Jump to content
Hockey Wilderness
  • What Does Brock Faber Need To Do To Generate Value On His Contract?


    Image courtesy of Brace Hemmelgarn-USA TODAY Sports
    Justin Hein

    The Minnesota Wild just made a major investment in their future. In the most expensive move of his offseason, Bill Guerin signed defenseman Brock Faber to an eight-year, $8.5 million per year contract. And they signed it a year before Faber’s current deal expired. 

    This move is like paying off a mortgage or student loans for an NHL franchise. Minnesota won’t have as much flexibility or cash on hand for the next few years, but they’ll probably come out ahead over the lifetime of the investment. Without that flexibility, the team might miss out on a better investment, but they’ve taken care of a payment they had to make eventually. 

    Now, the big question is this: Can Brock Faber pay off the value of this contract? Did the Wild get a good deal? 

    That’s a complicated question for many reasons. Assigning a dollar value to a hockey player is extremely complicated. The Wild also own exclusive rights to sign Faber for the first five years of this extension, which gives them a great deal of leverage. That means we should expect Faber’s cap hit to come out lower than his on-ice value. But how much of a discount could the front office expect with this leverage? 

    Let’s address the hard numbers first. According to The Athletic’s analytical model, Faber will likely produce more on-ice value than the cap hit over the contract lifetime. 

    That gives a good baseline, but theory will take you only so far. Hockey is a team game, so measuring on-ice impact is difficult, especially with only one season of data. Even the most enthusiastic stat-heads prefer to work with at least two seasons of data, and ideally three. Furthermore, the numbers in this model only show what Faber has done in the past. Projecting into the future adds another degree of uncertainty. 

    Understanding the context around Faber’s numbers can reduce that statistical uncertainty, although it introduces some level of human bias. Still, it helps to consider who Faber played with (both opponents and teammates). The model attempts to account for the quality of teammates and opponents, but it’s still important to contextualize Faber’s role.  

    Per Natural Stat Trick, Faber spent most of his five-on-five minutes next to Jake Middleton (802 min) and Jonas Brodin (561). Middleton and Brodin are conservative in the offensive zone, which gave Faber license to jump into the offensive play. He also spent more time with Kirill Kaprizov (526), Joel Eriksson Ek (484), and Matt Boldy (481) than any other player. 

    So, that tells us the Wild expected Faber to bolster the top line’s scoring. Interestingly, this group of six players had a very definite role according to Dom Luszczyszyn’s model. Evason and Hynes used them to attack their opponent’s best offensive weapons. It was a difficult defensive assignment, but if they could win back the puck, there would be scoring opportunities (partly since they all played with Kaprizov). 

    Wild Player Roles by xRating.png

    Faber’s role was to cover Kaprizov defensively, allowing the sniper to take more risks. Faber could chip in on offense since he always had Brodin and Middleton ready to backcheck. Based on their competition, this was a fairly demanding role and a perfect role for a modern top-pair defenseman. But with the support around him, it wasn’t as demanding of a role as might be expected of a team’s No. 1 defenseman. 

    Based on this role and his analytical production, it would be entirely fair to say Faber’s 2023-24 season turned in top-pairing quality play. At age 21 and in his rookie season, that’s an encouraging performance. Even if he regresses from that level in the short term, he should continue to improve and eventually outperform that as his contract extension ages. 

    So, is that enough? 

    The short answer is “yes.” If Brock Faber’s floor is top-pairing defense, that’s still break-even value by Luszczyszyn’s model. If Faber turns into a true No. 1 defenseman (top 15 in the NHL), the deal will be one of the best contracts in the league. 

    Faber Contract tails.JPG

    So let’s work off that number in the middle, based on the Athletic’s projection for Faber’s value throughout his career. It’s as good a guess as any publicly available number into how much value the deal adds to the Wild roster. 

    By this estimate, Faber gave up about $13 million to lock in eight years of NHL employment and salary. He also gave up three years of unrestricted free agency in his age-28, age-29, and age-30 seasons. Those are typically very fat years for an NHL defenseman. In return, he essentially insures himself against the chance of a major regression in 2024-25 or a career-altering injury. 

    That’s undeniably a good deal for Faber, given that he can only talk to Minnesota for the next five years. Given that leverage, is this optimal value for Minnesota? Analyzing leverage can be tricky, so contract comparables are one of the best ways to break that down. Usually, these deals for young players are rare, but Guerin has signed two in recent years: Boldy and Kaprizov. 

