Hodgson - Only 5 Or 6 Defensive Zone Faceoffs? Really? ... Not

[nuck nit]

Which leads me back to my initial question: if Hodgson were to play the 2C, and Kesler were moved to the 3C, who would be the wingers on those lines? I'm assuming Booth would stay on the 2nd, and Hansen would stay on the 3rd. So who would get Higgins and who would get Raymond?

regards,

G.

[Canuck Surfer]

The reasonable logic is that Hodgson was neither sheltered from defensive responsibilities; nor given plumb shifts all the time which the stats clearly say are given Edler, the Sedins & Burrows.

Hodgson had roughly equal defensive & offensive face off starts.

It also showed he had not completely earned the coaches trust; He is not really being relied on when he has substantially more neutral zone face offs to either specific defensive or offensive draw responsibilities. Lets not be stupid, and so called enlightened people are being stupid if this is called proof that Hodgson was a defensive liability. We all know Kesler & Malhotra are our defensive stoppers, the Sedins our offensive juggernaut. This simply indicates the coach was bringing him on carefully without relying on him. A completely neutral position, smart with a rookie.

Did they really pump up his value, by giving him extra offensive shifts in January? Well if they did, he led them in scoring for the month, we had a winning record at the time and won big games based on key goals by Hodgson. Every team makes conscious decisions to test how guys respond to situations. Looks like he responded when they did.

Reports like this by MG simply stink of the GM trying to justify an unpopular decision. It would not take any kind of advanced metrics to make a case for the fact that Kassian did remarkably little for us this year.

Taking reasonable assets and trading them for prospects is something that teams like Calgary should be engaged in.

Said before, and said again; maybe Cody was not happy! We still deserved a trade that better reflected a chance to win. We were sold the trade on the basis that Kassian reflected help to correct missing balance in physical match ups > so we could make a play off run. That turned out to be a false hope. In a bit of an embarrassing way, people are covering their backsides amidst criticisms.

It would be more respectable if someone just said the obvious, that the trade did not work out as planned & hopefully Kassians upside will still help us in the future.

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.

[VMR]

Still talking about this? He is gone right or wrong.

[VMR]

Canucks fans don't talk about Neely or Bure any more , either. Please.

Once a Canuck,always a Canuck,unless your name is Messier.

[Pouria]

The whole Hodgson fiasco shows clearly that Gillis was incompetent to be a GM when he came here, and that he still is. I can't believe this would have happened with any other gm at the helm. (And it just goes to show, once again, what a great liar MG is.) He caused all the problems but he wants to give H. all the blame.

[prana16]

Still talking about this? He is gone right or wrong.

[Gollumpus]

It is your proposed scenario for Kes to go to the third.

[nuck nit]

When people talk about Neely and Bure, they talk about the what if's or how great they were. They way people are talking about Hodgson, its almost like they expect him to come back or a do over is coming. He is not coming back and neither did they!