Rumor: Columbus interested in Douggie Hamilton

[major major]

I'm sure this will convince absolutely nobody, but... http://nhlnumbers.com/2015/6/11/5-things-the-value-of-dougie-hamilton

I find it extremely convincing, thanks. I'd even consider going above 7.3.

 

[KlichkoBro*]

I'm sure this will convince absolutely nobody, but... http://nhlnumbers.com/2015/6/11/5-things-the-value-of-dougie-hamilton

Wow,so one sided view that it looks like Hamilton paid for it. I hope you've seen this post in the Hamilton thread on the mains:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=97476787&postcount=110

Hamilton has negative effect towards goals against for EVERY SINGLE BOSTON player. I mean you can count his shots, hits, pukes, etc., but all what matters is goals. Every single player with Hamilton on the ice gives away more 5 on 5 goals than without him.
I recall a few years ago according to those advanced stats Tyutin-Nikitin was a top-3 NHL defensive pair.
And off course they compared Hamilton to the best defensemen,but totally dismissed Pitkanen, Barker, Tverdovsky, Ryan Whitney, etc. who'd had similar NHL debut.

 

[KlichkoBro*]

I find it extremely convincing, thanks. I'd even consider going above 7.3.

Let's see.
Boston with both Bergeron and Hamilton on the ice gives away 3.86 goals per 60 min.
Boston with Bergeron, but without Hamilton gives away 2.00 goals per 60 min.

Let's sign that guy for 7 years/$7.5 mil.per cause we need more goals against!

 

[blahblah]

The fact that Cam Barker produced at a similar clip after being brought along "the right way" and then completely fell apart is absolutely an important consideration. A team that's looking to throw an offer sheet at someone will have to lay out (immense) salary and assets to be able to get him, and to compare to someone of the same age and pedigree and production to that point is a pretty logical thing to do.

Dear lord. I didn't even bother with the second paragraph.

Cam Barker. That could be one of the worst comparisons I've seen in a long time. In his "breakout" year he was a PP specialist and did almost nothing 5 on 5 (29 of his 40 points were on the PP). He played 4 minutes less a night and was protected by a pretty damn good defense ahead of him. Only 33 or so percent of Dougie's production over his career has been on the PP.

I'm not saying Dougie is the greatest thing since sliced bread, that he's worth 7 million a year, or that he's even going to be a 1/2; but he's going to be in the league for a long time assuming a career ending injury doesn't take him out.

Well, I'll talk to you guys again in 5 years. Until then, I've got better things to do. Peace.

 

[blahblah]

Hamilton has negative effect towards goals against for EVERY SINGLE BOSTON player. I mean you can count his shots, hits, pukes, etc., but all what matters is goals. Every single player with Hamilton on the ice gives away more 5 on 5 goals than without him.

Not going to bother with advanced stats; I'm not shocked that a younger defensemen has some defensive issues to work on. I will say this; when he's on the ice his team scores a lot of 5 on 5 goals as well. If the advanced stats you are quoting are accurate and they didn't his +/- would be terrible and it hasn't been.

There is a place for advanced stats, but it's not the end all be all. If I remember correctly Wiz had pretty good advanced stats, but we didn't want anything to do with him and the Ducks didn't play him in the playoffs.

I'm pretty sure that Boston would rather keep him than move him; but finances are also an issue.

 

[Fro]

http://www.csnne.com/boston-bruins/offer-sheets-remain-very-real-threat-hamilton

 

[blahblah]

Are you mentally healthy? Cause you're the only one who's found in my post a reason to laugh out loud.

I find most of your posts recently laugh of loud worthy, honestly. I haven't questioned your mental heath, I recommend you refrain from personal attacks. You aren't very good at them.

Well, you've just called blahblah a "no one".

There were too many defensemen who's best year happened when they were 22-23 years old. Phaneuf and Barker are only two of many examples. Oleg Tverdovsky's best season was when he was 21 years old, Joni Pitkanen scored 88 points when he was 23... Their careers went downhill after that. And it's not about the stats only, they were regressing overall.

Pitkanen never scored 88 points in a season, you were probably looking at his PIM's. He's had a very consistent career and would have had an even better one without the injury issues. I already commented on Barker - that is a horrific example. As far as Phaneuf; he's been in this league a long time and has had a pretty good career. He's in that second tier of 1/2 d-men. Nothing to be ashamed of. If Oleg's "best" season was at 21, he had 2 other seasons that were right on par as far as production. That statement was inaccurate.

Do you really have any idea what you are talking about? These are horrible examples. Keep digging, I'm sure you'll find some that are actually relevant.

At least that is some attempt at real analysis was done with the introduction of advanced stats.

 

[blahblah]

I'm sure this will convince absolutely nobody, but... http://nhlnumbers.com/2015/6/11/5-things-the-value-of-dougie-hamilton

I'll read when the 404 goes away.

