HFBoards

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

Hodgson Trade Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-07-2013, 02:26 AM
  #76
Stories Tales Lies
and Exaggerations
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kesler is Bestler View Post
why reopen old wounds?
my guess is people are looking for ways to blame someone for the losing slump, AV thread got repetitive, so we make a MG thread a Hodgson thread and a Booth thread...

Stories Tales Lies is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 02:27 AM
  #77
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
you can't really compare them right now because hodgson is rocking an on ice sv% of a minor league call up in the 1980s. once ryan miller gets over his inability to look away from hodgson's strong jaw line when he's on the ice and make a ****ing save, his stats will look at lot better

I know. Poster Proto remarked as such about his on ice SV% being skewed by bad luck as well as suspect defense. However, if people are making the argument that he is behaving like a 1st liner based on PPG pace, after 20 games of data, I think it equally as deserving to delve into what the GA differential actually is, over that same sample. What will it show us?

I'm wondering what the actually net impact is of each player while on the ice.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 02:34 AM
  #78
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4,581
vCash: 695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I know. Poster Proto remarked as such about his on ice SV% being skewed by bad luck as well as suspect defense. However, if people are making the argument that he is behaving like a 1st liner based on PPG pace, after 20 games of data, I think it equally as deserving to delve into what the GA differential actually is, over that same sample. What will it show us?

I'm wondering what the actually net impact is of each player while on the ice.
a lot of that is going to come down to breaking down individual plays and assessing judgement right now. we really don't know much about the buffalo sabres except

A: they have one good line
B: they have one good, familiar defenceman (pro-click, look how ****ing lost the sabres are without him)
C: ryan miller is not playing to what people expect out of him
D: hodgson isn't carrying the play. he relies a ****ton on ehrhoff and his linemates

Verviticus is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 02:51 AM
  #79
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
a lot of that is going to come down to breaking down individual plays and assessing judgement right now. we really don't know much about the buffalo sabres except

A: they have one good line
B: they have one good, familiar defenceman (pro-click, look how ****ing lost the sabres are without him)
C: ryan miller is not playing to what people expect out of him
D: hodgson isn't carrying the play. he relies a ****ton on ehrhoff and his linemates

Stats.hockeyanalysis.com is a great site. Any others you are using?

I agree with your premise, it would be pretty difficult to break down. Which is why I asked if someone had a better way. An easier way. On the points though, A, C and D were known to me prior this. B was not, interesting...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 03:38 AM
  #80
Socratic Method Man
Gillis' Last Remnant
 
Socratic Method Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,614
vCash: 622
Some people really need to take a chill pill. People get so worked up after a freaking game or two. I think Bleach already pointed out, you've got to look at the big picture, see the forest and not the trees. Players get hot, like Vanek, it doesn't mean it will last. Cody got hot. If he went through a drought instead of a hotstreak, everyone would be talking about how awful he is and what a bad trade Buffalo made.


Something else I was thinking about.

Hodgson is playing with two elite players, with Vanek being one of the hottest players in the entire league this year. That doesn't mean Cody isn't good. However, it ALSO doesn't mean he is a #1 C.

Some of you may not realise this, but Hodgson WAS taken off the Vanek line, and Tyler Ennis was put on it. Hodgson was scoreless and Ennis scored at the pace Hodgson is currently scoring at (I think a bit better actually, but it was only for a game or two). So Hodgson was scoreless off Vanek's line - but what about Ennis? He has 17 points this year, nearly as many as Hodgson, and WHILE PLAYING AWAY FROM VANEK'S LINE. What that tells me is that Ennis is at least as good as Hodgson offensively. And this is completely ignoring that Hodgson is one of the worst defensive players in the NHL this season.

It wouldn't surprise me if part of the reason Cody is playing on the top line line is because Cody's "party" - his agent, his dad, and himself - are demanding the icetime. After all, that is exactly what happened when Cody was in Vancouver.


And THAT is the main reason Cody is no longer in Vancouver.

What that means is that Gillis and AV have the flexibility to throw Kassian on any line, and he won't complain - he'll just work hard and earn his time.


Which leads me to the points difference. People are upset because Cody is puting up some points while Kassian is not. But Cody is playing with Vanek and Pominville and Kassian is on the 4th line. Some will say: "Yeah but Kassian isn't good enough to play on a first line, he wouldn't put up the points even if he WAS on the first line". But Kassian WAS on the first line already this season - and he put up tons of points. He was our leading goal scorer, scoring some beauties.


