Jackson LaCombe
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.
Underpaid by ~$5.1M/yr
Fair-value range $3.4M – $8.4M
Pending restricted free agent (RFA) His contract expires this season, but as a restricted free agent his current team keeps his signing rights and can match rival offers. This is a rating, priced in dollars — what the model rates his on-ice value at, not a forecast of what he'll sign for. See the projected signing price on the Free-Agent board.
Track record Judged as-of — with only the model and data available each season — this deal has returned +$6.0M over 3 seasons through 2024-25. See how past calls held up →
+0.07 cap-years of surplus ≈ +$6.0M
Judged as-of — each season priced with only the model and data available then — Jackson LaCombe has delivered 0.07 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.
- Philip Broberg +$658K
- Thomas Harley +$1.5M
- Jordan Spence +$2.1M
Why this verdict
Why this verdict
Where this contract sits vs. the market
Each dot is a real free-agent signing (2015-2026): 613 comparable defense 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, +$5.1M/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 RFA (restricted) 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):
- Philip Broberg $4.6M +$658K
- Thomas Harley $4.0M +$1.5M
- Jordan Spence $1.5M +$2.1M
- Tyler Tucker $925K +$2.4M
- Jordan Harris $825K +$1.9M
- Adam Wilsby $775K +$2.1M
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.
Defenseman impact uses a deployment-adjusted model (RAPM) that isolates each player from his linemates, competition, and zone starts at even strength. It covers 5-on-5 play and venue only — special-teams value and shot-blocking beyond its effect on 5-on-5 expected goals are not captured, and two defensemen who play almost all their minutes together cannot be fully separated.
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 | $9.0M | $6.6M $915K–$31.0M | Leaning overpaidunder-rated ascending defensemen — treat as uncertain | near-term projection |
| 2027-28 | $9.0M | $7.2M $999K–$34.5M | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2028-29 | $9.0M | $7.7M $1.1M–$37.6M | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2029-30 | $9.0M | $8.2M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2030-31 | $9.0M | $8.7M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2031-32 | $9.0M | $8.8M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2032-33 | $9.0M | $8.6M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2033-34 | $9.0M | $8.3M insufficient comparable signings | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
Approaching his peak
Production index for defensemen. The dot marks Jackson at age 25.
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.
How this deal's surplus has accumulated — each elapsed season judged as-of,
scored with only the model and data available that season (no hindsight) and priced at the
player's age that year. This retrospective runs through 2024-25; the
current-season verdict is shown above. The waterfall builds the running total left to right; the subtotal below is a tally to date, not a forecast. Single-season value is noisy, and early-year
deficits partly reflect a lower salary cap — the same AAV was a smaller share of
the cap then — while the model tends to underprice an elite player's early-career
season, so read the early seasons with extra caution.
Partial record: part of this deal falls outside our as-of coverage, so only its 2022-23–2024-25 seasons are graded here.
Full stats
Full stats
On-ice expected-goals impact per 60 — RAPM-adjusted (teammate- and competition-adjusted) where career 5v5 ice time clears the reliability floor, a raw on-off xG differential otherwise. Not wins. The RAPM figure is career-pooled (one value across seasons); the on-off fallback shows the most recent season.
Counted outcomes — totals and rates that carry shooting and goaltending luck.
| Season | GP | G | A | P | TOI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 82 | 10 | 48 | 58 | 24.2 |
| 2024-25 | 75 | 14 | 29 | 43 | 22.3 |
| 2023-24 | 71 | 2 | 15 | 17 | 19.4 |
| 2022-23 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18.5 |
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 | 53.7 | 12.2 | 126.4 |
| 2024-25 | 49.3 | 8.7 | 83.1 |
| 2023-24 | 44.5 | 3.2 | 49.5 |
| 2022-23 | 40.7 | 0.0 | 1.4 |
- 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
Playoff track record
Playoff track record
Not enough playoff games to assess.
Descriptive only — not part of Value Score or Fair Value. Playoff samples are small and team-dependent; shown for the record.