Confirmed with Link: (PHI/STL) Kevin Hayes (50%) to STL for a 2024 6th round pick

[Brian39]

Not necessarily someone internally, but it might block someone we could have gotten in trade/free agency down the road. $3.5 is also a bit expensive for a 3rd line C. Not a ton. But the cap could block us from making acquisitions elsewhere as well.

Capfriendly has 63 centers currently set to make $3.6M+ next year and we'll add at least a few guys to that list over the summer as free agents are signed. The expectation should be for a quality 3C at that price point, but I wouldn't say it is expensive for that role. Whenn you factor in the number of top 6 Cs on ELCs and bridge deals, I'd wager that a significant portion of teams are spending more than $3.6M on their 3C.

Hayes just doesn't move the needle for me. Army just likes to add these midldle 6, middle pair vets when we need gamechangers. $3.5M for a 30+ year old defensively suspect middle 6 forward is just not something I am going to get excited about. I'd rather roll the dice on a cheaper, youner guy with a lower floor and higher ceiling given the spot we are in. Newhook cost too much, but something along those lines would have been preferable.

Its a nit pick I know. I just can't help feeling a little meh about bringing in another vet cast off.

I think we'd all prefer a cheaper, younger, higher ceiling option. But as you outline in the next sentence, those don't come cheap. You're not getting one on waivers, they don't exist in UFA, and teams aren't looking to move the ones they have unless you really make it worth their while.

A 'Newhook-light' player is still going to cost you one of the late 1sts and likely more. Pick #29 and one of the 2024 2nds is a worse package than what Newhook returned (#31 and #37 in a consensus good draft plus a modest prospect). A package like #29, #76, and a prospect like Skinner is probably what it would take to snag a a guy along the lines of Newhook (but not as good).

If you are willing to go a bit older and more proven, the Avs just flipped #37 for Ross Colton. He has arbitration rights and can go UFA as early as next summer. The #29 would have landed us Colton and maybe we could have even gotten Tampa's 2024 3rd back too. He is going to want more than $3.6M to sign for more than 1 year and frankly I think he'd get close to $3.6M in arbitration. I'll take the Hayes deal over that type of deal. I'm not interested in moving one of the 1sts for a 2-3 year solution to the middle 6 and I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable giving Colton a 4+ year extension after spending a 1st to get him.

Improving the left side of the blue line is the only roster help I want to move those late 1sts for and we weren't getting the type of center you want without moving at least one of those late 1sts.

I get that Hayes isn't a franchise-changing move. But I don't think it is fair to compare it to a dream scenario that isn't a realistic option. If you're comparing it to getting a younger guy with more upside then you can't ignore that the cost for such a deal starts with one of the late 1sts. GMs have figured out the value of cap space and young NHL guys with upside (but lack of a resume) are cheap. Teams aren't parting with them for mid-value futures.

 

[Blueston]

Capfriendly has 63 centers currently set to make $3.6M+ next year and we'll add at least a few guys to that list over the summer as free agents are signed. The expectation should be for a quality 3C at that price point, but I wouldn't say it is expensive for that role. Whenn you factor in the number of top 6 Cs on ELCs and bridge deals, I'd wager that a significant portion of teams are spending more than $3.6M on their 3C.


I think we'd all prefer a cheaper, younger, higher ceiling option. But as you outline in the next sentence, those don't come cheap. You're not getting one on waivers, they don't exist in UFA, and teams aren't looking to move the ones they have unless you really make it worth their while.

A 'Newhook-light' player is still going to cost you one of the late 1sts and likely more. Pick #29 and one of the 2024 2nds is a worse package than what Newhook returned (#31 and #37 in a consensus good draft plus a modest prospect). A package like #29, #76, and a prospect like Skinner is probably what it would take to snag a a guy along the lines of Newhook (but not as good).

If you are willing to go a bit older and more proven, the Avs just flipped #37 for Ross Colton. He has arbitration rights and can go UFA as early as next summer. The #29 would have landed us Colton and maybe we could have even gotten Tampa's 2024 3rd back too. He is going to want more than $3.6M to sign for more than 1 year and frankly I think he'd get close to $3.6M in arbitration. I'll take the Hayes deal over that type of deal. I'm not interested in moving one of the 1sts for a 2-3 year solution to the middle 6 and I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable giving Colton a 4+ year extension after spending a 1st to get him.

I get that Hayes isn't a franchise-changing move. But I don't think it is fair to compare it to a dream scenario that isn't a realistic option. If you're comparing it to getting a younger guy with more upside then you can't ignore that the cost for such a deal starts with one of the late 1sts. GMs have figured out the value of cap space and young NHL guys with upside (but lack of a resume) are cheap. Teams aren't parting with them for mid-value futures.

It’s also worth pointing out in the original trade flyers were apparently retaining 30% on Hayes. When that fell through we got him at 50. So he is better asset for us now. Will see what else we get done, but hard to find fault with this deal. Although predictably some on here do.

