Who doesn’t love a good ranking? At The Athletic, we rank the best prospects and the best players, but today’s concept is different. We’re ranking the best players in the NHL from an asset perspective. Meaning, if a player was put on the open market tomorrow, contract and time to free agency all considered, what would their value be?
Advertisement
For this exercise, Max Bultman and Corey Pronman teamed up and averaged out their opinions on the top 100 assets in the NHL. Then, after lengthy discussions — including with NHL sources — to tweak the list, they arrived at these five tiers of players.
It’s much easier to think of this list along the lines of “Would Team A trade Player X to Team B for Player Y?” — which still isn’t always easy. Teams are perpetually in different spots in the competitive cycle, and priorities can vary wildly for that reason. Whether it’s better to have a talented and cost-controlled (but largely unproven) prospect, or a pricier veteran with a much more proven track record, is a different proposition for a lottery team compared to a Stanley Cup contender. That’s why trades happen in the first place, and it’s what makes the exercise worthwhile.
It’s also what differentiates our list from a standard “top 100.” You won’t find Norris Trophy winner Erik Karlsson on the list, for example, owing primarily to his substantial contract: four remaining years at a $10 million cap hit. That’s borne out by the return when San Jose traded him this summer, while eating 13 percent of the contract. Even for one of the best players in the sport, Karlsson’s age and cap hit meant the Sharks’ return was simply a protected first-round pick, defenseman Jan Rutta and the less-than-desirable contracts of Mikael Granlund and Mike Hoffman.
Especially difficult was what to do with pending UFAs, especially in a year loaded with some notable ones. William Nylander of course makes our list, in the midst of a stellar platform campaign, but knowing he’s in line for a huge contract, he’s not an easy one to place within the ranking. What do you do with a scoring winger like Jake Guentzel when comparing his trade value to some of the sport’s young risers, or against other veterans with more stable contracts? And beyond that, how do you treat established top defensemen like Mikhail Sergachev against up-and-comers Owen Power, Jake Sanderson and Luke Hughes?
Advertisement
These are the types of questions we grappled with. Here’s where we landed.
This tier doesn’t need much explaining. These are the sport’s elite, all of them perennial trophy candidates. While no one is ever truly untouchable, most of these players could be practically termed as such — although two of them (Matthew Tkachuk and Adam Fox) have in fact been dealt before, albeit before the latter debuted.
The most common things separating these names from other elite stars who didn’t make this cut: age and contract. Nathan MacKinnon is the oldest player in this tier at 28, and now that Auston Matthews has signed his contract extension, all are under team control for multiple years, with most locked up for the foreseeable future. And since all of them are legitimate superstars, how long their respective contracts run played a meaningful factor in ordering them.
Leon Draisaitl, for example, is a consistent top-10 finisher in MVP voting playing on a bargain $8.5 million cap hit. But with only two years remaining on his deal, as opposed to much more for his peers — or at least RFA rather than UFA status upon expiry — he ended up dropping within this top tier.
What kind of return one of these players might fetch while locked into a long-term deal is hard to fathom. Tkachuk as an RFA last summer netted the Flames a top-line forward, a top-four defenseman and a future first-round pick in return. But it’s a trade the Panthers would surely make again, because of just how hard pieces like these are to find.
Biggest Debate: Adam Fox
Pronman: Fox is obviously an elite player. He’s one of the smartest and most creative players in the league who has won a Norris and is a true top NHL defenseman. The player type — namely a small, average-footspeed defenseman — having major postseason success is very rare, though. One can argue that Fox doing what he’s done is rare for his player type too. But when comparing him to the greats in the league like Tim Stützle, Matthew Tkachuk, Rasmus Dahlin and Jack Hughes, that aspect can be a meaningful tiebreaker.
Advertisement
Bultman: To me, it comes back to the fact that he’s a Norris Trophy winner in his prime, and is under contract through 2029 at a number ($9.5 million) that will only look better as the cap rises. I ranked him seventh, slightly ahead of David Pastrnak and Tkachuk, because of the positional value of a defenseman over a winger — even though certainly Pastrnak and Tkachuk are rare in their caliber and style too. The margins are extremely narrow, but I leaned toward the extra minutes defensemen play, allowing them to impact that much more of the game, and how unusual it is for defensemen of Fox’s level to become available on the market.
I most struggled with where to rank him against the other young defensemen. I can see the argument for Dahlin ahead of Fox on age and upside, both of which favor the young Sabres star, but Dahlin will soon make a full $1.5 million more than Fox per season. Is the gap between them that wide? To me, the more compelling challenger is Miro Heiskanen. I leaned Fox for the longer track record of elite offense, but Heiskanen can bring many of the same play-dictating elements in a bigger body and at a lower charge against the cap.
Tier 2 still comprises mostly superstars, but in this group they tend to be stars with an asterisk. Maybe they’re on the older side of their aging curve, like Sidney Crosby or Victor Hedman. Maybe they’re young players like Adam Fantilli or Tage Thompson who are still developing into what they can become. They are excellent NHL players but they may have one or two flaws in their skill sets that keep them from being in the elite of the elites. Or they are a goaltender such as Andrei Vasilevskiy and Igor Shesterkin, playing a position teams don’t typically value as much contract-wise as the most elite skaters.
