Player Discussion Jimmy Hayes II

Status
Not open for further replies.

missingchicklet

Registered User
Jan 24, 2010
36,589
34,464
Bad trades happen all the time in the NHL. The Bs are no stranger to such trades. Effective teams move on. It's stupid to hold on to any hope that Hayes will somehow magically turn things around. He sucks at NHL hockey at this point. He has been given more than enough chance. He's hurting the team. Every time he hits the ice for the Bs is proof of the lack of intelligence of the Bs management for allowing him to remain on the roster.
 

DKH

Worst Poster/Awful Takes
Feb 27, 2002
76,671
57,728
Bruins owe Hayes about $3.5 M on contract whereas Smith 5/25 with NMC (2-4) kicks in this summer

Both teams take a bath
 

ap3lovr

Registered User
Dec 31, 2005
6,219
1,291
New Brunswick
Bruins owe Hayes about $3.5 M on contract whereas Smith 5/25 with NMC (2-4) kicks in this summer

Both teams take a bath

A trade that was bad for both teams.... Hayes can at least be exposed during the expansion draft, or moved to a team looking to hit the cap floor next season. I think Vegas and Pheonix may have issues hitting the cap floor next year. I don't think Vegas will want any of the big contracts exposed in the draft, nor do I believe that they will attract many big UFA's. So it could be interesting to watch.
 

finchster

Registered User
Jul 12, 2006
10,641
2,130
Tbilisi
Bruins owe Hayes about $3.5 M on contract whereas Smith 5/25 with NMC (2-4) kicks in this summer

Both teams take a bath

Reilly Smith will be like Kris Versteeg, an inconsistent 40-50 point scorer. During 5 years, I'd expect Smith to probably put up his contract maybe 2/3 seasons out of 5.

Hayes will or should be bought out.
 
Last edited:

DKH

Worst Poster/Awful Takes
Feb 27, 2002
76,671
57,728
Reilly Smith will be like Kris Versteeg, an inconsistent 40-50 point scorer. During 5 years, I'd expect Smith to probably put up is contract maybe 2/3 seasons out of 5.

Hayes will or should be bought out.

Sounds about right
 

Southiechickie

Registered User
Nov 15, 2016
91
0
South Boston
Crazy, with Pasta out will Hayes actually touch the ice tomorrow night?!?!
Then again, he did score the last time the team played a matinee!!
God help us!!
 

DominicT

Registered User
Sep 6, 2009
20,533
37,620
Stratford Ontario
dom.hockey
Reilly Smith will be like Kris Versteeg, an inconsistent 40-50 point scorer. During 5 years, I'd expect Smith to probably put up his contract maybe 2/3 seasons out of 5.

Hayes will or should be bought out.

The situation with Hayes is a little mucky.

The Bruins have to leave two forwards unprotected for the expansion draft in order to meet the qualified players. That would be Hayes and Beleskey. If you remove Hayes prior to the draft, Marchand is the only player that qualifies (no NMC - under contract - and meets games played) that fits the criteria. (this of course barring any trades that brings someone else in that would meet that criteria)

I was asked elsewhere if the Bruins can use the second buyout window on Hayes.

The simple answer is: No!

While the Bruins have several players that are arbitration eligible, and it would take one of those players going to arbitration to open up the second buyout window, Hayes doesn't make enough money to be able to be bought out in that window.

A player eligible to be bought out in the second window has to make a minimum of $2.75 million per season. (2016 numbers based on league average salary and will only go up for 2017).

There is only one option for the Bruins:

The buyout period is the latter of June 15th or 48 hours after the Stanley Cup is awarded up to and including 5:00 pm on June the 30th.

The expansion draft is June 21st. You keep Hayes up to the expansion draft and expose him. If he is not claimed by Vegas, they buy him out between June 22 and June 30.

As I said, barring another move, you keep him. The cost of moving him prior to the expansion draft could be huge to the Bruins. The good news is he has met his games played qualifications, so with a healthy squad, they can sit him as long as they want.
 

Pia8988

Registered User
May 26, 2014
14,659
9,232
The situation with Hayes is a little mucky.

The Bruins have to leave two forwards unprotected for the expansion draft in order to meet the qualified players. That would be Hayes and Beleskey. If you remove Hayes prior to the draft, Marchand is the only player that qualifies (no NMC - under contract - and meets games played) that fits the criteria. (this of course barring any trades that brings someone else in that would meet that criteria)

I was asked elsewhere if the Bruins can use the second buyout window on Hayes.

The simple answer is: No!

While the Bruins have several players that are arbitration eligible, and it would take one of those players going to arbitration to open up the second buyout window, Hayes doesn't make enough money to be able to be bought out in that window.

