[8-Minute Insights] 32 Minutes of Cody Hodgson, some Mason Raymond, & a little bit of Jannik Hansen.

[TrickOfShapes]

 

Let's go back in time to January 2012.

21-year-old Cody Hodgson was in the midst of a successful rookie season in the NHL. He scored six goals and 10 points in 11 games that January while playing mostly on the Vancouver Canucks' third line alongside Mason Raymond and Jannik Hansen. It seemed he was the team's answer to their center depth and secondary scoring issues. He was the NHL's January 2012 Rookie of the Month.

 

https://www.nhl.com/canucks/news/cody-hodgson-named-nhl-rookie-of-the-month/c-614816

In total, by January 31, 2012, he had scored 14 goals and 30 points in 50 games with an average TOI of 12:42.

Canucks fans had enormous expectations for their 10th overall pick in the 2008 NHL Draft. Only one month later, at the trade deadline on February 27, the biggest news of the day broke: Cody Hodgson had been traded.

Canucks Nation let out a collective gasp.

Edited September 10, 2020 by TrickOfShapes

[DeNiro]

Amazing trade that allowed us to draft Cole Candella!

 

Hodgson>>>Kassian>>>Prust + 5th>>>Candella

[Neil HD]

If Hodgson had to be traded, I wish Gillis had waited until the draft and targeted a good RHD prospect.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

4 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Amazing trade that allowed us to draft Cole Candella!

 

Hodgson>>>Kassian>>>Prust + 5th>>>Candella

Kassian will end up with a longer NHL career than any of those guys.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

4 hours ago, Neil HD said:

If Hodgson had to be traded, I wish Gillis had waited until the draft and targeted a good RHD prospect.

Kassian might've come in handy during the Vegas series.

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

Say what you want about Cody Hodgson, but he was one of my favourite prospects during that time.

 

I still think he had a bright future in Vancouver, too bad the chips fell as they may.  I really feel the moment he was traded, the secondary scoring that year took a hit, where it dried all up against the Sharks in the playoffs.

[Lancaster]

1 hour ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Kassian will end up with a longer NHL career than any of those guys.

To be fair, Hodgson had to retire due to medical issues.  

If he was able to stay healthy and without his chronic issues.... he could have been a good serviceable 2nd/3rd line centre in the NHL.  

[HorvatToBaertschi]

I actually enjoy looking back at our fall from the top of the league, now that our team is as good as it is. Remembering all the lower tier players we have had makes me appreciate our team even more. Of course we have our share of lower tier players, and there's some players I wish would leave the team (Sutter in particular). Hearing the following names makes me appreciate our team so much more

 

Stanton, Prust, Megna, Oreskovich, Booth, Sbisa (who i actually really liked), MDZ, pouliot, Hutton, Kenins, Matthias, McMillan, Vey, Ebbett, volpatti, weise, chaput

 

What a time to be a Canucks fan!!

 

[Ferlands_Head]

2 hours ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Say what you want about Cody Hodgson, but he was one of my favourite prospects during that time.

 

I still think he had a bright future in Vancouver, too bad the chips fell as they may.  I really feel the moment he was traded, the secondary scoring that year took a hit, where it dried all up against the Sharks in the playoffs.

100% 

 

A lot of posters back then felt the Canucks went downhill after their win vs Boston in "Game 8" and were never the same after.

 

In reality they were never the same after the Hodgson trade, they lost a top 6 forward and gained a bottom 6 project, absolutely made no sense. Having CoHo that year gave us 3 dangerous scoring lines, we became much easier to defend after that. The cheap elbow by Duncan Keith on D.Sedin didn't help either. 

 

In the 19 games after the Hodgson trade they averaged 2.26 Goals Per Game. They ended up finishing their season at 3.03. 

 

Can only imagine if they kept Hodgson and D.Sedin was healthy, that 2012 cup likely could've been ours. 

[Goat James]

Man I was so bummed out when CoHo was traded; I remember CDC going down for several hours. 

[Gollumpus]

2 hours ago, Ferlands_Head said:

100% 

 

A lot of posters back then felt the Canucks went downhill after their win vs Boston in "Game 8" and were never the same after.

 

In reality they were never the same after the Hodgson trade, they lost a top 6 forward and gained a bottom 6 project, absolutely made no sense. Having CoHo that year gave us 3 dangerous scoring lines, we became much easier to defend after that. The cheap elbow by Duncan Keith on D.Sedin didn't help either. 

