Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 7 votes

Cody Hodgson with the goal of the year?


  • Please log in to reply
397 replies to this topic

#331 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 24 March 2013 - 07:41 PM

You are correct, Lancaster -

Henrik's first season - averaged 13:31 mins/game including 2:32 on the power-play
Daniel's first season - averaged 12:59 mins/game including 2:30 on the power-play


Mike I get it.

You are making a major case that you think Cody > Henrik at 23. Got it. I disagree that Henrik and Daniel were spoonfed opportunity.

Cause if you haven't noticed. They were playing 3rd line. Cody Hodgson is playing 1st line with 2 supremely talented players. I don't think Cody's numbers would be much better than Henriks back in Henriks day playing with the players he played with, and vice versa. I think the Sedins would have much better early numbers playing with Tomas Vanek early on.

But alright, continue to compare this. Cause in my last post, we already covered this.

Alright his first 3 years.

We have already established this.


Edited by Smashian Kassian, 24 March 2013 - 07:41 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#332 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:05 PM

I replied to your first claim that Henrik was better than Hodgson in "every regard", but you shrugged off the hard numbers which proved your position to be flawed and now are claiming "right now the Twins are better in every area".


I think you established something really important in your post. That must be taken into consideration. The variables.

When you are comparing offensive stats. You have to also consider linemates. Offensive zone starts. Minutes played. Cause lets say you remove Cody's third year, and the Sedins third year. I'm sure it doesn't look so great in Cody's favor.

It's great you can say Cody's PPG is higher, but then consider this. Cody is playing with Tomas Vanek and Jason Pominville in the new NHL. Henrik and Daniel played with Trent Klatt in the dead puck era. Clearly the circumstances are going to favor Cody.
----------------------
Also, it is well known that the Sedins didn't go on the traditional development path that you would expect up and coming young stars to go on. As we have seen the players destined for greatness like the Sedins, usually breakout quite early in there careers. We know that wasn't the case with the Twins. Which brings me to this:

Sergei Samsonov, Mike Comrie, Martin Havlat, Raffi Torres, David Legwand.

These players (aswell there are more) were all drafted around the same time as the Twins, they have have better offensive stats in there first 3 years.

How many of them have Art Ross Trophies? How many of them have have Hart/Lindsey trophies? How many of them are captain of there team? How many of them are leading a franchise in scoring?

I get it, Cody Hodgson has better early offensive numbers than the Sedins. Gotcha. But then you consider era and teammates/opportunity. I would say offensively, all things considered it is pretty even.

Character. The Sedins faced alot of adversity in there time here, but didn't quit, stayed and played through it all. Cody Hodgson faced some adversity with the back injury. Although the organization stood by him. And then he requested a trade. He gave up on the team because he didn't want to have to earn his opportunity. Unlike the Sedins. They did not. Seeing as now Henrik and Daniel are the leaders of our club, and possibly the nicest, more respectful players in the entire league. I think we can establish the character advantage to the twins.

And see the nightmare that is Cody Hodgson defensively (now that he isn't being sheltered) we can see it isn't pretty, despite putting up incredible numbers. This is even at the least, although I would feel more comfortable giving the advantage to the twins.


Once Cody Hodgson wins an Art Ross and Hart Trophy, once he is a captain, once he becomes Buffalo's all time leading scorer, or atleast matches Henriks point total. Then we can talk about him being as good as the Sedins.

But one year of sheltered hockey, and another half year of great offensive hockey with superb linemates while struggled elsewhere, isn't a large enough sample size since last year he was about the same as the twins points wise.

Once he proves for a large amount of time he can be this good offensively, aswell as defensively. Then we will start making comparisons. Although until he gains any hardware, or becomes a top 5 center in the league like Henrik was. I think comparisons are very pre-mature.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 24 March 2013 - 08:06 PM.

  • 1

zackass.png


#333 Tom Sestito

Tom Sestito

    Probably Not A Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,162 posts
  • Joined: 10-February 12

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:16 PM

smashian wins this thread, just end it

ggnore
  • 0
Posted Image
Thank you VC!

#334 Lancaster

Lancaster

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,505 posts
  • Joined: 03-September 12

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:20 PM

Spoiler


The Twins had each other. They both weren't scrubs as they were drafted 2nd and 3rd overall. While Trent Klatt was the regular linemate, they also got shifts with Todd Bertuzzi when he was double shifted. If Henrik and Daniel were on the "3rd line", please tell us who made up the 2nd line back then....

Hodgson was already 0.5PPG in Vancouver playing with the likes of Hansen, Raymond, etc. Now he's putting up more points against top-pairing and with rotating linemates.

For character, the Canucks never stood by Hodgson. AV threw him under the bus and the medical staff misdiagnosed him for over a year. If that's what supporting means, then what is 'not supporting'? AV going all Tanya Harding on him?
Hodgson asked for a bigger role on the team, a team struggling for offense because of a gimped and prideful Kesler. Had it been reversed with Kesler doing the same, you'd probably be saying, "Oh wow! Talk about character and leadership. Wanting to accept more responsibility and doing whatever it takes to improve the team." Yet Cody was traded and suddenly he's a primadonna... okay there...

While you like to banter about how great the twins are.... their back-to-back Art Ross seems more like an anomaly than the norm. Great PPG players, exactly what everyone expected when they were drafted.... pretty much exactly what's expected from Hodgson.
  • 2

#335 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:32 PM

Good lord. My eyes hurt just skimming over these posts.


Not entirely surprising. It's a common symptom experienced by those who readily dish out opinions as though they were indisputable truths, then have nothing of substance to say when presented with the actual facts. :rolleyes:
  • 1

#336 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:48 PM

The Twins had each other. They both weren't scrubs as they were drafted 2nd and 3rd overall. While Trent Klatt was the regular linemate, they also got shifts with Todd Bertuzzi when he was double shifted. If Henrik and Daniel were on the "3rd line", please tell us who made up the 2nd line back then....

Hodgson was already 0.5PPG in Vancouver playing with the likes of Hansen, Raymond, etc. Now he's putting up more points against top-pairing and with rotating linemates.

For character, the Canucks never stood by Hodgson. AV threw him under the bus and the medical staff misdiagnosed him for over a year. If that's what supporting means, then what is 'not supporting'? AV going all Tanya Harding on him?
Hodgson asked for a bigger role on the team, a team struggling for offense because of a gimped and prideful Kesler. Had it been reversed with Kesler doing the same, you'd probably be saying, "Oh wow! Talk about character and leadership. Wanting to accept more responsibility and doing whatever it takes to improve the team." Yet Cody was traded and suddenly he's a primadonna... okay there...

While you like to banter about how great the twins are.... their back-to-back Art Ross seems more like an anomaly than the norm. Great PPG players, exactly what everyone expected when they were drafted.... pretty much exactly what's expected from Hodgson.


Naslund, Morrison, Cassel, Bertuzzi, even Harold Druken had a pretty decent year.