    Both players had played one season for the Wild, just like Faber. COVID had shortened Kaprizov’s to just 55 games, and Boldy split his 89 games between 2021-22 and 2022-23. At the time of his signing, Kaprizov’s deal presented a surplus value (team-friendly due to leverage) of about $16.5 million over four years. Boldy’s rounded out Luszczyszyn’s top-10 contracts in hockey with a whopping surplus of $3.2 million this year and a projection of $24 million in the next six years. 

    Of these deals, Kaprizov’s is probably the most player-friendly. While he was underpaid by $3 million more than Faber, he got out from under that and went into free agency sooner. He’ll be 29 in his first UFA season, and Faber will be 30. Kaprizov will also have fewer years of NHL wear-and-tear on his body and will be significantly overpaid as a superstar forward. That’s how NHL free agency works. Faber’s deal is probably more team-friendly since the Wild get more years of cheap play from Faber than from Kaprizov. 

    On the other hand, Boldy’s deal is so team-friendly that it looks like Guerin’s best-case scenario for the Faber extension. Boldy signed away his prime years just like Faber but at a much steeper discount. Taken together, the extensions for Kaprizov and Boldy make Faber’s look totally fair. 

    Ultimately, this is another excellent bet by the Wild GM. It’s a fair market value for the Wild in exchange for the lengthy term and the flexibility they gave up with that term. Furthermore, the two sides met at a number that’s in line with his projected value over the life of that contract in light of that leverage. 

    The only remaining wrinkle is that it’s tough to reliably project a player’s career off of any one season of data, let alone their rookie year. Fortunately, this contract leaves room for Faber to underperform or overperform the number by a great deal without becoming a total rip-off for either party. 

    Faber gets his generational wealth, and he’ll likely outplay the value of this extension. The only way he can’t is for his rookie year to be the best season of his life. The interesting thing about the NHL is that they don’t usually let a rookie defenseman luck into a top-pair-quality season. They normally attack them, and Faber held his own. 

    Nobody will know how good this contract is until Faber plays one or two more years in the NHL. By then, there won’t be much to do about it. For now, call it a win for both sides and enjoy eight more years of Brock Faber in Forest Green. 

    Think you could write a story like this? Hockey Wilderness wants you to develop your voice, find an audience, and we'll pay you to do it. Just fill out this form.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Featured Comments

    Faber was a top 5-6 scorer for the team all season.  He was also very good at engaging and reading plays and attacking. He was also very capable defensively, though not to the extent of a Brodin or Spurgeon.  The plus side is he looked more at home as a power play guy than they do, which is frightening for his level of experience.

    To be so well-rounded, durable, and a complete ice-tilter as a rookie is worth the investment.

    • Like 6
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think what we need to do in analysis is to look at the current value going 8 year deal vs. going with the bridge deals. Since a bridge deal likely doesn't get signed right now, what would a couple of bridge deals look like before a longterm deal is signed? 

    I'm not sure about the actual games played requirement for RFAs, but I think it is safe to assume that the 1st bridge deal, Faber has very little leverage. The 2nd bridge deal, he'd have the offersheet option. Faber is a little different case than most in his category since he is playing out his dream for the team he always wanted to play with. He's also young enough where $2m-3m is a lot of money. His agent probably wouldn't think so, but a 21 year old kid living at home with his parents probably would. 

    Let's just say that through the 3 years of bridge deals, he would average $4.5m which comes out to $13.5m. Let's also assume that he is at this level or better in play. Going into his final RFA year, he'd get the big contract, probably maxed in years. What would that number be even with a hometown discount? It would take him to year 33. I'd have to assume that with the cap rising and him having more data, $10m would be the least he would sign for. It's simply a "pay me now, or pay me later" type of scenario. But, we'd get him for 4 years longer. 

    Was it smart of Guerin to lock him in? This can be debated all over. I'm a little more conservative in this aspect and would have wanted more data for the big signing. My approach probably would look more like a hybrid, where a 2 year bridge comes out of an ELC, especially when burning a year for 2 games. Then, if everything works out, I'd probably go for the 8 year one after the 1st bridge deal. In this deal, you'd have him through year 31. You also get 2 years of very high value, but I'd probably have to pay more on the long deal, yet I'd have more data to back up that number.

