Kevin Hayes Simply HAS to go. Briere, make it so.

[GrittyForever]

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

The money argument is solid. I get it. They way I look at it, the roster spot is worth the money. If you are trying to build a young team from the ground up, you need all the time possible to let those players grow and mesh together. I will assume these will be young players with dreams of making a huge contract.  Keeping a lame duck player who won't perform at his best, and wont want to be there, will clash with the above objectives. Then you mix in how he goes about financially,  in a lackadaisical manner, and that is a bad optic for a young player. Assuming I am even in the ballpark with this assessment,  Torts will spend a huge amount of time putting his foot up KH arse, causing a drama I wouldn't want around my team

 

They need to remove him, whatever the cost. It will pay off in the long run

Ya, you don't want a veteran guy in the locker room who doesn't buy in to the system, doesn't listen to the coach, doesn't give effort every night, and makes more money than the young guy sitting beside him. Just a very bad role model and so, as I said before, whatever it takes. Get him gone. 

[GratefulFlyers]

21 hours ago, radoran said:

They don't need cap space for the relatively young roster they will have for the next few years, they will need it when it is time to be making next steps.

 

Yes if they actually go that route - they said they will so I guess until they don't I'll believe them.

 

but like @ruxpin said earlier a competent GM can likely get rid of Hayes in a trade and Briere strikes me as competent (at least). But the salary retention can't be the max 50%. As much as I can't stand the player, Hayes at $3.55mil for 3 years is a bargain and too much to give up. Hayes at something closer to $5mil is more reasonable. I'd rather have the Flyers on the hook for ~$2mil and not get a pick back, instead of $3.55 and get a late-rounder in the deal.

 

I hope you're reading this thread Danny B - lotta good stuff on this forum!

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

I'm no Kevin Hayes fan, but, I have been looking at the situations in Philadelphia and Minnesota, and I think Hayes would actually make a good fit, if only as a stop gap for the next three years, with the Wild.

Minnesota will be entering their "Cap Hell" where 14M in cap space would be tied up in the Suter/Parise buyout hits.
Wild want to stay competitive as they do a rebuild or semi rebuild, or whatever the hell they want to call it, while the Flyers look like they are happy to tear down and start from the bottom up.

Main issues with any trades between MN and PHI would be:
---Would Kevin Hayes want to go to Minnesota? He has 12 places he can say NO to....is that one of them? Wild most certainly would give him the 1C position and all the ice time he could want if he did go there.

---Would the Flyers eat the max 50% on salary in order to move him? Wild simply CANNOT take on the full 7.1M cap hit with their looming Suter-Parise demons, but, they can likely fit in 3.6M or so to get Hayes in there.

Then there is the picks situation.
Both the Flyers and Wild are wanting picks because both want to get younger and more competitive, though they seem to be approaching it from different angles.

I'd say, if Philly were to attach one of their 3rd rounders (they have two), keep 50% of Hayes' contract while moving him over to Minnesota, the Wild could send their 5th rounder, along with Calen Addison, to the Flyers.

Addison is a 23 yr old puck moving defenseman, not particularly large, but a good skater, whose skill set is very similar to Tony DeAngelo's, but with a lower turnover rate, and without the sideshow garbage Tony D is known for.
He doesn't seem to figure into the Wild's long term plans, as they seem to be favoring larger, more physical defensemen, and there has been whispers of them moving him for a pick somewhere else.
If Philly believes they can get more out of Addison than Minnesota has to this point (the Wild really haven't showered Addison with a ton of ice time...something he could get with Philadelphia), then his addition would help replace the 3rd rounder Philly would be giving up....and still having the 5th Minnesota would send.

