Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

playboi19

Zack Kassian: A Little Patience Required

83 posts in this topic

So,Ellington and two fourth rounders for Pahlsson.

Two fourth rounders gone.

Ellington is gone.

Pahlsson is gone.

Sulzer is long gone.

Gragnani is gone.

Hodgson is long gone.

Essentially,seven players were discarded to secure Kassian and shore up Hodgson's positional loss for the playoff run.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Kassian will pan out. But we're going to have to be patient and wait until he's 23/24 years old before we see him break out. I do think he can be a 55+ point powerforward. He has hands, toughness and the ability to steamroll players if he wants to. He just needs some time to put it together.

I'd be happy with around 10 goals from him on the 4th line this season while getting bumped up the depth chart once in a while. Ideally he should be in the AHL developing into a powerforward, but I think Gillis will want him in the lineup and use his toughness.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kassian has the potential to be the next Lucic. MG made the right call in the deal, Kass just needs a few years to develop.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think him playing on the third line this year would be perfect for his development. He was pretty much a ppg when he played in the AHL, he needs to get used to the speed and strength of NHL players so he can dominate physically like he did in junior. I'm sure he'll be in much better shape this season also.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, seven guys discarded to secure Kassian, you say? Interesting.

I still believe the Canucks got the better of the deal.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Kassian is a good pick up. He is big, strong and aggressive. He did make a few nice plays that really did show his potential. The thing I liked the most was his patience with the puck. He wasn't affraid to hold onto it for that extra split second in order for someone to get open. Then his pass was crisp and on the tape. I think a full training camp is exactly what he needs. A chance to get familiar with our team and our system without the pressure to perform right away. I feel that within the next season or two he is going to be an important part of this team and no one will be missing Hodgeson.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall him saying he'd make an immediate impact. He did say Kassian had a ways to go in development though and that he'd help "in different ways".

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he made the trade while thinking about the future more so than the season at hand. Either or, I liked Kassian before the trade and was happy when we acquired him.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall him saying he'd make an immediate impact. He did say Kassian had a ways to go in development though and that he'd help "in different ways".

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can argue that Kassasin is similar to that of Bobby Ryan.........Bobby Ryan was the 2nd OVERALL pick and he didnt come into the league into age 23.......I say that Kassasin would be around the same time before he finally emerge as a impact player

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty that still don't get it. I have plenty of very knowledgeable friends who have never played any organized hockey. I also have friends that have played that really miss the boat. Those of us that have played should have a better understanding but it's simply not the case. Thus I hate it when people play the "have you ever played" card as it really doesn't matter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CoHo would not have put us over the hump in the playoffs, we were missing a power forward and now we have one.

Anyone can make a prediction and say this or that may have happened, but its clear that CoHo was not happy here, at least that is the impression I took from the Gillis interview after he was traded.

For all we know Buffalo had another pending deal with another club for Zack and Gillis decided to pull the trigger, we now have this big power forward who is still going to develop and maybe turn into a force for the club.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No ,what I said,Regards G. is:

Essentially,seven players were discarded to secure Kassian AND shore up Hodgson's positional loss for the playoff run.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Cody is a good young player but I think the Canucks came out ahead as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doan would be a perfect mentor for Kassian. Hope like hell he signs here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I can agree to this article. While Hodgson was playing on the third line, his skill and intelligence was quite apparent to pretty much every fan and sport0 analyst, in his rookie season he scored 41 pts and anchored our 2nd Powerplay for near half a season. Here we can instantly see that Hodgson is 1. likely a perennial 20+goal scorer 2. offensive potential is self-evident 3. makes his linemates better.

In the trade, it has pretty much boiled down to Kassian for Hodgson, since the other parts were less significant or even completely discarded. (MAG)

The point here is, we have a short window of opportunity, since last year, to win a cup with this core. Luongo, Sedins, Bieksa, Burrows, Malholtra, etc. are all past their 30s, we have a few contracts in Hansen, Edler, Burrows, (Hodgson), (Schneider) that were solid bargains and are likely facing significant raises that may displace them in our future, therefore our aim should have been to WIN NOW.

