nergish Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 29 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: Clearly Botch is on these forums. The question is, who is he on these forums? well, it won't be any of the accounts that have beautiful women for avatars... because... y'know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THERETOOL Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 I had a feeling Chicago would be the match !!!! Hopefully he waives !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, riffraff said: I see the sense in what you're saying. But if we are talking money, where is the garuntee he will make similar money or the money you say he will lose based on re signing anywhere including here assuming jb would, which I doubt. cap casualties are all around us and Dan could easily be one based on age, current value, and injury history. not sure if you were inferring that I may be a teenager but I am far from it. I wish Not at all, I was speaking of my own experience and priorities. As one grows older financial security becomes more important than a Stanley Cup ring. Hammer is similar age to me and I'm sure he feels the same way. His wife and children are his biggest priority. When I was a teen my priorities were different. I wish I was a teenager, so don't take it the wrong way. Oh what I'd give to be a teen again.lol What I'm trying to say is IF Hammer waives, lets say for Chicago, he will be front and centre in the playoffs. He'll be exposed for not being a top tier top 4 Dman. Right now his reputation precedes his play. When he goes on the UFA market he's known for being Canucks best Dman, he'll get a lot of money, after having a lackluster playoff he won't be worth nearly as much on the UFA market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 I think Hamhuis would rather go to LA, but he would likely waive for Chi as well. The big problem for the Nucks with Chi is the salary cap. I think they would want to include Bickell in any trade, which would be gross. The only way the Nucks get their #1 defenceman, is by taking on the horrible contract. Uhg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks-12 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 2 minutes ago, higgyfan said: I think Hamhuis would rather go to LA, but he would likely waive for Chi as well. The big problem for the Nucks with Chi is the salary cap. I think they would want to include Bickell in any trade, which would be gross. The only way the Nucks get their #1 defenceman, is by taking on the horrible contract. Uhg. I would take Bickell if it means getting other assets from Chicago. Just buy him out in the summer. Plus he wouldn't be a bad 4th liner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Just now, Canucks-12 said: I would take Bickell if it makes getting other assets from Chicago. Just buy him out in the summer. Plus he wouldn't be a bad 4th liner. Why buy him out and extend the period of time of having a cap hit from him? We have copious amounts of cap space, unless we go and sign Stamkos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 1 minute ago, WHL rocks said: Not at all, I was speaking of my own experience and priorities. As one grows older financial security becomes more important than a Stanley Cup ring. Hammer is similar age to me and I'm sure he feels the same way. His wife and children are his biggest priority. When I was a teen my priorities were different. I wish I was a teenager, so don't take it the wrong way. Oh what I'd give to be a teen again.lol What I'm trying to say is IF Hammer waives, lets say for Chicago, he will be front and centre in the playoffs. He'll be exposed for not being a top tier top 4 Dman. Right now his reputation precedes his play. When he goes on the UFA market he's known for being Canucks best Dman, he'll get a lot of money, after having a lackluster playoff he won't be worth nearly as much on the UFA market. Yes as I have said in other threads I fully support dans family first mentality. Have a lot of respect for that. Feel the same way. but financially I'd say he's pretty set by now. However his family I'm sure is well settled and comfortable where they live now and moves are ignificant. im actually older than he is, not by much, but if I had millions in the bank and a paid off house, I would take a shot at the cup given the chance. I'm sure my family would support me in this. Wouldn't even have to sell the house. Just buy or rent whatever in my new city short term. If the cup didn't happen is either make a decision to play for whatever the new contract is worth, or simply retire with my health and financial stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 1 hour ago, J.R. said: No OK JR , IF Hammer gave Benning 1 team he'll waive to, only 1, what would the Canucks get for him? What did Kesler get us? Kaberle refused to waive, he approached mgmt several time for an extension. After being turned down and being implored by Toronto media, fans, and Leafs mgmt he gave only 1 team he would waive to. The Boston Bruins. Even then the return was Colburn + 1st + 2nd. Do you think Hamhuis would return the same on the open market let alone just 1 team? I doubt it. The market decides value of a player, not me you or anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Kane Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 13 minutes ago, theminister said: That would depend highly on whether they can ship out Bickell/Scuderi. In addition, they'd possibly be willing to pay more to get that done. They've done it before to dump contracts over the last few years. Cost of doing business. There's a big difference between dumping contracts like Sharp, Ladd, Byfuglien, Bolland, Leddy and Frolik than Bickell and Scuderi. If Bowman could have unloaded Bickell he would have done so already. Assuming Bickell and Scuderi are unloaded a good chunk of that money will be eaten up by Seabrook & Anisimov's new contracts, Panarin's performance bonuses, and whatever raises Shaw & Kruger will likely get (they are RFAs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Vrbata and Hamhuis to Chicago would be great. We know the Hawks pay well for rentals so the