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

[Long live the King]

I don't see how you can prove this. Fact is he's never broken 51 points in 6 NHL seasons. Hurt or not, he's not a reliable point getter.

 

2016-2017: Started out on a 65 point pace through 19 games. Then his leg snapped. Once he got his game back together he finished the year, 17 regular season and 12 playoff games, at a 62 point pace.

 

2017-2018: Started out on a 75 point pace through 24 games. Then he got concussed. Once he got his game back together he finished the year at a 73 point pace over the final 18 games. (Plus if you want to count it he was over a ppg at the Worlds)

 

2018-2019: Through 28 games he's on pace for 73 points. Playing with an at best 3rd liner in Fast.

 

 

 

I think two things are pretty clear.

 

1) Despite those pretty significant injuries, he continued to get better through his early 20's.

2) He'd easily be a ppg player with wingers like Panarin and Kravstov.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

Zib is miles ahead of Hayes, especially now that he's starting to take the tougher matchups aswell.

 

I dont care about who's 1,2,3 or 4 but Zib, Chytil, Howden, Lias has the potential and is looking to be a REALLY solid C-depth for the next decade.

 

Trade Hayes and Zuc for futures or D/W. Its an easy desicion to make.

[Future]

Hayes is .61 PPG. I can't see how that's considered near.

 

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

He's 12 in 14 since they put him with Kreider and Chytil - by far the most talent he's ever played with on the wing.

 

Nobody is saying he's an 80-point player, but he can be a 60-point, defensively strong 2nd-line center. That's worth $6m all day.

[Future]

Hayes isn't on the level of those guys because he isn't dependable. The best 2-way c's in the league show up every night, on every shift and can be depended on to play a responsible game and maintaining performance levels.

Find me the 5 guys then.

 

Every player in the NHL takes shifts/games off. Hayes is about as responsible defensively as it gets. Who are these 2-way Cs that everyone seems to want to say Hayes is worse than? Nobody can name a single one lol. I'm not saying that he's Bergeron or Barkov, but the guys with his skillset who aren't on ELCs just don't exist. People are comparing Hayes to ideals.

[Future]

Zib on Pace for 73 points playing against other teams top lines.

 

Hayes on Pace for 50 points.

 

Zib is a #1 center. Hayes isn't even close to what Zib is.

 

Zib's production is pretty incredible considering the fact that he has fucking 4th liners on his wings.

[Giacomin]

We’ve seen him produce less with the more talented wingers.

 

If a guy is producing more with less, why change that?

Put Chytil with Panarin and Kravtsov, then, his production doubles while Zibanejad is still producing on the 2nd line. Maximize the production of all the players.

 

Or, you get a Panarin and save the Hayes money for an upgrade on Zibanejad’s wing.

 

All I’m saying is Zibanejad has been producing with less. If you are trying to convince me he’s a 1C, then we definitely need to pay Hayes to keep him as our 2C. I’d much rather use 6m+ for elite/scoring wingers. And Zibanejad’s progress has allowed them to do that.

 

Josh, you are over complicating this. If anybody is a top line/pair player on this team it is Z. As you said, he continues to produce with lesser talent on his wing, probably less than any other 1C. He has continued to ascend thru his tenure on the Rangers, even his D has gone from OK to good to very good to...

 

We get to watch Zib every game, and some things become undeniable even if you don't focus on him. He drives play and is often two steps ahead (mentally, then physically) of any teammate during the course of a play. Last year there were countless times it seemed he was teaching the game/play (where he was going and what he was doing) to Kreider who is supposed to be our most talented winger.

 

He has brilliant hockey aptitude, is fast and makes quick decisions. If you watch him like a scout, he has more talent than any current Ranger (outside of possibly Chytil) and has a complete set of skills. Give him guys with a high hockey IQ and top talent and Z becomes lethal.

 

Put Z with the guys Crosby, Kuz, Schiefele, Bergeron, Stamkos, etc, get to play with and you are not questioning him as a #1C. Hell, give him crappy Ottawa's Tkachuk, Stone and Chabot on D and a PPG is money.

 

BTW, this doesn't mean Hayes wouldn't be a tremendous asset as a 3C on a Championship contender. The issues are unrelated, even if Z's D is almost stellar. Actually it is Howden and Lias who make Hayes an asset that may be moved. The depth at the 2C and 3C spot, along with his contract and our need for wingers and top 4 Dmen is what makes him a logical target.