That's the main argument against Hodgson trade back then, and still is today. Hodgson was contributing significantly to our team and overall play, and was gaining prominence in our offense when he was traded, whereas Kassian did not contribute to our offense nor did he make us "tougher" to play against. In that sense, MG lost the trade (for that year). While both players are young and still have bright futures, our team is getting older, and other teams with youth are beginning to develop their systems and strengths (i.e. Oilers, Panthers, Blackhawks, Bruins, Senators, etc.)

We are now still without a cup, but now we face significant obstacles in our offensive front - it was obvious last year was not the same dominance as the year before, where we dominated near every major team statistic. During the playoffs we struggled mightily once again offensively, (albeit to a better team in retrospect).

The arguments put forth in the article attempts to dissuade naysayers that Kassian will develop to be a 20-30goal scorer in due time - the examples circled around four years. Unfortunately for our team, we don't appear to have four years.

The reality of this team, this core, is that our window is closer to 2 years left. If winning the Cup is our goal, then this trade according to the article's argument means we've lost out on the trade.

The only "working" argument for trading Hodgson away was if his party really did demand either a trade or unreasonable demands for ice time that was unwarranted. In that case, then he may have been a lockerroom distraction or a significant obstacle come off season or contract time, then trading him when his external value is high but internal value low means we make the best of a bad situation. While most reports regarding this has been speculative, my opinion is that something along the suggested lines happened and set off warning flags for Mike Gillis.

Further, ad hominem attacks against critics is not a sound argument... suggesting that most critics of kassian/MG are teens living in their parent's basements (really, how many teenagers live in the basements of their own homes?) Teens are expected to be still living with their parents... anyhow...

The fundamental argument of how Sedins, Burrows, Kesler, Edler, Hansen etc. took many years to develop to what they are now is moot, considering Hodgson is NOT Kassin, and are NOT any of those players mentioned. Completely different backgrounds and skillsets make their comparisons as useful as if I compared Kassian's lack of production against Milan Lucic's (8-19-27 89PIM) rookie season, or maybe to Jeff Skinner's (31-32-63 46PIM) or maybe to Ovechkin's (52-54-106 52PIM)...

What I'm trying to illustrate is that Kassian is not comparable to any of those players listed above. Sedins were known as playmakers with potential but deficient in skating, Kesler was a speedy grinding forward, Hansen was a speedy grinder, Edler was a defensive defenceman. (different position to boot.)

Kassian was described as a top power-forward prospect, therefore if he cannot jump right into scoring he should at least use his large frame to benefit the team by adding toughness. Unfortunately his addition did little to affect the overall performance of our team.

The fact is in the new NHL, strong skaters with skill have exploded onto the scene, regardless of their age, and we should not be EXPECTED to develop Kassian for another four years before he may or may not become the player we traded for.

For the TL;DR people...

- The trade did not benefit the makeup of our team during the remaining season and post season.

- Kassian is a young player with potential, but potential's all he's got unless he develops properly. Saying he needs more time does not make our team any better.

- Loss of Hodgson as our secondary offensive threat in my opinion greatly contributed to our powerplay woes in the latter half of the season, stretching into the playoff exit.

- Comparing Kassian to Kesler, Burrows, Sedins... is not a valid argument, else it begs the question why he cannot be compared to the Crosby, Ovechkin, Kane, Hall, Stamkos, Tavares,... or maybe not 1st overalls, but Evander Kane, Skinner, Couture, Couturier, Giroux, Shaw... hell, Hodgson...etc. List of young players having a big impact on even veteran teams is long and still growing.

- The final outcome of the trade has yet to be finalized for obvious reasons, but our window of opportunity if we intend on winning with our current core means we do NOT have "four years" to develop our players. We should be in a Win-Now mentality, therefore whatever "future" problems Hodgson may have been had he been discontent, did not automatically mean this trade was "good", even if MG felt it was necessary.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.