Friedman: Kevin Hayes Linked to Boston & Colorado

[EscapedGoat]

Hayes, 50% retained

Colorado: their 1st, Makar, Greer/Morrison, conditional 2020 2nd if he resigns

Are you kidding me?!

You really think you can swindle the Avs into giving you a conditional 2020 2nd if Hayes re-signs. Not acceptable!

Ottawa's first, Makar and Greer, well yeah, that sounds fair. But nice try sneaking that conditional 2020 in there. The Avs would absolutely demand that be taken out. Nice try.

 

[tradenashnow]

Colorado is not trading Makar. They have lacked defenseman for years. Rangers need to sign Hayes. Not trade him. Zucc they need to trade. Along with Staal.

 

[Profet]

To put it in context of more specific packages that would makes sense for Colorado to offer; for Hayes anything more than our 1st and a B-prospect...or a 3rd + Andrighetto...would make me uncomfortable. Whereas for Zibby I’d be ok with going up to #6-10 overall and an A-prospect; or our 1st and 2 A-prospects...or an A prospect & a conditional 2020 1st.

But see... I think a first and a b prospect gets a Hayes deal done.

For Mika though, you're grossly undervaluing him.

It would take considerably more than you're offering to get a locked up #1 center.

We're talking unprotected first and young roster player.

 

[DutchNYR]

Ottawa is not trading Makar. They have lacked defenseman for years. Rangers need to sign Hayes. Not trade him. Zucc they need to trade. Along with Staal.

You’re right, Ottawa aren’t trading Makar. But then again, they’re not trading McDavid either.

 

[tradenashnow]

LOL meant Colorado.

 

[EdAVSfan]

But see... I think a first and a b prospect gets a Hayes deal done.

For Mika though, you're grossly undervaluing him.

It would take considerably more than you're offering to get a locked up #1 center.

We're talking unprotected first and young roster player.

Like a ROR-like package?

Pretty sure the Avs could afford that kind of package.

 

[cgf]

But see... I think a first and a b prospect gets a Hayes deal done.

For Mika though, you're grossly undervaluing him.

It would take considerably more than you're offering to get a locked up #1 center.

We're talking unprotected first and young roster player.

If Kerfoot and our unprotected first got it done then that’s a no-brainer lol

But I think you’re mistaken on what the comps would be for a Zibby trade, if you think my offers grossly undervalue him.
-Stepan coming off of years of 50 pt seasons + a starting goalie only netted you the 7th pick & a B-prospect.
-ROR got traded from Colorado around the age that Zibby is now, with an extension & a middle-6 winger, for a not-quite-bluechip A-prospect (Zadorov), 31st overall, a B-prospect I loved (Compher), and a reclamation project (Grigorenko).
-

 

[TGWL]

Kevin Hayes is not being traded until after January, when we're allowed to negotiate new terms with him. If Hayes wants a 5 year deal, at 5.8/6 million, I'd probably be fine with it. I don't want to go longer. I also don't want to risk losing him for nothing. He's a fantastic player, but our rebuild isn't finished, and we're going to need a lot more young players who can come in and play, relatively soon. Kevin Hayes is one of the odd players out because his contract is currently up. If this was Kreider instead of Hayes, I think we'd be in the same situation. It has nothing to do with wanting to get rid of them.

Kevin Hayes is worth a lot. I don't consider Ottawa's first a lot - I consider that substantial and not a realistic offer. Every NYR fan needs to accept that we're not getting a high first, no outside playoff team is trading for a UFA, unless some unforeseeable contract extension is agreed upon. Hayes makes any team better and the pick will end up anywhere from 18 or later. So if that's the pick we're getting, I want a really good prospect, one that should be projected to either immediately make our roster next year, or the year after, and there needs to be top 6 potential.

I also get why Colorado doesn't want to go all in with their current team and the uncertainties they have this season on being an actual playoff threat. If they thought their only hole was going to be filled in by bringing in Hayes, they'd probably be a little more willing to pay a bigger return for a UFA player with his skill set.

Trading Hayes opens a really big hole on our team. He's a two-way center, who can fill in on any line you put him on. He kills penalties well. He's defensively responsible. He can skate through the neutral zone. He'll be missed.

