Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 17 votes

why did we trade cody hodgson


  • Please log in to reply
421 replies to this topic

#271 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,940 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 26 March 2012 - 04:23 PM

*
POPULAR

The more interesting question to me is, "Why didn't we trade Cody Hodgson for a proven player?"

The fact that Gillis didn't ante up Hodgson for a expensive rental player at the deadline given our window of opportunity here is unusual. The fact that he didn't acquire that player says one of two things: Either that player was out of reach, even with Hodgson thrown in; or that Gillis isn't 100% sold on this being the year to make such a move.


What i don't like about the Hodgson trade is that any plan involving Hodgson's rise to stardom within his entry deal for us has now vaporized. Now while those plans may have never come to fruition, due to Hodgson being slightly injury-prone and not fleet of foot, the question is what the hell is the plan now? Certainly it doesn't involve players on entry deals. And perhaps that's fine for a time in which cap ceilings are pretty damn high anyway.

Another thing i don't like about the Hodgson trade is the attention it has gotten. As soon as he was traded, he was annointed the next biggest thing since Fabian Brunnstrom. Prior, he was a ho-hum pseudo offensive threat going through a rookie late-season slump. Was he going to be a difference-maker in the playoffs? Meh. I like what Kassian brings to the table a bit more for those kinda games. Even though it's a bit early to label him a saviour as well.

I equate the Hodgson trade to a lesser Kessel trade. Kessel wanted to be the go-to guy. Boston wanted to win. Sometimes things don't mesh well.

On that note, Hodgson didn't just want more icetime here. He wanted THE icetime. Meaning Henrik's, not Kesler's. ie. The cushy offensive zone starts that get you the most easy points against the easiest competition. This is what gets guys like Stamkos the points and it's what got Henrik an Art Ross and Hart. However, Hodgson is not Stamkos nor Henrik and he likely never will be comparable.


What i like about the Hodgson trade is that he filled two team needs while getting rid of a potential distraction. I for one won't miss the talk about how Hodgson is being screwed here. But i won't like all the game-to-game of Hodgson's progress in Buffalo. 'Hey, how about that Grabner?' Cheers.


TOML
  • 8
Posted Image

#272 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,512 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 26 March 2012 - 05:33 PM

Gosh is someone grumpy? :rolleyes:

The view that Hodgson had captain material in him was widely noted. Your a moderator, supposed to be enforcing rules. Here your chastising someone for having an opinion. Personally, I think Burrows (if we managed to re-sign him) is the lead by example, great teammate (remember his support of Luc Bourdon, relationship with our current guys...), do anything to win guy & would be our best choice as Captain. He adds the Bobby Clarke stick up for himself and the team characteristic to the type of leadership we get from Hank. But that not withstanding, Hodgson kept a great attitude despite benchings, made class A efforts to better himself in the pre-season, accepted and was making a name for himself in the role he was given... To quote AV just a few weeks before the trade; "here is a young man who is starting to put it together, and is doing the things we need him to to help the team win."

Yeah, its premature to nominate him for captain at that point.

But, It was only after the trade, and the backlash, that curiously rumours began to surface. And now people who are disappointed in the trade are roundly told to "get over it," and that we are not loyal fans. You did not say this, but your tone clearly does?

And who does pick the captain? No the fans do not directly. But fan reactions are valid postings.

I think you should be disappointed with yourself as a moderator for your reaction.

As to the trade, Kass has yet to show he is worth giving up on a prospect with as much potential as Hodgson. It is most curious because he is not really prime time, NHL ready. That's the type of talent typically traded for by contenders. As a fan, I obviously still hope we win, and Kass does well; but feel wholly justified in questioning the move.






:rolleyes:

The future captain of this team according to WHO, exactly? You? Fans? Here's a scoop........neither you or the fans of this team pick any captains, future or otherwise. A lot of people here are guilty of putting the horse before the Cody cart........and by the way, capitalizing the beginning of your sentences & player names, proper punctuation etc., would make your drivel here a tad more readable.......

Not to mention that this could have gone in any of the Cody threads that are already in existence.


  • 4

#273 .Naslund

.Naslund

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,072 posts
  • Joined: 14-June 09

Posted 26 March 2012 - 07:49 PM

*
POPULAR

And Cody's linemates were better than Kesler's.. no? Pretty easy to have a better +/- if your linemates are better than another's. How many of Cody's "+'s" were on the power play.. when "someone else" scored?

