Imagine the NHL's most electrifying talent opting for team loyalty over a fortune in free agency – that's the jaw-dropping reality of Connor McDavid's latest move, and it's sending shockwaves through the entire league! But here's where it gets controversial: Is this selfless act a stroke of genius or a missed opportunity that could reshape how stars negotiate their futures? Let's dive into the winners and losers of this blockbuster deal, breaking it down step by step so even newcomers to hockey can follow along.
The agreement is finalized: Connor McDavid is committed to staying with the Edmonton Oilers. In a surprising twist for an NHL superstar, he opted for a remarkably short-term deal at an unbelievably low price, locking in a two-year extension (as detailed in this New York Times Athletic article: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6474073/2025/10/06/connor-mcdavid-contract-oilers-extension/) with an average annual value of just $12.5 million. This is significantly less than the $17 million per season that Kirill Kaprizov secured with the Minnesota Wild just last week, and it matches the AAV from McDavid's previous contract, which he signed all the way back in July 2017. The repercussions of this extension will ripple across the entire league, creating clear winners and losers as one of the sport's all-time greats chose to offer his team a substantial hometown discount instead of exploring free agency options.
Let's explore this further.
Winner: The Edmonton Oilers
There's no doubt about it – Oilers CEO Jeff Jackson must be celebrating wildly after sealing this agreement. McDavid had the leverage to push for a record-breaking, league-maximum contract of $19.1 million annually for any duration he desired. Instead, the franchise's iconic face saved the Oilers $6.6 million against the salary cap over the next two seasons, freeing up funds to potentially add another solid player to their lineup. If Edmonton had lost McDavid without compensation in free agency next July, their chances of competing for the Stanley Cup would have been severely damaged. Now, the Oilers remain strong contenders, particularly with the two-time defending champion Florida Panthers dealing with captain Aleksander Barkov's season-long injury. And this is the part most people miss: By keeping McDavid, Edmonton not only retains a superstar but also boosts team morale and fan excitement, setting the stage for a deeper playoff run.
Loser: Every team that dreamed of landing McDavid
If McDavid had reached free agency in 2026, all 31 other NHL teams would have been eager to woo him. Many had compelling arguments to make (as explored in this New York Times Athletic piece: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6663764/2025/09/27/connor-mcdavid-contract-oilers-nhl-32-teams/). Numerous squads are desperately seeking help at the center position, and virtually every team craves another superstar, especially one as transformative as McDavid. This deal removes a major unrestricted free agent from the market, hindering the league's rebuilding and retooling franchises from closing the gap in a landscape where elite players rarely become available. How can any team compete with a player of his stature earning far below market value for a championship-caliber squad that's already reached back-to-back finals? It won't be straightforward, and that's sparking debate: Should teams like the Toronto Maple Leafs or others feel cheated, or is this just the natural flow of a star prioritizing loyalty?
Winner: Connor McDavid
Some might argue he's on the losing end for forgoing extra earnings. We disagree. Sure, McDavid could have pocketed an additional $12 million or more, but this contract delivers a massive victory with his devoted fanbase, provides the Oilers' management with extra cap flexibility, and underscores his primary goal: winning a Stanley Cup in Edmonton. McDavid has already amassed over $100 million in NHL earnings, and lucrative endorsement opportunities will continue. At just 28 years old, with the salary cap expected to rise, locking into an eight-year deal now might not align with maximizing future financial potential. By the time he's a free agent again after this extension on July 1, 2028, he'll be only 31 and poised to secure a long-term pact near $25 million per season – potentially adding another $150 million to his bank account, making this two-year bargain a mere footnote. But here's where it gets controversial: Is McDavid undervaluing his worth, or is he cleverly positioning himself for even greater rewards later? Fans are divided on whether this is altruism or savvy strategy.
Loser: The Minnesota Wild
The Wild took necessary steps to retain their star, but it's tough to view this development as a triumph for Minnesota. The major concern with awarding Kaprizov such a hefty contract – unmatched in the league – is whether other teams will match it. What if Leon Draisaitl's $14 million AAV becomes the new benchmark for elite deals, leaving Kaprizov's $17 million as an outlier for years? Spending a bit more on a top talent isn't catastrophic, but it's far from ideal, particularly if it takes time for other comparable stars to reach similar salaries. Plus, the Wild might soon face their own young prospects demanding big paydays. This situation raises questions: Did the Wild overpay prematurely, setting a precedent that could burden their future budgets?
