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

[Dunny]

Chytil/Kravtsov/Panarin on the wing?

 

Yeah, that'll play.

[Long live the King]

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

 

In 2 or 3 years if you want to move Chytil back to center, you can trade Hayes or Zib. In the meantime, Panarin - Zib - Kravtsov and Kreider - Hayes - Chytil is a fantastic top 6.

[Giacomin]

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).

 

you also can't trade guys just for the sake of trading them.

 

Right. To describe this idea further, let's state it another way. If the Rangers are trading players with actual value (real assets, not a guy not producing for another), it is all about targeting the return. I've posted before emphasizing the Rangers make trades that target specific players, prospects, picks or key positional needs. It should not be about trading the player, even if deemed a tradeable asset. To suggest we should trade X asset, w/o discussing specifics, is less than meaningless. You hear, "the devil is in the details", but is beyond that. It is all about the details.

 

So, what are we seeking. Top line forwards, scorers, an all-around #1RHD, or prospects/picks with potential to be one of those. Additionally, good cost-controlled assets and hopefully specific players are in our crosshairs too.

 

This means we are looking for good opportunities to add impactful pieces. For starters, no 3rd rounders. Almost every post lockout draft you can find important pieces well into the 2nd round. Yet, after the first 50 it becomes a lottery of luck. Take a look. Sure, trade a Holden or McQuaid for a 3rd, but not a "real" asset. We are also not really interested in "decent" or B/B+ level prospects. You guys keep admitting that we need upside potential. Quality over quantity, even many A level prospects don't make an impact in the NHL. IOW, if a '3rd and a decent prospect' rounds out a deal for Hayes, then the return is not what we seek. Don't make the deal or add something to upgrade the trade to get the return we want.

 

Finally, let's not be so narrow about Hayes or asset mgmt. We could very well sign Hayes (as soon as January) and still trade him this year or next. Even if he gets a small 8-10 team NTC, it will kick-in down the line. Should be no big deal. If we resign him during the season we'll get a discount just for the insurance policy the agent/players gets. Plus we are not in a courting/bidding situation. If we resign him does his trade value rise above a rental? Those here recognizing that Hayes is a valuable two-way 26 y/o C, realize teams will pay handily for one. We have quantity and quality, we want quality in return.

[Gravesy]

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.

 

No, you didn?t. I got my quoting mixed up as I was discussing what to expect in return with NyRangers723. He was expecting a ?big? return.

I think you?re spot on, it?ll be along the lines of the Statsny deal.

My point was that people expecting this huge return are going to be disappointed if they?re expecting top prospects. Nobody?s giving up their best prospects for Hayes as a rental.

[Albatrosss]

as of right now, Zib and Hayes are awesome 1-2 punch

[NYRangers723]

No, you didn’t. I got my quoting mixed up as I was discussing what to expect in return with NyRangers723. He was expecting a “big” return.

I think you’re spot on, it’ll be along the lines of the Statsny deal.

My point was that people expecting this huge return are going to be disappointed if they’re expecting top prospects. Nobody’s giving up their best prospects for Hayes as a rental.

 

I think you misinterpreted ewhat I meant by big. I wasn’t saying a first,second,and their top prospect. Hayes is a UFA after all. However I do think he is probably one of the biggest attractions on trade radar right now.

[Giacomin]

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

 

What?!! I beg to differ. Chytil looks like a star and future #1 to me. When you factor his age, growth (physically and mentally), some NHL experience, skills, and upside this kid has a legit shot at being a top C in this league. I know a few here see it, sorry to hear you don't even see a top 6. I so excited about this player, surprised you are not. You will also be wrong about Howden who to me projects out to be a better, faster, bigger, stronger Stepan. He also possesses leadership characteristics that far surpass Step and Hayes. These two are our future. Add Zibs and we are looking good up the middle.

