Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Which Players Will Join The 3,000-Hit Club?

Hamhuis could go to Wild?

 

This is my first fanpost/fanshot on HW so take it easy on me ;)

According to ESPN insider rumor central (I don't have the subscription so I can't read the whole article), the Wild may sign Dan Hamhuis as an unrestricted free agent. That's pretty interesting since we don't have any spots open on defense and have a bunch of d-men prospects in Houston. The only way I see the Wild signing Hamhuis (barring a trade), is if Hnidy is not resigned and Nate Prosser ends up starting the season in Houston.

Hamhuis had 5 goals and 19 assists for 24 points this season for Nashville. He has never scored more than 7 goals in a season and his career high in points is 38. He is pretty durable and can stay on the ice. In his career he has played an average of 80.5 games a season.

If the Wild do indeed sign Hamhuis as a FA, who do you think will be traded or let go? Would you want Hamhuis to be a member of the Minnesota Wild?

ESPN rumor central

Poll
Would you approve of signing Hamhuis as a FA?
Yes
30 votes
No
48 votes
I don't care/indifferent
16 votes

94 votes | Poll has closed

The opinions posted here are not those of Hockey Wilderness

Comment 21 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Nice find! I will ask around for someone who has access to the entire rumor.

My take is that the Wild are loaded at D, have plenty of prospects at the position, and it is time to look at forwards, not defensemen. Hopefully this is truly just a rumor.

Hockey Wilderness

Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.

by BReynolds on May 3, 2010 4:44 PM CDT reply actions  

Thanks!

I agree. It is time to get forwards who can help the team now and in the future.

by taralynn09 on May 3, 2010 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions  

Initially, I thought he’d be an upgrade defensively, but for the amount of money he’d cost, I’m not sure he’d be much of an improvement.

Here’s where Hamhuis would have fit in if we plug in his stats to the Wild. I’ll figure without Johnsson:

Shots – 2nd (115)
TOI – 4th (21:15)
ES TOI – 2nd (18:09)
PK TOI – 3rd (2:39)
Hits – 2nd (148)
Blocked Shots – 4th (95)
Takeaways – 1st (48)
Giveaways – 2nd (51)

My gut feeling is he’d be an upgrade over Schultz, and if we could move that contract it wouldn’t be bad, but with so many promising young D-men (especially with size) in the system, I’d rather bring them along instead.

by Jarick on May 3, 2010 5:06 PM CDT reply actions  

Here is the whole story:

Courtesy of James O’Brien @cyclelikesedins – make sure you follow him on Twitter and read his work at Pro Hockey Talk, NBC’s hockey blog.

Dan Hamhuis likes Nashville and says it’s possible he could be back. And, in the end, it’s about money because it’s unlikely the Preds will pay $4 million annually — his estimated market value — to lock him up.

That said, the Edmonton Journal’s Jim Matheson writes, “Hamhuis is exactly what the Minnesota Wild need — a solid shutdown guy.” However, Wild GM Chuck Fletcher has said he’d be looking for internal improvements, as well as some on the trade market. But he hinted he wouldn’t spend too big on the free agent market.

Hamhuis previously told the newspaper, “There are options out there,” which might indicate that he wants to test the market.

But Hamhuis could stay put. Preds GM David Poile told the Tennessean that there’s a reasonable chance he can re-sign Hamhuis, which is a little surprising.

Hockey Wilderness

Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.

by BReynolds on May 3, 2010 6:37 PM CDT reply actions  

Schultz is ;locked in at 3.5 mil per. Hamhuis is at 2 already, and will get a significant pay raise if he is such a high grade shut down guy, as the article claims. My bet is he signs for roughly what Schultz makes, so the question is… is he better than Schultz?

Hockey Wilderness

Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.

by BReynolds on May 3, 2010 6:42 PM CDT reply actions  

I’m going to answer “yes” to your direct question. I like Schultz for the most part, but he looked barely average at times this year.

However, the discussion is probably moot because of all the other current contract issues and D men in the system as have been commented on previous.

I would pose a counter question: could we anything for Schultz at the draft? If not Schultz, anyone else? If an option like Hamhuis is out there (and you think you can lock him up July 1), I think you’d have to consider it.

Let's Go Twins!
Minnesota Wild Off-season: In Fletch We Trust.

by redheadzeb on May 3, 2010 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions  

When has Schultz NOT been average?