These are still some of the most valuable players in the NHL. If you want to contend, and you don’t have a player in Tier 1, you better have at least one player in Tier 2.
Biggest Debate: Kirill Kaprizov
Bultman: Kaprizov’s three-year term makes him tough to place. I struggled the most with comparing him to Hintz, who has much more team control and plays the more premium position. In general, I value both of those factors very highly. But Hintz has never truly threatened MVP territory like Kaprizov has, and considering they’re the same age, I couldn’t get past that factor. I also have him above Hedman and Josi, mainly due to the considerable age gap — particularly since Hedman has less term remaining.
Pronman: I leaned heavily toward centers and defensemen above all else when making my list, and thus a player like Kaprizov gets knocked a bit in that process. He’s obviously an electric player, with a ton of high-end traits between his skill, elusiveness and compete, but I would take the slightly older players if it means I get impact at a premium position. Unless Kaprizov keeps scoring at massive numbers over the next five years, I think the alternative will be slightly more valuable than a small scoring winger.
This tier mostly encompasses No. 1 defensemen and top-line forwards who fall just short of elite status. They may not be the best player on a Cup winner, but they are franchise pillars who would be immensely difficult for their teams to replace.
Advertisement
In terms of age, it’s a nice blend of recent top draft picks, and veteran top-line players whose contracts will keep them in place for what could be an entire contention window. Parsing between top centers like Mika Zibanejad, Dylan Larkin and Sebastian Aho, and defenders like Sergachev, Aaron Ekblad and Zach Werenski, against their younger counterparts such as Logan Cooley, Matty Beniers, Mason McTavish, Hughes, Power and Sanderson is tricky because it still involves so much projection on the latter names. But that’s what teams ultimately have to weigh when making trades: the proven versus the potential.
That being said, it would be rare (though not unheard of) to see a player in this tier traded, because their talent and contracts (or at least team control) make them too important to their teams’ present and futures to move for anything less than a bounty.
Biggest Debate: Luke Hughes
Pronman: I’ve grown a reputation as a Luke Hughes defender, but I have a hard time not imagining this player having a long and very successful NHL career. The elite feet at his size to go with strong offensive skills — he’s already shown PP1-level skill in the NHL — suggests to me a potential NHL star, especially given how well he’s played at other levels over his career. Hughes versus Power is a reasonable debate, as it has been since his draft season, and I can get putting those two next to each other, but I think Hughes has a little bit more of a special element that I’d like a mild distinction.
Bultman: For me, Hughes belongs more at the bottom of this group rather than in the top half — at least right now. His potential has always been evident, as it’s rare to find defensemen with his skill and skating combo at his size. But I would want a longer sample in the NHL in order to rank him above Power and Sanderson. Sanderson, in particular, is already bringing huge offense with similar size/skating, and I’d have more trust in him in tough minutes. That would create some separation there for me.
Tier 4 mostly comprises very good young players who may be true foundational players but they are a step below the true star young talents in the game. There are legit stars in this group too, but they are either on the older side if they are legit superstars, or not at the highest levels of impact in the NHL. These are very important parts of an NHL organization, but for teams trying to contend these players alone don’t move the needle enough.
One of the most interesting names here is Nylander, who is in the midst of a star turn at age 27. If this were a strict top 100, he would of course rank higher. But he’s a pending UFA, and one that looks in line for a massive next contract. That uncertainty plays into this list — if a team were to trade for him, would he sign? And what would it take? — especially without the elite long-term track record of someone like Pastrnak.
J.T. Miller, too, is a fascinating one. Before this season, he might have been a fringe candidate to even make the list, but his torrid start at age 30 offers some reason to believe he can deliver for at least the near future, as he begins a seven-year deal worth $8 million annually.
Advertisement
This final tier has a bit of everything. There are top prospects like Matvei Michkov, who might be higher if not for the same external considerations that caused him to fall in the draft. There are young players who would be significant pieces in any lineup, but also won’t necessarily make or break the direction of their franchise. There are even top-line wingers in their late 20s or early 30s, who carry the prudent question of how they will age.
Anyone in this group being traded would classify as an absolute blockbuster, but unlike the names at the top of this list, it’s not so hard to imagine it actually happening.
What may be most interesting are some of the players who just missed the cut-off, including 2022 No. 1 pick Juraj Slafkovský, multiple 40-goal scorers, including Guentzel and Adrian Kempe, and several aging superstars like Steven Stamkos and Connor Hellebuyck as well as reigning Vezina winner Linus Ullmark.
We opted to keep all-time greats Alex Ovechkin and Evgeni Malkin on the list, even in their twilight years, but even they only cracked the very bottom. Working in their favor: the exact right blend of present production and remaining term. Malkin in particular is delivering real surplus value on a $6.1 million AAV, and Ovechkin has the unquantifiable value of the all-time goals record chase going for him as well.
And if nothing else, we can avoid being the latest top-100 list to snub Malkin.
(Illustration: John Bradford / The Athletic. Photos: Christopher Mast, Ethan Miller / Getty Images)
ncG1vNJzZmismJqutbTLnquim16YvK57k3JpcmxhaXxzfJFsZmppX2eBcLrHpWStqpGZsm7CwKWsnmWgoa66sdFmmKyrlal6s63NpKCnn6Nk