Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XX

[GAGLine]

i wonder if we could make a deal with the Flyers. Flyers are probably desperate to shake things up. Would anyone consider a deal with Hayes going to flyers for Nolan Patrick and other pieces?

Everyone but the Flyers, I would imagine.

 

[offdacrossbar]

I think he had more of a history, but there was also a sense that the 70, and probably the 60 point seasons were behind him.

Hayes is probably the opposite in that regard, a team is banking on him at least being what he is, and hoping maybe he's a little more in their system. We're also talking about a 5 year age difference at the time of the trades.

Overall, I think the value for Hayes will be higher. Not multiple assets higher, but I think it'll be there.

i think hayes is valued pretty highly around the league. his issue is the rental thing and where will he sign. hes got leverage. hes been very good this year and last. his 5v5 numbers are terrific.

his value is lowest here where everyone thinks 21 and 72 and 50 can replace him no problem. hes an average 2c and a good 3c here according to those in the know. "nothing special 50 point player".

elsewhere, he plugs into a talented team as their 2C and hes money.

the return better be an NHL young Dman with top pair potential or a top 6 pivot.

 

[Thirty One]

With only 2 years left on his contract teams with short windows to win won’t be afraid to trade for Shattenkirk. I think term is what scares teams off more than anything.

I think the question is will he waive his nmc to go anywhere?

He only has a 10-team no trade list. I think he would be a tougher sell than you're budgeting for though.

 

[mulli25]

moving 22 at this point is a cap dump.

gives him a chance to win a cup.

we have 44 and 77 who can both play the pp point.

no reason not to move 22 if we have a taker.

hes part of the problem. large cap hit and poor defensively, not effective offensively. seems slower and not healed. and he doesn't get any pp1 or pp2 time anyway.

if he can be moved, hes gone. ill drive him to the airport.

i agree, and I think it might be a little easier than some others here tend to think.

I could see teams thinking he'd do much better playing PP minutes and sheltered 5v5 minutes with a significantly better supporting cast. That might not be too much of a stretch from reality either.

 

[NYR Viper]

i think hayes is valued pretty highly around the league. his issue is the rental thing and where will he sign. hes got leverage. hes been very good this year and last. his 5v5 numbers are terrific.

his value is lowest here where everyone thinks 21 and 72 and 50 can replace him no problem. hes an average 2c and a good 3c here according to those in the know. "nothing special 50 point player".

elsewhere, he plugs into a talented team as their 2C and hes money.

the return better be an NHL young Dman with top pair potential or a top 6 pivot.

Why would a team trade a top-pair d-man for a 2C who is a pending UFA?

 

[mulli25]

i think hayes is valued pretty highly around the league. his issue is the rental thing and where will he sign. hes got leverage. hes been very good this year and last. his 5v5 numbers are terrific.

his value is lowest here where everyone thinks 21 and 72 and 50 can replace him no problem. hes an average 2c and a good 3c here according to those in the know. "nothing special 50 point player".

elsewhere, he plugs into a talented team as their 2C and hes money.

the return better be an NHL young Dman with top pair potential or a top 6 pivot.

I agree he's likely valued very highly around the league, and should get a very good return.

You are undoubtedly setting yourself up to be quite mad though.

 

[Off Sides]

I think much like McD/Miller/Nash the return for Hayes, Zucc, etc is not going to be any blue chip prospect.

I think for Hayes as a rental, it's more likely to be that teams 2019 1st, some 2020 conditional pick based on them extending Hayes or on their playoff performance, and some prospect(s) who are viewed as having a limited ceiling.

There is some wiggle room in there, the lesser prospect the better conditional, vice versa, them maybe sending back something they don't want for that or next year, but that is basically what was returned last year.

Picks, limited ceiling prospects, semi cap dumps.

To me that is not a bad return, from there it depends on what they use those pick on, and how limited the ceilings of the prospects are. I think last year they did pretty well, if they can replicate that, draft and all, they have kind of doubled the amount of Miller, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, Howden, Hajek level stuff and have given themselves a chance to do even better.

