There's no way Hamhuis was ever going to sign in VanCity without taking a massive haircut on his contract....let's face it, he's not a top-four guy anymore and won't be paid like one...but having said that, I'd much rather have Hammer than Sbisa...too bad Sbisa's contract is virtually unmovable.
Dan Hamhuis - Will test FA; "We're still working through things, so we'll see"
- Thread starter btdvox
- Start date
- Status
You may want to watch the (woogie) play if you had you would not have written that post the Russian levels big players .
Hamhuis is clearly, unequivocally, still a top-4 defender. How does this rubbish keep getting repeated?
FOurteenS inCisOr
FOS COrp CEO
This.
Pretty pathetic. Even in a season where he dealt with either injury or babysitting a horrible partner he still performed as a top 4.
Unless Hutton were to find some consistency in his own end, Hamhuis would unquestionably be the 3rd best D on the team going in to next season.
Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
Yup. Can't stand having these long haired hippies creating a country club atmosphere in the locker room.
(I've done some pretty awful typos MYSELF but I'm not sure how you managed that one
).
settinguptheplay
Classless Canuck Fan
- Apr 3, 2008
- 2,629
- 873
Yup. Can't stand having these long haired hippies creating a country club atmosphere in the locker room.
(I've done some pretty awful typos MYSELF but I'm not sure how you managed that one
Where is the typo? If you are referring to the haircut it is actually an expression. Meaning a hefty drop in salary (or whatever).
Yup. This is the exact same situation as the idiotic Garrison buyout talk that caught on like a wildfire. There are still people who argue Vey was a good return because that contract was such an albatross...those same people also often defend the Sbisa contract though, so...
Guarantee over the summer once Hamhuis signs somewhere for a reasonable price and term that we hear how it actually wasn't a bad thing that they couldn't get anything at the deadline "because obviously he isn't that sought after."
Yup. Can't stand having these long haired hippies creating a country club atmosphere in the locker room.
(I've done some pretty awful typos MYSELF but I'm not sure how you managed that one
Uh, isn't it pretty common saying "take a haircut" to imply the necessity for a discount? It's also a commonly used phrase when talking about loans and collateral haha.
Canuck version Hawks went with Ladd circled back but with Bickell in deal. Dallas went with with Russel circled back and offered a 3 rd. Pittsburgh and Boston both wanted Dan but he would not waive to go east.
That's great, from multiple sources it's not what happened, and if I remember correctly, the Canucks changed their story, (but that is just memory so if it is wrong my bad). The story went that both teams offered the same package to us that ended up going to the other teams. We sat on it, so they went with the other players. Both teams did circle back to us, and I would have tried harder to work out a Bickel deal. Seen if they would throw in a lot more.
mathonwy
Positively #toxic
- Jan 21, 2008
- 19,080
- 10,006
It makes sense because Hammer had a pretty bad year and isn't exactly pro-management. Hammer isn't exactly anti-management either but I'm thinking that management would rather have a young / new go-getter that's eager to proven himself versus a non-emotional even keeled veteran mentor like Dan.
The problem (and we've already seen it) is that the newness wears off and when the wizard behind the curtain is revealed to be a moron the veteran's play goes south.
Examples: Vrbata, Dorsett and maybe Prust.
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
Couldn't agree more, I've had to repeat it myself many times.
So many people in this thread and in the Hamhuis thread in the Trades/Rumors section keep spouting off about how he's done or he's not a top-4 D anymore or it's time to move on because he's not the player he once was.
What the hell? There's nothing that shows he isn't still effective at a top-4 rate. People are so optimistic about our D that they are willing to let go of a guy who can anchor a 2nd pairing and still try to make the playoffs?
I love Hutton's potential but he still has a ton to prove, Gudbranson is a career #5 and Tryamkin also has great potential but we don't know if he'll ever be anything more than a 5/6.
If people think we should cut ties with Hamhuis just because of age or changing the core reasons, fine. But to say he's not good anymore is baseless. He had a tough stretch at the start of the season last year and people can't get it out of their minds.
Unless he takes another step back next season or Hutton takes a big leap forward, he's still our 3rd best D-man.
Cancuks
Former Exalted Ruler
Balls Mahoney
2015-2016 HF Premier League World Champion
Bankerguy
Registered User
- Apr 28, 2013
- 3,818
- 1,957
Hamhuis is a smart Dman and still very mobile... yes, he's a solid second paring guy for sure.
He has so many ties to BC... it makes sense for him to want to resign here. He's a player that gives us so much depth if placed on the third pairing. Get rid of Sbisa. Get Hammer.
Edler Tanev
Hutton Gudbranson
Hamhuis Trymakin
That is a VERY good set of D. No real 'weak link'. Lots of size, hitting, smarts, puck moving.
He has so many ties to BC... it makes sense for him to want to resign here. He's a player that gives us so much depth if placed on the third pairing. Get rid of Sbisa. Get Hammer.
