Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Rangers Should Not Trade Kevin Hayes


Phil

Recommended Posts

I will say this again, too, not for the first time and certainly not the last: The Rangers should not trade Kevin Hayes, whose shorthanded goal with 40 seconds remaining broke a 1-1 tie, unless the impending free agent?s ask on a new contract is completely unrealistic or an interested third party offers a young, first-pair right defenseman (see: Cale Makar, UMass/Colorado) in exchange for No. 13. Both of these hypotheticals are unlikely.

 

I don?t care whether the team is ready to contend in two years or four. This building process will not be aided by trading the center who has been the team?s best player for the past two years. All teams ? even, or perhaps especially, ones in the Rangers? position ? need linchpins.

 

When you find them, you don?t send them away. You don?t sacrifice your few known quantities for a roll of the dice. That would represent a full measure that would leave me empty.

 

https://nypost.com/2018/12/19/rangers-cant-let-unfair-system-force-them-into-tearing-up-team/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

^ That.

 

I'm a first class Hayes hater but he's played very very well. His return at this point should be astronomical. If the Colorado rumor is true, I'm talking about OTT's #1 pick+.

 

This isn't the first time Brooks as written this, so it won't be the first time I say this: Rangers are still rebuilding. Hayes will be 27 at the end of this season which makes him about 29 or 30 when this team is a legit contender. Why not get something for him now, while the team is still a few years away?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1-1a C's are very hard to come by and its probably one of the main reasons we lost to LA.

 

maybe its because he knows he will get paid but the guy has put in the work on his game and might be more valuable than kreider right now. i'm not sure i'd part with him unless i'm getting a known quantity in return.

 

But if the team is arguably (and statistically) one of the worst in the league, what's the point? The idea is to build a young core which will all grow together. We could get a massive return for Hayes and add to that list of Chytil, Andersson, Kratsov, Miller, Lundkvist, Howden, Buch. By the time the kids are ready, Hayes will be on edge of his prime if not already on the decline. Gotta strike while the iron is hot and get a haul for him. He may never repeat this kind of performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if the team is arguably (and statistically) one of the worst in the league, what's the point? The idea is to build a young core which will all grow together. We could get a massive return for Hayes and add to that list of Chytil, Andersson, Kratsov, Miller, Lundkvist, Howden, Buch. By the time the kids are ready, Hayes will be on edge of his prime if not already on the decline. Gotta strike while the iron is hot and get a haul for him. He may never repeat this kind of performance.

 

If the team is arguably (and statistically) one of the worst in the league, and you replace the best player with a teenager, the team gets way worse. Then it takes you from contending in two years to hopefully 4 if not longer. Then in 4-6 years you're having this same debate about the first batch of kids you got in your rebuild. Hello, Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson. We should start figuring out what scrub D-man we're gonna trade Chytil for in 2023.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i understand your ideology for sure. Listened to Pierre on NHL network driving in this morning and his take in talking to GM's around the league is that the Rangers rebuild is ahead of schedule.

 

Add Panarin and Stone next year and who knows...

 

They're not getting both. That'd be like a $24 million bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team is arguably (and statistically) one of the worst in the league, and you replace the best player with a teenager, the team gets way worse. Then it takes you from contending in two years to hopefully 4 if not longer. Then in 4-6 years you're having this same debate about the first batch of kids you got in your rebuild. Hello, Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson. We should start figuring out what scrub D-man we're gonna trade Chytil for in 2023.

 

That makes sense on a team that's competing, not for a team that isnt competitive.

 

On a losing team, does it matter if your 2nd line center is 50-pt Hayes or 40-pt Howden?

 

We NEED top level talent. We can lose a handful of middle 6 guys, and the team wont get worse.

We need to stop overpaying middle 6 guys, which prevents them from retaining other players or signing free agents.

 

Re-signing Hayes comes down to the answer to this question - can the Rangers win the cup with Zibanejad and Hayes as their top 2 centers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ That.

 

I'm a first class Hayes hater but he's played very very well. His return at this point should be astronomical. If the Colorado rumor is true, I'm talking about OTT's #1 pick+.

