The sophomore slump Faber is about to have is going to make for some fun times on these boards lol.
The Faber trade definitely hurts but it's hard to argue it wasn't fair value at the time. Faber was a VERY good prospect and some people saw star potential in him but still was far from a guarantee at the time he was traded. You trade a 1st and an A or B tier prospect for a point per game scoring winger who can drive any line you put him on and helps make your team significantly better offensively. You have to give to get.
I don't even think the timing of the trade was as inappropriate as others would suggest. The Kings had just made the playoffs after a couple years of re-tooling but came up short, losing in 7 games to a good Oilers team. It was pretty clear the Kings biggest need after that season was a top 6 scoring winger (to improve offensively). So they went out and traded for a very good playmaking winger and paid a fair price to do so. That's not necessarily illogical.
The problem is, the trade clearly hasn't 'gotten the Kings over the hump' - which was essentially the goal of the trade. On top of that, Faber has exploded into a potential star RD... so it looks pretty bad a couple years later. It's a mistake tons of teams have made historically and teams will continue to make as long as the game of hockey is played professionally. You give up unproven talent for proven talent and there's always risk involved there. Part of the problem as well is that other Kings prospects haven't taken the steps fans & management hoped they would (yet). That definitely throws a wrench in 'the plan'. I'm sure at the time they traded for Fiala they were looking at their prospect pool thinking 'Damn, it sucks to lose Faber but we have a number of other guys who can/should be impact players in the NHL within the next 2-3 years - so we should be OK'.... But that hasn't really happened. Byfield has taken longer than expected but is finally getting there. Turcotte has had serious issues staying healthy. Vilardi broke out but had/has issues staying healthy. The Kings probably expected their young players/prospects to be farther along by this point - which would've definitely made the Fiala trade look better & more justified. That said, choosing the wrong player to give up in the Fiala trade is bad asset management / bad player evaluation - However..... The Kings may not have had the option to give up another RHD in the trade - For all we know the Wild rejected other offers that included other RHD and the only way the Kings were going to be able to acquire Fiala is by sending Faber the other way. So it's tough.
Another thing here is that the loss of Faber is immediately less painful if Clarke turns out to be a star defenseman.... There's still a chance Clarke ends up being the better of the two d-men. If that happens, are we really still crying about losing Faber? Probably not. Especially if Fiala continues to produce at a point per game pace over the next 4-5 seasons.
Spence is another factor here. Spence had a higher points per 60 minutes than Faber last year (also higher than Moritz Seider and many other very good defensemen and just lower than Doughty and Durzi). There's still a chance Spence ends up being a verrrrrrrry solid top 4 d. So we'll have to see how things look a couple years from now to really truly evaluate the situation. If Spence and Clarke both hit... Losing Faber ends up stinging a whole lot less.
The Faber trade definitely hurts but it's hard to argue it wasn't fair value at the time. Faber was a VERY good prospect and some people saw star potential in him but still was far from a guarantee at the time he was traded. You trade a 1st and an A or B tier prospect for a point per game scoring winger who can drive any line you put him on and helps make your team significantly better offensively. You have to give to get.
I don't even think the timing of the trade was as inappropriate as others would suggest. The Kings had just made the playoffs after a couple years of re-tooling but came up short, losing in 7 games to a good Oilers team. It was pretty clear the Kings biggest need after that season was a top 6 scoring winger (to improve offensively). So they went out and traded for a very good playmaking winger and paid a fair price to do so. That's not necessarily illogical.
The problem is, the trade clearly hasn't 'gotten the Kings over the hump' - which was essentially the goal of the trade. On top of that, Faber has exploded into a potential star RD... so it looks pretty bad a couple years later. It's a mistake tons of teams have made historically and teams will continue to make as long as the game of hockey is played professionally. You give up unproven talent for proven talent and there's always risk involved there. Part of the problem as well is that other Kings prospects haven't taken the steps fans & management hoped they would (yet). That definitely throws a wrench in 'the plan'. I'm sure at the time they traded for Fiala they were looking at their prospect pool thinking 'Damn, it sucks to lose Faber but we have a number of other guys who can/should be impact players in the NHL within the next 2-3 years - so we should be OK'.... But that hasn't really happened. Byfield has taken longer than expected but is finally getting there. Turcotte has had serious issues staying healthy. Vilardi broke out but had/has issues staying healthy. The Kings probably expected their young players/prospects to be farther along by this point - which would've definitely made the Fiala trade look better & more justified. That said, choosing the wrong player to give up in the Fiala trade is bad asset management / bad player evaluation - However..... The Kings may not have had the option to give up another RHD in the trade - For all we know the Wild rejected other offers that included other RHD and the only way the Kings were going to be able to acquire Fiala is by sending Faber the other way. So it's tough.
Another thing here is that the loss of Faber is immediately less painful if Clarke turns out to be a star defenseman.... There's still a chance Clarke ends up being the better of the two d-men. If that happens, are we really still crying about losing Faber? Probably not. Especially if Fiala continues to produce at a point per game pace over the next 4-5 seasons.
Spence is another factor here. Spence had a higher points per 60 minutes than Faber last year (also higher than Moritz Seider and many other very good defensemen and just lower than Doughty and Durzi). There's still a chance Spence ends up being a verrrrrrrry solid top 4 d. So we'll have to see how things look a couple years from now to really truly evaluate the situation. If Spence and Clarke both hit... Losing Faber ends up stinging a whole lot less.
Last edited:
