Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Free Agent Frenzy Part V: Gorton is on McLeod Nine.

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
TheGuarantee said:
What’s the rush? It’s 7/13. I’d rather they wait and make those moves at the TDL where there is desperation on other teams ends than forcing a move in July. Enjoy the summer, catch a baseball game, relax.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who is a GM for top clubs in Sweden. At one point he was GM (and coach and what not) for a club with the smallest budget by far in the 2nd tier division. He could spend like 2m USD, the other teams had between 10-20m. Every year he waited until August/September to sign players. He only signed guys to 1 year deals (IE he didn’t have to pay anyone over summer). Everyone who signed with his team — locates in a real shithole — was outspoken about their priority being to get out of Dodge as soon as possible. No hard feelings.

He managed to do really well 6 years in a row, ont year he was actually not far away from getting team to the SHL.

We have no pressure, Gorts should be bargain hunting. You make bargains in August/September.

Will any team walk away from an arbitration award? Will any RFA hold out? Will a team end up in a cap squeeze later in the summer? And most importantly — will a team suck tremendously the first month of the season and want to jump start a tanking season by selling off? This is what Gorton have talked about before. During the season — previous years at least when teams have had little cap space — contracts have been cheap to pick up.

If a team like — just for example — STL starts horribly being like 5-15-5 after 25 games, they often look to start to unload early. What is he point in trying to compete? If 15 teams have no cap space and another 10 GMs are sitting on their hands you can make bargains in those situations. Go get a Luke Schenn and Dimitrij Jaskin for a couple of B-tier prospect and a later pick.

Patience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bernmeister, kovazub94, TheGuarantee and 1 other person
Bozle said:
Lindholm is such a milquetoast player to me. Would never sign him long term like that, personally.
Click to expand...

See and I think the Rangers need to do more deals like that. Better to have an important cog, even if he’s not a great player, locked up long term at a reasonable price (and $5m is a reasonable price for a 45 point player) than to have to pay more to keep him after his bridge deal expires. If he does progress at all, it becomes a steal.

It’s the Predators model.
 
After impressing in his rookie year, Hayes’ sophomore season was thought to be disappointing, which may have been why the Rangers decided to sign him to that bridge deal. If their hope was for him to prove himself in those next two years, he certainly did just that and showed a whole other side of his game as he was developed in more of a defensive role these last two seasons.

Despite playing that defensive role, playing a key role on the penalty kill, and not being used much on the power play, Hayes still scored at an impressive rate and directly contributed to the offense with primary points. His underlying numbers, while not inspiring, weren’t too concerning considering the state of this team and his usage. To his benefit, if he gets to arbitration, all of those underlying numbers could be used to depict his value as well, making a stronger case for a significant raise.

The situation with Hayes is so tricky because of that original short-term deal, which is why the Rangers may not want to repeat it with Skjei. Hayes proved himself in those two years and now they have to consider what to do since the Rangers are aware of his value, as is Hayes. But there are still questions management has to ask themselves. Do they want to sign the now 26-year-old for five years until he’s 31? Is it worth it to extend him at this cost if he’s going to pivot the third line or be shifted to the wing? Will allowing him to maintain his position on the second line hinder the development of either Filip Chytil or Lias Andersson? Does keeping Hayes mean the Rangers should consider moving Mika Zibanejad?

Any time a player is extended, especially with a long-term deal, everything has to be considered. The Rangers have a decision to make with Hayes. If he is extended, it wouldn’t be too surprising if his time in New York ends similarly to Stepan’s, all because of that original bridge-deal.
Click to expand...

Goldman: Bridge deals versus long-term contracts and how...

I agree with Shayna. Even if Hayes is extended, he will be traded at some point in the near future.
 
Hayes is not going to hinder Chytil or Anderrson from developing. All of the three can be moved to the wing (Hayes the least useful at that position).

Keep him, don't trade him, give him a fair deal and he will be trade bait when Chytil and Andersson are ready. Just give him the Lindholm deal
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kovazub94 and nyr2k2
TheTakedown said:
Hayes is not going to hinder Chytil o wing or Anderrson from developing. All of the three can be moved to the wing (Hayes the least useful at that position).

Keep him, don't trade him, give him a fair deal and he will be trade bait when Chytil and Andersson are ready. Just give him the Lindholm deal
Click to expand...
My understanding, however, is that Hayes will get bonkers money because Namestnikov got $4M, and that's just how RFA contracts work.

:sarcasm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: NewYorkNick
bobbop said:
Anyone who wants to completely bottom out either is a) very young and has not lived through the dark years (60-66; 97-04) and/or b) is not shelling out $10K of their own pocket for tickets.
Click to expand...

the $$ part is one thing...you can have a young team that doesn't win very much but is still fun to watch but thats another discussion...

as for the dark years from 97-04...the #1 reason why those years were so bad is that we never bottomed out. we can't bringing in free agents to prevent that from happening. we stunk for the sake of stinking. there was nothing positive and it took the luckiest pick in history and a straight up miracle that we ever got good again after that black hole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rangers in 7, NikC, LGR92 and 3 others
TheTakedown said:
Hayes is not going to hinder Chytil o wing or Anderrson from developing. All of the three can be moved to the wing (Hayes the least useful at that position).

