Welcome back to part two of my wanderings through the ever-changing, evolving landscape of defencemen contracts.

Last week I covered off most of the newer, large contracts that were signed over the summer like Cale Makar, Zack Werenski, Seth Jones, to name but a few. If you missed last week's read, you can check it out here and catch up.

I'll stick with the IKEA analogy to start. Like any trip to IKEA, it is easy to get detoured and sidetracked. That said, before I dive into some of those contracts, we need to re-evaluate we need to tie in the two big contracts signed in the last week, Morgan Rielly and Adam Fox.

Fox signed for pretty much exactly what was expected. I had thought his Norris Award might bump him above his immediate comparable, Cale Makar. The only surprise was the seven- and not eight-year length of the deal. The reasoning for that can only be properly determined by Fox and his agent. For our purposes, we don't really care. A basic rule of thumb in dynasty leagues is to never look further ahead than three years. Too much changes too fast, so we're not going to. With this deal, Fox tucks right in behind Makar and alongside Carlsson for contract value. It's my belief Makar has a higher offensive ceiling than Fox. Some might disagree and I wouldn't argue too strongly with that opposing view, but Makar has a higher ceiling (see what I did there).

The other signing was Rielly at $7.5M for eight years with the Leafs. Had he gone to free agency he would have hauled in $8.5 to $9M on the open market. Rielly's desire to remain a Maple Leaf long term has his fantasy owners fist pumping. With the increase in salary across the blueline these past few months, getting Rielly locked up significantly below current market value is a huge win.

This creates a nice seg-way into a player currently breaking into a new fantasy tier of offence and offering a direct comparable to Rielly's new deal, Aaron Ekblad.

Since Ekblad signed his eight-year, $7.5M deal in Florida I have steered clear. With his 40-point production it just stuck out like an albatross of a deal. But as players like Jones and Werenski signed for millions more Ekblad looked more and more attractive with each signing. For the last two years he teased with 50-point paces, interrupted by injury and COVID. This year, he's off to a fast start and baring another injury or debilitating fifth wave of the pandemic, he should eclipse 50-points for the first time in his career. 

As he improves offensively and contracts around him jump significantly I am moving onto team Buy Ekblad (so are his current owners though). His point totals are moving closer to Rielly territory. And with a higher shot volume he becomes more attractive with every passing day.

Last year I picked Justin Faulk out of free agency, I needed a defenceman that could fill my hits, blocks and shots. Knowing he had 40-point potential made his $6.5 cap hit feel bearable. I was running some high-profile entry-level contracts in Rasmus Dahlin and Quinn Hughes that balanced my blueline budget quite reasonably. I didn't think I would keep him, a one and done, so to speak. Then he seemed to settle into St. Louis and defencemen got paid and I had to re-evaluate.

I just kept looking back and forth at Faulk's production versus a Seth Jones and asked myself was a 15-point difference worth $3M in salary? The answer is a clear no. I made the estimates that Jones would reasonably hit 55-points in Chicago and Faulk would produce 40-points in St. Louis. That resulted in 5.79 points per million for Jones and 6.15 points per million for Faulk.

There is even room for my estimates to be off a couple points each way to create an argument that Faulk is directly more valuable than Jones in a points only pool – based on the simple strategy of 10-points per million in salary. Jones has only hit 55-points once in his career so I may be high. Faulk has surpassed 40-points once and teased with 40-point seasons (pace) three separate occasions.

There was no way anyone could have considered Faulk – Jones close to even value last year. I suspect, even at $9.5M, the Jones owner would to reject an offer for Faulk one for one. Not only do you have new value in Faulk, you have hidden value. If I were in a cap crunch and owned Jones I would ask for a nice add-on to Faulk if I went that route.

The warning flag I need to point out is on name value. Just because you recognize a player holds the same cap-value as a player with more name value, does not mean other owners will hold the same view – nor will you be able to convince them (it will just make you desperate and artificially deflate trade value even more).

