Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Great Pitb Article Regarding "the Trade"


Captain Aerosex

Recommended Posts

The trade overall made sense, in the end the only way to tell if Trading Hodgson for Kassian was a win or loss is waiting to see how these 2 young players will develop.

Even if Pahlsson helped us win a stanley cup, if Kassian turns out to be a career AHLer (god forbid) then the trade is an utter failure.

The main basis being is since we got Pahlsson for 2 draft picks, Hodgson was expendable to trade to any team for prospects / picks. The fact that we chose to pickup Kassian means we're taking a chance that he'll develop to be a top 6 power forward.

Link to comment
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? Where are you seeing zero in return overall? When you see the overall picture, Pahlsson is the current impact player we are receiving. Sulzer could have an impact, but will likely be depth (in fact, Kassian actually might have more of an immediate impact with Vancouver than Sulzer would have). Hodgson will have an impact, but is that positive or negative? I'm certain that Pahlsson will contribute more to a deep playoff run than Hodgson would. In the immediate future (the 2012 Stanley Cup playoffs), I'd be inclined to say the Canucks improved for a Cup run with Pahlsson over Hodgson. Once again, I emphasize looking at the day on the whole, not just each trade individually.

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. And how long does Cody want to stay in Vancouver behind Henrik and Kesler, and with Schroeder also breathing down his neck? I'd love to keep him too, but his future is in question...does he even have a future here? Kassian and Gragnani maybe don't have the same potential as our former top prospect, but they do have potential, and what they also have is opportunity.

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. Of course Hodgson's individual agenda is what prompted the trade. But if you think MG wasn't looking for a defensively responsible 3rd line centre, you're misinformed. I'm sure Gillis recognized the need to cover his holes in the bottom 6. You can prefer to think it's simply a convenient cover story, but regardless of whether the trades were improvisation (for lack of a better word) or not, I still say the Canucks improved.

Link to comment
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to also remember Cody was playing highly sheltered minutes. As a coach, it is extremely difficult to have to play one line only in the offensive zone, especially if it's your third line. Add to that, AV had to always try to match him up with third defensive pairings or risk getting scored on. That was why his minutes were so low. It had nothing to do with AV playing favorites. It had more to do with AV was limited on which situations Cody could play. I love what Cody brings to the table as he is highly skilled and has great vision but I think the author is trying to say he becomes a redundant player in our system.

We got Pahlsson so then what do we do with Cody? Have him ride the pine? Fans in Vancouver will be in even more of an uproar and that's not fair to Cody at all. So what does Gillis do? He takes a redundant, albeit highly skilled player, and replaces him with two things we are sorely lacking in our system.

I didn't like the trade when it was announced as I love Cody but after time it makes more and more sense. I am also willing to wait to see how it pans out as the Canucks are still in contention and the move did not change this in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Hodgson away makes me excited for the type of player the Canuck management team thinks Jordan Schroeder can become. Kassian meanwhile is a beast he has a memorial cup, played in the world juniors, and will at the very least be a massive force on our 3rd line for many years.

Hodgson will be an excellent player for Buffalo soon, but right now he is a defensive liability evidenced by his -8 since his arrival. All the while Sabres have been winning!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...