HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Cody Hodgson

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-29-2013, 01:26 AM
  #101
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post

When your own teammates make fun of you as they did in the Canucks locker room, you have to consider that maybe there was something wrong with his attitude in Vancouver at least. I'm not saying that any of this stuff has or will ever come up in Buffalo, but it must have rubbed his teammates the wrong way for them to make fun of him the way they did because he was asking for specific roles/treatment as a rookie on a veteran team.

Given what had happened in Vancouver, where he was playing behind 2 undeniably better centers, who were both core players and leaders on the team, and having a rookie's parents/agent get involved in asking the team to play him in a different role, would you not question such a player's attitude? When your own teammates tape a "C" on your jersey as a rookie player because of such things coming out that he wanted to play a different role then what the coach put him in, how do you not question a player's attitude?
Based on my understanding of what i have read on this....

He got injured, doctors misdiagnosed his injury. the treatment then basically made the condition worse. He questions the team doctors by getting a 2nd opinion and proves they were wrong.

The GM was threatened by this in some way. Given he was a very high draft pick...the highest Vancouver had in some time, they should have expected he would be someone who wants to prove he belongs and wants to challenge others for ice time. Some like this--others may look at this as a threat. Given Vancouver had a large veteran core of players (especially with forwards) they likely felt threatened by a kid who wanted to succeed.

On top of this you have a known difficult agent and a highly involved Dad. This complicates things even further.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 01:49 AM
  #102
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
Based on my understanding of what i have read on this....

He got injured, doctors misdiagnosed his injury. the treatment then basically made the condition worse. He questions the team doctors by getting a 2nd opinion and proves they were wrong.

The GM was threatened by this in some way. Given he was a very high draft pick...the highest Vancouver had in some time, they should have expected he would be someone who wants to prove he belongs and wants to challenge others for ice time. Some like this--others may look at this as a threat. Given Vancouver had a large veteran core of players (especially with forwards) they likely felt threatened by a kid who wanted to succeed.

On top of this you have a known difficult agent and a highly involved Dad. This complicates things even further.
that's not entirely correct:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4...vely-diagnosed

Quote:
Hodgson sought out other medical opinions, both from specialists in the US and also the medical staff of the Brampton Battalion. Everyone concurred with the original assessment from the Canucks' staff that it was a disc problem that should heal with rest.

Skip ahead several months, and Hodgson was still plagued by back problems as he tried to compete for the Battalion in the OHL playoffs. Rather than join the AHL Manitoba Moose for their playoff run as expected, Hodgson instead returned to Vancouver for yet more testing.

What Gillis revealed today is that this further testing in April 2010 determined that Hodgson’s back pain wasn’t due to the disc issue but rather from a torn muscle.
The 2nd and 3rd opinions he got from his own doctors agreed with the (incorrect) initial disagnosis done by the team.

And I don't buy that a veteran core of players on the Canucks felt threatened by Hodgson's willingness to succeed. That sounds rather ridiculous infact. The core has been around for a long time. Do you really think that players like Henrik or Kesler would feel threatened that a rookie is coming up and going to take their job or their icetime? Especially since we're taking about the captain and assistant on the team who were both already locked up to long-term contracts?

It's much more likely that they felt that Hodgson was out of line making demands as a rookie - something that no other rookie during their time has done in Vancouver.

Remember this is a veteran team that just came off game 7 of the Cup finals after setting regular season records as the top offensive and defensive team in the league. They knew their only goal now was to win the Cup. Would they really feel threatened that a kid is coming in to take their job, or more likely would they feel upset that a kid is coming into their team and making demands about roles and playing time instead of doing whatever is asked of him to help the team succeed?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 02:20 AM
  #103
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,766
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
Cody wanted out because he didn't get the role that he (or his parents/agent) wanted to start his career. He came on a team that had 2 elite centers playing the top 2 lines. Do you bump Henrik or Kesler down to accommodate Cody? Should any rookie be entitled to that?
Acting like it was an either/or situation where Cody bumps an established center down to third line minutes or plays the deployments he got is wrong. Most championship teams find ways to accommodate three centers, usually not running their checker into the ground or limiting their possession controlling first line to offensive zone starts only.

