Top 10 Dan Hamhuis Moments As a Canuck

7014504

Anne-Marie Sorvin-USA TODAY Sports

Since his arrival in the summer of 2010, Dan Hamhuis has been a steady presence on a chaotic team. Taking less money to play for his hometown team, Hamhuis will rightfully remain a favourite of many in Vancouver. His game isn’t flashy, but it is solid, neat, and a huge reason why the Canucks were able to compete for the Stanley Cup when they did. General opinion tends to see the injury that resulted from his hip check on Milan Lucic in game 1 of the 2011 Finals as a key reason for the Canucks’ eventual series loss, but let’s not get into that again. Here are the best aspects of Hamhuis’ time with the Canucks – from his handsome, fatherly charm to his excellent work as a blueliner.

10. Being confused by David Booth: 

There may be moments that deserve to be on this list more than this video, but I can’t think of them and you can always suggest something better in the comments if you wish. I love this video. With one brief smile, Hamhuis managed to sum up the entire David Booth era. It was a perfect moment. 

 

9. The Hamhuis Hip Check:

The aforementioned Lucic hip check ended up being the worst, but overall, Dan was pretty good at the hip checking thing. The most perfect example of his mastery of the art was when Hamhuis, as Youtube user CanucksHD so accurately puts it, destroyed Douglas Murray: 

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

8. Dan did not score very often: 

There are literally no goals on this list. I remember Dan Hamhuis scoring goals as a Canuck but I cannot remember any specific Dan Hamhuis goals as a Canuck. Can you think of any iconic or extra-memorable Dan Hamhuis goals? Link me to them in the comments because I have got nothing. 

Sort of the anti-Bieksa, Hamhuis had a flair for the undramatic and it made for hockey that was super satisfying to watch. His low-key game was what made him such a useful Canuck, but his lack of offensive glamour was sort of funny sometimes. This montage of him missing seven chances from the same spot on one powerplay is the perfect illustration of that. Oh Dan. 

7. Dad Hamhuis:

Advertisement - Continue Commenting Below

Being a family man is a big part of why Hamhuis was so reluctant to waive his NTC. In this adorable Canucks.com feature, we learn that little Anna Hamhuis calls Alex Edler “Mr. Alex”, can’t tell the Sedin twins apart, and refers to the penalty box as the “naughty box”. The Hamhuis family is adorable. 

tumblr_ndbjc9Xy3a1tu5pq1o3_250   tumblr_ndbjc9Xy3a1tu5pq1o4_250

via

6. Sad Hamhuis:

Hamhuis has really sad eyes so even when he smiles it kind of looks like he is about to cry. I don’t think he is actually sad, but the puppy-dog-eyes thing is a key part of Dan Hamhuis folklore and his legacy in Vancouver. 

8362408

via

hamhuis-jpeg

via

cut

via

Screen Shot 2013-09-17 at 7.38.18 AM

article_ced2effb-07c2-417d-be4d-0165b79aaff7

via

5. Dan Hamhuis fought sometimes:

Sad-eyed family guy Dan Hamhuis can thrown down. It didn’t happen often, but few things were more amusing than Hamhuis resorting to violence. Remember when he fought the Nuge?

Plus, here is this hilarious .gif of him KO’ing Patrick Kane (kind of):

tumblr_ln0wdrn7dL1qdford

via

4. Surrogate Dad Dan Hamhuis:

Hamhuis’ style of play, especially a couple of years ago, made him the ideal partner for young (Chris Tanev) or erratic (Kevin Bieksa) defensemen. Hamhuis stepped into a leadership role on the Canucks back-end almost immediately and filled the “kind, wise, reliable defenseman” gap that appeared when Sami Salo left. He allowed Kevin Bieksa to make those high-risk rushes and allowed a mostly silent Alex Edler to avoid frequent interaction with the media. Chris Tanev credits Hamhuis with teaching him details of the game – even defensive aces like Tanev need a safety net when they’re young. Contributing greatly to Tanev’s ascent to being one of the smoothest defensive defensemen in the league is a pretty good legacy to leave behind. 

3. Dan the Golden Boy:

He wasn’t wearing a Canucks jersey, but Hamhuis’ gold medal win at the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics is one of the nicest moments from his time in Vancouver. Hamhuis did not play a lot in Sochi and was certainly not one of the key parts of a ridiculously good Canadian defense, but he was there and it was awesome. Dan was even on the ice for the final seconds of the gold medal game. Look at that smile. No sad eyes here. 

Screen Shot 2016-02-28 at 2.40.57 AM

via

2. Dan “Community Man” Hamhuis:

One could probably make a top-10 list composed entirely of Dan Hamhuis’ various charity endeavours. This man loves giving away his money and time. Some time ago, Pass It To Bulis started calling him Dan “Community Man” Hamhuis and it stuck, probably because of the playground he helped build. Or the $100K he donated to Ronald McDonald House. Or the tickets he gives to young community leaders for each Canucks home game. Or his continued connection to the Best Buddies program in Nashville. I do not have time to list the rest. Hamhuis was actively involved in so many organizations that put smiles on kids’ faces and used his role as a local celebrity in the best ways possible. 