Are you bashing Cody's linemates?

Chris Higgins had a PPG pace over 50 points last year, he also played with Jannik Hansen who is proving to be a 2nd liner, Mason Raymond who had previous scored 25 goals, and David Booth too. I think he had some pretty solid linemates. I'll take those guys over Trent Klatt.

And I love this. MG stood by him the entire time. Noticed how he never traded Cody earlier? He had plenty of opportunities Even moving into last season and in 10/11 he had nothing but good things to say about him, I remember in 10/11 specifically we had a spot open for him to earn. And MG the entire year pumped his tires and talked highly of him.

He also kept the problems under wraps the entire season.

You don't play a regining 40 goal, (back to back) 70 point, Selke winner behind a rookie. He was doing some great things offensively, but he was playing sheltered minutes, ya Cody still has skill but Kesler is the better player and we aren't moving him back, he is probably when on his game the most important component of this hockey club and that wasn't taking a backseat to Cody Hodgson. Rookies have to earn there icetime and earn there keep and his situation was no different.

The Sedins are PPG players atleast. There was a strong period of time where they were top 5-7 players in the league, and they both proved how dominant they can be. Not to mention they do this consistently for us despite top matchups and shutdown centers. On top of that they are reliable defensively and chalk full of character. They are so unappreciated it is embarrassing.

These 2 guys will possibly go down as the greatest Canucks of all time, and now we are comparing a 2nd year player to them since he is having a great offensive season with prime linemates, in a shortened year. While being bad defensively.

Give me a break. Is Nazem Kadri gunna be as good as the twins too?
  • 1

zackass.png


#337 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:51 PM

Not entirely surprising. It's a common symptom experienced by those who readily dish out opinions as though they were indisputable truths, then have nothing of substance to say when presented with the actual facts. :rolleyes:


The truth of the matter is Cody is having an impressive offensive half-season.

Does that make him anywhere close to the players and people the Sedins are? No. No it does not.

The fact of the matter is, Henrik Sedin is an Art Ross and Hart Trophy winner, and the Leading Scorer in Franchise history. He also at one point was a top 5 player in the game.

Is Cody Hodgson that? Hell No. If I had to bet, would I bet Hodgson will meet that, and possibly exceed what Henrik has acomplished? Not a chance.

I get that everyone is still insanely butthurt, and in complete disbelief that there golden boy Cody Hodgson could actually request a trade.

But lets stop the rediculous comparisons. Is Nazem Kadri gunna be as good or better than the Sedins too? I don't see anyone making that case? Cause hes a better player than Cody Hodgson right now.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 24 March 2013 - 08:51 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#338 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:08 PM

I think you established something really important in your post. That must be taken into consideration. The variables. When you are comparing offensive stats. You have to also consider linemates. Offensive zone starts. Minutes played. Cause lets say you remove Cody's third year, and the Sedins third year. I'm sure it doesn't look so great in Cody's favor.

It's great you can say Cody's PPG is higher, but then consider this. Cody is playing with Tomas Vanek and Jason Pominville in the new NHL. Henrik and Daniel played with Trent Klatt in the dead puck era. Clearly the circumstances are going to favor Cody.


You seem to have missed it, but it's not just in the offensive categories that Hodgson compares well to how the Sedins performed during their own first three years ;)

But anyway, yes, let's consider linemates as an issue, and how it is that both Henrik and Daniel at least near always had each other (the twin factor) to rely on, while during his own first 3 seasons Hodgson spent roughly half his games shuffled around AV's makeshift lines and the other half producing with or without his regular linemates (ie: the short-handed goal which triggered this thread which was a solo effort, the three point night two games ago when Vanek was in the press box, etc., etc., etc., etc.).

Also, it is well known that the Sedins didn't go on the traditional development path that you would expect up and coming young stars to go on. As we have seen the players destined for greatness like the Sedins, usually breakout quite early in there careers. We know that wasn't the case with the Twins. Which brings me to this:

Sergei Samsonov, Mike Comrie, Martin Havlat, Raffi Torres, David Legwand.

These players (aswell there are more) were all drafted around the same time as the Twins, they have have better offensive stats in there first 3 years.

How many of them have Art Ross Trophies? How many of them have have Hart/Lindsey trophies? How many of them are captain of there team? How many of them are leading a franchise in scoring?


Huh? The fact that the Sedins broke into their stride slower than other selected players, or that they've since accomplished more than other selected players, is irrelevant to your claims (first that Henrik was "better than Hodgson in every regard", then that "the twins are better in every area") which precipitated the Sedins vs Hodgson comparisons.

I get it, Cody Hodgson has better early offensive numbers than the Sedins. Gotcha. But then you consider era and teammates/opportunity. I would say offensively, all things considered it is pretty even.

Character. The Sedins faced alot of adversity in there time here, but didn't quit, stayed and played through it all. Cody Hodgson faced some adversity with the back injury. Although the organization stood by him. And then he requested a trade. He gave up on the team because he didn't want to have to earn his opportunity. Unlike the Sedins. They did not. Seeing as now Henrik and Daniel are the leaders of our club, and possibly the nicest, more respectful players in the entire league. I think we can establish the character advantage to the twins.


Again, Hodgson doesn't only compare well to the Sedins offensively. But anyway, I'd entirely agree that all things considered - all the factors that make them different players in different circumstances - they're pretty even. And "pretty even" is far from either Henrik or Daniel being "better than [Hodgson] in every way".

You're relying on unsubstantiated theories about Hodgson's character. He was never known to have wanted out of Vancouver before the trade, nor did either him or his agent suggest it after the fact. There has never been any evidence to suggest Hodgson "gave up" on his team, or that he didn't "want to earn his opportunity".

Only when attempting to rationalize the trade after the fact, did Gillis say they (mgmt) decided (for Hodgson) that he "wanted out". Gillis was trashing the kid to rationalize having pulled the trade, implying character flaws. But by all accounts, Hodgson was shocked learned he'd been traded, and has been quoted afterward as only having positive and professional things to say of his former team.

Also, consider basic human nature for a second - if you give a primadonna precisely what he wants, essentially rewarding the behaviour, the brat normally becomes worse because he's been taught that he gets rewarded for poor behaviour. So if Hodgson was such a primadonna before the trade, shouldn't he have become more of a problemed player for the Sabres? But instead, there hasn't been even the hint of any negative in the kid's character since the trade, while his coaches and teammates speak in glowing terms about him.

Fact is, Hodgson had a good rep throughout his junior years and again now in Buffalo, leaving the only people claiming he's a character problem being the GM who was trying to rationalize having traded him away and some fans who bought into the story without questioning the bias of Gillis' comments.

And see the nightmare that is Cody Hodgson defensively (now that he isn't being sheltered) we can see it isn't pretty, despite putting up incredible numbers. This is even at the least, although I would feel more comfortable giving the advantage to the twins.