Quote:
And if you're going to blame AV for his treatment of his back injury, why wouldn't you blame Cody's own doctors who were the first to misdiagonse that same injury? AV isn't a doctor and yes he screwed up by accepting what Cody's own family doctors had to say of his injury. That injury was first misdiagnosed by his own doctors then the Canucks team doctors, and it was only later by the Canucks team doctors that they disagnosed it properly. So blaming AV for his comments, based on what 2 different sets of doctors stated in their own initial diagnonis (again including Cody's own doctors), is bunk!
How were his own people the first to misdiagnose the injury given that it happened at an organization-supervised training event?

Quote:
As for the role he was given, he was given sheltered minutes on the 3rd line because he was crap defensively. AV had his game plan with Henrik and Kesler and Hodgson was given the easy minutes behind them. This is a coach that just won the President's trophy (by a big margin) and didn't have a 3rd line defensive center as he likes to use, so he used Cody the way he should - and I emphasis the word "used" because it's not about what's best for the player here but what's best for the team. Would you rather have a coach that coddles a rookie player instead of doing what's best for his team's success? Maybe in Buffalo when they are rebuilding and have to put an emphasis on player development. But not on a team that is coming off the season they are, where their core was in their prime. You use every player to put them in the best position for "TEAM" success. But that word "TEAM" I know was lost on Cody from the moment he stepped in Vancouver.
It's weird that you're putting full faith in the Canucks management for knowing bar none "what's best for the team" given their actual results. And a 30% offensive zone start ratio with 40 point on a good day linemates doesn't exactly equal "sheltered" deployments.

And why is Kesler suddenly above defensive deployments, given that he actually scored more at ES the last time he got them? What's good for the development of the young player would have also been good for the team, considering how many scoring depth issues they've had over the years.

And sure, top that terrible paragraph off with more baseless histrionics.

Quote:
Had Vancouver given Cody a decent winger, you take that decent winger away from the Sedins or Kesler, and they are the horses you go with if you want team success, not to cater to a 20 YO rookie. This seems lost on some people here, like you?? There is a salary cap in the league, you can not stack every line. Most teams have 3rd line players on their 3rd line, and they play their top-6 wingers with their top centers. The Canucks top centers were Henrik and Kesler, and Cody was (and still is) no where near developed enough to overtake them and have the top wingers on the team play next to him. Cody was a rookie joining a President's trophy winning team as the #3 center on the depth chart, who was absolutely terrible defensively and couldn't handle the defensive match-ups that team's system required for a traditional 3rd line center. So who do you accommodate here? Cody? Pesonally, I go with the decisions of the coach with a proven track record coming off a franchise record setting season.
Kesler with Higgins and Hansen and Hodgson with random scoring winger X is a win/win situation. Patrick Sharp was a "third line center" when the Hawks won the Cup in 2010, but his role is drastically different than what Hodgson was deployed in, and accommodating such a role would have been better for both team and player.

Quote:
I'm not someone blindly towing the team's line. I'm a die-hard Canucks fan, not a Cody fan, that has followed this team for over 30 years, and just saw them put up the best season in franchise history, with a coach who ran a team that was 1st overall in almost every team category - something that no team in the league has done since the 77 Habs. I'm going to trust in that coach to make the decisions that best serve the team's goals - winning! Not catering to what a rookie and his family demand of the team.

Again you're looking at this from a Sabres POV - a team trying to develop their young talent where the priority is not winning now, but to develop that young talent to win one day. The Canucks were not in that position. They needed Cody to do what the team needed to succeed, not what Cody needed to succeed.
That statistical dominance nearly got bounced in the first round, was incredibly boom/bust in the playoffs for how "dominant" it was in the regular season, hasn't been replicated since, and that coach has also been fired. Why are we appealing to his authority again? Why is Hodgson's success mutually exclusive from Vancouver's?

