pimpcurtly Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magoomba Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Sulzer was the big loss in this trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyHockey Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 <p> It's funny that you bring up the game in Detroit (February 23rd, 2012) as an example of Cody's good defensive play because that was the game when my fear of his defensive coverage was solidified in my mind and you either have mistakenly identified the wrong game or you have selective memory with a revisionist history. Let me bring to your attention one Cody Hodgson getting absolutely schooled by Detroit 4th liner Justin Abdelkader twice in the span of eight minutes during the critical 3rd period of the game that directly led to two go ahead goals by Detroit: (1st goal @ 3:15, 2nd goal @ 4:36). Cody finished the game a -1 and he did not set up the game winning goal in Detroit. Burrows got the gwg in the shootout. Cody got a lucky bounce off Kronwall's skate to tie the game 2-2, but what good was that when he got completely outmuscled by Abdelkader in front of Luongo just barely 20 seconds later? On the first goal by Quincey (primary assist to Abdelkader) he got burned twice by Abdelkader on the cycle because: A ) he wasn't/isn't fast enough to cut off the cycle and, B ) he's not strong enough to pin guys to the boards. If he couldn't handle Detroit's 4th liners on the road when Babcock had last change, how much worse would Datsyuk have made him look? Actually, forget last change. Cody was -2 vs Detroit in 13mins in Vancouver three weeks earlier! You may not believe it but AV had to cherry pick Cody's shifts in order to get him to a +8 during his time here. He was a -11 in Buffalo's last 16gp when they were fighting for their playoff lives. During those 16gp, Buffalo was 11-4-1. To put Hodgson's Sabre +/- in perspective, Derek Roy is their worst minus forward and he's only a -8 in 79gp! Hodgson managed to match Roy's entire season of minuses in only 19gp! Like soulucidor wrote, people simply jumped over the part where PITB says the stats show that Hodgson was on the ice for 41% of all the goals against in the last 19gp. One day Hodgson will be a solid defensive player but that day is not today, it is more like years from now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyHockey Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 <p> Cody is not going to become a superstar in this league, he is not in the same universe as Crosby or Malkin or Stamkos. Putting a superstar tag on him is rediculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpcurtly Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 <p>Each time a goal is scored on Vancouver, some player has made an error. The guy is a rookie for Gods sakes and yet people want and expect him to play faultless every moment he is on the ice. How many times has Edler, Bieksa, Ballard, the Sedins etc made errors, yet they seldom fall into the critical vision of skeptical fans. All hockey games are won and lost as a result of mistakes.With respect to your comment that a couple of Detroit players undressed Hodgson with their moves a couple of times, hell I have been watching hockey for 60 years and I have seen the best get deked right out of their jock straps. You suggest others have selective memories yet you use to mistakes committed by a player in his rookie year to make your point.By the way, what is your point - that hockey players should not make mistakes? Well Hodgson has been gone for 18 games now and the Canucks have still been scored on. Glenncross says hello to Henrik Sedin all the way from Calgary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 <p>Each time a goal is scored on Vancouver, some player has made an error. The guy is a rookie for Gods sakes and yet people want and expect him to play faultless every moment he is on the ice. How many times has Edler, Bieksa, Ballard, the Sedins etc made errors, yet they seldom fall into the critical vision of skeptical fans. All hockey games are won and lost as a result of mistakes.With respect to your comment that a couple of Detroit players undressed Hodgson with their moves a couple of times, hell I have been watching hockey for 60 years and I have seen the best get deked right out of their jock straps. You suggest others have selective memories yet you use to mistakes committed by a player in his rookie year to make your point.By the way, what is your point - that hockey players should not make mistakes? Well Hodgson has been gone for 18 games now and the Canucks have still been scored on. Glenncross says hello to Henrik Sedin all the way from Calgary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyHockey Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Re-read: Is that clear enough for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 The old guy turns in the performance of the night. I like that part where'AV cherry picks Cody's shifts to make him a *8 while here' nonesense. Come on,we all know that is way above AV's abilities. Realistically,the Canucks.org coveted Kassian just as they coveted Booth and Gragnani. Losing Sulzer,Hodgson and Samuelsson isn't the best trades this org has pulled.Actually,all three former Canucks would have held this team in better stead going into this year's playoffs,IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I would like to know what information you are privy to or where you get the basis for claiming Vigneault "cherry picked" the minutes that Hodgson played because he was a defensive liability. Hodgson played approximately 12+ minutes per game while in Vancouver. Is that not about average for a bottom six forward? You need to be able to back up your comment with a little more than a just a quick peek at Hodgson's Average Ice Time Statistics to convince me in that respect. Malhotra, Raymond, Lapierre are in that range of time per game as well. Would you consider them to be defensive liabilities in the same light