Why not wait till Grigorenko and/or Girgensons show anything in the NHL before we start trading Centers? As far as we know both won't be in the NHL for 1 or 2 years, it's not like we can put both in the line up right away.
I remember how a lot of people put Catenacci in their line-ups after he stated he wants to make the team right away.
Center depth is key to winning the Stanley Cup. Finally we have some kind of depth and we're already on the OMG TRADE TRADE TRADE
Did you read the article?? He played that night on the 4th and then the next day he was practicing with the fourth again.
He played a few shifts late in the 3rd of one game on the 4th line. Where he practices is irrelevant since he played 16:32 the next night. Thats not 4th line minutes. So he played some 4th line mintues late in one game. Whats your point?
Quote:
The center could be wearing down. Acquired from Vancouver in the final stage of a six-game road trip, Hodgson is on a run of 15 games in 26 days. He has traveled from one coast to the other five times during the span.
"He's gone through a real tough stretch," Ruff said. "I played him some real heavy minutes in Ottawa. I saw a little bit of fatigue there, and I don't even know if his fatigue is on the physical side for sure; I think there's some mental fatigue there of what he's gone through and the emotions of being traded and the circumstances around it.
"I just said, 'Don't get frustrated.' I said, 'You went from the most minutes maybe in Ottawa to lesser minutes last game. Part of that was how well [Tyler] Ennis, [Marcus] Foligno and [Drew] Stafford have played.' And I said, 'Just let it happen. Don't look for points or cheat for points. Just play your game.' "
Ruff wanted to give him a break from the grind he had. Ruff wanted him to relax. Again, if you read the article in full and didn't cherry pick what you wanted you would have seen and understood that. Context is a wonderful thing.
Do you even have a point any more or are you just trying to find little snippets that are negative about Hodgson?
Agree. Ennis is a far more dynamic player. Better skills with the puck on his stick, much better skating... The only thing Hodgson currently has on him is size, which we have coming in Grigs and Girgs.
Agree. Ennis is a far more dynamic player. Better skills with the puck on his stick, much better skating... The only thing Hodgson currently has on him is size, which we have coming in Grigs and Girgs.
I think Cody has better vision then Ennis as well. Cody will put up more assists and Ennis will put up more goals. Just happy to have both of these guys in our system. If Cody can work on his skating he could potentially be a number one center.
He played a few shifts late in the 3rd of one game on the 4th line. Where he practices is irrelevant since he played 16:32 the next night. Thats not 4th line minutes. So he played some 4th line mintues late in one game. Whats your point?
Ruff wanted to give him a break from the grind he had. Ruff wanted him to relax. Again, if you read the article in full and didn't cherry pick what you wanted you would have seen and understood that.
Do you even have a point any more or are you just trying to find little snippets that are negative about Hodgson?
The point is there are people here saying he was never on the 4th line, however there are facts to say he was. There are people calling him this good two way center when there are facts to show otherwise. Hodgson is far from this all star center people are making him out to be on here.
Why not wait till Grigorenko and/or Girgensons show anything in the NHL before we start trading Centers? As far as we know both won't be in the NHL for 1 or 2 years, it's not like we can put both in the line up right away.
I remember how a lot of people put Catenacci in their line-ups after he stated he wants to make the team right away.
Center depth is key to winning the Stanley Cup. Finally we have some kind of depth and we're already on the OMG TRADE TRADE TRADE
Truth. And even then... I have no issue with Ennis going to wing to create if all these centers are capable NHLers in a few years' time. The guy is an explosive scoring threat, use him. If it's on the wing, so be it.
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Truth. And even then... I have no issue with Ennis going to wing to create if all these centers are capable NHLers in a few years' time. The guy is an explosive scoring threat, use him. If it's on the wing, so be it.
I think Cody has better vision then Ennis as well. Cody will put up more assists and Ennis will put up more goals. Just happy to have both of these guys in our system. If Cody can work on his skating he could potentially be a number one center.
Can you name on instance where Hodgson showed great vision because I just can't seem to recall any. I remember a lot of times he was the one getting feed great passes to spring him open but I don't really remember anytime where I was impressed with him finding a Sabre. On the other hand, I don't think I seen as many odd man rushes in a 15 game stretch by any other line than the FES line in a very long time. Ennis was constantly feeding the open man.
