Confirmed Signing with Link: [MIN] D Brock Faber signs extension with the Wild (8 years, $8.5M AAV)

[Reality Czech]

Seems most of the NHL is moving toward locking in younger talent where the gamble is on future productivity rather than overpaying for past accomplishments.

For sure. I'm reading Bobby Orr's autobiography right now and in the chapter about the state of hockey today he wondered if some players lose motivation when they get paid so much money at such a young age. Said that maybe guys dig deeper when they are playing for their livelihood rather than getting too comfortable after signing that big contract. He did mention this wouldn't apply for all player, but the quote stuck out to me.

Regardless, I can see why Guerin would take this gamble and there certainly seems to be a trend of locking up young stars much earlier than ever before. Guess we'll see how it turns out but Faber sure seems to be the real deal.

 

[Reality Czech]

The idea is to lock young players up before they breakout. There is obviously risk, but it's the only way to get good value in a cap world, and to "underpay" your stars a bit.

If you wait to pay everyone until after they have their best season, you'll be in cap trouble quickly and will not do well in this league over the longer run.

Just like the Leafs right?

 

[Chainshot]

For sure. I'm reading Bobby Orr's autobiography right now and in the chapter about the state of hockey today he wondered if some players lose motivation when they get paid so much money at such a young age. Said that maybe guys dig deeper when they are playing for their livelihood rather than getting too comfortable after signing that big contract. He did mention this wouldn't apply for all player, but the quote stuck out to me.

Regardless, I can see why Guerin would take this gamble and there certainly seems to be a trend of locking up young stars much earlier than ever before. Guess we'll see how it turns out but Faber sure seems to be the real deal.

It’s possible Faber has a year where the contract weighs on him but from how he performed last year, even “just” doing what he did is worth the gamble IMO.

 

[rynryn]

He's a Kaprizov level of safe with regard to handing him big money early IMO. I know some people didn't like that Kaprizov contract either but it turned out just great for MIN. Sometimes being conservative will cost you more in the long run. Only reason to hold off the extension is if you need the cap space now (and pay for it later when the cap goes up and/or he gets even better) or you think he regresses and you can lock him up for less a year from now--even if he does regress it's not going to be so much that you wouldn't want him on your team.

 

[behemolari]

wild.

 

[Craig Ludwig]

How much more??? You believe he can be the best defenceman in the league in a year or two?

In two years from now a top D will command at least $12 Million

 

[BuiumSaveUs]

Is it amazing though if they have to wait 4 years for the contract to turn amazing?

It's a lot for a guy who's had 1 year. If continues to improve, he'll be paid approximately right around where he should be getting paid ( Heiskanen, Sergechev, Pietrangelo money ) in the top 15 for salaries.

Yeah if if fair value for what he brings now, and it’s locked in for 8 years starting next year.

 

[BKarchitect]

I’m not sure why people bring up contracts signed in 2020 (Pie) and 2021 (Heiskinen) and assume that has any relevance.

I really feel like NHL fans in general are the least financially savvy of any of the major sport fanbases. Its just this constant moaning and griping about how every season there’s an entire new crop of young players being overpaid and UFA’s being overpaid and it’s all just bad and nobody has any conservative fiscal responsibility. Moaning about contracts (on any team but yours) is like the #1 past time on this forum.

I think the dead cap and COVID era plus the fact that NHL salaries and finances have basically been so stagnant compared to other sports (Joe Sakic signed an offer sheet with a $15 million bonus freaking 27 years ago) that has given NHL fans either some complex that rising salaries are bad or made it hard to grapple with the notion that being the #X paid player at your position is not equal to being the #X “best” player at your position.

Nobody NFL fan thinks Tua or Lawrence is better than or equal to Mahomes. There is an acceptance of what it costs to lock down young players and that every year, contracts just cost more. Nobody is comparing the Tua contract to ones signed four years ago because fans realize that’s not applicable.

What you get paid, what your contract terms are…does not have a direct correlation to your “rank” in the hierarchy you have constructed on your head for how good somebody is. That’s not how this works.

 

[kp61c]

He's a Kaprizov level of safe with regard to handing him big money early IMO. I know some people didn't like that Kaprizov contract either but it turned out just great for MIN. Sometimes being conservative will cost you more in the long run. Only reason to hold off the extension is if you need the cap space now (and pay for it later when the cap goes up and/or he gets even better) or you think he regresses and you can lock him up for less a year from now--even if he does regress it's not going to be so much that you wouldn't want him on your team.

Kaprizov played 6 years in the khl before his first season in the nhl. One may say he was a bit more proven then Faber. As for the contract, it was bad for kaprizov from the get go. The deal should have been 2 years shorter.

 

[MuckOG]

Kaprizov played 6 years in the khl before his first season in the nhl. One may say he was a bit more proven then Faber. As for the contract, it was bad for kaprizov from the get go. The deal should have been 2 years shorter.

But there were quite a few posters on this site claiming that Kaprizov was "unproven" when he signed his deal.