Hayes' addition to the Wild would help the team achieve their goal of trying to stay competitive while they ride out the Suter-Parise cloud, because as Hayes' contract ends, Minnesota is coming out from under that big cap hit buyout block.
And while Hayes leaves a lot to be desired in many areas, he still CAN be a competitive player, enough so, the rest of the Wild's defensive mindset, can offset any gaffes by him.
I happen to like Hayes when he is on a good streak, but of course, detest him when he isn't.
But as a fan of the Wild, I think I could put up with him in the short term, while upgrading a pick.....while the Flyers would get the relief of no longer having a guy who certainly is not in their plans, and get a young defenseman with upside in the process.

So basically, in this scenario, the Flyers would give Hayes (while retaining) for a 5th.....and then give one of their 3rds for Addison who certainly has ceiling still, and could grow with whatever young core the Flyers end up with.
In essence, the Flyers would have "spent" one of their 3rds on a barely used defenseman who needs a shot to play more minutes at the NHL level.

 

Obviously all speculation, and I haven't seen ANYWHERE where Hayes has been linked to the Wild, but some Wild fans have been screaming for a top line center, and while Hayes isn't that, he could be a budget version of one till the dark cap hit cloud passes over.

And Flyer fans have been screaming about ridding themselves of Hayes (among others), and they can do so for a modest price, while getting a player they can still groom.

Not sure what kind of relationship Briere and Bill Guerin (Wild's GM) have had over the course of their playing days and over the years as execs, but if something like this were to happen, I'd be happy with it from a Wild's standpoint, and if I were a Philly fan, I wouldn't mind it either because it DOES help push the Flyers in the direction they want to go with youth and removing excess veterans that aren't going to figure into a competitive roster down the road.
 

[pilldoc]

@TropicalFruitGirl26

 

Marco Rossi along with a 5th and the Flyers eat 50% of Hayes cap for Hayes.
 

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

17 minutes ago, pilldoc said:

@TropicalFruitGirl26

 

Marco Rossi along with a 5th and the Flyers eat 50% of Hayes cap for Hayes.
 

 

That might work too!
Rossi seems to be fading on the Wild's depth chart, and he certainly isn't ready now, but COULD be down the road.
Wild seems to have lost patience with him as well. He likely needs a change in scenery and be around a group more closely matched to where he is in his development.

I'd be ok with Rossi and a 5th for Hayes, but Minnesota would probably STILL want a pick upgrade coming their way...remember: they are after the same thing as the Flyers (youth and picks), except they want to keep competing in the present...hence Hayes. 
And either Addison or Rossi would be well worth the 3rd rounder for the Flyers.

[GrittyForever]

Tortorella likes Folignos. Foligno for Hayes and we eat salary. Works for me. Honestly idc what we get back. Nothing is fine too. 

[GratefulFlyers]

Nothing back works for me but eating half his salary is too much. The Flyers should get something or somebody good in return for retaining 50% of Hayes’ cap hit.

[radoran]

4 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said:

Nothing back works for me but eating half his salary is too much. The Flyers should get something or somebody good in return for retaining 50% of Hayes’ cap hit.

 

If they were going to "need" that cap space in the next three years, true.

 

Getting the $3.5M and the roster space is worth it.

[GrittyForever]

6 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said:

Nothing back works for me but eating half his salary is too much. The Flyers should get something or somebody good in return for retaining 50% of Hayes’ cap hit.

50% for this upcoming season, not the length of the contract. That works for me.  

[GratefulFlyers]

6 hours ago, GrittyForever said:

50% for this upcoming season, not the length of the contract. That works for me.  

 

I don't think that's right pretty sure it's for the life of the contract.

 

I searched "NHL trade salary retain rules" this is the top site:

Puckpedia website

 

from the opening graph (emphasis mine):

 

Quote

When teams trade a player, they can retain, or keep, some of the players' salary and cap hit.  The team keeps a % of both the cap hit and salary for the remainder of the contract. 

 

and this from capfriendly.com

 

Quote

The team who retains the salary then pays the retained percentage of the salary, and also retains the percentage of the cap hit until the contract expires.

 

Sorry to burst the bubble - I sure like your idea better especially when it comes to $3.5mil for the next 3 years.