 

This isn't the first time Brooks as written this, so it won't be the first time I say this: Rangers are still rebuilding. Hayes will be 27 at the end of this season which makes him about 29 or 30 when this team is a legit contender. Why not get something for him now, while the team is still a few years away?

 

Would never happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team is arguably (and statistically) one of the worst in the league, and you replace the best player with a teenager, the team gets way worse. Then it takes you from contending in two years to hopefully 4 if not longer. Then in 4-6 years you're having this same debate about the first batch of kids you got in your rebuild. Hello, Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson. We should start figuring out what scrub D-man we're gonna trade Chytil for in 2023.

 

Then why rebuild at all? Trading McDonaugh made them way worse and took them away from being a contender as well.

 

The point of a rebuild is to gain cap flexibility, restock the cupboards with talent, and foster from the bottom up with cap-controlled players. I guess I don't understand the point of paying Hayes 7m+ for three years of scraping together OT losses and missing the playoffs when you can get rid of him for a good return, lose more games, and bottom out quicker. The idea being to hit the bottom and rebound back up the table.

 

I think this idea that the rangers can "go for it" next year is pretty absurd. So, my opinion is to sell our most valuable assets now so we don't have to wallow in 9th or 10th for the next three years. The worst thing the Rangers can be is mediocre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes sense on a team that's competing, not for a team that isnt competitive.

 

On a losing team, does it matter if your 2nd line center is 50-pt Hayes or 40-pt Howden?

 

Well Hayes is on pace for 67 points and Howden for 36, so yeah that 31 point difference matters.

 

Re-signing Hayes comes down to the answer to this question - can the Rangers win the cup with Zibanejad and Hayes as their top 2 centers?

 

In the 22 games since October 30th, around the time Zibanejad was given the defensive role, Hayes has 24 points and Zibanejad has 21, so I'd say yes they could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Hayes is on pace for 67 points and Howden for 36, so yeah that 31 point difference matters.

 

 

 

In the 22 games since October 30th, around the time Zibanejad was given the defensive role, Hayes has 24 points and Zibanejad has 21, so I'd say yes they could.

 

So then the next question is, do you think they could win the cup in the next three years (Hayes' prime)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both of these are pretty small sample sizes

Well Hayes is on pace for 67 points and Howden for 36, so yeah that 31 point difference matters.

 

Yes, it makes a difference between 14th or 15th in the conference - insignificant for a "rebuilding" team

 

 

In the 22 games since October 30th, around the time Zibanejad was given the defensive role, Hayes has 24 points and Zibanejad has 21, so I'd say yes they could.

 

8-10-3

 

whoops

11-10

 

 

3 OT/SO wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why rebuild at all? Trading McDonaugh made them way worse and took them away from being a contender as well.

 

The point of a rebuild is to gain cap flexibility, restock the cupboards with talent, and foster from the bottom up with cap-controlled players. I guess I don't understand the point of paying Hayes 7m+ for three years of scraping together OT losses and missing the playoffs when you can get rid of him for a good return, lose more games, and bottom out quicker. The idea being to hit the bottom and rebound back up the table.

 

I think this idea that the rangers can "go for it" next year is pretty absurd. So, my opinion is to sell our most valuable assets now so we don't have to wallow in 9th or 10th for the next three years. The worst thing the Rangers can be is mediocre.

 

You need quality veterans to make a rebuild work...

 

gain cap flexibility - deal with Shattenkirk, Staal, and Smith

restock the cupboards with talent - pretty well stocked

 

If you sign a Panarin, the offense improves. Chytil, Kravtsov, and our 2019 1st rounder develop better, and the offense improves even more, surrounded by Zibanejad, Panarin, Hayes, and Kreider than if they have to carry the load as teenagers.

 

The issue is defense. Clear out 2 of Shattenkirk, Staal, and Smith to make room for Hajek and Rykov to compete. Give Miller, Lundkvist, and a 2019 late 1st (from Zucc) another couple years to develop.

 

Signing Hayes and Panarin is fine. That's not "going for it". That's part of "rebuilding" the team. Just don't trade picks or prospects for anything other than a bonafide low- to mid-20's top 4 D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need quality veterans to make a rebuild work...

