HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

What would our lineup look like if we still had Grabner and Hodgson ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-27-2013, 06:05 PM
  #26
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,255
vCash: 500
One of my good friends now lives in Buffalo and is a huge Sabres fan. He was so happy when they got Hodgson and I told him at the time about the drama that was coming out here. A couple weeks ago I was watching a Buffalo game on the tube and they showed a stat showing Hodgsons defensive liabilities... he apparently lead the league in goals scored against while he was on the ice, and something like 50% of goals scored were when he was playing.

My friend who loved the trade when it happened, now HATES it and wishes they could trade for Kassian. He watches every Sabres game and told me before I saw the above stat that he had no idea how bad Hodgson was in playing D.

I'll keep Kassian thank you very much..., he's still one year behind Hodgson in development, and I think he'll turn into the type of sandpaper/scoring forward you need in playoffs.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 06:12 PM
  #27
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,102
vCash: 500
(This is not a thread to start trade arguments.)

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 09:04 PM
  #28
serge2k
Registered User
 
serge2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
(This is not a thread to start trade arguments.)
Don't see what else it could really be.

serge2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 09:14 PM
  #29
Christina Woloski
Registered Something
 
Christina Woloski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Narnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRNuck View Post
Sedin-Hodgson-Burrows
Raymond-Kesler-Grabner
Booth-Friesen-Sturm
Desbiens-Lapierre-Weise

Campoli-Bieksa
Jack Johnson-Tanev
Barker-Alberts

That's right. Your selfish game of "what if" set off a horrific butterfly effect that forever changed the Canucks roster for the worse!


Well done, sir.

Christina Woloski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 09:28 PM
  #30
Lonny Bohonos
Kassian = P.A.G.A.N
 
Lonny Bohonos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United Nations
Posts: 7,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
This is not a thread to start trade arguments.

But Im curious what our starting lineup would look like if we had them and not the forwards that are in their spots.

Hodgson would probably have the second line center spot locked because Kesler is injured too much.

And I could see Grabner being on the second or third line.
It would look pretty awesome if we still had Grabner and Hodgson. Especially with Jimmy Sandlak patrolling their wing.

Lonny Bohonos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2013, 11:48 PM
  #31
BrockH
HFBoards Sponsor
 
BrockH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
If Kes could play on the wing then I don't think it was worth keeping him in the center spot just to prove a point to Mr. Hodgson.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrockH View Post
Because it wouldn't have been the best lineup we could ice. You don't build a team around a dad's demands.
You do realize that putting out "the best lineup we could ice" is not putting Kesler at center "just to prove a point." It's how you win games...you put the best team you can in the game. Not sure how you got the "to prove a point" from my post?

BrockH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2013, 11:50 PM
  #32
LiquidSnake
Agent of Chaos...
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,766
vCash: 883
Our team would look softer slower and easy to play against.

LiquidSnake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:04 AM
  #33
Wizeman*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 500
I also watch the Sabres games and Cody needs to play with quality players. It maximizes his on ice vision and quick release.

He would be useless in any other role. He does not have the speed or strength nor defensive awareness. He tends to play a 130ft ice as opposed to the whole 200ft. He stays high to make up for his lack of foot speed.

He doesnt fight or make bone crunching hits, but he does kill penalties because he anticipates so well and he virtually stands still in a box.

There was no room for Hodgson to thrive here as is being proven in Buffalo. He would have had to center the Sedin line to be effective.

One of the first things AV tried was putting Cody on with Kesler and Burrows and it lasted about 2 shifts. Burr and Kes were 4 strides up the ice faster than Hodgson.

I think the trade was a win win for both teams.

I still think we should have held onto Grabner but the other poster made a good point about AV doghousing the guy . He also could never thrive under a coach like AV.

Wizeman* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:13 AM
  #34
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
I'm keeping Ehrhoff as well, because I just realized that Ballard wouldn't be there.

Sedin - Sedin - Kesler (I can't picture this line getting shut down in the playoffs)
Burrows - Hodgson - Hansen (They looked dangerous playing with Pahlsson, Burrows is a better fit with him than Kesler, and Hansen has chemistry with both)
Raymond - Schroeder - Grabner (I don't care how small this line would be, it'd be dynamite, IMO-- the playing styles complement each other perfectly)
Higgins - Lapierre - Booth (Booth wouldn't be nearly as frustrating playing here)

Edler - Ehrhoff
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Garrison - Tanev

Schneider
Luongo

It completely changes our identity, we wouldn't be able to match up physically or play as many different styles, but I still think it's a big improvement on what we have, personally-- We'd come out in waves offensively with that lineup.


Last edited by Shareefruck: 03-01-2013 at 12:45 AM.
Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:15 AM
  #35
aandbreatheme
Registered User
 
aandbreatheme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shareefruck View Post
I tried, but it's tough. Looks more like a team that will be great in a couple of years rather than right now.

Sedin - Sedin - Power Forward from Luongo trade
Burrows - Hodgson - Kesler
Raymond - Schroeder - Grabner
Kassian - Lapierre - Hansen

Edler - Tanev
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Garrison - Ballard

Schneider
XX
We wouldn't have Kassian if we kept Hodgson.

aandbreatheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:19 AM
  #36
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by andbreatheme View Post
We wouldn't have Kassian if we kept Hodgson.
Yeah, I forgot.

