Let’s try to consolidate rumors for Justin Faulk and potential Right-handed Defenseman deals in a post-Andersson NHLMarket.
I’ll start off with a common one, Boston Bruins… or as one fan so affectionately referred to them in the Comments as the “Ruins.” I kind of enjoyed this article because of what the comments brought to the on-going discussion.
One name the Bruins are linked to is veteran defenseman Justin Faulk from the St. Louis Blues.
“Teams looking to add a veteran right-shot defenceman to their roster are eyeing Faulk, who has another year left on his contract,” Pagnotta wrote. “He owns a 15-team no-trade list and will have some say if he’s moved. The Blues are open to it, but will they find the right deal? Teams Reportedly Linked: Toronto, Boston, Dallas.”
Faulk is in the sixth year of his seven-year, $45.5 million deal with the Blues, so he could be part of the Bruins’ roster for two playoff runs.
The 33-year-old is a three-time NHL All-Star and would add some more experience to the Bruins’ blue line.
Faulk plays well defensively, and he can also add some offense to the backend. With the Blues this season, he’s recorded 11 goals and 19 assists for 30 points in 57 games.
Peanut Gallery: Nope acquiring Faulk is a horrible idea.....Wouldn't even pick up the phone from St. Louis. Notice anyone that everyone is for sale there and no one is buying.....Thomas, Kyrou, Faulk and even Bennington....They're asking price has been ridiculous for ANYONE you might be interested in them.....This is a team to stay away from....p.s. Ruins should also avoid any future dealings with FLORIDA AND CHICAGO.....There is a big ugly shoe about to drop.....And if you thought the Marchand give away was bad.....wait til the rest of this disaster unfolds... -smirnov
Faulk that! Guys on social security - Biff Embiid
This would be a really good move! Actually they need TWO guys like this (although, lets avoid penalty-prone guys). Their defense as it stands today, will not aid them in winning a playoff series. Other thoughts out there?? - Lou
Side-Note: Lou might be an undercover agent and his comment has been voted 2/9 (like/dislike)
Depends on what Faulk would take for St. Louis to move him. He would fit nicely and Bruins could use him on the right side. He costs 6.5 on the cap, however I see his contract was more up front so the final 2 years he actually is owed 4.5 million. If you could get Blues to take back a million bringing cap to 5.5 and actual salary 3.5 it's worth looking at. Bruins then could use the draft as Defense and give the new prospects a little more development time. Right now it's hogwash as we have a daily dose of players coming to Boston who writers/ analysts just are making up their own armchair GM trades. Let's let Sweeney do the dealing then debate it further.
Go Bruins -Nor
1.) #1 pick is nonnegotiable.
2.) The first one to give us a prospect that is a past #1 wins the sweeps.
3.) Yes we can talk expiring contract you don't want to minor help with Faulk's salary.
MandatoryDenial wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 07:54 am
Here is my idea of a return for Faulk.
1.) #1 pick is nonnegotiable.
2.) The first one to give us a prospect that is a past #1 wins the sweeps.
3.) Yes we can talk expiring contract you don't want to minor help with Faulk's salary.
I think they absolutely Need to eat 50% of remaining contract. Do what you have to in order to maximize faulk return
MandatoryDenial wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 07:54 am
Here is my idea of a return for Faulk.
1.) #1 pick is nonnegotiable.
2.) The first one to give us a prospect that is a past #1 wins the sweeps.
3.) Yes we can talk expiring contract you don't want to minor help with Faulk's salary.
I think they absolutely Need to eat 50% of remaining contract. Do what you have to in order to maximize faulk return
Agree. We need to retain 50% on Faulk, Schenn, and Binnington to maximize the return and probably to move them to contenders period. Most of those teams are capped out.
I agree that we could use Faulk on the team next year. But I'm of the belief that we need to maximize returns and get more assets into this organization to get back to being competitive. His value with a 50% salary retained for this playoff run and next should be very high.