Hammer_small

via

1. The easiest guy to cheer for:

It was impossible to pick one moment or event that defined Hamhuis’ tenure as a Canuck because Hamhuis isn’t really a big moment type of player. Basically, the best thing about his time here is a combination of the previous nine sections of this list. Hamhuis is a really cool guy and was, for a time, the best defenseman on the roster. It’s fun to root for good players, but it’s even more fun to root for good people and Dan Hamhuis falls under both categories. He’s certainly not as effective as he once was, but that’s how sports and time work. If Hamhuis does decide to return to Vancouver this summer, maybe he can score a really memorable overtime winner to be included in the Dan Hamhuis retirement coverage. 

 tumblr_n2jtd8f7ya1qzfcb0o2_r1_400

via

Grant Logo

Find out more information at www.canada.ca 



  • Bud Poile

    What a ridiculous list. Almost none of these are moments.

    Here’s my favourite:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLyQBw5w98k

    No look backhand saucer breakaway outlet pass while under pressure from Jonathan Toews. Absolutely absurd play. Gets none of the glory, none of the credit. Completely sums up Hamhuis.

    Runner up along the same lines: 100+ foot lob pass to Stamkos for an OT winner at the WHC. No highlight vid unfortunately, but same idea.

  • Bud Poile

    Hamhuis took far less to come and never wanted to leave the Canucks so it is a new era without his steady presence and demeanour.

    Fondly remembered and never forgotten!

  • Dirty30

    Took a slight pay cut so his family could live where they wanted to live.

    Could have helped his team at the trade deadline and didn’t.

    Took a bigger pay cut to play some place else.

    Expect that kind of crap from RK who never tried to be the nice guy, but at least some help came from his departure.

    With Hammy we get the ‘he was a nice guy when it was in his interests’ spiel and nothing else.

    Remember that kids — don’t expect your team to help you if all you’re doing is helping yourself.

    Particularly when you sign for half the term and salary you were demanding from your current team to stay near your family. And then whine about finding a team that sees your value — two years at 3.75 per: duly noted.

    • TheRealRusty

      Ridiculous. To mix the Hamhius and RK situation is ignorant.

      Dan wanted to play in his home Province and the NTC was negotiated into his cap friendly deal. He never wanted to be traded and when approached by management at the trade deadline gave them 2 teams to which he would be willing to waive his NTC for. If anything blame GMJBTL for not approaching him way in advance of the deadline so that a deal could have been worked out without the clock ticking down.

      RK also signed a cap friendly NTC but requested to be traded (see the distinction?). He then handicapped management with a list of only 2 teams (actually 1 since the Hawks were maxed out on cap space).

      Your assertion that he asked for double the term and double the $ is ridiculous and unsupported. Delusional if you don’t think that he won’t have put pen to paper if the Canucks had offered him the same contract to stay here.

      From beginning to end Hamhius conducted himself with honesty and class. On behalf of Canuck Nation I thank him for his service.

      To GMJBTL, it is unfathomable to me that you would prefer Sbisa over Hamhius at this point in their respective careers. You gave up (with no compensation coming back) on a veteran defender with a calming presence who would have been a great mentor to the new crop of young defencemen. Instead you choose to retain an error prone panic strikken player in Sbisa. Good luck with this foolish decision.

      • Bud Poile

        Sbisa is under contract and 26 years old.

        Hamhuis was a UFA and going on 34 years of age.

        Biega plays a respectable game and is 6 years younger at 15% of the Hamhuis salary.

        Sbisa cannot hold a candle to Hamhuis but Benning is playing the hand he is given now that Tryamkin,Sbisa,Hutton and Edler all compete for minutes on the left side.

        Brisebois and Juolevi (lefties) should be on the roster in two years time,making both Hamhuis and Sbisa expendable.

  • Vanoxy

    I’m really looking forward to the Top 10 Taylor Fedun moments blog Grainne is working on now.
    It will probably take a while to trim the list down to just 10.

  • Brent

    Going to miss him, but probably for the best. Wish he had agreed to more potential teams at the trade deadline. Can’t really blame this loss of assets on Benning.

  • Steamer

    WE LOSE: LEFT WITH:

    Garrison Sutter
    Bieksa Granlund
    Bonino
    Forsling
    Vrbata
    Hamhuis
    Shinkaruk
    Corrado
    Fox

    THAT is Benning’s idea of ‘asset management’ – of course, must also add
    nearly a dozen draft picks also frittered away.

  • Rolland

    I think it was the history of the two owners, Gaglardi and Aquilini that totally messed up the deal with Dallas. They had a big squabble when they were both trying to buy the Canucks and Gaglardi was probably butt hurt when it went to the supreme court and he lost. Who knows what went on behind the scenes, but probably a clash of egos was the reason the deal fell through.

    I can’t say much bad about Hamhuis, he could have expanded the number of teams he’d go to and probably would have ended up with a lot better deal than he ended up with now. Stating that he wanted to sign with the Canucks after the playoffs didn’t help his case either but that is just honest Dan.