 

In the 19 games after the Hodgson trade they averaged 2.26 Goals Per Game. They ended up finishing their season at 3.03. 

 

Can only imagine if they kept Hodgson and D.Sedin was healthy, that 2012 cup likely could've been ours. 

The Canucks were never the same after Malhotra was injured. Hodgson played a lot of very sheltered minutes as I recall. 

 

Having Hodgson as 3C in 2011 - 12 the Canucks scored 249 goals. In 2010 - 11, with the more defensive minded Malhotra at 3C the Canucks scored 262 goals. Having Hodgson as 3C threw off the balance of the team. Assignments had to be changed to provide Hodgson with sheltered minutes. Hodgson got a greater amount of neutral or even offensive zone starts more because he was a liability in his own end rather than because of his offensive talent.

 

                                                             regards,  G.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

I honesty thought, at that time, that Cody Hodgson would be the next captain after Henrik Sedin.

[themcdeal]

People here were ruthless regarding Hodgson and attacked his character when he got traded. The reality was, the guy was seriously sick and it was miraculous that he was playing at the NHL level. 

 

He clearly knew something was wrong with his body but the doctors (Canucks doctors included) couldn't figure out what it was

[EternalCanuckFan]

1 minute ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

I honesty thought, at that time, that Cody Hodgson would be the next captain after Henrik Sedin.

It certainly seemed that way.  Hodgson was a genuinely good player.  It came as a surprise that there were alleged issues going on in the background regarding playing time, and an even bigger surprise when his career ended so early due to health problems.

[Lancaster]

5 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

The Canucks were never the same after Malhotra was injured. Hodgson played a lot of very sheltered minutes as I recall. 

 

Having Hodgson as 3C in 2011 - 12 the Canucks scored 249 goals. In 2010 - 11, with the more defensive minded Malhotra at 3C the Canucks scored 262 goals. Having Hodgson as 3C threw off the balance of the team. Assignments had to be changed to provide Hodgson with sheltered minutes. Hodgson got a greater amount of neutral or even offensive zone starts more because he was a liability in his own end rather than because of his offensive talent.

 

                                                             regards,  G.

Plus Kesler unnecessarily rushed back from his hip injury.  IIRC, he was supposed to return after the New Year, but instead was ready from October.  

RK17 was noticeably off his game the entire season and was a factor on why the Canucks played poorly in the post-season.  Not saying he would have turned the team around... but a healthy Kesler going into the playoffs with Hodgson being the depth scoring.... LA was stacked, but the series should have went longer than it did.  

[Darkstar]

10 hours ago, Ferlands_Head said:

100% 

 

A lot of posters back then felt the Canucks went downhill after their win vs Boston in "Game 8" and were never the same after.

 

In reality they were never the same after the Hodgson trade, they lost a top 6 forward and gained a bottom 6 project, absolutely made no sense. Having CoHo that year gave us 3 dangerous scoring lines, we became much easier to defend after that. The cheap elbow by Duncan Keith on D.Sedin didn't help either. 

 

In the 19 games after the Hodgson trade they averaged 2.26 Goals Per Game. They ended up finishing their season at 3.03. 

 

Can only imagine if they kept Hodgson and D.Sedin was healthy, that 2012 cup likely could've been ours. 

I still think the biggest loss on that team was Ehrhoff. Losing the only puck-mover on defense essentially killed the Canucks' transition offense. He's probably the most forgotten part of that 2011 team, especially because he played poorly in the Finals (due to injury). 

 

I think if the Canucks had flipped Hodgson, a first round pick, and another asset for a puck-moving defenseman, the Canucks would have won the cup in 2012 or 2013, even with Daniel Sedin injured at the beginning of the playoffs. The only tough team in the West (in 2012) were the Kings, and the transition offense would have allowed them to win. I mean, look at the series winning goal between the Kings and Canucks for example. Hamhuis, Edler, and Bieksa were great d-men, but none of them could effectively move the puck up the ice.

 

For example, imagine this Canucks team without Quinn Hughes. I know Ehrhoff isn't even on the same level as Hughes, but they bring a similar style of game that wasn't on this team for 8 years. The second they added a defenseman who can move the puck up the ice, the team made the playoffs. This is something I've been touting since 2011.

 

I compare this to when the Canucks refused to improve in net during the WCE days. Honestly, if you're a contender, you should throw any piece you can to perfect your team. The Canucks blew several opportunities to win the cup because they couldn't trigger a deal to improve the holes on the roster. I'm hoping Benning learns from these mistakes during his tenure. 

