Value of: Kevin Hayes

[Hunter368]

1st rounders are not unrealistically high for Premier rentals. Neither on HF nor in real life

No one said a 1st round pick was....

 

[bernmeister]

That's Bern

I'd do Hayes for Fox and the Canes 1st in 19 and call it a day

that's overly greedy.
If Hayes was def leaving for sure, and under 4+ years term w/nice salary, then yeah

but as is, with him IMO likely to do a Chapman to Yankees, it is not.
Hayes + our early 2nd for their 1st and right to talk to Fox.
If Fox signs with us 2 more seconds which is fair.

 

[Lion Hound]

For the sake of the NY Rangers rebuild, trading Hayes just makes so much sense.

The return should be similar to the Hanzal trade. 1st rounder, plus journeyman 4th liner in exchange for Hayes plus AHL asset (Letteri maybe)

The reality of the situation is Rangers are now sitting 2nd in the Metro. If they continue this trend of winning, it's highly unlikely the club will part with Hayes even though it makes a ton of sense to continue to stockpile assets, and continue to add and develop youth.


One thing that scares me as a Rangers fan was the smirk on Glen Sather's face when Hayes was discussed at their Town Hall. I think his comment was Kevin is going to get paid handsomely on his next contract. Not sure if General Sather still has any say on the checkbook, but if history repeats itself again with an exhorbitant contract for a B level player it will be incredibly disappointing for the fanbase.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

The return should be similar to the Hanzal trade. 1st rounder, plus journeyman 4th liner in exchange for Hayes plus AHL asset (Letteri maybe).

I need more to move him.

 

[Lion Hound]

I need more to move him.

I would like to see them get more but trying to be realistic.

He will be younger then Hanzal was so thats a plus. Big, two way centers always have a lot of value so maybe the return will be better.

 

[pld459666]

that's overly greedy.
If Hayes was def leaving for sure, and under 4+ years term w/nice salary, then yeah

but as is, with him IMO likely to do a Chapman to Yankees, it is not.
Hayes + our early 2nd for their 1st and right to talk to Fox.
If Fox signs with us 2 more seconds which is fair.

Hayes and three second rounders is absurd.

No other way to put it.

 

[pld459666]

I would like to see them get more but trying to be realistic.

He will be younger then Hanzal was so thats a plus. Big, two way centers always have a lot of value so maybe the return will be better.

I know he doesn't have the pedigree of Nash, but hayes is younger, is a mid to high 40 point player that has done an amazing job of rounding out his game to become a hell of a good defensive player.

If he doesn't get a better return than a washed up Rick Nash, I'd be disappointed

 

[Ori]

If he has 20+ goals by the deadline, he's likely won't be traded.

Yes, and they still want to trade Zucc he had 26 goals in 2015-16 season.

 

[bernmeister]

Hayes and three second rounders is absurd.

No other way to put it.

You''re buying certainty and not coughing up a 1st.
It is only 3 2nd rounders if Fox signs with us.
If/when that happens as likely, those two additional 2nds are payable as they become due, over time. We are not paying two more 2nds in this draft.
And, if Fox fast tracks, he can be here relatively soon, sooner than any 2nd round pick(s).

Think of it this way.
There is a chance that Hayes could go elsewhere, but that is also the current scenario. While not a given, it is more likely he returns, assuming no unexpected $ issues.
We are lending him to Canes, who can use him, or, if things go bust, they can flip and recover much of what they paid.
So presume Hayes long term is out

So we get the Canes 1st for a 2nd, and a free and clear shot at Fox, then paying two more 2nds only if Fox signs.

That's a good deal.

 

[spockBokk]

You''re buying certainty and not coughing up a 1st.
It is only 3 2nd rounders if Fox signs with us.
If/when that happens as likely, those two additional 2nds are payable as they become due, over time. We are not paying two more 2nds in this draft.
And, if Fox fast tracks, he can be here relatively soon, sooner than any 2nd round pick(s).

Think of it this way.
There is a chance that Hayes could go elsewhere, but that is also the current scenario. While not a given, it is more likely he returns, assuming no unexpected $ issues.
We are lending him to Canes, who can use him, or, if things go bust, they can flip and recover much of what they paid.
So presume Hayes long term is out

So we get the Canes 1st for a 2nd, and a free and clear shot at Fox, then paying two more 2nds only if Fox signs.

That's a good deal.

It’s ridiculous and no way CAR does it, but nice try.

 

[Shootertooter]

To the Boston Bruins: Kevin Hayes

To The New York Rangers: 2019 1st round pick + Jakub Lauko/Zach Senyshyn

I think this is fair value.