Remember, Cody is primarily concerned with cashing in for himself. That is why he needs to secure top icetime for himself regardless of what is best for the team. He got his prime opportunity beside Vanek and he is going to want to cash in on his next contract. This is another reason Cody didn't fit so well in Vancouver - we can't afford the high cap hit he wants to take up. And he wasn't willing to earn his spot by starting out on the third line. Kassian is. And that is why Kassian isn't puting up more points. But Kassian isn't a primadonna like Cody - Kassian is a team player.

Socratic Method Man is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 03:43 AM
  #81
biturbo19
Registered User
 
biturbo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,469
vCash: 500
I know some are sick of this comparison, and the trade being constantly re-hashed. But there's a reason many Canucks fans are hung up on this.

Hodgson was the first prospect to come along in a long time, make the team and provide a genuine dynamic spark. There's a reason so many Canucks fans fell in love with the guy. He offered something we haven't seen in a very long time. Something exciting and new. And a player with legitimate 1st line upside. We haven't seen 1st line offensive upside in that vein since...well the Sedins really. He absolutely has his warts as a player, and there are the daddy issues, etc. But at the end of the day...we had an extremely skilled player who excited the fanbase, gave them hope for the future beyond the Twins, and aside from Gillis' smear campaign after the trade...was looked at as a good Canadian kid, potential future captain material, and someone who produced in spite of a complete lack of trust from AV. He had become something of an 'underdog' in many respects.

And ultimately, Cody Hodgson became a huge fan favourite in a huge hurry. He was adored by many, and largely as a consequence of all this...this trade is forever going to be scrutinized until long after these two players have retired. This is the way trades like this go...if a deal is as shocking as this one was on deadline day...it's because it has huge impact for a franchise. Just like the Neely deal is still constantly brought up to this day.

Basically, the people who act like this trade was nbd and everyone should just get over it and move on...are out to lunch. It was a huge deal. A franchise shaping deal. The sort of move that defines a GMs tenure with an organization. Easily the most volatile move Gillis has ever made...and it's by that sort of measure that he will be judged in the future.

biturbo19 is online now  
Old
03-07-2013, 03:52 AM
  #82
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,329
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Stats.hockeyanalysis.com is a great site. Any others you are using?
That one and NHL.com is where I got the data for the above post. There are others around that are great but those are the ones I used.

me2 is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 04:12 AM
  #83
The Kassian Train
228 LBS of Pain
 
The Kassian Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
When Cody gets older, he might be better than Datsyuk.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

saw this on CDC. Made my week.

The Kassian Train is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 04:14 AM
  #84
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilch View Post
Second of all, I'd trade Hodgson++ for Scott Gomez's old contract if it meant guaranteeing us a cup.

Same, anyone who can say the trade was worse than the cup loss is more of a Cody fan than a Canucks fan.

Atleast with the Cody trade (Which I like) We get a PWF with a rare complete package and big upside that we need moving forward.

With the cup loss, there was nothing but tears and an empty feeling that got alot bigger and will never go away. Still haunts me.

Sergei Shirokov is online now  
Old
03-07-2013, 08:15 AM
  #85
hockeywoot
Registered User
 
hockeywoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: China
Posts: 898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by biturbo19 View Post
I know some are sick of this comparison, and the trade being constantly re-hashed. But there's a reason many Canucks fans are hung up on this.

Hodgson was the first prospect to come along in a long time, make the team and provide a genuine dynamic spark. There's a reason so many Canucks fans fell in love with the guy. He offered something we haven't seen in a very long time. Something exciting and new. And a player with legitimate 1st line upside. We haven't seen 1st line offensive upside in that vein since...well the Sedins really. He absolutely has his warts as a player, and there are the daddy issues, etc. But at the end of the day...we had an extremely skilled player who excited the fanbase, gave them hope for the future beyond the Twins, and aside from Gillis' smear campaign after the trade...was looked at as a good Canadian kid, potential future captain material, and someone who produced in spite of a complete lack of trust from AV. He had become something of an 'underdog' in many respects.

And ultimately, Cody Hodgson became a huge fan favourite in a huge hurry. He was adored by many, and largely as a consequence of all this...this trade is forever going to be scrutinized until long after these two players have retired. This is the way trades like this go...if a deal is as shocking as this one was on deadline day...it's because it has huge impact for a franchise. Just like the Neely deal is still constantly brought up to this day.

Basically, the people who act like this trade was nbd and everyone should just get over it and move on...are out to lunch. It was a huge deal. A franchise shaping deal. The sort of move that defines a GMs tenure with an organization. Easily the most volatile move Gillis has ever made...and it's by that sort of measure that he will be judged in the future.
Lol. We thought he was 1st line talent...
And I thought it was just other fan bases who overrated their prospects.

Good trade. A good fit for both sides.
It isn't simply about 'winning' a trade.
You can't simply measure in points totals either.

