| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Guest2262
( )
|
 Posted - 02/27/2012 : 15:02:45
|
|
Any thoughts on Canucks moves today?
|
|
|
foolpittier
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
374 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 15:36:50
|
| Not Huge. |
 |
|
|
just1n
PickupHockey Pro
282 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 15:46:48
|
| I don't really know much prior to what I've read about Kassian and the d-man, so hard to assess at this point. The TSN guys seem to like the trade tho, hah. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 15:54:16
|
When i first heard the Hodgson deal, i didn't like it. But, that's because the "bigger name" was going the other way and the guy we got in return has yet to begin to really establish himself in the NHL. Kassian was however, a first round draft pick himself, so obviously he was expected to be pretty good. The more i learn about Kassian and his potential, the more i'm okay with the deal. I would have liked to have seen the Canucks get a little more for Cody, but judging by the way the day went, they prob got a little desperate for some toughness and had to roll the dice with this move. You also have to keep in mind that Hodgson was expendable due to the fact that he was going to continue to struggle to get mins at C in Vancouver behind Kesler and Sedin. I wanted them to get one of Downie, Ott or Gaustad but i really would have preferred they dealt Raymond and a pick (though other teams may not have accepted that). Always tough to know what offers were out there as usually this stuff isn't shared with the public. I really wonder if the whole relationship between AV / the Canucks and Cody had anything to do with this move?
Regardless, i think Buffalo got a darn good player and i can only hope that Kassian is the kind of guy that helps the Canucks down the stretch and in the playoffs. The other thing i didn't like hearing was that Kassian's had a lot of trouble with suspensions. Well Zach, one cheap hit and if you're not already on the top 5 most hated NHLers, you will be soon. I mean, just being traded to the Canucks is enough to climb a few spots on that list!  |
|
|
|
Utemin
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
451 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 15:58:49
|
Gillis is clearly converted to Al-Quaida for Trading Hodgson for a substanderd player. Hodgson Is a young rookie, who has an accurate blast of a shot, and massive teamwork abillities. Hodgson was clearly the future Captain Canuck. Zack Kassian is unknown to me and does not put up nearly as much points as Hodgson, Since Kassian is a power forward his potential is likely less than Hodgson's. The Canucks have already made an error aquiring current power forward David Booth, and this error is 100x worse.
It is likely that I will jump off a bridge today.
FU GILLIS
I am a fat boy, who plays too much X box, But my opinions are my biggest health hazzard |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 16:13:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Utemin
Gillis is clearly converted to Al-Quaida for Trading Hodgson for a substanderd player. Hodgson Is a young rookie, who has an accurate blast of a shot, and massive teamwork abillities. Hodgson was clearly the future Captain Canuck. Zack Kassian is unknown to me and does not put up nearly as much points as Hodgson, Since Kassian is a power forward his potential is likely less than Hodgson's. The Canucks have already made an error aquiring current power forward David Booth, and this error is 100x worse.
It is likely that I will jump off a bridge today.
FU GILLIS
I am a fat boy, who plays too much X box, But my opinions are my biggest health hazzard
WOW....no offense, but i hope that bridge is really high if that's your attitude. Talk about brutal! You can't judge this trade stictly on points. I agree, Kassian will prob never match Hodgson for points going forward, but he fills a role, one which you clearly have no idea about. Did you by any chance watch the playoffs last year???
Bottom line, if you didn't see it already, is that Hodgson wasn't gonna get a chance to be a 1 or 2 center here. So Gillis went out and aquired a "need". And, you know what, as shocking as it may be to you, you gotta give up something to get something. Considering what MG has done since his arrival here, i'd say we owe it to him to trust him and his scouts on this transaction. Of course, if you believe the Booth deal to be so bad, i'm sure i'm wasting my time talking any sense into you anyway!  |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 16:20:28
|
I am pretty happy with the Pahlsson acquisition - we got a great defensive centreman there, and gave up relatively little to get him.
I'm still not sold on the trade with BUF, but don't hate it either. I've been saying all along that Hodgson's days are numbered in VAN - he's a top-2 centre on a team that already has 2 top centres, and was never going to get to develop here. Further, there is speculation that some bad blood exists between the team and Hodgson, that dates back to his lost year with back injuries. All in all, he was not going to be a Canuck for long.
