Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Discussion] Hamhuis. What To Do.


Boddy604

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Oh I agree 100%.  There is one small catch though.  Our younger players are playing better than many of our older guys, and coming UFAs.  We trade Hamhuis and Vrbata, and replace them with Biega and McCann.  That's the plan.  I agree with it.  However, we could keep winning, or even win more, with the young guys.  If we are going to tank, we need to SIT BOHO.  He's playing too darned good!  :frantic:  

Honestly I don't really consider Biega a prospect hes already 27 and this is most likely all hes ever going to be. If we had a younger defenseman with more potential I would waive him with out a second thought

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugor Hill said:

Amazing... few days ago everyone was "MUST. TRADE. HAMHUIS." Now after a couple of good games everyone wants to keep him.

Fickle fan base.

 

Everyone? Let's not generalize here. I have been a vocal supporter of keeping Dan Hamhuis.

Basing your opinion of this fanbase based on what you read on an online forum is just silly.

Most people on here (myself included) just speculate because we are dedicated fans of the team.

None of us would actually know what to do if we were handed the reigns to orchestrate a trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EdgarM said:

Never wanted to trade him. Sorry you must be thinking of the other fans. ::D

Fair enough. But your original reply to me makes no sense:

1 hour ago, EdgarM said:

So.......... get rid of something that we need and then, maybe, over pay for the same thing..................... If we find such a player again.Yeah, makes sense.

We are not getting rid of him for nothing. We get a high pick or prospect in return. NOT trading him is losing him for nothing. And if his agent is doing his job, resigning him before July 1st is probably going to be for open market value anyways. 

Trade and resign is probably the option for the most value. However, most people would agree that JB is probably looking elsewhere for vet D help, if he is looking for vet D help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hamhuis was playing like garbage before his injury. Sadly, the giveaway that directly led to him getting hit in the face, perfectly summed up his last couple seasons.

This being said, he has looked good in the last two games... well, at least, the last 1.5 games.  There were some bad pinches and puck fumbles in the 2nd half of the Colorado game.

My best guess is that the time off helped his groin injury, the injury he won't get an operation on, to heal up (again).

I think we should trade him, and then seek to re-sign him in the off season if the price and term are decent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, xereau said:

Hamhuis was playing like garbage before his injury. Sadly, the giveaway that directly led to him getting hit in the face, perfectly summed up his last couple seasons.

This being said, he has looked good in the last two games... well, at least, the last 1.5 games.  There were some bad pinches and puck fumbles in the 2nd half of the Colorado game.

My best guess is that the time off helped his groin injury, the injury he won't get an operation on, to heal up (again).

I think we should trade him, and then seek to re-sign him in the off season if the price and term are decent.

Of course we should trade him.  I don't know about the resigning part though.  We need spots for our two Russian Bears!:frantic:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugor Hill said:

Amazing... few days ago everyone was "MUST. TRADE. HAMHUIS." Now after a couple of good games everyone wants to keep him.

Fickle fan base.

 

I don't think anyone questioned his value. The concern is possibly losing a valuable asset (UFA) for nothing if he wants to leave, wants too much term or money, or doesn't fit with JB's plans. He'd be great to keep (shorter term and less money) and great to trade for a first round pick or young D prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stawns said:

I'll be fine if JB doesn't trade Hamhuis.  First of all Hamhuis might not even want to be moved and it's his call in the end.  Second, Hamhuis is a BC boy who is the best ambassador to Canucks fans in the province and had done a great job promoting the Canucks and hockey, in general, in BC........sometimes loyalty matters.

Right with you on this. I am a fan of Dan "Family Man" Hamhuis, and if he wants to stay and play out his career here, I salute him and will continually support him. He is an excellent defenseman whose body of work speaks for itself, not to mention his dedication and selflessness.

If there is a better defenseman to mentor the kids coming up the ranks, I'd like to hear who people think it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Right with you on this. I am a fan of Dan "Family Man" Hamhuis, and if he wants to stay and paly out his career here, I slaute him and will continually support him. He is an excellent defenseman whose body of work speaks for itself, not to mention his dedication and selflessness.

If there is a better defenseman to mentor the kids coming up the ranks, I'd like to hear who people think it is.

There isnt, it sure isnt Edler, no offence to the guy but he just doesnt come across that way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yotes said:

There isnt, it sure isnt Edler, no offence to the guy but he just doesnt come across that way

I agree. While Edler seems to be able to manage his minutes and do a decent job of handling his position, he doesn't strike me as a leader in any shape or form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trade any and all vets you can except for the Sedins.  So far this year, and we will continue to see, inconsistent play from them and our young guys have been carrying the play.  Imo our standings/results/playoff performance won't be any different without a hamhuis/vrbata etc.

 

the time is now to correctly rebuild this team.  The hockey we are seeing right now is not high quality or even entertaining for sixty minutes.  I don't see the point in maintaining this for the hopes of a couple games in the post season.  If this is the definition of competitive, then this franchise has accepted a low standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they trade Hamhuis, they will have to replace him with a free agent at a higher cost.  I would expect the difference for an equivalent quality player to be $2M or more.  Hamhuis has already said that he would take less money to re-sign.  Bieksa was in a similar situation and was extended for 2 @ $4M per.  I thought he made out like a bandit.

They would still be in a position where they need to find a top 4 D-man who can play the right side.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He knows everyone's talking about it and if your GM comes and asks you to waive your no-trade clause you get the message. If he wants to stay, fine. I however think that Benning can be convincing.

I don't care about the playoffs. I don't want to get into the plaoffs just to get bounced in the early rounds. We aren't a young team looking for experience and making the playoffs is a step towards a bigger goal. We're an older team transitioning that doesn't need that sniff of the next level. To me that's a pointless goal at this stage of the game. Being mid level or just missing can damn a team for years and years. Sell off, rebuild, learn and grow again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

If they trade Hamhuis, they will have to replace him with a free agent at a higher cost.  I would expect the difference for an equivalent quality player to be $2M or more.  Hamhuis has already said that he would take less money to re-sign.  Bieksa was in a similar situation and was extended for 2 @ $4M per.  I thought he made out like a bandit.

They would still be in a position where they need to find a top 4 D-man who can play the right side.

 

We have Edler, Tanev, Hutton, Sbisa, Biega, and two Russian Bears.  Plus, if we are smart, we will have Chychrun, who looks to be NHL ready. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope they trade him.  Get a high draft pick or young prospect...anything.    

The complication of course is that Hammy doesn't have to go anywhere, with his NTC.  

If I were Hamhuis's agent I'd only agree to a trade if there was a contract extention in it, as part of the deal. Like the Bieksa trade to Anaheim - I believe the Ducks verbally agreed to extend Bieksa before the deal was done, that's why BXA agreed to waive. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

If they trade Hamhuis, they will have to replace him with a free agent at a higher cost.  I would expect the difference for an equivalent quality player to be $2M or more.  Hamhuis has already said that he would take less money to re-sign.  Bieksa was in a similar situation and was extended for 2 @ $4M per.  I thought he made out like a bandit.

They would still be in a position where they need to find a top 4 D-man who can play the right side.

 

Crabcakes,  I think the play would be to trade hamhuis at the deadline for the playoff run.  Get a first and a prospect. 

Sign him again in Sept for Vancity for 2 year deal....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...