Quote:
And blaming the coach here is just downright stupid! Again you're criticising the decisions made by a coach who's coming off the best season in franchise history and was still able to win another President's trophy during Cody's rookie season despite the problems they had with him. How many coaches have won back to back President's since that trophy came into existence? But no we should blame the GM and coach of that franchise who's goals it is to actually win, and side with a spoiled rookie who feels he deserves special treatment and won't accept the role that the club gives him?
Because that club got thrashed in an alarming amount of their losses and then bounced in the first round the next season, and that core is defined by losing playoff series due to a lack of scoring depth past their best 3 players.

And more "Cody is a selfish cancer" histrionics.

Quote:
He didn't set the team back by trading Hodgson. He moved a guy out that wanted out. A player that his teammates lost respect for and basically insulted by taping a "C" on his jersey for acting like he was entitled to something. As a GM of a team do you keep a player like that? Do you deal the core because they don't get along with the rookie?
No, you don't create a perfect storm of ineffective linemates, defensive zone draws, and limited icetime on a team with secondary scoring issues in the ******* first place. And if you do, you trade him for actual NHL roster upgrades because you're trying to win the Stanley Cup, not patch a hole that barely existed in the first place three years later if Kassian develops.

Quote:
Gillis is 2 seasons removed from GM of the year. He is the first GM in Canucks history to win a Presidents' setting the team up for one of the most successful seasons that any team has had in over 30 years. He followed that season up by winning a 2nd Presidents'. This after taking over a team that was in the bottom 10 in the league - and went on to win the division his first year and hasn't missed the playoffs since. How rare is it for a team to win back to back Presidents' following that? Yes he's made some mistakes, but which GM hasn't? He has a long leach right now given his successes, and is no where near being fired at this stage. Anyone that thinks that either has a hate on for Gillis, or just doesn't understand how difficult it is to put together the type of seasons he has. He is easily the most successful GM in franchise history, and that doesn't put you anywhere close to being fired because of a couple disappointing seasons after.
More appealing to the authority of someone who hasn't actually won anything, with one successful season + playoffs under his belt. AV and MG put together a team that can win in the regular season in a terrible division, and almost win the Cup once in 6 years while burning out in the playoffs to various degrees every other year. That's great and all, but that's not an infallible track record.

Quote:
There is NO ONE on the team that was given top line minutes right away. Not a single player. Daniel, Henrik, Kesler, Burrows, Hansen, Edler, Bieksa, Schneider. Every single player drafted and developed by the Canucks paid their dues - WITHOUT A SINGLE EXCEPTION! Every one of them developed under AV. Not a single one of them complained about their roles. Maybe the reason why so many Canucks fans are soured on Cody is because he has been the LONE exception. In fact since following the Canucks since the mid-70s, I can't think of a single rookie that has come into our system, under any coach or GM we've had, that has raised issues with how they were used as a rookie and demanded anything from the team. To have a rookie come on to a top team and make any kind of demands at all was just ridiculous. Again, it was so ridiculous that even his own teammates - guys that have been through the system here and developed under AV - made fun of the kid!
This is more hyperbole. And AV didn't develop the Sedins.

Quote:
And that basically is the bottom line. You have a rookie that made demands about his role, his family/agent that felt they had any say in how he should be used on a team, and a locker room that lost respect for him because of those actions, what do you do as a GM of that team? You move the piece out that's creating the problems, not cater to him!
Not let that situation get to that point in the first place by doing any combination of A) playing Hodgson in more offensive situations B) acquiring a talented young winger to develop alongside him and provide lots of secondary scoring or just C) playing him slightly more in general.

He made those demands because the team had no interest in investing in his future, even when it was in everybody's self interest.

Quote:
Maybe things in Vancouver could have been different with Cody if we were a rebuilding team like Buffalo and cared more about how best we could develop him as a prospect instead of how best to win as a team. That's where Cody obviously placed his priorities and it's great for him that he's joined a rebuilding Sabres team where those priorities align. They didn't in Vancouver. We cared more about winning then making a rookie happy so he can maximize his earning potential on his next contract. Good for Cody to find a situation that works for him. It didn't work in Vancouver, not with the team's goals, and not with his teammates that also saw him as an entitled rookie who's situation should take priority over team goals. Maybe in Buffalo he can develop properly and get his big contract quicker, and actually earn that "C" one day, rather than have a locker room full of teammates that joke about it by taping one on his jersey?
On what planet does a team that's pieces away from winning a Cup not want one of those pieces to develop?