    Why would Guerin sign him after seeing him only a year? Well, besides the year in the N, he was heavily scouted in his 2 Gopher years to understand his talent. One thing I found very interesting is that even though Faber was a rookie, he very rarely got juked out of position. Even more impressive was if he was, he almost always recovered before the opposition could get around him. In context, we saw Chisholm get juked and even more from Hunt. If you're watching this from the GM's booth, you can see that talent. Another factor was him playing the final 1/4 of the year with cracked ribs and still performing well. Was he less than his normal self? Yes! But he was still our best defender on the ice. So, Guerin knows he's also durable and can play through pain. 

    Out of the 3 he resigned, I'd say Boldy was the riskiest one. Both Kaprizov and Faber you could immediately tell were special players and had more in the tank than most other players in the N. With Boldy, he still has that same potential, but it wasn't immediately displayed and he still has more work to do. And, for ODC and Dean, locking up Faber long term does help Kaprizov with his future decision. I believe it is positively in the Wild direction. 

    At some point, though, Guerin is going to have to use the bridge deal method. He won't be able to sign everyone like this. I think it is smart to give Rossi another year of leash before resigning him, likely a bridge. However, I also think Rossi will add to his value this season, especially if the reports are correct that he is stronger than last season. Short doesn't make you small, short and skinny makes you small.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Going into next off season the Wild will have 21 million in cap space.  That is with Brocks contract.  Figure Kaprizov will get a pay raise of around 1.5 to 2.5 million with an extension.  They still have 21 million in cap space, because his extension wouldn't go into effect until the next season.  So a one year rental of 1.5 to 2.5 is possible.  With that the Wild still have 18.5 to 19.5 million to fill the roster out replacing Johanson, signing Rossi and Khusnutdinov.

    Getting really tired of the media saying that the Wild are cash strapped with Foglino and Hartman contracts.  They will be perfectly fine. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 8/10/2024 at 9:22 AM, mnfaninnc said:

    This has to be on autofill!

    I usually copy and paste it from his article bylines. Has to be a common technique for bloggers around the league because his analysis is truly second to none. 

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 8/9/2024 at 4:34 PM, Citizen Strife said:

    Faber was a top 5-6 scorer for the team all season.  He was also very good at engaging and reading plays and attacking. He was also very capable defensively, though not to the extent of a Brodin or Spurgeon.  The plus side is he looked more at home as a power play guy than they do, which is frightening for his level of experience.

    To be so well-rounded, durable, and a complete ice-tilter as a rookie is worth the investment.

    Really exciting that he could evolve into an all-defense or a 200-foot defenseman, and either way it's really easy to imagine he pays off this contract. Gives him a great floor and ceiling!

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 8/10/2024 at 9:47 AM, mnfaninnc said:

    I think what we need to do in analysis is to look at the current value going 8 year deal vs. going with the bridge deals. Since a bridge deal likely doesn't get signed right now, what would a couple of bridge deals look like before a longterm deal is signed? 

    This is a good point, and it's why I included Kaprizov as a comparable. For Minnesota, it's mostly about gaining surplus value, and for the player it's all about long-term security to insure against the chance of injury. 

    Kaprizov's deal probably provides Minnesota with less value since it was shorter, and they'll have to pay UFA prices sooner. Faber's deal gives up more cash, but gets him more security -- that's what makes it a win-win. 

    The bridge deal route may have ended up more costly for Minnesota, but it would have allowed them to pay Faber less in his RFA seasons (2025-26 through 2029-30. That's interesting since it's supposed to be The Window. Probably implies that Guerin has a lot of faith in Yurov, Buium, and the other prospects during their cheap years. 

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 minutes ago, Justin Hein said:

    This is a good point, and it's why I included Kaprizov as a comparable. For Minnesota, it's mostly about gaining surplus value, and for the player it's all about long-term security to insure against the chance of injury. 

    Kaprizov's deal probably provides Minnesota with less value since it was shorter, and they'll have to pay UFA prices sooner. Faber's deal gives up more cash, but gets him more security -- that's what makes it a win-win. 

    The bridge deal route may have ended up more costly for Minnesota, but it would have allowed them to pay Faber less in his RFA seasons (2025-26 through 2029-30. That's interesting since it's supposed to be The Window. Probably implies that Guerin has a lot of faith in Yurov, Buium, and the other prospects during their cheap years. 

    Another shout out for the HW Podcast.  Just listened to the 'Free Agency' podcast.  All killer, no filler.  Great job boys!!

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, Pewterschmidt said:

    Another shout out for the HW Podcast.  Just listened to the 'Free Agency' podcast.  All killer, no filler.  Great job boys!!

    Thanks man! You can find me on twitter @Justin_the_Hein -- we'd love to get some fan questions and that's the easiest place to reach me. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...