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
Obviously they dont NEED to. And it goes without saying that salary retention is for a bigger price tag. But to believe faulk will be equal to or more productive next season is wishful thinking. The only logical reason to keep faulk is to potentially be competitive next season.
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
Obviously they dont NEED to. And it goes without saying that salary retention is for a bigger price tag. But to believe faulk will be equal to or more productive next season is wishful thinking. The only logical reason to keep faulk is to potentially be competitive next season.
That's a bad thing? Buys time for the Mailman and Jiricek. Hey, if the GMs believe they need to make a deal I'm down with it, but I'm ok with hanging on to him and seeing what develops down the road.
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
Obviously they dont NEED to. And it goes without saying that salary retention is for a bigger price tag. But to believe faulk will be equal to or more productive next season is wishful thinking. The only logical reason to keep faulk is to potentially be competitive next season.
That's a bad thing? Buys time for the Mailman and Jiricek. Hey, if the GMs believe they need to make a deal I'm down with it, but I'm ok with hanging on to him and seeing what develops down the road.
It would be nice to get a positive return for once. Next season is likely another middling season (ok with this) so im not worried about needing faulk to fill minutes for a season. Id rather have a season of opportunity. Doesnt mean you cant sign a RH veteran for 1 year. Just means it should not be faulk.
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
exactly.. not like he's blocking some stud rhd in the system
Agree 100 percent.
And it seems folks tend to forget the repercussions of "getting rid" of a player just to do so. In this case, Mailloux becomes 2RHD and XXX becomes 3 RHD. That's insane. And if 55 gets hurt .....
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
exactly.. not like he's blocking some stud rhd in the system
Agree 100 percent.
And it seems folks tend to forget the repercussions of "getting rid" of a player just to do so. In this case, Mailloux becomes 2RHD and XXX becomes 3 RHD. That's insane. And if 55 gets hurt .....
Of course you still have intentions of filling faulks position. It just will not be faulk. You bring in assets with the trade and sign a free agent for a season. You are not signing a 2RHD. You are allowing LM to grab some of faulks minutes and opportunities while also having a spot to factor in jiricek for his cup of coffee. Nobody blocked. Opportunities to be seized. The only logical reason to not make this move is if you see a path to be competitive next season with faulk on the roster.
All in all we need some darts to throw. We already know what faulk is this season. He should no doubt be able to at least bring a 1st round equivalent pick. Im not willing to count on that next deadline.
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
exactly.. not like he's blocking some stud rhd in the system
Agree 100 percent.
And it seems folks tend to forget the repercussions of "getting rid" of a player just to do so. In this case, Mailloux becomes 2RHD and XXX becomes 3 RHD. That's insane. And if 55 gets hurt .....
At least in Boston’s case, they could send Peeke or Jokiharju back as a cap dump. They may not be good enough for a PO teams top 4 but for a re-whatever team they are passable as a placeholder until a prospect steals the spot.
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
exactly.. not like he's blocking some stud rhd in the system
Agree 100 percent.
And it seems folks tend to forget the repercussions of "getting rid" of a player just to do so. In this case, Mailloux becomes 2RHD and XXX becomes 3 RHD. That's insane. And if 55 gets hurt .....
Of course you still have intentions of filling faulks position. It just will not be faulk. You bring in assets with the trade and sign a free agent for a season. You are not signing a 2RHD. You are allowing LM to grab some of faulks minutes and opportunities while also having a spot to factor in jiricek for his cup of coffee. Nobody blocked. Opportunities to be seized. The only logical reason to not make this move is if you see a path to be competitive next season with faulk on the roster.
All in all we need some darts to throw. We already know what faulk is this season. He should no doubt be able to at least bring a 1st round equivalent pick. Im not willing to count on that next deadline.