Hodgso a "nightmare" defensively? lol

That "nightmare" is a regular go-to guy on the PK, has produced short-handed points (best defense is always a good offense, right?), was a plus player during his first two seasons, has gradually returned to being a plus +/- player this year after a team-wide struggling start to the season, and has only put his team down a man for 26 penalty minutes.

Comparatively, by the same age the Sedins were not yet entrusted with regular PK duty, were moderately stronger as plus players (but then weren't facing the top lines/defense of other teams), produced less short-handed, and put their team down a man for 112 and 90 minutes respectively.

With all factors considered I could go with the comparison being a draw, or "even" as you say. But then to call Hodgson a defensive "nightmare" would equate to calling the Sedins defensive nightmares, and they just weren't.

Once Cody Hodgson wins an Art Ross and Hart Trophy, once he is a captain, once he becomes Buffalo's all time leading scorer, or atleast matches Henriks point total. Then we can talk about him being as good as the Sedins.


For my own part, I wasn't talking about Hodgson being as good as the Sedins. I've only pointed out that we can really only loosely compare them as 23 year olds in their 3rd season, and based on the objective factors available Hodgson is actually just as good as or better than the Sedins were at the same age and stage of development.

That suggests Hodgson has at least the potential to do as well as either Sedin, but citing what the Sedins accomplished after their first 3 seasons to support the claim that they're better than Hodgson is apples compared to oranges.

But one year of sheltered hockey, and another half year of great offensive hockey with superb linemates while struggled elsewhere, isn't a large enough sample size since last year he was about the same as the twins points wise.


1) The numbers don't look at "one year of sheltered hockey and another half year of great offensive hockey", but at all of the data available for both Hodgson and the Sedins during their first 3 NHL seasons. The defense numbers, offense numbers, faceoffs, +/-, etc.

2) Sedins had each other + guys the likes of Bertuzzi, Linden, etc. Hodgson has had a long cast of characters as linemates throughout his first 3 seasons, including Vanek and Pominville most recently (guys who claim to have done well with and because of Hodgson, ie: not the kid merely riding their coattails), though not always (see Vanek in the press box while Hodgson is having a 3 pt night, or Hodgson's solo short-handed, Hodgson setting up Erhoff, etc, etc., etc.).

Once he proves for a large amount of time he can be this good offensively, aswell as defensively. Then we will start making comparisons. Although until he gains any hardware, or becomes a top 5 center in the league like Henrik was. I think comparisons are very pre-mature.


The comparisons have already started because Hodgson has been as good (or better in some respects) than the Sedins were during their first 3 seasons. You've taken the position that the Sedins are "better in every area", but that is either entirely untrue (if we compare all that there is to compare - the first 3 seasons of each player) or entirely unknown (we can't compare futures that haven't happened yet).

If we compare how these players each performed during their first 3 NHL season, Hodgson is better or at least "even", as you say. And also as you say, it is premature to compare Hodgson today against what the Sedins have accomplished over 13 seasons. So that pretty much means you concede the point that there's no basis for claiming the Sedins are "better in every area". You don't actually know the future ;)
  • 3

#339 O'Doyle

O'Doyle

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 13

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:15 PM

Hawks fan from Vancouver here. Hodgson is sure doing great in Buffalo. He definitely looks to be doing better than Kassian at the moment but as I'm sure everyone knows if Kassian's offensive skills can catch up to his physicality he could become one of the very few true power forwards in the league. The type of player every team wishes they had but are next to impossible to find in this day and age. The Canucks could win this trade yet.

Was also just imagining how awesome it would be if the Hawks could somehow pry Hodgson away from the Sabres at the deadline and then face the Canucks in the playoffs. What a crazy series that would be B)
  • 0
Posted Image

#340 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:24 PM

The truth of the matter is Cody is having an impressive offensive half-season.


Actually, the comparative numbers have taken into account Hodgson's performance over 123 games. That's more than half a season, and covers far more than mere offensive numbers. ;)

Does that make him anywhere close to the players and people the Sedins are? No. No it does not.


You're right, Hodgson's performance during his first 3 NHL seasons does not compare to what the Sedins have accomplished during their 13 NHL seasons.

What the numbers do show, however, is that Hodgson has performed as good as or better than the Sedins did during their first 3 NHL seasons in nearly every respect - offensively and defensively. What the anecdotal evidence suggests is that Hodgson is of equally good character too.

The fact of the matter is, Henrik Sedin is an Art Ross and Hart Trophy winner, and the Leading Scorer in Franchise history. He also at one point was a top 5 player in the game.

Is Cody Hodgson that? Hell No. If I had to bet, would I bet Hodgson will meet that, and possibly exceed what Henrik has acomplished? Not a chance.

I get that everyone is still insanely butthurt, and in complete disbelief that there golden boy Cody Hodgson could actually request a trade.

But lets stop the rediculous comparisons. Is Nazem Kadri gunna be as good or better than the Sedins too? I don't see anyone making that case? Cause hes a better player than Cody Hodgson right now.


FYI, no one from either the Canucks or Hodgson's camp has ever claimed Hodgson requested a trade. Get that? Read Gillis' comments again and distinguish the difference between what he actually said and what was IMPLIED to redirect the heat onto Hodgson for the trade.

But anyway, yes, let's stop the ridiculous comparisons - stop comparing how a 23 year old has performed over less than 3 full NHL seasons, with what the Sedins have accomplished over 13 seasons... ;)
  • 1

#341 Patrick Kane

Patrick Kane

    Assistant to Regional Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,366 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 08

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:40 PM

I love you mikeburn.

And all the Hodgson lovers.

Hodgson > Kassian

/thread
  • 3


You will be missed.


#342 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:44 PM

I love you mikeburn.

And all the Hodgson lovers.

Hodgson > Kassian

/thread


:blush:
  • 0

#343 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:54 PM

Hawks fan from Vancouver here. Hodgson is sure doing great in Buffalo. He definitely looks to be doing better than Kassian at the moment but as I'm sure everyone knows if Kassian's offensive skills can catch up to his physicality he could become one of the very few true power forwards in the league. The type of player every team wishes they had but are next to impossible to find in this day and age. The Canucks could win this trade yet.

Was also just imagining how awesome it would be if the Hawks could somehow pry Hodgson away from the Sabres at the deadline and then face the Canucks in the playoffs. What a crazy series that would be B)


Sick Sig man.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 24 March 2013 - 10:54 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#344 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 24 March 2013 - 11:27 PM

You seem to have missed it, but it's not just in the offensive categories that Hodgson compares well to how the Sedins performed during their own first three years ;)


Alright mike, I think I get the just of what you are saying.

My comparison wasn't Cody in his early years, to the Sedins in there early years. That's you comparison that you keep forcing down my throat.

It is impossible to make a prediction between Cody and the Sedins, because the Sedins have acomplished far more. And Cody still has his career ahead of him.

As for some of your other points.