[Giacomin]

Bottom line, everyone I watch the games with notices how many more points Z would have if his teammate would have made the play. Or the right play, or received the pass, or saw him cutting to the net, etc. We don't see it with such regularity with any other Ranger because they are not as dynamic, smart and quick a player.

 

The good news is that we are starting to see that some with Howden who thinks the game at a much higher level than his linemates. We also saw it with Chytil, granted partly because he was saddled with inept linemates and guys not near his level. The bad news is that we need more talented wingers and scorers and dmen.

[Gravesy]

Find me the 5 guys then.

 

Every player in the NHL takes shifts/games off. Hayes is about as responsible defensively as it gets. Who are these 2-way Cs that everyone seems to want to say Hayes is worse than? Nobody can name a single one lol. I'm not saying that he's Bergeron or Barkov, but the guys with his skillset who aren't on ELCs just don't exist. People are comparing Hayes to ideals.

 

Dude, you said he’s one of the best 2 way c’s in the league. I argued against that. Now it appears we’re not allowed to name the best ones. I’m not sure where you’re going with this tbh.

 

I stand by my original statement; Hayes on a 6m+ deal is going to be a deterrent if we’re looking to trade him.

[Pete]

Zib's production is pretty incredible considering the fact that he has fucking 4th liners on his wings.

 

I know! So how isn't he a #1?

[Future]

Dude, you said he’s one of the best 2 way c’s in the league. I argued against that. Now it appears we’re not allowed to name the best ones. I’m not sure where you’re going with this tbh.

 

I stand by my original statement; Hayes on a 6m+ deal is going to be a deterrent if we’re looking to trade him.

No, I said he is "one of the better 5v5, two way Cs." I said that on purpose to take him out of the context of Barkov/Bergeron. Your argument is that he's not as good as those guys b/c of a bunch of subjective reasons, but that means he's not worth $9m, not $6.

 

I'm asking you to name ANY centers who signed as a UFA for less than $6m who play the same type of game and are in the same range in terms of production. $6m is essentially the going rate for what Hayes is, so the idea that a contract like that would be a deterrent is totally baseless. He is a good second-line center who can score when given talented linemates and can play well in a checking role.

 

If you just look at a small sample set - since the start of November - he has 10 EVP in 16 games. That's one less than ROR and one more than Anze Kopitar (17 games). In total, he has 13 points in 16 games - more than Ryan Johansen ($8m, 16 games) and RNH ($6m, 17 games). So when given the opportunity with talented linemates, he's producing at a clip comparable to superior players (ROR and Kopitar) who make way more, and outpacing peers (Johansen and RNH), whose contracts would be benchmarks. Does that translate to an entire season, no, but that's why Hayes is closer to a $6m guy than an $8m guy. If Hayes continues at the same clip the rest of the season, especially compared to those guys, $6m is a steal, not a deterrent, especially since those guys signed when the cap was lower.

 

If Hayes goes UFA, don't be shocked if he gets $7m, b/c that's where his value is relative to the rest of the league.

[Future]

I know! So how isn't he a #1?

?\_(ツ)_/?

 

Zib is a lot like Stepan, in terms of how they are a #1. On a team that can roll lines and sort of have a 1A and 1B with good wingers, he's absolutely effective. I think people who don't consider Zib a #1 expect every #1 to be a 22:00/night dominant player, when that's just not the reality of the league.

 

The only way Zib isn't a #1 is if you say "not every team in the league has a #1 C," but nobody ever does that leg work.

[Pete]

?\_(ツ)_/?

 

Zib is a lot like Stepan, in terms of how they are a #1. On a team that can roll lines and sort of have a 1A and 1B with good wingers, he's absolutely effective. I think people who don't consider Zib a #1 expect every #1 to be a 22:00/night dominant player, when that's just not the reality of the league.

 

The only way Zib isn't a #1 is if you say "not every team in the league has a #1 C," but nobody ever does that leg work.

 

Stepan never paced 70+ points or was the PP threat that Zib is. And Zib has the size to go up against other big men.

 

He's really developed into a great player who doesn't get talked about because the team sucks.

[Future]

Stepan never paced 70+ points or was the PP threat that Zib is. And Zib has the size to go up against other big men.