 

[WannabeFinn]

http://www.csnne.com/boston-bruins/offer-sheets-remain-very-real-threat-hamilton

IMO that guy is just throwing crap against a wall hoping it sticks. Don't think he has any legitimate sources to tell him that we're genuinely interested.

 

[Fro]

i just came across it...wasn't saying he did or didn't...more fodder both ways

 

[niflheim]

I don't bother about Hamilton. I simply think that this offer sheet politics not compatible with our moral principles. Don't worry, God bless Us

 

[EspenK]

So if Boston doesn't sign him by July 1 he can be offered sheeted. Isn't the window for buyouts closed then? If so how does Boston free up cap space to match any realistic offer? Make bad trades? Thoughts?

 

[blahblah]

So if Boston doesn't sign him by July 1 he can be offered sheeted. Isn't the window for buyouts closed then?

Yes, June 30th.

If so how does Boston free up cap space to match any realistic offer? Make bad trades? Thoughts?

They should be fine. 63 million minus Savard's 4 million. That gives them around 12.5 million to fill in the holes. Not comfortable if they give Dougie a new contract, but they should be able to make it work without too much of a problem.

 

[dickiedunnwrotethis]

So if Boston doesn't sign him by July 1 he can be offered sheeted. Isn't the window for buyouts closed then? If so how does Boston free up cap space to match any realistic offer? Make bad trades? Thoughts?

I believe teams are able to be 10% over the cap during the summer so that would be a figure just under 76 milliion. With their current cap situation that gives them around 11 million to match any offers. Of course they would have to trim down to 71.4 million before the start of next season.

 

[EspenK]

Yes, June 30th.



They should be fine. 63 million minus Savard's 4 million. That gives them around 12.5 million to fill in the holes. Not comfortable if they give Dougie a new contract, but they should be able to make it work without too much of a problem.

I believe teams are able to be 10% over the cap during the summer so that would be a figure just under 76 milliion. With their current cap situation that gives them around 11 million to match any offers. Of course they would have to trim down to 71.4 million before the start of next season.

Yeah it looks like they could fit 7.3 under the cap but would really have to scrimp on Connolly and McQuaid. PLus a coupl eof other minimums to make it work. Plus I think there is something about being cap compliant at the beginning of a season and only then once the season starts can you use the LITR out. Cap Geek had a big explanation that I could follow as I read but not remember the specifics afterwards.

Here's the link to cap geek

http://capgeek.org/nhl-salary-cap-faq-how-does-long-term-injured-reserve-ltir-work/

Example 3 actually pertains to the Bruins so it looks like for them to do it this way again they would have to have a couple of waiver exempt guys to play with.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Dear lord. I didn't even bother with the second paragraph.

Cam Barker. That could be one of the worst comparisons I've seen in a long time. In his "breakout" year he was a PP specialist and did almost nothing 5 on 5 (29 of his 40 points were on the PP). He played 4 minutes less a night and was protected by a pretty damn good defense ahead of him. Only 33 or so percent of Dougie's production over his career has been on the PP.

Barker had basically zero power play time in 2007-08, and in his big 2008-09 breakout he logged a ton with Brian Campbell (who was also his primary 5-on-5 partner). The knock on Barker was that he wasn't too bright in his own end and tended to run around, but his skating and mobility were praised.

Sure, Hamilton hasn't been protected at all, what with being primarily paired with Chara and Seidenberg. I'd have to wonder how Barker would have looked if he'd been paired with a shutdown type and thus been given room to carry the puck. (Probably not good, but we didn't really see it anyway.)

I'm not saying Dougie is the greatest thing since sliced bread, that he's worth 7 million a year, or that he's even going to be a 1/2; but he's going to be in the league for a long time assuming a career ending injury doesn't take him out.

Most guys who have big years early on stick around for a while no matter what. The thinking seems to be that if a player was extremely productive early and then fell off, there must be external factors that have negatively hampered his production since then; a guy who does nothing and then breaks through late won't get that type of benefit.

 

[blahblah]

Barker had basically zero power play time in 2007-08, and in his big 2008-09 breakout he logged a ton with Brian Campbell (who was also his primary 5-on-5 partner). The knock on Barker was that he wasn't too bright in his own end and tended to run around, but his skating and mobility were praised.

Barker's breakout season. You were talking 40 points seasons. 29 of 40 points on the PP.

'08-'09
CHI
68 6 34 40 -6 65 101 5.9 5 24 0 1 1 -- 18:21 31:11

Have a nice day.

Not going to bother with the rest of it. It has nothing to do with the player in question, just random "facts" about other players that doesn't pertain to Dougie. Discuss the player and don't play the crow and looking around for something shiny. Comparing Hamilton and Barker was nonsense; they aren't the same type of players and even a glace at their stats proves that.

