The question of Mika Zibanejad’s future with the New York Rangers is perhaps the most vexing conundrum facing the storied franchise as the 2024-25 NHL season draws to a close and the offseason looms. Is his substantial contract now a costly error, or simply a temporary dip in performance that the Rangers must ride out? The answer is complex, fraught with emotional attachments to a player who has delivered electrifying moments, but also stark realities about salary cap management and the relentless pursuit of a Stanley Cup.
Zibanejad, who turned 32 in April 2025, is in the third year of an eight-year, $68 million contract extension he signed in October 2021.1 That deal carries an annual average value (AAV) of $8.5 million and extends through the 2029-30 season, when he will be 36 years old.2 At the time of signing, it seemed like a fair market deal for a player who had just blossomed into a legitimate superstar. From 2019-20 to 2022-23, Zibanejad was consistently a point-per-game player or better, highlighted by his incredible 2019-20 season where he scored 41 goals in just 57 games, and a career-high 91 points (39 goals, 52 assists) in 2022-23. He was the dynamic, two-way center the Rangers desperately needed, a consistent threat on the power play, and a vital component of their special teams. His chemistry with Artemi Panarin made them one of the league’s most feared duos
However, the 2023-24 season saw a noticeable dip in Zibanejad’s production, finishing with 26 goals and 46 assists for 72 points in 81 games.3 While still respectable, it was a significant drop from his previous season’s totals. The concerns deepened in the 2024 playoffs, where his offensive impact was largely muted, particularly in critical moments. Fast forward to the conclusion of the 2024-25 regular season, and the alarm bells are ringing louder. Zibanejad finished the campaign with 20 goals and 42 assists for just 62 points in 82 games, his worst full season since 2017-18. His goal output significantly declined, and his overall offensive effectiveness, particularly at even strength, has been a major talking point. Reports from mid-season indicated a “shadow of his former self” and a player lacking the “jump” that defined his peak years. His expected goal share at 5-on-5 plummeted, and the team was often out-chanced with him on the ice.
The eye test, often a brutal arbiter, has corroborated the statistical decline. There are noticeable lapses in his defensive zone coverage, a perceived lack of urgency on the backcheck, and a struggle to consistently win puck battles against opposing top centers. Critics point to a player who appears less engaged in his own end, relying more heavily on his linemates or the goaltending to bail him out. On the offensive side, his reliance on the one-timer from the power play’s left circle, while historically effective, has become predictable, making him easier to defend at 5-on-5. Some analysts even suggested a lack of confidence, a “sensitive” reaction to criticism, impacting his on-ice performance.
This dip in form comes at the most inopportune time, both for Zibanejad personally and for the Rangers organization. The Rangers are in their prime Stanley Cup window, boasting an elite goaltender in Igor Shesterkin, a Norris Trophy-winning defenseman in Adam Fox, and a Hart Trophy candidate in Artemi Panarin. They have accumulated significant talent and have pushed deep into the playoffs in recent years. For a team with championship aspirations, their number one center needs to perform at an elite level, especially given his cap hit.
The financial implications are perhaps the most pressing concern. Zibanejad’s $8.5 million AAV represents a significant chunk of the salary cap, which is expected to rise in the coming years but still remains a tight constraint for all contending teams. With key restricted free agents (RFAs) like K’Andre Miller, Will Cuylle, and Matt Rempe needing new contracts, and other core players still on large deals, every dollar counts. A long-term commitment to a declining player eats into valuable cap space that could be used to acquire secondary scoring, defensive depth, or to retain crucial young talent.
So, is it a costly error? If Zibanejad’s current performance (62 points, diminished 5v5 impact, defensive struggles) becomes his new norm, then yes, an $8.5 million cap hit for the next five seasons would be a significant albatross. It ties up substantial funds in a player who is no longer producing commensurate value, hindering the team’s ability to evolve and improve.
However, is it time to move on? This is where the decision becomes agonizingly difficult.
First, Zibanejad possesses a full No-Move Clause (NMC) through the 2029-30 season.4 This means he cannot be traded, waived, or assigned to the minors without his explicit consent. For the Rangers to move him, Zibanejad himself would have to agree to waive this clause, which he has no obligation to do. Convincing a player to leave a familiar environment, a team he’s been with since 2016, and potentially a major market, is a monumental task, often requiring the destination to be highly appealing or for the player to genuinely desire a fresh start.
Second, trading a player of Zibanejad’s perceived stature and contract length would be incredibly challenging. Any acquiring team would demand significant salary retention from the Rangers, further complicating their cap situation, or require the Rangers to take back another burdensome contract, essentially swapping problems. The return in terms of assets (draft picks, prospects) would likely be diminished given his recent performance and the contract’s term. As recent history shows with players on large, long-term deals, moving them without significant concessions is exceedingly rare.
Third, there’s the question of replacement. Who steps in as the Rangers’ top-line center? Vincent Trocheck has proven to be a valuable second-line center, but elevating him to the first line creates a domino effect down the lineup. The Rangers’ prospect pool, while promising, may not have an immediate, top-tier center ready to step into Zibanejad’s shoes. Acquiring a comparable talent via trade or free agency would be extremely expensive, likely exceeding Zibanejad’s current cap hit or requiring multiple assets.
Finally, there’s the possibility of a rebound. Players, even elite ones, experience dips in form due to injury, confidence, or system changes. Zibanejad is still relatively young for a center at 32, not yet in the typical decline phase for many. Could a change in coaching philosophy, a new linemate, or simply a renewed commitment to certain aspects of his game unlock his previous form? Some have argued that his usage under recent coaches, including Peter Laviolette, has forced him into a more defensive, matchup role against bigger, more physical centers, which may not suit his finesse game, leading to his offensive struggles. If deployed differently, perhaps on the wing or with less defensive responsibility, his offensive numbers could rebound. His late-season surge in 2024-25, which saw him put up 7 points in his last three games, offered a glimmer of hope that the talent is still there.
The Rangers are clearly at a crossroads. General Manager Chris Drury has shown a willingness to make tough decisions, as evidenced by the recent trade of Chris Kreider (a hypothetical event in the user’s previous prompt, but here contextually indicating a bold GM). This suggests that no player is truly untouchable if it benefits the team’s long-term goals. However, Zibanejad’s NMC makes his situation unique and incredibly complex.
Ultimately, the Rangers’ decision on Zibanejad will likely come down to a delicate balance:
- Assessing his future performance: Do they believe he can return to being an 80+ point center, even if his goal-scoring is closer to 25-30 than 40+?
- Evaluating the market: Is there a feasible trade option that doesn’t cripple them with retained salary or a poor asset return, assuming he even waives his NMC?
- Alternative solutions: Can they find a suitable replacement for his role (either within the organization or externally) that offers better value for the money or a more complete game?
At present, with the high cap hit and declining performance, it leans towards being a costly error. But moving on is far from simple, akin to trying to untangle a deeply knotted rope. The most probable, albeit unsexy, solution might be for the Rangers to try to mitigate his decline through coaching adjustments, optimizing his linemates, and perhaps reducing his demanding minutes. They might hope for a rebound, banking on his veteran presence and previous offensive prowess to shine through, while accepting that the days of a consistent 90-point Zibanejad might be behind them. For now, the Rangers appear locked into the Zibanejad contract, and the true cost will only be fully understood in the coming seasons.
