mikeburn

Members
  • Content count

    847
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

370 Excellent

About mikeburn

  • Rank
    Comets Star

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

1,956 profile views
  1. The thing about Kesler is true - mgmt knew before pulling off the trade that Kesler was already playing with an injury that would require off-season surgery, and had to have wondered how far the Canucks would get into the playoffs with that scenario. I just think they looked at Kesler being relied upon for two key pieces (expected to produce top 6 offense & taking the brunt of heavy physical play), then looked at how to replace one of those pieces with the hope Kesler could plug thru the injury for a long playoff run. If that was the thinking then management had two options - 1) rely on the rookie Hodgson to plunk in sufficient offense to reduce reliance on Kesler's production; or 2) inject some physicality into the forward group to reduce the burden on already injured Kesler (ie: have another guy who could smack around opposition) There would have been natural problems for going with option 1, such as that it woulda meant an ego hit to Kesler as Hodgson got more ice time and pp opportunity, and it wasn't exactly the way a rookie should be developed anyway. And then of course there's the whole risk of whether Hodgson was truly ready to take on a greater offensive role. Comparably, if they had indeed traded Hodgson for an NHL-ready "power forward" (rather than Kassian), they'd have had a viable replacement to at least some of Hodgson's offense and been able to rely on that new acquisition to be throwing his body around, meaning Kesler didn't have to do all the heavy lifting on his own shifts. That's my non-conspiracy theory anyway. I believe Gillis spoke the truth right after the trade - they were simply trying to swap the more cerebral talented type (Hodgson) for the more power/physical talented type (Kassian), they were trying to "get bigger", or rather heavier. And the timing was precisely due to figuring out how to fill in some gaps to keep Kesler going as strongly as possible for as long into the season/playoffs as possible. I'm not convinced that mgmt for any team ought to put themselves into a position to promise a rookie anything. Doesn't do any good for the team or the kid. But then seeing how no one in a position to know, not even Gillis or AV, have ever gone on record to claim that Hodgson demanded (much less asked for) more ice time or a greater role, I'm not convinced there was an ice time conflict whatsoever. To me, the whole "he deserves more minutes" thing originated from the media driven drama machine (much like how Horvat became the subject of such "he deserves more..." hype last year) and then later, when Gillis tried to deflect the negative attention for the trade back onto the player with his oneliner about "mgmt spending so much time on Hodgson's (unspecified issues, but probably re: his misdiagnosed back injury) so we (as in mgmt itself) decided the kid didn't want to be here", well, the ice time and trade demand rumours just took flight. Besides, given Hodgson's public record character, he just doesn't seem like the type to "demand" anything. Either way though, mgmt shouldn't have their backs to the wall dealing with any unproven kid. Considering Hodgson's development didn't actually continue after the trade, his next 2.5 seasons of producing top 6 results is rather remarkable. Considering that he's only resumed his rookie/sophomore development this season, and is showing up well for the effort, your argument may be premature, lol.
  2. Yup, that's true. For now. Though of course when you start digging into it, Hodgson's 8 points are probably more remarkable than Horvat's... I mean, looking at the two kids this year it's only fair to flag that Hodgson's 8 points consist of 3 es goals & 4 es assists (to Horvat's 0 es goals & 3 es assists), while averaging a measly 10:54 TOI/game with just one sniff of the PP to account for that last point (to Horvat's 16:05 TOI/game, including regular PP shifts). Then there's the clutch factor - Hodgson's 8 points include a team leading 2 game-winning goals & 2 game-winning first assists (to Horvat's 1 gwg). The +/- differential also goes to Hodgson, whose +4 is tied for 2nd among forwards on the Preds (to Horvat's excessively ugly -15). The SAT/corsi% is in Hodgson's favour too, but then his 58.48% doesn't just place him 1st among regular Preds forwards, it beats out every Canuck forward (including Horvat's blah 45.44%). Whatever though, cuz comparing Hodgson & Horvat this year is really comparing 8 project oranges to 8 sophomore apples... If we were to look at both their rookie years, it's arguable Hodgson had the better campaign - Hodgson, 83 games averaging 13:49 toi, 41pts (.49pts/game), +1 (49.6% es corsi) Horvat, 68 games averaging 12:15 toi, 25pts (.37pts/game), -8 (44.8% es corsi) Hodgson of course went on to have a great short sophomore year (pacing for 26 goals & 58pts) and then a very respectable long sophomore year (pacing for 23 goals & 50pts) while leading his bottom dwellers. Can't say the same about Horvat, who still has the Sedins (and to a lesser extent Sutter) for some shelter but is on pace for 5 goals & 21 points, and already a hideous -15 with a 43.0% corsi. Still, I'd rather be a Horvat having a sophomore cliche of a year than be a 25 year old Hodgson subjected to lame dissing while obliged to prove himself all over again from scratch - and likely waived and gone from the NHL altogether if he doesn't. Horvat's 21 point pace this season may kinda suck for a guy getting quality ice time and opportunity, but it's better he go thru a cliche sophomore year now than at 25
