It's odd that I didn't see this much criticism of Hodgson last year....
I don't find it odd - it's perfectly logical.
A number of people (including myself) we willing to ignore a number of flaws with his current game as a Canuck because he often was given two slugs as linemates. Difficult to show what you got if you asked to carry a line with two offensively challenged players.
Now he doesn't have that excuse anymore.
And again, this doesn't mean he can't get better; only that he's still not "ready from prime-time".
It's odd that I didn't see this much criticism of Hodgson last year....
To be fair, he was in a much better situation here than he is in Buffalo, at least in terms of expectations. Here he wasn't expected to be a go to guy, he was merely a talented young prospect who was given sheltered minutes and was being developed slowly into a future top 6 player. Any offense he provided was a bonus really.
In Buffalo, he was made the number 1 center and the expectations for that position and stature are wildly different. He got what he wanted obviously, and I would say Cody should welcome the heat of the spotlight that comes with that position.
I still think he's going to be a good a player in the league, never elite but a poor man's #1 - great #2. His skating is still an issue and with his body type, it may always be what keeps him from really becoming elite.
Hated seeing him go but seeing Schroeder and Kassian's play has softened the blow a bit. Hopefully they both keep it up.
A number of people (including myself) we willing to ignore a number of flaws with his current game as a Canuck because he often was given two slugs as linemates. Difficult to show what you got if you asked to carry a line with two offensively challenged players.
Now he doesn't have that excuse anymore.
And again, this doesn't mean he can't get better; only that he's still not "ready from prime-time".
Was he with slugs here? i remember him and Hansen playing a lot together. He was our third line center so he was not playing with Manny, Volpatti, Weise or Lapierre. Not sure who else can be considered offensively chanllenged as the rest have proven more as pro's then Hodgson has. He did produce with these players at an acceptable pace for a rookie. The year before he was with slugs and did not produce at all.
Was he with slugs here? i remember him and Hansen playing a lot together. He was our third line center so he was not playing with Manny, Volpatti, Weise or Lapierre. Not sure who else can be considered offensively chanllenged as the rest have proven more as pro's then Hodgson has. He did produce with these players at an acceptable pace for a rookie. The year before he was with slugs and did not produce at all.
Well perhaps that word I used was too unkind but even in Hansen's case - he is hardly even a proven 20 goal scorer.
Well perhaps that word I used was too unkind but even in Hansen's case - he is hardly even a proven 20 goal scorer.
True but neither is Hodgson. Last year Hodgson got 17 vs 16 for Hansen. I think Hansen and Higgins would be two of the easiest wingers to play with in hockey. Both hustle pay great defense and can pass the puck. They ofcourse are not Vanek but they are closer to the level Hodgson has show to date. In fact Hansen and Higgins are better players at this point then Hodgson is. So perhaps they can complain with having to play with slug in the middle
It's odd that I didn't see this much criticism of Hodgson last year....
Yeah, it's a different lens that's used to view him with now, after knowing what we know. There was still criticism, but as mentioned above people weren't going to be too critical given how we all want our prospects to succeed for the Canucks.
It's odd that I didn't see this much criticism of Hodgson last year....
Rose coloured glasses. Everytime he was in the defensive zone I'd cringe. I remember when he got rocked by Foligno and thinking that served him right. What was he trying to accomplish by dipsy doodling on the defensive zone half wall? and all he had to do was chip it out.
Rose coloured glasses. Everytime he was in the defensive zone I'd cringe. I remember when he got rocked by Foligno and thinking that served him right. What was he trying to accomplish by dipsy doodling on the defensive zone half wall? and all he had to do was chip it out.
Jebus can someone start a
CRYING FOR CODY
thread and move all the Hodgson posts their. Every ****ing thread is getting overwhelmed.
thread and move all the Hodgson posts their. Every ****ing thread is getting overwhelmed.
How about one all encompassing, "Who's Cody?, Fire AV, Fire Bowness, Luongo trade, Ebbett should in Chicago, Schroeder should get more icetime, our shootout sucks and why wasn't so-in-so selected, etc.,"
Never liked Ryan Whitney. Might be thinking of someone else, but he seems like an idiot on Twitter too. Maybe he should back up his chirping? Perhaps he'll think twice before talking ****.
St. Louis by a decent margin. Pittsburgh doesn't have the depth, Philly when healthy is pretty good though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timw33
St. Louis, not a single player out of place in their lineup.
The Pens' depth isn't bad I think - their 3rd line of Cooke-Sutter-Kennedy is pretty decent IMO. Dunno about their 4th line though.
As for Philly, with Couturier as their 3C? Man... And we all know about Boston's depth, having seen it first hand.
For me it's between the Bruins and the Flyers in the east.
It's funny - I look at how the Kings and the Blues stack up against each other and they're pretty close I think. Either way though, both their forward groups are huge. So much freaking size (LA with a slight edge I think). It'll be a grind to get past those 2 teams in the playoffs. Looking at their bottom 6:
3rd lines: King-Stoll-Lewis vs. McDonald-Steen-Tarasenko
4th lines: Gagne-Fraser-Nolan vs. D'Agostini-Sobotka-Langenbrunner
Methinks it'll be a pretty daunting task to overcome that sort of depth. I like the skill we can put out in our bottom 6 though, with a guy like Raymond or Higgins potentially on the 4th line.
With the league seemingly calling more penalties though, who knows if size and obstruction will still win out against speed and skill this year though?
I would agree that Hodgson is being thrown to the wolves or misused to a certain degree. It's pretty much a necessity for the Sabres though as Ruff has a few forwards that he pretty much views as unplayable (Ellis, Scott, and from time to time Gerbe and Kaleta). It puts a lot of time onto the shoulders of the other 8 or 9 forwards in the lineup....including Hodgson.
But he is certainly being exposed on the defensive end of things so far this season. At least to my eyes. The concern for Hodgson is that if Grigorenko gets better in a hurry and can learn the defensive game, the increased size and mobility is a threat to Hodgson's position in the lineup (and by extension Ennis). You can fall on the depth chart in a hurry if your defensive game is causing issues for the team. It doesn't help that he's getting schooled in the faceoff department as well.
The Penguins got Boychuk, pretty jeally. I wonder if we'll find out who all put in claims?
I believe at this point of the season, priority is still based on last year's standings, so no one else other than the Canucks, Rangers, or Blues could have.
I would agree that Hodgson is being thrown to the wolves or misused to a certain degree. It's pretty much a necessity for the Sabres though as Ruff has a few forwards that he pretty much views as unplayable (Ellis, Scott, and from time to time Gerbe and Kaleta). It puts a lot of time onto the shoulders of the other 8 or 9 forwards in the lineup....including Hodgson.
But he is certainly being exposed on the defensive end of things so far this season. At least to my eyes. The concern for Hodgson is that if Grigorenko gets better in a hurry and can learn the defensive game, the increased size and mobility is a threat to Hodgson's position in the lineup (and by extension Ennis). You can fall on the depth chart in a hurry if your defensive game is causing issues for the team. It doesn't help that he's getting schooled in the faceoff department as well.
The lack of acceleration and defensive struggles are issues. Like you said, if Grigorenko gets better in the defensive zone, Hodgson would have to get bumped down. And at that point, it's the Roy situation all over again. They traded Roy for Ott to get that sand paper in their bottom 6, I'm not sure how Hodgson ending up there helps things. Would he not continue to get misused there too?
A more likely scenario is that Hodgson pushes Ennis to the wing on the 2nd line LW. I think they go that way first.