The entire anti-Hodgson Vancouver argument really comes down to the terrible assumption that Cody's pre-showcase deployments were the only things he could be afforded if the Canucks wanted to win hockey games, but those two things weren't actually mutually exclusive.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 02:31 AM
  #104
Karlkarotte
Registered User
 
Karlkarotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
that's not entirely correct:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4...vely-diagnosed



The 2nd and 3rd opinions he got from his own doctors agreed with the (incorrect) initial disagnosis done by the team.

And I don't buy that a veteran core of players on the Canucks felt threatened by Hodgson's willingness to succeed. That sounds rather ridiculous infact. The core has been around for a long time. Do you really think that players like Henrik or Kesler would feel threatened that a rookie is coming up and going to take their job or their icetime? Especially since we're taking about the captain and assistant on the team who were both already locked up to long-term contracts?

It's much more likely that they felt that Hodgson was out of line making demands as a rookie - something that no other rookie during their time has done in Vancouver.

Remember this is a veteran team that just came off game 7 of the Cup finals after setting regular season records as the top offensive and defensive team in the league. They knew their only goal now was to win the Cup. Would they really feel threatened that a kid is coming in to take their job, or more likely would they feel upset that a kid is coming into their team and making demands about roles and playing time instead of doing whatever is asked of him to help the team succeed?
Holy s*** man, do you make it a point to ask a stupid amount of rhetorical questions every time you post something ?

I mean wouldn't you question that after reading your last few posts ?

Karlkarotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 04:02 AM
  #105
the edler
Inimitable
 
the edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,591
vCash: 500
The team should have hold on to both Hodgson and Schneider and given them more playing room and tried a bit harder for it to work both on and off the ice, it should be obvious to everyone. To cut off the future of the team like that wasn't good moves at all. Especially not for those returns. Sedins and Burrows are older now and slower and wont be as effective in playoff crunch time, Kesler is constantly injured and Luongo is past his prime with a massively bruised ego. Doesn't look good. Last two playoff series doesn't lie. The team isn't a serious contender anymore. Wont be surprised if Hodgson and Schneider both have great seasons this coming year.

the edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:19 AM
  #106
Skead
Registered User
 
Skead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by biturbo19 View Post
This is the same song and dance it's always been. Hodgson has defensive issues. Great. But the point still remains, prior to the trade to Buffalo, those issues were largely sheltered with his 'protected' deployment. And in those 'protected' minutes, Hodgson still showed very well offensively. You toss a guy like that onto a top line with zero insulation, and yeah...he's going to get lit up defensively.

It's not as though Kassian is a remotely reliable defensive player either. And he doesn't even have the physical limitations to fall back on as an excuse.

Both players have some serious warts. But at this point, Hodgson is the vastly more productive player...no matter the role.

I think you underestimate just how bad Hodgson was defensively; last season he was the 15th easiest player to score on (GP>40). Kassian was nowhere near that and he was employed on all lines.

And as for Sheltered minutes that would boost your offensive production since you're facing weaker competition. MG already admitted to putting CoHo in very favorable offensive situations.

They're both young, a lot could happen. Kassian could become a 3rd/4th line meatgrinder only or could be a 2nd/1st line powerforward. Hodgson could be a 3rd line center with limited ice or a 1st/2nd line center with solid two way play.

Skead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:29 AM
  #107
CraniumCram
Bring back BJS
 
CraniumCram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Syracuse/Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skead View Post
I think you underestimate just how bad Hodgson was defensively; last season he was the 15th easiest player to score on (GP>40). Kassian was nowhere near that and he was employed on all lines.

And as for Sheltered minutes that would boost your offensive production since you're facing weaker competition. MG already admitted to putting CoHo in very favorable offensive situations.

They're both young, a lot could happen. Kassian could become a 3rd/4th line meatgrinder only or could be a 2nd/1st line powerforward. Hodgson could be a 3rd line center with limited ice or a 1st/2nd line center with solid two way play.
You're right about Kassian, but at this point, Cody is already AT LEAST a #2C. He was considered an elite 2-way player in juniors, so I see no reason that he can't dramatically improve at this level.