 

[Edge]

i think hayes is valued pretty highly around the league. his issue is the rental thing and where will he sign. hes got leverage. hes been very good this year and last. his 5v5 numbers are terrific.

his value is lowest here where everyone thinks 21 and 72 and 50 can replace him no problem. hes an average 2c and a good 3c here according to those in the know. "nothing special 50 point player".

elsewhere, he plugs into a talented team as their 2C and hes money.

the return better be an NHL young Dman with top pair potential or a top 6 pivot.

There are parts of this I agree with, and parts I don't.

I agree that Hayes value is pretty high around the league, and the Rangers would be selling high. The contract thing prevents it from being a Duchene-like trade, but I think they'll get some good assets.

I don't think the Rangers will get a defensive prospect with top pair potential or a blue chipper, for the reasons stated above.

I do think they can come away with a prospect who has a shot to be a top 6 forward, or maybe a top 4 defenseman.

I disagree that everyone or even most people think that 21, 72 and 50 can replace Hayes no problem. But volumes have already been dedicated to that topic and there's nothing really new to add. If that's what you've gathered from all the comments, then I don't really know what to tell you.

But all-in-all, there's value there and the Rangers are clearly going down a path. Now the hope is that everything works out.

 

[leetch99]

I gotta chime in on this one because I somewhat agree with Leetch.

As a Soccer and Hockey goalie myself at a younger age, I tell my son seemingly every year as a Lacrosse goalie, "you set the tone", keep your head up and if one goes in, don't let your team or opponent know it gets to you. It snowballs. Sometimes, as goalie, you have to be the mentally toughest dude on the field.

Sulking or frustration gestures during a game is contagious and it snowballs through to following games. Believe me, I've seen some 20 to 2 stinkers when the boys play Section 1 teams and you have to bounce back. Fight or flight.

I love Hank, but that to me has been one of his only weaknesses his career here. He gets that way sometimes. It was different when there were other senior players in leadership positions. That's a different animal with players who are already developed. I'm not saying Hank is on a Shockey/Manning level here, but young kids don't need to look up to that as the way they are supposed to carry themselves. It breeds excuses and dissent, not to mention "walking on broken glass" confidence issues.

Yup....it is there and you can almost sense it when viewing it via TV and watching the replays and his body language . Don't kid yourself...it does have an effect on those around him trying to secure a position and learn to play defense at the NHL level . I thought what Stepan did in the playoffs the time Hank blew his cool was good stuff...telling him to calm down...it had to be said and I am glad he did it in public . I just cannot see how keeping him around is going to make things any easier for our D who really do play better in front of our back ups IMO.

 

[NYR Viper]

There are parts of this I agree with, and parts I don't.

I agree that Hayes value is pretty high around the league, and the Rangers would be selling high. The contract thing prevents it from being a Duchene-like trade, but I think they'll get some good assets.

I don't think the Rangers will get a defensive prospect with top pair potential or a blue chipper, for the reasons stated above.

I do think they can come away with a prospect who has a shot to be a top 6 forward, or maybe a top 4 defenseman.

I disagree that everyone or even most people think that 21, 72 and 50 can replace Hayes no problem. But volumes have already been dedicated to that topic and there's nothing really new to add. If that's what you've gathered from all the comments, then I don't really know what to tell you.

But all-in-all, there's value there and the Rangers are clearly going down a path. Now the hope is that everything works out.

The only caveat I would add is if a team can have a chance to sign him prior to the trade.

 

[DutchShamrock]

i think hayes is valued pretty highly around the league. his issue is the rental thing and where will he sign. hes got leverage. hes been very good this year and last. his 5v5 numbers are terrific.

his value is lowest here where everyone thinks 21 and 72 and 50 can replace him no problem. hes an average 2c and a good 3c here according to those in the know. "nothing special 50 point player".

elsewhere, he plugs into a talented team as their 2C and hes money.

the return better be an NHL young Dman with top pair potential or a top 6 pivot.

I don't think anyone claims this will be a seamless transition without its growing pains. It keeps boiling down to Zibanejed and Hayes being enough to get it done on the next cycle.