 

[TGWL]

If Kerfoot and our unprotected first got it done then that’s a no-brainer lol

But I think you’re mistaken on what the comps would be for a Zibby trade, if you think my offers grossly undervalue him.
-Stepan coming off of years of 50 pt seasons + a starting goalie only netted you the 7th pick & a B-prospect.
-ROR got traded from Colorado around the age that Zibby is now, with an extension & a middle-6 winger, for a not-quite-bluechip A-prospect (Zadorov), 31st overall, a B-prospect I loved (Compher), and a reclamation project (Grigorenko).
-

Tony wasn't a B prospect. Tony was drafted in the first round and was considered to be a high end prospect, with a lot of baggage. All the skill was there, but he was a high risk, high reward type of prospect. He wasn't a blue chip but he also wasn't just an above average prospect.

The goalie we traded was not a starting goalie. He was a backup goalie who performed well, and had potential to be a starting goalie based on the numbers you put up and how well he played. He was traded with the opportunity to be a starting goalie. There's a big difference there.

 

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

Based on the previous moves Sakic has made, I fully expect the Avs to go after him as a UFA, but they won't pay the price to get him during the season (unless they can work out an extension)

 

[Trxjw]

If Kerfoot and our unprotected first got it done then that’s a no-brainer lol

But I think you’re mistaken on what the comps would be for a Zibby trade, if you think my offers grossly undervalue him.
-Stepan coming off of years of 50 pt seasons + a starting goalie only netted you the 7th pick & a B-prospect.
-ROR got traded from Colorado around the age that Zibby is now, with an extension & a middle-6 winger, for a not-quite-bluechip A-prospect (Zadorov), 31st overall, a B-prospect I loved (Compher), and a reclamation project (Grigorenko).
-

You're missing a major component of the Stepan trade: the fact that the Rangers wanted to move his contract. There's no incentive to trade Zibanejad for anything less than a premium. Especially when he's pacing for 70 points and is over a million cheaper per year than Stepan. The player Zib has been since October 2017 is significantly better than Stepan ever was as a Ranger.

 

[Patagonia]

AVs are not going to pay the price for Hayes and sacrifice prospects and picks after they've exiting their rebuild. NYR should offer him elsewhere, otherwise Sakic will likely pursue as a UFA.

 

[cgf]

Tony wasn't a B prospect. Tony was drafted in the first round and was considered to be a high end prospect, with a lot of baggage. All the skill was there, but he was a high risk, high reward type of prospect. He wasn't a blue chip but he also wasn't just an above average prospect.

The goalie we traded was not a starting goalie. He was a backup goalie who performed well, and had potential to be a starting goalie based on the numbers you put up and how well he played. He was traded with the opportunity to be a starting goalie. There's a big difference there.

Though he wasn’t yet proven as a starting Goalie, he still had comparable value to the Talbots & Grubauers of the world at the time of their trades; which was a later 1st or an early 2nd + rating a capdump...at least IMO.

And fair enough. I was never high on him because of what one of our board’s insiders told us about his baggage; even though i’m usually in ‘the red flags in hockey are generally bullshit’ crowd. So I felt like he was a B-prospect, but the talent alone was that of an A-prospect so I’ll concede that point. Though that’s still a comparable that reinforces my hypothetical avs proposals.

...which were made in the context of a ‘trade Hayes & hold onto Zibby vs cash in on Zibby for more & re-up Hayes’ conversation; so I was just trying to elucidate what those options could look like using proposals from my team, who could be interested in either one. Those being to move forward with:

Hayes + A-prospect + OTT 1st* (#6-10)
or
Zibby + B-prospect + COL 1st (#20-31)

*or COL 1st + A prospect if OTT pick ends up top 4 or 5 after the lottery


For us I’d rather having the latter but our window opens the moment Zibby & Makar hit the roster. While you are still a couple seasons away from your kids starting to carry the load; so maybe your calculus would be different. I was just trying to put some realistic hypotheticals into the conversation between two NYR fans that I found interesting.

 

[cgf]

You're missing a major component of the Stepan trade: the fact that the Rangers wanted to move his contract. There's no incentive to trade Zibanejad for anything less than a premium. Especially when he's pacing for 70 points and is over a million cheaper per year than Stepan. The player Zib has been since October 2017 is significantly better than Stepan ever was as a Ranger.