The difference between these two IMO is in the work ethic and attitude. When Kassian was given chances in Buffalo, he completely took them for granted, and basically forced Darcy's hand in trading him. He's got all the talent to be a top power forward, but I'm not so sure he's got the heart to ever get there. In Cody though, I see that heart that makes a great player/captain. I think all the talk of his "attitude" in Vancouver is completely overblown. His parents and agents were pushing for him to be put into a better position to succeed, and they found it in Buffalo. Now that he's here, he's putting in the work, and we're seeing the results.

CraniumCram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:38 AM
  #108
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post

Yet in that same article:

Quote:
How did this important injury to the Canucks' top prospect go misdiagnosed by multiple sets of specialists over a 10 month period?

Will Coach Vigneault apologize for his undiplomatic and characteristically blunt comments on Hodgson, now that the truth is known?

Will stories still continue to circulate about Hodgson having a problem with the Canucks organization?

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:42 AM
  #109
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cramdizzl View Post
You're right about Kassian, but at this point, Cody is already AT LEAST a #2C. He was considered an elite 2-way player in juniors, so I see no reason that he can't dramatically improve at this level.

The difference between these two IMO is in the work ethic and attitude
. When Kassian was given chances in Buffalo, he completely took them for granted, and basically forced Darcy's hand in trading him. He's got all the talent to be a top power forward, but I'm not so sure he's got the heart to ever get there. In Cody though, I see that heart that makes a great player/captain. I think all the talk of his "attitude" in Vancouver is completely overblown. His parents and agents were pushing for him to be put into a better position to succeed, and they found it in Buffalo. Now that he's here, he's putting in the work, and we're seeing the results.
I'd argue they both have a great work ethic and attitude. The Buffalo fan base throws Kassian under the bus for this but he has been great since coming to Vancouver. Works hard and has a great attitude. No sense of entitlement. The Vancouver fan base similarly complains about Hodgson's attitude. It looks to me like both benefitted from a change of scenery. I'd add that many of Hodgson's issues in Vancouver appear to have been exacerbated by an over zealous father rather than the player himself.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:52 AM
  #110
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
Based on my understanding of what i have read on this....

He got injured, doctors misdiagnosed his injury. the treatment then basically made the condition worse. He questions the team doctors by getting a 2nd opinion and proves they were wrong.

The GM was threatened by this in some way. Given he was a very high draft pick...the highest Vancouver had in some time, they should have expected he would be someone who wants to prove he belongs and wants to challenge others for ice time. Some like this--others may look at this as a threat. Given Vancouver had a large veteran core of players (especially with forwards) they likely felt threatened by a kid who wanted to succeed.

On top of this you have a known difficult agent and a highly involved Dad. This complicates things even further.
This is where you're wrong. Gillis, and AV, didn't feel threatened by Hodgson's willingness to succeed, they likely felt annoyed with the process and how he went about it. No player is above the team, if you are ask to play a certain role you should play it, no questions asked. The Hodgson camp, on the other hand, felt as if Hodgson was entitled to something greater when he definitely wasn't. The guy was a rookie playing behind an Art Ross winning center, and a Selke winning center, he needed to pay his dues. Had he stayed, he would have received that opportunity, guaranteed. Instead his camp complained about ice time and his role on the team, that isn't a good team first mentality and no rookie should ever do that.

A good example of how such a situation should be dealt with is Cory Schneider. That guy is pure class and did things the right way. He didn't demand a trade, he didn't complain about starts, and he never put himself ahead of the team. And he was in a far worse situation than Hodgson ever was.

I like Hodgson as a player, but I don't see how anyone can support the way his camp handled things in Vancouver. Maybe they had their reasons, but those reasons were primarily selfish, for better or for worse.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:56 AM
  #111
CraniumCram
Bring back BJS
 
CraniumCram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Syracuse/Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
I'd argue they both have a great work ethic and attitude. The Buffalo fan base throws Kassian under the bus for this but he has been great since coming to Vancouver. Works hard and has a great attitude. No sense of entitlement. The Vancouver fan base similarly complains about Hodgson's attitude. It looks to me like both benefitted from a change of scenery. I'd add that many of Hodgson's issues in Vancouver appear to have been exacerbated by an over zealous father rather than the player himself.
I guess work ethic was a bad choice of words. I meant on-ice attitude, because I've seen him take shift after shift off. I do know that he is a workout warrior though.