 

Because I don't agree that it's no big deal because the Flyers will likely stink for the next few years. I see the logic and it makes some sense. But why should the Flyers let a competitor acquire Hayes for $3.5mil? I'm a Hayes-hater but even I realize he has some value and I believe it's greater than $3.5mil/year.

 

Fletcher did more than enough favors for other teams to last a lifetime. Get rid of Hayes by all means but don't give him away.

 

Edited June 20, 2023 by GratefulFlyers

[SCFlyguy]

You're not getting rid of Hayes without including a pick with him, unless you retain max salary (50%) and even then, you're not getting more than a third I would guess.  I would do that deal in a heartbeat.

 

What I won't do is any deal where we are extending his cap hit (such as a buyout would) or including assets with him to make it happen.

[aziz]

34 minutes ago, SCFlyguy said:

You're not getting rid of Hayes without including a pick with him, unless you retain max salary (50%) and even then, you're not getting more than a third I would guess.  I would do that deal in a heartbeat.

 

What I won't do is any deal where we are extending his cap hit (such as a buyout would) or including assets with him to make it happen.

 

I'd be curious what fans of other teams think about this.  Obviously no one would mistake Hayes for a high end player, but he is a pretty consistent .6+ p/g.  By no means elite, but those are legitimate 2/3C numbers.  He probably would have had 20 goals and 40 assists on a slightly better team last year, and that's not nothing.  Would $3.5mil for a 60 point player *really* be a stretch for someone not a flyers fan, such that more sweeteners would be needed?

[FD19372]

If he can rid us of Hayes, that'll immediately and permanently catapult him in front of Fumbles Fletcher, as a competent GM.

[flyercanuck]

21 minutes ago, FD19372 said:

If he can rid us of Hayes, that'll immediately and permanently catapult him in front of Fumbles Fletcher, as a competent GM.

 

it didn't matter who they hired...they immediately catapulted in front of Fletcher because no one else can be that clueless when it comes to running a hockey team.

[GrittyForever]

7 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said:

 

I don't think that's right pretty sure it's for the life of the contract.

 

I searched "NHL trade salary retain rules" this is the top site:

Puckpedia website

 

from the opening graph (emphasis mine):

 

 

and this from capfriendly.com

 

 

Sorry to burst the bubble - I sure like your idea better especially when it comes to $3.5mil for the next 3 years.

 

Because I don't agree that it's no big deal because the Flyers will likely stink for the next few years. I see the logic and it makes some sense. But why should the Flyers let a competitor acquire Hayes for $3.5mil? I'm a Hayes-hater but even I realize he has some value and I believe it's greater than $3.5mil/year.

 

Fletcher did more than enough favors for other teams to last a lifetime. Get rid of Hayes by all means but don't give him away.

 

I knew the limits on maximums but I had thought you could negotiate under that maximum if you wanted to. So in terms of number of years you retain as well as the amount. I guess not maybe. I'm probably just thinking about all the times it gets done before the deadline on expiring deals. 

 

I'd still retain on Hayes for the full thing. It's truly worth it to be able to clean the slate and move on fresh. If you're bringing in lots of youth (as planned) you won't need the cap space anyway and you might even need that dead money to reach cap floor like Buffalo did. 

[OccamsRazor]

2 minutes ago, GrittyForever said:

I'd still retain on Hayes for the full thing. It's truly worth it to be able to clean the slate and move on fresh.

 

All we want to do.

 

I don't have to try and get rich moving this clown just move him and be done with it.

[GratefulFlyers]

1 hour ago, OccamsRazor said:

don't have to try and get rich moving this clown just move him and be done with it.

 
it’s not about getting rich it’s about fair market value. There is no reason to take less than he’s worth. Allowing a competing team to grab Hayes for 3 years at $3.55mil would be a sign of weakness on Briere’s part. Similarly if it’s the only deal offered that would indicate - to me anyway - that Briere played the negotiating game poorly and ended up getting beat. 
 

