{nhl} Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 it was supposed to/is going to make us better for the future..not this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I'm curious. Where did you find this quote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
لني Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 It was a team1040 radio interview with Gillis but that is not actually a direct quote and I put the obstruction answer as part of the answer to that question when in fact the interviewer (BMac iirc) asked a follow up question about whether or not the league was purposely not calling hooking/holding pims. The only part that is verbatim is, "Did you do this begrudgingly?" and the emphatic "Yes. I believe offensive hockey..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbits Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I still go by what I said when the trade went down. I thought it was too much of a rush to trade cody. I understand that there really wasn't a spot for him in the long run for the team, but I thought we could've dealt him away in the offseason. Can you imagine hodgson packaged with cory? I don't understand why we got Kassian. If we wanted grit and toughness for the playoffs we could've easily traded for a 4th liner role player. I think we blew that trade. Let me know what you guys think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
لني Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 It was a team1040 radio interview with Gillis but that is not actually a direct quote and I put the obstruction answer as part of the answer to that question when in fact the interviewer (BMac iirc) asked a follow up question about whether or not the league was purposely not calling hooking/holding pims. The only part that is verbatim is, "Did you do this begrudgingly?" and the emphatic "Yes. I believe offensive hockey..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filthycanuck Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 So, Hodgson was at about a .5 PPG pace during the regular season, and now all of a sudden he would have become a point per game player in the playoffs? No, sorry. I don't care how much of a threat he would have been on our 2nd powerplay unit, it's unreasonable to think that he would have more than a point or two at this point. Pahlsson is doing everything he's expected to do at this point. It's players like Hansen, Higgins, and Raymond that need to step it up on the third line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 This article says something similar from Gillia: http://www.getrealho...them-join-them/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I still go by what I said when the trade went down. I thought it was too much of a rush to trade cody. I understand that there really wasn't a spot for him in the long run for the team, but I thought we could've dealt him away in the offseason. Can you imagine hodgson packaged with cory? I don't understand why we got Kassian. If we wanted grit and toughness for the playoffs we could've easily traded for a 4th liner role player. I think we blew that trade. Let me know what you guys think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chohing Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I believe if Hodgson is still with the nucks, he will make a difference. This guy likes the pressure and he is clutch. He basically carried the canadian world Junior team to champ. Look at buffalo;s record after he was traded there. His personal numbers may not show the result, but his presence will improve the team in whole. I wish the sabres were in the playoff actually to see how he performs. Oh well, now we can only pray......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Hodgson would have made more of a difference than Kassian is right now. I would honestly rather have Hodgson and Sulzer than Kassian, Gragnani and even Pahlsson. We clearly need offence on our 3rd line and having Pahlsson there changes the identity of our bottom-6 completely. We had so much success with 3 scoring lines, then to change our entire identity at the deadline was the biggest blunder a GM can make. It's a simple rule not to mess with team chemistry when we were doing so well, let alone reshape the identity of our club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Påhlsson Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 If you think Kassian couldn't make a difference on the pp then you are dillusional. The fact AV will not even try him there for one pp shift. (I don't know if he did last game since I had work and only got to see the highlights) is ridiculous. I mean Kassian is strong in the corners and is a +1 and when we scored he was infront of the net. He would be more effective then Burrows in my opinion and would accomplish more since Burrows is more of a 5 on 5 player. Then again I'm not an NHL coach so what do I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaken Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Grags is a scratch and Kassian just has not really been effective and our PP has suffered with out Hodgson since the deal . Like i have said from day one this deal was one to be made in the off season if at all . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkoshack Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Hodgson wouldn't have changed this series. All people mention is some clutch goals he scored against Boston(a reg season game btw). People seem to forget he had like 3 points 13 games prior to the trade and 0 for like 10 games afterwards. The Canucks PP has been awful since the Boston game in January and that was a long stretch with Hodgson on the 2nd unit. Plain and simple this team hasn't been the same in the 2nd half and these deadline deals neither helped or hurt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Everyone knows AV hates younger players. Kassian doesn't have a chance. Hodgson wasn't given a chance - remember all the "ice time" threads? And Tanev only got better cause he was with MacTavish in Chicago all year. No reason that he shouldn't have been playing with the big club, saving Salo for the end game... but no... now Salo looks dead tired and slow. Kassian showed potential first few games - he showed glimpses of what he could be if given a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I like Kassian, but the trade just never made a whole lot of sense to me. I'm not necessarily posting this now because I think Hodgson would have been a huge difference maker against the Kings either. I think that he would have helped; but at the end of the day, Quick is playing lights out. No, what bothered me about the trade was Gillis' whole "We are emmulating the Detroit model." If that's the case, Detroit would have never given up on Hodgson; instead, they would have managed his reported unhappiness. Kassian is a good kid and a force on the ice, but how often are teams looking for a number 1 centre? I guarantee that Babcock and co. would have created an environment that would have made it possible for Sedin, Kesler, and Hodgson to co-exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Hopefully Kassian turns into the player you'd be nuts to trade away, but right now we're not seeing it. The fact Gillis traded away Hodgson for another prospect and not a playoff-proven vet should've gave everyone a big clue on what our expectations should've been for these playoffs. Cheers. TOML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Imagine how awesome this team would be if it had kept Grabner and Hodgson? The offensive power would be deadly. They are giving away too many valuable prospects and getting jack s**t in return except a waste of cap space. And Gillis should have definitiely kept Torres and at least have tried a little harder to find a way to keep Ehrhoff. If I recall the negotiations ended rather abruptly, and it makes me wonder if Gillis gave up too quickly. Puck moving d men of his calibre dont come around often and he was so important to the power play. Then Bitz and Duco would fit nicely on the 4th line with Lapierre and provide the needed grit and toughness, and then all they would need to focus on is finding another good solid defenseman and they would be set. Presto, there you have a real contender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
لني Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 It was a team1040 radio interview with Gillis but that is not actually a direct quote and I put the obstruction answer as part of the answer to that question when in fact the interviewer (BMac iirc) asked a follow up question about whether or not the league was purposely not calling hooking/holding pims. The only part that is verbatim is, "Did you do this begrudgingly?" and the emphatic "Yes. I believe offensive hockey..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiMundha Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Even if Hodgson was here he would of not made a difference, the only player that would of is Daniel and thats it enough said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 This link references the interview it looks like. http://headtothe.net...get-used-to-it/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.