Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Moderator: Referees
Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
http://www.csnphilly.com/pages/print_la ... feedID=704&
Hamhuis talks
No goalie on the horizon for the Flyers, and the talks between the club and Dan Hamhuis’ camp have not yielded anything substantial. Sources say the two sides are not even close to a deal. Holmgren would like to return to Philly this weekend with Hamhuis locked up. Unless things pick up quickly, that won’t happen.
.......................................................................................................................
Maybe he doesn't wanna play for the Flyer and will wait till July 1st to sign with his home town
Hamhuis talks
No goalie on the horizon for the Flyers, and the talks between the club and Dan Hamhuis’ camp have not yielded anything substantial. Sources say the two sides are not even close to a deal. Holmgren would like to return to Philly this weekend with Hamhuis locked up. Unless things pick up quickly, that won’t happen.
.......................................................................................................................
Maybe he doesn't wanna play for the Flyer and will wait till July 1st to sign with his home town
- the toucan kid
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3923
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Just seems like a dumb move by Philly, I mean why wouldn't he go UFA even if he does end up with Philly after all? I just don't get that move.
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Because Calgary got the D-man they wanted last season after trading for him just before July 1st, Philly overestimated the chance of signing Hamhuis before July 1. Couldn't they make the deal conditional upon Hamhuis signing?the toucan kid wrote:Just seems like a dumb move by Philly, I mean why wouldn't he go UFA even if he does end up with Philly after all? I just don't get that move.
- ClamRussel
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: New South Wales, Australia
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Why would Nashville make that deal? Doesn't benefit them in the slightest.
Philly gambled & won w/ Hartnell & Timonen....looks like they lost this one. Meh, who cares they're just greedy anyways, their problem was not defence...they just address their goaltending deficiencies imo. The only reason Boucher & Leighton look THAT good is their blueline is so awesome, in the end their ok goaltending wasn't enough.
Philly gambled & won w/ Hartnell & Timonen....looks like they lost this one. Meh, who cares they're just greedy anyways, their problem was not defence...they just address their goaltending deficiencies imo. The only reason Boucher & Leighton look THAT good is their blueline is so awesome, in the end their ok goaltending wasn't enough.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Because if they don't make any deal, they get nothing. Philly seriously overpaid.ClamRussel wrote:Why would Nashville make that deal? Doesn't benefit them in the slightest.
- ClamRussel
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: New South Wales, Australia
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
So thats the risk they take if they want exclusive negotiating rights. Buyer beware.Kel wrote:Because if they don't make any deal, they get nothing. Philly seriously overpaid.ClamRussel wrote:Why would Nashville make that deal? Doesn't benefit them in the slightest.
If I was a GM holding his rights it would be all or nothing, losing & gaining players is just a fact of life in the new NHL.
Tough titty for Philly.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
- the toucan kid
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3923
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
I don't understand, are you saying it was unwise for Nashville to take Parent instead of nothing, knowing they wouldn't be re-signing Hamhuis?If I was a GM holding his rights it would be all or nothing, losing & gaining players is just a fact of life in the new NHL.
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Sounds like rights to negotiate with Hamhuis were just traded to Pittsburgh in exchange for a 3rd round pick next year.
- ClamRussel
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: New South Wales, Australia
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
No they did exactly the right thing. It was suggested Philly should have made the deal contingent on actually signing Hamhuis and I was saying Nashville has no motivation to make that deal. They put the heat on the Flyers, its a gamble and for the gift of negotiating prior to July 1st you have to pay for it.the toucan kid wrote:I don't understand, are you saying it was unwise for Nashville to take Parent instead of nothing, knowing they wouldn't be re-signing Hamhuis?If I was a GM holding his rights it would be all or nothing, losing & gaining players is just a fact of life in the new NHL.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
- the toucan kid
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3923
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
So bye bye Gonchar?
Well, you would have to figure that if there's no deal there pretty quick, then his heart is set here.
Well, you would have to figure that if there's no deal there pretty quick, then his heart is set here.
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Gonchar reportedly wants a three year deal and given that he is thirty-seven should he retire after year one, the remaining two years of his contract continue to count against the cap. If Gillis goes for that besides having rocks in his head, he had better win the cup.the toucan kid wrote:So bye bye Gonchar?
Well, you would have to figure that if there's no deal there pretty quick, then his heart is set here.
- Sid Dithers
- CC 1st Team All-Star
- Posts: 952
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 7:34 pm
- Location: Surrey, B.C.
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
I didn't consider the idea of Gonchar coming here. I don't like that it AT ALL.Arbour wrote:Gonchar reportedly wants a three year deal and given that he is thirty-seven should he retire after year one, the remaining two years of his contract continue to count against the cap. If Gillis goes for that besides having rocks in his head, he had better win the cup.the toucan kid wrote:So bye bye Gonchar?
Well, you would have to figure that if there's no deal there pretty quick, then his heart is set here.
And what does Pittsburgh know about Hamhuis that Philly didn't?
AraChniD iS stoOpiDz!
- the toucan kid
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3923
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
Oh christ, I wasn't trying to imply WE should go after Gonchar, just that Pitt might be trying to jump in on Hamhuis because they've hit the wall with Gonchar. Sorry.Gonchar reportedly wants a three year deal and given that he is thirty-seven should he retire after year one, the remaining two years of his contract continue to count against the cap. If Gillis goes for that besides having rocks in his head, he had better win the cup.
Re: Hamhuis and Philly are not close to a deal
It was an odd move for Philly to go after Hamhuis considering they were already relatively set on defence and assuming Hamhuis's demands are around $4.5 mil, his salary would put them over the cap with Coburn still unsigned and their goal tending still a question mark. My only guess is that they may have been looking to move a forward, Gagne the most likely choice, but he has a no trade clause, so of the remaining contracts the only other forward in that range would be Carter at $5.0 mil. Given the rumblings out of Philly it is strange that Holmgren didn't go after a goaltender first, but maybe that's next on the list now that Hamhuis didn't pan out.Sid Dithers wrote:I didn't consider the idea of Gonchar coming here. I don't like that it AT ALL.
And what does Pittsburgh know about Hamhuis that Philly didn't?