Canucks get Zack Kassian

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby mathonwy » Fri Mar 09, 2012 5:30 pm

rats19 wrote:Codys value was at a high point with no guarantee of it getting higher before summer

It wasn't a matter of whether coho's value was going to get higher, it is about the here and now and what is more useful to the Canucks for our long playoff run.

Last year, we were a half crippled team who took the champs to game 7.

Last year's issues were:

Our lack of on-the-road goaltending
Our lack of a PP.
Our lack of defensive depth (due to the mismanagement of Keith Ballard).
Mason Raymond on the 2nd line not scoring.

This year:

We got Ginger to address the goaltending.
Our PP's gone pretty stinky recently but its been pretty good for the majority of the season.
Our defensive depth was pretty good until Ballard got concussed. We brought in Gragnani who had a pretty good last game on a pairing with Tanev but who really knows over the long term.
We got David Booth and our Amex line is solid

So... why trade Coho? Obviously GMMG must see Kassian playing a bigger role on our team for the playoffs than if we had Coho but I don't.

We trade depth down the middle for the possibility of size on the wing. I just don't like it.
User avatar
mathonwy
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:53 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby Jovocop » Fri Mar 09, 2012 5:32 pm

rats19 wrote:Codys value was at a high point with no guarantee of it getting higher before summer


Plus the Kassian's value was at a low point with no guarantee of it not going back up before summer.
User avatar
Jovocop
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby Jovocop » Fri Mar 09, 2012 5:41 pm

mathonwy wrote:
rats19 wrote:Codys value was at a high point with no guarantee of it getting higher before summer

It wasn't a matter of whether coho's value was going to get higher, it is about the here and now and what is more useful to the Canucks for our long playoff run.

Last year, we were a half crippled team who took the champs to game 7.

Last year's issues were:

Our lack of on-the-road goaltending
Our lack of a PP.
Our lack of defensive depth (due to the mismanagement of Keith Ballard).
Mason Raymond on the 2nd line not scoring.

This year:

We got Ginger to address the goaltending.
Our PP's gone pretty stinky recently but its been pretty good for the majority of the season.
Our defensive depth was pretty good until Ballard got concussed. We brought in Gragnani who had a pretty good last game on a pairing with Tanev but who really knows over the long term.
We got David Booth and our Amex line is solid

So... why trade Coho? Obviously GMMG must see Kassian playing a bigger role on our team for the playoffs than if we had Coho but I don't.

We trade depth down the middle for the possibility of size on the wing. I just don't like it.


I am not sure that MG did trade depth down the middle. Pahlsson seems to be a very nice addition, at least from I have seen so far. He might not outscore Hodgson but Pahlsson had the "shutdown" capability that Hodgson does not have right now. As for clutch goals, Pahlsson just scored one last night. With the Hodgson's trade, I think that the Canucks added the needed size and grit to the bottom six. With the addition of Pahlsson, the bottom six is tougher to play against. Personally, I don't believe Sulzer had much value at the time. I believe that Gragnani was also part of the Hodgson's deal as well.
User avatar
Jovocop
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby herb » Fri Mar 09, 2012 5:46 pm

mathonwy wrote:We trade depth down the middle for the possibility of size on the wing. I just don't like it.


Vigneault doesn't trust rookies and I doubt Hodgson would have played much here in the post season. Manny and Lapierre likely would have been playing elevated minutes when the games that count start.

This BS about Hodgson being some sort of "insurance" in case Hank or Kes go down is just that; BS. If Hank or Kes go down we are screwed anyway. No 33 point rookie is going to lead us to the promised land.
User avatar
herb
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2186
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:17 pm
Location: Mars

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby Hockey Widow » Fri Mar 09, 2012 5:53 pm

I think the expectation is that Kassian can help us now but that the long term projection is that he will help us immensely in the future so it wasn't a wasted trade for this year's run. It is a project which does not negate the fact that he can have a vital role on the team right now and hopefully as he develops that role will increase. In Hodgson he had hit the wall with respect to where he was going as a Canuck in the short term. What we saw was what we were going to get.

The trade cannot be looked at in isolation when assessing whether we are better now or before the trades. It is the overall additions that make us better. Palhsson is what we had in Manny before the injury. If that injury does not happen and Manny continued along his way I suspect Hodgson would not have been given the opportunity he had this year anyway. AV wasn't suddenly going to insert him and give up that traditional 3rd line he covets. Hodgson git his chance due to the injury and ran with it.

I liked the kid and had high hopes for him but the deadline day deals make perfect sense to me. Whether that helps us win the cup time will tell but I doubt very much that standing still and keeping Hodgson would be any better, at least not with the coaching philosophy we have.

If Kassian can play catch up and get himself to a point where he is not gassed in the third period I think he will add a dimension to the team we have had a little glimpse of. If he can't then we will see a number of players on the 4th line again.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3987
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby CorranHorn » Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:07 pm

That's just it HW.

I had a hard time accepting this trade too, but I started to look at this trade in a different way.

At the beginnin of the year people were exclaiming for that 4th line player who can hit, fight(if he needs to) but also play the game. In my mind, for this cup run, that's the role Kassian is going to have/fill, and if St. Louis game was any indication of how he going to play in that role then he is going to be fine.