CraniumCram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:57 AM
  #112
Sabreality
Registered User
 
Sabreality's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,884
vCash: 500
oh look, another HFboards thread devolving into rehashing old crap

Hodgsons value again is what?

Sabreality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 11:59 AM
  #113
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cramdizzl View Post
I guess work ethic was a bad choice of words. I meant on-ice attitude, because I've seen him take shift after shift off. I do know that he is a workout warrior though.
I haven't noticed that in Vancouver. He tries hard but just lacks consistency and can be ineffective at times.
And to be fair, I've noticed Hodgson looking lost in the defensive zone for you guys. I don't think it's an attitude issue with Hodgson but definitely something he needs a lot of work on just like we saw in Vancouver.
I'd say he's ahead of Kassian in his development but in Vancouver after watching Kelser and the Sedins struggle for their first few years some of us are becoming more patient.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 12:03 PM
  #114
Kobe Armstrong
Registered User
 
Kobe Armstrong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 4,395
vCash: 332
Lars Eller

Kobe Armstrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 12:04 PM
  #115
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabreality View Post
oh look, another HFboards thread devolving into rehashing old crap

Hodgsons value again is what?
23 year old center who finished 19th-23rd* in scoring among Centers in the NHL

*depending on who you consider centers

Jame is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 12:10 PM
  #116
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,471
vCash: 500
Its difficult to offer value for a young center like Hodgson, what are the needs of Buffalo? A young center, I believe haha. So basically, do you want a list of other young centers close to his value? Draft picks? What?

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 12:25 PM
  #117
CraniumCram
Bring back BJS
 
CraniumCram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Syracuse/Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
Its difficult to offer value for a young center like Hodgson, what are the needs of Buffalo? A young center, I believe haha. So basically, do you want a list of other young centers close to his value? Draft picks? What?
Our top need IMO is a young scoring winger of the same ilk as Cody. I'm sure to piss some fans off, but somebody like Voracek, Tarasenko, JVR, E. Kane. Not saying all of their values are equal, but those are the types of names I would trade Cody for.

CraniumCram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 12:26 PM
  #118
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,438
vCash: 500
A few facts beyond Hodgson's promising offense and not so promising defensive play and skating...

-the back injury. NFITO is absolutely correct. The Canuck doctors misdiagnosed the problem. After the treatment (rest) didn't work the Hodgson camp solicited 2nd and 3rd opinions which agreed with the initial assessments. in the end the canucks doctors figured out the problem. The canucks did not mishandle the injury anymore than other teams of doctors did. Nor do I think what AV said about it was some gross insult. He said what the doctors were saying. Hodgson and his camp took it personally.

-the canucks used Hodgson in very specific circumstances. Soft matchups (which he was losing btw) and PP time.

-moving Kesler to the wing was never going to happen. He is a 40 goal scoring selke winner for goodness sakes. It was a stupid suggestion (and still is IMO).

-He was never going to replace Henrik is a superior player

-Ritch Winter foolishly tweeted that they indeed asked for a more prominent role on the team and more icetime.

-The canucks acquired Sami Pahlsson on deadline day hours before they had anything in place with Hodgson. They acquired Pahlsson to be the third line center. You know the place Hodgson played.

-The 4th line center was LaPierre and likely to remain so

-Henrik, Kesler, Pahlsson, and LaPierre at center. Hodgson unable to play the wing. The math is simple and the answer obvious, at least to me, as to where Hodgson was going to be down the stretch and in the playoffs.

That was why he was traded when he was. At the peak of his value. Before the healthy scratches and inevitable trade demands began to happen.

that isn't to say Hodgson isn't a promising player. He certainly is. but he DID (or his camp for him) ask for a bigger role and more icetime. It was a "me, me, me" move. It wasn't a request for the betterment of the team but the betterment of Cody's bank account ('cause I would argue that being forced to develop his defensive game earlier rather than later would be for the betterment of Cody the player).