 

[Bluesnatic27]

It’s also worth pointing out in the original trade flyers were apparently retaining 30% on Hayes. When that fell through we got him at 50. So he is better asset for us now. Will see what else we get done, but hard to find fault with this deal. Although predictably some on here do.

Yup.

I don't particularly care for Hayes. Never did. But snagging a middle-6 option for 3.6 million for 3 years for a 6th is nothing I'm going to complain about.

 

[TJJefferson]

Everyone said Tortarelli just wanted him gone so maybe we can retain 50% of what's left and flip him for a 2nd at the draft, otherwise I love the dumpster diving

 

[Brian39]

Everyone said Tortarelli just wanted him gone so maybe we can retain 50% of what's left and flip him for a 2nd at the draft, otherwise I love the dumpster diving

I'd keep him and use him this season before retaining 50% for 3 years in order to snag a 2nd. I don't want to tie up cap space in him for 3 years (and still need to address a 3C hole) just to get a 2nd round pick.

 

[Memento]

I'm absolutely fine with this. We can't exactly count on Dean to be our number three center just yet, and Alexandrov is going to be the fourth line center, so we needed a number three center. Hayes is a big body who can score, and that's good enough for me.

 

[TheDizee]

kyrou will welcome him once he gets kevin;s epic ID to invite him to an all night fortnite gaming session.

 

[Robb_K]

Most of your points are valid.

But Vrana is most definitely not in the same window as someone drafted today. He was drafted a full 9 years ago, and will be well into his 30s when this year's kids develop into big time NHL players.

I'm almost 80 years old. I no longer have much of a concept of time. I hadn't realised Vrana's been around so long. No problem. The Blues need a few players that can put the puck in the net consistently, and especially at times when they need a goal badly. He can provide that for us for a few years, and, as there are ALWAYS several teams who are desperate to add a goal scorer every year, he can bring back some decent draft capital, when The blues no longer need him.

 

[Brian39]

I'm almost 80 years old. I no longer have much of a concept of time. I hadn't realised Vrana's been around so long. No problem. The blues need a few players that can put the puck in the net consistently, and especially at times when they need a goal badly. He can provide that for us for a few years, and, as there are ALWAYS several teams who are desperate to add a goal scorer every year, he can bring back some decent draft capital, when The blues no longer need him.

I'm 35 and haven't had a decent concept of time in something like 2-15 years.

 

[Memento]

I'm almost 80 years old. I no longer have much of a concept of time. I hadn't realised Vrana's been around so long. No problem. The Blues need a few players that can put the puck in the net consistently, and especially at times when they need a goal badly. He can provide that for us for a few years, and, as there are ALWAYS several teams who are desperate to add a goal scorer every year, he can bring back some decent draft capital, when The blues no longer need him.

I'm 35 and haven't had a decent concept of time in something like 2-15 years.

I'm thirty-two, and what is this "time" you speak of?

 

[Majorityof1]

Capfriendly has 63 centers currently set to make $3.6M+ next year and we'll add at least a few guys to that list over the summer as free agents are signed. The expectation should be for a quality 3C at that price point, but I wouldn't say it is expensive for that role. Whenn you factor in the number of top 6 Cs on ELCs and bridge deals, I'd wager that a significant portion of teams are spending more than $3.6M on their 3C.


I think we'd all prefer a cheaper, younger, higher ceiling option. But as you outline in the next sentence, those don't come cheap. You're not getting one on waivers, they don't exist in UFA, and teams aren't looking to move the ones they have unless you really make it worth their while.

A 'Newhook-light' player is still going to cost you one of the late 1sts and likely more. Pick #29 and one of the 2024 2nds is a worse package than what Newhook returned (#31 and #37 in a consensus good draft plus a modest prospect). A package like #29, #76, and a prospect like Skinner is probably what it would take to snag a a guy along the lines of Newhook (but not as good).

If you are willing to go a bit older and more proven, the Avs just flipped #37 for Ross Colton. He has arbitration rights and can go UFA as early as next summer. The #29 would have landed us Colton and maybe we could have even gotten Tampa's 2024 3rd back too. He is going to want more than $3.6M to sign for more than 1 year and frankly I think he'd get close to $3.6M in arbitration. I'll take the Hayes deal over that type of deal. I'm not interested in moving one of the 1sts for a 2-3 year solution to the middle 6 and I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable giving Colton a 4+ year extension after spending a 1st to get him.

Improving the left side of the blue line is the only roster help I want to move those late 1sts for and we weren't getting the type of center you want without moving at least one of those late 1sts.

I get that Hayes isn't a franchise-changing move. But I don't think it is fair to compare it to a dream scenario that isn't a realistic option. If you're comparing it to getting a younger guy with more upside then you can't ignore that the cost for such a deal starts with one of the late 1sts. GMs have figured out the value of cap space and young NHL guys with upside (but lack of a resume) are cheap. Teams aren't parting with them for mid-value futures.