Edited September 10, 2020 by Darkstar

[IBatch]

One thing yet to be mentioned was CoHo was instrumental in keeping our PP alive with the second unit.   Teams had figured out how to deal with first PP unit in 2011-2012 and it was the second unit that kept it up there.   Always felt that MG made some knee jerk reactions to losing in 2011 and this by far was the biggest of them.  At the time Hodgson looked like a clear cut number 2 in the making, it wasn’t a fair deal really.   It was the beginning of the end for a team that really should of had 2-3 more cracks at it. 

[Ferlands_Head]

4 hours ago, Darkstar said:

I still think the biggest loss on that team was Ehrhoff. Losing the only puck-mover on defense essentially killed the Canucks' transition offense. He's probably the most forgotten part of that 2011 team, especially because he played poorly in the Finals (due to injury). 

 

I think if the Canucks had flipped Hodgson, a first round pick, and another asset for a puck-moving defenseman, the Canucks would have won the cup in 2012 or 2013, even with Daniel Sedin injured at the beginning of the playoffs. The only tough team in the West was the Kings, and the transition offense would have allowed them to win. I mean, look at the series winning goal between the Kings and Canucks for example. Hamhuis, Edler, and Bieksa were great d-men, but none of them could effectively move the puck up the ice.

 

For example, imagine this Canucks team without Quinn Hughes. I know Ehrhoff isn't even on the same level as Hughes, but they bring a similar style of game that wasn't on this team for 8 years. The second they added a defenseman who can move the puck up the ice, the team made the playoffs. This is something I've been touting since 2011.

 

I compare this to when the Canucks refused to improve in net during the WCE days. Honestly, if you're a contender, you should throw any piece you can to perfect your team. The Canucks blew several opportunities to win the cup because they couldn't trigger a deal to improve the holes on the roster. I'm hoping Benning learns from these mistakes during his tenure. 

Excellent post i couldn't agree more. IMO the problem was masked a bit in 2011-12 by career years from Edler, Bieksa and Hamhuis. But you're right something definitely was off and it was the transition offense. Just like this year we had no answer for the Kings forecheck in 11-12. I've been saying even before this year Hughes is a game changer but he can't play 60 mins a night. Hopefully with the arrival of Juolevi and possibly Rathbone we can finally put an end to these issues and win a damn cup! 

 

12 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

The Canucks were never the same after Malhotra was injured. Hodgson played a lot of very sheltered minutes as I recall. 

 

Having Hodgson as 3C in 2011 - 12 the Canucks scored 249 goals. In 2010 - 11, with the more defensive minded Malhotra at 3C the Canucks scored 262 goals. Having Hodgson as 3C threw off the balance of the team. Assignments had to be changed to provide Hodgson with sheltered minutes. Hodgson got a greater amount of neutral or even offensive zone starts more because he was a liability in his own end rather than because of his offensive talent.

 

                                                             regards,  G.

Absolutely, Malhotra allowed Kesler to take on a more offensive role and he was a HUGE loss. It also forced us to play Lapierre on line 3 instead of the 4th line, effectively killing our ability to run 4 effective lines. Our revolving door 4th line contributed nothing to our cup run.

 

 

[Maginator]

On 9/10/2020 at 5:43 AM, The Game said:

Man I was so bummed out when CoHo was traded; I remember CDC going down for several hours. 

Me too,

 

I was shook because he was having such a good season. After that bar-down Boston goal, we had our answer.

 

Then in a moments notice he was gone, and the answer to Boston vanished.

[Patel Bure]

On 9/9/2020 at 7:01 PM, Neil HD said:

If Hodgson had to be traded, I wish Gillis had waited until the draft and targeted a good RHD prospect.

The Hodgson trade never made sense to me.  I get that Hodgson may have been unhappy behind the scenes and so a change of scenery may have been necessary, but the package that Gillis got was really strange in my opinion.

 

Back in 2012, the Canucks were an elite team that was still arguably the best team in the league.   If Gillis was going to trade Hodgson, it should have been for a “win now” piece.

Hodgson + (one of Luongo or Schneider)

 

for

 

A major piece + a less heralded older back up.

 

The Hodgson for Kassian-MAG deal was a strange deal that made the team worse short term and may have projected to the team that the GM didn’t have confidence in them.   

Edited September 16, 2020 by DarkIndianRises