Had they reined in the demands and been content to learn from one of the best offensive centers in the league and one of the best defensive centers in the league, coupled with the injuries this past season you likely would be seeing a better Cody Hodgson than the one that ended the year in Buffalo. However, he still wouldn't be Henrik or Kesler, he would still be the #3 center.

tantalum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 12:34 PM
  #119
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,834
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroPT View Post
O wouldn't do that deal personally
I don't know if most of the other letters would do that deal either.

-------------------------------

In terms of strictly "value of", probably a similarly aged young player with offensive upside. I doubt Buffalo has any interest in moving him at the moment, with a host of untested centers who haven't yet shown they can even produce to his level. I'm curious to see what happens for him with another summer of training and a full camp to find out what the current Sabres staff wants to do system-wise.

Contract-wise, I won't be concerned unless he's not inked by camp. The time to be in Rolston's system and working with his potential linemates is important in my humble opinion.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 12:53 PM
  #120
Strangelove
Registered User
 
Strangelove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Location! Location!
Posts: 854
vCash: 500
Hmmm… I see he had 7 points in the 10 games Vanek missed.

1 goal (Pominville assisted on it) 6 assists (3 of which came on Pominville goals) [/QUOTE]

He was on the ice with pominville what do you want him to do score ten unassisted goals? He fit in with Vanek and Pommer and if you watched the games he actually created a lot of that offence. A bunch of daniel sedins goals were assisted by henrik sedin I guess he must be riding henriks coattails right?[/QUOTE]

Way to come in on the middle of a conversation bro.

The conversation was about the 32 games in which CoHo scored 28 points...

and how much of that could be attributed to playing with JP + TV while they were hot.

Anyway.

Those who like to think Canuck fans besmirch CoHo 's attitude just because he was traded away should take note of how Canuck fans still rave about Schneider's great attitude. It's hard to place a value on CoHo right now due to the small sample size and the fact he has defensive issues... and skating issues... and attitude issues. He's young, he may very well overcome these issues in time.

I hope he does.

Strangelove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 01:08 PM
  #121
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strangelove View Post

The conversation was about the 32 games in which CoHo scored 28 points...

and how much of that could be attributed to playing with JP + TV while they were hot.
this is the issue with his contract now....How much did his stats do with him playing with Pommers and Vanek? How much of a factor was he in their stat line?

If buffalo was to move Vanek before the season how do you jusge what hodgson's value is on a contract?

Personnaly this is why I push for a 2 yr bridge contract and if Vanek is still around, try to have him play without Vanek and see what he can do.

Bufalo also has 4 other young Centers who they will want to see which one emerge as who the top 2 are and set up some sort of salary structure.

they pay Hodgson alot on a long term deal then say Grigs and Girgs emerge as the #1 and #2 centers then Buffalo can get handcuffered with Hodgson's contract.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 01:37 PM
  #122
CraniumCram
Bring back BJS
 
CraniumCram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Syracuse/Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strangelove View Post
Those who like to think Canuck fans besmirch CoHo 's attitude just because he was traded away should take note of how Canuck fans still rave about Schneider's great attitude. It's hard to place a value on CoHo right now due to the small sample size and the fact he has defensive issues... and skating issues... and attitude issues. He's young, he may very well overcome these issues in time.

I hope he does.
Ummm... No, no, and no.

Defensive issues: Hodgson became Buffalo's #1 center this past season, on a line with Vanek and Pominville. Pominville had one of his worst defensive seasons ever, and Vanek is certainly not known for defensive effort. Hodgson was put into a score-first role, and performed it excellently. He was a renowned two-way prospect, and we know he can play defense. The emphasis this past season was not on defense, it was on offense. Do you expect a 23yr old, first time #1C, to put up good defensive numbers against the other first lines of the Eastern Conference? He'll get there, its only a matter of time.

Skating issues: When Cody arrived in Buffalo, his skating left a lot to be desired. Over the offseason, he worked with both Gary Roberts, and Dawn Braid, a skating specialist and instructor that has improved the skating of many, many players, including John Tavares. In 12-13, he made huge strides in skating, and was noticeably better than the season prior. He has gone from 'bad skater' to 'average skater', and is still working on that aspect.

