[brooks] Kevin Hayes is More to Rangers Than a Potential Trade Chip

[Drew a Penalty]

Nash isn't even a good comparable for Hayes. He's a center. They tend to get more at the deadline than wings. Hanzal is a closer comparison. Hanzal, Ryan White and a 4th went for a 1st, 2nd, conditional 4th and Grayson Downing. Hanzal is a 30-40 point defensive center. Hayes is a step above Hanzal.

[josh]

Wiki

The Pittsburgh Penguins' first-round pick went to the New York Rangers as the result of a trade on June 22, 2018 that sent Boston's first-round pick and New Jersey's second-round pick (26th and 48th overall) both in 2018 to Ottawa in exchange for this pick.[11]

Ottawa previously acquired this pick as the result of a trade on February 23, 2018 that sent Vincent Dunn and a third-round pick in 2018 to Pittsburgh in exchange for Ian Cole, Filip Gustavsson and this pick.[12]

[Phil]

wasn’t the 28th Tampa’s pick? They traded 26 and 48 for 22

 

Oh, you may have it right then. So it was the 26th and they packaged it up to get to 22. I stand corrected.

[NYRangers723]

Nash isn't even a good comparable for Hayes. He's a center. They tend to get more at the deadline than wings. Hanzal is a closer comparison. Hanzal, Ryan White and a 4th went for a 1st, 2nd, conditional 4th and Grayson Downing. Hanzal is a 30-40 point defensive center. Hayes is a step above Hanzal

 

Yeah I wasn’t comparing just saying that If a declining player got that type of package then Hayes would get a even better package being a real good two way center which I agree is more attractive

[Pete]

Nash isn't even a good comparable for Hayes. He's a center. They tend to get more at the deadline than wings. Hanzal is a closer comparison. Hanzal, Ryan White and a 4th went for a 1st, 2nd, conditional 4th and Grayson Downing. Hanzal is a 30-40 point defensive center. Hayes is a step above Hanzal.

And 3 years younger at the time of the trade I think.

[The Dude]

Nash fetched Spooner (already traded again), Beleskey (Boston cap dump playing in the minors), Lindgren (long shot to amount to anything of significance), and the #28 OA pick. I'd rather have a 27 year old top 6 center that plays in all situations.

 

Unless someone is willing to give up their top prospect, I'd rather resign Hayes.

 

Why is this board so down on Lindgren? Is he playing poorly? That's twice I've read someone say he's not going to be anything. This after a summer of thinking this guy had captain like abilities...

[Phil]

Why is this board so down on Lindgren? Is he playing poorly? That's twice I've read someone say he's not going to be anything. This after a summer of thinking this guy had captain like abilities...

 

Because he projects as a bottom-pairing defenseman, if he gets there at all.

[Fatfrancesa]

Prior trades in prior years may set a price but it doesn’t mean a team will ante up that price. The hanzal trade argues more against the point the poster is trying to make. Because league wide that trade is blasted and serves as a cautionary tale. Stastny is a better comparison but even that deal maybe hard to find.

 

The way Hayes is playing it’s safe to say this team would get worse by trading him. However lock him up long term and he becomes a terrifying player with questionable habits. It’s a really tough decision for the rangers. You can only hope they get blown away with an offer as that would make the decision for them. That is unlikely though because all the questions we are posting here is far from a secret.

[Gravesy]

Nash isn't even a good comparable for Hayes. He's a center. They tend to get more at the deadline than wings. Hanzal is a closer comparison. Hanzal, Ryan White and a 4th went for a 1st, 2nd, conditional 4th and Grayson Downing. Hanzal is a 30-40 point defensive center. Hayes is a step above Hanzal.

 

The Yotes packaged 2 players and a pick and received two picks and a worthless prospect who hasn't played a minute in the NHL and in all likelihood never will.

Paul Statsny, arguably a better player and certainly a safer option as a rental for a playoff run, brought back a 1st, a conditional 4th and Erik Foley who is an ok/decent prospect.

If that's your definition of a "big" return then fine.

 

I mean, a couple of picks and a prospect is a good return for a rental generally speaking. I just don't think you can expect anything more than that for him.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

The Yotes packaged 2 players and a pick and received two picks and a worthless prospect who hasn't played a minute in the NHL and in all likelihood never will.

