Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

[Trade] Cody Hodgson to Buffalo


  • Please log in to reply
726 replies to this topic

#451 JustJokinen!

JustJokinen!

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,099 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 28 February 2012 - 01:49 PM

Sharks were Big last year too. We beat them in 5. Tell me if Ben Eager helped them. All that TOUGHNESS.


Yes, we beat them in 5, without Hodgson as a contributing offensive player.

In the big picture we are better than the team we had in the playoffs last year. Especially our fourth line, which should be able to play against any line instead of being hidden like last year.

Edited by JustJokinen!, 28 February 2012 - 01:50 PM.

  • 0

#452 Yeria

Yeria

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,400 posts
  • Joined: 05-December 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 01:51 PM

Noone wanted a huge trade that involved Hodgson. Most of us just wanted to add some vetern physical depth players.
Yes people wanted a big, skilled gritty forward BUT not someone who has played 27 games in the NHL has 9pts? and can't stick with the Sabres
Yes we wanted more D depth but from someone who is more reliable, physical Dman (last time I checked he wasn't that reliable....)
Yes we wanted more depth on the bottom 6 (and that was adressed) But not from giving up our dynamic center.

The main thing is that this guy is not proven.....and this is not the time to take on a project.


Yes, because Cody was proven, right? Playing 12 games in the playoffs last year and 62 games this year was just enough to approve him to be completely trusted over here.

I feel if Sedins were able to play their games properly, they can provide enough offense in the playoffs to push us through. I also think Kassian is a guy that could enable Sedins to do that.

I know point isn't everything, but since you were going to pull that "9 points in 27 games" crap, I would like to let you know that Cody provided 1 assist in the playoffs last year. What makes you believe Cody will provide the offense in the playoffs he did in the regular season? He averaged 6 and a half minute per game last year in the playoffs and didn't even play against Boston. There are still lots of unknown for Cody too and counting on him to perform is just as risky.

Kassian was not brought in to score. I really hope you get this through to your head because I don't want you come back and complaining how Cody is providing more offense than Kassian. That would be like complaining Holmstrom can't produce more than Zetterberg.

Perhaps some day we will look back and say it would have been great if we didn't have to make this trade. I do hope that we will be able to say that it was worth it back then and I do believe Kassian gives us a better chance for us to be able to say that in the future.
  • 0
Posted Image
Thanks to Hockey_Crazy for the sig!

#453 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 28 February 2012 - 01:57 PM

So how exactly can Kassian help Vancouver for THIS PLAYOFF RUN??? We gave up a young centre who was on pace to get 45-50pts playing 11-12 min a game and have that scoring depth for the playoffs. How many teams can boast that??? If anything...why didn't Van make this trade in the off-season?? Unless MG thinks Kassian and MAG are game changers that will win us the cup.

Bleh...


I agree that this trade will look really bad right now, considering how well Cody played this year. There's no denying that.

I'm just trying to make sense of the trade. It's hard to say what will happen in the playoffs. I am as surprised by this trade as anyone, but I think I tried to explain MG's reasoning.

Clearly MG wants a more prototypical third line, a shutdown line, to free up Kesler for more offensive duties. That's really how this helps us. It also gives AV a really big body to throw up and down the RW lineups where he needs it that can do some serious damage physically and possibly pot a few goals.

What Gillis meant by balance, was that we have too many skilled, but undersized forwards. So by sending out something we have in spades, for something that we lack, a BIG body that has skill, we balance our roster.
  • 0

RIP LB RR PD


#454 Dazzle

Dazzle

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,947 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 01:58 PM

So how exactly can Kassian help Vancouver for THIS PLAYOFF RUN??? We gave up a young centre who was on pace to get 45-50pts playing 11-12 min a game and have that scoring depth for the playoffs. How many teams can boast that??? If anything...why didn't Van make this trade in the off-season?? Unless MG thinks Kassian and MAG are game changers that will win us the cup.

Bleh...


I agree.

The last part is just what I don't understand; we clearly took a step back removing Hodgson from point producing and adding an unpolished new NHLer in to potentially spice it up. Knowing AV, he might just hurt Kassian's development by putting him on the fourth line.
  • 0
Posted Image --> THANKS EGATTI.

I have to say Dazzle's was the coolest. ROTFLOL


#455 Dazzle

Dazzle

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,947 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:02 PM

I agree that this trade will look really bad right now, considering how well Cody played this year. There's no denying that.