as you hold Hodgson, simply based on their average ice time per game? Your comment was plucked from thin air, unsubstantiated and does not wash. I was not debating whether or not he set up the winning goal nor what type of player he will turn out to be in a few years. I simply elaborated on the fact that he is a young and experienced player that has made mistakes. A fact that is also true about experienced and older players. All hockey players make mistakes. However, thanks for your insight and the attempt to prove to me you can change the color and font on your computer. There was really no need for another pointless effort on your part. I do however agree with you that as he develops more he will become a "solid defensive player" and like all young players, it will take time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 The old guy turns in the performance of the night. I like that part where'AV cherry picks Cody's shifts to make him a *8 while here' nonesense. Come on,we all know that is way above AV's abilities. Realistically,the Canucks.org coveted Kassian just as they coveted Booth and Gragnani. Losing Sulzer,Hodgson and Samuelsson isn't the best trades this org has pulled.Actually,all three former Canucks would have held this team in better stead going into this year's playoffs,IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Hodgson's QualComp finished at a -0.032 and anyone that knows anything knows he faced stiffer opponents during his time in Buffalo than in Van, icetime alone dictates as much, meaning his QualComp was even lower than a -0.032 in Vancouver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyHockey Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It'd be average if he had defensive zone starts (see: Sean Couturier). He did not have defensive zone starts in Vancouver but he had them in Buffalo & he was -8 in Buffalo & +8 in Vancouver. Get it yet? Btw, I have centre ice & have watched all of CoHo's games in Buffalo so I'm not some schmo who hasn't watched Cody as of late (just an FYI)... Edit: As for font change, I'm sorry but you asked me what my point was so I thought you were being honest as opposed to sarcastic. My mistake. I'm impressed that someone of your age responds in such a condescending manner. You fit right in on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkpoet Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Btw, I have centre ice & have watched all of CoHo's games in Buffalo so I'm not some schmo who hasn't watched Cody as of late (just an FYI)... Are you making a suggestion that because you subscribe to Centre Ice and you have watched Cody play in Buffalo a few times that you are now more of an authority on his defensive deficiencies. Hmmm.....I suppose that is like me claiming that I have complete set of encyclopedias in my home library and foolishly try to convince people that I know every tid-bit of information in that entire set of books. Is that how you defend your position of debate of a subject? You have convinced me of nothing to date and therefore, I consider your posts only to be opinionated in value just like mine are. In short, you are just another "schmo" like me who enjoys the game of hockey and we both "fit right in on here." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 The Canucks have a greater chance to win without Cody Hodgson. Pahlsson, Kassian and Reinprecht are just what we need. Experience, grit and secondary scoring. Cody would simply be manhandled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Losing With Pride Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 AGH! They traded Mah Cody!! I think that the majority of people upset about this trade feel that we could have gotten more for Hodgson. (with his resume) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Good Lord! Are people still crying about Cody? Did we not just finish first overall in the league for the second straight year? Quit worrying about a trade that can't realistically be assessed for several years and enjoy the coming playoff run. Pahlsson's 6 points and +4 looks better for the playoffs than Hodgson's 8 points and -7 since the deadline (with that extra ice time he felt he deserved). If that carries over to the first 19 playoff games, which would be of greater importance....the extra 2 goals Hodgon would be in on or the extra 11 goals against that Pahlsson helps prevent? Seems like a no brainer to me. What Kassian or Hodgson will become can't be determined for years. That's when the trade should be judged. What Pahlsson provides will help us win now. It's going to be bloody tough to come out of the west. I do believe the deadline deals increased our chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyHockey Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Your comprehension skills seem to be lacking if that is indeed what you understood from that sentence but by now I've realized your posts are just an attempt to twist everything I say for who knows what reason. I said the particular sentence to explain that I'm not just grabbing Hodgson's scoresheets and spewing off his +/- stats (as you claimed I was doing). Authority on his defensive deficiencies... lol, who said anything like that?! Debate needs to have some sort of tangible evidence to support your opinion. So far I've at least provided some statistics, some more "advanced" statistics (not my preferred description but that's what they generally call things like fenwick & corsi) and a video that showed the previous poster's memory of the Detroit game was completely inaccurate. So far you've put forth nothing tangible, except very basic general truths (rookies make more mistakes than veterans, even vets make mistakes, etc etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgillnuck Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Not that it counts for anything but I'm going with Millerdraft here, SimplyHockey. His argument is very much stronger than yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.