HFBoards

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

"Ironically, earlier that day, Hodgson’s teammates had playfully taped a “C” "

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-17-2012, 11:01 AM
  #176
sully1410
Registered User
 
sully1410's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Turner Valley, Alta.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,045
vCash: 50
I get that maybe he did need to be traded, but the return bothers me. Heading into the playoffs, and expecting to aim for the cup....I would have expected a top six fwd in return not a prospect, while promising that is not NHL ready. I just think that the return should have been helped get the team there.

sully1410 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 11:11 AM
  #177
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sully1410 View Post
I get that maybe he did need to be traded, but the return bothers me. Heading into the playoffs, and expecting to aim for the cup....I would have expected a top six fwd in return not a prospect, while promising that is not NHL ready. I just think that the return should have been helped get the team there.
Why would the Canucks trade a young center for an aging top 6 player? Our prospect pool was thin enough. That would be incredibly stupid when the Canucks have an abundance of wingers as it is. I dont think that extra top 6 winger would have gotten us past L.A than we'd be sitting here castrating Gillis for trading the future. Gillis is going for a Detroit model. You dont just put your eggs in one basket. A lot of luck goes into winning a cup and you have to be a contender for a long time to get that luck.

Nuck This is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 11:14 AM
  #178
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcrazycanuck View Post
Love all the bashing the kid now gets now that is is off the team because GOD aka Gillis said he was not good
Uhhh a lot of people didn't think he looked that good. If you thought he looked good than your dreaming in Cody fan boy land. His defensive game was awful. His defensive awareness was awful he was weak in the corners and didn't have the speed to make up for his defensive gaffs. He developed at an early age and was better than everybody his age in junior but his development from the age of 18 until now was nothing. He always had an "nhl" ready shot even when he was 17. He hasn't improved in many areas since. some players bloom early and some bloom later. cody was an extremely early bloomer and hasn't blossomed. I dont think he will. He'll be a good pp specialist and O blue line and in player but he's gonna have to get off the ice if the play is in the neutral zone or defensize zone because he's atrocious there.

Nuck This is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 12:48 PM
  #179
sk8er
Registered User
 
sk8er's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 303
vCash: 500
What I love about this thread is people complaining about the return we got for hogson, like gillis could have gone to any team and just picked the player he wanted. Or, more correctly, the player the fan wanted. I love the trade and I think kassian is going to be a hell of a player, maybe not this year, but in a year or so, hodgson will be a distant memory, because kassian will be dominating.
I also think gillis realized we were not going to go as far in the playoffs this year, and was looking to the future. And, just how was hodgson going to help us against L.A, playing behind Sedin, Kesler, and probably Lapierre.

sk8er is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 01:13 PM
  #180
sully1410
Registered User
 
sully1410's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Turner Valley, Alta.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,045
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
Why would the Canucks trade a young center for an aging top 6 player? Our prospect pool was thin enough. That would be incredibly stupid when the Canucks have an abundance of wingers as it is. I dont think that extra top 6 winger would have gotten us past L.A than we'd be sitting here castrating Gillis for trading the future. Gillis is going for a Detroit model. You dont just put your eggs in one basket. A lot of luck goes into winning a cup and you have to be a contender for a long time to get that luck.
I do understand that. But I think the right top six winger that had a solid two way game like kesler does and was producing goals would have gone a long ways. Adding a top six guy fills more holes then just that one position as it allows other players to slot into their positions alot better.

I do understand trading for futures. I do get it. I just think that the goal is winning the cup. It's not like any ody knew that an eighth seeded kings team that practically clawed their way into the playoffs was going to ****ing steam roll through four pretty good teams to the cup.

It's very easy for us all to say that I don't think another top six forward would have got the job done, because we saw with how much ease the Kings swept through two heavy defense style teams and one offensive powerhouse.

That being said, if the team had been playing well...the Canicks would have destroyed LA. I truly believe that. The Kings victory, in this case(I'm not taking anything away for how they played,which was amazing) was more due to vancouver's failures as a team. I have no doubt that the series would have gone to seven, because LA played really well but I do believe that Canucks would have taken it.

I digress.

I think not acquiring another top six fwd, which would have given Vancouver 2 solid top lines, really showed a lack of confidence in his team. I don't think it was a good move then, and I don't think it is now...but hopefully Kassian turns out to be that elite power forward that the team needs.

