Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Zack Kassian: A Little Patience Required


UFCanuck

Recommended Posts

Players like Hodgson are more common than players like Kassian. It is possible to sign a Hodgson-type centre via free agency or trade. If Kassian develops he will be close to untouchable. Bertuzzi, even after the Moore incident, poor performance and an injury plagued season still garnered a highly touted prospect and two 2nd round picks at the deadline.

A guy like Ryan Clowe or Milan Lucic would cost a superstar player in return.

Kassian has potential to be as good if not better offensively than Hodgson. As a first year pro, Kassian scored 15 goals 26 points in 30 games compared to Hodgson's 17 goals 30 points in 52 games. At the NHL level, Kassian scored 4 goals and 10 points in 44 games to Hodgson's 1 goal, 3 points in 20 games.

I wouldn't be shocked to see Hodgson out of the NHL in a couple years. He is slow, small, and injury prone. That is a lot to overcome. Plus he has a a lot of competition in Buffalo with their recent draft picks. Burke never acquired a second line player, opening the door for the Sedins to plug away (Jan Hlavac doesn't count).

Kassian I think is 100% an NHLer in over the 10 years barring a major injury. At worst he well be kept around to hit and fight. He has fantastic skill and playmaking ability plus he is so tough that his fighting majors in the OHL dropped because nobody would fight him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...