[Signing] Wild extend Brock Faber (8 yrs, $8.5 mil AAV)

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Their roster is worse today than it was two years ago. It's a total mess and hopefully Conroy paid attention to what happened there. The worst thing that happened to the Kings was overachieving and making the playoffs in the 21/22 season as management thought they had already made it and started making moves like a team that was on the cusp of winning a cup and in the process made the organization worse.

The Kings basically went full Canadian team there.

[Sylvanfan]

Used to be you wouldn't give out these deals after 1 season. But things have changed. Some thought the Wild were nuts for giving Kaprizov his deal, it's worked out pretty well. Boldy and Erikson-Ek look like those might work out too.
There is risk that he could regress a bit like Chabot. But you likely are better off to bet on players in this age range than sign UFA age guys. Is he going g to be like a Vanek or Chabot...or will he progress like Makar and Hughes? We'll find out. I think its probably a bet worth making for the Wild as I think they're largely out of the Parise and Suter buyout mess when this deal starts as each guy will only be a 833k bogey starting next year.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Their roster is worse today than it was two years ago. It's a total mess and hopefully Conroy paid attention to what happened there. The worst thing that happened to the Kings was overachieving and making the playoffs in the 21/22 season as management thought they had already made it and started making moves like a team that was on the cusp of winning a cup and in the process made the organization worse.

Kind of like that 14/15 Flames run.

Traded a 1st and 2 2nds at the draft for Hamilton, which wasn't a bad move but we picked 6th the following season, and followed it up with trading a 1st and 2 2nds for Travis Hamonic at the next draft and we proceeded to miss the playoffs again.

We shouldn't entertain any trades until our dream #1C is on the roster.

[Erick Estrada]

The thing is, even if he regresses and turns into a solid 2nd pairing defenseman it's considerably easier to move a 27 year old top 4 defenseman with three years left on his contract than a 34 year old top 4 defenseman trending to bottom pairing that has three years left on his deal. These 8 year contracts to young players make much more sense than handing out 8 year deals to late 20's free agents.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Makar was also far far better when he signed his contract. That is also a big difference. He was coming off two weird Covid seasons where he was a PPG dman. Faber ain’t that. Faber was never anywhere near as good as Makar in college. It is reasonable to assume that Faber will never be anywhere as good as Makar.

Makar also signed at a time when the Cap was pretty flat. $8M won't look nearly as high in a few years. It will end up being a great contract.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by dino7c

you guys think every contract is a steal...many are not

time will tell

I wouldn't call this a steal. Faber has some developing, which may or may not happen, to make this contract fair value. He wouldn't be the first d-man to have one big season and then regress too.

Great player, but he was also 21 in this rookie season, not 18.

I would call this contract a calculated risk to retain top end talent, not a steal. Best case scenario is that the Wild are overpaying for the next couple of years and then get a steal on the last few years. A lot of things have to go right for that outcome to occur.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Kind of like that 14/15 Flames run.

Traded a 1st and 2 2nds at the draft for Hamilton, which wasn't a bad move but we picked 6th the following season, and followed it up with trading a 1st and 2 2nds for Travis Hamonic at the next draft and we proceeded to miss the playoffs again.

We shouldn't entertain any trades until our dream #1C is on the roster.

The Hamilton trade was excellent as they got a 1st pairing and power play defenseman that was 22 years old and not yet in his prime. The benefit was they could still move on from him a handful of years later and fetched a better return than what they originally paid to acquire him. This was when everything was going Treliving's way on the trade front. Unfortunately things unravelled for Treliving after the Hamonic trade and some really poor UFA signings.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

Maybe I’m wrong but Makar only makes $9M so like I said nuts.

Makar signed when the cap was flat for 11% of the cap.

Faber signed when the cap went up and is going up for 9% of the cap.

Makar rightfully got a premium over Faber and based on the cap projections he signed for a reasonable proportion of the cap. Whether he deserved it based on how little he's played remains to be seen.

I do wonder what, if anything, this means for Bouchard, Nemec and Hughes. Those guys will all need contracts this year or next.

[Enoch Root]

Why do people keep comparing Faber to Makar?

Faber:
D+2: .438 PPG in college
D+3: .710 PPG in college
D+4: .573 PPG

Makar:
D+2: 1.20 PPG in college
D+3: .877 PPG
D+4: 1.000 PPG

These players are not in the same universe.

[FurnaceFace]

It’s also worth keeping in mind this doesn’t kick in until next season, where the percentage of cap will be even lower. He’s signed now until he’s 30. It should be a good deal even if he just replicates last year.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Why do people keep comparing Faber to Makar?

They see dollar figures without context and assume that Faber needs to be as good as Makar to justify his salary.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Makar was also far far better when he signed his contract. That is also a big difference. He was coming off two weird Covid seasons where he was a PPG dman. Faber ain’t that. Faber was never anywhere near as good as Makar in college. It is reasonable to assume that Faber will never be anywhere as good as Makar.

To be fair, it's unlikely that any Dman in the league will be as good as Makar - when all is said and done he'll probably be in top 5 all time.

[Fire]

Pretty risky after one good season. If the last season was an outlier they have to live with it for 8 years.

[dirk diggler]

Does this mean he is almost as good as Darnell Nurse, dare to dream? salary would seem to support that.

[Meers]

He’s a good young player. But, should he be paid more than the current Norris trophy winner? It’s a little rich a little early in his career.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Meers

He’s a good young player. But, should he be paid more than the current Norris trophy winner? It’s a little rich a little early in his career.

Hughes was not the Norris Trophy winner when he signed that contract three years ago.

[The Fonz]

Minnesota will finally be clear (the vast majority) of the Parise/Suter cap burden after this season. It's pretty incredible they've been handcuffed to the tune of $15m/season due to the buyouts of these two players back in 2021.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Meers

He’s a good young player. But, should he be paid more than the current Norris trophy winner? It’s a little rich a little early in his career.

I don't think you really comprehend how contract value and length are determined.

3 years from know Faber may well be underpaid compared to others who are signing at that time.

Hughes' salary today is largely irrelevant.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

I think Faber is great and all but are players who have played one season worth this?

I realize it’s a calculated risk and you want to lock these young studs up to 8 year deals early but it seems nuts to me.

If you have 2-3 seasons under your belt that seems more reasonable to me but getting this after your rookie season?

If they waited until next offseason to do this, would his value have increased that much? Sanderson and Power are getting less than him so give him the RHed bump and I don’t see how he makes that much more even if he takes another big step.

Maybe I’m wrong but Makar only makes $9M so like I said nuts.

Makar is not a good comparable as he should be earning $14-$16mil, realistically. He signed for top pairing money, not game breaking, superstar money.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The thing is, even if he regresses and turns into a solid 2nd pairing defenseman it's considerably easier to move a 27 year old top 4 defenseman with three years left on his contract than a 34 year old top 4 defenseman trending to bottom pairing that has three years left on his deal. These 8 year contracts to young players make much more sense than handing out 8 year deals to late 20's free agents.

Yep, it's where the NHL has been trending but a lot of CP posters are still stuck in in the old ways of "pay the 29 year old with known play and bonus for service with a guaranteed drop off that we accept is coming rather than bet on a young, budding player" mode when evaluating signings.