  3. Um, yeah, so like... about Baer... Seeing how this isn't really a Dorset or Prust thread....
  4. Unlike the hordes of those who form opinions on the basis of personal theories posted as "facts" on anonymous discussion boards, and the scores of others who fall for empty rhetoric, your snap shot is pretty straight on with reality. Just a few points of clarity where it goes mainly to the sequence of events... Gillis did bus toss the kid, but his real hardball was thrown long after the trade, on the heels of the Canucks having been bounced out of the first round of the playoffs which triggered the media-driven drama machine revisiting the trade with vigor - that's when Gillis said "we decided he didn't want to be here". Meaning Gillis did not actually say that Hodgson wanted out, but rather that management decided for Hodgson that he wanted a trade. Using Gillis' logic, when he was later fired himself, ownership could have rationalized the decision merely by saying "we decided Gillis didn't want to be here". Like huh? Just a lame rationalization intended to deflect negative attention for his own decision. In that same post-playoff interview, Gillis also threw out a line about how mgmt had spent "more time on Hodgson's issues than any other player]". If remotely true, I'd go with believing the trainer afterward who called out Gillis for the comment and clarified that throughout that Hodgson's prospect/rookie year, the kid's back injury had been misdiagnosed and mismanaged, resulting in more than a year of development time lost. But Gillis didn't refer to any of the medical issues that ought to have consumed some of mgmt's time, he merely said "issues" - and in context with the inference that Hodgson had asked for a trade, it sure fed the notion that the kid was a prima donna or otherwise had character "issues". But let's be fair to Gillis - Gillis is not actually the source of the notion that Hodgson demanded ice-time (that came from the same media-driven drama machine that was pushing Horvat last year and inferring that because Horvat wasn't getting what he was "due" then there must be a player-coach problem btwn the kid and WD). Gillis is also not the source of the notion that Hodgson's "daddy" was involved in any way whatsoever (that came from a single comment made by a fan on twitter during a spat with Hodgson's agent after the fact - and imagined to be true merely because the agent didn't specifically respond to that one comment out of hundreds). All in, Gillis didn't actually say much at all. The guy is a lawyer and a promoter, and he used just the right few words to infer a heck of a lot without saying anything. He said enough to toss the kid under the bus as fodder for a media market built on click bait - and a fan base already disgruntled with the playoff results fell for it hook and line; Hodgson became targeted for all sorts of petty character theories. To be equally fair to Hodgson's side of the matter - Every player *wants* more ice time, if the guy doesn't then you'd have to question his compete level, lol. It's equally normal for players to ask for more ice time, for pp and pk duty, to approach their coaches asking how they can earn up, what they need to work on to get more trust, etc... Faulting Hodgson for anything from wanting to asking for more of a leash is crazy unless we're gonna fault every other player in the league for those same basics. But let's be clear - Hodgson has never been quoted as having asked for more ice time, nor has anyone else in a position to know has ever gone on record as saying he so much as asked (even though it would be a normal ask, lol). Hodgson has never been quoted as having demanded more ice time from proven vets ala Henrik & Kesler, nor has anyone else in a position to know ever gone on record as saying he did (and given Gillis' bus tossing, well if the kid had demanded such a thing it's hard to imagine Gillis wouldn't have just said as much ;)). Hodgson did though, quietly, fire the agent who got into the media/fan spats - a point which seems to have been lost on those who try to spin the agent's antics as somehow reflecting the kid's own character (anyone around here talking about Sven, whose "daddy" actually did give a rather damming interview about his son's coaching staff in Calgary? Neither Hodgson nor Sven are responsible for the antics of others and the fact that Sven subsequently denounced his father's comments gets the same kudos from me as Hodgson subsequently firing an agent who was saying/doing things that the kid evidently did not agree with.) Hodgson also did, politely and humbly, refute Gillis' inferred accusation that he'd asked for a trade - a point which seems to be willfully ignored by those who support their character accusations of the kid on the basis that he didn't call Gillis a liar. He actually did - Hodgson said he was shocked with the trade, that it came entirely unexpectedly, and when pushed by media types to outright declare Gillis had lied, the kid politely and professionally, just like thousands of pro players have done before him, changed