 

Lias has not shown me anything to project top 6, but the Rangers (and Josh?) still disagree strongly. Hope that changes, he is still very young.

[Giacomin]

Why do you guys think anyone trading for Hayes will not be interested in signing him to a contract? If a 1st+ is involved, wouldn't the acquiring team like to keep the guy they just traded valuable assets for?

If we give Hayes an extension ourselves in January, why could we then not trade Hayes in Feb, or in the offseason or next year? Would he be worth more than a rental then?

[Sod16]

If we give Hayes an extension ourselves in January, why could we then not trade Hayes in Feb, or in the offseason or next year? Would he be worth more than a rental then?

 

Eligible for no trade clause starting at age 26, which is what he is.

[Pete]

Eligible for no trade clause starting at age 26, which is what he is.

 

Huh? Where are you getting this from?

[josh]

Huh? Where are you getting this from?

 

UFA years. Can’t have a NTC before then

[Pete]

UFA years. Can?t have a NTC before then

Yeah but who says we have to give him one?

[Scott]

Welp they were dumb enough to give Brendan Smith a modified NTC.

[The Dude]

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.

 

Really? Is that because you see one as a 1C? There's no doubt in my mind that Chytil and or Howden can eventually take on the 2 C spot. I've been planning on that happening since the summer. Trade Hayes, slide Chytil or Howden up to 2 C (depending on the hot hand) and try sliding Andersson up to 3 C. If you have to, slide Chytil to the wing, which I'm against, but then you would be guaranteeing Andersson the minutes he needs to be getting.

 

I think Andersson is the obvious tell on what the Rangers do with Hayes. They burn an entry level year of his, it's because he's going to play. He isn't going to play if Hayes is here. Not with Howden playing so good.

[Sod16]

I'm merely pointing out that an extension would start with his UFA year making him eligible for a no-trade. He could theoretically sign an extension with a no trade on Jan. 1 that would kick in July 1 and the Rangers could trade him while he was still under the old contract. Players would consider that pretty poisonous dirty pool and it would not be an advisable thing for Gorton to do. I don't know if it will last for years, but Hayes has been the Rangers' best skater, and the fact that many aspects of his game have continued to develop after he's been in the league for three or four years says a lot. If Skjei recovers from his sophomore (plus) slump the way Hayes has recovered from his dissolute sophomore year, the Rangers will be a very significantly better team.

[lefty9]

Who.would of thought Kevin Hayes could demand this type of $$$$$ and trade clause,where Is the nhl heading

[Pete]

Who.would of thought Kevin Hayes could demand this type of $$$$$ and trade clause,where Is the nhl heading

 

Towards another lockout.

[Gravesy]

I think you misinterpreted ewhat I meant by big. I wasn’t saying a first,second,and their top prospect. Hayes is a UFA after all. However I do think he is probably one of the biggest attractions on trade radar right now.

 

I didn't really interpret anything, I didn't know what you considered a big return. I was just making the point that a rental usually gets a 1st, maybe a later pick and a decent prospect at best. It's up to everyone to decide whether they consider that's a big return or not for Hayes. Obviously offset by whatever it'll end up cost re-signing him.

[Giacomin]

I didn't know what you considered a big return. I was just making the point that a rental usually gets a 1st, maybe a later pick and a decent prospect

It's up to everyone to decide whether they consider that's a big return or not for Hayes.

 

If we end up going this route, mgmt must turn "the decent prospect and later pick" into a top prospect. Even if it means adding something to the deal. Or allowing the team to talk to Hayes' agent just before they pull the trigger. Not talking about A+ (elite) prospect like Heiskanen, Makar, or Q Hughes, but certainly someone who'd be a 1st rounder in a redraft AND has outperformed his draft position.

 

We have to view this similar to RyJo situation, w/o all the hard feelings. Also, Ryan's was a higher salary for a cheap owner. The point being Hayes is a good enough C to warrant getting back a younger Seth Jones type (I'd even forego the 1st) or a winger with serious skating and scoring potential.