A player eligible to be bought out in the second window has to make a minimum of $2.75 million per season. (2016 numbers based on league average salary and will only go up for 2017).

There is only one option for the Bruins:

The buyout period is the latter of June 15th or 48 hours after the Stanley Cup is awarded up to and including 5:00 pm on June the 30th.

The expansion draft is June 21st. You keep Hayes up to the expansion draft and expose him. If he is not claimed by Vegas, they buy him out between June 22 and June 30.

As I said, barring another move, you keep him. The cost of moving him prior to the expansion draft could be huge to the Bruins. The good news is he has met his games played qualifications, so with a healthy squad, they can sit him as long as they want.

Doesn't Nash fit? Signed for next season with 96 games so far over the last 2 years.
 

Southiechickie

Registered User
Nov 15, 2016
91
0
South Boston
Great explanation. I think many of us realized that but just hoped something drastic could be done. Can they still send him to PVD(he will obviously clear waivers) and still be used/exposed for the expansion draft?
 

JCRO

At least I'm safe inside my mind
Sponsor
Mar 8, 2011
9,185
10,729
Your right. Not sure how I missed Nash.

Pretty sure they want to keep Beleskey though so it becomes Nash and Hayes.

Hard to say right now with the lack of bottom 6 scoring going on... but with all of the left handed wingers coming up the pipeline and Beleskeys lack of performance before his injury... I wouldn't mind seeing him left exposed. Get that cap space back and spend it elsewhere and let the rookies fill in.

They won't do it though.

Edit: Of those three, I would like to think once Beleskey starts rolling again he would have more trade value/overall value to this team anyways so I guess that's another reason it wouldn't happen
 
Last edited:

ODAAT

Registered User
Oct 17, 2006
52,682
21,588
Victoria BC
Hard to say right now with the lack of bottom 6 scoring going on... but with all of the left handed wingers coming up the pipeline and Beleskeys lack of performance before his injury... I wouldn't mind seeing him left exposed. Get that cap space back and spend it elsewhere and let the rookies fill in.

They won't do it though.

Edit: Of those three, I would like to think once Beleskey starts rolling again he would have more trade value anyways so I guess that's another reason it wouldn't happen

He would have more trade value but that`s a big if for him to "start rolling"
 

JCRO

At least I'm safe inside my mind
Sponsor
Mar 8, 2011
9,185
10,729
He would have more trade value but that`s a big if for him to "start rolling"

Oh I'm with you there...

But honestly, over those two do you really see it happening? Not in Dons house :laugh:
 

Flannelman

Quiet, Gnashgab.
Dec 3, 2006
13,880
3,148
The expansion draft is June 21st. You keep Hayes up to the expansion draft and expose him. If he is not claimed by Vegas, they buy him out between June 22 and June 30.

As I said, barring another move, you keep him. The cost of moving him prior to the expansion draft could be huge to the Bruins. The good news is he has met his games played qualifications, so with a healthy squad, they can sit him as long as they want.

Assuming no one would claim him, if put on waivers for the rest of they year, they could bury him with no reprecussion towards the entry draft. That would open up about 900k and a roster spot. I would expect the seemingly vocal Hayes family to demand a trade but it my humble opine thinks that is a better option that having him on the NHL roster, especially if the forwards can be healthy.
 

dredeye

BJ Elitist/Hipster
Mar 3, 2008
27,419
3,072
Your right. Not sure how I missed Nash.

Pretty sure they want to keep Beleskey though so it becomes Nash and Hayes.

I wouldn't be upset losing any of the three listed to expansion. I think Belesky would get snagged if exposed though.
 

dredeye

BJ Elitist/Hipster
Mar 3, 2008
27,419
3,072
I'm wondering who might have an equally frustrating player that we could make a change of scenery trade with. Hopefully with a lesser contract or one year remaining at a higher dollar for this year
 

EverettMike

FIRE DON SWEENEY INTO THE SUN
Mar 7, 2009
45,910
35,261
Everett, MA
twitter.com
I'm just glad this team is run like a meritocracy.

mr-bean.jpg
 

DominicT

Registered User
Sep 6, 2009
20,533
37,620
Stratford Ontario
dom.hockey
Assuming no one would claim him, if put on waivers for the rest of they year, they could bury him with no reprecussion towards the entry draft. That would open up about 900k and a roster spot. I would expect the seemingly vocal Hayes family to demand a trade but it my humble opine thinks that is a better option that having him on the NHL roster, especially if the forwards can be healthy.

I doubt they would put him in Providence, but you never know.

I've already posted this, but Jimmy Hayes would cost the Bruins about $368,000 more in Providence than with the big club.

No escrow in the AHL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Ad