pettersson projects well and is probably the 2nd best option, but Matthews projects better, is currently better and more proven, and is a goal-scoring phenom; 1 extra year doesn't counter that. Matthews is easily better than anybody else on the list, and past a certain term length, you're just buying seasons well out of their prime anyway.

 

[BHD]

The player with the second most goals since entering the league, and is under contract for 7 years at only 5(!) million per season.

 

[Bouboumaster]

Went with Matthews, but Aho, Point, Pettersson and Tkachuck are all great choices.