Travis Hamonic

[The_People1]

I think a lot of GMs still remember Duchene scoring his 30th of the season two years ago in the final minutes of a 4-1 loss and he was pumping his fist like he won the Cup. 

[MAC331]

Just now, The_People1 said:

I think a lot of GMs still remember Duchene scoring his 30th of the season two years ago in the final minutes of a 4-1 loss and he was pumping his fist like he won the Cup. 

I honestly think they should fire Sakic and keep Duchene. The guy is 26 and because of a few past mistakes je is destined to make more. I would be building around Duchene and McKinnon.

[cross16]

22 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's more of the value he is worth.  That's fair value even if it doesn't make sense for them.  I doubt they get anything better than that moving forward.  Especially after the season starts.

 

They don't have to move him this off season though. Time still on their side and he had a terrible year and that is probably reflected in trade offers. 18 goals and 40 points and going goalless for what was it, 20 games or something, is not going to get a lot of GMs calling.

 

I compare this to the Drouin situation. Had Lightning moved him when everyone said they had to i'd be willing to bet money they would not have gotten a return like Sergachev. But again I don't know the full story and It doesn' tmake sense to keep going back and forth when we don't know what the other offers were. All I will say again is if I were Sakic I would not have moved Duchene for Hamonic and a first as that trade just doesn't make sense for me given where they Avs are right now and how bad the roster/farm system is. Don't think a 27 year old defensive dman only signed for 3 years makes a lot of sense for the Avs and where they are. 

[The_People1]

22 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

They don't have to move him this off season though. Time still on their side and he had a terrible year and that is probably reflected in trade offers. 18 goals and 40 points and going goalless for what was it, 20 games or something, is not going to get a lot of GMs calling.

 

I compare this to the Drouin situation. Had Lightning moved him when everyone said they had to i'd be willing to bet money they would not have gotten a return like Sergachev. But again I don't know the full story and It doesn' tmake sense to keep going back and forth when we don't know what the other offers were. All I will say again is if I were Sakic I would not have moved Duchene for Hamonic and a first as that trade just doesn't make sense for me given where they Avs are right now and how bad the roster/farm system is. Don't think a 27 year old defensive dman only signed for 3 years makes a lot of sense for the Avs and where they are. 

 

In comparison to the Drouin situation, Yzerman immediately did his best to smooth over relations as soon as he found out he wasn't going to get fair value for Drouin.  Sakic, on the other hand, has given no indication he welcomes Duchene back this season... It will be an awkward training camp when Sakic cannot find a trade partner and Duchene comes to camp. And it's Sakic's fault.

[cross16]

22 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

In comparison to the Drouin situation, Yzerman immediately did his best to smooth over relations as soon as he found out he wasn't going to get fair value for Drouin.  Sakic, on the other hand, has given no indication he welcomes Duchene back this season... It will be an awkward training camp when Sakic cannot find a trade partner and Duchene comes to camp. And it's Sakic's fault.

 

That would be the case if Duchene has asked for a trade which, at least as far has been reported publicly, is not the case. That and i'm not sure what Yzerman did to smooth things over given he just basically told Drouin "i'm not moving you, ball is in your court" and then Droun came back to play and they let him play. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

They don't have to move him this off season though. Time still on their side and he had a terrible year and that is probably reflected in trade offers. 18 goals and 40 points and going goalless for what was it, 20 games or something, is not going to get a lot of GMs calling.

 

I compare this to the Drouin situation. Had Lightning moved him when everyone said they had to i'd be willing to bet money they would not have gotten a return like Sergachev. But again I don't know the full story and It doesn' tmake sense to keep going back and forth when we don't know what the other offers were. All I will say again is if I were Sakic I would not have moved Duchene for Hamonic and a first as that trade just doesn't make sense for me given where they Avs are right now and how bad the roster/farm system is. Don't think a 27 year old defensive dman only signed for 3 years makes a lot of sense for the Avs and where they are. 

 

IMO, Drouin and Duchene are different discussions.  Duchene had value as a player still on an ELC, who got PO'd over not being used properly and then being demoted.  He made amends and came back in the playoffs. Last year he had 53 point year, so his value was way higher.  Not the case with Duchene.  He's on an expensive contract that only gives you two years of faithful service.  More like the value of Eberle.

 

I guess I look at the value a bit differently.  I think a value contract for a young-ish d-man for three years and a 1st round pick is worth more than a similar-aged forward at $6m with only 2 years remaining.

 

 

[kehatch]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

They don't have to move him this off season though. Time still on their side and he had a terrible year and that is probably reflected in trade offers. 18 goals and 40 points and going goalless for what was it, 20 games or something, is not going to get a lot of GMs calling.