I think you can trade Faulk, but I don't think your plan is as easy as it seems. Signing a 1 year rental isn't that easy, except for skewer level players who are just hoping to survive another year. If you want development from young guys, you need people around them that know how to make hockey happen. If you continue to see 3rd level at best play out of LM, you will also be signing a person who is doing the same on the 2nd pairing. No one is coming here capable of filling a 2nd pairing defense spot for 1 year. Those guys sign minimum 2 year deals. Faulk makes sense to stick around for 1 more year because of the age issue of Jiricek. Next year, I 100 percent agree with you about trading for maximum value.
You guys act like Faulk wasn't a respected player in this league for the last 2 seasons. You guys just chose him to be the whipping boy after Krug and then this year had your come to jesus moment. He can play, and his drop off isn't what you guys predicted. He will most certainly bring similar value next year, especially as teams understand their cap situations more going forward.
There's a value proposition for the Blues, and a 1st round pick by itself doesn't really get it done for me. Now if the Blues are able to package together some kind of trade deals to put another young body into that RHD role, and as you say have darts to throw. I'm OK with that. Jiricek is coming in 2 years and will likely get a cup of coffee next year. If you want to put a Timer on LM and have him compete against another young prospect next year I'm OK with that. But currently the blues don't HAVE that.
DawgDad wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:33 am
The Blues do not NEED to trade Fauk this season. Retention must return value in players or picks.
exactly.. not like he's blocking some stud rhd in the system
Agree 100 percent.
And it seems folks tend to forget the repercussions of "getting rid" of a player just to do so. In this case, Mailloux becomes 2RHD and XXX becomes 3 RHD. That's insane. And if 55 gets hurt .....
Of course you still have intentions of filling faulks position. It just will not be faulk. You bring in assets with the trade and sign a free agent for a season. You are not signing a 2RHD. You are allowing LM to grab some of faulks minutes and opportunities while also having a spot to factor in jiricek for his cup of coffee. Nobody blocked. Opportunities to be seized. The only logical reason to not make this move is if you see a path to be competitive next season with faulk on the roster.
All in all we need some darts to throw. We already know what faulk is this season. He should no doubt be able to at least bring a 1st round equivalent pick. Im not willing to count on that next deadline.
I think you can trade Faulk, but I don't think your plan is as easy as it seems. Signing a 1 year rental isn't that easy, except for skewer level players who are just hoping to survive another year. If you want development from young guys, you need people around them that know how to make hockey happen. If you continue to see 3rd level at best play out of LM, you will also be signing a person who is doing the same on the 2nd pairing. No one is coming here capable of filling a 2nd pairing defense spot for 1 year. Those guys sign minimum 2 year deals. Faulk makes sense to stick around for 1 more year because of the age issue of Jiricek. Next year, I 100 percent agree with you about trading for maximum value.
You guys act like Faulk wasn't a respected player in this league for the last 2 seasons. You guys just chose him to be the whipping boy after Krug and then this year had your come to jesus moment. He can play, and his drop off isn't what you guys predicted. He will most certainly bring similar value next year, especially as teams understand their cap situations more going forward.
There's a value proposition for the Blues, and a 1st round pick by itself doesn't really get it done for me. Now if the Blues are able to package together some kind of trade deals to put another young body into that RHD role, and as you say have darts to throw. I'm OK with that. Jiricek is coming in 2 years and will likely get a cup of coffee next year. If you want to put a Timer on LM and have him compete against another young prospect next year I'm OK with that. But currently the blues don't HAVE that.
Who is you guys? I want to trade faulk because he HAS value. Not because i think he is trash. He needs to go because it wouod be nice to get a return for a player instead of jumping through hoops to clear the roster space (not saying we would do that for faulk but it is something we have done hanging onto assets too long… saad and leddy)
Thats all we need next year is a bunch of guys saying “i was on the trade faulk bandwagon the entire time”
Ps- i dont necessarily trade faulk for just a 1st. I believe faulk is one of the most attractive defenders on the market and should fetch more than a first. It was just me establishing a basis to get me to listen to the trade.
But i also dont think what faulk brings to the team between this deadline and next is worth the gamble of him probably not repeating.
