Dan Hamhuis - Will test FA; "We're still working through things, so we'll see"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trelane

Registered User
Feb 12, 2013
1,987
42
Salusa Secundus
Hardly - if you have no intention of re-signing him; what purpose did it serve to keep him on the team that finished in 3rd last place in the league?

Zero...zilch.

Now you can say...

/thread

You've an uncanny way of restating the obvious - as in already admitted to by posters quoted.

It served NO purpose to keep him at the deadline other than preventing him from going to rivals for near zero value and setting a bad precedent for future dealings.
 

alternate

Win the week!
Jun 9, 2006
8,250
3,232
victoria
Being a GM is hard. Making trades is haaard. Expecting to get value back from players is asking too much.

Yawn. So many excuses for this clown.

Yup you're right, Hamhuis being willing to waive (or not) and another GM being willing to pony up a reasonable offer (or not) has no place in this evaluation because you've said so. Benning should have just filed the paperwork on a deal he liked, and if Hamhuis or the other GM don't like it, tough beans for them.

If only Gillis had been here to masterfully orchestrate the deadline like he did with Luongo. Amirite.
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,380
14,200
Hiding under WTG's bed...
You've an uncanny way of restating the obvious - as in already admitted to by posters quoted.

It served NO purpose to keep him at the deadline other than preventing him from going to rivals for near zero value and setting a bad precedent for future dealings.
You mean by Benning helping out the Pens cap situation or many of Benning's other past trades and/or contract dealings? :laugh:
 

604

Registered User
Nov 1, 2011
7,306
1,512
Yup you're right, Hamhuis being willing to waive (or not) and another GM being willing to pony up a reasonable offer (or not) has no place in this evaluation because you've said so. Benning should have just filed the paperwork on a deal he liked, and if Hamhuis or the other GM don't like it, tough beans for them.

If only Gillis had been here to masterfully orchestrate the deadline like he did with Luongo. Amirite.

The difference is that the league changed the rules on Gillis, thanks Burke, while we was working on trading Luongo.

By all accounts, the Canucks had offers from Dallas for Hamhuis which included a 2nd and a good prospect but played hard ball and lost.
 

Johnny Canucker

Registered User
Jan 4, 2009
17,750
6,116
The difference is that the league changed the rules on Gillis, thanks Burke, while we was working on trading Luongo.

By all accounts, the Canucks had offers from Dallas for Hamhuis which included a 2nd and a good prospect but played hard ball and lost.

Yep, multiple sources (other than Canucks front office) have confirmed they got offers for hammer and tried to play hardball. We got 0 for him.


Worst management since ....... Ever.
 

Johnny Canucker

Registered User
Jan 4, 2009
17,750
6,116
It's ok, we got that big Russian woogie who can't skate, and doesn't hit. Pair him with Juolevi who nobody thinks is more than a 2nd pairing guy , and who needs Hamhuis. Am I right!
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,380
14,200
Hiding under WTG's bed...
Yep, multiple sources (other than Canucks front office) have confirmed they got offers for hammer and tried to play hardball. We got 0 for him.


Worst management since ....... Ever.

You've an uncanny way of restating the obvious - as in already admitted to by posters quoted.

:sarcasm::naughty:

Although I wouldn't state this team is the worst; though being medicore is hardly a ringing endorsement...
 

Bourne Endeavor

Registered User
Apr 6, 2009
38,031
6,505
Montreal, Quebec
Seems like a pretty misleading title based on the info in OP. Obviously will not be signed before the UFA period opens...but that they're "still working through stuff" sounds like they're still leaving the door open a crack on bringing him back, depending what else happens with Free Agency.

Agreed. My take is they want to take a crack at Lucic and Eriksson first, then they'll revisit Hamhuis based on what salary we have left and if he's willing to take a discount.
 

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,204
5,921
Vancouver
Agreed. My take is they want to take a crack at Lucic and Eriksson first, then they'll revisit Hamhuis based on what salary we have left and if he's willing to take a discount.

I don't know what to think. Everything I hear seems to suggest the team never had any intention of signing him. just listen to the pat cast from yesterday.
 

iceburg

Don't ask why
Aug 31, 2003
7,645
4,026
I really don't understand why there is such concern whatever happens with Hamhuis. It was pretty clear at the beginning of last year that father time was catching up to him. He was better after he came back from his injury but I think the rose coloured glasses would have to be firmly in place to think he could sustain that level. Is it really that surprising that JB wasn't offered anything substantial for him at the deadline?

He's never been the biggest, fastest, or toughest guy - just a very steady, reliable more defensive defenseman - very valuable for a core group. But as the skills diminish he has no one attribute with which he can dominate. He would be a good guy to have around for leadership and to add depth to 5 through 8 but he isn't a difference-maker anymore. I think we should just be thankful that he was a solid contributor for many years who is now going to move on.
 