 

[pld459666]

You''re buying certainty and not coughing up a 1st.
It is only 3 2nd rounders if Fox signs with us.
If/when that happens as likely, those two additional 2nds are payable as they become due, over time. We are not paying two more 2nds in this draft.
And, if Fox fast tracks, he can be here relatively soon, sooner than any 2nd round pick(s).

Think of it this way.
There is a chance that Hayes could go elsewhere, but that is also the current scenario. While not a given, it is more likely he returns, assuming no unexpected $ issues.
We are lending him to Canes, who can use him, or, if things go bust, they can flip and recover much of what they paid.
So presume Hayes long term is out

So we get the Canes 1st for a 2nd, and a free and clear shot at Fox, then paying two more 2nds only if Fox signs.

That's a good deal.

Thing is, there is nothing certain about the 1st or Fox.

To cough up additional assets for uncertain returns is a bad deal

 

[Cousin Eddie]

The term “first round pick” has been getting tossed around for Hayes far too loosely imo. He’s a good player, but I don’t think he gets a 1st as a rental. You have less and less teams willing to trade 1sts with each passing year and there are simply much better rental options available than Hayes. Those guys are going to be the ones returning 1sts.

One trade doesn’t set the market and I feel Rangers fans are far too caught up in the value they got for Nash. That was simply a bad trade by Boston. I don’t think people should keep assuming they’ll get better value on a Hayes trade simply because Hayes is better. That’s not how it always works.

I think he’ll get a 2nd + prospect or maybe a 2nd+3rd/4th.

 

[Savant]

The term “first round pick” has been getting tossed around for Hayes far too loosely imo. He’s a good player, but I don’t think he gets a 1st as a rental. You have less and less teams willing to trade 1sts with each passing year and there are simply much better rental options available than Hayes. Those guys are going to be the ones returning 1sts.

One trade doesn’t set the market and I feel Rangers fans are far too caught up in the value they got for Nash. That was simply a bad trade by Boston. I don’t think people should keep assuming they’ll get better value on a Hayes trade simply because Hayes is better. That’s not how it always works.

I think he’ll get a 2nd + prospect or maybe a 2nd+3rd/4th.

Worse players than Hayes have gotten firsts at the deadline.

The Nash trade wasn't a bad trade by Boston, it was a market value trade. Rentals get 1sts. Time and time again and Nash was doing great for Boston until he got a concussion.

Hayes gets more than you are suggesting if the Rangers move him. Probably pretty easily. I could see the Rangers trying to move Hayes for a similar D or winger, but I'd be shocked if they took less than a first if they traded him for picks.

 

[EpicDing]

The term “first round pick” has been getting tossed around for Hayes far too loosely imo. He’s a good player, but I don’t think he gets a 1st as a rental. You have less and less teams willing to trade 1sts with each passing year and there are simply much better rental options available than Hayes. Those guys are going to be the ones returning 1sts.

One trade doesn’t set the market and I feel Rangers fans are far too caught up in the value they got for Nash. That was simply a bad trade by Boston. I don’t think people should keep assuming they’ll get better value on a Hayes trade simply because Hayes is better. That’s not how it always works.

I think he’ll get a 2nd + prospect or maybe a 2nd+3rd/4th.

Hanzal got a 1st+2nd+a conditional pick. Tatar got a 1st+2nd+3rd. Ryan f***ing Hartman got a 1st. Expecting a 1st for Hayes isn't as ridiculous as you make it out to be.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Worse players than Hayes have gotten firsts at the deadline.

The Nash trade wasn't a bad trade by Boston, it was a market value trade. Rentals get 1sts. Time and time again and Nash was doing great for Boston until he got a concussion.

Hayes gets more than you are suggesting if the Rangers move him. Probably pretty easily. I could see the Rangers trying to move Hayes for a similar D or winger, but I'd be shocked if they took less than a first if they traded him for picks.

Hanzal got a 1st+2nd+a conditional pick. Tatar got a 1st+2nd+3rd. Expecting a 1st for Hayes isn't as ridiculous as you make it out to be.

You guys are just magnifying my point. Specific trades don’t set the market. Those examples are both bad trades, and situations where better options weren’t available.

If the likes of Duchene, Stone, Panarin and Bobrovsky are available nobody is giving up a 1st for Hayes.

There are only so many 1st rounders to go around and who gets then is relative to who is available. You’re looking at 2 or maybe 3 1st’s being given up at the deadline. If Hayes is one of the 3 best options available he will probably return one. I’m just saying I don’t think he’ll be one of those top 2-3 rental options.

Supply and demand.

 

[bernmeister]

Thing is, there is nothing certain about the 1st or Fox.

To cough up additional assets for uncertain returns is a bad deal

I agree that nothing is 1000% certain, even acquiring a known commodity, there can be an injury or something afterward.

But Fox is a reasonably known commodity. Yes, if 1OAs can bust so can he, but we measure reward and risk vs each other, and obviously, if he were redrafted and there were no ?s as to him returning to school, but instead he were to make a statement he would get started to be in NHL asap, he would go higher than he was actually drafted, IMO, based on projected success based on estimated talent.

consider also
we really wanted K'Andre Miller.
Some say we overpaid to move up to get him
Was that overpayment wrong?
Sure Miller COULD fall flat on his face the day after tomorrow, but more likely he becomes a stud D for us.

And it is one thing if Hayes was already extended and we are 111% giving him away.
This is Hayes going with a reasonable chance he returns if we don't insult him $ wise.

So while not certain, it likely turns into three 2nds for a 1st + Fox.

Sorry, but methinks that's good.

 

[bernmeister]

It’s ridiculous and no way CAR does it, but nice try.

Disagree, and as to CAR's side, it is good for them.

They get Hayes NOW and they have up until the deadline to see how their season is going. If Hayes does not extend - reasonable he will either come back to us or test the market - they can still flip him if they don't want him for this year's cup run. He will still command assets from a contender going deep, and they will recover that 1st and get more.

As for Fox, it's reasonable all things =, he would consider giving Carolina a shot to sign him, although he supposedly wants to be closer to coast and particularly, like Hayes, closer to NY.

However, even if you get past that, Canes currently very deep at RD, why should he try to break that lineup -- not that he ultimately can't, but where is it in his interest to wait - when he can insist on being moved. He controls the cards, not Carolina. He stays in school and if they are not a match by then he waits and they are forced to trade him or let him go for bupkis into a redraft.

Makes more sense to take Hayes, get production, keep as a gamble for cup run, or, if playing percentages, instead flip him later for 1st + and if/when as likely Fox signs with NYR, who need young stud RDs, then use the 2020 and 2021 2nds. Playing a waiting game w/Fox generates no production or assets for Carolina.

The only ? for Canes is if there is a better offer, and that again to be realistic must be tempered vs where will Fox agree to play, not whatever the hell Canes want.

 

[QJL]

Comments on the last few posts...

Hayes undoubtedly gets a 1st.

Adam Fox is going to be a better player than Hayes and would only be traded if Hayes signs long-term immediately. To think a 1st would be added to Fox is nuts. That would be Gorton’s greatest move if he pulled it off.

I think Nylander ends up in Carolina.

The Hayes for BOS 1st + Lauko/Senyshyn is fair value but I don’t see the Bruins moving another 1st this year.

 

[Vitto79]

Hayes doing well so trade value high . I’d deal him for young help now instead of a 1st if they get a good offer

Don’t think he’d sign w a new team like Turris did though . If he would values higher

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

If Carolina were to flip Hayes at the deadline, that would mean the team would be sufficiently outside of the playoffs and the pick given up to the Rangers would be in the early teens or better. A rental Hayes flipped doesn't recoup that. Carolina loses the deal in that scenario, potentially catastrophically, from a macro viewpoint.

I understand the desire for Carolina to be involved, but Hayes is just an excessively risky move for a team of that caliber to make. Realistically, the focus should be on good to great teams, not below average to average ones.

 

[pld459666]

I agree that nothing is 1000% certain, even acquiring a known commodity, there can be an injury or something afterward.

But Fox is a reasonably known commodity. Yes, if 1OAs can bust so can he, but we measure reward and risk vs each other, and obviously, if he were redrafted and there were no ?s as to him returning to school, but instead he were to make a statement he would get started to be in NHL asap, he would go higher than he was actually drafted, IMO, based on projected success based on estimated talent.

consider also
we really wanted K'Andre Miller.
Some say we overpaid to move up to get him
Was that overpayment wrong?
Sure Miller COULD fall flat on his face the day after tomorrow, but more likely he becomes a stud D for us.

And it is one thing if Hayes was already extended and we are 111% giving him away.
This is Hayes going with a reasonable chance he returns if we don't insult him $ wise.

So while not certain, it likely turns into three 2nds for a 1st + Fox.

Sorry, but methinks that's good.

Agree to disagree.

