Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

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


  • Please log in to reply
939 replies to this topic

#781 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,739 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 September 2013 - 06:18 PM

Well I never

I'll have you know that I've never been formally introduced to a monkey that did not stink. Not once !

And the fact that I've never been formally introduced to a monkey is irrelevant


Damn you and your logic!! You win this round.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#782 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,967 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 03 September 2013 - 06:27 PM

not sure but I think he's quoting Austin Powers

Cody Hodgson is Dutch.

I got nothing. Wish Bobby Mack did his job and reported Coho's demands.
  • 0
Posted Image

#783 viking mama

viking mama

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,103 posts
  • Joined: 17-January 10

Posted 03 September 2013 - 11:13 PM

Yeah, no kidding. Roy could have been not on the ice at times.
But I guess that's what happens with a shortened season. Hard to gel with a guy you've only play a few games with and then all of a sudden, you're in the playoffs.


If you ask me, AV mis-used Roy through-out that player's stint in VAN. Higgins & Roy showed some early promise & chemistry together....but AV inexplicably splits 'em-up. AV's play-off configurations were a modge-podge of hunches. He was out-of-touch with his team,... out-of-sync with his goalies,.... & out-of-fresh ideas. Roy saw the writing from the bench....when AV couldn't stick with any of his decisions long-enough to let a new guy catch a break & find his synergy. Roy became just another one of AV's many under-utilized assets...like Lu...& Garrison...Schroeder or Kassian. AV failed to demonstrate the proper-handling of any of these guys - last season.

Edited by viking mama, 03 September 2013 - 11:21 PM.

  • 2

#784 Absent Canuck

Absent Canuck

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,565 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 13

Posted 03 September 2013 - 11:28 PM

Scanning HF, Coho has done enough to earn a Myers-type raise from Buffalo.


Scanning HF as a news source? lol

Coho's 1/2 season of a 58 point 'pace' as a first line center with 7mil dollar wingers is ENOUGH to score Tyler Myers kind of contract. Can you explain that please?
  • 0

Another great sig by Vintage Canuck

 


#785 Nuxfanabroad

Nuxfanabroad

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,913 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 07

Posted 03 September 2013 - 11:31 PM

If you ask me, AV mis-used Roy through-out that player's stint in VAN. Higgins & Roy showed some early promise & chemistry together....but AV inexplicably splits 'em-up. AV's play-off configurations were a modge-podge of hunches. He was out-of-touch with his team,... out-of-sync with his goalies,.... & out-of-fresh ideas. Roy saw the writing from the bench....when AV couldn't stick with any of his decisions long-enough to let a new guy catch a break & find his synergy. Roy became just another one of AV's many under-utilized assets...like Lu...& Garrison...Schroeder or Kassian. AV failed to demonstrate the proper-handling of any of these guys - last season.


Vigneault was let go 3 seasons late-2010 would have been better. Hate how his guy treated Ballard, & under-utilized youth who COULD have played a much bigger role.
  • 3

#786 viking mama

viking mama

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,103 posts
  • Joined: 17-January 10

Posted 03 September 2013 - 11:59 PM

Yah - Ballard was dog-housed too often & could never please AV.

Ballard now has his play-off experience...& buy-out money to compensate him for AV's mistreatments....& as a native-Minnesotan, he is going to bounce-back & be the player that he could have been for us...but as a member of the Minnesota Wild.

I think AV's perception of Ballard...was that he became emotionally un-glued...& was not as resilient as AV liked his D-men to be. Let's see if those criticisms have any validity,... as Ballard battles for the Wild with a very large chip on his shoulder. Ballard may even have a...near career year.

Edited by viking mama, 04 September 2013 - 08:15 PM.

  • 0

#787 kazin!

kazin!

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,111 posts
  • Joined: 06-September 06

Posted 04 September 2013 - 12:05 AM


At age 21 you dont DEMAND to be traded because you cant shove the Hart trophy and Selke winning centers off their ice time.

That is utter arrogance that Mario Lemiuex wouldnt even have. You dont DEMAND more ice time as a 21 year old rookie on a president trophy winning team. I dont care how much heavy spin you use. Its ridiculous.

