Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Now That You Have Seen The 3Rd Line In Its Entirety, Pahlsson Or Hodgson?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
72 replies to this topic

Poll: Now That You Have Seen The 3Rd Line In Its Entirety, Pahlsson Or Hodgson? (228 member(s) have cast votes)

which one would rather have on a cup contender?

  1. higgins-pahlsson-hansen (200 votes [87.72%])

    Percentage of vote: 87.72%

  2. Voted higgins-hodgson-hansen (25 votes [10.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.96%

  3. other (3 votes [1.32%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.32%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61 Jagorim Jarg

Jagorim Jarg

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 12

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:08 PM

Anyone notice Kopitar last time we played the Kings?


Luongo stopped him cold on a mid air redirected shot, it was a good save and could easily have been a goal actually..


Have to say something about all this stuff to do with Hodgson being 'better for future'. Can you see the future? Does it need to be stated that (first rounder) players do not always develop into expectation? Take Steve Bernier for example. Better for future? Patrik Stefan, better for future? Daigle? Stojanov? Can you predict the future? Exactly how many goals will Cody score next year? 2nd line centre? Preposterous. Look how well it's worked so far in Buffalo.

Look, I like the kid, but get real. Pahlsson is real, and he has a proven track record. Cody Hodgson has the clouded images you people are trying to see in a crystal ball. Irrational attachment to things is never healthy. Pahlsson is exactly what this team needs in a deep playoff run, while Hodgson, to be fair, was a 5th wheel on a team loaded with centres. Again, he's a good kid, not a gift from god.

Edited by Jagorim Jarg, 10 April 2012 - 04:19 PM.


#62 Ṣpiderman

Ṣpiderman

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,455 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 11

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:21 PM

Luongo stopped him cold on a mid air redirected shot, it was a good save and could easily have been a goal actually..


Have to say something about all this stuff to do with Hodgson being 'better for future'. Can you see the future? Does it need to be stated that (first rounder) players do not always develop into expectation? Take Steve Bernier for example. Better for future? Patrik Stefan, better for future? Daigle? Stojanov? Can you predict the future? Exactly how many goals will Cody score next year? 2nd line centre? Preposterous. Look how well it's worked so far in Buffalo.

Look, I like the kid, but get real. Pahlsson is real, and he has a proven track record. Cody Hodgson has the clouded images you people are trying to see in a crystal ball. Irrational attachment to things is never healthy. Pahlsson is exactly what this team needs in a deep playoff run, while Hodgson, to be fair, was a 5th wheel on a team loaded with centres. Again, he's a good kid, not a gift from god.


If that's the case, Kassian must be useless. He's invisible and was traded for the future.

He's done nothing.

Posted Image


#63 Jagorim Jarg

Jagorim Jarg

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 12

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:24 PM

If that's the case, Kassian must be useless. He's invisible and was traded for the future.

He's done nothing.


Kassian has played less than 50 games in the NHL, what were you expecting, the next Brett Hull? Come on, be realistic. There is a LOT of time yet to consider these things, and Kassian hasn't had a sliver of a hope of reaching your abnormal expectations set by an irrational sentiment toward some kid this team drafted. I don't think anyone can say anything yet, he's played less than half a season for us LOL. What would your response be if we DRAFTED Kassian, and then traded him for someone? You'd probably sing the same tune in reverse?

Kassian was brought in for his physical attributes, not for future alone, it's simple math. Pounds or kilos. It's on paper, it's in front of you, you don't need the crystal ball for this. If he's been 'invisible' then he hasn't been screwing up- he's on the fourth line not being used for scoring so if you notice him it's for a big hit (which he has delivered a few times no?) or for screwing up a scoring chance (which he hasn't done)

Edited by Jagorim Jarg, 10 April 2012 - 04:29 PM.


#64 Canucks_Wrister73

Canucks_Wrister73

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 384 posts
  • Joined: 01-January 11

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:27 PM

Right now, going into the Playoffs 2012. Pahlsson for sure, he's big, strong, smart, and highly skilled. He will win almost all the one on one battles he gets into and will shut down the opposing teams top lines. If he can play the way he did in 2007, we have a great chance of winning the Stanley Cup.

#65 Ṣpiderman

Ṣpiderman

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,455 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 11

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:29 PM

Kassian has played less than 50 games in the NHL, what were you expecting, the next Brett Hull? Come on, be realistic. There is a LOT of time yet to consider these things, and Kassian hasn't had a sliver of a hope of reaching your abnormal expectations set by an irrational sentiment toward some kid this team drafted. I don't think anyone can say anything yet, he's played less than half a season for us LOL. What would your response be if we DRAFTED Kassian, and then traded him for someone? You'd probably sing the same tune in reverse?

Kassian was brought in for his physical attributes, not for future alone, it's simple math. Pounds or kilos. It's on paper, it's in front of you, you don't need the crystal ball for this.


What did you expect from Hodgson then? The next Yzerman in his full year?

Physical? Besides the first few games, he's been invisible. Let's face it, he's just another Steve Bernier.

Posted Image


#66 Jagorim Jarg

Jagorim Jarg

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 12

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:35 PM

What did you expect from Hodgson then? The next Yzerman in his full year?