I'm just trying to make sense of the trade. It's hard to say what will happen in the playoffs. I am as surprised by this trade as anyone, but I think I tried to explain MG's reasoning.

Clearly MG wants a more prototypical third line, a shutdown line, to free up Kesler for more offensive duties. That's really how this helps us. It also gives AV a really big body to throw up and down the RW lineups where he needs it that can do some serious damage physically and possibly pot a few goals.

What Gillis meant by balance, was that we have too many skilled, but undersized forwards. So by sending out something we have in spades, for something that we lack, a BIG body that has skill, we balance our roster.


Adding a rookie (that's what Kassian is) to place on the third line is an absolute waste. If that's what he's (Gillis/AV) gonna do, this trade is gonna be a bust for sure. It'll hurt Kassian's development who's trying to be a power forward, which seems to be very difficult to turn into.

Edited by Dazzle, 28 February 2012 - 02:02 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image --> THANKS EGATTI.

I have to say Dazzle's was the coolest. ROTFLOL


#456 Teemu Selänne

Teemu Selänne

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,199 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:04 PM

I haven't watched him for a few years, so I wouldn't know. Good to see someone endorse him.

I actually think this is the overlooked risk of yesterday's deals: will we still have an effective third line? It will have a different look, yes. But is Pahlsson, Manny or Lapierre capable of anchoring an effective checking line? If not, we may have diminished our depth.


He hasn't lost a step. He's great along the boards. He's poised all the time. He wins puck battles ALL the time. He hasn't lost any mobility.

Pahlsson can anchor a 3rd line still, no problem. Lapierre did it last year on a team that made the SCF & he has only looked better this year IMO.

It wouldn't surprise me if the line-up looked like this:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Raymond - Kesler - Booth
Higgins - Lapierre - Kassian
Malhotra - Pahlsson - Hansen

The bottom two lines will both be '3rd lines' getting about the same amount of minutes. Lapierre is only on pace for about 18 points or something, but he's looked good offensively when given small chances (i.e. the Booth - Lapierre - Hodgson line of 1.5 games).

I am sure it will take AV a couple of games to decide what line-up is best though. I am excited to find out how it works out.

Edit: Nearly forgot about Raymond.. oops.

Edited by Teemu Selänne, 28 February 2012 - 02:09 PM.

  • 0

#457 Grind-Like-Lightning

Grind-Like-Lightning

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:07 PM

He hasn't lost a step. He's great along the boards. He's poised all the time. He wins puck battles ALL the time. He hasn't lost any mobility.

Pahlsson can anchor a 3rd line still, no problem. Lapierre did it last year on a team that made the SCF & he has only looked better this year IMO.

It wouldn't surprise me if the line-up looked like this:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Hansen - Kesler - Booth
Higgins - Lapierre - Kassian
Malhotra - Pahlsson - Weise

The bottom two lines will both be '3rd lines' getting about the same amount of minutes. Lapierre is only on pace for about 18 points or something, but he's looked good offensively when given small chances (i.e. the Booth - Lapierre - Hodgson line of 1.5 games).

I am sure it will take AV a couple of games to decide what line-up is best though. I am excited to find out how it works out.


No Raymond? Not saying I disagree, but come playoff time, if we are in need of some added scoring, he might be our best/only option now.
  • 0
Posted Image Posted Image

#458 Teemu Selänne

Teemu Selänne

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,199 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:09 PM

No Raymond? Not saying I disagree, but come playoff time, if we are in need of some added scoring, he might be our best/only option now.


Actually forgot about him for a second, I knew something was missing..
  • 0

#459 Mookie Wilson

Mookie Wilson

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,013 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:10 PM

He hasn't lost a step. He's great along the boards. He's poised all the time. He wins puck battles ALL the time. He hasn't lost any mobility.

Pahlsson can anchor a 3rd line still, no problem. Lapierre did it last year on a team that made the SCF & he has only looked better this year IMO.

It wouldn't surprise me if the line-up looked like this:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Hansen - Kesler - Booth
Higgins - Lapierre - Kassian
Malhotra - Pahlsson - Weise


The bottom two lines will both be '3rd lines' getting about the same amount of minutes. Lapierre is only on pace for about 18 points or something, but he's looked good offensively when given small chances (i.e. the Booth - Lapierre - Hodgson line of 1.5 games).

I am sure it will take AV a couple of games to decide what line-up is best though. I am excited to find out how it works out.


That could well be a playoff line-up. In the short-term, I expect Raymond to play on the second line, Pahlsson to get a shot to anchor the third line, and Kassian to start on the fourth line. Hopefully Kassian will get comfortable, improve and be a top-9 option come playoffs.

