Player Discussion Travis Hamonic (D)
- Thread starter AchtzehnBaby
- Start date
Outstanding article about Travis Hamonic by Ian Mendes. He really wants to stay in Ottawa so let's get it done! Every successful team needs character guys like this.
YouGotAStuGoing
Registered User
SlapJack
Scum bag Sens
- Dec 6, 2010
- 2,004
- 1,294
Yeah that was a touching story. After reading that, if they don't resign him I'll definitely feel real bad for the guy.
And I'd love to keep him. He has deserved the criticism he gets for his play this year but when he's slotted correctly, he's an asset. Since the Chychrun trade, DJ has had to experiment with pairings and giving Hamonic 5D/6D minutes vs 3D/4D minutes has shown his true value. They need a guy like that, just not in the top 4.
When you have the right personnel up top, your bottom end becomes stronger and it doesn't take a lot of changes. Like having Norris next year makes the bottom 6 forwards much better...Pinto will likely thrive with 3rd line C duties and that pushes somebody else down to the 4th line. Chychrun pushes Hamonic and Brannstrom to the bottom pairing or the equivalent in minutes, yet they can still play a significant amount in the correct situations. That's what makes good teams better.
Sounds like Hamonic might take a team friendly deal as well, something else that comes with the benefit of being a good team
Alf Silfversson
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2011
- 6,075
- 5,231
Two years absolute maximum. We'll need every penny to pay for up and comers and need flexibility. Hamonic is a good 3rd pairing guy but you don't give out longer term deals to 32 year old #6 D men.
Tragedy
Registered User
Exactly this. Hamonic is absolutely the kind of guy who you want on the 3rd pairing and PK. Our D has looked so terrible in the last few years because guys were always slotted ahead of their ability. It will so nice being able to play 5/6D guys on the 3rd pair and have them actually look competent.
TonySoprano11
It's a very delicate situation.
Do that many of you have subscriptions to the Athletic or is there some chicanery you're using to read this article?
I have a $1/month subscription for one year and it is obviously worth that kind of money. They sometimes have specials like this.
Term isn't the problem, it's AAV. To illustrate the problem with your point, you'd be against signing him to a hypothetical 3 year deal that pays him $1.25M AAV? Would seem bizarre to say no since you would still need a replacement at league minimum anyway. And then what quality of defenseman are you getting at that price point?
Two years absolute maximum. We'll need every penny to pay for up and comers and need flexibility. Hamonic is a good 3rd pairing guy but you don't give out longer term deals to 32 year old #6 D men.
Nice article, seems like a real character guy.
I remember at the time all the noise about him being a problem in the room in Vancouver. I said at the time if he was a room problem then Capuano would know.
I remember at the time all the noise about him being a problem in the room in Vancouver. I said at the time if he was a room problem then Capuano would know.
I've been pleasantly surprised by how well he's played in the second half of this year.
Didn't like him early in the season but he's turned things around. Good bottom pairing defenseman.
I expect some team will overpay him in free agency but if he's cheaper than 2M I'd re-sign him for a year.
Didn't like him early in the season but he's turned things around. Good bottom pairing defenseman.
I expect some team will overpay him in free agency but if he's cheaper than 2M I'd re-sign him for a year.
Alf Silfversson
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2011
- 6,075
- 5,231
If he's open to what's basically an ELC then no problem of course.
I just don't think that is a realistic option.
God Says No
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2012
- 8,542
- 1,916
SlapJack
Scum bag Sens
- Dec 6, 2010
- 2,004
- 1,294
That's what I remember at the time; everyone was pissed with that trade (myself included) because Vancouver was supposedly giving him away due to bad locker room chemistry or something. And that's all we heard. But the root of the story was how he signed the contract with them then didn't vaccinate immediately as he was concerned about his daughter and wanted to get more information.
The perception was that the team was pissed he took $6M and wasn't playing, plus the fact they addressed a hole on D which became a hole again. Knowing the Vancouver media, it was probably blown out of proportion and turned into, "Hamonic causing dressing room turmoil, details at 11"
Senovision
Registered User
- May 23, 2011
- 2,933
- 1,983
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
No thanks. Give me Gudas.
Hamonic is a defensive specialist, and he sometimes falters quite badly at that.
Only reason to bring him back is defacto number 6 defender. The role Holden should have played for us last year.
Hamonic is a defensive specialist, and he sometimes falters quite badly at that.
Only reason to bring him back is defacto number 6 defender. The role Holden should have played for us last year.
Last edited:
YouGotAStuGoing
Registered User
I don't see anyone suggesting otherwise. Hamonic is a great locker room guy whose play has improved to the point where he's a serviceable NHLer. But absolutely, especially with our depth, he should be stapled to the bottom pairing.
FunkySeeFunkyDoo
Registered User
I like the way he plays, and have from his first game in Ottawa after the trade last year.
Would definitely like to see him back on the 3rd pairing next year.
But only at a salary that is in line with a 3rd pairing d-man.
Would definitely like to see him back on the 3rd pairing next year.
But only at a salary that is in line with a 3rd pairing d-man.