Winner: Leon Draisaitl
Speaking of Draisaitl, this must come as a huge sigh of relief for the Oilers' other superstar. If McDavid had departed in 2026, Draisaitl would have been stuck with seven more years on an eight-year deal amid a weakened Oilers team. Instead, his close friend accepts a pay cut – earning $1.5 million less per season than Draisaitl – ensuring they'll dominate together for at least three more seasons. The rest of the Oilers' roster benefits too, as this extension solidifies Edmonton as a Western Conference powerhouse through 2028. Imagine the chemistry boost: Two elite centers like this could redefine offensive play in the NHL.
Loser: Jack Eichel and other stars negotiating contracts
Kaprizov's deal lit up dollar signs in the eyes of potential 2026 unrestricted free agents. Leading that pack are Vegas Golden Knights center Jack Eichel, Winnipeg Jets sniper Kyle Connor, and New York Rangers winger Artemi Panarin. While all three are likely to secure strong contracts, especially on the open market, McDavid's bargain doesn't bolster their leverage. Teams might encourage players wanting to stay by suggesting they emulate McDavid, accepting less for the team's sake. Whether this tactic succeeds is uncertain, but as of now, both Eichel and Connor seem inclined to remain put and are advancing in talks. We predict their deals will resemble those of Draisaitl, Mitch Marner, and Mikko Rantanen rather than Kaprizov's $17 million cap hit. And this is the part most people miss: Could this trend pressure other stars to prioritize team success over personal gain, potentially lowering expectations across the league?
Winner: The NHL’s middle class
If superstars like McDavid continue taking pay reductions, more funds flow to others under the league's strict salary cap. Historically, the NHL's top talents have been underpaid relative to their impact, allowing the 'middle class' – think second-line wingers and second-pair defensemen – to secure larger contracts than otherwise possible. The Oilers' recent seven-year, $7 million-a-season deal for defender Jake Walman right after McDavid's announcement exemplifies where that extra cash might go league-wide, assuming McDavid inspires a trend. For beginners, this means role players get better opportunities, strengthening rosters overall.
Loser: The Toronto Maple Leafs
Talk of 'Bring McDavid Home' has reached a boiling point in Toronto, especially during his extension negotiations through training camp. The Leafs lost a key player this offseason, and with a thin prospect pool and aging squad, McDavid – who hails from Newmarket, a Toronto suburb – seemed like a game-changing fix if he hit free agency. Fans even debated sacrificing roster improvements for the 2025-26 season to free up cap space for him (as discussed in this New York Times Athletic article: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6582469/2025/09/02/maple-leafs-stolarz-domi-ufa-2026-carlo/). Now, it's time for Plan B, though they'll still have ample cap room in 2026-27. But here's where it gets controversial: Was the Leafs' obsession with McDavid a pipe dream, or does this highlight how one player's decision can crush regional rivalries?
Loser: Free agency in 2026
For teams eyeing next year's market... it might be slim pickings. With McDavid and Kaprizov locked in, and Eichel and Connor likely following suit, the 2026 class has dwindled from extraordinary to underwhelming. Panarin remains the standout name (ranked in this New York Times Athletic piece: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6472199/2025/07/04/nhl-top-free-agents-2026-ranking-mcdavid-kaprizov/), but he'll be nearing 35 by July. Interested in Adrian Kempe? A bidding war for Martin Necas? Or perhaps Nick Schmaltz? Good luck to the TV analysts next year – it's shaping up to be a letdown. This scarcity could force teams to focus on trades or internal development, sparking debate on whether the league's talent distribution is becoming too uneven.
Winner: Free agency in 2028
Perhaps it's just a postponement for McDavid's admirers? By 2028, he might have claimed his Stanley Cup in Edmonton and, mission accomplished, seek a new chapter elsewhere. Or he could still be chasing that elusive title and test the waters. Either way, suitors should prepare for what could be the NHL's most epic unrestricted free agent frenzy ever. Imagine the bidding wars – it might redefine player movement!
What do you think? Did Connor McDavid make a brilliant move for his legacy, or is he shortchanging himself financially? Should stars prioritize loyalty like this, or is it time for the league to adjust how contracts work? Do you agree with the winners and losers we've outlined, or see it differently? Share your opinions in the comments – let's discuss!