- Just because Cody is used on the PK doesn't mean he is good at it. If you haven't noticed Buffalo's PK is 26th in the league. And as for your claims that he isn't bad defensively. And that he wasn't sheltered here.

Last season he had over 50% offensive zone starts, and a negative Corsi rating of over -2.

This year, he has a negative corsi rating of -6.25 (ouch) aswell as 48% offensive zone starts. On top of that he leads all Buffalo Sabres with 24 giveaways. (More than anyone on our team)

So yes, there is work that needs to be done defensively.

And you honestly think there weren't issues? And that he didn't request a trade?

It's funny at the time of the deal. Mike Gillis refused to answer. He said "Things that happen behind closed doors in our offices are not for public consumption". That was in Phoenix after the deal was made. So if Cody did indeed not reequest a trade? Why wouldn't he just deny the Rumors instead of brush it off?

Rich Winter, Cody's agent. Also refused to answer the question? Again, if it didn't happen. Why wouldn't the agent of all people just come out and squash the rumor?

Hodgson travelled a long winding path to get healthy. He was also facing an uphill climb for ice time on the Canucks given the two stars in front of him at centre, Ryan Kesler and Henrik Sedin, dominated the playing time and would for years.
During the playoffs last year, the reality started to sink in. Hodgson’s playing time dwindled until he disappeared in the Cup final.
When it was over, Hodgson’s agent Ritch Winter said this:
“I’ve been telling Cody to stay with it, stay positive and that he would score the Cup winning goal.
”It didn’t work out that way and I’m waiting for things to cool down before we talk. It’s clearly going to be a challenging situation there.”
In the offseason, Hodgson’s spirits were lifted when he connected with Claude Lemieux, who worked as his personal mentor and coach. Hodgson was essentially told to stay positive. It was stressed to him the advantages of playing in a great organization.
The thought was, he could ask for a trade, end up on a bad team, and regret it.
Predictably, his “challenging situation” carried over into this season, when there were ongoing concerns from Hodgson’s camp about his ice time.
When asked about it, Vigneault pointed out there wasn’t much he could do. He had Mr. Hart (Henrik Sedin) and Mr. Selke (Ryan Kesler) playing ahead of Hodgson.


http://blogs.theprov...sk-for-a-trade/

If he didn't want out, why did he not just answer truthfully to Elliot Pap?

Pap: Given the history of your back issues two seasons ago, and the supposed bad blood over that, did any type of conversation take place between your side and the Canucks in which you were told, if you wanted a trade, you would have to play well in a Canucks uniform to establish your trade value?

Hodgson: “Like I said, I don’t look back at everything that’s happened. I’m happy for my time here. I’m really grateful that they drafted me and gave me an opportunity to play. They helped develop me and become the player I am today so I have nothing but good things to say about the organization and what they’ve done for me.”


"There clearly were issues that were ongoing," Gillis said of Hodgson. "I spent more time on Cody's issues than every other player combined on our team the last three years."

"We made a determination that he didn't want to be here,"

"We put Cody on the ice in every offensive situation we possibly could," Gillis said. "I don't think he took more than five or six defensive zone faceoffs and that was by design. And like I said earlier, I don't regret that move. I'd do it again. I'd do it today."

Read more: http://www.vancouver...l#ixzz2OWu8yvrm


Rich Winter his agent even said that "They had different goals than Cody" in otherwords. We wanted to win, Cody wanted more icetime and more opportunity.

Even when asked point blank by Scott Oake if he request a trade on HNIC when he came back as apart of the Sabres. Cody Hodgson dodge the question completely.

Its clear he didn't want to be here, the rumor is he requested a trade after the Finals. Which makes sense and when reading between the lines and pieces all the details together makes sense.

I don't blame him for requesting a trade. I understand why he did it completely. But people need to stop living in this fantasy world where Cody Hodgson could have remained on this team happily ever after.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 24 March 2013 - 11:27 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#345 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:47 AM

Alright mike, I think I get the just of what you are saying. My comparison wasn't Cody in his early years, to the Sedins in there early years. That's you comparison that you keep forcing down my throat. It is impossible to make a prediction between Cody and the Sedins, because the Sedins have acomplished far more. And Cody still has his career ahead of him.


We're on the same page now, then.

I still dunno what you were (are) comparing that leaves you thinking the Sedins are better in every respect, and I am of the take that based on what we can compare (each players' first 3 seasons), Hodgson stacks up well enough that there's an argument to be made he has at least the potential to perform equally well going forward.

But I entirely get it that the Sedins have accomplished far more in 13 seasons than Hodgson has in 3, and any prediction about the future would be just that - a prediction, not a guarantee, either way.

(For what it's worth, btw, I was genuinely surprised when looking up the Sedins' numbers for their early years to realize that Hodgon compared so well to them.)

As for some of your other points.

- Just because Cody is used on the PK doesn't mean he is good at it. If you haven't noticed Buffalo's PK is 26th in the league. And as for your claims that he isn't bad defensively. And that he wasn't sheltered here.

Last season he had over 50% offensive zone starts, and a negative Corsi rating of over -2.

This year, he has a negative corsi rating of -6.25 (ouch) aswell as 48% offensive zone starts. On top of that he leads all Buffalo Sabres with 24 giveaways. (More than anyone on our team)

So yes, there is work that needs to be done defensively.


I don't recall saying that Hodgson "isn't bad defensively". I do recall saying (in this, I believe, and certainly other threads) that earlier on in the season he often looked lost defensively and that I even cringed at times watching him in the d-zone. I have claimed that his defensive game has improved notably as the season's progressed - something I've credited to coaches giving him the patience and support to develop his entire game (and have suggested Kassian would benefit from receiving, rather than being benched for the smallest screw up!).

Which goes to your comment that I've claimed he didn't receive "sheltered" ice time in Vancouver. I don't believe I've ever claimed he wasn't "sheltered" in Vancouver? I'm one of those who doesn't subscribe entirely to the corsi tracking, but anyway, acknowledge that he wasn't getting PK experience or facing top lines and defense, etc. and to that extent would agree he was "sheltered" in Vancouver.

By flagging out the kid's short-handed role, I'm flagging out that he's been entrusted with regular PK duty this season - meaning he's not considered to be a "defensive liability", and is no longer only given "sheltered" ice time. He's received the opportunity to develop his entire game, and has in fact steadily improved. So give credit where credit is due and dump the "defensive liability" label.

As for the GA, sucks. It was only two weeks ago that he was actually better in that category than all of the Canuck forwards. But the last three games alone he's had 8 give-aways. Go figure. As you would say - three games is a small sample size ;)

And you honestly think there weren't issues? And that he didn't request a trade?

It's funny at the time of the deal. Mike Gillis refused to answer. He said "Things that happen behind closed doors in our offices are not for public consumption". That was in Phoenix after the deal was made. So if Cody did indeed not reequest a trade? Why wouldn't he just deny the Rumors instead of brush it off?