So, I guess the only question is did they get good value for him? I think they did - but that value will not be evident until later. Kassian is undoubtedly a highly touted prospect, and certainly is a big guy that plays a physical game. However, he does not have the skill that Hodgson has yet, and is not as good an overall player, right now. BUF definitely got the better player as of today. Kassian is projected to become a great power forward however, something that the Canucks don't have a lot of and need, so I'm excited for the future with this guy. I'm concerned about the right now however, Hodgson brought a lot of depth to the team, and really made the Canucks into a 3-line scoring threat. That is largely gone now.
I also like the dman deal - we traded away Sulzer, who was a sort-of prospect, in return for a better prospect in Gragnani. Apparently Gragnani was coached by AV in junior, so he's a known commodity. I think we got the better end of that part of the deal.
So we'll see - Pahlsson is money in the bank, bold move with Hodgson, will it pay off? |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 16:35:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Utemin
Gillis is clearly converted to Al-Quaida for Trading Hodgson for a substanderd player. Hodgson Is a young rookie, who has an accurate blast of a shot, and massive teamwork abillities. Hodgson was clearly the future Captain Canuck. Zack Kassian is unknown to me and does not put up nearly as much points as Hodgson, Since Kassian is a power forward his potential is likely less than Hodgson's. The Canucks have already made an error aquiring current power forward David Booth, and this error is 100x worse.
It is likely that I will jump off a bridge today.
FU GILLIS
I am a fat boy, who plays too much X box, But my opinions are my biggest health hazzard
Kassian is a year younger than Hodgson, so lets put a few things into perspective about your comment "Zack Kassian is unknown to me and does not put up nearly as much points as Hodgson, Since Kassian is a power forward his potential is likely less than Hodgson's."
at 21 Hodgson played 8 games in the NHL and scored 2 points
at 21 Kassianhas played 27 games in the NHL and has 7 points
best year in the CHL Hodgson scored 92 points in 53 games
Best year in the CHL Kassian scored 77 points in 56 games
Hodgson's best season in the AHL he scored 30 points in 52 games
Kassian's best season in the AHL is 26 points in 30 games.....
If anything Kassian has shown more potential to score at the Pro Level than Hodgson
plus Kassian brings much more to the game than Hodgson than just scoring, I think both teams got good players i think Kassian will be a much better player than Hodgson, and i think your opinion is ill informed and jsut plain silly
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 17:48:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pasty7
If anything Kassian has shown more potential to score at the Pro Level than Hodgson
plus Kassian brings much more to the game than Hodgson than just scoring, I think both teams got good players i think Kassian will be a much better player than Hodgson, and i think your opinion is ill informed and jsut plain silly
Potential aside, Hodgson is ACTUALLY SCORING at the pro level today, at a higher clip than Kassian.
I don't think that Kassian brings more to the game than Hodgson, they bring different things. Kassian is a big thumping power forward that can (hopefully) score and play a gritty game. Hodgson is a very intelligent centre that sees the game well and makes very smart hockey plays. He has excelled in Vancouver, and unlike other players, has not done it on the backs of the Sedin's or Kesler - he was a huge part of turning the 3rd line into a legitimate scoring threat, and gets most of his points playing with lesser players and playing less minutes.
BUF management knows what they got in Hodgson - a good player that will likely be their first or second line centre next year, if not immediately. However, VAN does not know what they have with Kassian yet.
I will agree with you on one thing - Utemin is uninformed and silly. |
Edited by - nuxfan on 02/27/2012 17:49:34 |
|
|
|
Statman
Rookie
Canada
125 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 18:21:41
|
I can truly say that I am heartbroken today at the team trading away Hodgson, however it will be a great move for him as he blossoms into a top line centre and NHL captain for many years to come.
Henrik and Kesler have the top two center positions sewn up in Vancouver for the next several years, so Cody never had the chance to get the ice team he needed. I see now that I was in denial about the whole situation, always half expecting him to be converted to a winger.
Kassian is a blue chip prospect in his own right and should be a good addition down the road, but I can't help but think that the team actually got weaker for the playoff drive. Everyone applauds the great pick-up of a guy like Pahlsson, but you're supposed to add your pick-ups to the current roster in place of depth players, not a guy that is producing points in clutch times and running your second PP unit. Our scoring went down and our powerplay just got worse. The draft would have been the better time to move Cody as is the case with Schneider. |
|
|
|
Guest0978
( )
|
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 19:36:34
|
| Quick note here guys, the nux play buffalo on Saturday, On CBC. Should be interesting |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 20:19:05
|
| yeah, I'll be at the game - I'm hoping the crowd will give him a big thanks and a nice send-off. Aside from being a great young player, he was one of the more popular players here this season. |
|
|
|
Guest2969
( )
|
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 21:56:33
|
| Utemin please stop posting stuff on this website. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2012 : 22:11:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2969
Utemin please stop posting stuff on this website.
