Andrew "The Hamburglar" Hammond - "Robble Robble"

[Micklebot]

It's baffling that this team is so interested in positive PR moves considering they're basically a wildcard team every year. Hammond/Neil extensions were both done with the fans in mind imo. They need to learn that it's ok to get trashed in the media for a few days if it makes your team better in the long run.

So, how exactly does not signing Hammond make us better in the long run? We'd lost confidence in Lehner (he'd been awful), and decided to move on from him for better or for worse. Andy was, and still is, our #1, we needed a cheap backup to allow us to trade Lehner (for what turned out to be the pick used for White, but having 2 1st rd picks might have lead us to take the more risky Chabot instead of a safer option with the earlier pick too).

When healthy, Hammond has been an adequate backup. He just hasn't been healthy enough, particularly this year. Signing hammond didn't hurt us long, or short term. We'd have had to sign another backup anyways, or carry on with Lehner who we weren't happy with (both on the ice and in the locker room).

 

[danielpalfredsson]

I can't believe people are talking **** about the Hammond extension. It was hugely low risk as he was paid backup money for maybe 1 year too long. He also had the skill level to become an NHL backup, it was injuries which ultimately did him in. When healthy and consistent, he was fine last season. It also has to be considered that the Sens couldn't just do a 1 year show me deal as Hammond was a UFA at the time of the signing.

Ultimately, it was a situation where the Sens gave Hammond 1 year too many at backup money when they would have to sign a backup anyways if they were going to let Hammond go (Lehner was getting traded regardless of Hammond so they were gonna need a backup).

For a short period of time, Hammond was the Sens most popular player not named Karlsson. From a marketing standpoint, this is still a business. They had no choice but to re-sign him. Now, they obviously would have let him walk if he were asking for something stupid, but they got off really easy. It is almost like people are forgetting the hysteria around Hammond. Even on this board which is one of the most cynical too cool for school hockey boards the hysteria around him was huge. If you even suggested when Anderson gets healthy that he should play, you'd get flamed. Imagine with casual hockey fans aka 90 percent of the fanbase who only read the Ottawa Sun and watch Sportscenter how they'd react if the team let Hammond go?

The risk/reward of the extension was incredibly skewed in Ottawa's favour. Hammond's not a very good goalie, but he'd still be a low end NHL backup if not for injuries.

 

[SensHulk]

I can't believe people are talking **** about the Hammond extension. It was hugely low risk as he was paid backup money for maybe 1 year too long. He also had the skill level to become an NHL backup, it was injuries which ultimately did him in. When healthy and consistent, he was fine last season. It also has to be considered that the Sens couldn't just do a 1 year show me deal as Hammond was a UFA at the time of the signing.

Ultimately, it was a situation where the Sens gave Hammond 1 year too many at backup money when they would have to sign a backup anyways if they were going to let Hammond go (Lehner was getting traded regardless of Hammond so they were gonna need a backup).

For a short period of time, Hammond was the Sens most popular player not named Karlsson. From a marketing standpoint, this is still a business. They had no choice but to re-sign him. Now, they obviously would have let him walk if he were asking for something stupid, but they got off really easy. It is almost like people are forgetting the hysteria around Hammond.

People actually forget that McDonald's was giving out FREE burgers in one of the games during hamburglar mania. It made sense from a business standpoint. It actually became so big McDonald's re-introduced the Hamburglar character and conspicuously made him look like Hammond....

Besides that, I think Hammond was doing well even up till last season. This season was a total breakdown though so you can argue that maybe the term given to him wasn't right (2 vs 3 years, hindsight tho...). But signing him was absolutely the right move, guy highhandedly galvanized the team and fanbase and took the league by storm in a way no senator ever could.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

I can't believe people are talking **** about the Hammond extension. It was hugely low risk as he was paid backup money for maybe 1 year too long. He also had the skill level to become an NHL backup, it was injuries which ultimately did him in. When healthy and consistent, he was fine last season. It also has to be considered that the Sens couldn't just do a 1 year show me deal as Hammond was a UFA at the time of the signing.

Ultimately, it was a situation where the Sens gave Hammond 1 year too many at backup money when they would have to sign a backup anyways if they were going to let Hammond go (Lehner was getting traded regardless of Hammond so they were gonna need a backup).

For a short period of time, Hammond was the Sens most popular player not named Karlsson. From a marketing standpoint, this is still a business. They had no choice but to re-sign him. Now, they obviously would have let him walk if he were asking for something stupid, but they got off really easy. It is almost like people are forgetting the hysteria around Hammond. Even on this board which is one of the most cynical too cool for school hockey boards the hysteria around him was huge. If you even suggested when Anderson gets healthy that he should play, you'd get flamed. Imagine with casual hockey fans aka 90 percent of the fanbase who only read the Ottawa Sun and watch Sportscenter how they'd react if the team let Hammond go?

The risk/reward of the extension was incredibly skewed in Ottawa's favour. Hammond's not a very good goalie, but he'd still be a low end NHL backup if not for injuries.

How is saying it was a bad contract talking ****?