Rich Winter, Cody's agent. Also refused to answer the question? Again, if it didn't happen. Why wouldn't the agent of all people just come out and squash the rumor?

[/color][/size][/font][/color]
http://blogs.theprov...sk-for-a-trade/

If he didn't want out, why did he not just answer truthfully to Elliot Pap?

Rich Winter his agent even said that "They had different goals than Cody" in otherwords. We wanted to win, Cody wanted more icetime and more opportunity.

Even when asked point blank by Scott Oake if he request a trade on HNIC when he came back as apart of the Sabres. Cody Hodgson dodge the question completely.

Its clear he didn't want to be here, the rumor is he requested a trade after the Finals. Which makes sense and when reading between the lines and pieces all the details together makes sense.

I don't blame him for requesting a trade. I understand why he did it completely. But people need to stop living in this fantasy world where Cody Hodgson could have remained on this team happily ever after.


I honestly believe there were "issues" before the trade. Like with the Linden situation - despite Linden later claiming AV was a great coach for him, I still believe there were "issues" between player and coach, at least from the coach's end. But issues do not, by definition, equate to a player requesting a trade or management being somehow forced to cede to the wishes of a 22 year old newb.

I can see Gillis declining to answer a straight out question as a tactic for implying the contrary answer without actually lying (ie: "I can't answer whether Hodgson wanted a trade, hint hint"). I can also see Hodgson's camp, as things erupted, declining to answer questions that might have fueled the flames (ie: "if we outright call Gillis a liar then this gets even worse, and besides Gillis hasn't actually lied, only implied an untruth..."). I can even see a 22 year old taking the advice of his agent, et. al., after having been based by former mgmt and just repeating the positive, polite, professional rhetoric no matter how he may have wished to say something otherwise. The kid wants a future in the NHL - having a fight with his former team's GM through the media isn't exactly gonna help his career, or reputation.

Yeah, I can see all these characters being human enough to distort the truth and play word games within the media, hoping to sway public opinion one way or another. And Gillis' comments sure have worked to sway the anti-Hodgson movement... For example, it's got you putting words in Winter's mouth and imagining that "different goals" was code for Hodgson not wanting to win but instead wanting more ice-time [at the expense of the team, presumably].

Rather than presuming Gillis didn't straight out say Hodgson asked for a trade because he was shielding a kid who he'd just entirely bashed in the media (with all the "we made him look better than he was" stuff), why not ask the better question - if Hodgson asked for a trade, why wouldn't Gillis just say so? Why did Gillis instead say that management "decided" Hodgson wanted a trade?

But even IF Hodgson wanted or asked for a trade, my brain keeps going back to the fact that he was a 22 year old newb - where was management being management? Parents are the adults, not the kids. Canucks needed a quality center in the system who has the potential to one day replace the retired Sedins - if Hodgson really did ask for a trade, management ought to have told him who was boss, not caved into the little guy.

This kid only had a good rep before the Canucks (which you'd think was part of why the Canucks drafted him?), was never talked about has having an attitude or primadonna illusions before the trade, and has only been spoken of favourably by his current team. This suggests any "issues" he had were Canuck-specific. And to the extent the Canucks have had "issues" with other players (Mitchel, Ballard, Kesler, etc.), it kinda paves the way for it being very plausible that Canucks management is the common-denominator in their own "issues".

Edited by mikeburn, 25 March 2013 - 01:04 AM.

  • 1

#346 rbochan

rbochan

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 109 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 08

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:11 AM

haha
  • 0
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs;
it's Don't Tread On Me.

#347 Losing With Pride

Losing With Pride

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,725 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 06

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:53 AM

Stojanov for Naslund
Neely for Pederson
Hodgson for Kassian

at least we won one of those trades.
  • 4

#348 Hairy Kneel

Hairy Kneel

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Joined: 01-November 10

Posted 26 March 2013 - 05:47 AM

I know we lost this trade but I don't think the level of the trade should be the sole reason Kassian stays in the line up.I think he's better served to learn in Chicago playing 1st line minutes and the PP and structuring a physical regimine to suit what type of power forward he will become (picking his spots ie not erratic>body checking and fighting)...plus we can bring him up during the playoffs.
  • 0

#349 InTheCrease

InTheCrease

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,601 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 06

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:59 AM

I know we lost this trade but I don't think the level of the trade should be the sole reason Kassian stays in the line up.I think he's better served to learn in Chicago playing 1st line minutes and the PP and structuring a physical regimine to suit what type of power forward he will become (picking his spots ie not erratic>body checking and fighting)...plus we can bring him up during the playoffs.


It is still far too soon to say we lost this trade, it only seems more like that since we are short on centers and Cody would have been an instant fix. I do agree though, he would benefit getting first line minutes with the wolves, but that isn't really a possibility until we get healthy or make a trade and don't have to use a D as a forward.
  • 0
QUOTE
I played for the Leafs for three years, Im used to the booing so it wont affect me - Kyle Wellwood

#350 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:45 PM

I honestly believe there were "issues" before the trade. Like with the Linden situation - despite Linden later claiming AV was a great coach for him, I still believe there were "issues" between player and coach, at least from the coach's end. But issues do not, by definition, equate to a player requesting a trade or management being somehow forced to cede to the wishes of a 22 year old newb.

I can see Gillis declining to answer a straight out question as a tactic for implying the contrary answer without actually lying (ie: "I can't answer whether Hodgson wanted a trade, hint hint"). I can also see Hodgson's camp, as things erupted, declining to answer questions that might have fueled the flames (ie: "if we outright call Gillis a liar then this gets even worse, and besides Gillis hasn't actually lied, only implied an untruth..."). I can even see a 22 year old taking the advice of his agent, et. al., after having been based by former mgmt and just repeating the positive, polite, professional rhetoric no matter how he may have wished to say something otherwise. The kid wants a future in the NHL - having a fight with his former team's GM through the media isn't exactly gonna help his career, or reputation.

Yeah, I can see all these characters being human enough to distort the truth and play word games within the media, hoping to sway public opinion one way or another. And Gillis' comments sure have worked to sway the anti-Hodgson movement... For example, it's got you putting words in Winter's mouth and imagining that "different goals" was code for Hodgson not wanting to win but instead wanting more ice-time [at the expense of the team, presumably].

Rather than presuming Gillis didn't straight out say Hodgson asked for a trade because he was shielding a kid who he'd just entirely bashed in the media (with all the "we made him look better than he was" stuff), why not ask the better question - if Hodgson asked for a trade, why wouldn't Gillis just say so? Why did Gillis instead say that management "decided" Hodgson wanted a trade?

But even IF Hodgson wanted or asked for a trade, my brain keeps going back to the fact that he was a 22 year old newb - where was management being management? Parents are the adults, not the kids. Canucks needed a quality center in the system who has the potential to one day replace the retired Sedins - if Hodgson really did ask for a trade, management ought to have told him who was boss, not caved into the little guy.