Here's what I expect:

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Booth Kesler Raymond
Higgins Pahlsson Hansen
Malhotra Lapierre Kassian

Raymond is the guy with the shortest leash. He may quickly be demoted to the third line in favour of Higgins. And he could be out of the line-up after that, with each of those fourth liners - or Reinprecht - being a top-9 option.

EDIT: also, your glowing endorsement of Pahlsson - you implied he's as good as he was in '07 - is weakened by placing him behind Lapierre on the depth chart.

Edited by Mookie Wilson, 28 February 2012 - 02:11 PM.

  • 0

#460 Not Alain Vigneault

Not Alain Vigneault

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,395 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:10 PM

I figure it's time to say what's on my mind.

Like many, I was shocked and disappointed. After all that was preached about developing prospects and using "home-grown" talent, to see MG deal away his first ever draft selection and most successful to date, just like that, was pretty disappointing.

We need to think for a moment though. Why are we upset? Why does trading our current third-line center, with potential to be a future top line center, not justify taking back a big, physical, goal-scoring, power-forward prospect that we've always lacked and has just as much potential?

I hope we can agree that players develop at a faster rate than others. Cody is also a year older. Just because his statistics are far better than Kassian's currently, doesn't mean it can't change in the future.

The way I see it, MG wouldn't have made this move if he didn't feel Zack was ready for the NHL. MG has been patient with Schneider so this trade doesn't prove that MG likes to "give up" on prospects and young guys.

We got back a significant player that will really help us, I believe.

One last question. If Cody has five less goals and five less assists and Zack has five more goals and five more assists, would everyone still be against this deal? Or better yet, if this deal was made last summer, would we all share similar feelings and outlooks of the past 24 hours?

Thanks for reading. Be happy guys!
  • 0

#461 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:19 PM

Adding a rookie (that's what Kassian is) to place on the third line is an absolute waste. If that's what he's (Gillis/AV) gonna do, this trade is gonna be a bust for sure. It'll hurt Kassian's development who's trying to be a power forward, which seems to be very difficult to turn into.


Oh, don't get me wrong, I also don't understand the timing of this trade either.

There are so many reasons why a trade like this would go down. Perhaps Ott and Brown were just much too expensive to acquire?

Moen is injured and so was un-movable. The Stars are in playoff Contention so Ott and Morrow would realistically be unavailable. Doan unavailable, Coyotes top of the division.

All the guys CDC wanted were more or less unavailable.

I don't know, nobody knows what Gillis and Co. were thinking when they made this trade.

I'm merely trying to speculate as to why.
  • 0

RIP LB RR PD


#462 Teemu Selänne

Teemu Selänne

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,199 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:21 PM

That could well be a playoff line-up. In the short-term, I expect Raymond to play on the second line, Pahlsson to get a shot to anchor the third line, and Kassian to start on the fourth line. Hopefully Kassian will get comfortable, improve and be a top-9 option come playoffs.

Here's what I expect:

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Booth Kesler Raymond
Higgins Pahlsson Hansen
Malhotra Lapierre Kassian

Raymond is the guy with the shortest leash. He may quickly be demoted to the third line in favour of Higgins. And he could be out of the line-up after that, with each of those fourth liners - or Reinprecht - being a top-9 option.

EDIT: also, your glowing endorsement of Pahlsson - you implied he's as good as he was in '07 - is weakened by placing him behind Lapierre on the depth chart.


Yeah, I added Raymond.. he slipped my mind for 'some reason'...

As I said, they'd both be 3rd lines. That is if Lapierre can show some signs of offense, otherwise it could look completely different. Stoked for tonight and to watch the stretch drive.

Edited by Teemu Selänne, 28 February 2012 - 02:21 PM.

  • 0

#463 HeatSikhing

HeatSikhing

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,862 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:26 PM

Sad to see CoHo go. But honestly with him, Raymond and to a lesser degree Hansen made our forwards kind of soft. Nobody can say the Canucks are soft now adding Kassian and even Phalsson.

Coho's offense and playmaking will be missed no doubt but Gillis layed the ground work for getting a power forward ever since he signed and failed to land Backes after tendering an offer sheet back in 2008. Kassian is raw but I think he has more upside at his age now than Backes did back in 2008 when Backes was 24 years old. Gillis' foresight was correct on Backes in 2008 and I trust his foresight in trading CoHo for Kassian. Buffalo wins the trade today becuase CoHo is the best player in the deal right now but Kassian has massive upside and all the tools this team needs and the kid is only 21 years old.