The point is there are people here saying he was never on the 4th line, however there are facts to say he was. There are people calling him this good two way center when there are facts to show otherwise. Hodgson is far from this all star center people are making him out to be on here.
You don't seem to be grasping the fact that posters are debating the upside POTENTIAL of Ennis and Hodgson not what they are now. Neither of them have even established themselves as top 6 centers yet, let alone what posters hope they can be.
Btw the video and its break down by a Nuck blogger proves two things. 1) your very desperate to rip Hodgson. 2) that he was bad defensively on that one play. Beyond that it is meaningless and proves nothing.
I thought he showed more of being a center than Ennis to me. The defining difference to me is their skating, Ennis' skating is elite and Hodgson's is below average. If Hodgson could skate like Ennis he would be better IMO. Ennis put up more points, I attribute that to chemistry and quality linemates. Hodgson was playing with injured Vanek and Tropp.
I agree with you, so why trade either of them?
Ennis quality of linemates was any better? Stafford was on pace for ~10-12 goals before being centered by Ennis, and he made Foligno look like an all-star. Ennis' linemates looked better than Hodgson's because Ennis made their jobs easy.
But yeah, at this point, I wouldn't be too excited about moving either of them. I'll revel when the day comes where we actually have too much NHL center depth. Right now, we have depth in the system, but who really knows if and when Grigo and Girgs will be making an impact in the NHL?
Ennis and Miller are the two main reasons this team almost made a miracle run into the playoffs last year. Clearly, he was instrumental to this team winning, and were talking about him not being a fit going forward. I have a hard time wrapping my brain around this one.
I don't think there is only one model to building a winning team, but a golden rule for me would be to keep the best players. Until Hodgson proves that he can be on par with Ennis, I take Ennis every day of the week. I get the fit argument, I just can't jump on board. Just my two cents.
It's not just cutting Ennis or trading him for futures though, it's a hypothetical trade for Bobby Ryan... Ennis is nice, but Ryan might fit the big picture better 2-3 years down the road.
You don't seem to be grasping the fact that posters are debating the upside POTENTIAL of Ennis and Hodgson not what they are now. Neither of them have even established themselves as top 6 centers yet, let alone what posters hope they can be.
Btw the video and its break down by a Nuck blogger proves two things. 1) your very desperate to rip Hodgson. 2) that he was bad defensively on that one play. Beyond that it is meaningless and proves nothing.
Did you not read the article?? Read some of the stats especially where he was on the ice for 41% of the goals that were scored on the Sabres during his time here. That is atrocious and would expect a lot better from a center that is supposed to be good defensively. Also there is much more than one play. He just used one as an example.
Ennis quality of linemates was any better? Stafford was on pace for ~10-12 goals before being centered by Ennis, and he made Foligno look like an all-star. Ennis' linemates looked better than Hodgson's because Ennis made their jobs easy.
But yeah, at this point, I wouldn't be too excited about moving either of them. I'll revel when the day comes where we actually have too much NHL center depth. Right now, we have depth in the system, but who really knows if and when Grigo and Girgs will be making an impact in the NHL?
I don't think anyone WANTS to move either of them. I sure don't. Its a hypothetical about which of them you would trade to get Ryan.
Can you name on instance where Hodgson showed great vision because I just can't seem to recall any. I remember a lot of times he was the one getting feed great passes to spring him open but I don't really remember anytime where I was impressed with him finding a Sabre. On the other hand, I don't think I seen as many odd man rushes in a 15 game stretch by any other line than the FES line in a very long time. Ennis was constantly feeding the open man.
The first 10 games he played with us he set up 10-20 scoring chances. No one on our team could finish...Odd man rushes doesn't equate to great vision. Watch him play...You'll see his vision easily within 1 or 2 games. Hockey sense/Vision cannot be taught. Just go over to the Canucks forums, they will completely agree with my statement.
It's not just cutting Ennis or trading him for futures though, it's a hypothetical trade for Bobby Ryan... Ennis is nice, but Ryan might fit the big picture better 2-3 years down the road.
Ennis had a higher ppg this year than Ryan, even with his awful start. IMO, Ennis is going to be the much better player.
I don't think anyone WANTS to move either of them. I sure don't. Its a hypothetical about which of them you would trade to get Ryan.