This kid only had a good rep before the Canucks (which you'd think was part of why the Canucks drafted him?), was never talked about has having an attitude or primadonna illusions before the trade, and has only been spoken of favourably by his current team. This suggests any "issues" he had were Canuck-specific. And to the extent the Canucks have had "issues" with other players (Mitchel, Ballard, Kesler, etc.), it kinda paves the way for it being very plausible that Canucks management is the common-denominator in their own "issues".


Gillis did say so. He flat out said there were on-going issue. That he had been dealing with for a long time, and they eventually "made the determination" in otherwords realized that he didn't want to be here. And when he said "we made him into something he could move" To me that says, the 'determination' was made before the season. And the entire year they tried to showcase his offensive talents as best they could.

I think Hodgson asked for a trade after the Finals. Considering he got little icetime, and in that article I posted, when Winter talks about him keeping his head up, and that he talked to Claude Lemeiux. It seems like that the case, that he didn't see his opportunity here.

I don't blame him for requesting a trade. It makes sense, he is stuck behind two star players.

But I don't like how people blame MG for giving him away like this situation was salvagable, and there was a possibility that he had a future here.

You can't push someone around forever and just decline his request for a trade. Cause it seems like they already did. Or atleast delayed that request.
  • 0

zackass.png


#351 SabreFan1

SabreFan1

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,861 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 12

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:57 PM

Last year I watched a Youtube compilation (titled Cody Hodgson "so good") of his goals from when he was a Canuck and he had some pretty sweet goals as a 'nuck.
  • 0

CDC_Banner.jpg     #23 - Buffalo's New Generation!


#352 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 27 March 2013 - 03:32 AM

Gillis did say so. He flat out said there were on-going issue. That he had been dealing with for a long time, and they eventually "made the determination" in otherwords realized that he didn't want to be here. And when he said "we made him into something he could move" To me that says, the 'determination' was made before the season. And the entire year they tried to showcase his offensive talents as best they could.

I think Hodgson asked for a trade after the Finals. Considering he got little icetime, and in that article I posted, when Winter talks about him keeping his head up, and that he talked to Claude Lemeiux. It seems like that the case, that he didn't see his opportunity here.

I don't blame him for requesting a trade. It makes sense, he is stuck behind two star players.

But I don't like how people blame MG for giving him away like this situation was salvagable, and there was a possibility that he had a future here.

You can't push someone around forever and just decline his request for a trade. Cause it seems like they already did. Or atleast delayed that request.


That's where you lose me. In response to my query why Gillis didn't simply straight out say that Hodgson wanted a trade, you state that he "did say so". But he actually didn't.

What Gillis did say is that there were "issues" and that they (management) "made the determination" that Hodgson wanted a trade. As to be expected of a man who has made a career of handling the media, Gillis said a lot without actually saying anything. A few tidbit hints here and there of what those "issues" might possibly have been, and Gillis very effectively lead you (and others, of course) to infer Hodgson was a player who caused problems and wanted out - without actually saying as much. He only implied a thing, it's others who have interpreted to mean "in other words..."

I'm open to other plausible options, but the only rationales I can think of for why Gillis didn't outright say "Hodgson asked for a trade (now, end of year, whatever) and so we worked to showcase and jumped at the best deal when it came up..." are:

1) Gillis wanted to protect the kid from backlash for having asked for a trade; or
2) Hodgson didn't ask for a trade (to be effective then or for down the road) or otherwise say that he wanted out.

Option #1 is possible, but difficult to believe. To the extent that the balance of Gilli's commentary went effectively to discredit Hodgson's character (see: suggestive "issues") and talents (see: showcasing), and that he then later did/said nothing to diminish the backlash he'd caused for the kid, it is difficult to imagine Gillis didn't outright say Hodgson asked for a trade because he was trying to protect the kid's public rep. Which leaves me stuck on option #2 as the only viable option - Hodgson didn't ask for a trade or otherwise say he wanted out.

So, why would Gillis deliberately imply Hodgson did ask to get out if the kid hadn't? Easy - Gillis was facing negative public opinion about the trade, so he deflected it onto the player in the question. Gillis did what so many of us do - rationalized his own decisions and his own actions on the basis that someone else is to fault.

Incidentally, if true, this wouldn't be the first time Canucks' management handled negative public opinion over a decision by implying fault lay with the player. For example, mgmt implied Morrison wasn't signed only because the player chose not to accept the Canucks' offer, inferring Morrison wanted too much. The difference between Hodgson and Morrison is that Hodgson is truly a kid and was likely advised to keep his head down and just move on, while Morrison the vet called Canucks out for it - Morrison couldn't have declined the Canuck's offer because there had never been one.

All in, I don't deny the possibility that Hodgson did want a trade (frankly, I wouldn't want to play under AV either ;) ), I simply recognize that there is no evidence that the kid ever said he wanted out of Vancouver or requested a trade. Concurrently I recognize that Gillis stood to gain from implying otherwise (deflect onto the player), didn't have anything to lose from doing so (no one can actually call him a liar, he only implied after all ;) ), and has done the same thing to another player (see: the imaginary offer to Morrison)...
  • 2

#353 mpt

mpt

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,539 posts
  • Joined: 08-November 03

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:58 AM

That was a friggin sick goal.

Reminds me of that sick Jonathan Toews goal where he went through four defenders, dangling them one by one.


This reminds me nothing of that goal.
  • 0

#354 Monteeun

Monteeun

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,368 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 03

Posted 28 March 2013 - 05:04 AM

Detroit had more goals than Pittsburgh in the 2009 Stanley cup playoffs. Still lost


They should've scored more.
  • 1

BAD MOVE!!!

BAD FING MOVE

HAHAHA ANOTHER INJURED MORON ON OUR TEAM

HE WILL JOIN US IN 2019

Benning will be fired next year. Hope he enjoys screwing around for a few months. I just cant believe this. Another injured BC player. We just got rid of garrison. Seems like the canucks and linden just wanted any BC born player. Doesn't matter if hes good or not. We don't need another Linden to get us to game 7 of the Stanley cup and lose. We need someone to win us a cup.

5 million a year for Vrbata? 6 million for Miller? Kesler for Bonino and 24th instead of 10th pick or one of their top prospects? Garrison for scraps?

ive already lost faith in JB. Ive never EVER had this bad of a feeling about management.

 


#355 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 01:37 AM

That's where you lose me. In response to my query why Gillis didn't simply straight out say that Hodgson wanted a trade, you state that he "did say so". But he actually didn't.

What Gillis did say is that there were "issues" and that they (management) "made the determination" that Hodgson wanted a trade. As to be expected of a man who has made a career of handling the media, Gillis said a lot without actually saying anything. A few tidbit hints here and there of what those "issues" might possibly have been, and Gillis very effectively lead you (and others, of course) to infer Hodgson was a player who caused problems and wanted out - without actually saying as much. He only implied a thing, it's others who have interpreted to mean "in other words..."