 

gain cap flexibility - deal with Shattenkirk, Staal, and Smith

restock the cupboards with talent - pretty well stocked

 

If you sign a Panarin, the offense improves. Chytil, Kravtsov, and our 2019 1st rounder develop better, and the offense improves even more, surrounded by Zibanejad, Panarin, Hayes, and Kreider than if they have to carry the load as teenagers.

 

The issue is defense. Clear out 2 of Shattenkirk, Staal, and Smith to make room for Hajek and Rykov to compete. Give Miller, Lundkvist, and a 2019 late 1st (from Zucc) another couple years to develop.

 

Signing Hayes and Panarin is fine. That's not "going for it". That's part of "rebuilding" the team. Just don't trade picks or prospects for anything other than a bonafide low- to mid-20's top 4 D.

 

Pretty well stocked? People are bitching about Andersson already -- our #7 overall pick. The other day someone said Howden had plateaued and would never be more than a 3rd liner. So which is it? Are we well stocked with 3rd liners?

 

"Talent" is the key word. We need a lottery pick this season -- and preferably a top 2 pick. 3-4 first rounders, including a top pick and NOW we're talking about being stocked.

 

What if Panarin doesn't want to come to a non-playoff team? What's the plan then?

 

A rebuild doesn't happen in a year and now one player is playing above his head and we're ready to call it off -- I don't understand. This team SUCKS. Have we forgotten that? They're a long way away from making any kind of noise in the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17th in GA, but that's irrelevant. They scored 65 and allowed 68. I would think the guy that is constantly irate over blown leads would want to keep the guys getting the lead (Hayes and Zib), and replace the guys blowing it (the D-corps)...

 

Are you looking at the list upside-down?

 

 

They need top level talent to take over the game when necessary.

But if you think its defense, save the Hayes money for Karlsson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not 'people' or 'someone the other day'

 

Pretty well stocked? People are bitching about Andersson already -- our #7 overall pick. The other day someone said Howden had plateaued and would never be more than a 3rd liner. So which is it? Are we well stocked with 3rd liners?

 

"Talent" is the key word. We need a lottery pick this season -- and preferably a top 2 pick. 3-4 first rounders, including a top pick and NOW we're talking about being stocked.

 

What if Panarin doesn't want to come to a non-playoff team? What's the plan then?

 

A rebuild doesn't happen in a year and now one player is playing above his head and we're ready to call it off -- I don't understand. This team SUCKS. Have we forgotten that? They're a long way away from making any kind of noise in the playoffs.

 

But....

 

But if the team is arguably (and statistically) one of the worst in the league, what's the point? The idea is to build a young core which will all grow together. We could get a massive return for Hayes and add to that list of Chytil, Andersson, Kratsov, Miller, Lundkvist, Howden, Buch. By the time the kids are ready, Hayes will be on edge of his prime if not already on the decline. Gotta strike while the iron is hot and get a haul for him. He may never repeat this kind of performance.

 

...plus Hajek, Rykov, Shestyorkin. 3 top 60 picks this year (if Tampa wins the cup those 3 picks are probably top 40). Likely another for Zucc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you looking at the list upside-down?

 

 

They need top level talent to take over the game when necessary.

But if you think its defense, save the Hayes money for Karlsson.

 

yes, I was! :slats: ...but the main point still stands... They scored 65 and allowed 68. The O gets the lead and the D can't hold it.

 

 

Karlsson will cost a lot more $$$ than Hayes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta strike while the iron is hot and get a haul for him. He may never repeat this kind of performance.

 

That's the problem isn't it. His performance this season is driving the price of re-signing him up, whilst it isn't really helping the Rangers getting "a haul" for him as he's a rental. The haul is going to be limited to a 1st and a prospect or two. His performances might secure you a slightly better prospect but that's about it.

 

So that's the headscratcher for Gorton and co. Do you re-sign the guy at a high cost, worrying he may never repeat this kind of performance, or do you trade him for an ok but most likely not great haul? It isn't a straight forward decision at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...