Hamhuis and his place on this team

[HK Phooey]

11 hours ago, D-Money said:

Even though I think it's time to move on, Hamhuis is still a good D-man. He just needs what Mitchell did - a younger, faster, offensive, free-wheeling D-man to pair with. Then he can just hand over the puck, and focus on covering for his partner, rather than having to drive play himself.

Mitchell played some of the best hockey of his career paired with Doughty. And Hamhuis was outstanding at the WC's paired with Burns. But we don't have that kind of player, so he's been dragged down by fringe NHL-ers like Weber and Bartkowski. The closest we have is Tanev, and Hammer and him actually played very well together before. But Edler is so dependent on CT now that their pairing is a must.

Would agree with you...Hamhuis is not the guy to be the alpha dog on his pairing, but when partnered with a highly skilled and competent partner, he could very well be back to where he was prior to his Olympic selection.

This may be a slight tangent on what you're saying, but with guys like Edler and Hamhuis, they are more complementary players on their pairing, as opposed to being the go-to guys.  Both are thrust into being the lead guys, which IMO, is setting them up to be not as successful as they can be.

My feeling is that if JB could find the right RHD to play with Hamhuis (a player with skill sets similar to Burns would be a wet dream), then the Canucks back-end becomes infinitely better than what they are now.

Edler -- Tanev / Hamhuis -- Shattenkirk (?) or Hamonic (?) / Sbisa -- Hutton  would make the Canucks back end become one of the tops in the NHL almost overnight.  And yes, getting either Shattenkirk and Hamonic would be a stretch (and who would we have to give up to get either of them?).

[Positive Canuck]

Sorry but overall Hamhuis has been plummeting last 2 years.

if he wants to re-sign at a discount for 2M per year i think about it but barely.

Id be moving Hammer to the Habs with Vrbata and try and get McCarron + Tinordi

rather see

 

Edler-Tanev

Hutton - Buff

Sbisa-Pedan

Tryamkin-Tinordi

[Crabcakes]

7 hours ago, HK Phooey said:

Would agree with you...Hamhuis is not the guy to be the alpha dog on his pairing, but when partnered with a highly skilled and competent partner, he could very well be back to where he was prior to his Olympic selection.

This may be a slight tangent on what you're saying, but with guys like Edler and Hamhuis, they are more complementary players on their pairing, as opposed to being the go-to guys.  Both are thrust into being the lead guys, which IMO, is setting them up to be not as successful as they can be.

My feeling is that if JB could find the right RHD to play with Hamhuis (a player with skill sets similar to Burns would be a wet dream), then the Canucks back-end becomes infinitely better than what they are now.

Edler -- Tanev / Hamhuis -- Shattenkirk (?) or Hamonic (?) / Sbisa -- Hutton  would make the Canucks back end become one of the tops in the NHL almost overnight.  And yes, getting either Shattenkirk and Hamonic would be a stretch (and who would we have to give up to get either of them?).

BINGO!  On both Edler and Hamhuis.  Hammer was a star when paired with Brent Burns at the worlds.

Edler is fine with Tanev who covers his back.  Hammer is a little different.  He is the kind of player who needs someone like himself as his partner.  He makes occasiona offensive moves and if he has someone who will cover his back when he does it works very well.  Hamhuis also does the same for his partner.  So if a team had a player like Burns, he would be a fabulous addition.  I think that he could net a nice return but a deal only gets done if there they would have a way to get a top 4 D coming back or by free agency.

[Canuck Surfer]

I am not an advocate of trading Hamhuis at the deadline.  I can se the logic behind it.  Wont be surprised if...

But we need to be confident Bartkowski, Tryamkin or Pedan can replace him?

Also make sure we get a good return to burn off an excellent Canuck.  That said I just reviewed the upcoming rental market.  Hamhuis's only competition IMO as a top class LHD is Goligoski. http://www.generalfanager.com/freeagents?expiryyear=2016&position=D&shoots=Both&team=all&RFA=1&UFA=1 The exercise also left me believing we might get a good RHDJuly 1.Goligoski scores more but is smaller and not really in the same league as a defensive or two way D. Nor is Dallas likely to be a seller. 

I believe we would get an excellent return on Dan Hamhuis!

And an even better one keeping him...

[shiznak]

As much as I like Hamhuis, I wouldn't re-sign him back, unless he takes a significant paycut, like 2M or less, which most likely won't happen. 

Trade him at the deadline for whatever we can get, and use that money to sign Russell.

[VanNuck]

Excellent post, and apparently people are divided on this one. I, for one, agree with the OP - Hamhuis, every bit as much as the Sedins, deserves to stay with this team until he retires. He is a core team player and leader, his intangibles are irreplacable. Sure, he has declined in play, but really I think he's mainly exposed - under normal circumstances, he's a number two or three defenseman, but he can be number one playing between an all-world goaltender and an Art Ross winner. But there is no replacing his leadership, character, and stability in the locker room and on the ice. He can be a role model for the younger players.

However, if he clearly will not win a Stanley Cup here in Vancouver before he retires (and same story goes for the Sedins), I would trade him off to a team where he is more likely bound to win. This guy has gone through much, has already won gold in international tournaments, and he deserves to win a Cup before he retires.