He pissed his team mates off so much they taped a plastic C to his uniform during practice before the unaware Coho was informed he had been traded.

Ouch.

How many players do you know make decisions like this? They are called 'prima donnas' . Cody is not a super star so he is a poor man's prima donna.


Where did you read this?

Edited by kazin!, 04 September 2013 - 12:06 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image

#788 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,728 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 04 September 2013 - 12:58 AM

Hodgson has a big head.

Edited by Erik Karlsson, 04 September 2013 - 01:00 AM.

  • 0

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#789 Sugar baby watermelon

Sugar baby watermelon

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,368 posts
  • Joined: 15-September 11

Posted 04 September 2013 - 04:53 AM

If you ask me, AV mis-used Roy through-out that player's stint in VAN. Higgins & Roy showed some early promise & chemistry together....but AV inexplicably splits 'em-up. AV's play-off configurations were a modge-podge of hunches. He was out-of-touch with his team,... out-of-sync with his goalies,.... & out-of-fresh ideas. Roy saw the writing from the bench....when AV couldn't stick with any of his decisions long-enough to let a new guy catch a break & find his synergy. Roy became just another one of AV's many under-utilized assets...like Lu...& Garrison...Schroeder or Kassian. AV failed to demonstrate the proper-handling of any of these guys - last season.


This. Couldn't have said it better myself
  • 0

#790 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,165 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 04 September 2013 - 07:34 AM

Yah - Ballard was dog-housed too often & could never please AV.

Ballard now has his play-off experience...& buy-out money to compensate him for AV's mistreatments....& as a native-Minnisotan, he is going to bounce-back & be the player that he could have been for us...as a member of the Minnisota Wild.

I think AV's perception of Ballard...was that he became emotionally un-glued...& was not as resilient as AV likes his D-men to be. Let's see if those criticisms have any merit, as Ballard battles-on for the Wild with a very large chip on his shoulder. Ballard may even have a...near career year.

I guess we will see how Ballard does in Minny. I thought he had a shot with AV and repeatedly got burnt and thus lost AV's confidence. Acquiring Garrison simply put the final nail in his Van coffin. Ballard simply never played well enough inVan to warrant any more than what he got.
  • 0

#791 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,967 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 04 September 2013 - 08:16 AM

Scanning HF as a news source? lol

Coho's 1/2 season of a 58 point 'pace' as a first line center with 7mil dollar wingers is ENOUGH to score Tyler Myers kind of contract. Can you explain that please?

If you 'scanned HF' as well, you'd know that various Sabres/Hodgson articles and tweets were posted. lol?

However, i didn't post those articles. My bad.

I think the explaination of how Tyler Myers earned his mammoth deal... After just one half-decent season... Should help point you towards a reasoning. ie. 'What's good for the goose is good for the gander'?
  • 0
Posted Image

#792 Absent Canuck

Absent Canuck

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,565 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 13

Posted 04 September 2013 - 03:23 PM

If you 'scanned HF' as well, you'd know that various Sabres/Hodgson articles and tweets were posted. lol?

However, i didn't post those articles. My bad.

I think the explaination of how Tyler Myers earned his mammoth deal... After just one half-decent season... Should help point you towards a reasoning. ie. 'What's good for the goose is good for the gander'?


Didnt Myers also win the Calder trophy? So it was 2 good years.

A 58 point pace playing with 7mil dollar wingers is somehow the same as that? Please explain.

edit

My info is correct right? a 58 point pace for a 1st line center.

Edited by Absent Canuck, 04 September 2013 - 03:24 PM.

  • 0

Another great sig by Vintage Canuck

 


#793 mbal23

mbal23

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,684 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 11

Posted 04 September 2013 - 05:15 PM

Last
  • 0

#794 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,967 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 04 September 2013 - 08:08 PM

Didnt Myers also win the Calder trophy? So it was 2 good years.

A 58 point pace playing with 7mil dollar wingers is somehow the same as that? Please explain.

edit

My info is correct right? a 58 point pace for a 1st line center.