Lol, just be thankful he's on here as sporadically as he is.  |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 05:52:41
|
I was surprised at this trade - Hodgson was a highly skilled young guy with loads of upside, and has already shown he can play.
Actually, Cody Hodgson has shown more than that - he has shown that he has superstar potential, let's be frank. The kid is getting third line minutes (12:55 per game on average), and yet he has 16 goals and 17 assists. The best third liner in hockey, is what I see. And he's not a third liner, so I get trying to deal him OR dealing someone else to move him up, but . . .
. . . to deal him for a totally unknown/unprovn quantity in Zack Kassian? I think that's plain stupid.
If you were overpaying for a player that could help you RIGHT NOW in your next playoff run - I could get that, makes sense. But to deal a kid already past his first step on the way to stardom, for another kid who has yet to take that step and may or may not ever score 15 goals in a season . . . is a backwards step.
Buffalo will immediately become a more skilled team, great pick-up by Buffalo. To me, the takeaway from this deal is that Derek Roy is going to be very available this summer.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 06:46:39
|
Slozo, the unknown is the only reason i hated this trade originally. That unknown is just how effective Kassian can be,and more importantly, if he can be, how soon? Even if he lives up to expectations aand becomes the next Lucic-like power forward, unless its instantaneous, it doesn't help the Canucks today. I have to assume Gillis couldn't pry a Steve Ott or Paul Gaustad away for anything less than Hodgson and chose to go with the kid with the higher upside even if he may not be as effective as the others are today.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 07:48:15
|
I think this is a situation of assets and needs. I think everyone agrees that Cody Hodgson has shown to be on his way to meeting his potential. However, with Sedin(31) and Kesler(27) firmly holding the #1 and #2 centre position, Hodgson playing for the Canucks was not moving up the ladder any time soon. Hodgson is the kind of player that is a waste if he is not in the top 6.
That being said, the Canucks had an asset and needs. Their needs are they need to be tougher to play against for the other teams forwards. We all know what happened in the play-offs last season and the times when Vancouver was in trouble and their ultimate demise was the other teams top players simply outplaying Vancouver's defensive forwards. Enter Pahlsson and Kassian.
Without a doubt this is a risk for Vancouver. If they don't win the Cup based on lack of offensive the finger can be pointed and not having Hodgson. However, if they win the Cup based on having a better group of defensive forwards than the deal is just what they needed. I also like that Gagnani kid. He hasn't cracked the Buffalo line up this year, but he had 7 pts in 7 play-off games last year. I think he adds some offensive depth to the Vancouver group in the case of injuries.
I think the deals that Vancouver made has pushed them to the team to beat in the west. |
Edited by - Beans15 on 02/28/2012 08:21:21 |
|
|
|
Guest5744
( )
|
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 07:55:39
|
i think vancouver was already the team to beat in the west (after beating detroit despite datsyuk not playing). kassian could turn out to be a fantastic player im just wondering how long 2, 3 .... 5 years?
if they were going to sell hodgson as an asset i think they should have gotten a power forward, like kassian, who could step in this year and make a difference for the playoffs which i don't believe kassian is capable of doing.
in closing, the nucks better hope kessler or one of the top 6 forwards isn't injured.... the depth beyond that top 6 doesn't have a ton of upside. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 09:16:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I think this is a situation of assets and needs. I think everyone agrees that Cody Hodgson has shown to be on his way to meeting his potential. However, with Sedin(31) and Kesler(27) firmly holding the #1 and #2 centre position, Hodgson playing for the Canucks was not moving up the ladder any time soon. Hodgson is the kind of player that is a waste if he is not in the top 6.
This is pretty much the crux of the situation - as good as Hodgson is, or as much potential as he has, he is not better than Hank or Kesler. VAN has one of the best top-2 centre combos in the league, both locked up for the forseeable future, and Hodgson simply was not going to crack that.
A couple of other things to consider:
- there is speculation in Vancouver that Hodgson might have requested a trade, either earlier in the year or recently. We all know he had nowhere to go in Vancouver - Hodgson certainly knew it as well, and rightly so might have wanted an opportunity on a team that has a need for a top-2 centre. If that is the case, then I think Vancouver handled it very well by accomodating, and without going all Howson-like and announcing it to to the world.
