I decided to focus this week’s poll on something that’s debated a lot but, as far as I’m aware, has never been voted on here at the site, namely which players are signed to the worst contracts. Of course, when using a word like “worst” it’s not always easy to measure one player versus another; so I have a few requirements/guidelines in terms of what players I included and how you should base your voting.
First off, all players must be making $4M+ per year, since if you’re signed for less your contract can’t be all that bad. Also, I’m ignoring those who’ve yet to play an NHL game in 2019-20, so that means no LTIR guys, players buried in the minors, or those otherwise in non-NHL limbo. Plus, Beyond that, all forwards had to have scored at least 55 points in one or more previous seasons, all defensemen at least 30 points, and the goalies included had to have won at least 30 games in one or more prior campaigns. That way these all will be familiar names. Lastly, I didn’t include anyone who signed a deal this summer, as I figure we need to let the ink dry for at least a full season before lumping them in with players who’ve had a lot more time to show how bad their contracts truly are.
What constitutes “worst?” Certainly dollar amount is key; but perhaps duration matters even more so, since arguably a contract paying an underperformer $7M for four more years is worse than one paying an equally bad player $8 but for only three. Also, a player shouldn’t be assessed solely based on his fantasy numbers, as perhaps someone with a bloated salary is making “real NHL” contributions which lessen the pain of his contract. We’re looking for the worst of the worst, by all measures of the word.
In terms of voting, I’d like you to pick the five worst contracts. Why five? I figured if I just let everyone vote only once then the outcome would be too predictable, or people would see the ongoing results and let that (sub)consciously influence how they vote. This way things should be more interesting, yet still, yield what we’re looking for.
Also, please note th