I don't really have to explain further. The original point was that while Regier would like not to repeat a super-early and (with hindsight) insane Myers-type deal, Coho and his agent would very much like for him to ante up. Also, the Henrique deal set a bar. These players, Coho and others, have not accomplished all that much, but still got locked up to significant long-term deals.

At this point we can only speculate, but if Regier didn't have a long-term contract in mind for Coho, then why did he trade for him?

Was hoping Bobby Mack would have the gonads to post Coho's demands, but no go.
  • 0
Posted Image

#795 Cyril Sneer

Cyril Sneer

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,327 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 13

Posted 04 September 2013 - 08:11 PM

Holy crap you guys, 27 pages? Get over it.
  • 2

#796 hudson bay rules

hudson bay rules

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts
  • Joined: 03-November 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 08:59 PM

Kadri or CoHo? I think they are both waiting for the other shoe to drop. IMO Coho should get a bit more but Buff aint a playoff team spending to the cap. If Kadri signs first and Buff won't step up expect a trade. Calgary anyone?
  • 0
I love rock and roll, just put another dime in the juice box baby.

#797 Amish Rake Fighter

Amish Rake Fighter

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,463 posts
  • Joined: 06-October 08

Posted 04 September 2013 - 09:31 PM

Holy crap you guys, 27 pages? Get over it.


Pro tip - if you see a thread that you don't like, instead of taking the time to bitch in it, just move along

Edited by Amish Rake Fighter, 04 September 2013 - 09:32 PM.

  • 2

#798 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 04 September 2013 - 10:52 PM

Pro tip - if you see a thread that you don't like, instead of taking the time to bitch in it, just move along


Pro tip - if you see a [post] that you don't like, instead of taking the time to bitch [about] it, just move along.

See what I did there?
  • 3

#799 Amish Rake Fighter

Amish Rake Fighter

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,463 posts
  • Joined: 06-October 08

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:08 PM

Pro tip - if you see a [post] that you don't like, instead of taking the time to bitch [about] it, just move along.

See what I did there?


out douched me ?
  • 3

#800 higgyfan

higgyfan

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,582 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 12

Posted 05 September 2013 - 03:54 PM

To be fair, Cody has had two good seasons; last year and the year before when he was close to being nominated for Calder. The way some fans vilify Hodgson seems to blind them to anything he does well. His playmaking abilities and offensive skill are great and he will likely improve his defensive game as time goes by.

He was never a good fit in Vancouver, as we had better #1 and #2 Cs and he isn't the kind of player the team wants at 3C (although it will be intersting what happens to Schroeder). I will always believe that AV foot in mouth public flogging regarding Cody 'faking' his back injury was the beginning of the end for CH in Van.

Anyways, I don't care that he is no longer with the team and am hopeful that Kass can improve his game this year. I also think that Hovart will end up being a better player.
  • 1

#801 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,846 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 04:33 PM

Holy crap you guys, 27 pages? Get over it.


hehe, I was wondering where people would go to bitch at one another when the Luongo saga ended
  • 0

#802 Absent Canuck

Absent Canuck

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,565 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 04:39 PM

Did they sign Cody yet?
  • 0

Another great sig by Vintage Canuck

 


#803 The Coach

The Coach

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,651 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 09

Posted 05 September 2013 - 05:13 PM

He produced 34 points in 48 gms.

If anyone thinks he isn't worth more than 3.25/yr especially over 4 years they need to give their heads a shake and go dig out some stats for players making more than that to see how they produced.

A fair deal is 4.25/yr on a 3 year deal imo. If they want to try and be cheap they'll lose him and rightfully so. This is the game, this is how players get paid. This is why there is the NHLPA.

This whole CoHo is a baby routine makes me sick. He's always produced fairly well for a younger player and Gillis's kind words about him mean little to me after the gong show he pulled on Luongo and ultimately us, the fans who will pay for his poor moves.
  • 1

#804 Absent Canuck

Absent Canuck

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,565 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 05:48 PM

He produced 34 points in 48 gms.


