Esa Lindell
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.
Overpaid by ~$2.1M/yr
Fair value prices on-ice production only — it excludes a no-movement or no-trade clause, franchise and marketing value, and the premium teams pay for term itself. An overpay on production alone here can still be a sound allocation. How fair value works.
Fair-value range $840K – $5.5M
−0.22 cap-years of deficit ≈ −$18.9M
Judged as-of — each season priced with only the model and data available then — Esa Lindell has cost 0.22 cap-years more than he's delivered across our data window. One cap-year = a full season's salary-cap ceiling.
Career still active — this total will keep moving.
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, −$2.1M/yr, refines this by adjusting the market rate for age, contract term. The plot compares to the raw market curve; the verdict adjusts it.
Structurally similar active deals
This contract sits in the Star, long-term 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):
- Dylan DeMelo $4.9M −$1.3M
- Artem Zub $4.6M −$1.0M
- Sean Walker $3.6M +$1.6M
- Josh Manson $4.5M −$1.2M
- Rasmus Andersson $2.3M +$3.2M
- Matt Roy $5.8M −$2.9M
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 | $5.3M | $3.8M $2.5M–$6.4M | Leaning overpaid | near-term projection |
| 2027-28 | $5.3M | $3.7M $2.0M–$6.6M | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2028-29 | $5.3M | $3.5M $1.3M–$6.7M | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
| 2029-30 | $5.3M | $3.3M $1.1M–$6.7M | Too far out to call — projected range only | long-range projection |
Past his peak window
Production index for defensemen. The dot marks Esa at age 32.
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
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 | 6 | 26 | 32 | 23.2 |
| 2024-25 | 80 | 5 | 21 | 26 | 22.2 |
| 2023-24 | 82 | 5 | 21 | 26 | 20.5 |
| 2022-23 | 82 | 8 | 16 | 24 | 19.9 |
| 2021-22 | 76 | 4 | 21 | 25 | 22.0 |
| 2020-21 | 56 | 5 | 11 | 16 | 23.2 |
| 2019-20 | 69 | 3 | 20 | 23 | 23.4 |
| 2018-19 | 82 | 11 | 21 | 32 | 24.3 |
| 2017-18 | 80 | 7 | 20 | 27 | 22.1 |
| 2016-17 | 73 | 6 | 12 | 18 | 21.9 |
| 2015-16 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14.0 |
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 | 48.6 | 6.0 | 85.5 |
| 2024-25 | 46.2 | 5.9 | 79.1 |
| 2023-24 | 50.2 | 5.1 | 80.4 |
| 2022-23 | 48.3 | 6.8 | 73.5 |
| 2021-22 | 45.9 | 4.7 | 72.4 |
| 2020-21 | 51.7 | 4.4 | 49.0 |
| 2019-20 | 46.7 | 5.8 | 71.4 |
| 2018-19 | 44.9 | 6.9 | 76.1 |
| 2017-18 | 52.5 | 7.6 | 85.9 |
| 2016-17 | 48.7 | 4.9 | 66.1 |
| 2015-16 | 50.9 | 0.1 | 2.2 |
- 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
Playoff track record
Playoff track record
Underdelivers in the playoffs for his caliber (12th pct)
Descriptive only — not part of Value Score or Fair Value. Playoff samples are small and team-dependent; shown for the record.