Goat James Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 So, with Big Buff off the market Dan Hamhius is suddenly the best possible rental d-man. Hammer's on the last year of the six year deal signed in 2010, and there's a few cup contenders that may want to add a solid second pairing defenseman (Washington, Pittsburgh). I know that we kinda need Hammer here, but if we could flip him for a first and a decent prospect it'd be totally worth it. Anyways, I this is the first time in a long time that the Canucks have this kind of leverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuporbust Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Makes hammer more valuable possibly. One less good D man in the mix. He probably has the most value among our tradeables so Jim better not screw this one up. Let's just hope GM s think this season was just a bad one and he still has something left in the tank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 1 minute ago, The Game said: So, with Big Buff off the market Dan Hamhius is suddenly the best possible rental d-man. Hammer's on the last year of the six year deal signed in 2010, and there's a few cup contenders that may want to add a solid second pairing defenseman (Washington, Pittsburgh). I know that we kinda need Hammer here, but if we could flip him for a first and a decent prospect it'd be totally worth it. Anyways, I this is the first time in a long time that the Canucks have this kind of leverage. This is assuming he maintains the level of play he did vs the Flames, of course. I hope we trade him, the playoffs are unlikely. Will Hamhuis agree to waive though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 13 minutes ago, Boddy604 said: This is assuming he maintains the level of play he did vs the Flames, of course. I hope we trade him, the playoffs are unlikely. Will Hamhuis agree to waive though? I'm sure GMJB could swing it. Edit: Personally, I'd like to see him traded, and then we sign him back in the offseason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 I can't imagine why Hammer wouldn't wave. He would be going to a contender and it would only be for a couple of months if he really wants to stay in BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockhart Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Some people on the radio were throwing out Hammer for Ritchie. I'd love to see that Ritchie Horvat Virtanen Talk about a tough line that's hard to contain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 1 minute ago, CanuckianOne said: I'm sure GMJB could swing it. Edit: Personally, I'd like to see him traded, and then we sign him back in the offseason Agreed. I wouldn't mind having him back. But at a discount on a shorter term. Like 3.5 for 2 years. Maybe try and swing even less, like 3 per, with the understanding he plays 3rd pairing as a mentor to up comers with less minutes. I know I'd feel safer giving guys like Subban, Fedun, Tryamkin, and Pedan a tryout on the big club if we had Hammer on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 What it means, is that the next team to sign Edler will vastly over pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 1 minute ago, xereau said: What it means, is that the next team to sign Edler will vastly over pay. Edler is no Byfuglien. No comparison. Byfuglien is a freak of nature Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJDDawg Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 7 minutes ago, Lockhart said: Some people on the radio were throwing out Hammer for Ritchie. I'd love to see that Ritchie Horvat Virtanen Talk about a tough line that's hard to contain. Yeah, I heard that as well and almost pee'd myself at the thought. One can easily argue now that Buff is signed that Hammer is in the top two of d-men potentially available at the deadline. A Hammer for Ritchie deal straight-up is exactly up JB's alley and something I could see happening. From Hammer's standpoint, he stays on the West Coast (for family reasons), gets to play with a Cup contender and his best buddy Juice. As they mentioned on the radio show, JB has little interest in trading assets for picks, preferring to get players already two or three years into their development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nd1989 Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Could deffinetly see a trade and resign in the offseason type of scenario if hammer really does want to stay here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Yandle is out there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 11 minutes ago, MJDDawg said: Yeah, I heard that as well and almost pee'd myself at the thought. One can easily argue now that Buff is signed that Hammer is in the top two of d-men potentially available at the deadline. A Hammer for Ritchie deal straight-up is exactly up JB's alley and something I could see happening. From Hammer's standpoint, he stays on the West Coast (for family reasons), gets to play with a Cup contender and his best buddy Juice. As they mentioned on the radio show, JB has little interest in trading assets for picks, preferring to get players already two or three years into their development. Anaheim, where Canucks fan favourites go to retire. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersexual Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 The Canucks need Hamhuis for the playoff push. If Benning trades Hamhuis, next years D will looks like the Oilers. Does anyone here really want Sbisa to be a top 4 D? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desiboynux4lifee******* Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 6 minutes ago, homersexual said: The Canucks need Hamhuis for the playoff push. If Benning trades Hamhuis, next years D will looks like the Oilers. Does anyone here really want Sbisa to be a top 4 D? 1st round exit? lol this is it dude, management is never going to get a better chance to save some years off the rebuild which is looking like atleast 5year process due to many of our prospects developing into two way guys. This chance they have is to get a solid prospect and picks, you can't get a better chance then that, I am willing to sacrifice one years playoffs for a solid pick. Hopefully Benning doesn't think like you, sorry dude, but I hope he doesn't if Benning doesn't move Hammer he will be ran out of town in 2 years. MARK it down. Media will never forget this nor will the fanbase after the seasons over. The expectations for the Canucks' fans is not 1st round exit, its cup or bust! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 2 minutes ago, homersexual said: The Canucks need Hamhuis for the playoff push. If Benning trades Hamhuis, next years D will looks like the Oilers. Does anyone here really want Sbisa to be a top 4 D? Sbisa is a top 4 D with or without Hamhuis. We're 5 points out from being 30th in the league, keeping Hamhuis and passing on the high end prospect or draft pick we'd get in return is a huge mismanagement of assets. And what if we miss anyways? Trade Deadline is still like 6 weeks before the actual end of the season, it's not like we'll actually know much more about our playoff chances than we do right now. On Feb 29th, we'll still be a few points out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 6 minutes ago, homersexual said: The Canucks need Hamhuis for the playoff push. If Benning trades Hamhuis, next years D will looks like the Oilers. Does anyone here really want Sbisa to be a top 4 D? We aren't good enough as a team to compete or perhaps even make the playoffs. Too much inexperience toppled off with stale veterans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 21 minutes ago, Mathew Barzal said: Yandle is out there too. If Yandle were made available, Rangers would demand pieces which would help them now. Canucks would want futures. Big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Just now, TheRussianRocket. said: If Yandle were made available, Rangers would demand pieces which would help them now. Canucks would want futures. Big difference. Pretty much this unless the Rangers feel confident in their defense or believe they can find another player that can help them else where. Idk why the would want to trade Yandle though. He was good for them last playoffs and again this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 So send Hamhuis to Anaheim. Maybe Anaheim pries Luongo out of Florida, then maybe we send Anaheim Burrows and Higgins. Anaheim will be the closest we as Canucks fans get to a cup, sort of, in the next 5 years! All kidding aside, I smell a bidding war coming. With Big Bufflo out of the picture now maybe 2 or 3 teams go after Hamhuis - especially if one of the contenders get a top 4 injury on the blue line! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.