A 58 point pace for a 1st line center.

While playing the most ice time with two 7 million dollar wingers. He was also one of the worst defensive forwards in the ENTIRE league. In fact, he was on the ice for more goals against than any other forward in the whole league.

Again , lets review.

The guy gets the most ice time , including the juciest power play time. He has 2 proven SEVEN million dollar wingers (Vanek and Pominville) to play with, and he cant get more than a 58 point pace?

Didnt Anson Carter get 33 goals playing with the Sedins? Didn't Taylor Pyatt get 23 with the twins?

There is no way the guy is worth 4 million dollars. You can complain all you want but you wont win many converts with his stats.
  • 2

Another great sig by Vintage Canuck

 


#805 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,300 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 06:12 PM

He produced 34 points in 48 gms.

If anyone thinks he isn't worth more than 3.25/yr especially over 4 years they need to give their heads a shake and go dig out some stats for players making more than that to see how they produced.

A fair deal is 4.25/yr on a 3 year deal imo. If they want to try and be cheap they'll lose him and rightfully so. This is the game, this is how players get paid. This is why there is the NHLPA.

This whole CoHo is a baby routine makes me sick. He's always produced fairly well for a younger player and Gillis's kind words about him mean little to me after the gong show he pulled on Luongo and ultimately us, the fans who will pay for his poor moves.

Produced in 1 zone.
  • 1

#806 TheEhrhoffEffect

TheEhrhoffEffect

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,122 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 06

Posted 05 September 2013 - 07:34 PM

[/size]
A 58 point pace for a 1st line center.

While playing the most ice time with two 7 million dollar wingers. He was also one of the worst defensive forwards in the ENTIRE league. In fact, he was on the ice for more goals against than any other forward in the whole league.

Again , lets review.

The guy gets the most ice time , including the juciest power play time. He has 2 proven SEVEN million dollar wingers (Vanek and Pominville) to play with, and he cant get more than a 58 point pace?

Didnt Anson Carter get 33 goals playing with the Sedins? Didn't Taylor Pyatt get 23 with the twins?

There is no way the guy is worth 4 million dollars. You can complain all you want but you wont win many converts with his stats.

Stamkos, Hall, Tavares, Stepan, Kadri, Duchene and Eberle were the only players at Hodgson's age (Born in 1990) or younger that got more points than him last year. Hodgson also had more goals last year than any single player on the Vancouver Canucks, while playing on the Buffalo Sabres, a team that is not considered by many to be packed with elite talent. Yes, he played with Vanek and that definitely helped his stats, but nobody expects Hodgson to be the second coming of Crosby and do it on his own, which is why he won't be paid as such. Hodgson at 4.5 per is not a stretch at all, especially if it's a bridge contract (2-3 years).

The whole 58 points in 82 games for a first line centre isn't that big of a deal especially if you look at a team like Boston, who's top two centres David Krejci and Patrice Bergeron put up 33 and 32 points respectively (Hodgson put up 34). You look at Vancouver with Henrik Sedin who put up 45 points in 48 games and see how Vancouver did in the playoffs as opposed to Boston (if you didn't hear, it didn't go so well for the Canucks once again). Being on pace for 58 points in a season as a 22-23 year old centre who's been thrown to the wolves on a weak Buffalo team is somewhat decent IMO.

You can also complain about Hodgson sucking defensively but the kid will definitely pick up his game. He was an accomplished two-way centre in junior and with more time adjusting to a big role, he'll improve his faceoffs and defensive ability. There aren't a ton of players that get out of junior, becoming a first line centre, and keep up their two-way ability. As a first line centre, he was expected to keep up offensively with Vanek and Pominville instead of worrying about the other side of the ice. If he is this bad defensively 3 years from now, then you may have a point. He's slowly getting better, much to the disdain of Canucks homers worldwide and yes, he's worth 4-4.5 mil per season on a short-term deal, especially with the cap projected to go up steadily in the years to come.
  • 4

#807 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,739 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 11:51 PM

*
POPULAR

Stamkos, Hall, Tavares, Stepan, Kadri, Duchene and Eberle were the only players at Hodgson's age (Born in 1990) or younger that got more points than him last year.