This is a one way value capitalization and you need to understand and accept that. You won't get equal value for Faulk when it comes time to sell. Labels are hard to shed. I can't stress that enough. Faulk holds a stigma as an overpriced defenceman. There is no expectation he will suddenly produce 50-points. You're getting what you're getting. And you would later be trading what others are perceiving.

You've been warned. Acquiring Faulk is essentially a buy and hold, or sell for undervalue.

Part his offensive value is limited is due to his teammate, Torey Krug, who holds the same AAV at $6.5M. Clearly, he is the better own in points pools. There's legit 60-point potential. Krug really speaks for himself. Heads and tails a better points-only option. In multi-cat, Faulk's value jacks up with the peripheral stat-line her consistently provides.

There are players with similar contracts to Faulk, Ryan Ellis ($6.25M) and Ivan Provorov ($6.75M) that we need to re-evaluate with the same value lens (Side note, it is pure coincidence I've selected two sets of teammates).

Provorov hasn't looked as enticing since signing his $6.75M contract. He provides similar offensive output as Faulk. Time to re-evaluate. Shave a few hits and his stat-line looks eerily similar to Faulk. The extra $500 000 he is paying does knock his value a bit.

Ellis requires a full re-evaluation. Out from under the shadow of Roman Josi, Ellis has the potential to lead a number one power-play unit for a full season for the first time. There is clear, untapped upside if he settles into that role and takes full advantage. We could see him eclipse 50-points for the first time as a result.

Then there is Jeff Petry. Ignore the horrible start, he will be fine. I would not expect him to push 60-points again, but he doesn't have to. At $6.25M he only needs 40-points to push ahead of players like Jones and Werenski for value.  Yep, I said it

Following this train of thought leads us to Jake Muzzin. In multi-cat pools his $5.6M contract was palatable due to his consistent hits and blocks along with a reliable 40-point pace more years than not. Locked into an offensive city like Toronto he is a plug-and play reliable option. A Muzzin owner appreciates his consistent stat coverage and likely won't undersell him.  The cap shift lets him settle into rosters a little more comfortably.

And finally, for this week anyway, we have the underwhelming. The players we have high hopes for but just seem to break our hearts, Colton Paryako ($5.5M), Rasmus Ristolainen ($5.4M), Ryan Pulock ($5M this year, $6.15M starting next year), and Noah Hanifin ($4.95M). At least the first three, expectations were to become annual 45-50-point multi-cat monsters.

Ristolainen delivers on the peripheral front but we have watched their collective offensive production stagnate and decline, Parayko is perennially buried behind more offensive options in St. Louis & Pulock is just a natural born heart breaker that likes to hit and block (being taped to a seven foot 44 year old anchor named  Zdeno Chara, is in no way helping him this year) and tease and disappoint.

And then there is Hanifin, who is ultimately included due to unrealistic expectations that remain from his draft year. He was never an offensive dynamo. Unfortunately that expectation was attached to him due to his high draft position.  A guy you want on your second pairing in the NHL. Not in your starting six online.

Their values shift up compared to some of the new big contracts, but shift down slightly compared to those formerly overpriced players. Essentially, maintaining that, 'meh', underwhelming offensive feeling with solid peripheral value.

This feels like a natural place to pause for this week. Next week we'll look into the rising cost of third pairing defencemen. Yes, even the cost of mashers increased, sadly. The financial shift on defencemen hit all pairings.

At this point, we've found the IKEA escalator and are moving downstairs into the décor, small appliance and kitchenware sections (I have clearly shopped there too often). You know, the sections that finish off your rooms and your 'D-Core'.

We'll ride the escalator together next week and see what's in stock.

Thanks for reading, hope your enjoying the maze.

(all salary information pulled from capfriendly.com; all stats pulled from frozentools.com

give me a follow on twitter @doylelb4