sQuish Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 The criteria for who is on the ice is different between d-men and centres so you can't compare the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suolucidir Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Huh? How is the criteria different??? If you're on the ice for a faceoff, you're on the ice.... that's a +1 for both a forward and a d-man. It's pretty simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Huh? How is the criteria different??? If you're on the ice for a faceoff, you're on the ice.... that's a +1 for both a forward and a d-man. It's pretty simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester@wraiths.ca Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 THe problem is, CH was a 3rd line center who's role should be to take more defensive zone faceoffs than the top 2 line centermen would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buttock Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 If Gillis and AV can hatch a plan to Hodgson into a 2nd line center numbers kind of guy, then come up with a plan to make Kesler into one. Will GM's ever trust doing deals with Gillis now that everyone knows he used a 'pump and dump' on one of his assets. It's like would you trade with someone who artificially inflated stock value so he can sell it to you? I think MG should have kept his mouth shut instead of trying to vindicate himself in the Hodgson trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buttock Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Je That would make sense if the team didn't have the top two way center, Ryan Kesler the Selke winner on it. Nobody we had or brought in, pahlsson or anyone else, would be a better choice for handling the tough assignments like that. He won a Selke for a reason. Choosing to use someone that isn't as good isn't a positive. As for ice time, it could have been handled FAR better. Look at Pittsburgh. 3 strong centers that had 21, 20, and 18.5 minutes per game averages. we'd have been far better served if we'd used Hodgson as the #2 offensive center, with Kesler as a shutdown guy. All 3 getting PP time, and Kesler also getting his PK time. Hodgson deserved more than 12 minutes a game based on his play, and it could have been done and balanced our team far better, but they chose not to. To me, it's constant horrible management of important assets, our prized young players, that has hurt the team. AV did not want to give any skilled young player a fair shake, I truly hope a coaching change is made and we bring in a coach who gives his young guys a real chance. look at Philly, with several young players who got chances all year and are paying dividends in the playoffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jyip Posted April 26, 2012 Author Share Posted April 26, 2012 Really? Really??? The criteria for when you put a player out on the ice is different for a Dman than for a forward. Clearly he wasn't saying that you somehow track the statistic differently. It just doesn't carry the same significance, especially when comparing to a CENTREMAN. The author of the article retracted his statement in light of further review so why are we even here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Some people are sheep and they believe everything they have been told. in the Vancouver market most people seemed to have turned on Cody now. Outside of the Vancouver market most people above all else find it curious Gillis would be so negative about a former player and are comparing him to Burke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 That would make sense if the team didn't have the top two way center, Ryan Kesler the Selke winner on it. Nobody we had or brought in, pahlsson or anyone else, would be a better choice for handling the tough assignments like that. He won a Selke for a reason. Choosing to use someone that isn't as good isn't a positive. As for ice time, it could have been handled FAR better. Look at Pittsburgh. 3 strong centers that had 21, 20, and 18.5 minutes per game averages. we'd have been far better served if we'd used Hodgson as the #2 offensive center, with Kesler as a shutdown guy. All 3 getting PP time, and Kesler also getting his PK time. Hodgson deserved more than 12 minutes a game based on his play, and it could have been done and balanced our team far better, but they chose not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 The .org....were doing the right thing for the Canucks and Hodgson's career, regardless of "pump and dump" strategies). Gillis exaggerating a little is nothing .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jyip Posted April 26, 2012 Author Share Posted April 26, 2012 I wonder if he'd like a shot of ketchup with that crow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 A question I have is this: Assuming Hodgson was moved to the 2nd line, who would be his wingers? Did Hodgson *deserve* more ice time? No. Had he *earned* more ice time? Sometimes, yes he did, but not enough that he should have been played ahead of Kesler on anything other than a temporary basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEAN HARNETT Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 They never used him because they needed an excuse to keep Malholtra and the excuse was he was the faceoff king in the defencive zone thats the real reason he never had many period. No duh, he dealt with Hodgson more because they were working on getting him healthy from his back injury.What a load of BS. Every since they traded Cody the team chemistry went downhill and the team went downhill evethough they squeaked out