 

He's really developed into a great player who doesn't get talked about because the team sucks.

Well yea he's better than Stepan, but he's a #1 in the same way that Stepan was.

[Gravesy]

No, I said he is "one of the better 5v5, two way Cs." I said that on purpose to take him out of the context of Barkov/Bergeron. Your argument is that he's not as good as those guys b/c of a bunch of subjective reasons, but that means he's not worth $9m, not $6.

 

I'm asking you to name ANY centers who signed as a UFA for less than $6m who play the same type of game and are in the same range in terms of production. $6m is essentially the going rate for what Hayes is, so the idea that a contract like that would be a deterrent is totally baseless. He is a good second-line center who can score when given talented linemates and can play well in a checking role.

 

If you just look at a small sample set - since the start of November - he has 10 EVP in 16 games. That's one less than ROR and one more than Anze Kopitar (17 games). In total, he has 13 points in 16 games - more than Ryan Johansen ($8m, 16 games) and RNH ($6m, 17 games). So when given the opportunity with talented linemates, he's producing at a clip comparable to superior players (ROR and Kopitar) who make way more, and outpacing peers (Johansen and RNH), whose contracts would be benchmarks. Does that translate to an entire season, no, but that's why Hayes is closer to a $6m guy than an $8m guy. If Hayes continues at the same clip the rest of the season, especially compared to those guys, $6m is a steal, not a deterrent, especially since those guys signed when the cap was lower.

 

If Hayes goes UFA, don't be shocked if he gets $7m, b/c that's where his value is relative to the rest of the league.

 

I don't understand how his value as a UFA is in any way relevant, because what I said was that I think that contract is a deterrent when a GM has to give up the assets we'd want (top prospects & picks, or possibly a top 4 d) in return AND pay him north of 6m. I'm not saying it's impossible to move him, I'm saying it becomes significantly more difficult and the amount of potential takers will be significantly fewer.

I'm also not sure why "one of the better 5v5, two way C's" takes him out of the context of, you know, the better 5v5, two way C's.

You can say it's all based on subjective reasons, but I think most people would agree he's an incredibly inconsistent player whose performances ranges from the excellent to the absolutely dreadful on a regular basis. That he produces in spurts is an actual fact. Again, I think many GM's will think twice before giving away significant assets AND paying a player like that 6m+.

 

I do agree that as an UFA he's highly likely to get north of 6m, but that's without having to give up assets for him which obviously changes the picture.

[Future]

I don't understand how his value as a UFA is in any way relevant, because what I said was that I think that contract is a deterrent when a GM has to give up the assets we'd want (top prospects & picks, or possibly a top 4 d) in return AND pay him north of 6m. I'm not saying it's impossible to move him, I'm saying it becomes significantly more difficult and the amount of potential takers will be significantly fewer.

I'm also not sure why "one of the better 5v5, two way C's" takes him out of the context of, you know, the better 5v5, two way C's.

You can say it's all based on subjective reasons, but I think most people would agree he's an incredibly inconsistent player whose performances ranges from the excellent to the absolutely dreadful on a regular basis. That he produces in spurts is an actual fact. Again, I think many GM's will think twice before giving away significant assets AND paying a player like that 6m+.

 

I do agree that as an UFA he's highly likely to get north of 6m, but that's without having to give up assets for him which obviously changes the picture.

Ok well "one of the better" and "best" are different to me. The Barkov and Bergerons are in the "best" conversation. But, semantics.

 

I guess I don't get what your point is, tbh. The Rangers aren't going to sign him and then trade him this year, and to some teams, a player who is under contract long term could be more valuable. If you don't think teams want to sign and extend him, that's fine, but it's got nothing to do with his price tag.

[Pete]

I don't ever think Hayes is dreadful. When he's "on", he's almost a Thorton-lite (emphasis on "almost", and "lite") and he's dominant on draws.

 

When he's off, he's infuriating because he holds the puck too long, tries to make impossible passes, is getting manhandled in the dot and looks like he's high.

 

With that^^^ said, he's always a responsible defensive player who's hard to take the puck from. It's that he either looks very good or very bad because he has the puck on his stick so much, it's magnified.

 

But he's never Cody McLeod. #NeverClump

[Gravesy]

Ok well "one of the better" and "best" are different to me. The Barkov and Bergerons are in the "best" conversation. But, semantics.