Keep him, don't trade him, give him a fair deal and he will be trade bait when Chytil and Andersson are ready. Just give him the Lindholm deal
Click to expand...
I guess because he was (arguably) our best player last year, many feel he should be traded ASAP because he'll bring back a king's ransom. Personally, I don't see him bringing in a 1st rounder straight up (and I am a Hayes fan).
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
Leetch3 said:
the $$ part is one thing...you can have a young team that doesn't win very much but is still fun to watch but thats another discussion...

as for the dark years from 97-04...the #1 reason why those years were so bad is that we never bottomed out. we can't bringing in free agents to prevent that from happening. we stunk for the sake of stinking. there was nothing positive and it took the luckiest pick in history and a straight up miracle that we ever got good again after that black hole.
Click to expand...
Indeed....those teams would somehow make a run near the end and usually just miss the playoffs.
 
bobbop said:
Anyone who wants to completely bottom out either is a) very young and has not lived through the dark years (60-66; 97-04) and/or b) is not shelling out $10K of their own pocket for tickets.
Click to expand...


I have an issue with this mindset...
I've lived through the 97-04 "dark ages"
And it's just a testament to the fact that trying to "go for it" when you don't have it, doesn't work! Time and time again. .. and the same results. .. not good enough.

The best teams under both Torts and AV... especially the latter ...almost, but still lacking. ..

Without elite or near elite talent on forwards and defense there's No chance for competing for a cup.. let alone no cup...

Now I've enjoyed the competitive yrs as much as anyone, but I want to follow a team that can really dominate.

The guys that pay $10k?? Seriously?
That's the problem, that culture, that mindset. ..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Galvatron and hi
Hayes 3 years @ 5.5M

Retain half in year 2 and trade him at the deadline provided we have developed his replacement.

Hayes for 1.5 years @ 2.25 could be a very attractive player for a contender

Centers typically have inflated values at the deadline. Hanzal? Vermette?
 
Dr Chin Richalds said:
Hayes 3 years @ 5.5M

Retain half in year 2 and trade him at the deadline provided we have developed his replacement.

Hayes for 1.5 years @ 2.25 could be a very attractive player for a contender

Centers typically have inflated values at the deadline
Click to expand...

We're (hopefully) going to be a contender in that time. Hayes will produce now. And he'll produce then. What's the purpose of trading him when he fits the direction this team is going on and can contribute over these next critical years?

The only reason to do so is if the compensation is through the roof. Hayes has expanded his game and it's been a pleasure watching him develop. I wouldn't move him unless it was a really good offer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
Inferno said:
I'm guessing there's a ton of content there from ppl I have on ignore because I really don't see what u guys are talking about lol
Click to expand...
Yes. I missed it initially because of these reasons.

It's a thread advocating for us to trade Zibanejad and Andersson, making Nieves the 1C, where he will play with Kreider and be great because they have "synergy."

Our centers would then be:

Nieves
Hayes
Howden
Lettieri

However, the poster is careful to state that on his own merits, Nieves is not a 1C, but he will be able to use the synergy he has with Kreider to enable Kreider to exploit and dominate.

I'm really glad that thread was linked to, or else I never would have known.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zats Muccarello, Inferno, NewYorkNick and 2 others
nyr2k2 said:
Yes. I missed it initially because of these reasons.

It's a thread advocating for us to trade Zibanejad and Andersson, making Nieves the 1C, where he will play with Kreider and be great because they have "synergy."

Our centers would then be:

Nieves
Hayes
Howden
Lettieri

However, the poster is careful to state that on his own merits, Nieves is not a 1C, but he will be able to use the synergy he has with Kreider to enable Kreider to exploit and dominate.

I'm really glad that thread was linked to, or else I never would have known.
Click to expand...
AmbitiousEquatorialAnchovy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zats Muccarello, Inferno, mrmovies779 and 4 others
nyr2k2 said:
Yes. I missed it initially because of these reasons.

It's a thread advocating for us to trade Zibanejad and Andersson, making Nieves the 1C, where he will play with Kreider and be great because they have "synergy."

Our centers would then be:

Nieves
Hayes
Howden
Lettieri

However, the poster is careful to state that on his own merits, Nieves is not a 1C, but he will be able to use the synergy he has with Kreider to enable Kreider to exploit and dominate.

I'm really glad that thread was linked to, or else I never would have known.
Click to expand...

Synergy bruh! We just need to try it for 5 weeks to see what happens
 
  • Like
Reactions: NewYorkNick and nyr2k2
nyr2k2 said:
Yes. I missed it initially because of these reasons.

It's a thread advocating for us to trade Zibanejad and Andersson, making Nieves the 1C, where he will play with Kreider and be great because they have "synergy."

Our centers would then be:

Nieves
Hayes
Howden
Lettieri

However, the poster is careful to state that on his own merits, Nieves is not a 1C, but he will be able to use the synergy he has with Kreider to enable Kreider to exploit and dominate.

I'm really glad that thread was linked to, or else I never would have known.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thirty One, Zats Muccarello, Inferno and 1 other person
mjolnir13 said:
I guess because he was (arguably) our best player last year, many feel he should be traded ASAP because he'll bring back a king's ransom. Personally, I don't see him bringing in a 1st rounder straight up (and I am a Hayes fan).
Click to expand...
I have no problem keeping Hayes but the one reservation I have is if he had the best season he is going to have. He gets extended based the 1 up year and we are stuck with an overpriced and underperforming player.

I'm also not as worried about him because he tends to have consistent performances and he seems to have rounded out his defensive game. But that's the one thing running through my mind with his long term future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wafflepadsave
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom