Rumor: Blackhawks' Kevin Hayes on Rangers radar?

[McSauer]

I don't know how much of an NHL career he has.

To put it in perspective, it is virtually unheard of of a top organization in a top US city to let a "top" prospect walk or have a "top" prospect leave.

I think the excuse of "he was blocked" is absolute ********. If he was good enough, he'd force his way into the line up.

Johnny Gaudreau in the same position in the same organization would force his way in.

He really shouldn't be hyped as much as he is.

It would be nice to get a "free" asset. No one would be complaining about that. But its getting a little ridiculous on here, in terms of potential level of excitement.

He could just be saying that instead of not outright saying he doesn't not want to play in Chicago (for whatever reason). The 'being blocked' excuse may be BS, but it's just a copout pretty much...

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

He could just be saying that instead of not outright saying he doesn't not want to play in Chicago (for whatever reason). The 'being blocked' excuse may be BS, but it's just a copout pretty much...

I can't believe that so many people can justify this excuse.

That's the talk of a loser. Not meant in an insulting way. It's a losing mentality.

"I can't go out and beat someone else for a spot, let me go somewhere else where it will be easier for me."

This isn't like the Erixon situation, where he was mortified of the geographic city that he'd have to live in playing for a team that wasn't close to making the playoffs.

Hayes is in a winning organization in one of the most appealing US cities to live in. If he doesn't want to go out and win a spot... that's on him and his resolve.

 

[RangerBlues]

Chicago is deep with talent. You cant keep everyone.
They should have traded his rights instead of getting nothing if he signs elsewhere.

 

[TheTakedown]

Chicago is deep with talent. You cant keep everyone.
They should have traded his rights instead of getting nothing if he signs elsewhere.

they dont need to if they just get a 2nd round pick for not signing him

 

[nyr2k2]

Chicago is deep with talent. You cant keep everyone.
They should have traded his rights instead of getting nothing if he signs elsewhere.

As was mentioned earlier in the thread, they get the 54th pick in the draft if he doesn't sign.

 

[RangerBlues]

A 54th pick is a body. This is a developed young player who can play NHL minutes now. Cheap.
Seems like poor asset management.

 

[nyr2k2]

A 54th pick is a body. This is a developed young player who can play NHL minutes now. Cheap.
Seems like poor asset management.

Okay but the point is they don't have to trade him or get nothing in return. And, they don't have to trade him for anything less than a 2nd. Doing THAT would be poor asset management.

Sometimes a kid doesn't want to sign with you. That's just how it goes. Chicago is one of the best-run franchises in the sport...they know what they're doing.

 

[Joey Bones]

To be honest, I think he ends up in Calgary. His chemistry with Gaudreau was stellar.

 

[One Winged Angel]

I think he could be a good fit and a decent NHL'er. I've watched a bit of him over the years at BC and I like his game. Definitely has to work on his skating, but his shot and his hands are well above average. Given the chance he could be a decent NHL player, but he definitely needs work. Don't know if he'd crack an NHL roster this year unless it was for a team like Calgary or something.

 

[n8]

what worries me about signing him is he's gonna get a lot. Using Justin Schultz as a point of reference, it's hard to justify $3.5M+ of cap hit on an unproven player like him. Another question is if he has a salary of 900k w/ bonuses pushing his cap up, is his QO as an RFA based off his base salary or that cap hit. I'm just thinking of MDZ who's salary was so high, his QO became just unjustifiable. Granted, this would be getting a player for "free" so it's not as bad as "losing" your 1st round pick for nothing if we were to get him. Good thing we traded DZ!

What is the best way to manage your cap in this situation? I mean $3.5M is Alex Barkov money. Tyler Johnson and Ondrej Palat got that type of money in TB. Heck, Stepan only has a 3.075M cap hit. I'm not sure signing an unproven player for that high a number is best for managing the cap moving forward. Granted players/agents are probably not looking at actual cap numbers... still gotta wonder if this could inflate your own internal market. RFAs be like "whoa, that's money I should be getting!"

