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

[Rumour] Sabres struggling to re-sign Hodgson, fielding offers for him


Recommended Posts

I meant that the rampant speculation about his character is hilarious, It is a great deal for both the Sabres and Hodgson and not greedy or over the top at all. It is funny that people have spent months degrading him when in reality it was all false. Clearly he is a corner stone piece for the Sabres and wants to be there long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many teams pay for potential, and it would be a good investment for Buffalo to take the risk on Hodgson, especially since he isn't a lazy player and he trains harder than anyone in the offseason. Give him a multi-year deal at a solid cap hit.

If you look at the two best players on the Canucks right now (the Sedins) and see where they were at the age of 23, it isn't far fetched to see the potential that Cody has. The Sedins at 23 were soft, slow, not great defensively and decent offensively. Not saying that Cody will win any Hart trophy's, but he does have the skillset to be an elite player in this league, just like the Sedins did. Hodgson is better offensively at this point in his career than the Sedins were and even though he may not keep up the pace that they did, I see no reason to why he can't improve and become a good 80-90 point centre in the NHL. He doesn't deserve 5+ mil, but he does deserve around 4-4.5 mil per season on a long-term deal or a 3-4 mil per season contract on a shorter term deal, especially with the cap situation today and the role that he has on the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Holy crap Batman!" OMG! OMG! OMG!

lol. Disgruntled much?

You asked in the other thread about why I follow this topic and I explained - it's entertainment. And truly, just now as I opened this thread and saw your extra little negative plug on the heels of everything else, I leaned back and got a great laugh. You're just a riot. Thank you. Please know that there is at least one person in the entire province thinking of you right now, laughing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because guys like Sakic never held out for huge contracts or signed offer sheets? Sakic made as much money as anyone could probably make playing hockey in his time and at the height of his career signed a massive offer sheet with the Rangers.

Contract negotiations have nothing to do with a players character, it's a business. They have short careers. They need to make what they can,

Sakic was a great player and leader but don't forget that he forced the Avs hand and made $17,000,000.00 in a season a long time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think Sakic...ever had to whine to his coaches about playing time...or play sheltered minutes to avoid defensive roles & responsibilities ....or throw teammates under a bus to make excuses for being a minus player....either. Few folks had any arguments with the AV's paying Sakic. That player lead by example on the ice for the most part....not thru self-promoting antics off the ice. Hodgson's current contract...could be the best contract he'll get. I predict that Hodgson will suddenly becomes more injury prone...& turn into BUF's David Booth in a few years. Watch for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to wait - the viking mama is already proven completely wrong.

Hodgson "whine[d] to his coaches about playing time" = wrong

No one, including even Gillis, has claimed Hodgson "whined", or even complained, about his ice time (That Hodgson had a problem with his ice time was only speculation and rumour, mostly driven by fans who wanted to know why he wasn't getting more from a coach to claimed "ice time was earned" (but didn't exactly practice what he preached) and the media types who picked on the topic in the constant search for controversy.)

Hodgson was played "sheltered minutes to avoid defensive roles & responsibilities" = wrong

The notion that Hodgson was played "sheltered" minutes came from Gillis' claim that they attempted to pump 'n dump the kid (after determining (for him) that he didn't want to be in Vancouver because of unspecified "issues") was always raw silly.

1] "Sheltering" rookies by playing them in selected game situations is common practice, and would not have been unusual, or even remarkable in Hodgson's case if not for Gillis' post-trade commentary intended to rationalize the move and deflect negative public opinion onto the player.

2] It's arguable that Hodgson was "sheltered" even to the extent proposed by Gillis in his commentary after the fact. It's arguable because it's been argued both ways, with stats used to support both sides (you know, stats that while factual, can be interpreted very differently by whoever wants to draw a particular conclusion).

See the second post down for an analysis that concludes Gillis was "in left field" and that the stats "put a lie" to his comments - http://www.suddendea...trading-Hodgson

3] Using Hodgson in an offensive role simply filled the gap for the benefit of the team. The Canucks weren't lacking for checking and defensive forwards (see: Malholtra, Lappy, etc.), but were (again) reduced to a 1-line offensive threat as Kesler et. al. struggled behind the Sedins. It's hardly surprising they'd deploy Hodgson into game situations intended to help fill the offensive gap.

4] And to the extent that Hodgson was shielded from "defensive roles & responsibilities" (in any way different from other rookies), it's arguable that this makes sense from a player development perspective. See Kassian as an example of what happens to a kid's confidence - and so development - when he's benched for every mistake and given the general impression that his coaches don't trust him. The only reason for coaching staff to systematically limit a rookies' whole game development is because it fits with immediate team needs for wins (or trades?), and while that may be a rational business decision, it's hardly something for which to fault the rookie.

Hodgson threw "teammates under a bus to make excuses for being a minus player" = wrong

Huh? This accusation against the kid is a new disgruntled fan fabrication as far as I call tell? All quotes attributed to Hodgson about his own negatives refer to him taking full responsibility, wanting and being willing to work on improvement, etc. Added to the only favourable commentary coming out of Buffalo (from his teammates and management) concerning the kid's work ethic and character, suggests that this simply isn't a player who makes excuses at the expense of someone else.

If you want bus tossing examples, refer to Gillis' habit of deflecting negative attention onto the players.

Hodgson engages "self-promoting antics off the ice" = wrong

Where did viking mama even come up with this fluff stuff? WOW. The only "off ice" stuff we've heard about Hodgson has been how much work he's been putting into training and improving himself, or the community work and appearances he's done... If these things are somehow reflective of a bad character as implied by viking mama, then Kesler must be a terrible guy (see yesterday's article about the guy's shot doctor work this summer) and the Sedins... OMG, the Sedins must be sociopaths (see the frequent mention of their community work and appearances)!!

The future world according to viking mama: "Hodgson will suddenly becomes more injury prone...& turn into BUF's David Booth in a few years. Watch for it." = amusing

For a guy who couldn't get anything right when looking back on time, it's rather... well, funny, to imagine he can accurately predict the future.

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...