Yup. Of the guys listed, how many of them are better skaters? Of the players listed, how many of them are at the very least as good as Hodgson in the physical aspects of the game? Of the guys listed, how many of them are at least as good as Hodgson or better when it comes to defense? I believe that last season Hodgson was only better than one of the guys listed when it came to faceoffs (Eberle). This being said, the thing that does distinguish Eberle from Hodgson is that Eberle has scored 30+ goals and has scored over 70 points in a season.

And of the players listed, how many of them would any team take over Hodgson? I think Hodgson's not a bad player, but he certainly isn't in the class of any of those other guys (IMO), and there's a pretty significant drop-off from them to him.


Hodgson also had more goals last year than any single player on the Vancouver Canucks, while playing on the Buffalo Sabres, a team that is not considered by many to be packed with elite talent. Yes, he played with Vanek and that definitely helped his stats, but nobody expects Hodgson to be the second coming of Crosby and do it on his own, which is why he won't be paid as such. Hodgson at 4.5 per is not a stretch at all, especially if it's a bridge contract (2-3 years).


Are you are implying that the Canucks could really have used those goals? Or just that Hodgson is extremely talented and would have had success, despite being paired up with Vanek and Pominville?

Let's play some "What if?". Hodgson wasn't traded. Kesler was still injured last season and only played 17 games. No Kassian, etc. So who would be Hodgson's linemates from last year? On the right side there would be Gordon, Hansen, Higgins (if he isn't on the left side), Pinnizotto and Weise. On the left side you can choose from Booth (12 games), Higgins (assuming he's not on the left side), Raymond, Sestito. There's a few others here and there.

Tell us how Hodgson gets as many points with the Canucks as he did in Buffalo, without Vanek and Pominville.


The whole 58 points in 82 games for a first line centre isn't that big of a deal especially if you look at a team like Boston, who's top two centres David Krejci and Patrice Bergeron put up 33 and 32 points respectively (Hodgson put up 34).


The whole 58 points in 82 games for a first line center isn't that big of a deal especially if you are looking to make a case for Hodgson, but I'm okay with it.

Hodgson had one more point than Krejci and two more points than Bergeron. That's some pretty big production. In one or two games Hodgson scored one or two points. How'd the season work out for Buffalo with Hodgson scoring those two whole points more than Bergeron? (If you didn't hear, it didn't go so well for the Sabres.)

On the other hand, Krejci was 55.2% at faceoffs. Bergeron was 62.1%. Hodgson was 46.8%. (As a matter of fact, the Bruins had at least nine forwards who had a better faceoff per cent total than Hodgson.) If I'm Boston I'll take the increased chances of team wins because of better faceoff results over the couple of points that Hodgson got.

Krecji was also a +1 player while Bergeron was +24. I'd also take those numbers over Hodgson's two extra points (he finished at -4). Those two guys are also better skaters, etc. etc.


You look at Vancouver with Henrik Sedin who put up 45 points in 48 games and see how Vancouver did in the playoffs as opposed to Boston (if you didn't hear, it didn't go so well for the Canucks once again). Being on pace for 58 points in a season as a 22-23 year old centre who's been thrown to the wolves on a weak Buffalo team is somewhat decent IMO.


Not sure why the Canucks' results are relevant in this particular instance. You previously commented on how Hodgson barely out-pointed the two Bruins' centers, which suggests that Hodgson is a good offensive player. You then go on in this part to give a "points aren't everything" kind of comment regarding Sedin. If you are suggesting that a number one center doesn't have to score points to be successful, then you aren't supporting your case as Hodgson really doesn't do anything else, with any kind of success, than try to score.

What was the most critical thing lacking in the last few years for the Canucks in the playoffs? Lack of toughness gets a lot of votes. Poor coaching was the biggest problem to others. Lack of scoring, not being as healthy as the other team, and even NHL plots to prevent the Canucks from winning the Cup.