the conversation to how much he appreciated Vancouver fans, was sad to go but also looking forward to the future. Canuck fans who remain disgruntled with the whole thing to the extent of leaping to trash a player who was traded as a rookie 4 years ago are, to my mind, projecting nasties onto the wrong target. Fault mgmt for making a decision that didn't pan out (not that I think it was a "bad" idea myself, going for the "bigger" over "cerebral", with Henrik at the time having years of "cerebral" left in the tank and Kesler already playing thru another injury that would require off-season surgery). Fault the media-driven drama machine that offers up imaginary controversies about any Canuck, past or present or hopefully future, as click bait. Fault the fans who continue to project their own hype onto players, and who then seem to get all nasty if a kid "betrays" them by somehow failing to live up to the lofty expectations imposed upon them.
  5. To be fair... Hodgson never actually said he wanted to be traded. Never once before the trade, never once before, never once since. Never. Only months after the trade (when the Canucks were bounced out of the 1st playoff round and media hounds went back onto the GM for having traded offense for a non-NHL ready physical type in Kassian) did Gillis say "mgmt decided [Hodgson] wanted to be traded". Mgmt "deciding" what someone wanted is entirely different that someone actually wanting it themselves. And the fact it was only said months after the trade itself while the GM was under intense scrutiny suggests it was more a bus tossing of the kid to defelect attention than anything else. Further more, while some will argue that Hodgson "wanted to be traded" because he didn't argue against Gillis' comment via the media after the fact, well, let's be fair right - what rookie worth a professional salt gets into that argument? Smart kids (or really, any player, any age) steer clear of engaging in those media-driven dramas after a trade, and instead just say the same old polite cliche things about loving the fans, being sad to go, hopeful about the future, yadda yadda. Hodgson said only what countless well-mannered polite rookies had said thousands of times before him - loved the fans, sad to go, but hopeful. Simple stuff. Too much has been read into the fact he refused to engage in the media-driven drama machine. Fact is, Hodgson has never once said a thing via the media that wasn't polite, humble, respectful and professional. It wasn't Hodgson who went on record as demanding ice time (and he quietly fired the agent who did make public comments about the kid being "owed" ice time), who claimed to be a 1C or even a 2C in the making (put that on the fan and media hype), or otherwise said or did a thing that put him up as a so-called "prima donna". Heck, even last year, during his statistical anomally of a dismal season for a lot of reasons that were actually out of his control, he never once back-talked the coach who repeatedly trashed him via the media, there was never a single report of teammates having issues with him, and while his own GM called him a "good solider", Hodgson himself was giving interviews in which in faulted himself exclusively for his results and complimented his assortment of linemates for their play (the same linemates who, this year, are either scratches, call-ups, 4th line grinders or haven't even yet seen a call up). Having said all of that - I suspect you're right and that the kid did *want* to rapidly ascend to top 6 awesomeness. What kid doesn't want to skip steps and be just that good? I'd imagine that when presented with the chance to be the defacto 1C in Buffalo, Hodgson was a very happy camper, lol. To be true, I was happy for the kid myself! Stupid stupid me though, cuz in retrospect I think you're right - if he'd stayed with the Canucks and developed ala the Sedins, Kesler and Burrows before him or the Horvat and McCanes now... well Canuck fans would had a very different and whole two-way game type 50 pts guy I suspect. As it is, he's got this year to go back into his development time and prove he's got enough of a two-way game to EARN into the top 6 and preserve himself a long NHL career. His whole game (from skating to physical play to the defensive game and advanced stats) has clearly dramatically improved, but it remains to be seen if it's enough to warrant the Preds' coach from giving him a go in the sulking top 6. Could turn out that Hodgson improved but picked the wrong team to show it with, or that he didn't improve enough. I dunno. But I do wish he hadn't been traded so that we could have seen his real ceiling as a properly developed kid ala Henrik, Kesler, etc. And for what it's worth, many of the development obstacles Hodgson faced that were out of his control are similar to those that Kassian faced and yet were out of Kassian's control too... multiple teams, regimes, changing coaches, rosters, constant flux of linemates, systems, expectations... Interesting how easily potential can be squandered in the press to rush for a result "today" at any cost.