The moral of the story is that no matter which player signs whatever deal, there will always be a certain percentage of fans criticizing it for whatever reason.

 

[von Rantala]

He loves to play home town, but Guerin gave him 8,5M. Guerin had all the lavarage, to sign more team friendly contract. After this contract all who play strong season, can ask atleast same. Guerin overpaying to his playrs one season prior current contract ending. He is bad GM.

 

[TaLoN]

He loves to play home town, but Guerin gave him 8,5M. Guerin had all the lavarage, to sign more team friendly contract. After this contract all who play strong season, can ask atleast same. Guerin overpaying to his playrs one season prior current contract ending. He is bad GM.

You think he's over paid, most every Minnesota fans who've been watching him since before he was even a Minnesota prospect (played locally for the Minnesota Gophers here at the U) love this deal and don't see overpayment at all, and can see this deal being a bargain for years.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

Lots of amateur negotiators in here. There is no way Faber leaves money on the table when he knows his worth. The good Dr. has already explained the numbers a couple times in this thread. This was the going rate for an extension eligible #1 D. If you think the Wild shouldn't have extended him yet, fine. But this "too much" argument isn't valid. Faber and his camp knew already what he would need for 8 years compared to recent deals. If you are an Athletic member, read the article on his extension. It provides some good context.

 

[rynryn]

Kaprizov played 6 years in the khl before his first season in the nhl. One may say he was a bit more proven then Faber. As for the contract, it was bad for kaprizov from the get go. The deal should have been 2 years shorter.

That KHL time wasn't enough to "prove" anything for quite a few people. Wild fans of course were optimistic before he set foot on the ice and even moreso after his first season. Faber? We were certain he'd be an NHL defenseman but no one expected (im sure some hoped) him to be a top pairing defenseman let alone prove it in his first season. The fact that he did it with a mix of D and O convinces me his value relative this contract is sustainable; maybe he takes a step back offensively if other D are taking PP time or whatever but that should be made up for by getting more proficient at D through experience. Or vice versa, taking more risks at D but scoring more offensively. or Just failing that and staying balanced. Not worried.

 

[TheUnusedCrayon]

The first half season numbers were great, combined with eye test. They did tail off a bit as the season wore on, which is not unheard of for NCAA players playing their first 82 game season, let alone one playing 25+ minutes a night with Spurgeon out.

Additionally, he played last 2 months of the season with broken ribs, which surely impacted his final numbers.

Then there are the external factors like the role he was thrust into as a rookie, is pretty close to unprecedented. Getting all the high leverage situations against top line comp, with a weak supporting cast due to injuries.

But if your looking for a specific example, Dom's model at the Athletic grades him well above average defensively. Broken down into the individual complements, he excelled at the expected goals against metric, in the top 10%, but had middling numbers in the actual results, and got hammered in his PK component(both impacted much more by team, specifically our goaltending was trash).

Appreciate the insight.

 

[BagHead]

For sure. I'm reading Bobby Orr's autobiography right now and in the chapter about the state of hockey today he wondered if some players lose motivation when they get paid so much money at such a young age. Said that maybe guys dig deeper when they are playing for their livelihood rather than getting too comfortable after signing that big contract. He did mention this wouldn't apply for all player, but the quote stuck out to me.

Regardless, I can see why Guerin would take this gamble and there certainly seems to be a trend of locking up young stars much earlier than ever before. Guess we'll see how it turns out but Faber sure seems to be the real deal.

I think incentives are a big part of what makes people do the things they do, and money is certainly an incentive that motives most of us, so I think there's truth to what Orr said. That said, these long and early contracts probably aren't the highest AAV contracts these guys will earn if they keep developing, so these donkeys may be more full than they used to be, but that carrot is still dangling.

I also think winning a Cup, international or Olympic medals, individual awards, and self-pride also provide incentive to players. I only want to pay big money to players who have intrinsic motivation, and I think Faber has that.

 

[norrisnick]

I think incentives are a big part of what makes people do the things they do, and money is certainly an incentive that motives most of us, so I think there's truth to what Orr said. That said, these long and early contracts probably aren't the highest AAV contracts these guys will earn if they keep developing, so these donkeys may be more full than they used to be, but that carrot is still dangling.

I also think winning a Cup, international or Olympic medals, individual awards, and self-pride also provide incentive to players. I only want to pay big money to players who have intrinsic motivation, and I think Faber has that.

All the Orr comments do is open a window into his own motivations. Which given everything we know about him, tracks.

 

[Lt Dan]

wild.

 

[TaLoN]

We were certain he'd be an NHL defenseman but no one expected (im sure some hoped) him to be a top pairing defenseman let alone prove it in his first season.

Depends if you're asking before or after people watched him play in the playoffs vs Dallas.
Before that showing, I think you're spot on... everyone expected an adjustment period.
After? Quite a few were already labeling Brock Faber as a Certified Stud.

It became a point of contention on HFWild on what to expect from him... many already anointing him a top 2-3 D-man on the team, others vehemently disagreeing. It wasn't until we got into the season and Faber proved his Certified Stud status that the very divisive subject was divisive no more.