I'm open to other plausible options, but the only rationales I can think of for why Gillis didn't outright say "Hodgson asked for a trade (now, end of year, whatever) and so we worked to showcase and jumped at the best deal when it came up..." are:

1) Gillis wanted to protect the kid from backlash for having asked for a trade; or
2) Hodgson didn't ask for a trade (to be effective then or for down the road) or otherwise say that he wanted out.

Option #1 is possible, but difficult to believe. To the extent that the balance of Gilli's commentary went effectively to discredit Hodgson's character (see: suggestive "issues") and talents (see: showcasing), and that he then later did/said nothing to diminish the backlash he'd caused for the kid, it is difficult to imagine Gillis didn't outright say Hodgson asked for a trade because he was trying to protect the kid's public rep. Which leaves me stuck on option #2 as the only viable option - Hodgson didn't ask for a trade or otherwise say he wanted out.

So, why would Gillis deliberately imply Hodgson did ask to get out if the kid hadn't? Easy - Gillis was facing negative public opinion about the trade, so he deflected it onto the player in the question. Gillis did what so many of us do - rationalized his own decisions and his own actions on the basis that someone else is to fault.

Incidentally, if true, this wouldn't be the first time Canucks' management handled negative public opinion over a decision by implying fault lay with the player. For example, mgmt implied Morrison wasn't signed only because the player chose not to accept the Canucks' offer, inferring Morrison wanted too much. The difference between Hodgson and Morrison is that Hodgson is truly a kid and was likely advised to keep his head down and just move on, while Morrison the vet called Canucks out for it - Morrison couldn't have declined the Canuck's offer because there had never been one.

All in, I don't deny the possibility that Hodgson did want a trade (frankly, I wouldn't want to play under AV either ;) ), I simply recognize that there is no evidence that the kid ever said he wanted out of Vancouver or requested a trade. Concurrently I recognize that Gillis stood to gain from implying otherwise (deflect onto the player), didn't have anything to lose from doing so (no one can actually call him a liar, he only implied after all ;) ), and has done the same thing to another player (see: the imaginary offer to Morrison)...


There is no concrete statement. But when you consider all the factors, add all the peices of the puzzle together I think it does point to Cody asking out.

MG when originally asked in Phoenix, before the heavy scrutiny. Said that those conversations stay behind closed doors. What does that mean? If it didn't mean that he asked for a trade, why would he not say that right then and there? There was no intense pressure at that time.

You say that #1 is difficult to believe because he didn't say why he wants to keep that private, right?. Actually he did. He said in his presser

"I chose not to speak about what happened behind the scenes because I expect our players to be able to come in and have the opportunity to speak to me without it being made public, and I am going to continue with that. But there clearly were issues that were on-going. I've spent more time on Cody's issues than every other player combined on our team in the last 3 years"

That's the reason he didn't come out and say it.

Now if you continue on in the quote he clearly illustrates there were alot of issues going back a long time.

Add these things together, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize what was going on. And I really can't see which part of MG saying there were issues that were on-going for a long time, and they determined that Cody didn't want to be here.

I guess what this comes down to is how he said it. Cause I think anyone can clearly see that he is saying Cody wasn't happy in Vancouver and didn't want to be here, and wanted to be moved. Is it because he doesn't come out in a blanket statement and say word for word "Cody Hodgson request a trade" that you don't believe it? I think anyone who follows this team realizes MG likes to keep things under wraps, and talks in a sophisticated way, because he doesn't like making blanket statements that reveal things.

Consider everything, its really not hard to figure out what happened.

The other thing about this is. That leaves a big hole in your 2nd theory. Is if Cody Hodgson didn't request a trade, why did he not say that.

Scott Oake flat out asked him on HNIC if he or anyone associated with him asked for a trade, and he completely dodged the question. Saying that he doesn't like to look back, what's done is done.

This is really where I find it difficult to believe your 2nd theory. Cause there is alot more evidence to support #1, its easy to link it all together, there is really no evidence to suggest otherwise, Cody didn't deny the rumors, his Agent didnt deny the rumors, his agent said they met with our brass.

C'mon your a smart guy, just piece it together.

Hodgson wanted to be move to get a greater opportunity, the orignial request came after the finals, so we guarenteed his roster spot to build up his value as best we could and show his great talent. As the season went along he and his camp asked for more icetime, and they had issues when AV would put him on the 4th line, exc. the issues continued. So when the deal came along that they were looking for they finally pulled the trigger. That would explain the weird timing.
  • 0

zackass.png


#356 Lancaster

Lancaster

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,505 posts
  • Joined: 03-September 12

Posted 29 March 2013 - 02:53 AM

^
Saying you want more opportunity =/= want to be traded

Besides, how would the Sabres feel if they got a player who didn't want to be there? The only choice Hodgson has is to say he doesn't want to talk about the past and just wanna focus on the future. Complaining about the previous team can only make him look bad.

As some previous poster has pointed out, the Canucks management is more than willing to use the media to make the masses believe their side of a story more than perhaps what the truth may be, eg. Brendan Morrison non-contract.
  • 2

#357 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 29 March 2013 - 04:53 AM

You say that #1 is difficult to believe because he didn't say why he wants to keep that private, right?. Actually he did. He said in his presser

"I chose not to speak about what happened behind the scenes because I expect our players to be able to come in and have the opportunity to speak to me without it being made public, and I am going to continue with that. But there clearly were issues that were on-going. I've spent more time on Cody's issues than every other player combined on our team in the last 3 years"

<snip>

I guess what this comes down to is how he said it. Cause I think anyone can clearly see that he is saying Cody wasn't happy in Vancouver and didn't want to be here, and wanted to be moved. Is it because he doesn't come out in a blanket statement and say word for word "Cody Hodgson request a trade" that you don't believe it? I think anyone who follows this team realizes MG likes to keep things under wraps, and talks in a sophisticated way, because he doesn't like making blanket statements that reveal things.


Read your own words: "talks in a sophisticated way..." and "doesn't like making statements that reveal things". Applying your own interpretation of Gilli's character and style it is reasonable to conclude that Gillis deliberately implied a thing (that Hodgson had asked for a trade) and created the impression that the player in question was somehow a problem.

As I proposed - Gillis said a lot without actually saying anything. It's people like you who have simply filled in the blanks the way you were lead by man well-experienced with word play and impression creation.

The other thing about this is. That leaves a big hole in your 2nd theory. Is if Cody Hodgson didn't request a trade, why did he not say that. Scott Oake flat out asked him on HNIC if he or anyone associated with him asked for a trade, and he completely dodged the question. Saying that he doesn't like to look back, what's done is done.


If you haven't noticed, players (almost by definition) dodge any question that may be construed as criticizing or reproaching mgmt/coaches in public. No matter what mgmt/coaches may say publicly about a player, players generally keep their mouths very far from anything that may be construed as criticizing or reproaching mgmt/coaches, even if that means not defending themselves.