Sacrifice a bit of pure offensive skill, for other attributes.
Which is a greater need?
A Hartnell/Clowe type or a Roy/Connolly type?

hockeywoot is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 08:56 AM
  #86
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,095
vCash: 500
Why can't we just leave it at the following:

Hodgson is a good young player with (potentially) a bright future, but he WAS stuck behind a Hart trophy winner and Selke trophy winner. It's simple fact. It remains fact. And just because one of those guys is currently hurt doesn't change that fact.

Kassian is a good young player with (potentially) a bright future. A player type the canucks did not have in the organization but the Sabres had two of (Foligno...who by the way is struggling).

It was and remains a hockey trade.

Also keep in mind that Kassian has the same number of points in the same number of games as Hodgson did at this point last season. THAT is the comparable for Kassian. Not what Hodgson is doing this year (which btw isn't contributing much overall to actual wins). Give Kassian the other 100 games of pro experience that he lacks compared to Hodgson and I suspect we'd see a much better player than the one we see now. Funny how that works.

tantalum is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:17 AM
  #87
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tantalum View Post
Why can't we just leave it at the following:

Hodgson is a good young player with (potentially) a bright future, but he WAS stuck behind a Hart trophy winner and Selke trophy winner. It's simple fact. It remains fact. And just because one of those guys is currently hurt doesn't change that fact.

Kassian is a good young player with (potentially) a bright future. A player type the canucks did not have in the organization but the Sabres had two of (Foligno...who by the way is struggling).

It was and remains a hockey trade.

Also keep in mind that Kassian has the same number of points in the same number of games as Hodgson did at this point last season. THAT is the comparable for Kassian. Not what Hodgson is doing this year (which btw isn't contributing much overall to actual wins). Give Kassian the other 100 games of pro experience that he lacks compared to Hodgson and I suspect we'd see a much better player than the one we see now. Funny how that works.
Just want to add.....AND I'll say it again & again, Gillis failed in attempting to fill the hole he created by dealing a center prospect/developing player. IF he had acquired one (either by trade or free agency), then a number of these complaints wouldn't be happening.

It would be somewhat like dealing one of our goalies without getting a veteran backup goalie in return within a short period of time.

Barney Gumble is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:25 AM
  #88
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Just want to add.....AND I'll say it again & again, Gillis failed in attempting to fill the hole he created by dealing a center prospect/developing player. IF he had acquired one (either by trade or free agency), then a number of these complaints wouldn't be happening.

It would be somewhat like dealing one of our goalies without getting a veteran backup goalie in return within a short period of time.
True, but then I don't expect teams to always be balanced. It's a rarity. Gillis shifted the focus from getting another Winger to another C. His assets are finite. I'm not sure I see it as a failure, more just filling the larger need at the expense of the other.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:29 AM
  #89
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,588
vCash: 500
I think the problem became more immediate when Gillis knew that Kesler would be out for a lengthy period of time in the off-season. I know there was "the lockout" but IMHO, he should've had some kind of contingency plan(s) in place (even if it was a plan B type of solution - given the way Kesler has a bad habit of getting hurt).

Barney Gumble is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:44 AM
  #90
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,393
vCash: 500
You can make an argument for the trade as a hockey trade. I love Kassian's potential.

My biggest problem with this trade was the timing of it. Teams that fancy themselves contenders don't generally trade 20 goal scorers for prospects at the trade deadline.

The fact that Hodgson wasn't given more minutes here last season was and always will be asinine. I saw this exact scenario playing out 4 years ago, and said so on these boards. For whatever reason, Vigneault never had much time for this player, and if Hodgson had concerns about his role here, it's only because he could see the writing on the wall.

I think Kassian is going to be a good player here, and I think he's going to be a fan favourite. In fact, I think he's already capable of playing a bigger role than he's been given.

I've said this before, in a perfect world, I would love to have both players.

As far as people shouting that they're "tired of talking about Hodgson", well, that seems to come from an absolute refusal by some to admit that the Canucks/Gillis/Vigneault are capable of making a mistake. These are the same people that want to defend trading the equivalent of two 1st round picks for a $4 million defenseman that can't stay in the lineup. There is no scenario in which that trade can be analyzed without suggesting either Gillis or AV have screwed up, but some refuse to acknowledge this.


Last edited by Alan Jackson: 03-07-2013 at 09:51 AM.
Alan Jackson is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:58 AM
  #91
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tantalum View Post
Why can't we just leave it at the following:

Hodgson is a good young player with (potentially) a bright future, but he WAS stuck behind a Hart trophy winner and Selke trophy winner. It's simple fact. It remains fact. And just because one of those guys is currently hurt doesn't change that fact.