 

[Chainshot]

I’m not sure why people bring up contracts signed in 2020 (Pie) and 2021 (Heiskinen) and assume that has any relevance.

I really feel like NHL fans in general are the least financially savvy of any of the major sport fanbases. Its just this constant moaning and griping about how every season there’s an entire new crop of young players being overpaid and UFA’s being overpaid and it’s all just bad and nobody has any conservative fiscal responsibility. Moaning about contracts (on any team but yours) is like the #1 past time on this forum.

I think the dead cap and COVID era plus the fact that NHL salaries and finances have basically been so stagnant compared to other sports (Joe Sakic signed an offer sheet with a $15 million bonus freaking 27 years ago) that has given NHL fans either some complex that rising salaries are bad or made it hard to grapple with the notion that being the #X paid player at your position is not equal to being the #X “best” player at your position.

Nobody NFL fan thinks Tua or Lawrence is better than or equal to Mahomes. There is an acceptance of what it costs to lock down young players and that every year, contracts just cost more. Nobody is comparing the Tua contract to ones signed four years ago because fans realize that’s not applicable.

What you get paid, what your contract terms are…does not have a direct correlation to your “rank” in the hierarchy you have constructed on your head for how good somebody is. That’s not how this works.

Hear, hear. It almost always boils down to how a particular fan thinks the player in question signing impacts a player on that fan's favorite team. It's not about the league-wide trend. It's not about the value of the particular player to the team signing them to the extension. It's all in the small world of their own fandom.

 

[TheUnusedCrayon]

Signing older players, guys on the cusp of the sunset of their careers to long, expensive deals seems to be an NHL tradition. Few of the younger player deals have proven bad due to level of play. Injury? Sure, but performance has not been an issue for these on younger players.

It's also relatively new. If they handed them out more frequently you'd likely see a lot more Nurse type of contracts.

 

[Chainshot]

It's also relatively new. If they handed them out more frequently you'd likely see a lot more Nurse type of contracts.

Nurse's current deal was his fourth contract. They bridged him twice ($3.2M for 2 years and $5.6M for 2 years which ended at UFA age). If Nurse had signed this as his second deal, I could see the beef.

 

[State of Hockey]

Signing older players, guys on the cusp of the sunset of their careers to long, expensive deals seems to be an NHL tradition. Few of the younger player deals have proven bad due to level of play. Injury? Sure, but performance has not been an issue for these on younger players.

Where are these fantastic deals for the team? The only "discount" over the life of the contract I can think of of the top of my head is Draisaitl. But that was a player with over 2 years of NHL action, and he was a #3 overall pick on a clear trend line to greatness coming off a year where he was 8th in points (and he's still hitting UFA status at age 29, so he'll be alright financially). I can easily think of more deals that haven't panned out for the team.

He's a Kaprizov level of safe with regard to handing him big money early IMO. I know some people didn't like that Kaprizov contract either but it turned out just great for MIN. Sometimes being conservative will cost you more in the long run. Only reason to hold off the extension is if you need the cap space now (and pay for it later when the cap goes up and/or he gets even better) or you think he regresses and you can lock him up for less a year from now--even if he does regress it's not going to be so much that you wouldn't want him on your team.

Nonsense. Kaprizov was 24 years-old and had proven himself against professionals for years. There was risk of course him only playing 55 games in the NHL, but it was much less than Faber's risk profile. And it was a fantastic deal for Kaprizov. He's still the 11th-highest paid winger and will hit UFA status at age 29. We won't get any significant discount on him, and we don't have control of him as long either.

Kaprizov played 6 years in the khl before his first season in the nhl. One may say he was a bit more proven then Faber. As for the contract, it was bad for kaprizov from the get go. The deal should have been 2 years shorter.

See above. It was a great contract for Kaprizov.

 

[Chainshot]

Where are these fantastic deals for the team? The only "discount" over the life of the contract I can think of of the top of my head is Draisaitl. But that was a player with over 2 years of NHL action, and he was a #3 overall pick on a clear trend line to greatness coming off a year where he was 8th in points (and he's still hitting UFA status at age 29, so he'll be alright financially). I can easily think of more deals that haven't panned out for the team.

Re-read my post since I did not say anything about a discount.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Nonsense. Kaprizov was 24 years-old and had proven himself against professionals for years. There was risk of course him only playing 55 games in the NHL, but it was much less than Faber's risk profile. And it was a fantastic deal for Kaprizov. He's still the 11th-highest paid winger and will hit UFA status at age 29. We won't get any significant discount on him, and we don't have control of him as long either.

Kaprizov was a weird thing, if you'll remember. We couldn't go long term because we didn't have the cap available to get to $10-$11+ million, and we couldn't bridge because of weird contract timing things; also couldn't bridge because his next contract would still be under the heavy part of the buyouts. We didn't have a lot of wiggle room anywhere.

So yeah, great contract for him, but also not a lot of other options.