HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

PHI trade Dan Hamhuis to Pittsburgh for 2011 3rd round pick

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-25-2010, 11:26 PM
  #101
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blah View Post
They didn't unnecessarily lose an asset. They traded Parent for the right to talk to Hamhuis before the start of FA. They talked to him. It didn't work out. They got another asset for those rights. Would you have rather they kept him until FA just to save face?

I don't know about that 1st round pick stuff. Going from a 1st this year to a 3rd next year is too hard to believe. There may have been more to it.
No, but "damage control" is called "damage control" for a reason... you took damage.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:30 PM
  #102
Amateur Hour
Registered User
 
Amateur Hour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Negadelphia
Posts: 6,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No, but "damage control" is called "damage control" for a reason... you took damage.
Oh, this is a classic case of damage control. There's no question Homer screwed this up and is trying to save face.

Amateur Hour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:32 PM
  #103
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,484
vCash: 5792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
From the Pens perspective? Absolutely... would have been terrible. I just enjoy that apparently that's what we were trying to talk 'em into giving us.
I could see Holmgren trying to talk them into it, but it's still rather ambitious. Hamhuis being a pending UFA, if Holmgren has Shero in a spot where he's willing to give up more than other offers, you gotta pull the trigger before he starts thinking about it too much.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:34 PM
  #104
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
he seems greedy

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:34 PM
  #105
blah
Registered User
 
blah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
The damage could have been in signing him. After talking to him, maybe they decided he was a player they didn't want to sign. I hope when he said that stuff about wanting to be named #3 their conclusion was they didn't want him at any price. I have no problem with any of what they've done with Hamhuis, if the press reports are to be believed.

blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:35 PM
  #106
MiamiScreamingEagles
Global Moderator
A Fistful of Dollars
 
MiamiScreamingEagles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 39,616
vCash: 1298
Peter, hi it's Paul...


MiamiScreamingEagles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:35 PM
  #107
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
he seems greedy
Hamhuis?

The 4/16M sounds quite reasonable... this concern over playing time strikes me as lacking confidence or something.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:37 PM
  #108
Shadow Flyer
Why So Serious?
 
Shadow Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Interwebs
Country: United States
Posts: 3,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Hamhuis?

The 4/16M sounds quite reasonable... this concern over playing time strikes me as lacking confidence or something.
Yea, the whole "playing time" concerns for Hamhuis is really odd, if you ask me. And if that's true, I want no part of him.

The guy is a pretty damn good Dman, but you can't have "me" players on your roster and expect to win, in my opinion.

Whatever, best of luck to Hamhuis wherever he ends up.

Shadow Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:38 PM
  #109
ArmchairGM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,312
vCash: 500
The only bad part is that its to Pittsburgh. Parents value was probably less then a 4th.

ArmchairGM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:40 PM
  #110
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blah View Post
The damage could have been in signing him. After talking to him, maybe they decided he was a player they didn't want to sign. I hope when he said that stuff about wanting to be named #3 their conclusion was they didn't want him at any price. I have no problem with any of what they've done with Hamhuis, if the press reports are to be believed.
See, that's all fine... and I don't disagree. But it ignores the attached observation that the original decision to go after him so aggressively was, clearly, a mistake. Ya know?

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:41 PM
  #111
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowFlyer View Post
Yea, the whole "playing time" concerns for Hamhuis is really odd, if you ask me. And if that's true, I want no part of him.

The guy is a pretty damn good Dman, but you can't have "me" players on your roster and expect to win, in my opinion.

Whatever, best of luck to Hamhuis wherever he ends up.
The fact that the team means nothing to him. At first said he was excited to join this defence

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:41 PM
  #112
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmchairGM View Post
The only bad part is that its to Pittsburgh. Parents value was probably less then a 4th.
It had taken a beating, but he was worth more to us than that. He was cheap and serviceable on the bottom pairing... and he had a summer to recuperate from his surgery and this season.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:42 PM
  #113
KaraLupin
카라
 
KaraLupin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No, but "damage control" is called "damage control" for a reason... you took damage.
These are things you have to do when you are a GM. You take risks to make your team better, and if it doesn't work out, you make the best of your situation.

A third for Ryan Parent.. Took so much damage there...

KaraLupin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:43 PM
  #114
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Keep the top 4 together now I'd say.

Sign a vet like Mara, Lydmen, Tallinder,Eaton

for the 3rd pairing with Bartulis

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:44 PM
  #115
ArmchairGM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,312
vCash: 500
I don't think they could have relied on him for the third pairing. He's in and out of the roster too much.

Who do the Flyer's look at next? I think there still going to try and get a 2nd pairing defensemen for the 5th spot.

ArmchairGM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:46 PM
  #116
MiamiScreamingEagles
Global Moderator
A Fistful of Dollars
 
MiamiScreamingEagles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 39,616
vCash: 1298
Ray Shero was Assistant G.M. in Nashville

MiamiScreamingEagles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:46 PM
  #117
Toonces
The beer kitty
 
Toonces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,676
vCash: 500
On one hand, this kind of is a **** deal, as I beleive Parent could have fetched a little more (a mid 2nd rounder at most), but on the other, Homer rolled the dice, as he did with Kimo and Hartnell a few years ago, but this time unfortunatly, failed. That's the price you pay to take a chance I guess.