Yea, I know. You are right. Can't even argue it. Doesn't mean I have to like the trade. With all the build up (Army talking about wanting 26 and under, having draft capital to make a move and draft well, Rumors of Krug getting moved, etc), its just disappointing to add another 30+ vet and not get anything done with our D.

It’s also worth pointing out in the original trade flyers were apparently retaining 30% on Hayes. When that fell through we got him at 50. So he is better asset for us now. Will see what else we get done, but hard to find fault with this deal. Although predictably some on here do.

I'm not exactly finding fault with it. Just explaining why I am meh on it. There is nothing wrong with the deal itself. Its just disappointing nothing else got done when we had the trade capital to make a deal AND improve our cupboard.

 

[Blueston]

I'm not exactly finding fault with it. Just explaining why I am meh on it. There is nothing wrong with the deal itself. Its just disappointing nothing else got done when we had the trade capital to make a deal AND improve our cupboard.

it is meh. Agreed. I'm not excited by it. But the move itself makes sense. If this is only move we make this summer, though, we still aren't going to be very good.

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

I'm 35 and haven't had a decent concept of time in something like 2-15 years.

The 90s were still only 10 years ago, right?

 

[GoldenSeal]

The 90s were still only 10 years ago, right?

This is where I live!

 

[Majorityof1]

Our Captain, Ryan O'Reilly signed for only 1 year and less than a million more with a division rival than we have reamaining on Hayes contract. Now I know why I didn't like this deal

 

[Mike Liut]

Our Captain, Ryan O'Reilly signed for only 1 year and less than a million more with a division rival than we have reamaining on Hayes contract. Now I know why I didn't like this deal

we had no idea what the ROR market was going to be. We needed a 3C and couldn’t wait to find out. Hayes will be fine for a stop gap 3C for a couple years while we re-tool. And ROR will keep declining in the meantime.

 

[Majorityof1]

we had no idea what the ROR market was going to be. We needed a 3C and couldn’t wait to find out. Hayes will be fine for a stop gap 3C for a couple years while we re-tool. And ROR will keep declining in the meantime.

We didn't have to make a move right then. And I'm sure we talked contract with O'Reilly before we traded him. We had an idea what he wanted. I don't see it dropping that much over a few months.

 

[Blueston]

Our Captain, Ryan O'Reilly signed for only 1 year and less than a million more with a division rival than we have reamaining on Hayes contract. Now I know why I didn't like this deal

Would rather have the Hayes deal than sign ROR to that deal. 4 years seems like a lot for him.

 

[Xerloris]

I would prefer ROR at 4.5 than Hayes t 3.5. So that f***ing sucks.

Also do not forget, we were able to speak with ROR this entire past week. So we either chose not to or we did and decided f*** ROR.

 

[TheOrganist]

Would rather have the Hayes deal than sign ROR to that deal. 4 years seems like a lot for him.

Agreed. It’s inconsequential regardless and not worth getting pissed about. This team is not seriously competing for a Cup anytime soon. I personally think ROR is not going to age particularly gracefully with the miles he’s logged to this point in his career. Maybe not a Backes level drop off but I wouldn’t want that contract on the books in 2025-2027. Though I am surprised he didn’t want to finish out the sunset of his career on a more competitive team.

 

[Majorityof1]

Agreed. It’s inconsequential regardless and not worth getting pissed about. This team is not seriously competing for a Cup anytime soon. I personally think ROR is not going to age particularly gracefully with the miles he’s logged to this point in his career. Maybe not a Backes level drop off but I wouldn’t want that contract on the books in 2025-2027. Though I am surprised he didn’t want to finish out the sunset of his career on a more competitive team.

Who is getting pissed? I am the only one against it, and I am far from pissed.

Geeze, it's a discussion forum. I am discussing it. I swear if you so much as make a mild complaint against popular opinon, people flock to paint you as angry and unreasonable.

 

[TheOrganist]

Who is getting pissed? I am the only one against it, and I am far from pissed.

Geeze, it's a discussion forum. I am discussing it. I swear if you so much as make a mild complaint against popular opinon, people flock to paint you as angry and unreasonable.

The forum contrarian. We get the schtick.

 

[Majorityof1]

The forum contrarian. We get the schtick.

It's not a schtick. It's my opinion. I am not always contrarian. I just don't automatically cowtow to popular opinion or kneel to authority.

 

[shpongle falls]

Would’ve been cool to get O’Ry back but at the same time I’m kinda like meh whatever. Think we’ll be better off long term not signing him. Love the dude though.

 

[Dr Robot]

Orielly will be 36 as his contract is ending. Hayes will still be 33 during his final season. Big difference in age. We all love ROR but we might have stepped out of the way of that one.