1-2 years too long and 0.5-1M AAV too much but that seems to be the case with these UFA deals. This is more of a replacement for Parayko on the second pair, who will move up when the Blues (likely now) let Pietrangelo test free agency. If I'm the Blues I would have rather looked to keep Pietrangelo around by simply moving Edmundson for futures (or letting him go as a UFA) and offering the 9.6M in budgeted cap space that the same two players used this season plus some of the cap inflation to get Pietrangelo under contract long term.

The money is about right, but the term is at least 2 years too long. Paying this guy until he's 35 probably won't end well.

Was this deal better or worse than the Spergeon contract?

Seabrook 2.0

This is a terrible deal. Spurgeon's contract is good.

Blues have 16m to sign 7 players including RFA Dunn and if they want two UFAs Schenn and Pietrangelo. So either way the Blues will getting rid of big cap players that currently on the roster.
The trade and signing. It was a pro active by the Blues to solidify their roster for next year. Yeah, I don't like the term that much.

If you’re a Blues fan, you have to hope this doesn’t mean the end of Pietrangelo in STL.

Possibly, but I actually think Faulk will age worse than Seabrook.

This team is going to tank after this season. Losing Pietrangelo, Schenn, maybe Bo.

Toronto.

This stinks of buyout before Year 6, maybe even sooner. As others have said, this makes signing Pietrangelo a virtual impossibility, which is odd as by almost all measures he’s a better all around D-Man than Faulk.

Dom Luszczyszyn’s player rankings in the Athletic - where he looks at the total value of each player, gives Faulk a 0.8 or “2nd Pair” (vs a 0.2 for Edmundson or “3rd Pair”) but Pietrangelo is a 2.2 or “Elite” putting him amongst the top-20 D-Men in the NhL!

So they go ahead and win the trade (or at least break even when you consider the addition of Bokk and the upgraded draft pick) but then go ahead an massively lose in signing this extension.

Unfortunately Edmundson was already moved this afternoon. In the Faulk trade. ?

What I meant in that post is trade Edmundson for futures or minimal cap space back instead of getting Faulk, and re-sign Pietrangelo using the budget of Pietrangelo + Edmundson (9.6M), but evidently the wording was unclear so I've edited that post.

Too much term, not surprised at money though.

and i thought the trade was bad...

I agree. And I also think CAR won this trade hands down. Faulk is a PP specialist behind Hamilton. And they weren't gonna re-sign him anyway.

Wow that's a lot for a number four guy...

Honestly Leafs could afford to offer him 10x5. I would do that

What makes Faulk so bad?

https://youtu.be/HCUu5ARAQzA as per Doug Armstrong first 5 years are No trade Clause Years then a M-NTC 15 Team No Trade List after @Banks @Jarvis

He's not bad, but seems to be quite overrated. A decent powerplay option, but at 5v5, he's a second pairing defenseman at best.

When you use this site's compare option I can't help but notice that points per game per career seems to be what they look at. Faulk's numbers are in line with those players who have put up similar numbers.

Parayko, Pietrangelo, Gunnarsson, Bouwmeester, Bortuzzo, Dunn. That’s a good defense on its own. And now Faulk? Seems suspicious...

This extension is a whole lot of yuck. I mean I guess it's ok to have a back up plan if Pietrangelo leaves, but that is a pretty big downgrade, and if he leaves, wouldn't have younger cheaper talent be better than replacing him with a player that is probably going to start an immediate and steep decline.

Carolina looks amazing here. Gardiner has been a better D than Faulk in recent years, and would actually fit Carolina or St. Louis better. For Carolina to get Gardiner signed for a value deal without a lot of term, then turn Faulk into an asset, they actually come out of it with a better built blueline with more certainty and an extra prospect. Wadell has been killing it this summer.