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

I like the way mgmt has used deep non-cap pockets to go after Undrafted NCAA players. We can trade our late 1st rounders and hand out some 925k contracts to well developed prospects

 

[Ola]

i might not be as excited about his game as many here are.

he doesnt have the overall game that poo displayed last season.

like i said, i dont see alot more than size, a really good shot and some nifty hands. his skating is meh and his ability to play the body isnt so good.

i think expecting kevin hayes to play in poos spot is a stretch.

I am excited about getting him, but I also agree with you on his game. His skating isn't great etc.

But he do have some potential. We certainly have room for a kid that brings what he brings. Etc.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

what worries me about signing him is he's gonna get a lot. Using Justin Schultz as a point of reference, it's hard to justify $3.5M+ of cap hit on an unproven player like him. Another question is if he has a salary of 900k w/ bonuses pushing his cap up, is his QO as an RFA based off his base salary or that cap hit. I'm just thinking of MDZ who's salary was so high, his QO became just unjustifiable. Granted, this would be getting a player for "free" so it's not as bad as "losing" your 1st round pick for nothing if we were to get him. Good thing we traded DZ!

What is the best way to manage your cap in this situation? I mean $3.5M is Alex Barkov money. Tyler Johnson and Ondrej Palat got that type of money in TB. Heck, Stepan only has a 3.075M cap hit. I'm not sure signing an unproven player for that high a number is best for managing the cap moving forward. Granted players/agents are probably not looking at actual cap numbers... still gotta wonder if this could inflate your own internal market. RFAs be like "whoa, that's money I should be getting!"

QO is based solely off of the players base salary.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

Hayes is a risk. Wasnt impressed with him at all at BC until last season.

He wants to play but hasnt played yet. I understand why he wants to leave but hes not NHL ready.

Two years in the AHL. Maybe one.

 

[RGY]

what worries me about signing him is he's gonna get a lot. Using Justin Schultz as a point of reference, it's hard to justify $3.5M+ of cap hit on an unproven player like him. Another question is if he has a salary of 900k w/ bonuses pushing his cap up, is his QO as an RFA based off his base salary or that cap hit. I'm just thinking of MDZ who's salary was so high, his QO became just unjustifiable. Granted, this would be getting a player for "free" so it's not as bad as "losing" your 1st round pick for nothing if we were to get him. Good thing we traded DZ!

What is the best way to manage your cap in this situation? I mean $3.5M is Alex Barkov money. Tyler Johnson and Ondrej Palat got that type of money in TB. Heck, Stepan only has a 3.075M cap hit. I'm not sure signing an unproven player for that high a number is best for managing the cap moving forward. Granted players/agents are probably not looking at actual cap numbers... still gotta wonder if this could inflate your own internal market. RFAs be like "whoa, that's money I should be getting!"

He is not getting $3.5 million. I'd be surprised if Hayes got over $1.5 million. He has been developing and showing up to Hawks prospects camps over the last few years...if he was that lights out he wouldve been given a contract and roster spot. He is not on the level of Schultz

 

[GAGLine]

what worries me about signing him is he's gonna get a lot. Using Justin Schultz as a point of reference, it's hard to justify $3.5M+ of cap hit on an unproven player like him. Another question is if he has a salary of 900k w/ bonuses pushing his cap up, is his QO as an RFA based off his base salary or that cap hit. I'm just thinking of MDZ who's salary was so high, his QO became just unjustifiable. Granted, this would be getting a player for "free" so it's not as bad as "losing" your 1st round pick for nothing if we were to get him. Good thing we traded DZ!

What is the best way to manage your cap in this situation? I mean $3.5M is Alex Barkov money. Tyler Johnson and Ondrej Palat got that type of money in TB. Heck, Stepan only has a 3.075M cap hit. I'm not sure signing an unproven player for that high a number is best for managing the cap moving forward. Granted players/agents are probably not looking at actual cap numbers... still gotta wonder if this could inflate your own internal market. RFAs be like "whoa, that's money I should be getting!"

