Photo Credit: Dennis Wierzbicki

Would you believe me if I told you Dan Hamhuis was a goon in junior hockey?

Age appears to be catching up with many parts of this Canucks roster and last season you could count Dan Hamhuis among the casualties. The steadfast defender had a less than desirable start to his season, before bad turned to worse with a nasty groin injury suffered in a game against the Anaheim Ducks. The tear was severe enough that were Hamhuis any younger he likely would have opted for surgery. Given his age and the layaway that an operation of that variety would incur, Hamhuis opted instead for rehabilitation and came back to salvage the second-half of his season.

Considering how ugly Hamhuis’ mid-season groin injury looked at the time, that he came back at all was a surprise unto itself; that he came back and continued to provide top-four defending is highly impressive. This is especially true when one considers the revolving door of defenders opposite Hamhuis for much of the season. Until the emergence of Yannick Weber into the Canucks top-four towards seasons end, Hamhuis bounced back and forth between Luca Sbisa and Kevin Bieksa. Continuity means a lot on the back-end; especially on the Canucks, given the emphasis Willie Desjardins places on controlled zone-entries and exits. Hamhuis played much of this season with anything but that. 

The assertion that Hamhuis was outplaying expected results, based on the environment and context in which he was used is asserted by his dCorsi Impact of +117.01 – a career high for Hamhuis. The dCorsi metric takes into account usage, linemates, team effects, etc. to determine a composite score based on how the player performed against expected results. 

To the naked eye, though, Hamhuis appeared to have lost a step this season. Whether he can regain it over the course of this off-season will be an interesting storyline to follow. Of course, suffering a mid-season groin tear never helps ones cause, but Hamhuis didn’t look the fleetest of foot before suffering that injury either. 

If anything is working in Hamhuis’ favour, it’s Desjardins reluctance to play him on the power play for anywhere near the level of significant ice-time he was iced by the previous regime. Hamhuis saw about 40-minutes less ice-time with the man advantage last season. Considering that Hamhuis is most valuable at even strength and shorthanded, it makes sense that they work to extract as much in those play states as possible. All the moreso if it comes at the expense of his power play ice time, given that Hamhuis isn’t the most offensively inclined of defenders. 

Solid, if unspectacular numbers for Hamhuis. It’s encouraging that his raw production increased from last season, given the time missed and the injury that caused it. Without a single goal at even strength, one has to imagine he might be due for an extra bounce or two that way next season as well, so there is that. 

Just escaping the red by the hair of his chinny-chin-chin, Hamhuis didn’t have an overwhelmingly positive season from the perspective of unadjusted Corsi data. Still, it was his sixth straight season in the black by both raw and relative measures. There’s something to be said for consistency and Hamhuis has steadily provided the Canucks that in his tenure with the team. 

The underlying goal data doesn’t shine the most flattering light on Hamhuis’ season. This campaign represented a sizable step back, given the immense success Hamhuis had by this register last season. He is in the red, both by raw and relative numbers, for the first time since the 2008-09 season. It took some serious reversion at both ends of the ice to make it happen, as Hamhuis performed worst both by generating and suppressing offense last season.

Given that Hamhuis’ play has always been described as uneventful, it’s not overly surprising that the Canucks did so much better with him on the ice at controlling scoring chances, than without. Hamhuis surrendered half a scoring chance less, per 60-minutes this season, which certainly helped drive his results in this regard.

By ten-bell chances, Hamhuis doesn’t make it into the black. The Canucks did, however, fare better by this metric with Hamhuis on the ice, than off. There’s something to be said for that.

Another negative showing for Hamhuis. Most disconcerting, is that the decrease in performance came at both ends to facilitate this result. It was his first negative showing in both raw and relative measures since the 2008-09 season – unsurprisingly, same thing as with his goal-based results.

There is no shortage of uncertainty shrouding next season for Hamhuis. Entering the final year of his contract, it seems entirely possible that this could be Hamhuis’ final season with the Canucks. The two-sides have yet to begin discussions on an extension, and given the Canucks status as a rebuilding franchise, it might not be in Vancouver’s best interest to keep Hamhuis past his 32nd birthday anyways. This makes Hamhuis a likely trade candidate as this club gears up for next year’s trade deadline.

In the lead-up to that period, though, I would expect Hamhuis to return to his second-pairing position, opposite Weber. The two displayed great chemistry down the stretch last season and offer a great set of offsetting skills to complement each other nicely. The understated duo posted a Corsi For of 52.2% last season, so they clearly have the foundation with which to build upon as a pairing. 

With the departure of Bieksa, I expect a change in Hamhuis’ special teams deployment. Bieksa logged massive minutes shorthanded last season and the Canucks will need to replace that somehow. Matt Bartkowski seems a likely candidate to help, should the Canucks choose a committee appraoch. I still expect Hamhuis to pick up most of the slack, though.

If it is Hamhuis’ last hurrah with this franchise, it should end similarly as it started. In a tremendously important, if understated and under-appreciated role defensively. You’ll hardly notice him most nights and I’ll be damned if that’s not a good thing, given his style of play.