For me, aside from a few key injuries, the biggest lack has been in faceoff success (as indicated above). With Kesler and Malhotra gone the entire team got out of sync trying to make up for their missing ability (having Hamhuis out also kind of hurt in the finals). Would having Hodgson have improved the team's chances in any of these areas? No.


You can also complain about Hodgson sucking defensively but the kid will definitely pick up his game. He was an accomplished two-way centre in junior and with more time adjusting to a big role, he'll improve his faceoffs and defensive ability. There aren't a ton of players that get out of junior, becoming a first line centre, and keep up their two-way ability. As a first line centre, he was expected to keep up offensively with Vanek and Pominville instead of worrying about the other side of the ice.


You definately know that Hodgson will definately pick up his game how? He had time here to learn and improve at all aspects of the game, both at the AHL level, and when he was on the third line here with two extremely good two-way wingers and guys like Malhotra from whom to learn. It never seemed to happen. Your assertion seems to be more like wishful thinking.

As a center, or so I've been told, Hodgson should be the guy on that line who is most concerned about the other side of the ice. It's his job. Not saying he shouldn't try to score points, but of the forwards he should also be the one who is most aware of where the opposing players are and play to prevent their scoring chances as much as trying to score for his own team, no?


If he is this bad defensively 3 years from now, then you may have a point. He's slowly getting better, much to the disdain of Canucks homers worldwide and yes, he's worth 4-4.5 mil per season on a short-term deal, especially with the cap projected to go up steadily in the years to come.


If he's this bad defensively in 3 years "...you may have a point"? I believe this is a significant piece of the discussion. Buffalo doesn't want to pay Hodgson money now in hopes that he may get better defensively and at other aspects of the game in 3 years. Hodgson looks like he does want to be paid now for a level of play which he has yet to achieve, and may well never achieve.

Your personal assurances are not enough to change my mind about Hodgson. He is a gifted offensive player. He is also lacking in faceoff ability, skating, physicality and defensive ability. If I were the Sabres he wouldn't get anything over $3.5 million per for a three year term. I'm sure that Hodgson will then have earned a better deal because of his improved play, or he'll get it because there's a bottom feeder team which needs him and is willing to pay him an undeserved amount.


regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 05 September 2013 - 11:56 PM.

  • 7
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#808 honey badger36

honey badger36

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,499 posts
  • Joined: 20-October 11

Posted 06 September 2013 - 09:27 AM

Vigneault was let go 3 seasons late-2010 would have been better. Hate how his guy treated Ballard, & under-utilized youth who COULD have played a much bigger role.


I'm not sure what youth we had to under utilize. If your referring to CoHo there is no way in my mind you play him ahead of Kes. And he was played to his strengths hence MG saying after the trade that CoHo was deployed against weaker opponents so that he had the best chance to succeed, and later be traded so that better players could once again be given those minutes and not have to compensate for CoHo's deficiencies.
  • 0

#809 canuck2xtreme

canuck2xtreme

    Canucks All-Star

  • Assistant to Regional Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,056 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 06

Posted 06 September 2013 - 02:07 PM

Yup. Of the guys listed, how many of them are better skaters? Of the players listed, how many of them are at the very least as good as Hodgson in the physical aspects of the game? Of the guys listed, how many of them are at least as good as Hodgson or better when it comes to defense? I believe that last season Hodgson was only better than one of the guys listed when it came to faceoffs (Eberle). This being said, the thing that does distinguish Eberle from Hodgson is that Eberle has scored 30+ goals and has scored over 70 points in a season.

And of the players listed, how many of them would any team take over Hodgson? I think Hodgson's not a bad player, but he certainly isn't in the class of any of those other guys (IMO), and there's a pretty significant drop-off from them to him.




Are you are implying that the Canucks could really have used those goals? Or just that Hodgson is extremely talented and would have had success, despite being paired up with Vanek and Pominville?

Let's play some "What if?". Hodgson wasn't traded. Kesler was still injured last season and only played 17 games. No Kassian, etc. So who would be Hodgson's linemates from last year? On the right side there would be Gordon, Hansen, Higgins (if he isn't on the left side), Pinnizotto and Weise. On the left side you can choose from Booth (12 games), Higgins (assuming he's not on the left side), Raymond, Sestito. There's a few others here and there.