- Moving Hodgson for anything other than an EL deal would have put the Canucks in cap trouble, either this year or next. They have room now thanks to Ballard's concussion, but had they picked up a Dustin Brown or Steve Ott, they would have been in trouble next year, and would have had to move a couple more bodies. This team does not want to consider moving bodies it does not have to move.
I'm getting used to this trade - yeah, its hard to lose Hodgson, but what is the point of having assets if you don't use them? I'm glad we got youth for youth - it would have been instantly gratifying to get a Dustin Brown or Shane Doan for Hodgson, but down the road maybe not so much.
Kassian is unknown, but its not like he doesn't come without credentials of his own - 13th overall pick, good numbers in junior and AHL, now in his first year in the NHL. The Canucks will take all the pressure off him to perform, he'll start on the 3rd line in Vancouver and develop properly. |
|
|
|
just1n
PickupHockey Pro
282 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 10:26:10
|
One thing I wanted to note is that the Canucks coaching staff has been pretty good at getting what they want out of new players. Higgins and Lapierre were both huge pick-ups at the deadline last year. Lapierre had a rep for being undisciplined but it was made sure that he fit into the system.
Rolling the dice a bit I'm sure, but I'm sure the Canucks brass has a plan. Still tough to see a rare first rounder that's playing well leave town tho. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 10:45:32
|
I just think that if they really wanted to move Hodgson, they could have gotten a better player for winning RIGHT NOW, as opposed to the future.
I can think of players of the calibre of a Ryan Smyth who could have been had for a Hodgson - gritty, two way forwards who can actually score! RJ Umberger . . . Stoll . . . there are others I am sure.
And myself - he could be BETTER than Kesler in the end, we just don't know. And he's been integral to Vancouver's success this year . . . and now, where do those goals come from?
To me, it's a big downgrade, just for a guy who, at this point, is just a good physical presence, nothing more. He might become more later, sure - but doesn't Vancouver have the team to win right NOW?
I still scratch my head at this one.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 11:10:10
|
Slozo, i totally understand where you're coming from and that's what i alluded to earlier when i mentioned Ott and Gaustad. The word around here, straight from Gillis, is that he wasn't willing to deal a young guy like Cody for and older guy, especially for a rental like Gaustad. I'm assuming that means that Dallas and Buff wouldn't accept what he offered so he went a different route. He's also stated that he wanted a true 3rd line, one not with a scorer like Hodgson, but a shut down type line which will be difficult to play against. This line, he hopes, will allow the Sedins and Kesler lines to be better matched up and not having to go power vs power all the time. The other thing that most outside of Vancouver prob don't understand is the fact that Hodgson's line, and he especially, was not playing a lot in key situations, late in games, especially with the lead. I heard a stat today on the radio that said Hodgson's line has started in the offensive zone, 75% of the time. THAT, is a line that the coach doesn't trust moving forward towards the playoffs! So, while he provided some scoring depth, his value at this point in his career as far as the playoffs go, may not have been as high as most of us think? At the end of the day (yesterday), Gillis thinks he's got a better positioned team for the long playoff battle he hopes his team faces again this year and ironically, that has more to do with the aquisition of Pahlsson, than it does Kassian!
The only way Hodgson could have stuck around moving forward would be if he managed to bump Kesler to the wing, which is possible, but at this point, unlikely. |
|
|
|
Leafs81
PickupHockey Pro
735 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 11:11:31
|
Being on the east cost I don't see Hodgson play much but I only heard praises about him so far so it hurts to see him go in a division rivals.
But Kassian is a big forward and is exactly what Vancouver needs, maybe not right now but I'm sure the Canucks fans will love him down the road. Good acquisition by both teams and lets not forget the Canucks got Gragnani.
Samuel Pahlson has a Stanley Cup ring and will bring stability and toughness to their third line. |
|
|
|
Guest3021
( )
|
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 11:23:55
|
I'm still not sold on this trade and here's why. If the canucks had played Tampa Bay in last years playoffs and not Botston (it cam close), then I think they would have either won the cup, or if they didn't, it would not have been because of team toughness.
I feel like the gillis with this trade made an attempt to upgrade his team for a playoff round against teams like Boston. But what if he gets matched up against only skill teams in four rounds?
Also, the other reason the canucks lost was, lets be honest, Tim Thomas played out of his mind, and the canucks top six dried up. Did any of you see the look on Tim Thomas' face when Cody Hodgson blasted that rocket right past him a few weeks age? The kid can score.
