Thats not enough for hayes

A good trade comparison would be Evander Kane last year. Similar age, similar production, both UFA's, Kane would have been probably a bit more valuable as he had been a bit more productive, on a bad team. As a rental, San Jose gave up a late 1st, and conditional 4th that became a 1st if Kane re-signed, and Dan O'Regan, a 24 year old former 5th round pick, who might end up as a depth forward at best.

Given what San Jose gave up for Kane, I wouldn't say that Hayes would be worth much more than I've listed (maybe switch a 2nd for a 1st if he re-signs). 2 second round picks are really good draft capital, Jon Gillies is a BIG, well regarded goalie prospect, and Mangiapane is a scoring machine, that has scored at every level he's played at. He could figure to be a potential top-6 forward if he pans out.

All that being said, Hayes is a rental, and GM's have really smartened up over the last few years.

I think when he said not enough, is Hayes contract. 5.5M is not enough for long term

That won’t touch Hayes. Either in trade or the extension amount.

Using Kane as an example is not ideal as he is a locker room cancer and all-around douche that most teams would not touch driving his trade value down.

Rentals still have value to cup contenders. That will never change. And the fact you signed him to an extension takes away the rental arguement. Can’t have it both ways.

The Kane deal was for a player who was perceived to be a locker room issue in several teams, and a winger. CGY would get outbid right away with this package. The Rangers don't need more goalie prospects. Benoit Allaire turns average tendys into serviceable goalies regularly. The Rangers need high end talent. They have a lot of high floor low ceiling prospects and prospects that produced in lower levels that are having trouble finding their game in NHL.

I'm pretty sure teams have it both ways every year. The fact remains that you're never going to get as much for a player on an expiring contract as you would on the same player with term (obviously unless that player has a terrible contract like a David Clarkson or Milan Lucic). You think the Senators would have gotten more for Karlsson this past summer if he had a long term deal? Of course they would have. Instead they get an underwhelming package with a couple picks, and an extra one if he re-signs.

In any case, sure, Hayes is probably worth more than that, but don't be surprised if the eventual return on him is underwhelming. Rarely are teams happy these days with the return when they sell one of their best players as a rental.

I'd be fine with signing him in free agency too, and save the assets. I have a hard time thinking he wouldn't want to sign with Calgary, a team with a young core, three good, young American-born players, and his former college wingman in Gaudreau. Brad Treliving is a genius when it comes to contracts, they can afford to pay him over 8M a season, but I wouldn't be surprised if he could get him to sign at under 6M.

All that being said, what would you all be looking for in a trade for Hayes?

Yes but regardless of if he is traded as a rental or not, gorton was a genius at last years deadline and you can guarantee that if there isn't an overpayment, there will be conditions up the wahzoo if hayes resigns with the team. If he is traded as a rental you are looking at a 1st rounder plus a prospect. Kane isn't a comparison as he is a winger and a detriment to the locker room (he was also producing at a .66 ppg pace while hayes is at .84 ppg for the year). Thats what happens when you trade when the player is at one of the lowest values of his career vs the highest. You are really looking at a return greater than stastny.

The way he hads played this year i’m asking for:

1st - premuim prospect

1st -high end prospect - 3rd

2nd - 2 premuims

I see 2 2nds 2 mid-levels. Not interested.

My only fear if i’m NY is the market may be saturated this year which might push retruns down. I’d start looking into extending him myself and hold onto him as an alternative before taking a lesser return.

not at all kane had locker issues not to mention he had lower points per game than hayes has currently, as well buffalo waited till almost the last moment to move kane which he lost quite a bit of value. Kane was also a winger while hayes can play all 3 positions and has a lower cap hit having more value. Kane was also one dimensional sniper while hayes was primarily used defensively and put up great numbers.

From calgary, probably dube and a 2nd, 1st if he re-signs

If this is the case we will trade you Monahan, Gio, Dube for your goalie coach!

Unfortunately, I don't even think Benoit Allaire can save Mike Smith.