wins. So instead of being hounded for trading him lets make up stuff. Everyone would of liked more icetime but who wouldn't atleast ask.This will have proved to be a big mistake remember this kid led WJC team to gold playing in all the cruicial moments. The only thing fans can hope for is Kassian doesn't turn out to be a dud and he reaches his potentials as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jyip Posted April 26, 2012 Author Share Posted April 26, 2012 To me ,it was the missed opportunity to help Kesler ease his load and help fill a void. Cody could have been the second line center with a recovering Kes on the wing with a shoulder injury relevation on top of the hip. Kes could have mentored Cody and taken faceoffs in the defensive zone. However,it was never to be.The Gillis .org determined to ship him out. This reminds me a lot of signing Luo to a generational contract after he had suffered a career altering groin injury. Dump Cody when you need him most to help Kes and the team.Sign Luo after he suffers a serious groin injury. Luo gone. Cody gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prana16 Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Read the rest of the thread where that story author retracts his story. The lengths to Hodgson fanboys are going through here illustrates exactly why Gillis had to say something and get folks to shut up (aside from the extremists who seem to remain). Hodgson didn't want to play here, and it was totally low class of him to pretend he was blindsided by the trade when it happened. Gillis took the high road, and Cody was a coward who wanted to put it back on the team. He even had the nerve to infer that the way he was informed was bad as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jyip Posted April 26, 2012 Author Share Posted April 26, 2012 Every good GM looks to sell high and buy low. If the Sabres have good scouts they were surely aware of all the stats posted in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pomorick Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Really the way this whole drama has evolved is asinine. Canucks draft prime player. Assign said player to be trained by Dave Gagne. Player is injured in dry land training??? Player shows up to camp injured and struggles to perform. Coach AV humiliates player suggesting he is using injury as an excuse for a poor showing. Player really was injured. Player's camp comes to his defense. Turns out player really was injured and injured following Canucks direction. Player on his own seeks better rehab, doctors and training and actually recovers. Player plays himself back into a prime prospect. Player gets rewarded with minimal ice time while injured under performing veterans are awarded most of the ice time despite poor production. AV definitely had a big negative influence on the likelyhood of Cody Hodgson ever being a success here. Gillis I think had what should have been a golden opportunity disintegrate infront of him due to the injury and how it unfolded. Gagne's training regimen perhaps caused the injury and AV turning the knife in the media scorning Cody was the second knife in the back. Cody is gone. I really can't blame him and his camp for wanting out. I don't really blame Gillis either. He depends on the people who he has working for him to be competent. Someone or somebodies failed here. Changes need to be made. Wish Cody well. I actually feel really good about Kassian. We will love him for a long time. Half Gino and half Pavel and a whole Todd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlas=d Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 It's funny how everyone keeps saying how the team went downhill after Hodgson was traded; Funny cause you know the 3rd line never looked better once Higgins and Pahlsson started getting some chemistry. If Daniel hadn't of been elbowed the Canucks would of easily defeated the kings, losing Daniel fracked the whole line-up. You guys must be blind not to see it the added pressure that was added to each player to step up and fill the void Daniel left screwed up everything. Having hodgson would of changed nothing in fact he would of been a huge liability out there because he can't play against proven top 6 forwards; he's too slow and doesn't win any battles for the puck. You can't sit there and BLAME a gm when he has no control over who gets injured. I honestly believed or thought that Hodgson was worth a lot more than what Gillis got. With that said there is no way in hell Hodgson would of changed the outcome for the Canucks. The stars didn't align this year, too many Canucks got injured! There is no WAY you can place the blame on the GM. Well you can but you have to have a pea sized brain. I just hope Gillis isn't pressured into making stupid radical changes brought on my the inane vast majority of the Canuck fan base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duodenum Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 If Hodgson wanted out, then great, trade him. Don't go spouting off to the media and make yourself look like an idiot. Huge goof-up. he did not lead the team, Tavares did. Hodgson had more points, Tavares was outstanding and hodgson was along for the ride. Hodgson will be a good player, but he's not the next coming Sakic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prana16 Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 It's funny how everyone keeps saying how the team went downhill after Hodgson was traded; Funny cause you know the 3rd line never looked better once Higgins and Pahlsson started getting some chemistry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.