Paul Statsny, arguably a better player and certainly a safer option as a rental for a playoff run, brought back a 1st, a conditional 4th and Erik Foley who is an ok/decent prospect.

If that's your definition of a "big" return then fine.

 

I mean, a couple of picks and a prospect is a good return for a rental generally speaking. I just don't think you can expect anything more than that for him.

 

I'd rather have, lets say; a 1st, a 3rd and a decent prospect than Hayes on a 6x6 deal.

 

If they don't trade him after having a really good (career best?)season, why did they bridge him? That would make no sense, unless they was banking on him playing bad and hoped to sign him cheap?

[Gravesy]

I'd rather have, lets say; a 1st, a 3rd and a decent prospect than Hayes on a 6x6 deal.

 

If they don't trade him after having a really good (career best?)season, why did they bridge him? That would make no sense, unless they was banking on him playing bad and hoped to sign him cheap?

 

I don't necessarily disagree with that although it's not a straight forward decision imo. Just saying folks shouldn't expect more. If that's what people think of as a "big" return for him then my work is done.

[Future]

I'd rather have, lets say; a 1st, a 3rd and a decent prospect than Hayes on a 6x6 deal.

 

If they don't trade him after having a really good (career best?)season, why did they bridge him? That would make no sense, unless they was banking on him playing bad and hoped to sign him cheap?

To Larry Brooks' point...

 

You draft that 1st rounder hoping he becomes Kevin Hayes and then assume you're getting lesser players with the other 2. Best case scenario, you get Hayes back and another 3rd liner.

[Drew a Penalty]

The Yotes packaged 2 players and a pick and received two picks and a worthless prospect who hasn't played a minute in the NHL and in all likelihood never will.

Paul Statsny, arguably a better player and certainly a safer option as a rental for a playoff run, brought back a 1st, a conditional 4th and Erik Foley who is an ok/decent prospect.

If that's your definition of a "big" return then fine.

 

I mean, a couple of picks and a prospect is a good return for a rental generally speaking. I just don't think you can expect anything more than that for him.

 

I never say it?s a ?big? return. I said centers get more. Is that wrong? I said Hayes should, in theory, get more than Hanzal. The Stastny return was almost comparable to Hanzal minus the second. Some think Hayes would be lucky to get a first. Here are two comparable centers who were worse and older at the time of trade. It?s not unreasonable to assume Hayes can do as well if not better.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

To Larry Brooks' point...

 

You draft that 1st rounder hoping he becomes Kevin Hayes and then assume you're getting lesser players with the other 2. Best case scenario, you get Hayes back and another 3rd liner.

 

No its not. Best case scenario is much better than just getting a Hayes with a 1st rounder. We could even trade for some D prospects (already said Fox, obviously a lot other alternatives), we could draft a D or wing prospect (which we need much more than a 2/3C atm), we could get several pieces/picks (maybe we draft a middle-6 winger and a top-4 D). Best case scenario is a lot better than a Kevin Hayes if we would get a 1st, a 3rd and a decent prospect (just an example). It could also be worse than Hayes, we could miss on the picks and the prospects busts, but we would still have 6m free cap space.

 

Besides, if we would just end up drafting a Kevin Hayes, that would still be a win. Then we would have an ELC, 22y/old Hayes in 2020/2021, instead of a 30 years old Kevin Hayes just halfway through his 6m a year contract.

[Future]

I never say it’s a “big” return. I said centers get more. Is that wrong? I said Hayes should, in theory, get more than Hanzal. The Stastny return was almost comparable to Hanzal minus the second. Some think Hayes would be lucky to get a first. Here are two comparable centers who were worse and older at the time of trade. It’s not unreasonable to assume Hayes can do as well if not better.

I don't know how much age plays in for Hayes if he's traded as a UFA rental at the deadline. Unless a team does something like what SJ did for Kane, and upped the return if he's re-signed, I'm not sure he would get a better return than Stastny.

 

If that's the case, I'm pretty sure I'd just sign Hayes.

[josh]

To Larry Brooks' point...

 

You draft that 1st rounder hoping he becomes Kevin Hayes and then assume you're getting lesser players with the other 2. Best case scenario, you get Hayes back and another 3rd liner.