I'm done discussion the rest of the NHL over the history of a few decades to support whatever this is you and a couple of other posters are stirring up.

 

[major major]

Wow,so one sided view that it looks like Hamilton paid for it. I hope you've seen this post in the Hamilton thread on the mains:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=97476787&postcount=110

Hamilton has negative effect towards goals against for EVERY SINGLE BOSTON player. I mean you can count his shots, hits, pukes, etc., but all what matters is goals. Every single player with Hamilton on the ice gives away more 5 on 5 goals than without him.
I recall a few years ago according to those advanced stats Tyutin-Nikitin was a top-3 NHL defensive pair.
And off course they compared Hamilton to the best defensemen,but totally dismissed Pitkanen, Barker, Tverdovsky, Ryan Whitney, etc. who'd had similar NHL debut.

I genuinely appreciate this as a statistical corrective, but how are you being not "one sided", while I'm the "one sided" guy? Goals against is one half the game. . How can Hamilton be that bad at it and not end up a huge minus player? Because there's another side of the game!

And no, they did in fact include all comparables for hamilton, that's why ian white is there. Cam Barker was in the sample but was not a comparable because he was never good in corsi terms (so yall please cool it with Barker, he is an argument for using corsi to evaluate players).

Tyutin Nikitin was briefly a great pairing, no matter how you cut it, but it was a brief run, a small sample size. I dont see how that impugns corsi any more than Connauton impugns the predictive accuracy of goal scoring.

 

[major major]

Barker had basically zero power play time in 2007-08, and in his big 2008-09 breakout he logged a ton with Brian Campbell (who was also his primary 5-on-5 partner). The knock on Barker was that he wasn't too bright in his own end and tended to run around, but his skating and mobility were praised.

Sure, Hamilton hasn't been protected at all, what with being primarily paired with Chara and Seidenberg. I'd have to wonder how Barker would have looked if he'd been paired with a shutdown type and thus been given room to carry the puck. (Probably not good, but we didn't really see it

Youre doing it backwards. Being "protected" or "sheltered" means having guys like Chara play the harder competition while you play on the other pairing with players like Campbell, and take advantage of the easier comp and better zone starts. Guess which pairing Hamilton played on? And Barker?

 

[Mayor Bee]

Barker's breakout season. You were talking 40 points seasons. 29 of 40 points on the PP.

'08-'09
CHI
68 6 34 40 -6 65 101 5.9 5 24 0 1 1 -- 18:21 31:11

Have a nice day.

Not going to bother with the rest of it. It has nothing to do with the player in question, just random "facts" about other players that doesn't pertain to Dougie. Discuss the player and don't play the crow and looking around for something shiny. Comparing Hamilton and Barker was nonsense; they aren't the same type of players and even a glace at their stats proves that.

I'm done discussion the rest of the NHL over the history of a few decades to support whatever this is you and a couple of other posters are stirring up.

"Random facts" are pretty important. If a specific player has done something that only nine other comparable players have done in the last 20 years and they've all become All-Stars, then that's kind of important. If it's something that nine others have done and only two have become All-Stars, chances are it's not necessarily a meaningful achievement.

Now, for something that you'll undoubtedly dismiss out of hand, here's what this search had for parameters:
- Defenseman
- Since 2000-01
- By their 21-year-old season
- With a 0.5 PPG during said season
- And at least 30 games played (to get anyone from the 2012-13 season in there)

There are 14 player seasons like that; Hamilton in 2014-15 is among them. The others were:
- Drew Doughty (twice)
- Erik Karlsson (twice)
- Dion Phaneuf (twice)
- Michael Del Zotto
- Oliver Ekman-Larsson
- Cam Fowler
- Jonathan Girard
- Tyler Myers
- Alex Pietrangelo
- Shea Weber

Girard is obviously the outlier; his career was cut short after nearly being killed in a car accident. Everyone else is active.

Ekman-Larsson played just 48 games, which represented the entirety of the 2012-13 season. For consistency's sake, he's out as well.

In their respective seasons in question:
- Del Zotto was 21, and had 8 goals and 16 assists at even strength, 1 and 13 on the power play. His most frequent defensive partner at even strength was Anton Stralman, followed by Michael Sauer and Marc Staal. On the power play, he was normally the only defenseman out there, as the Rangers used four forwards.

- Myers was 19, and had 8 goals and 23 assists at even strength, then 3 and 13 on the power play. His most frequent defensive partner was Henrik Tallinder by a huge margin (78.41% of Myers' season had these two paired, 68% at even strength and 10.41% shorthanded). On the power play, it was either Myers solo, or he was paired with one of Chris Butler or Craig Rivet.