I never suggested they were. @ Profet & Calad were discussing the merits of keeping Zibby & selling Hayes vs extending Hayes & cashing in on Zibby. Since I found their conversation interesting I volunteered some hypothetical packages from my team that could provide some context of what that decision could look like.

 

[KlausJopling]

Not that it couldn't happen but i don't think the Bruins are in a position to give up a lot (which it would take) to get someone only for this season. I think they go for someone with term or if someone who will be a UFA, a much cheaper player.

Hayes is gonna get paid this offseason.

 

[TGWL]

Though he wasn’t yet proven as a starting Goalie, he still had comparable value to the Talbots & Grubauers of the world at the time of their trades; which was a later 1st or an early 2nd + rating a capdump...at least IMO.

And fair enough. I was never high on him because of what one of our board’s insiders told us about his baggage; even though i’m usually in ‘the red flags in hockey are generally bull****’ crowd. So I felt like he was a B-prospect, but the talent alone was that of an A-prospect so I’ll concede that point. Though that’s still a comparable that reinforces my hypothetical avs proposals.

...which were made in the context of a ‘trade Hayes & hold onto Zibby vs cash in on Zibby for more & re-up Hayes’ conversation; so I was just trying to elucidate what those options could look like using proposals from my team, who could be interested in either one. Those being to move forward with:

Hayes + A-prospect + OTT 1st*
or
Zibby + B-prospect + COL 1st

*or COL 1st + A prospect if OTT pick ends up top 4 or 5 after the lottery


For us I’d rather having the latter but our window opens the moment Zibby & Makar hit the roster. While you are still a couple seasons away from your kids starting to carry the load; so maybe your calculus would be different. I was just trying to put some realistic hypotheticals into the conversation between two NYR fans that I found interesting.

Grubauer didn't get a late first or an early second.

Rangers didn't get a late first or early second for Talbot.

 

[cgf]

Grubauer didn't get a late first or an early second.

Rangers didn't get a late first or early second for Talbot.

You're right, for some reason I thought the 2nd used for Grubauer was from Ottawa. That said they were looking for a late 1st for him before we offered to eat Orpik. And Talbot got a 2nd & 3rd, so that's really splitting hairs...although I was thinking of what Buffalo paid for Lehner rather than what Edmonton paid for Talbot when I made that post

Either way, again, my point was about putting together realistic hypotheticals to provide context to the "Hayes + Zibby-return vs Zibby + Hayes-return" discussion rather than providing an opinion in that discussion.

 

[Bluto]

To Col: Kevin Hayes
To NYR: a guarantee that if time travel is invented, that they will go back in time to 1997 and ensure that the offersheet of Joe Sakic is not matched and that he becomes a member of NYR.

 

[cgf]

To Col: Kevin Hayes
To NYR: a guarantee that if time travel is invented, that they will go back in time to 1997 and ensure that the offersheet of Joe Sakic is not matched and that he becomes a member of NYR.

 

[Kupo]

To Col: Kevin Hayes
To NYR: a guarantee that if time travel is invented, that they will go back in time to 1997 and ensure that the offersheet of Joe Sakic is not matched and that he becomes a member of NYR.

I remember this day, which is surprising considering how many times Johnnie Walker’s and Jack Herer’s have hung out with me.

 

[CobraAcesS]

To Col: Kevin Hayes
To NYR: a guarantee that if time travel is invented, that they will go back in time to 1997 and ensure that the offersheet of Joe Sakic is not matched and that he becomes a member of NYR.

Yeah, go f*** yourself

You could give me Hughes right now today for free, and I'd tell you to f*** off.

 

[Machinehead]

Yeah, go **** yourself

You could give me Hughes right now today for free, and I'd tell you to **** off.

Well that wasn't very nice

 

[cgf]

Well that wasn't very nice

Neither was asking us to promise to commit such a dastardly time crime whenever time travel becomes publicly available

 

[Machinehead]

Neither was asking us to promise to commit such a dastardly time crime whenever time travel becomes publicly available

Don't worry, I ever get my hands on that shit, I'm headed straight for 1926 and there ain't gonna be no Rangers.

Somebody has to step up and save us.

 

[ImNeverWrong]

kevin hayes is a good player and is only 26...why would the rangers want to deal him? you need players like that to be competitive even through a rebuild and he's arguably been the rags best player this year. outside a big overpay, the rangers should like to resign the big guy.