 

While I usually agree with this notion, 100%... we already have enough 2nd and 3rd line centers. Re-signing one at a 1C rate makes little sense. While I'd rather package something for a potential upgrade, you can't not trade him just to maintain current status quo - which isnt good enough.

[Future]

No its not. Best case scenario is much better than just getting a Hayes with a 1st rounder.

 

Besides, if we would just end up drafting a Kevin Hayes, that would still be a win. Then we would have an ELC, 22y/old Hayes in 2020/2021, instead of a 30 years old Kevin Hayes just halfway through his 6m a year contract.

Not at, like, pick 25.

 

ELC 22 y/o Hayes is not a thing that exists after the first 10 or so picks in the draft. Guys who play at both end of the ice and score 25 goals are either in their prime or top picks. Just go look at the centers who have been drafted between 20-30.

 

2010 - Bjugstad (19), Riley Sheahan, Kevin Hayes, Quinton Howden, Kuznetsov, Charlie Coyle, Brock Nelson

2011 - Mark McNeill (18), Phillip Danault, Vlad Namestnikov, Zack Phillips, Rickard Rakell

2012 - Scott Laughton, Mark Jankowski, Brendan Gaunce, Henrik Samuelsson, Stefan Matteau

2013 - Curtis Lazar (17), Frederik Gauthier, Marko DAno, Jason Dickinson

2014 - Nick Schmaltz, Robby Fabbri, Conner Bleackley, Jared McCann, Adrian Kempe, John Quenneville

2015 - Joel Eriksson Ek, Colin White, Travis Konecny, Jack Roslovic, Anthony Beauvillier

 

Of that list, how many are the same productive two-way players as Hayes, and did it when they were 22? Kuznetsov didn't do anything until he was 23, Rakell plays the wing. Your chances of hitting on Hayes - and a guy who is going to be Hayes at 22 - are really slim. Yes, your Boesers, Pastrnaks and whoever will sneak in from time to time, but you're way more likely to draft Emerson Etem.

 

Would you trade Hayes for Namestnikov, Fast, and Brendan Smith?

[Future]

While I usually agree with this notion, 100%... we already have enough 2nd and 3rd line centers. Re-signing one at a 1C rate makes little sense. While I'd rather package something for a potential upgrade, you can't not trade him just to maintain current status quo - which isnt good enough.

6x$6 is 2C rate for a guy who isn't coming off his ELC, and now that they've finally given him legitimate top-6 linemates, he's scoring at a top line clip (12 pts in 11 games).

 

No you don't want to keep the status quo, but you also can't trade guys just for the sake of trading them.

[josh]

6x$6 is 2C rate for a guy who isn't coming off his ELC, and now that they've finally given him legitimate top-6 linemates, he's scoring at a top line clip (12 pts in 11 games).

 

No you don't want to keep the status quo, but you also can't trade guys just for the sake of trading them.

 

If he keeps it up, sure.

I dont trade just to trade, or sign just to sign. If he earns it by the deadline, keep him & pay him.

I'd still like to see an upgrade to our first line.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

Not at, like, pick 25.

 

ELC 22 y/o Hayes is not a thing that exists after the first 10 or so picks in the draft. Guys who play at both end of the ice and score 25 goals are either in their prime or top picks. Just go look at the centers who have been drafted between 20-30.

 

2010 - Bjugstad (19), Riley Sheahan, Kevin Hayes, Quinton Howden, Kuznetsov, Charlie Coyle, Brock Nelson

2011 - Mark McNeill (18), Phillip Danault, Vlad Namestnikov, Zack Phillips, Rickard Rakell

2012 - Scott Laughton, Mark Jankowski, Brendan Gaunce, Henrik Samuelsson, Stefan Matteau

2013 - Curtis Lazar (17), Frederik Gauthier, Marko DAno, Jason Dickinson

2014 - Nick Schmaltz, Robby Fabbri, Conner Bleackley, Jared McCann, Adrian Kempe, John Quenneville

2015 - Joel Eriksson Ek, Colin White, Travis Konecny, Jack Roslovic, Anthony Beauvillier

 

Of that list, how many are the same productive two-way players as Hayes, and did it when they were 22? Kuznetsov didn't do anything until he was 23, Rakell plays the wing. Your chances of hitting on Hayes - and a guy who is going to be Hayes at 22 - are really slim. Yes, your Boesers, Pastrnaks and whoever will sneak in from time to time, but you're way more likely to draft Emerson Etem.