I don;t think this trade helps the canucks for this year at all. Maybe later and I'm willing to entertain that based on the fact that Hodgson for sure would not have moved up in the lineup. However, I feel like they maybe should have hung onto him for this playoff run at least and then make a trade in the off season. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 11:32:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Leafs81
But Kassian is a big forward and is exactly what Vancouver needs, maybe not right now but I'm sure the Canucks fans will love him down the road. Good acquisition by both teams and lets not forget the Canucks got Gragnani.
The Gragnani comment is very interesting. If i'm not mistaken, the trade of Gragnani for Sulzer was announced separately from the Hodgson deal. Correct me if i'm wrong, but i saw them listed separately. On paper, it would seem Hodgson is the best player, followed by Kassian due to his potential, Gragnani and then Sulzer. What i'm getting at, is i wonder if it was a totally separate deal or if the Gragnani for Sulzer bit was a bit of an extra that Gillis maybe asked for? Not a big deal really, just curious.
Guest3021 - Good points. Funny though, i was actually hoping to play Boston. For some reason, TB scared the $&%# outta me! So much firepower last year in the playoffs! Either way, i think the need to beef up the Canucks was more than just for "IF" we face Boston again. Bottom line is, the playoffs are a grind. Any team can use some size and grit if they're going to go the distance.
As far as Hodgson helping them more this year in the playoffs, scroll up and read what i wrote above if you didn't already. Gillis made it clear that he wanted a totally different look to his 3rd line for various reasons. |
|
|
|
topcornermax
Top Prospect
Canada
10 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 11:43:07
|
| I think the Hodgson deal was a classic move that is going to bite Canucks in the ass later on the road |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2012 : 12:09:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest3021
I'm still not sold on this trade and here's why. If the canucks had played Tampa Bay in last years playoffs and not Botston (it cam close), then I think they would have either won the cup, or if they didn't, it would not have been because of team toughness.
I feel like the gillis with this trade made an attempt to upgrade his team for a playoff round against teams like Boston. But what if he gets matched up against only skill teams in four rounds?
If the Canucks come up against a pure skill team this year, they can run all over them with their newfound size like the Bruins did last year
But seriously, come on - the Canucks have tons of scoring skill left with the team. Its why they only have room on the 3rd line and second PP unit for someone like Hodgson, who would be a top-6 forward on most other teams, right now. The reason this trade happened at all is because they have faith in the Sedin's, Burrows, Kesler, Booth, Raymond, Higgins, and Hansen (not to mention Salo, Edler, Bieksa on the blueline) to be able to provide the scoring. |
|
|
|
just1n
PickupHockey Pro
282 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 09:47:11
|
Great point Alex, regarding a 3rd line as a shut down line. It's definitely a needed thing in the playoffs. Recalling the two previous years in which the Canucks lost to Chicago, you may recall that the Nucks had a helluva time shutting them down in those Game 6's. No room for Hodgson with Pahlsson as well.
Time will tell. Lots to give up, hopefully Gragnani will be good too. He was part of the same deal I'm sure, not separate for Sulzer. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 10:17:58
|
Now I am not saying the Canucks will win the Cup without question. There is always freak situations that could happen. However, I think the only think that can beat the Canucks today is health. If they run into injuries, all bets are off. However, if they are health, they are fabulous. I agree that Hodgson is likely the best player in the deal but I think people are grossly over rating this kid. I don't see him being a #1 line centre. He is a #2 and a very good one at that. But if that's not what the Canucks need, it's a waste.
The Canucks needs were to be able to slow/stop the oppositions forwards. That's it. Looking at last year's playoffs, the only team that did not give the Canucks problems was Nashville as they did not have a solid group of forwards. They nearly lost to Chicago, they were ridiculously out-shot and out-played by San Jose but found a way to win, and Boston simply ran them over. I truly believe that the games and Canucks won against Boston was had more to do with Boston playing poorly than Vancouver playing well.
Pahlsson and Kassian give them a pile of sandpaper up front and Gragnani has a lot (tons actually) of offensive upside from the point.
I like this deal for Vancouver a lot more than others do. I don't think Hodgson is as good as some think he is and he was not the puzzle piece that Vancouver needs to win. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 10:50:30
|
Oh, I don't know Beans - Hodgson was good, for sure. He is an extremely intelligent player that sees the ice well, and scored in bunches with little help. Its one thing to score repeatedly playing with Hall, Eberle, Hemsky and top line/top PP minutes. Its another entirely to nearly match those numbers playing with Hansen, Malhotra, Lapierre, on the second PP unit with 13 minutes of playing time per game.
