Ivan Demidov
2025-26· Data as of July 27, 2026
Status derived from CBA rules; edge cases (Group 6 UFA, 10.2(c), 35+ contracts) may be misclassified. Years remaining are not yet tracked.
Surplus value ~$4.8M/yr
Realizable today Entry-level rights let the team realize about +$1.4M of this as signable/tradeable surplus; the rest is locked-in cost control — real value the team enjoys but can't directly cash out while he's signed this cheap.
+0.02 cap-years of surplus ≈ +$1.9M
Judged as-of — each season priced with only the model and data available then — Ivan Demidov has delivered 0.02 cap-years more value than he's been paid across our data window. One cap-year = a full season's salary-cap ceiling.
Career still active — this total will keep moving.
Low-confidence total — thin or short seasons drive a large share of the swing, so read it with caution.
- Connor Bedard +$1.2M
- Zach Benson +$1.1M
- Beckett Sennecke +$1.5M
Why this verdict
Why this verdict
Where this contract sits vs. the market
Each dot is a real free-agent signing (2015-2026): 1082 comparable forward deals. The line is the going rate at each talent level, the market convention we price against. Real signings scatter around it; comparable players don’t all sign for the identical number.
The page’s headline verdict, +$1.4M/yr, refines this by adjusting the market rate for age, contract term, and restricted-free-agent status. The plot compares to the raw market curve; the verdict adjusts it.
This player is on an entry-level contract. Part of the gap below the curve is CBA cost control (teams pay restricted players below open-market value by rule), not evidence of a market inefficiency.
Structurally similar active deals
This contract sits in the Young / bridge region of the contract map. These are the active contracts whose shape is nearest to it, closest in spend, term, age, and role (not how they aged):
- Connor Bedard $950K +$1.2M
- Zach Benson $950K +$1.1M
- Beckett Sennecke $943K +$1.5M
- Will Smith $950K +$963K
- Matvei Michkov $950K +$899K
- Adam Fantilli $950K +$820K
Comparable by the shape of the deal, not by team or playing style. Archetypes are broad regions on a continuum; a deal near a boundary is genuinely in-between.
The range reflects pricing-model error, not measurement — fair value is a modeled estimate. The sample badge reflects games played, not dollar accuracy.
Outlook
Outlook
Future contract years valued by aging the player's current form forward against a projected salary cap — projections, not measurements. Each year carries a calibrated low–high range beneath its projected value — wider the further out the year runs and skewed downward to reflect players who leave the league. Confidence drops the further out they go, and the least predictable cases (elite players, goalies) show a wide insufficient comparable signings band rather than a precise figure. See the methodology.
This is a value trajectory, not a signing-price forecast — it does not apply the same-year discount the Free-Agent board uses for market timing and age risk. If a season below is also this player's free-agent year, expect the two pages to disagree; both are answering different questions.
| Season | Cap Hit | Proj. Fair Value | Verdict | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-27 | $952K | $2.5M $3.0M–$8.9M | Leaning underpaid | near-term projection |
| 2027-28 | $9.2M | $6.6M $2.6M–$9.8M | Model under-rates ascending skaters — value uncertainunder-rated ascending forwards — treat as uncertain | long-range projection |
| 2028-29 | $9.2M | $7.1M $2.1M–$10.6M | Model under-rates ascending skaters — value uncertainunder-rated ascending forwards — treat as uncertain | long-range projection |
| 2029-30 | $9.2M | $7.6M $1.5M–$11.4M | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2030-31 | $9.2M | $8.0M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2031-32 | $9.2M | $8.5M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2032-33 | $9.2M | $9.0M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2033-34 | $9.2M | $9.4M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
Approaching his peak
Production index for forwards. The dot marks Ivan at age 20.
Empirical production-by-age index (delta-method WAR fit, 2010-11+). Illustrative of typical aging; the dollar model prices age with a separate, softer decline.
No as-of track record for this deal yet — a leakage-free record needs at least two seasons graded as-of (coverage runs through 2024-25). The current-season verdict is above.
Full stats
Full stats
Limited career 5v5 sample — a teammate-adjusted (RAPM) impact needs more ice time than this player has logged, so we don't show a point estimate yet. It appears once career 5v5 ice time clears the reliability floor.
Counted outcomes — totals and rates that carry shooting and goaltending luck.
| Season | GP | G | A | P | TOI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 82 | 19 | 43 | 62 | 15.5 |
| 2024-25 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 13.7 |
On-ice shot shares and modeled expected goals — these stabilize faster than goal totals, but xG is an estimate, not a count.
| Season | CF% | xG | xGF |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 45.2 | 17.2 | 88.2 |
| 2024-25 | 45.5 | 0.7 | 3.2 |
- CF%
- Corsi-for percentage — share of shot attempts while on the ice
- xG
- Individual expected goals from the player's own shot attempts
- xGF
- On-ice expected goals — team's xG while this player is on the ice
Usage vs. Value
Usage vs. Value
Limited minutes, strong number.
Among forwards this season, Ivan's even-strength ice time ranks in the 31st percentile, while our value score puts him at 86. That's a gap of −55 — the coach is leaning out relative to our number.
- 5v5 TOI/GP
- 11:39
- Usage percentile
- 31
- Value score
- 86
- Primary PP usage
- 18%
- Primary PK usage
- 0%
Entry-level young player — light minutes are normal development, not a benching.
Where even-strength ice time and our value score disagree — descriptive, not a verdict. Our number doesn't yet adjust for role or power-play usage.
Ranked #5 on the forwards Usage vs. Value board. Usage is even-strength (5v5) ice time per game.
The value score is percentiled across the full position group, while the deployment percentile is taken over the eligible subset — the two aren't measured over the identical population.
Playoff track record
Playoff track record
Limited playoff sample
Descriptive only — not part of Value Score or Fair Value. Playoff samples are small and team-dependent; shown for the record.