Hayes might be an "elite 2c", he might finally break 50 points, he might keep improving despite conventional career trajectories. But if this center combo, and obviously this whole team, isn't adequate, something has to change.

I don't think anyone is saying Hayes is holding this team back and once he yields his spot to Howden, off we go. It's very much a 1 step back, 2 steps forward situation. He is an asset, we have so many holes, and we have a few candidates for the 2/3 center spot.

 

[offdacrossbar]

Why would a team trade a top-pair d-man for a 2C who is a pending UFA?

it would be a player in their system with that potential.

our staff would need to agree that that player has that potential.

it won't get us jake trouba unless he is traded and signed to an extension.

boston makes much sense but i just dont see that defensive player in their system.

 

[Edge]

The only caveat I would add is if a team can have a chance to sign him prior to the trade.

And that could change things around, if a team values him enough to pay a premium both to him and the Rangers, and if Hayes is willing to do that.

Do I think a team values him that much that they would go above and beyond to pay both Hayes (to forgo UFA) and the Rangers (to get the negotiation window and lock up Hayes long-term)?

I have serious doubts.

At the end of the day, even Hayes' most ardent supporters still view him as a second line center. And I don't know if even elite second line centers have that kind of market. But, anything is possible, even if it's not likely.

 

[mulli25]

it would be a player in their system with that potential.

our staff would need to agree that that player has that potential.

it won't get us jake trouba unless he is traded and signed to an extension.

boston makes much sense but i just dont see that defensive player in their system.

From what I've read, I'd imagine Vaakanainen and a 1st is probably the best we could get from BOS.

 

[Off Sides]

The only caveat I would add is if a team can have a chance to sign him prior to the trade.

I would not doubt if a trade framework is worked out before hand, the Rangers may give Hayes permission to talk to other teams about an extension prior to the trade, however I'm not sure if I believe Hayes is really looking to do so given he can test the market shortly after, yet it would sort of guard against injury or bad play post trade reducing his next contract.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

With only 2 years left on his contract teams with short windows to win won’t be afraid to trade for Shattenkirk. I think term is what scares teams off more than anything.

I think the question is will he waive his nmc to go anywhere?

Limited NTC with a NMC on top.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

I wouldn't discount the idea of moving another asset with Hayes to maximize a return. Hayes + McQuaid, for example.

 

[Edge]

I wouldn't discount the idea of moving another asset with Hayes to maximize a return. Hayes + McQuaid, for example.

I would say that's a a distinct possibility.

 

[DutchShamrock]

I think going down the road of Hayes getting extended prior to a trade is a recipe for disappointment. Its building up the value too high and daydreaming about a massive return all over again. A hayes trade won't reshape the organization over night.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Hayes/Fast
Hayes/Vesey
Hayes/Cleasson
Hayes/Lettieri
Hayes/Namestikov

I can't see Hayes and Zuc. Spread out the wealth even if it's for an extra "hope" pick or two.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Everyone but the Flyers, I would imagine.

Patrick, although only 20, has been very pedestrian so far. I'm sure I will be in the minority but I am not sold on that deal, much like I wasn't sold on Kreider for Puljujarvi when 10,000 different people were proposing that deal.

 

[Machinehead]

If we were to trade Kreider, then I become a rental for somebody.

So that's fun, I guess.

 

[NYR Viper]

it would be a player in their system with that potential.

our staff would need to agree that that player has that potential.

it won't get us jake trouba unless he is traded and signed to an extension.

boston makes much sense but i just dont see that defensive player in their system.

Adam Fox is a good one to consider

 

[Gardner McKay]

If we were to trade Kreider, then I become a rental for somebody.

So that's fun, I guess.

If we trade Kreider and the return is anything less than Duchene-esque, you may not be alone. Selling Kreider for anything less than a ridiculous over payment would be such a colossal f*** up.

 

[Zibanejbread]

If we were to trade Kreider, then I become a rental for somebody.

So that's fun, I guess.

The new Webster.