Martinez is a key veteran addition for the rebuilding Blackhawks.

• Player Overview
• Comparables
• Final Analysis

The Chicago Blackhawks signed Alec Martinez to a one-year contract as free agency opened on July 1, with the deal carrying a $4M cap hit.

Below, we take a look at the logic behind the move for Chicago, and what kind of value the Blackhawks are getting with the contract.

Player Overview

With three Stanley Cups and 15 years of NHL experience, few NHL defensemen have had as much success as Alec Martinez over the last decade and a half.

Spending parts of 11 seasons with the Kings, Martinez was a huge part of the organization’s success in the early 2010s, and memorably scored the Stanley Cup-clinching goal for Los Angeles in 2014, against the New York Rangers.

Then as the Kings entered a rebuild, Martinez was dealt to the Vegas Golden Knights, where the defenseman once again found success. He established himself as part of the team’s core through parts of five seasons from 2020 onwards, and captured another Cup with Vegas last season.

However, once Shea Theodore was acquired by the Golden Knights at the trade deadline, the writing was on the wall for Martinez’s exit this summer. Signing in Chicago, it’ll also mark a bit of a change of pace for Martinez, after having been a part of two different highly successful teams over his career.

But with the Blackhawks making it a priority to add veterans this offseason in order to insulate their young talent, Martinez is a perfect fit in Chicago. Given the team’s situation, Martinez’s stay in Chicago could be fairly short-lived though, with a likely chance that the defender could get flipped to a contender at the trade deadline.

The concern with Martinez is his ability to stay healthy, given over the last three years, he’s suited up for only 64 percent of his team’s regular season games (158 of 246 possible games). But when he’s in the lineup, Martinez is still capable of taking on a big role, facing the second-highest quality of competiton of any defender on Vegas last season (according to Dobber’s player usage charts).

Comparables

Below, we take a look at how Martinez’s deal compares to those of other defenders who signed one-year contracts around the same age. With Martinez turning 37 years old later this month, comparables were generally kept to defensemen who were between 35 and 39 years old by Dec. 31 in the first year of their contract.

For readers using mobile view, the tables below allow for horizontal scrolling.

Given Martinez’s age, a one-year deal isn’t surprising, with teams looking to minimize risk. Comparables for one-year deals are below.

Based on the comps, we’ve seen defenders around the same age get deals around a somewhat similar cap hit. Looking at how Martinez compares to the other defenders listed though, and there’s probably a good argument his value is actually lower than his $4M cap hit. Comparing Martinez to Alex Goligoski ($5.4M cap hit), he was significantly lower in ice time, and still quite a bit lower in production, while also being a year older at the time of signing. As a result, it’s easy to see why he wasn’t close to that range.

Even with the three other deals listed between a $3.5M and $3.75M adjusted cap hit though, while Martinez had better production in most cases, his ice time was still much lower than the other defenders. Especially comparing him to Ron Hainsey, who was very close production-wise and had higher ice time, it’s tough to justify Martinez’s value being above the $3.5M mark.

At the same time, the Blackhawks have shown over the past couple years that they don’t mind overpaying on short-term contracts. Their cap situation is healthy, and there’s pretty much no downside to outbidding other teams on a one-year deal.

Then there’s also a question as to whether Martinez could’ve potentially gotten more term on his contract. However, based on comparables, any two-year deal would’ve likely come in at a lower cap hit, as seen below.

Once a player hits their late 30s, teams are taking on a lot of risk giving out term on contracts, given their inability to make up cap space by buying out or burying a 35+ contract. As a result, when a multi-year deal is signed for a player around Martinez’s age, it’s likely going to be at a reduced cap hit.

It’s visible based on the deals for both Hainsey and Goligoski, where each defender got a higher cap hit on a one-year deal than a two-year deal, shown in the tables above. Then with Dan Hamhuis and Mark Giordano, each defender actually had better numbers than Martinez, and took a two-year contract around $1M per year or less. So considering Martinez made the same total amount of money on his one-year deal in Chicago that he was probably likely to get spread across any possible two-year deal, opting for the single-year deal made sense.

Final Analysis

A one-year contract was the most likely scenario for Martinez: with a single-year contract, Martinez gets a higher cap hit than he would’ve on any possible two-year deal, and the Blackhawks don’t take on any of the risks of a multi-year pact.

Chicago may have slightly overpaid on the contract, with a $3.5M cap hit seemingly the ceiling of what Martinez should have gotten on a one-year deal, based on comparables. Still, with the Blackhawks in a very healthy short-term cap situation and in need of veterans, slightly overpaying for Martinez, while likely being able to flip him for an asset at the trade deadline as well, is a worthwhile move.