  6. Actually... Hodgson went from pacing 41pts as a rookie to 58pts in the shortened season to 50pts as a sophomore - to suddenly and dramatically flopping to a buyout season. But to my mind the drop was entirely understandable - take a natural center playing in a top 6 offensive role producing top 6 numbers, and plug him into a grinder winger on a bottom feeder with a pivot who was either a career grinder (ala Mitchel), a career winger (ala Foligno), an AHL call-up (ala Schaller), or a career grinder winger AHL call-up (ala Ellis) and don't be surprised if that former top 6 producer suddenly puts up only what you'd expect of a grinder winger on a bottom feeder. Anyway, notwithstanding that I don't recall anyone suggesting Hodgson was a second-coming of a hockey god, Canucks did by far win the trade financially. So did Hodgson, lol. Sabres are the true losers - new mgmt clearly was going for the Eichel/McDavid lotterry and with Reinhart already in the fold had to figure that Hodgson's days were numbered as remotely useful to them... At that point mgmt ought to have insisted the coach allow Hodgson out of the doghouse last year long enough to showcase him (ala Stewart & Stafford) rather than being stuck with the buyout on the balance sheet. Instead, the Sabres GM called Hodgson a "good solider" while the coach continued to set the kid up in a grinder role where his weaknesses were unnecessarily exposed and his strengths useless. Sabres lost financially but they don't deserve sympathy for the poor asset management.
  7. So as of last night it's definitive - Buffalo lost the Hodgson-Kassian trade. At least I figure it's definitive seeing how they paid Hodgson to score the game winning goal against them. At a buyout of $6.33m over 6 years (492) games, that's roughly $12,865 Hodgson was paid by the Sabres to stretch out their loosing streak to 6 games. Ouch. Dunno that means Vancouver won the trade though (seems more like Hodgson did, lol), but the Canucks sure didn't lose it.
  8. A "decent year and a half in Buffalo"? Lol. The kid paced 41pts as a rookie split btwn Van/Buf, 58pts in the shortened season, and 50pts as a sophomore, with two of those seasons leading his bottom dweller Sabres in production despite changing regimes, coaches, gutted rosters... That's not "decent". That's proven top 6 production over 3 seasons. Just sayin' In any case, for the specific game you're referencing what's actually "strange" is that you'd even think to flag it as "strange" that one 3rd liner guy happened not to have a point in a 12 goal game where 6 of the goals were scored by 4th liners playing largely against their 4th line counterparts and another 5 goals were scored by the combined defense. Do you even realize that the ONLY goal in that game scored by a forward who wasn't a 4th line grinder was actually a power-play goal by the Senator's Michalek? Do you realize that means Hodgson was merely one of 18 top 9 forwards who didn't score? If you think it's "strange" that one particular 3rd liner didn't happen to put up a point in such a game, then I gather you figure it's bizarre that 6 of the 12 Preds forwards didn't put up a point either (hint: that's 50% of the forward group), and outright astonishing that 3 of the Preds' top six didn't hit the scoresheet while the other 3 who did still managed to be a combined -4. What's not remotely curious is that you didn't come back here after last night's game to flag Hodgson's performance in the Preds' second 7 goal outing of the early season. It's not curious cuz it doesn't fit the disgruntled Canucks fan narrative that it was Hodgson's puck battle and lead pass which gave him first assist on the game winner, and his forechecking and tape on setup pass which gave him another first assist on the game's final goal - his first power play point on the first night he got a sniff of power-play time. Go figure. What amuses though, is the continued rush of disgruntled Canucks fans to pounce on the smallest thread of a theory, however weakly based, to criticize a loonnng ago Canuck. Don't people realize that this a kid who was traded as a rookie coming up to 5 years ago, and who is still 1-3 years from his prime? He not only still has time (and reason, lol) to continue developing, he clearly has (basic and advanced stats back up the eye test) and is... Sheesh, on the Canucks roster Hodgson's 54.2 SAT/corsi% would rank him 2nd (behind only Virtanen's 55.1%), while he'd be 11th for ozone start% and ... The basis of this thread continues to be premature, as evidenced by trying to support the bust sentiment on the basis that a kid who has been put to the task of developing his two-way game while adapting to a new team in a 3rd line role happened to be 1 of 18 top 9 guys who didn't score one Tuesday night in November. Premature and grasping at straws.