And if you think Gillis traded for "right here, right now...".. you need to give your head a shake. It was a trade for "now.. AND the future". Gillis has said all along that was his M.O. He's never been a one shot GM. And personally.. I welcome that.

We were good enough WITHOUT Cody to get the President's Trophy last year, and we're STILL good enough to win the Cup WITHOUT Cody "this" year. You make it sound like all we had were Cody... and a big bag of extra parts.

Cody was a winer.. we don't need winers.

That includes all you "WHY did we trade Cody?" winers. Life goes on... deal with it.


And... if Cody truly is your God and Saviour... then maybe you're just cheering for the wrong team? Maybe you should just join BuffaloSabresDotCom.......


Your argument is invalid because +/- isn't affected by powerplay goals foo :P, meaning if Hodgson scores on the PP his +/- stays the same.

ANd also we weren't good enough to win the Cup last year because we LACKED SCORING. What Hodgson brought was solid 2-way play as well as SCORING. He brought a 2nd PP line which we now LACK, which is why trading Hodgson who brought what we lacked late last year (SCORING) wasn't a good move. tell me with a straight face Kassian is better offensively now than Hodgson is.

BTW Hodgson wasn't going to be anything in the future? You said Kassian is for now AND the future, what about Hodgson? he's peaked?

How is Cody a whiner? has he ever publicly complained about anything? You heard "rumors" generated by the media (who coincedentally do anything to get a story) who you blindly believe are telling the truth like the sheep you are, use some logical thought and think about what the Canucks traded away for a second and tell me that this team now is better without Hodgson on it.
  • 5
Posted Image

#274 vancan3322

vancan3322

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 88 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 12

Posted 26 March 2012 - 07:56 PM

Trade deadline was weeks ago get over it
  • 2

tVDwXa.gif WRn9cO.gif


#275 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,467 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 26 March 2012 - 10:12 PM

He was cleared by the Canuck medical staff to play in that camp. He was misdiagnosed.


Sure. Why would the medical staff, the coach or the GM bother listening to what the player is saying?
  • 2

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#276 ChuckNORRIS4Cup

ChuckNORRIS4Cup

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,385 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:40 AM

Canucks vs Buffalo Stanley Cup Finals!
Game 7 Canucks can't seem to score again, because they traded away their rookie who could help them score, guess who scores for Buffalo Cody Hodgson!
  • 2

Eh8NO.jpg

Trevor Linden Quote Nov. 29th 2012 [Asked if he would return to the game?]
"The game has been with me for a long time, if the right opportunity came about, you never know"


#277 ChuckNORRIS4Cup

ChuckNORRIS4Cup

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,385 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11

Posted 27 March 2012 - 12:44 AM

Sure. Why would the medical staff, the coach or the GM bother listening to what the player is saying?


It's true the Canucks organization cleared him to play when they misdiagnosed him.


Hodgson additionally believed that he had re-injured his back while colliding head-first into the boards during Game 7 of the opening playoff round.[52] He underwent an MRI in the off-season, which uncovered the misdiagnosed bulging disc to be a muscle strain instead.[52] With the Canucks' consent, he trained in the off-season with former NHL player Gary Roberts who had overcome a back injury during his career.[70]


  • 1

Eh8NO.jpg

Trevor Linden Quote Nov. 29th 2012 [Asked if he would return to the game?]
"The game has been with me for a long time, if the right opportunity came about, you never know"


#278 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,467 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 27 March 2012 - 01:24 AM

*
POPULAR

As to the trade, Kass has yet to show he is worth giving up on a prospect with as much potential as Hodgson. It is most curious because he is not really prime time, NHL ready. That's the type of talent typically traded for by contenders. As a fan, I obviously still hope we win, and Kass does well; but feel wholly justified in questioning the move.


Yes MG "gave up" on a guy being talked about as a possible rookie of the year nominee.

Trading a player does not automatically translate into "giving up" on them. Gillis didn't give up on Grabner. Grabner had run out of time and the odds of him winning a spot was somewhere in the slim to none area. It was move him or risk losing him for nothing. Nor did he give up on Hodgson. He traded a prospect who was unhappy with his ice time for another prospect who is a year younger and plus a D upgrade. He moved a player that has a Selke winner and an Art Ross winner ahead of him for a young power forward. In other words, he traded something we didn't really need for the near future for something we do need.