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:32 AM
  #37
CanucksSayEh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,470
vCash: 500
Booth-Hodgson-Kesler sounds pretty dang good.

CanucksSayEh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:39 AM
  #38
Steve Bennett*
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yes
Posts: 766
vCash: 500
I scanned nhl.com stats of Grabbster and it looks like he had that one good year in 2010-11 (52 pts in 76 games) and since then is less than half a ppg (42 pts in 99 games) - worse then his short stint with the Canucks (11 pts in 20 games)...


Steve Bennett* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:47 AM
  #39
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,760
vCash: 500
People forget Grabner was waiver material at the time he was traded; if he wasn't packaged with the pick and Bernier he'd probably have gotten sent down the wire. It took a franchise desperate for cheap warm bodies to fill their roster for him to excel; not even the Panthers liked him enough. So IMHO the "what if's" with him is pretty useless.

And will we ever stop talking about Hodgson?

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:47 AM
  #40
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksSayEh View Post
Booth-Hodgson-Kesler sounds pretty dang good.
That line would get lit up

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:51 AM
  #41
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyC View Post
People forget Grabner was waiver material at the time he was traded; if he wasn't packaged with the pick and Bernier he'd probably have gotten sent down the wire. It took a franchise desperate for cheap warm bodies to fill their roster for him to excel; not even the Panthers liked him enough. So IMHO the "what if's" with him is pretty useless.

And will we ever stop talking about Hodgson?
I'll stop talking about Hodgson when homer fans stop dismissing him.

I disagree about Grabner. He looked great when he was here, IMO-- yes he had a poor start, but I don't think we would have put him on waivers. Raymond - Kesler - Grabner added a mouth-wateringly dangerous identity to this team, IMO, and I actually think he would have done better playing on our team than on the Islanders, personally. I liked his defensive game in the playoffs against Chicago.

I can see how it wouldn't have been realistic/practical to keep all of Hodgson, Grabner, and Schroeder in the lineup, though.

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:51 AM
  #42
Apple Juice
Registered User
 
Apple Juice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 155
vCash: 500
Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Hodgson-Kesler-Grabner
Booth-Lapierre-Hansen
Raymond-Higgins-Weise

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Ballard-Tanev


That'd make the most sense... 4th line doesn't necessarily need to take face-offs anyways... That'd be tremendous depth offensively

Apple Juice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:55 AM
  #43
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple Juice View Post
Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Hodgson-Kesler-Grabner
Booth-Lapierre-Hansen
Raymond-Higgins-Weise

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Ballard-Tanev


That'd make the most sense... 4th line doesn't necessarily need to take face-offs anyways... That'd be tremendous depth offensively
I don't know, those forward lines kind of look like a bit of a mess to me outside of the first one.

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 01:04 AM
  #44
Apple Juice
Registered User
 
Apple Juice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shareefruck View Post
I don't know, those forward lines kind of look like a bit of a mess to me outside of the first one.
well in a nutshell that's what it'd look like... If we were to roll into the season like that, I'm sure AV would be mixing the lines up game by game and then he'll slowly move Hodgson down to the 3rd line and move up Booth or Hansen

Apple Juice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 01:11 AM
  #45
crazy Kassian
The North Remembers
 
crazy Kassian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,574
vCash: 500
Grabner, I would love back

Hodgson... no need to disrupt the locker room

crazy Kassian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 01:11 AM
  #46
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 796
Grabner in Vancouver = AV's doghouse. Watched a few of his Islander games, not impressed with his work ethic. not playing to his potential.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 01:13 AM
  #47
Treefingers
\_(ツ)_/
 
Treefingers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple Juice View Post
Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Hodgson-Kesler-Grabner
Booth-Lapierre-Hansen
Raymond-Higgins-Weise

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Edler-Garrison
Ballard-Tanev


That'd make the most sense... 4th line doesn't necessarily need to take face-offs anyways... That'd be tremendous depth offensively
Something tells me we wouldn't have Ballard with Grabner being here.

Treefingers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 01:15 AM
  #48
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shareefruck View Post
I'll stop talking about Hodgson when homer fans stop dismissing him.

I disagree about Grabner. He looked great when he was here, IMO-- yes he had a poor start, but I don't think we would have put him on waivers. Raymond - Kesler - Grabner added a mouth-wateringly dangerous identity to this team, IMO, and I actually think he would have done better playing on our team than on the Islanders, personally. I liked his defensive game in the playoffs against Chicago.

I can see how it wouldn't have been realistic/practical to keep all of Hodgson, Grabner, and Schroeder in the lineup, though.
I also liked Grabner very much and thought he was in for a bright future (as he has proven, kinda) but he would've definitively gotten lost in the numbers game. No way he would've gotten Top 6 time over Samuelsson out of camp and AV wouldn't play him in a bottom 6 role (most likely 4th line because of Hansen).

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 01:47 AM
  #49
CanucksSayEh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shareefruck View Post
That line would get lit up
That line would beast it through the playoffs.

CanucksSayEh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 03:23 AM
  #50
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksSayEh View Post
That line would beast it through the playoffs.
Why would you put the only two players on the team who are complete defensive liabilities on the same line?

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:42 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.