What a Nathan MacKinnon Extension Would Have Looked Like This Summer
Nathan MacKinnon is already under contract with the Colorado Avalanche through the 2030-31 season, but that doesn’t make it any less interesting to wonder what another extension would have looked like if the superstar center were eligible to sign one this summer.
MacKinnon’s current eight-year, $100.83 million contract carries a $12.604 million annual average value. When that contract was signed in 2022, it briefly made him the highest-paid player in NHL history by AAV. Nearly four years later, the league’s financial landscape has changed considerably.
The salary cap has climbed to $104 million for the 2026-27 season and is projected to rise to $113.5 million in 2027-28. Meanwhile, the market for elite NHL stars has continued to explode, with Leo Carlsson’s recent $18 million AAV deal pushing the league’s highest salaries into a new tier.
So, what would MacKinnon’s next contract have looked like?
MacKinnon Could Have Commanded $17 Million Annually
If the Avalanche were negotiating a new deal with MacKinnon this summer, a contract worth around $17 million annually would be a realistic starting point.
An eight-year, $136 million extension would be a massive commitment, but MacKinnon’s status within the organization would warrant it. He remains the centerpiece of Colorado’s championship window and one of the best players in the NHL.
More importantly, the rising salary cap makes the number easier to justify. The $104 million cap for the 2026-27 season means that a $17 million AAV would account for roughly 16.3 percent of a team’s total salary cap. With the cap projected to rise to $113.5 million in 2027-28, that same average annual value would drop to roughly 15 percent.
While that is a significant portion of the cap, it isn’t unreasonable for a franchise player such as MacKinnon, or even Cale Makar. With the NHL’s highest-end contracts continuing to rise, $17 million could have been the price to keep one of the league’s best forwards locked up long-term.
The Avalanche Would Have to Consider the Length
The biggest concern with an eight-year extension wouldn’t necessarily be the annual salary. It would be how much of MacKinnon’s career Colorado would be paying for. MacKinnon is 30 years old.
An eight-year extension would carry him through his age-38 season, meaning the Avalanche would be accepting significant risk on the back end of the contract. However, that is the potential tradeoff for keeping a player of his caliber.
Colorado has already shown a willingness to build around its stars, and MacKinnon’s importance makes him a player the organization would presumably want to keep in Denver for the remainder of his career. A shorter extension could protect the Avalanche from some of the aging risk, but it would also likely increase MacKinnon’s leverage to demand a higher AAV.
MacKinnon’s History Could Matter
There is also precedent for MacKinnon leaving money on the table to remain with the Avalanche. His current contract was viewed as something of a bargain relative to his production when he signed it. Colorado benefited from that decision, and it helped the organization maintain the supporting cast necessary to contend for a Stanley Cup.
If MacKinnon were negotiating another extension this summer, Colorado probably wouldn’t expect him to take another significant discount. Still, there’s a difference between paying MacKinnon $15 million and giving him the maximum possible salary.
An $18 million-plus contract might be justified by his status as one of the NHL’s elite players, but it could make it substantially harder for the Avalanche to continue surrounding him with enough talent.
A hypothetical eight-year, $120 million extension therefore feels like a reasonable middle ground. It would reward MacKinnon like the superstar he is without completely compromising Colorado’s ability to build around him.
Of course, the Avalanche don’t have to make that decision yet. MacKinnon is already under contract for four more seasons. But if he were eligible for an extension this summer, Colorado would likely have faced one of the most important—and expensive—decisions in franchise history.
