jyip Posted April 25, 2012 Author Share Posted April 25, 2012 They never used him because they needed an excuse to keep Malholtra and the excuse was he was the faceoff king in the defencive zone thats the real reason he never had many period. No duh, he dealt with Hodgson more because they were working on getting him healthy from his back injury.What a load of BS. Every since they traded Cody the team chemistry went downhill and the team went downhill evethough they squeaked out wins. So instead of being hounded for trading him lets make up stuff. Everyone would of liked more icetime but who wouldn't atleast ask.This will have proved to be a big mistake remember this kid led WJC team to gold playing in all the cruicial moments. The only thing fans can hope for is Kassian doesn't turn out to be a dud and he reaches his potentials as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 The criteria for who is on the ice is different between d-men and centres so you can't compare the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WL Canuck Fan Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 A better stat to know is what was Cody Hodgson faceoff %. Anybody know what that is? The top guys in the league average around 50%+ on the faceoff dot. If Cody % was a measly 30%...it would be a no brainer for AV to limit his defensive draws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jyip Posted April 25, 2012 Author Share Posted April 25, 2012 The criteria for who is on the ice is different between d-men and centres so you can't compare the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WL Canuck Fan Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Here is an interesting stat, 2 teams, 83 games played, 710 face offs in total, but only 17 shorthanded. 6 wins, 11 losses. Tells me both teams did not trust him to kill penalties, illustrating his defensive weakness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 please enlighten me with your logic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PUNJABI CANUCK Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Gillis shouldn't have talked about the Hodgson situation. - Ruining his rep. - This comment was so stupid , wasn't needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 For the sake of everyone. Please read the article before responding so you don't have to contridict yourself later. Below are some stats on a few notable players. With Canucks mismanagement of Hodgson's injury and the amount of ice he was getting ... you wonder why he was demanding. If you were Hodgson ... you probably wanted more opportunities to contribute too. Hodgson was on the ice for more defensive faceoffs in 60 games than Burrows or D Sedin this season. Kinda makes Gillis look dumb for making that statement yesterday. Hodgson's Kesler Burrows D Sedin Edler Defensive Zone 157 274 131 108 314 Neutral Zone 212 296 311 340 418 Offensive Zone 171 257 402 429 428 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babaganoush Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 For the sake of everyone. Please read the article before responding so you don't have to contridict yourself later. Below are some stats on a few notable players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFastOne21 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Everyone knows that Hodgson is an offense first center. He is not and will never be a defensive center or a 2-way center. He is an offensive center. His faceoff percentage is ok but not good. He was not trusted in VAN in the defensive end and was not either in Buffalo. What is the point of this argument? Gillis is not a moron. He did not mean 5-6 all season, there isnt a player in the world that is that limited in a specific zone faceoff. Hodgson is not the cry baby imo. I think it is his whiny agent and father that did all the complaining for him. Gillis dumped on him because he was sick and tired of the Hodgson camp creating drama about play time and his role constantly. I would get sick of his agent and dad knocking on my door every week also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks_dynasty Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 46.3% Regular season. No playoff stats, Buffalo didn't cut the mustard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 It's your article Codyboy, The author changed his tune and rewrote it based on not doing his homework. Exactly as Gillis stated, pump and dump. And I quote... http://blogs.edmonto...curious-claims/ EDIT Wed morning: Apparently I didn’t limit my search enough, because Hodgson’s Zone Starts evolved significantly within the season. Thomas Drance — who seems to be the Jonathan Willis of the Canuck-o-sphere, which is about as nice a compliment as I can pay him — documented Hodgson’s month-by-month performance through January in his other other blog, Pass It To Bulis. This revealed a sea change in Vigneault’s deployment of the young sniper in the new year, as his Zone Starts surged from just 33% in December to a Sedin-esque 83% in January. This was subsequently moderated to 59% (24 D / 35 O) from February 1 through the trade, suggesting that while Gillis clearly exaggerated his “5 or 6 defensive zone faceoffs” there was at least a kernel of truth underlying that remark, in that Vancouver clearly did limit the youngster’s defensive zone use in his final two months with the team. See also in that last link the extreme Zone Starts Vigneault gave to Manny Malhotra (#27) and Max Lapierre (#40) during that segment of the season, as the Canucks’ head man loaded them up with extraordinarily heavy defensive responsibilities. While other coaches like Joel Quenneville have relied heavily on Zone Starts as a tactic, Alain Vigneault seems to be pushing the envelope. Hard to argue with the results … at least, in the regular season. * * * Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Wow why is everybody taking what Gillis said so literally? "5 or 6 defensive draws" OMG NOT TRUESS GILLIS HE TOOK OVER 100 Obviously, he played half a season + as our 3rd line center "We feel like Columbus sometimes" ZOMG GILLIS SAID WERE COLUMBUS HE HATES TE FANZZZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 He was our Kyle Turris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Here's an article out of the Edmonton Journal that we all should read before we start hating Hodgson. http://blogs.edmonto...curious-claims/ This past season while with the Canucks, Hodgson had the following face offs: 157 - defensive zone 212 - neutral zone 171 - offensive zone Why did Gillis dump on Hodgson yesterday? I wonder ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onions Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 So ... how do you explain Edler being on the ice for less than 4 defensive faceoffs per game? Who's the stupid one again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Considering the canucks were a successful offensive team (meaning in the offensive zone more than defensive), these numbers seem pretty normal to me which means MG was making sh%t up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onions Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Wow why is everybody taking what Gillis said so literally? "5 or 6 defensive draws" OMG NOT TRUESS GILLIS HE TOOK OVER 100 Obviously, he played half a season + as our 3rd line center "We feel like Columbus sometimes" ZOMG GILLIS SAID WERE COLUMBUS HE HATES TE FANZZZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrippledCanuck Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Cody was showed he was a good player on a team with great players, so the team made him look better than he really is at this time in my opinion, not saying he wont improve. Lets look at stats he had 35 points in 71gp and a combined +8 - nucks and he had 8 points in 20gp and combined -7 - Buffalo 112 combined shots in vancouver in 71gp 51 shots in buffalo in 20gp shot percentage went down to 5.9 % in buffalo from 15.5 in vancouver He avg'd 6min more icetime in buffalo so if he was as great as everyone says he should have avg'd more points but didnt. Look at Alex Sulzer - he had 15 gp with buffalo had 8 poiunts and a +2 with 22 shots in total. with less time played than hodgson. So i would have to say by those stats it looks like sulzer is going to be a better offensive defenseman than hodgson is going to be as a scorer because obviously hodgson lacks in defensive capabilities hence why he was coddled in defensive situations in vancouver. So all in all he has shown he can be a great player on a great team but did he help buffalo make it past there first round opponent. Oh wait they didnt make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campers11 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Whats with all the Hate on Hodgson, up until two days ago people were still baffled by this trade. Now there is people calling him a cry baby and comparing him to Eric Lindros. Like wtf quit trying to make yourself feel better by making Cody seem like the bad guy. He isn't, he was completely caught off guard like all of us by the trade. And now that gillis has said that Cody MAY not have wanted to be here people just seem he was whining every day to be traded im sure that wasnt the case every time we saw cody talk he was a proffessional and a great young player at that. He would play where ever he needed too and as far as i have heard he was liked by his teammates not a cancer in the locker room so stop bitching and complaining about Cody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.