In addition to many excellent answers posted so far, I would like to explain another way in which the relations of the "graded" or degenerate affine Hecke algebras arise in representation theory, which I find most helpful in understanding them (and is how I would recover them for myself if stranded on a desert island). This introduction has the advantage that it could be explained to an undergraduate who knew what a surface and a fundamental group was. All of this is in Cherednik's book in one form or another.
In this point of view, the "full" DAHA and AHA are the primary objects, and one recovers the degenerate versions by a process similar to the degeneration from $U_q(\mathfrak{g})$ to $U(\mathfrak{g})$. Let me just discuss $A_n$, although an analogous construction works for any Weyl group (and parts of the discussion for any complex reflection or symplectic reflection group).
The Artin braid group $B_n$ is $\pi_1(C_n(\mathbb{C}))$, the fundamental group of configurations of $n$ points in $\mathbb{C}$. It's easy to identify this with the braid group associated to the root system of type $A_{n-1}$, since the reflection hyperplanes are precisely what impose the distinctness of the points in the configuration. Denote the usual generators of $B_n$ by $T_i$.
One may instead consider the "double affine braid group" $DB_n$, $\pi_1(C_n(E))$, which is the configuration space of $n$ points on an elliptic curve (or what matters topologically is that it's a $S^1\times S^1$. One finds generators $B_n$ corresponding to loops which are contained in a contractible ball, and new generators $X_1,\ldots, X_n, Y_1,\ldots, Y_n$ corresponding to taking the $n$th point of the configuration and running it around the the inside our outside ring of the torus. One computes relations that the $X_i$ commute, the $Y_i$ commute, and $T_iX_iT_i=X_{i+1}$, $T_iY_{i+1}T_i=Y_i$, and (Y_2,X_1):=Y_2X_1Y_2^{-1}X_1^{-1}=T_1^{-2}$.
Now, how is this related to the algebras in your question? Let $\tilde{A}$ denote the group algebra of $DB_n$ with coefficients in $\mathbb{C}[[\hbar]]$, completed in the $\hbar$-adic topology. Let $A$ denote the quotient by the additional relations
$(T_i-q)(T_i+q^{-1})$, where $q:=e^{\hbar/2}$.
Now suppose that $V$ is some representation of $A$ such that $Y_i$ acts as $1$ modulo $\hbar$. In this case, it makes sense to define $s_i$ and $y_i$ in $A$ by the relations:
$Y_i=e^{\hbar y_i}$, $T_j:=s_je^{k\hbar s_j}$.
Where I'm evaluating in the representation $V$ so that the first equation makes sense, but I'm not writing that in explicitly.
One now would like to check what relations are imposed on the generators $X_i$, $y_i$ and $s_j$ so defined. Let us just check what relations we get by considering the relations of $A$ up to first non-trivial order in $\hbar$. We find:
$(T_i-q)(T_i+q^{-1})=0 \Rightarrow s_i^2=1$.
Braid relations for $T_i \Rightarrow$ braid relations for $s_i$.
$X_i$'s commute (as before). $\tilde y_i:=y_i + \sum_{i `< j} s_{ij}$.
$T_iX_iT_i=X_{i+1}\Rightarrow s_iX_is_i=X_{i+1}$
$T_iY_{i+1}T_i=Y_i\Rightarrow s_iy_is_i=y_{i+1}+s_i$
$(Y_2,X_1):=Y_2X_1Y_2^{-1}X_1^{-1}=T_1^{-2}\Rightarrow [y_2,X_1]=ks_1X_1$
which are (one form of) the relations of the trigonometric Cherednik algebra.
Further writing $X_i=e^{\hbar x_i}$, one recovers the so called rational Cherednik algebra.
So there is a hierarchy of degenerations. The top and bottom of the hierarchy are essentially symmetric in the variables $X$ and $Y$, in the precise sense that there is a "Fourier transform" automorphism swapping the variables, in both cases. Note that at the top of the hierarchy, the Fourier transform is just the order four automorphism of the elliptic curve which is the matrix $((0,1),(-1,0))$ in $PSL_2(Z)$, the mapping class group of the torus, and which can be seen in various elementary ways. At the bottom of the hierarchy, the Fourier transform is just swapping $x_i$ and $y_i$ and is related to Fourier transform of differential operators on an abelian group. In the middle, there isn't really a Fourier transform, because the symmetry was broken by degenerating the $Y_i$, but leaving the $X_i$ unscathed.