As UAGoalieGuy said, QO is based on base salary. Performance bonuses aren't factored in.

He also has to earn those bonuses. He won't earn them if he doesn't make the team and even then, many of them will be set high enough that he's unlikely to reach them.

There's a big, big difference between a 3+ mil ELC and a 3+ mil 2nd contract.

 

[Baby Punisher]

WOuld love to get this kid! Hope it happens.

 

[Baby Punisher]

A 54th pick is a body. This is a developed young player who can play NHL minutes now. Cheap.
Seems like poor asset management.

Not really, The Hawks are staked top to bottom and they have a system that has talents as well. As said earlier you can't keep everyone.

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

Would be good to add him to the system, but he is not a good skater at all. Not really a fit in a system preaching speed through the neutral zone, quick transition out of the defensive zone, and wearing out defenders with speed.

Still worth a shot depending on his price.

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

Would be good to add him to the system, but he is not a good skater at all. Not really a fit in a system preaching speed through the neutral zone, quick transition out of the defensive zone, and wearing out defenders with speed.

Still worth a shot depending on his price.

If Hayes is available after 8/15, he's going to get the same contract (rookie max) regardless of where he signs. It's just a question of where he wants to play.

I doubt he'll sign here--from the sound of it (I haven't seen him play), he'd have a hard time making the roster out of training camp and could easily see several other prospects called up ahead of him during the season. Long term it might be a good fit, but I'd bet there are other teams where he would have a better chance of making the NHL sooner.

 

[Doctyl]

If Hayes is available after 8/15, he's going to get the same contract (rookie max) regardless of where he signs. It's just a question of where he wants to play.

I doubt he'll sign here--from the sound of it (I haven't seen him play), he'd have a hard time making the roster out of training camp and could easily see several other prospects called up ahead of him during the season. Long term it might be a good fit, but I'd bet there are other teams where he would have a better chance of making the NHL sooner.

Gaping hole at 3rd line wing is up for the taking

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

Gaping hole at 3rd line wing is up for the taking

It's the LW where the roster is short and Hayes evidently plays RW. There are already several prospects (Fast, Kristo and Haggerty--who AV should be very familar with) in the system who also play RW. Like I said in my original post, there's no guarantee Hayes makes the team, much less gets a chance if there is a spot open during the season.

ELC contracts by definition are two-way contracts, Hayes ends up in the minors and he earns $50-$60,000. If he's not going to sign with Chicago, why take a chance and sign with the Rangers?

 

[Beacon]

I don't know how much of an NHL career he has.

To put it in perspective, it is virtually unheard of of a top organization in a top US city to let a "top" prospect walk or have a "top" prospect leave.

Umberger again. We let him walk from our big city and he became a solid 40-50 point producer in the NHL. If we could get another Umberger in Hayes, I will be very happy.

 

[Beacon]

ELC contracts by definition are two-way contracts, Hayes ends up in the minors and he earns $50-$60,000. If he's not going to sign with Chicago, why take a chance and sign with the Rangers?

We have so little depth on the wing that any winger who doesn't make it is simply not ready for the NHL.

The idea that there are no spots available for a rookie is wishful thinking at best, delusional at worst.

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

We have so little depth on the wing that any winger who doesn't make it is simply not ready for the NHL.

The idea that there are no spots available for a rookie is wishful thinking at best, delusional at worst.

Where did I say I didn't think there were any spots on the NHL roster available for prospects? You highlighted a reason why I don't think Hayes will sign here--he's not a lock to make the NHL roster with the Rangers and could easily spend a whole season in the AHL because there are several other prospects--I named Fast, Kristo and Haggerty--who could conceivable be above him on the depth chart.

Hayes, if he doesn't sign with Chicago, is a free agent. I don't know if he truly prefers to sign with a team like Calgary because he has friends there (and would likely make the NHL sooner, rather than later) or wants to remain on/near the east coast. I do think that the Rangers will have competition if they want to sign him.

The Rangers can't pay him more than other teams and they won't guarantee him a roster spot. Why would he choose to sign here? Is Hartford that much fun?