.
Why was Hodgson not playing center, with Kesler on his wing? Perhaps the Canucks thought Hodgson was worth less as an asset than he really was, because he was not getting the opportunity to play consistantly in the top 6? It's the coaching staff's purpose to win games, and to put players in roles that best help the team to that end. Hodgson for Kassian was (at this time) an unballanced trade.

Alflives is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:00 AM
  #92
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,095
vCash: 500
I know we all liked the complain about the lack of minutes Hodgson got (myself included at times) but I think if you've watched his play this season (which is better than last btw) it's easy to know why that wasn't possible. They couldn't give him more minutes than they were because it would involve removing the protection they were giving him. He would have been eaten alive in those additional minutes. That was why they saw the need for Pahlsson...someone who they figured they could trust to not get victimized. I'm sure they would have loved to have a Jordan Staal type instead of Pahlsson to have a two way presence but that wasn't going to happen.

tantalum is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:14 AM
  #93
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tantalum View Post
I know we all liked the complain about the lack of minutes Hodgson got (myself included at times) but I think if you've watched his play this season (which is better than last btw) it's easy to know why that wasn't possible. They couldn't give him more minutes than they were because it would involve removing the protection they were giving him. He would have been eaten alive in those additional minutes. That was why they saw the need for Pahlsson...someone who they figured they could trust to not get victimized. I'm sure they would have loved to have a Jordan Staal type instead of Pahlsson to have a two way presence but that wasn't going to happen.
Nonsense. All things considered, they would have had a better chance to win in the playoffs if they had Hodgson and didn't have Pahlsson.

Would they have beaten LA? I have no idea, but the "more balance" approach was a colossal failure, in every possible way.

Hodgson was playing carefully controlled minutes last season, but he was scoring at a 20 goal pace in limited minutes with limited linemates and was a +8.

Alan Jackson is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:16 AM
  #94
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 38,056
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flik View Post
Good player, sad to see him go. Wish him the best.

Glad we got a good player in return, happy to watch him grow.
this so much, it's annoying to see half of us either bash him or pronounce him as a god in comparison to Kassian. He was a good skilled player, that we traded for a good, tough player. I hope both excel and develop well

LPH is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:17 AM
  #95
AndyPipkin
PSN: Lord_Of_War
 
AndyPipkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,485
vCash: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Jackson View Post
You can make an argument for the trade as a hockey trade. I love Kassian's potential.

My biggest problem with this trade was the timing of it. Teams that fancy themselves contenders don't generally trade 20 goal scorers for prospects at the trade deadline.

The fact that Hodgson wasn't given more minutes here last season was and always will be asinine. I saw this exact scenario playing out 4 years ago, and said so on these boards. For whatever reason, Vigneault never had much time for this player, and if Hodgson had concerns about his role here, it's only because he could see the writing on the wall.
I agree that I would have liked to see Hodgson play more then he did when he was here, what prospect haven't I had that complaint about, but does everyone remember the final nail in the coffin for Coho?
We were trying to make a run and he got flat out man handled by Helm who is not only much faster then Hodgson, he's smaller then Hodgson too. How was he going to compete against the bigger guys in the POs, especially if he can't outscore his mistakes?

AndyPipkin is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:17 AM
  #96
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 38,056
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kassian Train View Post
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

saw this on CDC. Made my week.
It's too much!!!!!

LPH is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:21 AM
  #97
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alflives View Post
Why was Hodgson not playing center, with Kesler on his wing?
We should make a Selke winning/40 goal man move to wing to make room for a "20 goal man" (who was & still is medicore in faceoffs)?

Barney Gumble is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:22 AM
  #98
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 38,056
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
We should make a Selke winning/40 goal man move to wing to make room for a "20 goal man" (who was & still is medicore in faceoffs)?
exactly, why would we force one of our best players out of position to please a rookie?

LPH is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:26 AM
  #99
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyPipkin View Post
I agree that I would have liked to see Hodgson play more then he did when he was here, what prospect haven't I had that complaint about, but does everyone remember the final nail in the coffin for Coho?
We were trying to make a run and he got flat out man handled by Helm who is not only much faster then Hodgson, he's smaller then Hodgson too. How was he going to compete against the bigger guys in the POs, especially if he can't outscore his mistakes?
Yes, young players sometimes make mistakes.

We were running away with the division and Kesler was hurt. There was no reason that he shouldn't have been playing more. That's how players get better. He didn't play more because he was a rookie and he was going damn well do what he was told. There was friction between the player and coach going back years, and the scenario was completely predictable.

Alan Jackson is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:26 AM
  #100
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
We should make a Selke winning/40 goal man move to wing to make room for a "20 goal man" (who was & still is medicore in faceoffs)?
If it makes the team better, why not?

Remember, Kesler was struggling with injuries for most of last season.

Alan Jackson is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:24 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.