I'm a bit bummed we lost Parent, but honestly, he wasn't going to develop here. As long as he gets Coburn signed, an upgrade in goal, and a bottom pairing vet, I'll be content.

Toonces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:48 PM
  #118
blah
Registered User
 
blah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
See, that's all fine... and I don't disagree. But it ignores the attached observation that the original decision to go after him so aggressively was, clearly, a mistake. Ya know?
No, because I don't think it's a mistake for them to aggressively go after a guy they think can help the team. Especially when it's a top 4 dman, and that 3rd pairing really let them down in the playoffs. It's not like they flew in blindly either, Hartnell and Timmonen had both played with him. Timonen probably would have been his defense partner. So, I'm not seeing a mistake. They're being careful in who they bring in to the team. It's doing their due dilligence before they offer a guy a sizable contract.

blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:48 PM
  #119
Shadow Flyer
Why So Serious?
 
Shadow Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Interwebs
Country: United States
Posts: 3,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
The fact that the team means nothing to him. At first said he was excited to join this defence
Yea, apparently saying he was excited was just a bunch of ****.

Anyway, what's done is done. Hamhuis won't be here, and that's not the end of the world. If we don't find an upgrade between the pipes, then yes, the world just might end (at least my world).

Get a goalie already, Homer.

Shadow Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:48 PM
  #120
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
The fact that the team means nothing to him. At first said he was excited to join this defence
I mean, whatever, it's nice response to a question... I'm not sure it's fair to hold the guy accountable for that. Also not sure why the Flyers as a team should mean anything to him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrieresSalary View Post
These are things you have to do when you are a GM. You take risks to make your team better, and if it doesn't work out, you make the best of your situation.

A third for Ryan Parent.. Took so much damage there...
If Ryan Parent gets over his injury problems, we will miss him. He also was going to be a cheap depth defenseman for us and we just sold him for low.

Additionally, lets think about taking risks. We already had a solid top 4 defense... there was no need to take a risk to get another top 4 guy (who was going to make more than 2 of our current group). As said, unnecessary risk and losing assets there's no good reason to lose.

Losing Parent will likely cost us salary cap space for our top 7 D, too... as of now I don't believe any of our AHL guys are necessarily guys you want in the 7 hole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
Keep the top 4 together now I'd say.

Sign a vet like Mara, Lydmen, Tallinder,Eaton

for the 3rd pairing with Bartulis
Likely what we always should have done and let Bartulis/Parent fight for the 6 spot.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:49 PM
  #121
Pantokrator
Who's the clown?
 
Pantokrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Semmes, Alabama
Country: Guatemala
Posts: 4,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmchairGM View Post
I don't think they could have relied on him for the third pairing. He's in and out of the roster too much.

Who do the Flyer's look at next? I think there still going to try and get a 2nd pairing defensemen for the 5th spot.
They should sign Aaron Ward!

Pantokrator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:50 PM
  #122
Richyrich
Registered User
 
Richyrich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amateur Hour View Post
Oh, this is a classic case of damage control. There's no question Homer screwed this up and is trying to save face.
You get what you can get in this instance. It doesn't matter if it's a divisional rival, in my opinion. If that's the best you can do, you do it. We are competing with 29 other teams, not 4.

Richyrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:50 PM
  #123
Shadow Flyer
Why So Serious?
 
Shadow Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The Interwebs
Country: United States
Posts: 3,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Likely what we always should have done and let Bartulis/Parent fight for the 6 spot.
Yep, but our brilliant GM seems intent on reinventing the wheel, instead of just taking the simple approach and putting air in the tires.

What can you do?

Shadow Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:50 PM
  #124
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I mean, whatever, it's nice response to a question... I'm not sure it's fair to hold the guy accountable for that. Also not sure why the Flyers as a team should mean anything to him.



If Ryan Parent gets over his injury problems, we will miss him. He also was going to be a cheap depth defenseman for us and we just sold him for low.

Additionally, lets think about taking risks. We already had a solid top 4 defense... there was no need to take a risk to get another top 4 guy (who was going to make more than 2 of our current group). As said, unnecessary risk and losing assets there's no good reason to lose.

Losing Parent will likely cost us salary cap space for our top 7 D, too... as of now I don't believe any of our AHL guys are necessarily guys you want in the 7 hole.



Likely what we always should have done and let Bartulis/Parent fight for the 6 spot.
I dont mean he should be faithful to the Flyers, I mean the fact that he doesnt care which team he plays for.

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2010, 11:52 PM
  #125
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blah View Post
No, because I don't think it's a mistake for them to aggressively go after a guy they think can help the team. Especially when it's a top 4 dman, and that 3rd pairing really let them down in the playoffs. It's not like they flew in blindly either, Hartnell and Timmonen had both played with him. Timonen probably would have been his defense partner. So, I'm not seeing a mistake. They're being careful in who they bring in to the team. It's doing their due dilligence before they offer a guy a sizable contract.
Due diligence...? If they'd "done their due diligence" they never would have traded for him because they would have known he was uncomfortable with playing on a team with our defensive depth.

We acquired him (without having spoken to him) and then found out he didn't really want to sign with us all that much. They DID fly in blindly.

And there are a lot of guys out there that can help the team. Under the salary cap you CANNOT aggressively go after everyone that can help... that's how you bleed assets.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:30 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.