The thing that always got me was how clutch his goals were. More than half scored in big games at big times, most of them clutch goals when the Canucks really needed one. Very calm and collected on the ice, passed well and had a wicked shot when he wanted to pull it out. He made that 3rd line a scoring threat, and the Canucks will miss it.
He just turned 22, and will be an instant second line centre in BUF. I do think he has the tools to be a first line centre at some point in his career, probably not that far down the road.
That being said - I do agree that the Canucks needed to get what they got in Kassian and Pahlsson. Watched them play last night, they were obviously out of sorts trying to gel with the team, but they both looked good and fast. Kassian showed he has hands, was absolutely robbed by Smith a couple of times. Once they gel with the team, Vancouver should be good to go, and be tougher to play against.
Some humour - I was listening to the news last night, the Vancouver media had a chance to interview Kassian before the game last night. He said he was surprised with being interviewed so soon, and was just looking forward to coming to Vancouver, playing his game and flying under the radar 
Good luck with that, welcome to Vancouver! |
Edited by - nuxfan on 02/29/2012 10:51:48 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 11:07:59
|
Well, each person is entitled to their own opinion. I didn't see what you did in Hodgson. Granted, you likely watch 3 Canuck games for every 1 that I see, but in the game I have watched this season he did not impress me. I never got the impression that he was an impact player. He will be a very good player but I don't see the hype. He surely is not Eberle, Hall, or RNH. I see impact from those guys regardless of the line they are on. But I digress.
I completely agree that this is what Vancouver needed, so I think it's a good deal. I highly doubt that Vancouver (or their fans) will regret this deal in the short or long term. If it does happen, it's impossible to regret winning the Stanley Cup, right???
Although, I have also been wrong a few times in my life. |
|
|
|
Guest3021
( )
|
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 11:13:15
|
Yeah, that was probably the main reason I was sad to see Hodgson go nuxfan, he was absolute clutch this year, and he moved the puck better than anyone on the team (not including the magical twin magnetism).
That being said, I watched the game last night and was quite impressed with Kassian. He seems to be a smart player who made some beauty passes, and had a couple of great scoring chances. His work in the corners maybe needs to get a bit better, but I think Buffalo fans probably felt similar about seeing him go to the way we're feeling about seeing Hodgson go...so that's something.
Didn't really notice Pahlsson last night, but he's a shut down guy anyway.
I will quickly adress Beans, you're absolutely right, and it's the reason I was questioning this trade initially. If the canucks lose a top six, and a D (hello Salo) to injury, which is very likely, we might not have that bottom six guy to step up and provide needed scoring in a long gritty playoff round. Having a money goal scorer like Hodgson there would be comforting to say the least.
But I get the new look of the team, the traditional lines, the checking line freeing up the scoring line to play more offensively, and I like it, it's a very new look for the canucks since a long time back. I'm just saying that for in order for that to work, the top six have got to start going to work. (Kesler especially)
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 11:43:00
|
Again, it all comes down to how well Kassian pans out in his projected roll. If he's closer to Lucic or Bertuzzi (in his prime) than he is Steve Bernier, then it'll be a good deal for the Canucks, even if Hodgson develops into a ppg first line center for Buffalo. It was a trade of/for needs.
Beans, i fell in love with Hodgson at the WJC's a few years back where i still say he was the best player and deserved MVP over Tavares. If he becomes anything close to what Tavares seems to be developing into, then Buffalo got a gem. Gotta give to get though and, although i know i'm repeating myself, the Canucks didn't just trade Hodgson for the future, they traded him as part of an effort to re-shape their 3rd line! It is a complete change in the concept of how this team plans on playing moving forward. Hodgson simply wasn't, at this point in his career, going to be valuable enough to the Canucks in the only role available for him so they chose to go a different route with a more traditional checking line all while upgrading their grit/toughness, not just for now, but for the future.
As far as Hodgson's potential, who knows? But at this point, he's putting up some really decent numbers considering his TOI and the linemates he's had. At this early stage of his career, it's hard to believe he can't become a 70-75 point guy with the right linemates in the right situation.
A good deal both ways imo, though Buff so far has the more proven asset for sure! |
|
|
|
Statman
Rookie
Canada
125 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 16:48:41
|
Beans, no offense to you and the two or so games you have watched of Cody Hodgson, but there is a reason people around these parts are so upset to watch him go.