 

I compare this to the Drouin situation. Had Lightning moved him when everyone said they had to i'd be willing to bet money they would not have gotten a return like Sergachev. But again I don't know the full story and It doesn' tmake sense to keep going back and forth when we don't know what the other offers were. All I will say again is if I were Sakic I would not have moved Duchene for Hamonic and a first as that trade just doesn't make sense for me given where they Avs are right now and how bad the roster/farm system is. Don't think a 27 year old defensive dman only signed for 3 years makes a lot of sense for the Avs and where they are. 

 

It isn't like the Drouin situation at all.  Drouin was a kid on an ELC deal playing for a very good team and there was every reason to believe he would improve.  Duchene is 26 and is on a terrible team with a terrible culture that has done nothing to address it's roster.  If he stays chances are he has another terrible year in Colorado reducing his value even more.  If Sakic didn't want Hamonic he could have flipped him to Calgary for a first and two seconds.  He needed to trade him before the draft.  Good luck getting two firsts and two seconds (or similar value) for him now.  

[conundrumed]

I'm with cross on this one.

If I'm Sakic, that's a low sell for Duchene.

You can compare him to Eberle if you like, doesn't make Eberle a center.

Drouin isn't either, I know.

Understand the "Patty Roy" effect. Bednar has a full season now so the turnaround could be effective.

Roy is a douchebag.

[DirtyDeeds]

On 24/06/2017 at 11:11 AM, Cowtownguy said:

I gave you a like for that post because you said Wideman and departure in the same sentence. Departure feels airportish or space station gone. 

 

I would have given you two likes if you had said "transported" and Wideman in the same sentence. 

Not a peep about Wideman. Was Wideman abducted? 

[The_Tribal Chief]

He Was unfortunatly Laser Killed By Aliens that came to his house to visit him

[The_People1]

10 games in.  How do we feel about Hamonic?  

 

For me, I give him a 6.5/10.  He's made Brodie much much better but he himself I'm left wanting more from.  His D has been good generally speaking but not stud and he's been outright beat badly once or twice per game leading directly to goals or quality scoring chances against.  Some of these misplays are from misreads or poor positioning.

 

His breakouts are average at best and his biggest problem from what I can tell is he's prone to panic clearing/icing when he actually has time.  Or worse yet, he doesn't look.  He goes by feel and does the spin/clear/ice when he should lift his head up for a split second and evaluate.  Especially since he has the size to withstand a sudden bump or check.

 

He's relatively mobile for what he's suppose to be so that's a good bonus. 

 

With a 5-5 record, I cant help but to think the Flames should've kept their picks, played Stone on the second pair, and used Rasmus Andersson on the third pair.  The picks could've/should've been used on a premium RW instead.

 

Season is still young, of course.

[cross16]

In terms of Hamonic specifically I don't feel it's fair to judge anyone this early on that is with a new team and a new system. 10 games is not enough time to get comfortable enough to really thrive with a new team especially for a Dman. I think he'll get better.

 

That being said I've always felt that the Flames should have either kept the picks or used the picks to target a RW/scorer as I viewed that as the bigger need. I would have preferred picking up someone like Jason Demers, who Arizona got for cheap, to use on the 2nd pairing and then addressing the RW issue. Given what I've seen so far it's hard to chang my mind that they made the right call but time will tell

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

10 games in.  How do we feel about Hamonic?  

 

For me, I give him a 6.5/10.  He's made Brodie much much better but he himself I'm left wanting more from.  His D has been good generally speaking but not stud and he's been outright beat badly once or twice per game leading directly to goals or quality scoring chances against.  Some of these misplays are from misreads or poor positioning.

 

His breakouts are average at best and his biggest problem from what I can tell is he's prone to panic clearing/icing when he actually has time.  Or worse yet, he doesn't look.  He goes by feel and does the spin/clear/ice when he should lift his head up for a split second and evaluate.  Especially since he has the size to withstand a sudden bump or check.

 

He's relatively mobile for what he's suppose to be so that's a good bonus. 

 

With a 5-5 record, I cant help but to think the Flames should've kept their picks, played Stone on the second pair, and used Rasmus Andersson on the third pair.  The picks could've/should've been used on a premium RW instead.

 

Season is still young, of course.

 

I don't think Stone has really looked up to snuff yet this season.  He's a fixture on the PK and hasn't been getting the job done.  As a 3rd pair guy, he nowhere near the worst.  