 

Would you trade Hayes for Namestnikov, Fast, and Brendan Smith?

 

No, but that trade is not comparable at all. Besides, the main point is that we dont need more centers, so we wouldn?t use the pick on a C, but rather a D or W we need much more.

 

Just picture 3 years from now. Do you think Hayes will be the teams 2nd best C? Zib, chytil, lias and Howden, all younger than him, and has more potential. Most likely he will just be 3/4th best C on The team, maybe even 5th best. 30 y/old Hayes being our 3/4 line C with 6m a year? No thanks.

 

It even goes further than 2-3 years. In 5-6 years when chytil, lias, kravtsov and so on are in their prime and we (hopefully) will be contenders in many years to come, hayes will be gone, while the pick/prospects we could get from him now will entre their prime.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Dunny]

Yes, I do. If current trends continue and Zib keeps producing, Hayes is a fine counterpart, especially when you can afford him easily.

 

I don't see any of Andersson/Howden/Chytil as 2C's.

[Dunny]

Zib/Hayes in my mind is better than Stepan/Brassard, and we won more than almost anybody with those two.

[josh]

Yes, I do. If current trends continue and Zib keeps producing, Hayes is a fine counterpart, especially when you can afford him easily.

 

I don't see any of Andersson/Howden/Chytil as 2C's.

 

Same was said of Zibanejad, Hayes, Stepan and Brassard when they were 20/21.

 

 

Zib/Hayes in my mind is better than Stepan/Brassard, and we won more than almost anybody with those two.

Individually, sure. But I think Stepan and Brassard made their linemates better, more than Hayes/Zib do.

 

If Zibanejad stays in the shut down role, and Hayes continues to produce close to what he's doing now, I mean... ok.

But you still need to add a Panarin-like weapon to the top line, you'd need Kreider to be an impact player every game, and then Kravtsov/Buch/Chytil/Andersson group need to play a big part.

Hayes/Zib is an ok tandem. I don't know if I see them as a duo that can lead the team to a cup.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

Yes, I do. If current trends continue and Zib keeps producing, Hayes is a fine counterpart, especially when you can afford him easily.

 

I don't see any of Andersson/Howden/Chytil as 2C's.

 

Right now maybe not, in 2-3 years? All of them could, the chance of none of them never becoming that is very small.

 

There?s a bigger chance that Hayes is just having a career best contract year and just ends up being a 45+ points pain in the ass for 6 years/6mill.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Future]

No, but that trade is not comparable at all. Besides, the main point is that we dont need more centers, so we wouldn’t use the pick on a C, but rather a D or W we need much more.

 

Just picture 3 years from now. Do you think Hayes will be the teams 2nd best C? Zib, chytil, lias and Howden, all younger than him, and has more potential. Most likely he will just be 3/4th best C on The team, maybe even 5th best. 30 y/old Hayes being our 3/4 line C with 6m a year? No thanks.

 

It even goes further than 2-3 years. In 5-6 years when chytil, lias, kravtsov and so on are in their prime and we (hopefully) will be contenders in many years to come, hayes will be gone, while the pick/prospects we could get from him now will entre their prime.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

That trade is basically the Stastny return, if they draft a defenseman with the second pick. Late first, middling prospect, middle pair defender. You're not going to get a top pick and an NHL ready top-4 defender for Kevin Hayes. It's not like Carolina is going to give you Brett Pesce, or Florida Mike Matheson for him.

 

We don't need another Wing as much if we leave Chytil there.

 

3 years from now, I think you have incredible C depth with Zib - Hayes - Howden - Lias. I don't think either Howden or Lias has more potential than being the player Hayes is right now - but flip Hayes then if you must. 30 is a pretty meaningless number in today's NHL, especially for a guy like Hayes, who isn't just going to shrink.

 

In 5 years, Hayes will be 32 and can still be a productive player. The exact type you'd trade for at the deadline with a young, contending team.