smokes Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Miss Hamhuis already. To this day, I still don't understand why the Canucks kept Sbisa over Hamhuis. Getting Eriksson is great but at the same time let go of an Olympian. That is not progreass. That's taking one step forward, one step back. Sorry but had to gripe. Nill says Hamhuis could be on the top defensive pairing in Dallas Leave a comment By Jason BroughJul 20, 2016, 11:43 AM For just $7.5 million over the next two years, the Dallas Stars may have found themselves a top-pairing defenseman in free agency. Stars GM Jim Nill was interviewed on TSN 1040 radio yesterday and was asked where he saw Dan Hamhuis playing next season. Nill replied that it was “wide open” heading into training camp, but didn’t rule out a major role for the 33-year-old veteran. “There’s a chance he could play with John Klingberg,” Nill said, per Today’s Slapshot. “John’s got great offensive skills. I think Dan Hamhuis might be a great fit for him, to be the guy back there moving the puck out, giving the puck to him.” Klingberg spent most of last season paired with Alex Goligoski, who’s in Arizona now. The Stars also lost Jason Demers to free agency and didn’t re-sign Kris Russell, leading Nill to target Hamhuis on July 1. If Hamhuis, a left shot, isn’t paired with right-shooting Klingberg, there are “lots of other options” for a partner, according to Nill. “We’ve got Stephen Johns,” Nill said. “We’ve got this Esa Lindell. Patrik Nemeth. We’ve got Jordie Benn. So we’ve got lots of young defensemen that could always use the mentorship of a veteran like Dan Hamhuis.” It will certainly be interesting to see how Hamhuis fares with his new team, and not just from a Stars perspective. Despite not being far removed from winning Olympic gold for Canada in Sochi, the Canucks did not make him a priority to re-sign, opting instead to acquireErik Gudbranson from Florida and bolster their forward group with Loui Eriksson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 That's because they have an awful defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 No diss to Hammer but it shows how far Dallas is blue line is then from becoming a cup contending d-core. They have a young blueline, one of the youngest I think. Will take a while to develop. They're in a bit better shape then us though when it comes to defense though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I just kind of assumed he would be up there with Klingberg as soon as they signed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 12 minutes ago, 250Integra said: That's because they have an awful defense. How awful can thier defence be if they won 50 games last year with subpar goaltending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 6 minutes ago, 250Integra said: That's because they have an awful defense. No it's because he is a solid top defenseman whom for some reason even on CDC was underrated here. Now that he is a Stars player people will continue to discredit his actual value. He is a top four defenseman on any team, a 4/5 on a deep team and could play top minutes for a couple more years as well as is posibly going to be evidenced in Dallas. The Canucks want to get younger and Sbisa provides more physicality and will likely continue to grow his came to another level which is better for the Canucks in the long run. The team being respectful of his wishes and his contract did not move him at the deadline last season and although they never got a return for him it was benefit to those on the team that he was there, think Tryamkin ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 1 minute ago, 250Integra said: That's because they have an awful defense. Especially after losing Jason Demers and Kris Russell. If I had to guess what their defence pairings would look like, maybe something like: Hamhuis - Klingberg Oduya - Johns Benn - Nemeth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Just adding salt to the wound. ...and I'm in the in the same boat as you OP. Since the beginning, I wanted management to keep Hamhuis over Sbisa. Makes no sense in what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 17 minutes ago, smokes said: Miss Hamhuis already. To this day, I still don't understand why the Canucks kept Sbisa over Hamhuis. ... Uh, because Sbisa already had a contract and Hamhuis didn't? Get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Thankful that Hammer provided service for so many years in our top-pairing and then top-4 as Eddie and Chris emerged. That being said though, our top pair is ready to lead the younger pair of Ben and Erik so I'm not overly disappointed that we let him go as 1) our top-4 is set with heirs apparent (the team likely trusts Ben as a top-4 moving forward), 2) it would've been an under-utilization of his talents in our bottom pair and limited role and 3) guys like Nikita and Andrey need minutes to develop and have potential to become NHL regulars in their own right so it makes sense to open up space for them as the team wants to go young. It's too bad we didn't trade him and Radim like we did with Juice to get an asset in return, but sometimes that's how it goes. Would be happy for him if he won in Dallas and then brought the Cup back to BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Type R Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Yeah, sorry OP, but Hamhuis is not a number 1 d-man. He is a number 4 at best. If Dallas is proclaiming he is number 1, then they are in more trouble defensively than we are. Hammer is a fantastic guy, and has played well for this club over the years, but he isn't as quick as he used to be, and we need youth. Sbisa will be next to be packing his bags, its just a matter of when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 25 minutes ago, smokes said: Miss Hamhuis already. To this day, I still don't understand why the Canucks kept Sbisa over Hamhuis. Getting Eriksson is great but at the same time let go of an Olympian. That is not progreass. That's taking one step forward, one step back. Sorry but had to gripe. Can we get over the Olympic thing already. That was 2 and a half years ago...and it will be 3 by mid season. That's a lot of time in an NHL career. Proof, Hamhuis wasn't even considered for the World Cup. He's still a good player, but not at the same level he was. Easy, Sbisa is a bottom 6 defenseman and Hamhuis wanted to play to four again. Seems like the Canucks wanted to go with Edler and Hutton as their two LHD. Pretty sure Hamhuis was offered similar money to Sbisa and what he got in Dallas, to play less in Vancouver. He wanted to be part of the core again. That is still without considering where Juolevi fits in, in a year or 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 because on our team, he would have been # 5 d-man...hammer is great and i wish him well...imo, it came down to money....edler, tanev, gudbranson and hutton are pencilled in the top 4 spots... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Yeah, just yesterday I was lamenting the loss of Hamhuis. I'll really miss his steady calming presence on the back end. I'm sure the community will miss him too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 3 minutes ago, smithers joe said: because on our team, he would have been # 5 d-man...hammer is great and i wish him well...imo, it came down to money....edler, tanev, gudbranson and hutton are pencilled in the top 4 spots... IMHO Hamhuis is better than some of the top four the Canucks currently have in their line up. Going young is one thing but going you anf have your veteren presence be Edler? It's the loss of the intangibles I have a problem with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 22 minutes ago, elvis15 said: Uh, because Sbisa already had a contract and Hamhuis didn't? Get over it. So keep an inferior player because he happens to have a contract? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I would be a shutdown dman on my nephew's atom team. I'm not trying to put down Hammer, he is still a very valuable player, but the reason why he'll be a shutdown dman on Dallas is because Dallas does not have a single defensively-minded dman that belongs in the top 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where's Wellwood Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 4 minutes ago, smokes said: So keep an inferior player because he happens to have a contract? Really? So how would you get rid of Sbisa then? and don't say waive him or 'trade him for a 7th rounder' because that isn't going to happen. Every team has players they'd rather be rid of. Do you see them all getting traded for 7th round picks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Nill needs to spend less time talking about this and more time trying to improve his goaltending situation - he has 10.4mil and two NTC guys locked in for the next two years and both are a high level of 'meh'. With or without Hammer, they go nowhere with this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where's Wellwood Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 34 minutes ago, TheRussianRocket. said: Just adding salt to the wound. ...and I'm in the in the same boat as you OP. Since the beginning, I wanted management to keep Hamhuis over Sbisa. Makes no sense in what they did. Hamhuis is 7 years older than Sbisa and declining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.