I just think it was a questionable move with the playoffs right around the corner.

sully1410 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 01:17 PM
  #181
sully1410
Registered User
 
sully1410's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Turner Valley, Alta.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,045
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sk8er View Post
What I love about this thread is people complaining about the return we got for hogson, like gillis could have gone to any team and just picked the player he wanted. Or, more correctly, the player the fan wanted. I love the trade and I think kassian is going to be a hell of a player, maybe not this year, but in a year or so, hodgson will be a distant memory, because kassian will be dominating.
I also think gillis realized we were not going to go as far in the playoffs this year, and was looking to the future. And, just how was hodgson going to help us against L.A, playing behind Sedin, Kesler, and probably Lapierre.
I totally agree. He wouldn't have helped. As you guys have said, his D game was weak. I sincerely hope that Kassian develops into that power forward, but I honestly believe that they could have gotten a more NHL ready player for him if not a top six forward.

sully1410 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 01:34 PM
  #182
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sully1410 View Post
I totally agree. He wouldn't have helped. As you guys have said, his D game was weak. I sincerely hope that Kassian develops into that power forward, but I honestly believe that they could have gotten a more NHL ready player for him if not a top six forward.
Maybe, but not a player that Gillis believes Kassian will bring to the table.

ddawg1950 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 01:43 PM
  #183
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,585
vCash: 500
The only type of type six forward you would get would be a "rental" for a prospect at the trading deadline. I'd sooner give up a 1st round pick + lower level prospect than Hodgson in such a deal (not that I would be in favor of dealing even that option).

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 01:51 PM
  #184
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
The only type of type six forward you would get would be a "rental" for a prospect at the trading deadline. I'd sooner give up a 1st round pick + lower level prospect than Hodgson in such a deal (not that I would be in favor of dealing even that option).
Both Antoine Vermette and Steve Ott were available and not rentals...both would have been much better options than Pahlsson if we were intent on trading Hodgson away, and knowing that Kesler was playing with a gimpy shoulder.

Canucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 02:14 PM
  #185
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
Both Antoine Vermette and Steve Ott were available and not rentals...both would have been much better options than Pahlsson if we were intent on trading Hodgson away, and knowing that Kesler was playing with a gimpy shoulder.
Don't think Ott is really a top six forward (and the Sabres had to give up an actual top six player [Roy] to get him). Vermette? Not too impressed with his offensive skills though I'd agree he'd be better overall player than Pahlsson (though the later only cost us a couple 4th round picks).

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 02:27 PM
  #186
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Don't think Ott is really a top six forward (and the Sabres had to give up an actual top six player [Roy] to get him). Vermette? Not too impressed with his offensive skills though I'd agree he'd be better overall player than Pahlsson (though the later only cost us a couple 4th round picks).
I think both Ott and especially Vermette would have done a lot more to help us in an area we were sorely deficient than Pahlsson. We weren't scoring, Kesler was injured and Gillis was intent on removing an offensive center...IMO this is where Gillis really screwed the pooch (and I'm a big Gillis supporter), we needed more offensive support and Gillis went out and got an aging defensive specialist. We may have paid more for an Ott or Vermette, but I think we would have seen a more effective lineup that may have actually eased Kesler's offensive burden rather than magnify it.

Canucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 02:30 PM
  #187
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,585
vCash: 500
I can see Vermette helping us but not really Ott (don't we have enough "instigators" on this team already?); think any offense we'd gain from Ott would be offset by the roster player we'd have to give up to get him.

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 02:39 PM
  #188
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
I can see Vermette helping us but not really Ott (don't we have enough "instigators" on this team already?); think any offense we'd gain from Ott would be offset by the roster player we'd have to give up to get him.
Thats possible, not knowing who would go in return...but I believe both players would be far more helpful than Pahlsson, and wouldn't be a defensive liability a la Hodgson.

Canucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 09:05 AM
  #189
archangel archangel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,898
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
Uhhh a lot of people didn't think he looked that good. If you thought he looked good than your dreaming in Cody fan boy land. His defensive game was awful. His defensive awareness was awful he was weak in the corners and didn't have the speed to make up for his defensive gaffs. He developed at an early age and was better than everybody his age in junior but his development from the age of 18 until now was nothing. He always had an "nhl" ready shot even when he was 17. He hasn't improved in many areas since. some players bloom early and some bloom later. cody was an extremely early bloomer and hasn't blossomed. I dont think he will. He'll be a good pp specialist and O blue line and in player but he's gonna have to get off the ice if the play is in the neutral zone or defensize zone because he's atrocious there.
Sorry. Been reading this board for several years and most of this place had a love in with him until the day he got traded and then when Gillis made his comments the board went against him.

archangel archangel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 10:04 AM
  #190
CM-
Registered User
 
