What would the Rangers do with restricted free agents Brady Skjei and Kevin Hayes?
This past weekend, we received a firm answer on Skjei’s future after the 24-year-old defenseman signed a six-year, $31.5 million contract. Even if you think the AAV of that contract is slightly higher than what you were expecting, you have to be thrilled with the term. As I’ve stated on multiple podcasts before this signing, when you’re dealing with restricted free agents you view as long-term puzzle pieces, you either extend them long-term or you find a trade partner to move them. Bridge deals only cost you more in the long run, and potentially complicate your down-the-road cap situation.
That’s exactly what happened when the Rangers decided to bridge both Kevin Hayes and J.T. Miller two years ago, which put the front office seemingly in a situation to sign one of, but not both, of their young talents to long-term deals. When Miller was included in the package that sent Ryan McDonagh to the Lightning at the trade deadline, we all assumed this meant the Rangers made their choice and would re-up with Hayes long-term moving forward.
According to Larry Brooks, that may not be the case.[/text_output][image type=”circle” float=”none” src=”2866″ alt=”” href=”” title=”” info_content=”” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][text_output]This development presents quite the conundrum for the Rangers moving forward.
I’m still of the opinion that Jeff Gorton and company should sign Hayes to a long-term extension, and there’s still time for that to happen before Hayes’s August 2nd arbitration hearing.
It’s difficult to make a case for anyone on the Rangers having a better or more productive season last year than Hayes. He’s blossomed into a strong two-way center who is plenty capable of taking difficult defensive zone assignments, and still provides this team with high offensive upside. In fact, of all the young Rangers returning to the team next year, it’s Hayes who likely provides the most offensive intrigue as long as David Quinn and his staff begin to use him on the power play, something Alain Vigneault – for some reason – refused to do until the tail end of last year.[/text_output][image type=”none” float=”none” src=”2867″ alt=”” href=”” title=”” info_content=”” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][text_output]Any way you slice it, Hayes is not just a top-six center, but one of the more dynamic options any team not named the Leafs or Penguins would be able to put out on the ice. Choosing to build around Hayes, who is still just 26, has its clear advantages.
There’s also the statistical improbability that each of Filip Chytil, Lias Andersson and Brett Howden will hit their highest ceilings. It is unlikely that all three will grow to become better players than Hayes is currently, and if we’re being completely honest, it’s fairly unlikely two of the three will exceed his talent. There’s also no guarantee that the trio will be able to remain at center for the long-term, with at least one of the forward potentially moving to wing to better use his skill set.
To say “we don’t need Kevin Hayes, we have so many young centers!” defeats the purpose of accumulating so many young centers in the first place. You can never have too many centers, and you can turn any young center you have into a trade asset for a piece you’re missing.
It sounds like that’s what the front office has been trying to do this off-season with Hayes, but without much success.
In their defense, nobody has had success exploring the trade market this off-season. Outside of the Calgary-Carolina blockbuster, everyone has seemingly been waiting for the Karlsson shoe to drop before making a move of their own.
Knowing his team needs help defensively, it’s safe to assume Gorton checked in on Dougie Hamilton before he was sent to the Hurricanes, and all indications suggest the Flames just didn’t like what the Rangers were offering.
We also have the understanding that the Rangers at least called Winnipeg to see what their plans were with Jacob Trouba. While the entire Trouba situation remains murky at this time, what’s clear is the Jets know they have a two-year cap crunch window they’re desperately trying to survive, and bringing in someone like Hayes – who has one year less of team control and no long-term guarantee – doesn’t alleviate any of their current issues.
Then there are guys who we thought could be available this off-season who simply haven’t appeared in any rumors. All has been quiet post-draft on Oscar Klefbom. There was a slight hint at Torey Krug possibly leaving Boston, but that fizzled quickly. And, of course, Erik Karlsson. You can only trade Hayes for a top four defenseman if another team wants to trade a top four defenseman, and it seems pretty evident that no team felt comfortable enough (at least, not yet) to do that.
Which brings us to the slightly uncomfortable question: If the Rangers don’t want to sign Hayes long-term, and they can’t find a trade they like to move him right now…what do they do?
If the Rangers go to arbitration with Hayes and elect to settle on a one-year deal, it’ll likely come in under Hayes’s $5.5M AAV ask on a long-term deal, and he will enter the season as one of the best trade chips any team could dangle.
The NHL is truly unlike any other professional sports league when it comes to trade value. In any other league, trading Hayes before the season start would increase his value, because the acquiring team would have him for a full season and be able to negotiate a long-term extension before Hayes reaches UFA status.
In hockey, that’s just not the case.
If Hayes enters the season on a one-year deal, all it takes is one team to experience an injury or under-performance from a middle six forward, and that time could be burning up Jeff Gorton’s phone.
Brooks mentions the Rangers being able to snag another first round pick in a in-season deal for Hayes, and it’s realistic to foresee one being included in a package. Simply look at the hauls the Rangers received for three months of Michael Grabner (a mid-second round pick and a B-level prospect) and Rick Nash (a late-first round pick, a B-level prospect, a cap dump and Ryan Spooner).
Hayes, at minimum, would match the Nash package in-season, and even likely exceed it with the acquiring team hoping to have a leg up on a new long-term deal. The obvious downside to waiting until the season begins to trade Hayes is two-fold. One, you’re not going to get an impact NHL-ready talent in return, so you have to be willing to accept a top prospect and a first round pick (and with the Rangers admitting this rebuild will take longer than a year, that shouldn’t be a huge problem). Two, Hayes could get injured between now and the deadline. You can’t control when injuries happen, so that’s mostly a risk you have to swallow.
Not extending Kevin Hayes is a tough pill to swallow. He’s a young player in the prime of his career, and could be on the verge of another mini-offensive breakout with an increased role on the power play. He’s already an established top six center, something you hope Filip Chytil and Lias Andersson become.
But if the Rangers are uncomfortable about his long-term role on the team, now is definitely the time to trade him. And while I always prefer to trade an asset on an expiring deal before the season starts to limit the injury risk, I understand the Rangers not wanting to trade him for cents on the dollar right now. If Jeff Gorton feels the best trade for Hayes will be available in December, January or February, then hold your cards until then.
It just shouldn’t have come to this. That’s the difficulty I have with the entire situation.[/text_output]
Author: Greg Kaplan
Greg Kaplan is a man of mystery. Did he write this? No. Was he asked to write this? Yes. But did he write this article? Maybe, do you like it?