Same Numbers, Wrong Timeline: Faulk–Andersson Trade Value

The hockey rumour mill is buzzing again. After the Calgary Flames moved Rasmus Andersson to the Vegas Golden Knights, it looks like the St. Louis Blues might be taking notes. Word is, they’re floating the idea of moving Justin Faulk for a similar return. Naturally, that has people asking whether it makes sense—or if it’s just another shake-up for the sake of headlines.

---

Comparing Faulk and Andersson: Does What the Blues Want Make Sense?

When you first line up Faulk and Andersson, it’s easy to see why the comparison gets made. Same-handedness and similar point totals, plus both have handled real NHL minutes—on paper, it almost works.

But hockey decisions aren’t made on paper. They’re made on timelines, and that’s where this comparison starts to wobble.

Andersson is 29. He was traded while still very much in his prime, someone whose best seasons were either underway or still ahead of him. Faulk, at 33 and more than 1,000 NHL games into his career, is in a very different place. He’s not a building block anymore. He’s a stabilizer. That matters, too. But not in the way the Blues want to admit it.

The Two Blueliners Have Similar Numbers, Different Contexts

If you just glance at the career totals, the gap doesn’t jump out. Their points-per-game rates are surprisingly close, and both have had seasons where they pushed into the 45–50 point range. That’s where the temptation comes from. There’s the idea that they live in the same neighbourhood.

But context does a lot of work here. It needs to be understood. Faulk came into the league as a shot-first, offence-driven defenceman. He was often the guy on some thin Carolina teams and was leaned on heavily to generate offence. A lot of his production came from volume shooting and power-play usage.

Andersson’s offence was different. He developed later and more methodically. It was less about firing pucks and more about moving them. His best seasons lined up with Calgary being structurally strong, where his puck movement and decision-making helped drive play rather than just finish it.

Faulk generated offence. Andersson made it happen. That’s not the same thing when you’re projecting forward.

Where the Separation Between Faulk and Andersson Really Shows

The real gap opens when you look at usage and defensive trust. Andersson was a true top-pair defenceman, regularly matched against elite competition and asked to handle tough minutes without being sheltered. His value was higher than Faulk’s because you could plug him into different situations and expect similar results.

Faulk’s results have been more environment-dependent. His best years in St. Louis came with the right partner and some insulation. When those things slipped, so did the numbers. He can still help you, but he needs the right fit more than ever.

That doesn’t make Faulk a problem. It just makes him a role player rather than a pillar.

Contract Reality Changes Everything for a Faulk Trade

This is where the Andersson comparison really breaks. His contract came with surplus value in the form of prime years at a manageable $4.55 million cap hit through 2025–26. Teams pay premiums for that because it helps you both now and in the future.

Faulk’s deal is the opposite. He’s at $6.5 million, with term through 2026–27, heading deeper into his 30s. That doesn’t eliminate his trade value, but it caps it hard unless St. Louis is willing to retain salary. Front offices don’t pay for past service. They pay for what they think they’re getting next.

So What’s a Fair Return for Faulk?

If we’re being honest, a good return for Faulk probably comes with salary retained; maybe you’re talking about a late first or a second-round pick plus a decent but not blue-chip prospect. That requires a contender that thinks it’s one piece away.

More likely, you’re looking at a straight second-round pick, or a third plus a young depth player who’s close to NHL-ready. And if there’s no retention and the market tightens? The return slides. That’s not disrespect, but economics.

The Bottom Line?

If you only look at the numbers, you can talk yourself into believing Justin Faulk should fetch Andersson-type value. But smart general managers don’t trade résumés — they trade futures.

Faulk can still help a good team. He just doesn’t change one. And that’s the difference that matters most. He simply isn’t worth what the Flames got for a far better blueliner.

Related: Does Rumour Chart Linking Morgan Rielly to the Oilers Have Any Legs?