That's not "giving up". It's simply asset management.
  • 5

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#279 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,782 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 27 March 2012 - 05:14 AM

Yes MG "gave up" on a guy being talked about as a possible rookie of the year nominee.

Trading a player does not automatically translate into "giving up" on them. Gillis didn't give up on Grabner. Grabner had run out of time and the odds of him winning a spot was somewhere in the slim to none area. It was move him or risk losing him for nothing. Nor did he give up on Hodgson. He traded a prospect who was unhappy with his ice time for another prospect who is a year younger and plus a D upgrade. He moved a player that has a Selke winner and an Art Ross winner ahead of him for a young power forward. In other words, he traded something we didn't really need for the near future for something we do need.

That's not "giving up". It's simply asset management.

baggins you would do better arguing with a stone..it might listen.
  • 2

#280 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:08 AM

Sure. Why would the medical staff, the coach or the GM bother listening to what the player is saying?


The Canucks are a financial entity,a business.That is why GM's are often lawyers.

The medical staff.coach and GM listen to all points of professional opinions available and then make a decision to go forth making sure -first and foremost- their rear ends are covered legally.
  • 0

#281 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:14 AM

In a recent interview with Team 1040 radio, Canucks GM Mike Gillis finally told Canucks' fans the truth about Cody Hodgson’s back injury.
Originally diagnosed as a disc injury suffered in July 2009, Hodgson was expected to be fine by the time training camp rolled around that fall. However, that wasn’t the case and he tried playing through the pain before being cut and sent back to the Brampton Battalion of the OHL.
Hodgson sought out other medical opinions, both from specialists in the US and also the medical staff of the Brampton Battalion. Everyone concurred with the original assessment from the Canucks' staff that it was a disc problem that should heal with rest.
Skip ahead several months, and Hodgson was still plagued by back problems as he tried to compete for the Battalion in the OHL playoffs. Rather than join the AHL Manitoba Moose for their playoff run as expected, Hodgson instead returned to Vancouver for yet more testing.
What Gillis revealed today is that this further testing in April 2010 determined that Hodgson’s back pain wasn’t due to the disc issue but rather from a torn muscle.
This revelation by Gillis might put to rest part of the great Hodgson debate in Vancouver, but it does raise other questions.
How did this important injury to the Canucks' top prospect go misdiagnosed by multiple sets of specialists over a 10 month period?
Will Coach Vigneault apologize for his undiplomatic and characteristically blunt comments on Hodgson, now that the truth is known?
Will stories still continue to circulate about Hodgson having a problem with the Canucks organization?
Who knows?
http://bleacherrepor...ively-diagnosed
  • 0

#282 iamspuzzum

iamspuzzum

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 12

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:29 AM

Cody was a boozer? That explains the trade, haha! I think you mean 'whiner'.



LoL!!

Good catch ::D. Think I was half asleep still :) .
  • 0

#283 iamspuzzum

iamspuzzum

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 12

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:32 AM

I'd take the Sabres over the Canucks without a Sedin right now. They way they have been playing is impressive and outside of Pittsburgh the East is wide open. Miller stays hot and the Sabres could easily go on a long run.


So go on then.. jump ship and join BuffaloSabresDotCom then..
  • 0

#284 spinarama

spinarama

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined: 12-July 08

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:36 AM

sorry but ..... WE didn't trade nobody.

MG & LG traded. they work at 800 griffiths.
  • 0

#285 spinarama

spinarama

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined: 12-July 08

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:39 AM

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


because most md's are idiots.
in the west what's mostly practiced is "slash n drug" ... that's the medicine that makes the most money ... for guess who.

amazing how they could get experts to say it was disc and it turns out to be just a muscle tear.

so why are those guys STILL experts?

you'd think after this, they're not such experts anymore.

ya'd...................... almost .....................think ................ eh?

_____________________


ps. disc is major op and major rehab, and possible no more sports career.
muscle tear is simpler. but one makes big money (for someone) the other doesn't.
(Ok I don't think much of the med/drug biz. I read kevin trudeau books. haha)

Edited by spinarama, 27 March 2012 - 11:09 AM.