He’s never been spectacular, but he’s still a solid rock in our D. That said, he may be able to fetch something at the draft, but probably not much. I wouldn’t want to part ways with him though, he’s been a good leader for this team.

twitter: BubbleWild48

by JSLandry on May 4, 2010 5:03 AM CDT up reply actions  

More thoughts...

Looking at the contracts…

Burns is in through 2012, Schultz is in until 2014, Zidlicky just got a long term deal, Barker is through 2012, as is Stoner. That is five guys signed for at least two more seasons. Hamhuis is not going to want a one year deal, and he is not going to come cheap. Bringing in another long term contract on the blue line makes it nearly impossible to get the kids into the line up, barring injury.

Sorry to put so much thought into such an obvious non-starter, but it is what it is. A rumor. Still, thank you for finding it, and for sharing it, Tara.

Hockey Wilderness

Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.

by BReynolds on May 3, 2010 6:47 PM CDT reply actions  

Your welcome!

I usually look at ESPN rumor central daily just to see what they say. I thought it was interesting so I figured I would share with my fellow Wild fans!

by taralynn09 on May 3, 2010 8:20 PM CDT up reply actions  

Great post Tara! :)

I think signing Hamhuis would mean either bye-bye Burns or no Stoner/Prosser/Cuma/Scandella this year, which is a no-no for me. Besides, we’ve gotta concentrate on forwards…

At first, I thought this was the first in our ‘’conspiracy mill’’! :D haha

twitter: BubbleWild48

by JSLandry on May 3, 2010 8:07 PM CDT reply actions  

Thanks JS!

I agree, I like Burns a lot and think he’s a good player. I don’t want him going anywhere anytime soon. I am excited to see all the guys you listed play a significant amount of games for the Wild.

by taralynn09 on May 3, 2010 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions  

I definitely hope this stays a rumor. I agree with the rest of you, we definitely don’t need to be signing any d-men.

by Chris Winner on May 4, 2010 7:00 AM CDT reply actions  

I agree… we need forwards, not d-men.

by Call of the Wild on May 4, 2010 12:32 PM CDT reply actions  

I would love Hamhuis as a Wild but....

We already have 6 D-men under contract
Barker
Zidlicky
Schultz
Burns
Zanon
Stoner

5 of them are capable of playing top 4 minutes. So if we got Hamhuis, we would have 6 guys who could play top 4, meaning we would have two top 4-dmen playing bottom pair minutes, now THAT is a waste of money…

by danccchan on May 4, 2010 5:54 PM CDT reply actions  

Exactly. Nothing against Hammy, but damn… why pay someone 3 mil+ to skate on the third pair?

Hockey Wilderness

Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.

by BReynolds on May 4, 2010 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

Just give us Zidlicky and Zanon back. You can have Hamhuis.

by cisar on May 5, 2010 2:19 AM CDT reply actions  

You can have Zids, but you aren’t get Zuperman back for nothin’.

Hockey Wilderness

Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.

by BReynolds on May 5, 2010 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions  

Well, Fletcher did say he wanted to get some things on the trade market, and the Wild’s depth is at defense. If he wants to shake a few things up on the blue-line, or trade a prospect, Hammy could become a good option to look at. But as of right now, he just wouldn’t fit…ah rumors, i love em!

by JeffE on May 5, 2010 2:20 AM CDT reply actions  

Does anyone know when Zids No trade clause kicks in? Maybe it kicks in on july 1st. then he could be dealt here at the draft???

by wild32384 on May 17, 2010 12:41 AM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Your Minnesota Wild Blog Community

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Walter_small
This may sound like a weird question, but ...
Small
would you make this trade ?
Small
A few questions
Wildlogoxaw_small
Tim Thomas is a racist?
Small
Who should the Wild sell?
Small
Anybody selling Saturday tickets for March?
Small
The Fail for Nail?
Me
Could this be a bad move? Yeah, maybe for this year...but the future? I'm not so sure.
Peter_griffin_small
Are there lockout positives?
P1000029_small
Lunch with Chuck

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Chuck Fletcher

Twitter_profile_small nathaneide

Mike Yeo

297235_228875923843877_197693266962143_697284_1857293148_n_small BReynolds

Darby Hendrickson, Daryl Sydor, Rick Wilson & Bob Mason

Mscon_bigger_small ms.conduct

Small bciskie

Granlund_small JDesthubert

N1282200019_30083840_3437_small elisebutler

6merh_small JSLandry

Avatar_small danccchan

Western-lg_small WCHBlog