return should be solid. And would give Hammer a great chance at winning a cup. Good to hear Hamhuis referencing Vermette as to how he's approaching the TDL. He'll waive for a trade and then be back in the summer with Vancouver his first choice as a UFA. Nice to see Hockey Widow (who seems to be right more than she's wrong) is saying the Chicago rumour has legs and that talks between the clubs are heating up. For what it's worth, she's saying we'd get a couple picks (including a first rounder) and a couple good prospects. And we'd either retain on Hamhuis and Vrbata or take back a cap dump from Chicago. Hopefully something gets done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Just now, WHL rocks said: OK JR , IF Hammer gave Benning 1 team he'll waive to, only 1, what would the Canucks get for him? What did Kesler get us? Kaberle refused to waive, he approached mgmt several time for an extension. After being turned down and being implored by Toronto media, fans, and Leafs mgmt he gave only 1 team he would waive to. The Boston Bruins. Even then the return was Colburn + 1st + 2nd. Do you think Hamhuis would return the same on the open market let alone just 1 team? I doubt it. The market decides value of a player, not me you or anyone else. That's not what I'm laughing about. And the market 5 years ago =/= the market today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 2 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Vrbata and Hamhuis to Chicago would be great. We know the Hawks pay well for rentals so the return should be solid. And would give Hammer a great chance at winning a cup. Good to hear Hamhuis referencing Vermette as to how he's approaching the TDL. He'll waive for a trade and then be back in the summer with Vancouver his first choice as a UFA. Nice to see Hockey Widow (who seems to be right more than she's wrong) is saying the Chicago rumour has legs and that talks between the clubs are heating up. For what it's worth, she's saying we'd get a couple picks (including a first rounder) and a couple good prospects. And we'd either retain on Hamhuis and Vrbata or take back a cap dump from Chicago. Hopefully something gets done. Thanks for the update - keep them coming please. I have heard of the Hockey Widow, and she (it) does seem to have some inside information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 1 minute ago, WHL rocks said: OK JR , IF Hammer gave Benning 1 team he'll waive to, only 1, what would the Canucks get for him? What did Kesler get us? Kaberle refused to waive, he approached mgmt several time for an extension. After being turned down and being implored by Toronto media, fans, and Leafs mgmt he gave only 1 team he would waive to. The Boston Bruins. Even then the return was Colburn + 1st + 2nd. Do you think Hamhuis would return the same on the open market let alone just 1 team? I doubt it. The market decides value of a player, not me you or anyone else. Kaberle and Hamhuis are not even the same types of dman. I don't know why people are comparing them. Kaberle was a big soft power play specialist dman. Hamhuis is a defensive dman who had, I'm not sure he does anymore, a great hip check. Hamhuis was rarely minus in his career where Kaberle put up a lot more points but was pretty much a minus every year. The Hawks would have no interest in Kaberle were he still around and available. Hamhuis is the guy that fits the Hawks needs perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 10 minutes ago, Darth Kane said: There's a big difference between dumping contracts like Sharp, Ladd, Byfuglien, Bolland, Leddy and Frolik than Bickell and Scuderi. If Bowman could have unloaded Bickell he would have done so already. Assuming Bickell and Scuderi are unloaded a good chunk of that money will be eaten up by Seabrook & Anisimov's new contracts, Panarin's performance bonuses, and whatever raises Shaw & Kruger will likely get (they are RFAs). I don't really follow your logic. Of course those other contracts are different...the only close one is Frolik. The point is that they are so different. If SB wants to get rid of then he will have to pay to do so. He hasn't been able to do it for free through waivers so to clear that cap space to make his team better he would have to give up assets. I don't know how they will choose to spend that money. I could see them move out Shaw and Kruger, as they have done before, to make room for one or two of McNeill/Danault/Hartman/Dano etc. maybe they would like to spend some on D? I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleShield Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 That could be a huge trade for us in terms of future value. To CHI: Hamhuis (-50% salary), Vrbata (-50% salary), 3rd To VAN: 1st, Bickell, Pokka, Dano, Teuvo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 10 minutes ago, J.R. said: That's not what I'm laughing about. And the market 5 years ago =/= the market today. Can you elaborate on the market 5yrs..... thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Just now, WHL rocks said: Can you elaborate on the market 5yrs..... thx Markets fluctuate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 You guys keep bringing up Vermette and I haven't read anything about Timonen. The Hawks traded a 2nd and a 4th for LHD who basically hadn't played all year and completely sucked. If they were willing to give up that for Timonen then a much younger Hamhuis should be at least worth 1st + 4th + Prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spotted Zebra Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 1 minute ago, EagleShield said: That could be a huge trade for us in terms of future value. To CHI: Hamhuis (-50% salary), Vrbata (-50% salary), 3rd To VAN: 1st, Bickell, Pokka, Dano, Teuvo You can only retain on 2 players, Luongo is one of them. Even if you could retain both there's no way you're getting that pull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nergish Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Just now, WHL rocks said: Can you elaborate on the market 5yrs..... thx the market changes daily, if not hourly, let alone every 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.