Catamarca Livin

Registered User
Jul 29, 2010
4,908
983
It's ok, we got that big Russian woogie who can't skate, and doesn't hit. Pair him with Juolevi who nobody thinks is more than a 2nd pairing guy , and who needs Hamhuis. Am I right!

Cannot be talking about Tryamkin? Can you? His hit on Pirri than throwing a 230 pound Stewart to the ice was a thing of beauty. Running over Backes was also a thing of beauty. Tryamkin has me as excited as Hutton as I think the way he is progressing from un drafted player to nhl player in three years while still improving is very exciting.
 

Knight53

#6 #9 #17 #35 #40 #43
Jun 23, 2015
9,302
5,585
Vancouver
I'm just going to put this out there.

Stuff like this happening with Canucks management is just making me hate the fact that I'm a Canucks fan.

I can't speak for all Canucks fans but I'd have no problem with a rebuild if it looked like we were doing a half decent job. I would go watch the guys except I don't know if managmeent is going to dump them for crap (Garrison + Shinkaruk) or make a stupid decision like not re-signing them after not trading a UFA at the deadline (in the case of Hamhuis).

I've gone from owning season tickets, to watching every game on TV and going to several games, to the point where I actually am starting to loathe the team due to management's incompetence.

I doubt I'll pay for a ticket this year.

Hopefully it's the last year of these clowns.

Boring ass team with no players worth paying money to watch live.

Can't get excited for trade deadlines because our GM can't negotiate to save his life.

Can't get excited for the draft because the goof trades picks away like candy.

It's a chore following this team atm.
 

Seatoo

Never Stop Poasting
Oct 19, 2012
3,315
149
Okanagan
Hopefully it's the last year of these clowns.

Boring ass team with no players worth paying money to watch live.

Can't get excited for trade deadlines because our GM can't negotiate to save his life.

Can't get excited for the draft because the goof trades picks away like candy.

It's a chore following this team atm.

Preach brother! :handclap:
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,380
14,200
Hiding under WTG's bed...
Poor Hamhuis must be so sad.

I'm sure Bonino is crying tears of joy right now.

Replacing Hamhuis with Gudbranson in the line-up is at least a great tank move.
You mean replacing Garrison with Gubranson is a great move.

Unfortunately there was a bunch of crap that happened inbetween; at least this part is good.
 

Dural

Registered User
Jul 1, 2013
183
140
Can't believe Benning couldn't get a pick for Hamhuis at the deadline. :smh
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,195
8,531
Granduland
Yup you're right, Hamhuis being willing to waive (or not) and another GM being willing to pony up a reasonable offer (or not) has no place in this evaluation because you've said so. Benning should have just filed the paperwork on a deal he liked, and if Hamhuis or the other GM don't like it, tough beans for them.

If only Gillis had been here to masterfully orchestrate the deadline like he did with Luongo. Amirite.

Say what you want but Gillis actually managed to move Luongo who was a much tougher task. GMs trade players with NTCs and get value all the time. It's just our GM that always gets bent over.
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,380
14,200
Hiding under WTG's bed...
Say what you want but Gillis actually managed to move Luongo who was a much tougher task. GMs trade players with NTCs and get value all the time. It's just our GM that always gets bent over.

Didn't he more or less have agreement with the Leafs but Nonis at the last minute added a demand like 'retain X salary' ?
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,195
8,531
Granduland
Didn't he more or less have agreement with the Leafs but Nonis at the last minute added a demand like 'retain X salary' ?

Personally I would rather not get into another Gillis discussion because it's not relevant to Benning ****ing up the trade deadline.
 

Jack Tripper

Vey Falls Down
Dec 15, 2009
7,261
104
Perth, WA
Yup you're right, Hamhuis being willing to waive (or not) and another GM being willing to pony up a reasonable offer (or not) has no place in this evaluation because you've said so. Benning should have just filed the paperwork on a deal he liked, and if Hamhuis or the other GM don't like it, tough beans for them.

If only Gillis had been here to masterfully orchestrate the deadline like he did with Luongo. Amirite.

of all the gillis deflections to potentially bring up to excuse benning, you use arguably the worst mistake of his tenure to defend getting nothing for hamhuis at the deadline?

bizarre

and it's been stated before countless times: we're in year three of the benning plan...gillis is completely irrelevant to judging benning's actions
 

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,204
5,921
Vancouver
Didn't hammer veto 2 trades? One with Chicago and one with Dallas? Seems to me the Canucks had some return but Hammer didn't want to help them? Am I wrong?

No, those were the two teams that he for sure ok'd trades to. They both made offers for him as well according to multiple sources.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad