Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Captain Aerosex

Great Pitb Article Regarding "the Trade"

Recommended Posts

So in light of the Kassian vs Foligno topic, and the continued ZOMGZ Y HODGSON!??!? sentiment around here, I thought some of you might want to read this recent PITB article that might help you rethink what happened on trade deadline day. They really explain it better than I do, so I encourage you to read it. Might also bring some optimism to your view on the Canucks' post-season.

(Full article is here)

Basically, what I think you should all take from that article is to look at the trades from that day in a different perspective. A lot of people have been fuming about the Kassian trade, the primary reason (other than CoHo fandom) being that we've thrown away a currently contributing player for a future project that might not even work out! I know, I had similar feelings immediately after the trade. But Hodgson wanted out, and the trade is done. So let's analyze a little before the playoffs.

As has been stated time and time again, Pahlsson is Hodgson's replacement. Not Kassian. I'll run that by you one more time. Pahlsson...is Hodgson's replacement. And though Hodgson might turn out to be a star, the Canucks as an organization are focussed on the now. And Pahlsson is a vast improvement; he's been a godsend for this team. Hodgson does have 8 points with Buffalo compared to Pahlsson's 5 with Vancouver. However, Cody is a massive defensive liability and would be a liability in the playoffs. Some evidence from PITB illustrates it:

"Since arriving in Buffalo 18 games ago, Hodgson has been on the ice for 15 Buffalo goals. However, he’s been on the ice for 18 of the Sabres’ 44 goals against. That’s 41% of them. Worse, the Sabres have been outscored 13 to 7 at even-strength with Hodgson on the ice...the Sabres control 44.6% of Fenwick events when he’s on the ice, which is a fancy way of saying the opposition has the puck a lot."

By comparison, here are Pahlsson's stats:

"Since the trade, Pahlsson has been on the ice for the same amount of goals as Hodgson at even-strength: 7. However, rather than watch the red light go on 13 times, Pahlsson has only been on the ice for 5 even-strength goals against. Furthermore, Pahlsson is boasting a Fenwick rating of exactly 50%, and this is more impressive than it sounds: consider that Pahlsson’s line has been playing against top lines and eating up defensive zone starts. Consider Cody's output the past week: with the Sabres' quest to make the playoffs currently hanging in the balance, Buffalo has lost 2 of 3 and nearly 3 of 3, surrendering 14 goals. Hodgson has been on the ice for 9 of them. You can't tell me that's helpful right now.Adjusted for these zone starts, Pahlsson’s Fenwick is actually 58%. In effect, match the Swedish centre up against the best forwards in the league and he’ll win the shift more often than not."

Basically, his scoring doesn't lag far behind, but his defence is supremely better (and we all know the old adage, don't we?) Though it isn't the postseason quite yet, the Sabres have been fighting for their playoff hopes for quite a while now, and in these games, there's an undoubtable playoff atmosphere. And this is just further evidence to illustrate that yes, Cody would be a liability in the playoffs.

"Consider Cody's output the past week: with the Sabres' quest to make the playoffs currently hanging in the balance, Buffalo has lost 2 of 3 and nearly 3 of 3, surrendering 14 goals. Hodgson has been on the ice for 9 of them. You can't tell me that's helpful right now."

Now a lot of people will begrudgingly admit that Kassian could be a good player in the future, but that Hodgson was more ready now and that we've thrown away current impact players for a power forward project because Boston is in our heads. However, if you combine the Pahlsson and Kassian trades together, you get a whole different view.

The 3 Canucks trades involved in that day were Cody Hodgson and Alexander Sulzer to Buffalo for Zack Kassian and Marc-Andre Gragnani, Taylor Ellington and two 4th round picks in 2012 to Columbus for Samuel Pahlsson, and Sebastian Erixon to Anaheim for Andrew Gordon. Essentially, regarding the more 'current impact' players, we traded Cody Hodgson and Alexander Sulzer (who would've simply been defensive depth here) for Samuel Pahlsson. On the 'future considerations' side, we traded ECHLer Taylor Ellington and two 4th round picks for former 1st rounder Zack Kassian and Marc-Andre Gragnani, who was practically a p/g player in the AHL (as a defenceman). Erixon for Gordon is negligible really, though Gordon can fill in as NHL-ready depth.

Reviewing the trades of that day from a different perspective, it becomes apparent that MG has actually improved the current Canucks a great amount. Sulzer's unlikely to slot in come spring, and Pahlsson has been a big improvement over Hodgson; this article really illustrates how much more sound Sami's been. Though CoHo has a bright future ahead of him, Taylor Ellington and two 4th rounders (basically peanuts) for two very rare talents in soft-handed power forward Kassian, and puck-moving blue liner Gragnani sounds like a fleecing. Of course only the future will tell, but I like the odds of these two developing more than Ellington and the pair of 4th rounders. Also keep in mind...does Hodgson even have a future here? He's competing with a younger Schroeder to play behind Henrik and Kesler. It was only a matter of time before he wanted out. Kassian and Gragnani will have chances here.

Anyways, just thought this was an interesting article and it's really made me sincerely look at the trade in a new way, rather than just be optimistic with conflicted feelings. Some might say Buffalo fleeced us in that trade, but if we're looking at the actual day itself, I feel that Gillis has actually improved our team both for the current Cup run, and the future. Got more appreciation for GMMG, and I feel if some of you doubters read this article and post, you might too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The move to have Pahlsson replace Coho was the right choice. Not as exciting and popular as having a young dynamic potential superstar, but this cautious approach will give us a better chance for a long run in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done W&S

My belief is if you don't understand what happened at the trade deadline you are too stupid to have a discussion with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This kind of provides stats from how I've felt about the trade the whole time. Gillis made some moves that make the team more playoff ready right now. I don't think that Gillis wanted to get rid of Hodgson but he new that he was not the right guy to be playing 3rd line center in the playoffs and I guess they didn't think he was ready/capable of playing wing on the second line, and he was already reportedly unhappy with his minutes so there really wasn't much of a choice but to trade him.

Unfortunately Gillis let go of a huge talent in Hodgson but I believe the team is better suited for the playoffs now then without him. This year and the next two years are our windows to win and Gillis and co are doing their best to make that happen, and hopefully Kassian pans out and turns into the type of player that his potential belies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt Hodgson has defensive issues. Pahlsson will show his worth in the playoffs, I think this trade is better than I originally thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He may not be as showy as Hodgson (and I don't mean that as an insult, just a comment on his style), but I really like what Pahlsson brings to the team. I do think it was a great trade. Unfortunately, fans here seem to only like showy players and not quiet, hardworking ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case there's some TL; DR type people around, I'll try to sum it up with some concise points. But you really need to read the article, and view the stats and points to get the whole picture.

1. There was more than one trade that day. To truly appreciate what MG did on that day, don't just view it as "Hodgson for Kassian, and we also picked up that Swedish dude." Look at it outside the box, instead of having tunnel vision and being close-minded.

2. We are a better, more versatile team. Pahlsson is Hodgson's replacement, and he has been a drastic improvement over him. Cody might provide tertiary scoring, but he is a severe liability on defence. Pahlsson might not provide that big goal out of nowhere like Hodgson did, but he will prevent all the goals let in because of CoHo's inability to backcheck. We're versatile now. The team's still got high-powered offence, but it's now capable of shutting down the opposition as good as (if not better than) anybody in the league.

3. Our future is actually brighter. Miss Ehrhoff? Want a power forward? MG has acquired a potential PP quarterback, and a big bruiser with soft hands. They may not pan out that way, but those still aren't everyday talents. And if you refer to point 1, you can view these acquisitions as an improvement over Taylor Ellington and two 4th round draft picks, rather than a swap for CoHo, who was in fact replaced by Pahlsson.