Edler Tanev
Hutton Gudbranson
Hamhuis Trymakin
That is a VERY good set of D. No real 'weak link'. Lots of size, hitting, smarts, puck moving.
Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
Didn't know myself - hey, who said one can't learn something new everything.
Not in VanCity he isn't....top four heading into next season are Edler-Tanev, and Gudbranson-Hutton according to Jimbo....Hammer would make a good 5-6 pairing with Tryamkin or maybe Larsen when he signs.....but they've still got Sbisa earning $3.5 per....unfortunately no way at 33 years old he makes any sense for the 'Nucks to sign.
You can't just gloss over Hamhuis' terrible play pre-injury and blame it on his partner. His partner had nothing to do with Dan getting routinely beaten by his man, coughing up pizzas all over the ice and looking slow and weak. Post injury he looked much better so it's possible he had a nagging injury that healed up while he was on the shelf, but Hammer had played with Weber the season prior and looked just fine. Trying to pin Hamhuis' poor start to the season on his partner reaks of fan boi or.agenda.
As for the Dallas deal, it was widely reported that Russell was the Stars' first choice. We know that Calgary was willing to accept the same offer, so why would Dallas give the same package for their #2 choice when it can garner them their #1 option? I realize reports say that 5he two sides had agreed on a deal, but if you think Dallas signs off on a trade without at least checking back on their #1 target first, you are naive. How many times have you heard a GM left empty handed say he thought he had a deal agreed upon, but then the other GM dealt player x to team b instead. Teams aren't negotiating with one team exclusively and I guarantee there's no.way Dallas acquires Hamhuis without first seeing if Calgary would take the same or.comparable deal for the player Dallas coveted more. And we know Calgary did take that deal, so really it comes down to whether Benning should have taken a 3rd or told Dallas to get wet. Personally, in this scenario, better to let.Hammer walk for nothing than let GMs believe Benning will always cave if you play some hardball.
As for the Dallas deal, it was widely reported that Russell was the Stars' first choice. We know that Calgary was willing to accept the same offer, so why would Dallas give the same package for their #2 choice when it can garner them their #1 option? I realize reports say that 5he two sides had agreed on a deal, but if you think Dallas signs off on a trade without at least checking back on their #1 target first, you are naive. How many times have you heard a GM left empty handed say he thought he had a deal agreed upon, but then the other GM dealt player x to team b instead. Teams aren't negotiating with one team exclusively and I guarantee there's no.way Dallas acquires Hamhuis without first seeing if Calgary would take the same or.comparable deal for the player Dallas coveted more. And we know Calgary did take that deal, so really it comes down to whether Benning should have taken a 3rd or told Dallas to get wet. Personally, in this scenario, better to let.Hammer walk for nothing than let GMs believe Benning will always cave if you play some hardball.
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 15,891
- 14,757
Good post i agree.
A 3rd is an insult for a player of Dan's ilk. Pure rental or not.
Dallas was dumb to not go in heavy. As their about to find out your opportunities to win can be fleeting especially with a lot of veteran players.
Yeah, sure don't want to ruin Benning's hard earned reputation as the best negotiator in the league...
The principle has some merit, but when other GM's/players are openly saying that this guy offers the best deals by far for players he wants...The rest of the post is just so bizarre it's not worth quoting. Hamhuis had games where he struggled and looked a bit off from the defenseman only two years from cracking Team Canada. He never fully recovered to being that player, but there was no point this season or ever where he was not a bonafide top-4 defenseman. And on the otherwise ****** Canucks defense, he was at all times the #3 behind Edler and Tanev.
Overstating his struggles is such a weird way to create a defense for when Hamhuis inevitably plays well for another team and his replacements (Gudbranson, Sbsisa) struggle to take on his minutes.
Yeah, sure don't want to ruin Benning's hard earned reputation as the best negotiator in the league...
The rest of the post is just so bizarre it's not worth quoting. Hamhuis had games where he struggled and looked a bit off from the defenseman only two years from cracking Team Canada. He never fully recovered to being that player, but there was no point this season or ever where he was not a bonafide top-4 defenseman. And on the otherwise ****** Canucks defense, he was at all times the #3 behind Edler and Tanev.
Overstating his struggles is such a weird way to create a defense for when Hamhuis inevitably plays well for another team and his replacements (Gudbranson, Sbsisa) struggle to take on his minutes.
So you want Benning to always be easy to negotiate with, or don't you? Not really following your muddled point here.
And yes, Hamhuis looked pretty bad by his standards early in the season. There's a reason Dallas preferred freakin Kris Russell to Dan Hamhuis. Hamhuis absolutely refound his game after missing time...did he start playing with better partners when he came back? I'm interested in your explanation for why the Stars had Russell ranked ahead of Hamhuis if Hamhuis was playing at such a high level all season.