  • 0

#286 iamspuzzum

iamspuzzum

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 12

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:40 AM

He was cleared by the Canuck medical staff to play in that camp. He was misdiagnosed.


I was misdiagnosed for 6 years until a neurologist finally said I was either in my 70's, or walked away from a car crash. I was only 33.

Misdiagnoses happen all the time.. and the back's the worst.
  • 0

#287 keslerian one

keslerian one

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,287 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:56 AM

It's like some people just can't get over that relationship which could've been great, but just didn't work out. Get over it. There are more important things for this hockey team than him.
  • 0

#288 the boards

the boards

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined: 03-July 11

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:19 AM

I've been thinking a lot about this, and I just want to know what our management team was thinking....
Why did we trade Cam Neely?


...oop.

Sorry, this lame, navel-gazing and morose debate is giving me flashbacks...

Coulda? Woulda? Shoulda? Pffft.

Let's move on, people.
  • 2
Of the dwarves, little is said.

#289 iamspuzzum

iamspuzzum

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 12

Posted 27 March 2012 - 10:22 AM

Your argument is invalid because +/- isn't affected by powerplay goals foo :P, meaning if Hodgson scores on the PP his +/- stays the same.


I stand corrected. I knew they counted on penalty kills, so I thought they also counted on power plays. But my main argument was that just because someones +/- is one way or the other, really doesn't mean much if it's his linemates who are scoring, and not Cody himself. Just because he's on the ice when someone scores, doesn't necessarily mean he had a hand in it.

And I didn't say anything about winning the cup last year.. I said we won the "President's Trophy" without Cody.. he only played 8 regular season games... and had 1 goal, 1 assist.. 2 points. Same amount of points Kassian has at this point.. 1 goal, 1 assist.


By the way..., drop the "foo" chit.. makes you sound like a child. Make your point, but no need to personally bash.
  • 0

#290 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,015 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 27 March 2012 - 11:04 AM

I do think it is time for some folks here to start their own "WeLOveAndMissYouCody" Forum where you can all hang out and bemoan "our" loss and praise his every move in Buffalo .. then, when he signs with Toronto as a UFA, you can all become Leafs fans .. irony and poetic justice all in one neat package .. sometime I crack myself up .. I admit it .. :lol:
  • 1

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#291 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,128 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 27 March 2012 - 11:09 AM

I thought it was a great trade for us. I also will not miss the whinning on CDC about Cody's ice time.
  • 0
Posted Image


#292 canucksnihilist

canucksnihilist

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,460 posts
  • Joined: 14-June 11

Posted 27 March 2012 - 11:12 AM

We traded Hodgson so we could win the cup. that is obviously the thinking. WIN NOW, while we are in this window.

Hodgson out
Phalsson in

We cannot win the cup playing a finesse game. Not with all the lines.

Only line that really shone during last playoffs was Kessler's line, and that wasn't by playing finesse. 3rd line was good too actually, again, not finesse.

Basically the team was built based on the NHL open-style rules. And we have a return to the clutch-and-grab dead-puck era. So Hodgson is a liability in a game like that, he doesn't hit, doesn't grind. Can't have more than a few finesse players on the team.

with Hodgson:
1st line: finesse
2nd line: grind
3rd line: finesse
4th line: grind

without Hodgson:
1st line: finesse
2nd line: grind
3rd line: grind
4th line: grind

grind out the cup. all hail the new dead puck era!

Edited by canucksnihilist, 27 March 2012 - 11:13 AM.

  • 1

#293 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,467 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 27 March 2012 - 01:05 PM

It's true the Canucks organization cleared him to play when they misdiagnosed him.


It doesn't change the fact that all through camp and preseason Hodgson kept saying HIS BACK WAS FINE which led the staff to clear him. That misdiagnosis came to light 8/9 months later, AFTER Hodgson went home and had his own doctors misdiagnose it as well for the entire season.