Exactly.
Neither of them should be actively shopped.
Neither of them should be traded UNLESS it's part of a deal to bring a young, top line forward. No futures or depth deals. No picks/prospects. They have to be bonafide top line talents.
But IF a deal came and we could acquire a top line talent but we'd need to give up Ennis or Hodgson, I'd certainly listen.
The first 10 games he played with us he set up 10-20 scoring chances. No one on our team could finish...Odd man rushes doesn't equate to great vision. Watch him play...You'll see his vision easily within 1 or 2 games. Hockey sense/Vision cannot be taught. Just go over to the Canucks forums, they will completely agree with my statement.
Honestly, I would argue that he looked as good as he did in the start because he was playing with Ennis.
Did you not read the article?? Read some of the stats especially where he was on the ice for 41% of the goals that were scored on the Sabres during his time here. That is atrocious and would expect a lot better from a center that is supposed to be good defensively. Also there is much more than one play. He just used one as an example.
Yep like the fact that the video used is Hodgson after he was already on the ice for 1minute. As in he was tired. But they still used it anyway and put the disclaimer at the end.
Or the fact that in that video he was the first forward back and the only one in the video for a bit. He was back WELL before his linemates. It was a 4 on 2 that Hodgson madem a 4 on 3. They were still out numbered and in a tough spot. Tropp and Vanek were no where to be found.
Or the fact that Leo and McNabb had back all the way up on top of Miller and never challenged the puck carrier.
Ennis had a higher ppg this year than Ryan, even with his awful start. IMO, Ennis is going to be the much better player.
Maybe, but the question is: are the Sabres a better team with Ennis and what he brings or Ryan and his different skill set?
Ryan's physical play might be a better fit for the Sabres than Ennis's offense, especially if Grigorenko can step into Ennis's spot. In which case, the Sabres as a team might be better with Ryan instead of Ennis.
Basically, which lineup is better (lines can be juggled)?
xxxx would be either Adam, FA acquisition, or trade acquisition.
Certainly, if Grigorenko is not ready to make the team, trading a center may not be wise. But if he is...which of those lineups is better? I'd say the one with Bobby Ryan--it's more balanced IMO.
So much of what you can do with next year's lineup is IMO dependent on what you do with Grigorenko.
Yep like the fact that the video used is Hodgson after he was already on the ice for 1minute. As in he was tired. But they still used it anyway and put the disclaimer at the end.
Or the fact that in that video he was the first forward abck and the only one in the video for a bit. he was back WELL before his linemates. It was a 4 on 2 and Tropp and Vanek were no where to be found.
Or the fact that Leo and McNabb had back all the way up on top of Miller and never challenged the puck carrier.
But its Cody's fault the goal went in
That's gotta be Play4Miracles on another account, there's no way he couldn't resist an attempt at bashing Hodgson.
The first 10 games he played with us he set up 10-20 scoring chances. No one on our team could finish...Odd man rushes doesn't equate to great vision. Watch him play...You'll see his vision easily within 1 or 2 games. Hockey sense/Vision cannot be taught. Just go over to the Canucks forums, they will completely agree with my statement.
It is really easy to use a generic set of parameters but where are some pinned down examples because I really can't think of any. The best one I can think of was the Pominville goal in the Tampa game. There are reasons why they are an odd man rushes and I would say having the vision to finish those rushes is huge. There weren't many times where Ennis and Stafford had an odd man rush where I was mad with the result. Can't say the same thing with Roy and Vanek's odd man rushes.
It is really easy to use a generic set of parameters but where are some pinned down examples because I really can't think of any. The best one I can think of was the Pominville goal in the Tampa game. There are reasons why they are an odd man rushes and I would say having the vision to finish those rushes is huge. There weren't many times where Ennis and Stafford had an odd man rush where I was mad with the result. Can't say the same thing with Roy and Vanek's odd man rushes.
Did you not read the article?? Read some of the stats especially where he was on the ice for 41% of the goals that were scored on the Sabres during his time here. That is atrocious and would expect a lot better from a center that is supposed to be good defensively. Also there is much more than one play. He just used one as an example.
Is it possible... Just possible .... That you expected more from a rookie center on a new team, Therefore you're disappointed in Hodgson? If you put it in perspective, objective perspective, the book on Hodgson has only begun.