  9. I'll disagree on the wanna thing. Never saw an interview with him where he came off as anything less than humble, polite and talking up others - even if "others" were the career grinder AHL call-ups who had yet again tripped over themselves trying to enjoy a breakway Hodgson had gifted. The wanna be prima donna stuff was all just conjecture of character post trade. Ohhh... but KESLER! I got stories! lol. Seriously, just have to actually deal with the guy face-to-face once to know his type! First time we were in a post-game scrum with him, it was Toronto back when Linden was still playing and while the rest of the key guys (Luongo, Morrison, Naslund, etc.) were all there doing the duty rounds, lil Kesler was with a couple elderly ladies, family likely, in a corner, with the ladies goey over him trying to pump him up as he squatted down like a kid, broken up near tears complaining that he hadn't scored a goal. After that first time, he just became the guy we couldn't be bothered with. Go figure. I loved what Kesler brought on ice in many ways - love the heart-on-sleeve style. Thing is, not every guy who plays that way really does has his heart on the sleeve. Some guys it's all me me me they mask as "caring about the team".
  10. hahhah! awesome! And hey the good news is that Henrik FINALLY surpassed Hodgson for es goals too tonight ;-)
  11. So where is the OMG Congratulations to Kesler for FINALLY scoring his first goal of the season last night? Sheesh, no love for Kesler FINALLY catching up with Hodgson in goals and es points (despite getting near double the ice time)?? I'm shocked! I am it's "news" worthy that both Kesler has finally caught up to Hodgson in es scoring and that BOTH of them have more es goals now that even the likes of Crosby, right? But maybe we're waiting to make sarcastic comments about former Canucks until Kesler erases his -9 so catches up with Hodgson in that respect too? Or are we waiting until Kesler starts to get some advanced stats that compare favorably to Hodgson too? For those who haven't clued in - the point being emphasized is how terribly premature the basis of this thread was, and ergo how terribly petty are those who leaped into the senseless trash talking.
  12. Deal. You hate, I like, and bonus - we get points!
  13. Well gee, good point, lol. And when the Canucks are facing in the Preds in the post-season, guess I'll have to hate Hodgson too Until then though, well, you get the point, lol.
  14. I haven't always agreed with you RW, but this ^^ is one of your contributions that ought to be a stickie. Really. Doesn't matter if the subject is Hodgson, Kassian, Kesler, Bieska, whoever... The same principle applies - enjoy the entertainment and thrill of what they bring, get the edge off with trash talking rants when they're gone or bust out, then wish 'em well and move it along to the next... Geesh, someone just again flagged here how if the Hodgson-Kassian trade never happened then it's arguable the Canucks would have never gotten Horvat - well I like Hodgson's character and hope the kid puts his whole game together to have a long career, but a choice between Hodgson and Horvat is a no-brainer, lol. Seriously, there's always the next guy to move along following and getting excited about, so like wish the oldies well and move on. At least after they've been gone four+ years! Besides, taking pleasure in anyone who is seemingly not doing well is simply petty - and dishing out lame grade-school snarks from behind an anon username at those who like a guy anyway is petty + empty tough talk.