[CBrowningPI]

A Dan Rosen Weekly Mailbag post on NHL App was asked about the Rangers being sellers and specifically about Zucc and Hayes. Of course he said Zucc would be traded for picks, prospects. But he thinks Hayes has been their most consistent foward and says he plays physical. ?? Then to top off his assessment, he states that Hayes could be their next Captain ! I know there is alot of mixed feelings on Hayes as a player on here but I never thought I would hear Hayes and Capt in the same sentence.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Future]

I don't know about Captain, but Hayes is more physical than he gets credit for. He's not a thumper, but the way he uses his body to protect pucks and win along the boards physical hockey. A lot like Rick Nash and Marc Staal, in that sense.

 

Whether or not they trade Hayes will pretty much determine what they're doing in the offseason. If they're going to be in on Panarin/Stone, I can't see them moving Hayes.

[ThirtyONE]

A Dan Rosen Weekly Mailbag post on NHL App was asked about the Rangers being sellers and specifically about Zucc and Hayes. Of course he said Zucc would be traded for picks, prospects. But he thinks Hayes has been their most consistent foward and says he plays physical. ?? Then to top off his assessment, he states that Hayes could be their next Captain ! I know there is alot of mixed feelings on Hayes as a player on here but I never thought I would hear Hayes and Capt in the same sentence.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Considering 5 players have a letter and Hayes is not one of them, I think he's wrong.

 

I'll turn in my fandom if the Rangers rebuild only to be lead by Kevin fucking Hayes for the next 10 years.

[Giacomin]

A Dan Rosen Weekly Mailbag post on NHL App was asked about the Rangers being sellers and specifically about Zucc and Hayes. Of course he said Zucc would be traded for picks, prospects. But he thinks Hayes has been their most consistent foward and says he plays physical. ?? Then to top off his assessment, he states that Hayes could be their next Captain ! I know there is alot of mixed feelings on Hayes as a player on here but I never thought I would hear Hayes and Capt in the same sentence.

 

Thanks Browning, btw your post game humorous takes are cracking me up.

 

Mgmt probably knows what it is going to take to sign Hayes when eligible in January. I'm inclined to think the team is not trading him unless the return is significant, meaning something the team sees as filling a big need or something with the upside of an impact player.

 

I hope they don't feel forced to trade Hayes and instead take the approach that they can trade him down the road, if they choose. Similar to Nylander. Just keep his NTC to a limit of 8-10 teams he can reject.

[Giacomin]

Whether or not they trade Hayes will pretty much determine what they're doing in the offseason. If they're going to be in on Panarin/Stone, I can't see them moving Hayes.

 

I don't think what they do with Panarin/Stone is contingent on Hayes, though they may be more inclined to add UFA(s) if they lose Hayes's contract. However, what mgmt does with any and all the bigger contracts will have some bearing on our approach to UFAs. If they manage to trade Shatty or Smith or Staal, or Hank or Strome, etc... then other future salaries like Kreid and Hayes (or the wingers mentioned) become less of a concern. Though term may still become a sticking point in any one of the deals.

[Future]

I don't think what they do with Panarin/Stone is contingent on Hayes, though they may be more inclined to add UFA(s) if they lose Hayes's contract.

I'd say it's the other way around. If they plan on pursuing one of those guys, they'd want to keep Hayes. It's not like Hayes' contract prohibits them from doing anything.

 

And, like them or not, none of Chytil, Lias, or Howden have shown any capacity at all to play as a top-6 center. Signing a guy means the rebuild is effectively over, and if that's the case, you don't pair him with Chytil and just hope it works.

 

You've also got the other side of thinking why would a player want to sign as a UFA on a rebuilder? Losing Hayes and signing Panarin doesn't make you any better positioned to compete in the playoffs and any UFA would be wary of that. Some might not care, but I think most do.