Hayes and three 2nd rounders for a mid 1st and Fox is wasting assets when there are going to be more suitors than just Carolina for a mid to high 40 point solid defensive center.

Gorton should be fired if he made that type of trade.

As good as Fox MAY be, that package should be reserved for something more certain than the potential of what could be.

 

[Luger]

The term “first round pick” has been getting tossed around for Hayes far too loosely imo. He’s a good player, but I don’t think he gets a 1st as a rental. You have less and less teams willing to trade 1sts with each passing year and there are simply much better rental options available than Hayes.

Almost all top 6 guys get a first plus as rentals, as do many third liners. Grabner brought back a mid-second and a prospect worth more than a second. Combined, the value is higher than or at least on par with a late first. There were a ton of similar deals that brought a first or an equivalent prospect (last year's first round draftee who is having a good D+ season) for much worse players than Hayes.

Buffalo traded a third for the right to negotiate with Vesey, who was never anywhere as good as Hayes, nor would be a playoff rental. The value people band about for Hayes is the value one pays to negotiate for a few weeks with someone who never played in the NHL.

Every year we hear that a rental won't bring back s first, and it always does. A washed up Nash brought back a first, a solid prospect, a bottom-6 player and a late draft pick. Hayes has more value because he can be resigned.

Look for Hayes to bring back #1, #2-3, a solid prospect and a low-end NHLer.

I think he’ll get a 2nd + prospect or maybe a 2nd+3rd/4th.

So less than Grabner brought back?

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Almost all top 6 guys get a first plus as rentals, as do many third liners. Grabner brought back a mid-second and a prospect worth more than a second. Combined, the value is higher than or at least on par with a late first. There were a ton of similar deals that brought a first or an equivalent prospect (last year's first round draftee who is having a good D+ season) for much worse players than Hayes.

Buffalo traded a third for the right to negotiate with Vesey, who was never anywhere as good as Hayes, nor would be a playoff rental. The value people band about for Hayes is the value one pays to negotiate for a few weeks with someone who never played in the NHL.

Every year we hear that a rental won't bring back s first, and it always does. A washed up Nash brought back a first, a solid prospect, a bottom-6 player and a late draft pick. Hayes has more value because he can be resigned.

Look for Hayes to bring back #1, #2-3, a solid prospect and a low-end NHLer.



So less than Grabner brought back?

There’s better options available this year. Why are people having such a hard time grasping this? I don’t care if Grabner returned two ducking 1st rounders. This year Hayes is way down the depth chart of what’s available. Every team looking to boost their team aren’t just going to give up 1st rounders.

People keep bringing up individual trades like it’s an example yet the examples used come from bad rental crops. Guys like Hanzal and Nash wouldn’t return what they did if guys like Duchene and Panarin were available.

If we just use bad outliers as examples I guess we can expect like 20 first rounders to be exchanged for rentals this year. Teams who aren’t even competing for the playoffs will probably offer a 1st for Kevin Hayes and his 18 goal pace because Michael Grabner returned a 2nd. Am I right?

Trades from previous years don’t tell a story of future trades. The supply and demand of the marketplace does.

 

[smoneil]

You guys are just magnifying my point. Specific trades don’t set the market. Those examples are both bad trades, and situations where better options weren’t available.

If the likes of Duchene, Stone, Panarin and Bobrovsky are available nobody is giving up a 1st for Hayes.

There are only so many 1st rounders to go around and who gets then is relative to who is available. You’re looking at 2 or maybe 3 1st’s being given up at the deadline. If Hayes is one of the 3 best options available he will probably return one. I’m just saying I don’t think he’ll be one of those top 2-3 rental options.

Supply and demand.

Your list of players in competition with Hayes is a little odd. Only one of them even plays the same position. Hayes also has more playoff experience than any of those skaters (significantly more experience than the only other center you mention).

You are right in that supply and demand will set the market, but I think it's a bit too early to speculate as to what the supply and demand will be. It's entirely possible that--not owning their own first round pick, Ottawa might hold on to Stone and Duchene (or if they do trade them, ask for an exorbitant price, which would set the market high). Same with Columbus and Panarin/Bob, as Columbus is more likely to be in the playoffs than Ottawa or the Rangers.

At this point, all we can really point to with certainty is the return that comparable players have received in prior years, and in the past, top six centers in their 20s--ESPECIALLY when they have solid post-season experience and can center a shut-down line--tend to bring back a 1st rounder +. It could well end up being a buyer's market this year, but based on history, it's a safer bet that Hayes DOES bring back a 1st rounder than not.