Tell us how Hodgson gets as many points with the Canucks as he did in Buffalo, without Vanek and Pominville.




The whole 58 points in 82 games for a first line center isn't that big of a deal especially if you are looking to make a case for Hodgson, but I'm okay with it.

Hodgson had one more point than Krejci and two more points than Bergeron. That's some pretty big production. In one or two games Hodgson scored one or two points. How'd the season work out for Buffalo with Hodgson scoring those two whole points more than Bergeron? (If you didn't hear, it didn't go so well for the Sabres.)

On the other hand, Krejci was 55.2% at faceoffs. Bergeron was 62.1%. Hodgson was 46.8%. (As a matter of fact, the Bruins had at least nine forwards who had a better faceoff per cent total than Hodgson.) If I'm Boston I'll take the increased chances of team wins because of better faceoff results over the couple of points that Hodgson got.

Krecji was also a +1 player while Bergeron was +24. I'd also take those numbers over Hodgson's two extra points (he finished at -4). Those two guys are also better skaters, etc. etc.




Not sure why the Canucks' results are relevant in this particular instance. You previously commented on how Hodgson barely out-pointed the two Bruins' centers, which suggests that Hodgson is a good offensive player. You then go on in this part to give a "points aren't everything" kind of comment regarding Sedin. If you are suggesting that a number one center doesn't have to score points to be successful, then you aren't supporting your case as Hodgson really doesn't do anything else, with any kind of success, than try to score.

What was the most critical thing lacking in the last few years for the Canucks in the playoffs? Lack of toughness gets a lot of votes. Poor coaching was the biggest problem to others. Lack of scoring, not being as healthy as the other team, and even NHL plots to prevent the Canucks from winning the Cup.

For me, aside from a few key injuries, the biggest lack has been in faceoff success (as indicated above). With Kesler and Malhotra gone the entire team got out of sync trying to make up for their missing ability (having Hamhuis out also kind of hurt in the finals). Would having Hodgson have improved the team's chances in any of these areas? No.




You definately know that Hodgson will definately pick up his game how? He had time here to learn and improve at all aspects of the game, both at the AHL level, and when he was on the third line here with two extremely good two-way wingers and guys like Malhotra from whom to learn. It never seemed to happen. Your assertion seems to be more like wishful thinking.

As a center, or so I've been told, Hodgson should be the guy on that line who is most concerned about the other side of the ice. It's his job. Not saying he shouldn't try to score points, but of the forwards he should also be the one who is most aware of where the opposing players are and play to prevent their scoring chances as much as trying to score for his own team, no?




If he's this bad defensively in 3 years "...you may have a point"? I believe this is a significant piece of the discussion. Buffalo doesn't want to pay Hodgson money now in hopes that he may get better defensively and at other aspects of the game in 3 years. Hodgson looks like he does want to be paid now for a level of play which he has yet to achieve, and may well never achieve.

Your personal assurances are not enough to change my mind about Hodgson. He is a gifted offensive player. He is also lacking in faceoff ability, skating, physicality and defensive ability. If I were the Sabres he wouldn't get anything over $3.5 million per for a three year term. I'm sure that Hodgson will then have earned a better deal because of his improved play, or he'll get it because there's a bottom feeder team which needs him and is willing to pay him an undeserved amount.


regards,
G.

I'm a bit late to this discussion admittedly, but I agree with pretty much all of this, especially the bolded paragraph.
  • 1

CDCGML Commissioner/Winnipeg Jets <---Click For Roster!
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Support Canuck Place Childrens Hospice - http://www.canuckplace.org/

This is what hockey should be. A lot of chances, a lot of hitting, no cheap shots, no chirping after whistles."


#810 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,739 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 06 September 2013 - 06:48 PM

I'm a bit late to this discussion admittedly, but I agree with pretty much all of this, especially the bolded paragraph.


Yeah, eventually I get to the point... :)

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.




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.