    Gudbranson was the final nail in Dan’s Canuck tenure, such is life when you are an aging NHLer.
    Good luck Dan Hamhuis and thanks.

  • Steamer

    Well i’m gonna go see if i can find a Stick-In-Rink Hamhuis jersey on sale somewhere. If it’s anything like last season’s Kesler and Bieksa jersey blowouts this time of year could be called Free Sweater Frenzy

  • Steamer

    Further to previous post ( format screwy ) – In return for: Garrison, Bonino, Bieksa, Forsling, Vrbata, Hamhuis, Shinkaruk, Corrado, Fox; we have: Sutter & Granlund to show. That is NOT good asset management.
    Benning completely – for 2nd straight year – mismanaged trade-deadline, getting nothing in return for Vrbata & Hamhuis. Benning further exacerbated this situation by dithering on Hamhuis right up until free agency rather than getting something for negotiation rights prior to free agency. Please Canuck faithful – explain how Sutter & Granlund show fair return for Garrison, Bonino, Forsling, Vrbata, Hamhuis, Shinkaruk, Corrado
    & Fox. Can’t be done; only a fool – or Jim Benning – could even suggest Van received anything near fair value for these players. From ‘rebuild on the fly’ to ‘complete rebuild’ back to ‘on the fly’ & ‘the McCann Plan’ now in the can. Does Benning really believe Sedins, Eriksson, Baertschi, Rodin will match up favourably vs. LA, ANA, SJ, CAL & EDM? Do you?

      • Bud Poile

        Thanks for letting me down gently. When you think about it, Benning really traded Bonino, Bieksa & Forsling for Sutter – I like Sutter, but not at that price, nor at his contract price. I also like Baertschi, Eriksson & the Sedins – all excellent players – but am concerned about the wear – especially on the 3 over 30’s in the Pacific. Think Benning is an excellent scout but am worried by his lack of attention to asset management: too may picks traded; too many questionable deals ( Forsling/Clendening,
        Bonino/Sutter, Shinkaruk/Granlund ). Time, no doubt, will tell. By the way, I was going to Canucks games when Poile was GM – even he was sometimes ‘out to lunch’:)

    • Bud Poile

      We also have added Eriksson and likely another player, thanks to the cap space freed up by Vrbata and Hamhuis… and some guy named Gudbranson, who is pretty good at hockey.

      I know it hurts your argument, but mixing in some actual facts will keep you from looking like a TOTAL ass-hat.

      • Bud Poile

        Check the facts yourself – Benning ‘managed’ to turn 9 players into 2 – Sutter & Granlund. Canucks still could have added Eriksson as a FA, AND could have received picks for Vrbata & Hamhuis had Benning been proactive in that regard instead of closing his eyes & hoping he’d get 2 home playoff games for ownership. By the way, how about presenting your arguments with supporting facts without resorting to insult? Strengthens your point rather than weakens it. Aim of the blog is for Canucks fans to share thoughts, opinions, etc. – insulting those you disagree with simply because you view matters differently is of little interest.

        • krutov

          Both Vrbata & Hamhuis were Free-agent signings. They cost us nothing other than cash and a roster spot. That is how this system works, we need to quit thinking that only our team should always get assets for upcoming free-agents and all teams should be buying our free-agents.

          Without this system in place the discussion would be regurgitated talk all summer long about how we as fans can do better than the GM… whoever it may be.

          Oh yeah that’s what we do anyways.

        • sh1t4brains

          How certain are you that other teams were interested in Vrbata (lets just use him to prove the faulty logic)?

          Radim was signed in 2014 for $5M with a LNTC (to 8 teams I believe). During the signing, only Iggy was available with the same money/impact type player. JB picked a natural sniper; can’t fault him for that. Radim probably felt the same way to play with the Sedins.

          Vrbata did well the first year but faded in the playoffs (no surprise to those watching hockey. Did he fade when the going got tough?

          What if the teams Radim listed weren’t the teams JB got calls or called and were interested?

          Which GM in their right mind would want to add $5M to their team with a player who didn’t show up during contract year? and who is north of 34? and who have not shown up historically during playoffs? Why waste a pick and the $$ on him when you know he is going to be RFA? See anyone lining up to pick him up for the cheap now?

          I don’t mind assumptions….but when assumptions are littered with faulty logic and then spun as the “right” argument….it is like seeing your hairy fat ex wife getting naked! Gurp!

  • Steamer

    I am so sorry to see Hamhumis going they will be sorry I heard Jim Henning think he is ☺Kevin Costner at trade time.The best of luck to you D Hamhumis I hope you are very happy in Dallas and you’re family.

  • sh1t4brains

    I just don’t get the whiners here….Danny got a chance to get traded to any suitors. He made his own call. At his age, it ain’t rocket science to figure out which way the wind blows. Can he play? for sure.

  • Bud Poile

    8. Dan did not score very often:

    Is this even a hockey team any more?

    Come watch ans spend your money on the Canucks…. we don’t care about competing for anything.

    Winning? HAAAAAAAAAAAAAATE IT!