Attitude Issues: In Van, Cody and his camp campaigned for a different role on the team in order to help him improve and succeed. They got it when he was traded to Buffalo. Where are these supposed "Attitude issues"? Of the three things you listed, this is the most ludicrous by far. Do you have quotes of Cody addressing the media and bashing his teammates, or complaining about the coaches, or anything like that? His attitude has been stellar in Buffalo. I mean, do you really believe what you just wrote?

So yeah, great analysis.

CraniumCram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 01:37 PM
  #123
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 34,577
vCash: 500
Funny how easily the Vanek excuse is used in regards to Hodgson's scoring last year...

everyone fails to note that Vanek had the best pt per game production of his entire career... but let's not give Hodgson any of the credit for that.


Vanek career pre 12-13 0.80 ppg
Vanek previous 5 seasons 0.79 ppg
Vanek previous 3 seasons 0.77
Vanek w/Hodgson 12-13 1.07

who benefited from who?


Last edited by Jame: 07-29-2013 at 01:44 PM.
Jame is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 01:39 PM
  #124
CraniumCram
Bring back BJS
 
CraniumCram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Syracuse/Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Funny how easily the Vanek excuse is used in regards to Hodgson's scoring last year...

everyone fails to note that Vanek had the best pt per game production of his entire career... but let's not give Hodgson any of the credit for that.
Yes and Martin St. Louis is still a top-10 player.

CraniumCram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2013, 02:29 PM
  #125
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tantalum View Post
A few facts beyond Hodgson's promising offense and not so promising defensive play and skating...

-the back injury. NFITO is absolutely correct. The Canuck doctors misdiagnosed the problem. After the treatment (rest) didn't work the Hodgson camp solicited 2nd and 3rd opinions which agreed with the initial assessments. in the end the canucks doctors figured out the problem. The canucks did not mishandle the injury anymore than other teams of doctors did. Nor do I think what AV said about it was some gross insult. He said what the doctors were saying. Hodgson and his camp took it personally.

-the canucks used Hodgson in very specific circumstances. Soft matchups (which he was losing btw) and PP time.

-moving Kesler to the wing was never going to happen. He is a 40 goal scoring selke winner for goodness sakes. It was a stupid suggestion (and still is IMO).

-He was never going to replace Henrik is a superior player

-Ritch Winter foolishly tweeted that they indeed asked for a more prominent role on the team and more icetime.

-The canucks acquired Sami Pahlsson on deadline day hours before they had anything in place with Hodgson. They acquired Pahlsson to be the third line center. You know the place Hodgson played.

-The 4th line center was LaPierre and likely to remain so

-Henrik, Kesler, Pahlsson, and LaPierre at center. Hodgson unable to play the wing. The math is simple and the answer obvious, at least to me, as to where Hodgson was going to be down the stretch and in the playoffs.

That was why he was traded when he was. At the peak of his value. Before the healthy scratches and inevitable trade demands began to happen.

that isn't to say Hodgson isn't a promising player. He certainly is. but he DID (or his camp for him) ask for a bigger role and more icetime. It was a "me, me, me" move. It wasn't a request for the betterment of the team but the betterment of Cody's bank account ('cause I would argue that being forced to develop his defensive game earlier rather than later would be for the betterment of Cody the player).

Had they reined in the demands and been content to learn from one of the best offensive centers in the league and one of the best defensive centers in the league, coupled with the injuries this past season you likely would be seeing a better Cody Hodgson than the one that ended the year in Buffalo. However, he still wouldn't be Henrik or Kesler, he would still be the #3 center.
Do you know this to be fact? Because I have a very hard time believing that. I believe they were dabbling in the idea of trading Hodgson for a while, talks heated up on deadline day, so they made the deal to acquiring Pahlsson knowing full well that Hodgson was very likely on his way on. Also, had the Hodgson deal fell through, I don't think there's any guarantee on who plays where. Who says Hodgson wouldn't have been played more on the wing? He was on JTs wing during the WJC tournament. Is this all speculative on your part? Because the way you are portraying yourself, it seems as if you are citing facts.

Luck 6 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 12:24 PM.

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.