CM-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuck This View Post
Uhhh a lot of people didn't think he looked that good. If you thought he looked good than your dreaming in Cody fan boy land. His defensive game was awful. His defensive awareness was awful he was weak in the corners and didn't have the speed to make up for his defensive gaffs. He developed at an early age and was better than everybody his age in junior but his development from the age of 18 until now was nothing. He always had an "nhl" ready shot even when he was 17. He hasn't improved in many areas since. some players bloom early and some bloom later. cody was an extremely early bloomer and hasn't blossomed. I dont think he will. He'll be a good pp specialist and O blue line and in player but he's gonna have to get off the ice if the play is in the neutral zone or defensize zone because he's atrocious there.
You do know for the most part you last few sentences could be pulled off and put in place for a player named Brett Hull (Yes they are not the same style of player). Was Cody awful defensively. I wouldn't go that far did he have much to learn yes he was still learning the NHL game. But how many players did/do we have that can beat Tim Thomas for over 100 feet away with no screen.

Here is why us "Cody Fan Boy Land" people were so pissed at the deal. Cody had proven at mulitple levels that when the games got important he could be counted on to help get a goal. Cody was developing into a clutch scorer for this team and a team that had a hurt Kesler. We could've used him over Kassian for the play-offs (does it mean we beat LA no but maybe we don't lose one of the first 3 then Daniel comes back and it isn't a scenario where we have to win every game with him in to advance. I think most of us could understand now that this was a trade that Gillis thought needed to be done but at the same time some of us think this would've been a deal better waited on until the draft instead of kinda screwing up our Stretch run.

Here is the other issue on this "C" thing unless you know the mindset of our room this could've been a message sent to Hodgson or could've been Kesler/Bieksa/Burr trying to be funny. Either way until someone from the roster says what it is about all this is; is speculation.

CM- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 10:26 AM
  #191
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcrazycanuck View Post
Sorry. Been reading this board for several years and most of this place had a love in with him until the day he got traded and then when Gillis made his comments the board went against him.
Not true. Many were pissed off. Than a lot saw Kassians potential and shut up. A lot of people didn't like how Gillis traded Hodgson at the time and some how he was going to be our playoff savior. Hodgson wouldn't have seen much ice in the playoffs. Maybe four minutes. His value would have declined significantly and Kassian wouldn't have been available for him. Kassian has major potential.... 30 goal 40 assist guy that can fight and hit hard and I mean haaard. Not to many players in the NHL can hit harder than him right now. Imagine when he becomes a man how strong he'll be.

Nuck This is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 10:39 AM
  #192
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,666
vCash: 500
I still hate this post-trade trashing and perspective-skewing treatment Hodgson gets, personally, claiming that Hodgson would have made no difference just because was sheltered defensively.

Hell, he got four minutes (just checked--6:45) in the playoffs the year before that when he was a significantly worse defensive AND offensive player, and he didn't hurt us then either-- Who's to say he doesn't suddenly step up in the playoffs and come through in key moments while being sheltered? I'm not saying he was a sure thing, but people brushing him off as insignificant in some way are showing their biases, IMO.

At some point, Hodgson's going to be a legitimate second line center at least (he's playing on Buffalo's first line now, although that's just.... yeah), and can at some point realistically become a first liner. If Kassian plays to his potential, great, that would absolutely make this a great trade-- but at this point, Kassian is without a doubt a step behind what we can assume he will or won't be, and is just a question-mark we're all anticipating and crossing our fingers for. At this point, he hasn't really shown us anything that should make us confident that he's going to be any more than a 3rd liner yet (although I definitely think he will).


Last edited by Shareefruck: 08-19-2012 at 10:50 AM.
Shareefruck is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 02:05 PM
  #193
Derp Kassian
Registered User
 
Derp Kassian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,220
vCash: 500
Wow a grave dig, another lockout an this topic can enter 2011 finals territory!

Derp Kassian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 03:06 PM
  #194
JanBulisPiggyBack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 371
vCash: 500
I fully expect Kassian will come to camp in excellent shape and extremely motivated

He should realize the canucks have a gapping hole on the second line that he will fit exceptionally well if he earns it and he now knows he must earn it.

Combine that with the off-season training and the expectations our club has for our players, plus getting the chance to develop some chemistry through offseason conditioning and practice will be the ticket.

Everybody knew he was a year away when the trade was made, he was given a few shifts up front to give him a taste and then relegated to the bottom six which was a good place for him, but unless he wants to pigeon hole himself as a good bottom six he will step it up

This is what I am looking forward to the most this coming season

JanBulisPiggyBack 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 03:59 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.