I hate to break it to you, but medical staff put a great deal of faith in what the patient is telling them. If you lie about how you're feeling there's a pretty good chance something will get missed. Hodgson had million$ of reason$ to want play and make the team. Hence being less than honest about how his back was. Which led to AV's comment about using his back as an excuse for not making the team. The kid had just spent 7 weeks saying his back was fine for God's sake. Had he been honest about his back in the first place and continued with the medical staff here (who found the problem when he returned after the season was over) it likely would have been fixed much sooner.
  • 3

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#294 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,015 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 27 March 2012 - 01:43 PM

It doesn't change the fact that all through camp and preseason Hodgson kept saying HIS BACK WAS FINE which led the staff to clear him. That misdiagnosis came to light 8/9 months later, AFTER Hodgson went home and had his own doctors misdiagnose it as well for the entire season.

I hate to break it to you, but medical staff put a great deal of faith in what the patient is telling them. If you lie about how you're feeling there's a pretty good chance something will get missed. Hodgson had million$ of reason$ to want play and make the team. Hence being less than honest about how his back was. Which led to AV's comment about using his back as an excuse for not making the team. The kid had just spent 7 weeks saying his back was fine for God's sake. Had he been honest about his back in the first place and continued with the medical staff here (who found the problem when he returned after the season was over) it likely would have been fixed much sooner.


Well said .. "and the truth shall set you free' ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#295 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:59 PM

It doesn't change the fact that all through camp and preseason Hodgson kept saying HIS BACK WAS FINE which led the staff to clear him. That misdiagnosis came to light 8/9 months later, AFTER Hodgson went home and had his own doctors misdiagnose it as well for the entire season.

Does not work that way,did not happen like that.

Hodgson had million$ of reason$ to want play and make the team.
Hence being less than HONEST about how his back was. Which led to AV's comment about using his back as an excuse for not making the team. The kid had just spent 7 weeks saying his back was fine for God's sake.

Had he been HONEST about his back in the first place and continued with the medical staff here (who found the problem when he returned after the season was over) it likely would have been fixed much sooner.


You mean the proper diagnosis ten months later,after he was cut and could not play a full season,right?

Just how do we know what was said behind closed doors?

How does any poster here know how he was treated or felt being misdiagnosed ?

Of course he wanted to play..Hello.He was told he was fine when he was not.

Calling any player a liar is pretty sad if you don't back it up without any facts.


http://www.nhl.com/i....htm?id=8474570

How did this important injury to the Canucks' top prospect go misdiagnosed by multiple sets of specialists over a 10 month period?
Will Coach Vigneault apologize for his undiplomatic and characteristically blunt comments on Hodgson, now that the truth is known?
Will stories still continue to circulate about Hodgson having a problem with the Canucks organization?
Who knows?
http://bleacherrepor...ively-diagnosed

Vigneault could not apologise legally.Misdiagnosis by a pro organisation isn't the best legal position to create if making apologies.

On a bright note,Cody has seven points in the last five games ,is a plus six, forty points on the year and is one goal shy of twenty.

Edited by nuck nit, 27 March 2012 - 08:05 PM.

  • 1

#296 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:02 PM

Pretty sad calling a kid a liar and money grubber -kind of like a thief-when he was told he was fine but the proper diagnosis and treatment came a full season later.

What a load of nonesense.

Edited by nuck nit, 27 March 2012 - 08:05 PM.

  • 1

#297 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,246 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:19 PM

Word on the street is, he was gettin down with mcleans old lady.
  • 1

#298 Edler

Edler

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,444 posts
  • Joined: 10-November 06

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:34 PM

I'm wondering if we could've used Cody right about now with Daniel out. We need a goal scorer and he sure did his part. If be would have played on the RW right now... he'd have a spot. I guess this is what happens when you have no patience.

He's lucky Sabers might just squeeze by in the playoffs, but expect a 1st round exit for them.
  • 0
No advertising.

#299 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,744 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:37 PM

I'm wondering if we could've used Cody right about now with Daniel out. We need a goal scorer and he sure did his part. If be would have played on the RW right now... he'd have a spot. I guess this is what happens when you have no patience.

He's lucky Sabers might just squeeze by in the playoffs, but expect a 1st round exit for them.


He probably would have been given a top six shot with Daniel out. But he wanted more minutes and ironically now he's playing on Buffalo's 3rd line.

Oops(get a new agent).
  • 0

#300 Edler

Edler

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,444 posts
  • Joined: 10-November 06

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:43 PM

See if he was patient, right now he'd have that RW spot on Henrik's line.... thats why Cory has become a awesome goaltender. He know it was all about patience and not getting cocky or ahead of yourself.
  • 0
No advertising.




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.