P.S. Schroeder could actually make Hodgson redundant, as he is a similar player in a similar situation (stuck behind Kesler and Henrik), but he is also a year younger which helps him out in staying here.

P.P.S. For those saying we could've got more than return...hindsight's 20/20. Maybe MG could've pulled a few more strings, but regardless he pulled off a great deadline day. We could've drafted Jagr also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think that the market value for Cody should have been higher though and that we could have gotten a pick coming back our way with ZK and MAG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end, it's still Hodgson for Kassian.

Hodgson wasn't a defensive liability with the Canucks. He may be struggling in Buffalo for the same reasons why Kassian has been invisible and ineffective, as they haven't fully adapted to their new team's system. Don't forget that at the time of the trade and the few weeks prior, Hodgson had played A LOT of games (something like 12 games in 20 days?).

Still a bad trade IMO but the its in the past now, nothing we can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in light of the Kassian vs Foligno topic, and the continued ZOMGZ Y HODGSON!??!? sentiment around here, I thought some of you might want to read this recent PITB article that might help you rethink what happened on trade deadline day. Might also bring some optimism to your view on the Canucks' post-season.

(Full article is here)

Basically, what I think you should all take from that article is to look at the trades from that day in a different perspective. A lot of people have been fuming about the Kassian trade, the primary reason (other than CoHo fandom) being that we've thrown away a currently contributing player for a future project that might not even work out! I know, I had similar feelings.

But, as has been stated time and time again, Pahlsson is Hodgson's replacement. Not Kassian. I'll run that by you one more time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The move to have Pahlsson replace Coho was the right choice. Not as exciting and popular as having a young dynamic potential superstar, but this cautious approach will give us a better chance for a long run in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Essentially, regarding the more 'current impact' players, we traded Cody Hodgson and Alexander Sulzer (who would've simply been defensive depth here) for Samuel Pahlsson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you don't need to run that by me one more time. I am quite aware of who took Hodgson's place as the centre on the 3rd line. Only idiots who casually follow the team think that Kassian was Hodgson's replacement. Thanks for coming out though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He may not be as showy as Hodgson (and I don't mean that as an insult, just a comment on his style), but I really like what Pahlsson brings to the team. I do think it was a great trade. Unfortunately, fans here seem to only like showy players and not quiet, hardworking ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is, we didn't trade Hodgson and Sulzer for Pahlsson. We traded two picks for Pahlsson.

'The trade' didn't involve Pahlsson. It involves Kassian and Gragnani.

While we see the overall picture, it at this point is still hard to defend 'the trade', since we gave up two 'current impact' (your assessment) players for zero in return. What kind of move is that for a cup run?

Question: We get Pahlsson and then stop trading. Is that better or worse than what we did on deadline day?

Even if Cody Hodgson rides the pine for the entire playoffs, we'll still have our top prospect available to us in the future, AND we'll still have Pahlsson.

No, you have to start defending Kassian and Gragnani before you can easily defend 'the trade.'

imo. Enter 'individual agendas.' Because Cody's individual agenda is what prompted his trade. Not the gain of Kassian and Gragnani. And esp. not the gain of Pahlsson, who we had before Cody was traded.

For a resource on why Cody was actually traded, i'd probably go to HF and look at that trade assessment thread on the main board. Some blabbering blowhard who writes like a lawyer has spent an epic amount of time filling up most of the 2000 posts regarding the trade. Cheers.

TOML

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes he was. I loved the guy, and don't want to sound like I'm taking cracks at him because he's a young guy, but he was a liability. For every big goal he scored, there were plenty scored on him because of his inability to defend. Sure, he has a different role with the Sabres, but it's not like he's in the cooker, he's just in a more realistic role. In Vancouver, he was getting sheltered minutes, typically with two very responsible wingers (usually Higgins and Hansen). That inflated his stats more than Buffalo's deflated his, if you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.