 

Hamonic is fine.  He's allowed Brodie to step up and make dumb mistakes.  When he does make a gaffe, you notice it, but mostly you don't notice him.  He's also a lot harder on players than any of the other top 3 guys.  I think they should use him more on special teams.  He's got a hard shot and is not slow.

 

We can debate the cost of picking him up, but then again we spent how many picks on goalies in the last two years?  We have needs for top line scoring.  That's no lie.  I hope that we can make use of depth elsewhere to address it.

[MAC331]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

In terms of Hamonic specifically I don't feel it's fair to judge anyone this early on that is with a new team and a new system. 10 games is not enough time to get comfortable enough to really thrive with a new team especially for a Dman. I think he'll get better.

 

That being said I've always felt that the Flames should have either kept the picks or used the picks to target a RW/scorer as I viewed that as the bigger need. I would have preferred picking up someone like Jason Demers, who Arizona got for cheap, to use on the 2nd pairing and then addressing the RW issue. Given what I've seen so far it's hard to chang my mind that they made the right call but time will tell

I get the feeling may feel they have the RW covered when they move Tkachuk there with an season's experience. Obtaining both Hamonic and Stone was IMO fortifying the back end to further support the maturing process of our youth. Even using a good pick on Smith was another effort in this direction, buys us 2 seasons. Maybe just my view.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't think Stone has really looked up to snuff yet this season.  He's a fixture on the PK and hasn't been getting the job done.  As a 3rd pair guy, he nowhere near the worst.  

 

Hamonic is fine.  He's allowed Brodie to step up and make dumb mistakes.  When he does make a gaffe, you notice it, but mostly you don't notice him.  He's also a lot harder on players than any of the other top 3 guys.  I think they should use him more on special teams.  He's got a hard shot and is not slow.

 

We can debate the cost of picking him up, but then again we spent how many picks on goalies in the last two years?  We have needs for top line scoring.  That's no lie.  I hope that we can make use of depth elsewhere to address it.

I thought Stone has looked better the last few games and Kulak has been getting more comfortable with his surroundings. Hamonic will be time in time with Brodie. Everyone on here want prime beef but doesn't want to pay for it. LOL

[jjgallow]

On 26/10/2017 at 0:22 PM, cross16 said:

In terms of Hamonic specifically I don't feel it's fair to judge anyone this early on that is with a new team and a new system. 10 games is not enough time to get comfortable enough to really thrive with a new team especially for a Dman. I think he'll get better.

 

That being said I've always felt that the Flames should have either kept the picks or used the picks to target a RW/scorer as I viewed that as the bigger need. I would have preferred picking up someone like Jason Demers, who Arizona got for cheap, to use on the 2nd pairing and then addressing the RW issue. Given what I've seen so far it's hard to chang my mind that they made the right call but time will tell

 

You did?   That's not what I recall, I thought you liked the Hamonic trade.  But, I am getting older.    And you have always honorably defended even the trades you didn't like....me not so much

 

I don't care if he ends up on our top D line (not going to happen), as things stand right now, adjusted for games, we gave away a TOP 10 2018 Draft Pick for this guy.   In a Really strong draft.   And a Lottery ticket for a possible generational player.

 

Now the season is early, and we do have our hopes and dreams.  

•      We hope that Hamonic will play like the top 4 D we paid for.      Even though I would question he ever really was.
•      We hope that we will Not finish in the standings as low as we are now.   Even though currently we seem to actually be headed in the wrong direction.

 

Hopes and dreams are Not nearly nice enough.    We gave up a draft pick of a potential first line player, potential superstar, for a guy who will Never play on the first line, and will Never be a superstar, and is approaching his 30's.   And we picked a Really strong draft to do it in.

 

We did this, knowing that we barely made the playoffs, knowing that we got absolutely smoked in the first round and made to look like we didn't belong there.    

 

We consciously made a trade that only a True contender can afford to make.    

 

SOMEBODY thought, maybe if we make this trade, we'll look like a contender.    Well, WE DON'T.         And even if we did, you don't make this kind of trade to "become" a contender.    You would only ever make this trade if you Already Are one, and you need that slightest edge to reach the cup, which you actually have a good chance at winning.

 

This trade lacked an incredible amount of foresight.  Not in hindsight.  It looked bad from day 1.   It's looking worse now.  If it keeps going this way, IMHO it's enough to cost a GM their job.    

 

p.s....Simple difference between this and the Hamilton trade, which we all praised:    Hamilton has first line, even superstar potential, and is at the start of his career.   We lost zero potential and we lost playing years in that trade.   In the Hamonic trade, we lose 7 playing years, and we lost Far too much potential.