The others don't really bear a further look; they're basically the best of the best in the league.

Myers may yet rebound, but his development went backwards in Buffalo pretty quickly. He was given a shutdown defensive partner in his prime who provided little offense.

Del Zotto went backwards in New York as well, to the point that he was traded for a second-pairing defenseman and then not qualified as a 23-year-old. He seems to have rebounded in Philly this past year, but whether it continues remains to be seen.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Youre doing it backwards. Being "protected" or "sheltered" means having guys like Chara play the harder competition while you play on the other pairing with players like Campbell, and take advantage of the easier comp and better zone starts. Guess which pairing Hamilton played on? And Barker?

Depends on pairing, depends on coaching. I can recall a young Scott Niedermayer being paired with a veteran Ken Daneyko; Daneyko would get hung out to dry quite a bit while the young Niedermayer figured out how to pick his spots in the NHL to carry the puck and jump up into the play.

Hamilton this year had 47.5% offensive zone starts (third-worst on the Bruins, ahead of Chara's 45.5% and Seidenberg's 43.8%), and the second-toughest QoC of the defensemen (a mile behind Chara's).

Myers in his big year (2009-10) had 50.1% offensive zone starts (third worst on the Sabres, ahead only of Tallinder's 49.0% and Rivet's 48.5%), and the toughest QoC of the team's defensemen.

Del Zotto had 51.3% offensive zone starts (part of a big cluster, and ahead only of regulars McDonagh and Girardi). His QoC was third-toughest among regular defensemen, well behind those same two. Michael Sauer was used in a shutdown role.

To me, all three of them mirror the mentality of the old Daneyko-Niedermayer: rely heavily on the veteran shutdown guy in your own zone, let the kid roam free.

 

[Kev22]

I guess I'm not convinced that Hamilton is the guy we're looking for. It would be expensive to acquire him and even more expensive to sign him. Is he good? No doubt. I may be totally wrong on this, probably likely.

 

[KeithBWhittington]

I guess I'm not convinced that Hamilton is the guy we're looking for. It would be expensive to acquire him and even more expensive to sign him. Is he good? No doubt. I may be totally wrong on this, probably likely.

He is one the guy that I think could organizationally "bankrupt" the jackets. The risk far outweighs his reward factor.

CBJ have the assets to comfortably go after other big fish, guys that would dramatically improve the blue line overnight without sacrificing organizational strength terribly both now and in the future.

 

[blahblah]

Not going to read the book, MB. Based on the fact that you produced one pretty much illustrates, without me having to read it, that you're just not getting it. I saw names, so I'll assume you're giving "evidence".

Just because other players succeeded of failed based on something early in their career has nothing to do with Dougie Hamilton. There are no conclusions that can be reached, no lessons to be learned, no predictions that can be made. It's simply spreading FUD because you don't like the player for whatever reason. Here's what I know. He's a pretty good player and has progressed in his first three years. He has the potential to be more than he is. If he sticks as a 3/4 he's still worth around the 5.5 million mark based on going rate on that role with that level of production.

Having said that I don't really give a crap if we get him, one way or another. I think he's pretty good, but he's no Keith or Weber. The FUD that is being spread is absolutely amazing. We have an absolutely paranoid fan base. If we did acquire him, we probably wouldn't sign him long term yet. This "bankrupting" of the Jackets is hilarious on it's face.

Good day, have fun.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Not going to read the book, MB. Based on the fact that you produced one pretty much illustrates, without me having to read it, that you're just not getting it. I saw names, so I'll assume you're giving "evidence".

Just because other players succeeded of failed based on something early in their career has nothing to do with Dougie Hamilton. There are no conclusions that can be reached, no lessons to be learned, no predictions that can be made. It's simply spreading FUD because you don't like the player for whatever reason. Here's what I know. He's a pretty good player and has progressed in his first three years. He has the potential to be more than he is. If he sticks as a 3/4 he's still worth around the 5.5 million mark based on going rate on that role with that level of production.

Having said that I don't really give a crap if we get him, one way or another. I think he's pretty good, but he's no Keith or Weber. The FUD that is being spread is absolutely amazing. We have an absolutely paranoid fan base. If we did acquire him, we probably wouldn't sign him long term yet. This "bankrupting" of the Jackets is hilarious on it's face.

Good day, have fun.

What's truly hilarious is that we fundamentally agree on everything about Hamilton and you don't recognize it.

He's decent, not Norris-caliber and there's a decent chance he never gets into that conversation at all. I wouldn't mind having him, but wouldn't lay out a ton of assets to make it happen. The market pegs him into the $5 mil range currently, but it'll go way higher if there's an offer sheet. He'll stick around for quite a while in the NHL even if he doesn't improve.

There, I just summed up everything I (and you) seem to feel about this into one paragraph.