 

I guess I don't get what your point is, tbh. The Rangers aren't going to sign him and then trade him this year, and to some teams, a player who is under contract long term could be more valuable. If you don't think teams want to sign and extend him, that's fine, but it's got nothing to do with his price tag.

 

Fair enough.

The original point was a response to someone saying something to the effect of "we should sign him and then look to trade him down the line in order to maximize the return" instead of trading him at the deadline for what will likely be a 1st and a prospect(s).

I just don't think it's that easy to move him on for what we'd want when he's on a big contract, because even though he's got the tools there are some serious question marks over him as a player.

[NYR2711]

I don't ever think Hayes is dreadful. When he's "on", he's almost a Thorton-lite (emphasis on "almost", and "lite") and he's dominant on draws.

 

When he's off, he's infuriating because he holds the puck too long, tries to make impossible passes, is getting manhandled in the dot and looks like he's high.

 

With that^^^ said, he's always a responsible defensive player who's hard to take the puck from. It's that he either looks very good or very bad because he has the puck on his stick so much, it's magnified.

 

But he's never Cody McLeod. #NeverClump

 

This is basically how I feel about him as well. To me, he is a lot like Dubinsky. I hate when he holds the puck for too long, it makes me yell at my TV.

[Ozzy]

He Doesn't shoot the puck enough. One of the more frustrating players to watch.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

That's a weird thing to say the day after he scored 2 goals, but okay.

[Ozzy]

That's a weird thing to say the day after he scored 2 goals, but okay.

 

I know man, but good god!!! How many opportunities does he get to shoot the puck??? I counted 11 last night, and instead he elects to pass.

 

His decision making I think needs some improvement....but this kid's GOTTA shoot more. He's got the talent to score a lot more than he does. His extra pass on that 3rd period PP that deflected out of the zone was a shitty choice. If the Rangers get a goal there, it's still a game.

 

Needless to say, there were lots of bad choices last night in the 3rd. Hayes just HAS TO SHOOT MORE.

 

Zucc man, the 2 goals were great...don't get me wrong....but The loss resonates when he's the guy that has to step up and grab the bull by the balls in the 3rd period. That's what Stamkos did! ....and that's why I think Hayes lacks that #1 center mentality right now.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

I know man, but good god!!! How many opportunities does he get to shoot the puck??? I counted 11 last night, and instead he elects to pass.

 

His decision making I think needs some improvement....but this kid's GOTTA shoot more. He's got the talent to score a lot more than he does. His extra pass on that 3rd period PP that deflected out of the zone was a shitty choice. If the Rangers get a goal there, it's still a game.

 

Needless to say, there were lots of bad choices last night in the 3rd. Hayes just HAS TO SHOOT MORE.

 

Zucc man, the 2 goals were great...don't get me wrong....but The loss resonates when he's the guy that has to step up and grab the bull by the balls in the 3rd period. That's what Stamkos did! ....and that's why I think Hayes lacks that #1 center mentality right now.

 

I couldnt watch the game, so I dont know. I agree tho, Hayes has to shoot more, but I?ve given up on that, he is what he is at this moment.

 

Hayes lacks everything to be a #1C, he will never be that. The question is if he can be a good enough #2C on a good contending team. I have my doubts about that too.

 

 

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

[Ozzy]

I couldnt watch the game, so I dont know. I agree tho, Hayes has to shoot more, but I’ve given up on that, he is what he is at this moment.

 

Hayes lacks everything to be a #1C, he will never be that. The question is if he can be a good enough #2C on a good contending team. I have my doubts about that too.

 

 

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

 

He just comes off as one of those hot and cold players; A lot like Kreider seems to me. He can be so good at times and disappear for long stretches. I hardly noticed CK last night.

 

Now I know it's a long season and guys go through droughts and crap like that, but I just don't feel it with Hayes. Kreider has his moments but I can at least "feel" Kreider out there most games. I think we sell high on Hayes and hope we strike gold with the return. I can't see paying him a ton for 5 or 6 years. He comes off like a guy who once he signs, he goes flat on us.

 

We've seen enough of that! ;)

[Mr.wiskers]

Save the money offersheet Laine, Mathews, Marner, Rantanen, Tkachuk, Piont or Meier.

 

 

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

[josh]

Maybe Mathews but Toronto would match. Others would take drastic overpayments for teams not to match.