[MAC331]

10 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

You did?   That's not what I recall, I thought you liked the Hamonic trade.  But, I am getting older.    And you have always honorably defended even the trades you didn't like....me not so much

 

I don't care if he ends up on our top D line (not going to happen), as things stand right now, adjusted for games, we gave away a TOP 10 2018 Draft Pick for this guy.   In a Really strong draft.   And a Lottery ticket for a possible generational player.

 

Now the season is early, and we do have our hopes and dreams.  

•      We hope that Hamonic will play like the top 4 D we paid for.      Even though I would question he ever really was.
•      We hope that we will Not finish in the standings as low as we are now.   Even though currently we seem to actually be headed in the wrong direction.

 

Hopes and dreams are Not nearly nice enough.    We gave up a draft pick of a potential first line player, potential superstar, for a guy who will Never play on the first line, and will Never be a superstar, and is approaching his 30's.   And we picked a Really strong draft to do it in.

 

We did this, knowing that we barely made the playoffs, knowing that we got absolutely smoked in the first round and made to look like we didn't belong there.    

 

We consciously made a trade that only a True contender can afford to make.    

 

SOMEBODY thought, maybe if we make this trade, we'll look like a contender.    Well, WE DON'T.         And even if we did, you don't make this kind of trade to "become" a contender.    You would only ever make this trade if you Already Are one, and you need that slightest edge to reach the cup, which you actually have a good chance at winning.

 

This trade lacked an incredible amount of foresight.  Not in hindsight.  It looked bad from day 1.   It's looking worse now.  If it keeps going this way, IMHO it's enough to cost a GM their job.    

 

p.s....Simple difference between this and the Hamilton trade, which we all praised:    Hamilton has first line, even superstar potential, and is at the start of his career.   We lost zero potential and we lost playing years in that trade.   In the Hamonic trade, we lose 7 playing years, and we lost Far too much potential.

I don't see your views as correct in most cases and especially your thoughts on "potential" prospects. I would rather have a player that fits right into a position (experienced with NHL play) than wait for a draft year and 2 or 3 after that for such a player to develop into what Hamonic is now. Also take a look around and if you adhere to wanting RHS defensemen or wingers for the RS they are not in abundance. You think we are a bad team with Hamonic or Hamilton now I would hate to see where we would be without them.

It is early and the expectation for this season is that our backend including our Goalie will support the maturing process of our youth into the players we need them to be in time. this doesn't happen over night and it doesn't happen without the support move BT has been putting in place. First round picks do not guarantee you a "superstar", you should get a very useful player and both Hamonic and Hamilton are all of that for us now.

[jjgallow]

11 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

 

I don't see your views as correct ......

...

I would rather have a player that fits right into a position (experienced with NHL play) than wait

 

I am not entirely sure that you are disagreeing with me so much as stating your preference for just having everything now.

 

You and the rest of the world.   That's not an opinion, that's the same wish we all have.

 

But actually operating that way as a business, or in personal life, or in sports, Will Wreck you.

 

p.s..

A top 10 pick in this year's draft is worth  a heck of a lot more than Hamonic, that's not even a discussion point.   I'll clarify the reason, it's because if they turned out like Hamonic, it would be if anything a bit of a dissapointment (they have far more potential), but More importantly, the team gets ALL of the playing years of that player.  Rather than a few years on the back end.   Also, continuing to acquire players at the peak of their salary is not a solution that will get you anywhere.

 

p.s.s... for the record, I Also would love to have everything now.   Show me a trade or a move where we are guaranteed to win the Stanley Cup this year, and it costs us All of our prospects, and all of our picks for the next 10 years, I'll make that trade.  No hesitation.

 

But there isn't one.   And teams/people/companies that invest all their time and money looking for it...pay a big price.

[MAC331]

2 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I am not entirely sure that you are disagreeing with me so much as stating your preference for just having everything now.

 

You and the rest of the world.   That's not an opinion, that's the same wish we all have.

 

But actually operating that way as a business, or in personal life, or in sports, Will Wreck you.

 

p.s..

A top 10 pick in this year's draft is worth  a heck of a lot more than Hamonic, that's not even a discussion point.   I'll clarify the reason, it's because if they turned out like Hamonic, it would be if anything a bit of a dissapointment (they have far more potential), but More importantly, the team gets ALL of the playing years of that player.  Rather than a few years on the back end.   Also, continuing to acquire players at the peak of their salary is not a solution that will get you anywhere.

 

 

How so ? needs are needs don't confuse them with wants. This team is/was not a finished product and I have stated throwing around the "contender" tag especially this season is premature IMO. Having said this I think having the opportunity to add Hamonic at this point for us was a needed move and I might add at a good price.