World Under 18 Top Scorer
World Under 20 Top Scorer
OHL Player Of The Year
CHL Player Of The Year
And now he is putting up strong point totals with little ice time in the NHL. Alex, you mention that you see him as a 70-75 point guy with the right line mates, in the right situation. If that turns out to be his career path I would be, grossly disappointed. His junior resume is that of a top five player in the NHL and a guy who could score 100 points on mutlitple occasions. Though I do realize many people fail to live up to their potential, most people around these parts think Cody was on his way to fulfilling that promise. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 19:15:17
|
Statman.....before i even start, i hope you know i'm a big Hodgson fan. Loved him when i first got to watch him during the WJC's and followed him more once the Canucks drafted him. I believe i even mentioned in a thread on here once not that long ago that i'd love to see the Canucks go after Matt Duchene, Cody's former team mate and good buddy from junior.
However, no offense, but i think my thinking he's a 70-75 point guy is far more realistic than your viewing of his junior resume saying he's a "top 5 player in the league" and "a guy who could score 100 points on mutlitple occasions". C'mon, explain something to me. If he was considered to have a shot at being one of the top 5 players in the NHL, why did 9 guys get picked before him in his draft year alone? I think you're being very optimistic! Sure, it could happen, i guess, but as much as i loved Hodgson here and still do as a player, i don't think he's gonna be cracking the top 5 anytime soon.
Very much like i said about Kassian by comparing him to Lucic / Bertuzzi vs Bernier, i'll say the same of Cody. He could very well be the next Toews, but he could just as easily be the next Kyle Wellwood. I think he'll be somewhere in between personally and won't be the least bit surprised if he never hits a point per game, but that will depend a lot on his linemates and the Sabres team moving forward.
Regardless of whether or not this trade blows up in the Canucks' face and causes us fans another Neely nightmare, i wish him well in his future in the NHL. I just hope Kassian pans out as well! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/29/2012 : 20:57:05
|
Statman, offense taken. Simply put, if a player's junior career had any meaning what so ever, guys like Doug Wickenheiser, David Gilbert, Brad Patrick, and Patrick Sound would have been the best players in the history of the NHL. Never heard of them before??? Use google. I don't have time to educate.
What I do have time to do is say again, in the 20 or so games of Hodgson's games I have watched he has been just another player on the ice. Not bad, but not the best player on the ice. Not once do I recall saying, "wow" at all.
So ya, if Hodgson goes on to score 70 ish points, it might be a loss to the Canucks. However, the Canucks already have 3 or so guys that will do that or more. What happens if Kassian becomes a 50 pt a season guy and the Canucks win 2 Cups in the next 5 years. Then what??? I bet you won't say that you miss Cody Hodgson!!
Hindsight is always 20/20. With what we know today, it is hard to argue that Hodgson was not getting into the top 6 group in Vancouver any time soon. The Canucks were missing the big strong forwards to make it tough for the other teams to play against. You gotta give something to get something. They gave what they could afford to give up to get what they think they needed.
PS, Kassian has a pretty decent junior career himself, including a Memorial Cup. Does Hodgson have one of those?? Nope. That must mean he sucks. |
|
|
|
Statman
Rookie
Canada
125 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2012 : 00:07:52
|
Wow, Beans. As usual your comments are stupifying.
As I mentioned (well before you did), not everybody fulfills the promise of their junior numbers. No need to make a list for me. And I'm sure I probably don't need to make a list for you of guys that have had amazing careers after putting up huge junior numbers. It's an indicator that the player has the talent but there are other factors at play, for sure.
I don't care if you didn't say "Wow" when watching him. He gets third line minutes and still beats the best teams in the league with clutch performances. Those big goals, late in games aren't about what he can do down the road. He was winning games for us NOW!
Now let's move on to your "what if" scenario. IF Kassian gets 50 pts and IF the Canucks win two cups in the next five years, does that make me forget about Hodgson? Nope, not by a long shot. Though I will look more favourably on the trade, of course. Then again maybe Kassian develops into Alec Stojanov to Hodgson's Markus Naslund.
Hindsight is 20/20. That's a refrain used repeatedly by those lacking foresight. My other pet peave of a line used by morons is "you have to give something to get something". Sounds good. Give me a $100 bill and a will give you back a five. You got something right?! Are you good with that deal? Hey, you had to give something to get something! That's a B.S. line fed to us by people that have just been taken to the cleaners in a trade.
Finally, I want to clear the air about one thing. I don't dislike Kassian. He was pretty solid at the world juniors and I do think he can help out the Canucks. I'm not sold on the fact that this is the year that will happen, but seeing the backlash that has come from this, the team seems willing to give him the opportunity. I hope he takes the most of it.