“open for business” is one thing “I’ll take anything” is another. GMs thinking of doing business with the Flyers will be watching closely what happens with Hayes. As much as it would pain me to see him in the O&B next year it would be worse to see Briere get rolled. 

[OccamsRazor]

3 minutes ago, GratefulFlyers said:

it’s not about getting rich it’s about fair market value. There is no reason to take less than he’s worth. Allowing a competing team to grab Hayes for 3 years at $3.55mil would be a sign of weakness on Briere’s part.

 

I fully expect Danny to get the best deal on the table. I have to trust him till he gives me a reason not too.

 

As of now i have no reason not to trust him. I feel that he wants to do good and make is happy and bring a Cup home.

 

I am just anxious for something to happen soon....i'm ready let's go!

 

[mojo1917]

7 hours ago, SCFlyguy said:

You're not getting rid of Hayes without including a pick with him, unless you retain max salary (50%) and even then, you're not getting more than a third I would guess.  I would do that deal in a heartbeat.

 

What I won't do is any deal where we are extending his cap hit (such as a buyout would) or including assets with him to make it happen.

I think this is overly pessimistic, Hayes has some value around the league.  

His modified NMC may be the thing that makes moving him the most difficult to work around. 

I can see willing trade partners being on the no- go list. 

I don't see Daniel straight salary dumping him. 

If he has to dress Hayes this season instead of taking a bad deal,  I think that's what he'll do. 

No reason to think Briere is adding picks to any deal. 

[flyercanuck]

47 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

I think this is overly pessimistic, Hayes has some value around the league.  

His modified NMC may be the thing that makes moving him the most difficult to work around. 

I can see willing trade partners being on the no- go list. 

I don't see Daniel straight salary dumping him. 

If he has to dress Hayes this season instead of taking a bad deal,  I think that's what he'll do. 

No reason to think Briere is adding picks to any deal. 

 

 

Pretty sure you could make Hayes open up to more teams if it became really uncomfortable for him in Philly...and there's none better than Tortorella at doing that.

[radoran]

3 hours ago, GrittyForever said:

So in terms of number of years you retain as well as the amount.

 

I have no idea but could they do a results-based retention like a "make the second round and we retain half otherwise we retain $2M the next year"

 

2 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said:

Allowing a competing team to grab Hayes for 3 years at $3.55mil would be a sign of weakness on Briere’s part.

 

If the return isn't based on the retention then Briere is incompetent.

 

Retain half, get a 2nd or 3rd and maybe a future 6/7 or performance driven return.

 

Retain less, get less.

 

Trading JVR last year at the deadline for a bag of pucks was the right thing to do for the veteran player on an expiring deal.

 

This isn't about that. This is about moving on from a bad contract and hopefully getting something in return.

 

If Briere goes all Fletch on us I'll be mightily surprised and probably take an interest in Portuguese second league football.

 

Antes morrer livres que em paz sujeitos

[ruxpin]

47 minutes ago, radoran said:

If Briere goes all Fletch on us I'll be mightily surprised and probably take an interest in Portuguese second league football.

 

 

não bata até que você experimente

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

22 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

 

não bata até que você experimente

 

My Portuguese is a little rusty, but, without googling anything....you say you ate your son's bat experiment and then lost your voice?
Cmon Rux...keep things hockey related here!! 
Plus, you should know better than to go around eating people's lab animals... 

[ruxpin]

14 minutes ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

 

My Portuguese is a little rusty, but, without googling anything....you say you ate your son's bat experiment and then lost your voice?
Cmon Rux...keep things hockey related here!! 
Plus, you should know better than to go around eating people's lab animals... 

 

Hey, when in Wuhan....

[SCFlyguy]

I don't think you could do the retention based on player stats, but you could do the picks around a player stat.  Maybe some stat Hayes is likely to achieve like 6 donuts per day?