Physical? Besides the first few games, he's been invisible. Let's face it, he's just another Steve Bernier.


No, I'm not the one who expects Hodgson to be Yzerman next year- I was pointing out how so many people in here do- and I think it's stupid. Stop making him out to be any more than he is, and judging current players based on the image in your mind of Hodgson's future. I think the trade was good for us, and Pahlsson is a favorite in this discussion every day of the week.

I agree, let's all make judgements based on 20 game stints. Kesler hasn't scored more than 2 goals in 20 games he's nothing more than a Steve Bernier too. Let's trade him. Let's see.. Daniel hasn't played for 9 games, we might as well retire him. Manny missed a couple of faceoffs he might as well retire now. Try having more patience than a goldfish people! Some NHL players play 1 0 0 0 games........

Edited by Jagorim Jarg, 10 April 2012 - 04:40 PM.


#67 Ṣpiderman

Ṣpiderman

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,455 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 11

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:41 PM

No, I'm not the one who expects Hodgson to be Yzerman next year- I was pointing out how so many people in here do- and I think it's stupid. Stop making him out to be any more than he is, and judging current players based on the image in your mind of Hodgson's future. I think the trade was good for us, and Pahlsson is a favorite in this discussion every day of the week.

I agree, let's all make judgements based on 20 game stints. Kesler hasn't scored more than 2 goals in 20 games he's nothing more than a Steve Bernier too. Let's trade him. Let's see.. Daniel hasn't played for 9 games, we might as well retire him. Manny missed a couple of faceoffs he might as well retire now. Try having more patience than a goldfish people!


Every day here? I don't think that means much. Most of the people here just bandwagon onto what we have and just support blindly for anyone who's a Canuck.

So what makes you think Hodgson shouldn't be credited? He was good, and if we're talking about now, he's produced way more than Kassian. We're not talking about the future right? If we're talking about now, Hodgson >

Posted Image


#68 hf44

hf44

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,208 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 08

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:41 PM

With the playoffs starting tomorrow and the Sabres out of it, I thought the Cody posts would go away for awhile. Boy was I wrong! :picard: :bored:

#69 Jagorim Jarg

Jagorim Jarg

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 12

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:44 PM

Every day here? I don't think that means much. Most of the people here just bandwagon onto what we have and just support blindly for anyone who's a Canuck.

Don't be hypocritical you're doing the same thing in favor of Cody

That is exactly what I am talking about- people and their irrational attachments to Hodgson, and no matter how you slice it, sorry, 20 games is not any amount of time with which to make judgements on players. I'm glad MG has some patience, I think he knows what he's doing.

Exactly how is Cody better than Kassian/Pahlsson/MAG for a deep playoff run?
(more depth, more size, we still have scoring, when last year the problem was with injuries, size and a lack of sandpaper?)

Edited by Jagorim Jarg, 10 April 2012 - 04:51 PM.


#70 Cristalinastar

Cristalinastar

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 411 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 11

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:48 PM

Anyone notice Kopitar last time we played the Kings?

Nope but was he playing? I watched a kings game recently and announcer said kopitars back which got me remembering that i didnt hear his name sooo injured or WE shut him down!!!!

16 WINS-its the beauty way to go!

Posted Image

credit to canazzy

#71 Jagorim Jarg

Jagorim Jarg

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 12

Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:56 PM

http://video.canucks...38&event=VAN692

Luongo save on Kopitar (March 26)

Edited by Jagorim Jarg, 10 April 2012 - 05:07 PM.


#72 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,059 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 10 April 2012 - 06:26 PM

Pahlsson - no doubt about it.
The Canucks now have four lines that can all get the best of their matchups... it;s like there have a 1st and 2nd scoring line and a 1st and second shut down line - I love the balance MG and AV have struck.

#73 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,694 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 10 April 2012 - 07:55 PM

Pahlsson, without a doubt.

To go back over the whole Hodgson deal, most folks have over-looked the real objective (IMHO) of why the Canucks traded Hodgson.


Do you believe Hodgson for Kassian was a bad deal in that you think Gillis should have gotten more for Hodgson?

Do you think that Hodgson should still have been kept with the Canucks, even with Pahlsson taking over the third line center duties?

Do you think that Hodgson could have remained with the Canucks through the playoffs, with guys like Bitz taking over the policeman role?

Do you think that Gillis should have waited until after the playoffs were over and then moved Hodgson, alone in with a package to fill some greater team need?


I think that Gillis was aware of all of these positions. So ask yourself this: why then did he trade Hodgson? What did the team gain? If Kassian wasn't enough of a return, and there were already guys on the team who could do the policeman role, and he could play wing on one line or another or sit in the press box, why then was he traded at the deadline?

I think the answer is this: the main goal of the trade was to remove Hodgson from the team. What reason(s) this could be is more than just Hodgson asking/demanding/whining for for more ice time, or suggestions that he wanted out of Vancouver. There were events going on around Hodgson which would cause enough of a distraction to the team that it would effect their results.

I do not suggest that Hodgson was at fault in this scenario. For all we know it was a team issue and moving him was the lesser of two evils, but to preserve the season he had to be moved.

regards,
G.
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.




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.