Edited by HeatSikhing, 28 February 2012 - 02:28 PM.

  • 0


#464 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,796 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:27 PM

Still stings getting rid of a future captain no matter how it's spinned. One theory is whether they found his family or agent to be a bit challenging to work with over the years
  • 0

#465 Dazzle

Dazzle

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,947 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:33 PM

Oh, don't get me wrong, I also don't understand the timing of this trade either.

There are so many reasons why a trade like this would go down. Perhaps Ott and Brown were just much too expensive to acquire?

Moen is injured and so was un-movable. The Stars are in playoff Contention so Ott and Morrow would realistically be unavailable. Doan unavailable, Coyotes top of the division.

All the guys CDC wanted were more or less unavailable.

I don't know, nobody knows what Gillis and Co. were thinking when they made this trade.

I'm merely trying to speculate as to why.


Well, here's my take on this that might be shared by some people.

It was a trade that was Hodgson FOR Kassian and Gragnani.

Sulzer was a throw-in.

So on paper, Hodgson was able to fetch a player who could fill a roster spot but also provides defensive depth.


But this is all hypothetical. I don't suppose Gillis cares if we win the cup this year or not, because Kassian will develop and the "core" players won't be going away for a couple of years at least.
  • 0
Posted Image --> THANKS EGATTI.

I have to say Dazzle's was the coolest. ROTFLOL


#466 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:44 PM

Well, here's my take on this that might be shared by some people.

It was a trade that was Hodgson FOR Kassian and Gragnani.

Sulzer was a throw-in.

So on paper, Hodgson was able to fetch a player who could fill a roster spot but also provides defensive depth.


But this is all hypothetical. I don't suppose Gillis cares if we win the cup this year or not, because Kassian will develop and the "core" players won't be going away for a couple of years at least.


I think it's safe to say that Gillis feels that Kassian can contribute something in the post-season for us this year, and down the road as well.

I don't think Gillis would simply throw this year away just to land a great prospect.
  • 0

RIP LB RR PD


#467 i4i™

i4i™

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,794 posts
  • Joined: 23-January 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:46 PM

Well, here's my take on this that might be shared by some people. It was a trade that was Hodgson FOR Kassian and Gragnani. Sulzer was a throw-in. So on paper, Hodgson was able to fetch a player who could fill a roster spot but also provides defensive depth. But this is all hypothetical. I don't suppose Gillis cares if we win the cup this year or not, because Kassian will develop and the "core" players won't be going away for a couple of years at least.


In my opinion he cares, and so does every GM for that matter. It's not about how he doesn't care, it's about how he thought this deal could make the team better.
  • 0

Posted Image

Sig made by allons-y. Concept by canuckforever00.

Thanks guys.


#468 Teemu Selänne

Teemu Selänne

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,199 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:47 PM

I think it's safe to say that Gillis feels that Kassian can contribute something in the post-season for us this year, and down the road as well.

I don't think Gillis would simply throw this year away just to land a great prospect.


Kassian is tougher and more physical than any forward the Canucks had in their line up in last year's playoffs.

Cody wasn't really a part of that team.

Regardless if Kassian's offensive production is amazing this year, at the very least his physicality is still an upgrade compared to last year's line up which made it 1 game away from winning it all.
  • 0

#469 westcoast

westcoast

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,392 posts
  • Joined: 21-January 03

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:49 PM

Well if Kassian gets his act together,he'd open up the cycling areas for the Sedins because a big dman would have to stay put to deal with him.In the playoffs teams with strong defense like to try and pin both Sedins against the boards down low at the same time.

Lets get his brother in the off season for a spare fourth liner.

Edited by westcoast, 28 February 2012 - 02:50 PM.

  • 0

#470 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:56 PM

Kassian is tougher and more physical than any forward the Canucks had in their line up in last year's playoffs.

Cody wasn't really a part of that team.

Regardless if Kassian's offensive production is amazing this year, at the very least his physicality is still an upgrade compared to last year's line up which made it 1 game away from winning it all.


Yes, exactly what I was explaining a couple pages back.
  • 0

RIP LB RR PD


#471 Teemu Selänne

Teemu Selänne

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,199 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:57 PM

Well if Kassian gets his act together,he'd open up the cycling areas for the Sedins because a big dman would have to stay put to deal with him.In the playoffs teams with strong defense like to try and pin both Sedins against the boards down low at the same time.