So, unlike a Morrison who had nothing to lose by calling Canucks' mgmt on their word play, Hodgson was a kid whose advisers likely told him to do the prudent thing - keep his head down, say only positive things, and just go foward. The only thing a kid at the start of his career has to gain from calling out mgmt and coaches is to give himself a rep in the league as a player who won't just suck it up. Hodgson did precisely what so many players before him have done in response to negative (and possibly untruthful, in this case) commentary from mgmt - he said nothing that could be construed as a criticism or reproach, even though that meant not defending himself.

(ps: For my own part, I think it's pathetic whenever mgmt or coaching staff "call out" a player publicly because players simply aren't in a position to defend themselves to the same audience. It's an abuse of power which most of us wouldn't tolerate in any other profession or position of employment...).

This is really where I find it difficult to believe your 2nd theory. Cause there is alot more evidence to support #1, its easy to link it all together, there is really no evidence to suggest otherwise, Cody didn't deny the rumors, his Agent didnt deny the rumors, his agent said they met with our brass.


Thing of it is, there is absolutely no evidence to support the theory that Gillis didn't just say Hodgson asked for a trade because he was trying to protect the kid from backlash. Gillis used his skill of "sophisticated" talking, as you call it, to bash the kid's character and skills; there's no way Gillis then tried to protect the kid's rep by refusing to outright say he asked for a trade.

C'mon your a smart guy, just piece it together.


I don't claim to be smarter than average joe, but I am definitely smart enough to know that when a guy like Gillis who is well-versed in word play and impression-making only implies a thing without actually saying it (ie: he never said Hodgson asked for a trade or that Hodgson said he wanted out), that guy is likely playing word games and trying to make impressions ;)
  • 1

#358 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 29 March 2013 - 11:21 AM

^
Saying you want more opportunity =/= want to be traded

Besides, how would the Sabres feel if they got a player who didn't want to be there? The only choice Hodgson has is to say he doesn't want to talk about the past and just wanna focus on the future. Complaining about the previous team can only make him look bad.

As some previous poster has pointed out, the Canucks management is more than willing to use the media to make the masses believe their side of a story more than perhaps what the truth may be, eg. Brendan Morrison non-contract.


This, Gillis had so many issues with Cody because they never supported him from the day Gagner injured his back, they created most of the issues. You don't do that to a top prospect especially when you haven't had one in a while and your drafting sucks. On top of that your 2nd line center is a band aid.

He would also be a lot better if he didn't miss all that development time because of his back.

And if he really did want out so bad then I doubt he would have looked as shocked as he did on deadline day.

Pretty sure his agent said they asked for more ice time...and he deserved it....which makes this whole thing so stupid.

I think Hodgson is going to be more valuable then Kesler starting next year and I'm sure Kassian would still be available today...

There's no way Kesler will return to his selke form after all these injuries and surgeries with the kind of game he plays. He's barely had any ice time or off ice time to practice also over the last 2 years.

Since he doesn't pass and is a shell of his former self I would have traded Kesler instead for a top 6 winger. Evander Kane or somethin?

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Booth-Hodgson-Kane

Way better.

Gillis thought he was soo smart bashing Cody and telling everyone how they gave him so many offensive starts and how he only played against third liners and that was the reason to his success.

Clearly they didn't like him, why would you say that about a young player you drafted?

He's playing against top players now and is scoring at the same pace as the twins and is steadily improving in his defensive game and faceoffs.

Roberts took him under his wing and look how he's turned out with the right leadership.

Gillis is a tool.
  • 1

m97o1w.jpg

Credit to Parise11


#359 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 01:41 PM

Well Mike if we are really arguing about interpitation of how MG speaks then I guess this is over.

I also find it funny how your continued response is that MG didn't say it point blank in the exact words you would like to here so it didn't happen.

Then when I bring up the fact that Cody point blank dodged the question a number of times (Which 100% hints he asked for a trade, and that he just doesn't want to admit it) you can make up some excuse for it.

Thats fine. Cody didn't want to be here, it is clear as day. And if you don't believe it just think about what would have happened had we not traded him. The issues would only continue and if we didn't trade him he would have made the RFA process a disaster and held out, or made it known that he wanted a trade.

Anyways, I wish the kid well, loved him when he was here, defended him when people were calling him a bust, and unfortunately there was just no place for him here long term and he wanted to move on to somewhere that he could get those opportunties. Good on him, more power to him in Buffalo and I'm with what we got in Zack.

That's really all there is too it, we have to move on.
  • 0

zackass.png


#360 mikeburn

mikeburn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,996 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 07

Posted 29 March 2013 - 02:35 PM

Well Mike if we are really arguing about interpitation of how MG speaks then I guess this is over. I also find it funny how your continued response is that MG didn't say it point blank in the exact words you would like to here so it didn't happen.


You're' still not getting it. It's not about me or the words I would like. It's about the fact Gillis never said Hodgson asked for a trade or said he wanted out of Vancouver. According to even you, Gilli is a "sophisticated" talker, he implied to create an impression and you've fallen for it.

Then when I bring up the fact that Cody point blank dodged the question a number of times (Which 100% hints he asked for a trade, and that he just doesn't want to admit it) you can make up some excuse for it.


The fact that players do not, as a general rule, "talk back" or otherwise criticize and reproach mgmt publicly, is not an excuse but a viable explanation for why Hodgson declined to say anything that might be construed as reproaching Gillis for how he described matters.

There's no rocket science involved here - the kid simply did what most players do when their character and/or abilities are criticized by mgmt - he spoke only positively of others, referencing his gratefulness for opportunities and fans, then moved on.

(Incidentally, has it occurred to you that if Hodgson did ask for a trade and everyone already presumed as much due Gillis' commentary, he had nothing to lose by just saying it straight up himself? What was done, was done after all. People liked him or not. The new team/fans might even like him more for having no regrets or misplaced loyalties. And many players before him have gone public with saying they wanted a trade for a different opportunity (see: Igninla ;) )

Thats fine. Cody didn't want to be here, it is clear as day. And if you don't believe it just think about what would have happened had we not traded him. The issues would only continue and if we didn't trade him he would have made the RFA process a disaster and held out, or made it known that he wanted a trade.

Anyways, I wish the kid well, loved him when he was here, defended him when people were calling him a bust, and unfortunately there was just no place for him here long term and he wanted to move on to somewhere that he could get those opportunties. Good on him, more power to him in Buffalo and I'm with what we got in Zack.


It's not "clear as day", there is no evidence that Hodgson "wanted to move on...", etc. That's the entire point, lol. No matter how many times you repeat a personal opinion, it will not magically become a fact.

That's really all there is too it, we have to move on.


You have had an opportunity to critically analyze what was actually said and done, and still persist with holding onto personal interpretations which simply don't stand up to scrutiny. And hey, no worries, it's only a hockey thing, it's only chatter about tiny matters and people in the scheme of things. The only "big deal" comes when people apply the same decision-making style when faced with the big decisions in life ;)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.