Alex, I generally respect your opinions and think you are one of the good ones on this forum. I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this one. |
|
|
|
@valanche
Rookie
Canada
240 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2012 : 05:37:35
|
.... so apparently canucks fans are in the
anger
phase of reaction to this change.
phew! they skipped denial that woulda been kinda wierd!
66 is > than 99 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2012 : 05:49:58
|
Stupifying?? Moron?? Statsman, if I did something to offend you, please let me know. If not, I will kindly ask you to follow the forum guidelines and leave then personal attacks out of your posts. I said nothing personal towards you however I did take offense to your comments. I disagree with your opinion and provided examples as to why. I would appreciate the respect of not having my opinion called stupifying or be called a moron simply because I disagree with your opinion. Different does not mean wrong.
Now, to your legitimate points in your post:
If you don't have to give something to get something than you would accept a $5 billing a trade for a $100 bill. Let me give another analogy. You live in DT Vancouver and drive a Ferarri. (Congrats on your success by the way). You are happy with your life but you want something more and decide that running an orchid is your life long dream. On your way to the orchid, you stop and trade in your Ferarri for a John Deere Combine. Your old friends in Vancouver are going to think you are a complete moron for trading in your sweet ride. But what will they think about thinks when you are harvesting your mutli-million dollar apple crop with your Combine???
I pose another question to you: Would you have been happy if the deal was Hodgson for Lucic??? If so, that is Kassian's potential. You do appreciate that Kassian is a year younger than Hodgson, right?? Kassian has not had a chance to play in the NHL and has taken about the same amount of time to crack the NHL as Hodgson did. Obviously, Gillis sees something that is valuable enough to move a player like Hodgson. Frankly, not only do I see it but I agree that Kassian is the kind of player the Canucks have been missing.
Finally, I don't mean to sound disrespectful and maybe I have missed all the clutch performances, but 2 GWG and a pace for 20 goals as a 3rd line player is not unheard of. Those numbers are certainly comparable to Ryan Jones, Curtis Glencross, Cal Clutterbuck, and David Jones. Those are all guys who are getting 3rd line minutes and producing in the same range as Hodgson. If I can find a guy that is comparable to Hodgson on every team in the Canucks division, it is likely there is one on every team in the NHL. Difference being is that all of the players I named bring more to the table, defensively speaking, than Hodgson does.
Now, before you jump all over me for that last comment, please appreciate that Hodgson has more potential and would produce more than any of those guys in 1st or 2nd line roles. However, there is no room for Hodgson in Vancouver's top lines. So, to get a player who can likely produce in the same range in a 3rd line role but bring more size and defensive abilities to the table is a good move in my opinion. Trade in a Ferarri for a Combine.
I guess time will tell, as I do have foresight but not a crystal ball. I believe that if the Canucks don't win it will not be based on missing Hodgson's scoring. They have that in droves already. I do believe that if the Canucks do win, it will be because they added the elements of Pahlsson and Kassian to their line-up. I also really like that Gragnani kid in the short and long term as well. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2012 : 06:22:42
|
Beans,
Please compare apples to apples here.
Cody Hodgson - ATOI 12:44, 16g, 17a, 33 pts
Plays on third line, gets LOW 3rd line minutes.
Compared with . . .
David Jones - ATOI 15:02, 15g, 13a, 28 pts
Playing on third line mostly, but gets low 2nd line minutes.
Cal Cutterbuck - ATOI 16:19, 14g, 8a, 22 pts.
Plays on a third line, sometimes 2nd line, get's 2nd line mins.
Ryan Jones - ATOI 15:19, 14g, 11a, 25 pts
Plays on 3rd line, gets 2nd line minutes.
Curtis Glencross - ATOI 18:18, 19g, 15a, 34 pts
Playing second line, high 2nd line minutes.
Now tell me,
How are any of these guys compareable in terms of ice time per game with Hodgson? Can you think of a player in the NHL right now even CLOSE to Hodgson's numbers, while playing under 13 minutes a game? I can't.
Most of these other guys bring more to the table, because they are more "true" 3rd liners . . .
Hodgson's pace is incredible, for his time on ice, Beans. I dare you to find anything remotely compareable this year.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest6498
( )
|
Posted - 03/01/2012 : 06:54:41
|
| I think the only reason Beans likes this deal is because it (potentially) hurts the Canucks, lol. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Nux deadline moves 