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
It's true he had his own issues but lots of players go through bad stretches, it doesn't mean they're "done". And even with that stretch, his season ended up looking good statistically.
The problem is he's always had to babysit his partner (except the year he played with Tanev). We've all seen how good D-men can make their partners look better, Hamhuis rarely has that luxury. And people remember gaffs that lead to goals against a lot more than they remember gaffs that were quickly covered up by their partner.
There were conflicting reports. Some thought Dallas made the same offer to Benning first and either he or ownership declined it.
What people want is for our GM to get the job done once in a while without so many ****ing miserable excuses being made for why he couldn't.
"You think this is EA NHL? It isn't that simple."
"What, you think YOU could do a better job than an NHL executive? Get real."
"Benning had no choice, his hands were tied by ownership."
This guy almost can't do anything right and some people just chalk it up to the stars not aligning perfectly. Just get the ****ing job done, look what Holland did with the Datsyuk situation.
Luongo is one of the worst examples you can make of a GM obtaining value for a player with an NTC.
It was long reported that Hamhuis took his time to consider waiving to Chicago and then Chicago moved on. Dallas apparently chose to go with Russell instead.
Agree. And I had hopes of bringing him back in a Sami Salo type capacity. But like Salo before him, management isn't willing to pay him the money and term he can easily obtain as a UFA. That's really the deal.
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
From Friedman's 30 thoughts:
11. Looks like Dan Hamhuis is going to free agency for the first time since 2010.
“There are a couple of differences,†he said by phone from B.C. on Wednesday. “Right off the hop, Nashville made it clear they weren’t going to pay the money I was going to be getting. They wished me good luck and thanked me for a great nine years. This was a little different. The Canucks mentioned numerous times since last July that we would talk about a contract extension. We were excited about it right up to beginning of June. That’s when we were led to believe an extension was probably not coming. There’s always a chance it could work out, but its pointing towards their priority is a high-profile forward or two.â€
Is he bitter at Vancouver?
“No, no. I don’t want people to think that. I believe all their talk was genuine. This is a fluid business. You’re not sure what the cap is going to be, what trades are out there. Ownership treated us unbelievably well here.â€
12. Last time, Hamhuis called his availability “a circus.â€
“You’ll remember, my rights were traded twice, to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. I like the six-day courting period. That’s been nice. I feel everyone makes a better decision, you’re more prepared.â€
There were rumours he wanted to stay close to B.C., but he denied that.
“Nashville was a 55-hour drive from home, but we loved it. Geography is not an issue. At the deadline it was, but we have more time to think now. My wife (Sarah) and I have talked about it, and she is very supportive of changing our established lives for the right fit.â€
And, what is that?
“I believe I have many good years of hockey left. I played in the Olympics two years ago. Last year, there were two major injuries and in the last 10 weeks I played my best hockey in a long time. I’ve got lots of ‘top-4 D’ hockey left in me, and my goal in summer training is to be the best defenceman on my new team. I will find a team that values what I do.â€
He added a winning situation does matter.
“I’m still very competitive. It’s more fun winning.â€
Hamhuis said he’s spoken to three teams (although he would not name them) and others have declared interest.
11. Looks like Dan Hamhuis is going to free agency for the first time since 2010.
“There are a couple of differences,†he said by phone from B.C. on Wednesday. “Right off the hop, Nashville made it clear they weren’t going to pay the money I was going to be getting. They wished me good luck and thanked me for a great nine years. This was a little different. The Canucks mentioned numerous times since last July that we would talk about a contract extension. We were excited about it right up to beginning of June. That’s when we were led to believe an extension was probably not coming. There’s always a chance it could work out, but its pointing towards their priority is a high-profile forward or two.â€
Is he bitter at Vancouver?
“No, no. I don’t want people to think that. I believe all their talk was genuine. This is a fluid business. You’re not sure what the cap is going to be, what trades are out there. Ownership treated us unbelievably well here.â€
12. Last time, Hamhuis called his availability “a circus.â€
“You’ll remember, my rights were traded twice, to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. I like the six-day courting period. That’s been nice. I feel everyone makes a better decision, you’re more prepared.â€
There were rumours he wanted to stay close to B.C., but he denied that.
“Nashville was a 55-hour drive from home, but we loved it. Geography is not an issue. At the deadline it was, but we have more time to think now. My wife (Sarah) and I have talked about it, and she is very supportive of changing our established lives for the right fit.â€
And, what is that?
“I believe I have many good years of hockey left. I played in the Olympics two years ago. Last year, there were two major injuries and in the last 10 weeks I played my best hockey in a long time. I’ve got lots of ‘top-4 D’ hockey left in me, and my goal in summer training is to be the best defenceman on my new team. I will find a team that values what I do.â€
He added a winning situation does matter.
“I’m still very competitive. It’s more fun winning.â€
Hamhuis said he’s spoken to three teams (although he would not name them) and others have declared interest.
- Status