Lets get his brother in the off season for a spare fourth liner.


Zack & Matt have no relation.
  • 0

#472 hockeyville88

hockeyville88

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,540 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 06

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:01 PM

This pained me to watch


  • 0
Posted Image
Sig credit: GoaltenderInterference. Thanks!

#473 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,414 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:04 PM



Awesome skill set for such a huge specimen.
  • 0

Subbancopy.jpg


#474 madrigal88

madrigal88

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Joined: 25-January 12

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:06 PM

Welp, there goes our chance at the cup this year. Cody was key to our secondary scoring. Kes this year is not the same as last year. Cody gave us another threat if (and probably when) the Sedins and Kes aren't producing in the playoffs. Plus I don't think MG addressed our most glaring problem, depth on D. Gragnani is not the answer. Our D is not as good as last year's, and last year's wasn't deep enough. I honestly just don't see us winning the cup this year with this lineup.
  • 0

#475 Special Ed

Special Ed

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:22 PM

Terrible deal. MG slipped up. I have always enjoyed his previous moves but this one stinks. Hodgson will be one of the best players in the league. This boils down to moving CH over fear to shake up the core and move Ryan Kessler instead. As well as a few things that as fans we don't hear about. Bottom line is Cody will be better than Kessler. Schneider will be better than luongo.

Personally feelings aside it's managements job to make the right choices that better the team. Which are often the hardest choices. For the Canucks I'm sorry to say it was to choose Cody over Ryan. Then next one will be Cory over roberto. If we lose Cory that will be another huge step backwards. I hope MG makes the Right choice next time.

This will never go away for us. Every time Cody Hodgson makes another leap forward it will slap us in the face. This will continue for years to come. The only thing that could prevent our sorrow is the cup.

Keep putting on wet bandages they won't stay on. It's going to be a long time before this fan base recovers from such a misguided trade. Brutal brutal job. Kassian is NOT a franchise player. Cody was. That's the end game.

  • 2

If you like looking at statistics to determine who's better, you're just a casual fan.

2.41 season GAA isn't very impressive. Let's not get into playoffs and his SV%.

Cory Schneider is the next Patrick Roy.


#476 16mark

16mark

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 78 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:23 PM

Yes, we beat them in 5, without Hodgson as a contributing offensive player.

In the big picture we are better than the team we had in the playoffs last year. Especially our fourth line, which should be able to play against any line instead of being hidden like last year.

Yes last year we didnt have Hodgson,but this year we did he was our edge. The ace in the sleeve that Boston never had to deal with last year.

Edited by 16mark, 28 February 2012 - 04:32 PM.

  • 0

#477 16mark

16mark

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 78 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:33 PM

Think about this trade from a Buffalo perspective. Buffalo just got a rookie of the year candidate and a future star and all they had to do was give up on a fringe fourth liner that was having a tough time cracking there lowly lineup. It's a no brainer from a Buffalo perspective. Hell Mike do you have any more young studs you want to trade? We got Cody McCormick, Interested?

Edited by 16mark, 28 February 2012 - 03:44 PM.

  • 0

#478 canuckstar16

canuckstar16

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 12

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:39 PM

I hope we don't regret this trade like the Rick Vaive trade to Toronto....as we as others. :picard:
  • 0

#479 Mookie Wilson

Mookie Wilson

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,013 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:45 PM

Think about this trade from a Buffalo perspective. Buffalo just got a rookie of the year candidate and a future star and all they had to do was give up on a fringe fourth liner that was having a tough time cracking there lineup. It's a no brainer from a Buffalo perspective. Hell Mike do you have any more young studs you want to trade? We got Cody McCormick, Interested?


Do you really think Kassian is just a fringe fourth liner? You don't see him as a valuable prospect? You don't think he has the potential to be the exact player this team needs? And you made no mention of Gragnani - is he also worthless in your eyes?
  • 0

#480 16mark

16mark

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 78 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 09

Posted 28 February 2012 - 03:51 PM

Do you really think Kassian is just a fringe fourth liner? You don't see him as a valuable prospect? You don't think he has the potential to be the exact player this team needs? And you made no mention of Gragnani - is he also worthless in your eyes?

Buffalo thought he was a fringe fourth liner. Does he have potential? sure he does. But our Window is NOW. im just looking at the trade from a different perspective than you. But you keep drinking the Kassian Koolaid. As for Gragnani, Tanev is higher on the Canuck depth chart. so what do you think?

Edited by 16mark, 28 February 2012 - 03:58 PM.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.