You throw the words "if" and "potential" around like you are buying into a sure thing when one could site many cases where you are not. Just look at all the negative discussion surrounding Bennett, for every struggling Bennett there are many 1st rounders that simply fall of the map.

[travel_dude]

8 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

p.s..

A top 10 pick in this year's draft is worth  a heck of a lot more than Hamonic, that's not even a discussion point.   I'll clarify the reason, it's because if they turned out like Hamonic, it would be if anything a bit of a dissapointment (they have far more potential), but More importantly, the team gets ALL of the playing years of that player.  Rather than a few years on the back end.   Also, continuing to acquire players at the peak of their salary is not a solution that will get you anywhere.

 

And if we end up being a top 10 pick, then we have lost the trade.  But if the pick was a Yamamoto, then I wouldn't care.  Brodie has made far more mistakes than Hammer.  An errant pass by Hammer here, a penalty taken after being dumped away from the play.  The odd sequence where the forwards blow the zone and he can't connect with anyone.

 

Look at Brodie's work.  If it wasn't for his early season success, he would be looking worse.  That's being hard on Brodie, since he makes so many good plays we overlook the bad ones.  People are only singling out the bad ones Hammer makes.      

[MAC331]

46 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

And if we end up being a top 10 pick, then we have lost the trade.  But if the pick was a Yamamoto, then I wouldn't care.  Brodie has made far more mistakes than Hammer.  An errant pass by Hammer here, a penalty taken after being dumped away from the play.  The odd sequence where the forwards blow the zone and he can't connect with anyone.

 

Look at Brodie's work.  If it wasn't for his early season success, he would be looking worse.  That's being hard on Brodie, since he makes so many good plays we overlook the bad ones.  People are only singling out the bad ones Hammer makes.      

Brodie is like he can't decide what he wants to be when he grows up. Is there something wrong with being both a shooter and a passer. He drives me crazy.

[LouCifer]

Look, I've been dissecting Hamonic's game 10 games in as well, and yes, he's made some goofs that have been illustrated in this thread. The thing that keeps my pitchfork in the shed is that I remember Hamilton's huge struggle when he joined the Flames. I'd even say Hamilton's struggle was worse. Hamonic is learning on the fly - new team, new system, new defence partner. He'll come around. I see he has a tendency to drop down to block shots and prevent passes, but I think his timing is off - I expect that to improve as the season moves along. 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

 needs are needs don't confuse them with wants.

........

 Hamonic at this point for us was a needed move

 

Oh my

 

I was unaware.......

 

So like this, then?

 

[LouCifer]

Also, in response to the assets traded for Hamonic and the desire for a RW, I don't see it the same way. 

 

BT had to get a good goalie this year, or he was signing his dismissal papers. The goalie carousel the past few years - and the 3 goalie rotation - was dreadful. He gambled on Elliott last year, and I would've too after the playoff performance he had for the Blues. But, it is what it is, was what it was, and BT couldn't go into this year without fortifying our end. So, he made a play for Smith as I'm sure he felt more comfortable going with a known commodity. To give himself an added safety net, he brought in Hamonic for a steep price, and re-signed Stone in the event of an injury. These were calculated moves that were meant to strengthen our backend, and save his job. They say "defence wins championships" right? Some GMs legitimately believe in that, and I think BTs moves are telling of that. The D and Goalie we have today give time for our D and Goalie prospects to grow. I believe this is part of the plan. And if an opportunity arises to nab a top 6 RW, I think we have defensive depth with our prospects to facilitate that kind of move. 

[jjgallow]

9 minutes ago, lou44291 said:

Look, I've been dissecting Hamonic's game 10 games in as well, and yes, he's made some goofs that have been illustrated in this thread. The thing that keeps my pitchfork in the shed is that I remember Hamilton's huge struggle when he joined the Flames. I'd even say Hamilton's struggle was worse. Hamonic is learning on the fly - new team, new system, new defence partner. He'll come around. I see he has a tendency to drop down to block shots and prevent passes, but I think his timing is off - I expect that to improve as the season moves along. 

 

The difference being that Hamilton was barely 20 years old and was a known potential star in this league.

 

And we...basically.....may have paid less for Hamiltion in a lesser draft with a lower pick.  

 

If Hamonic could become 7 years younger, show super-star potential instead of second-line potential, and lower his salary to league minimum, and if our draft pick wasn't currently a pro-rated top 10, and if 2018 wasn't an Extremely strong draft year, 

 

I would be totally cool with this trade.