The problem a lot of people are having is seeing past this years run, and what kind of role Kassian can EVOLVE into. It's either we got a poor mans bertuzzi right now OR we got a 4th liner.

The reality is we got both. A player that fills a need we have now, as well as a player that will fill a need that this team will have in the future. All for a player who would fill no need this team has now nor in the future
User avatar
CorranHorn
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 1:11 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby Meds » Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:09 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:If Kassian can play catch up and get himself to a point where he is not gassed in the third period I think he will add a dimension to the team we have had a little glimpse of. If he can't then we will see a number of players on the 4th line again.


Do you think he can get there in time for the post-season? I don't.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3343
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby Fred » Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:24 pm

Listening to MG he stated Kassian turned up in good shape. The reason IMO Kassian didn't play is he screwed up with his assignment along the boards whicvh lead to Wellwoods goal. He just got benched
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby mathonwy » Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:42 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:Whether that helps us win the cup time will tell but I doubt very much that standing still and keeping Hodgson would be any better, at least not with the coaching philosophy we have.

THIS is what I have an issue with.

If we're going to trade away a blue chipper rookie that was in Calder Trophy consideration at the deadline, then we think about the now and not the future based on the current state of your Vancouver Canucks.

Nobody can say definitively that having Kassian over Coho improves our chance at winning the shiny this year and as this is why I don't like the trade.

Anyways, this is all moot. I don't like the trade and I hope Kassian and Gragnani will change my mind. :)
User avatar
mathonwy
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:53 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby tantalum » Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:52 pm

I think Gillis said that he was in good shape but I don't think he implied he was in the shape this team expects.

It wasn't just his screw up on the goal. Wellwood was left completely uncovered as well. It wasn't just Kassian that got stapled to the bench. LaPierre did as well.

Shifts by period (first, second, third)

Kassian (5,3,1)
LaPierre (6,4,2)...Lapierre got a PK shift in the second
Malhotra (5,6,5)...PK and defensive shifts.


Fact of the matter is in a tight game where the canucks are playing catch up is going to put the 4th line on the bench more often than not. Especially when the three lines ahead of them are firing on most (not all) cylinders.

Anyways...I know it's been pointed out before but given that Hodgson had by far the worst possession stats of the forwards and can not be trusted in any sort of defensive situation means AV was simply not going to be using him in the playoffs. It would not have shocked me to see Hodgson in the pressbox with LaPierre and Malhotra centering the bottom 2 lines (before the Pahlsson acquisition). He wasn't going to be on the ice all that much for his "scoring" to matter. Assuming of course his scoring came back. It is probably more likely that with the game stepping up another notch in the playoffs that Hodgson would not be able to match that step up and fall further behind. Great prospect but I think they saw his defensive side of the game plateau pretty good since Christmas time and they weren't comfortable going forward with him in any sort of significant role.

Many of the same things can be said of Kassian of course. The difference in my book is that errors from the wing are usually less costly than errors from the center.

Of course no one can say Kassian over Hodgson is better for this year, however I'm pretty confident given the way the Western conference game has been played the last half of the season that PAHLSSON and KAssian instead of Hodgson makes the team better now.
User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby Strangelove » Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:16 pm

mathonwy wrote:If we're going to trade away a blue chipper rookie that was in Calder Trophy consideration at the deadline, then we think about the now and not the future based on the current state of your Vancouver Canucks.

Nobody can say definitively that having Kassian over Coho improves our chance at winning the shiny this year and as this is why I don't like the trade.


I hear ya. Coho for Beast woulda been nice. A Stanley Cup one day would be nice.
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7397
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby jkibler » Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:56 pm

wafflecombine wrote:I was leaning polio vaccine and the fact our banks didn't actively try to destroy our economy.

BTW... I'm still waiting for those WMD's you promised us in Iraq. I know you boys kept reciepts....


so you are claiming that good old sadaam had no WMD? let me guess, the gas he used on his own people what the last can of gad he had right?
jkibler
AHL Prospect
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby jkibler » Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:58 pm

tantalum wrote:
jkibler wrote:
Arachnid wrote:Poor Cody was -1 and no points in B-town tonight in a loss :(

Not that' I'm keeping tabs on the trade :D



so how did Kassian do last night!!!!! lol
how much ice time? how many hits??

LOL
:lol:



Kassian 2 points in 5 games and far bigger contributor than 0 point Hodgson has been in 6 games. Both are young. Both have a lot of learning to do. But it's not even a question right now who has played better overall since the trade.


Again, you surround a player with better players and you dont think he will perform better?
there is no doubt the canucks are a far more talented team than the sabres right now,. do you think gretzky would have had his numbers on a lousy team???
jkibler
AHL Prospect
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby jkibler » Fri Mar 09, 2012 8:03 pm

tantalum wrote:
jkibler wrote:and it has NOTHING to do with the quality of the team??? you wanted Kassian for toughness, how many fights has he turned down now?? They questioned his heart in Rochester, and he is showing you all why


They didn't get Kassian for fighting. You get a goon for fighting. You get a 13th overall pick at a PPG in the AHL as rookie for skill and his style of play. Perhaps this was the issue in buffalo and Rochester...they wanted to develop a clearly skilled power forward player as a grinding goon. There is no way Kassian should be fighting a Bissonette unless Bissonette has run a player.

Cody wasn't scoring when he left...on the this same quality of team. Cody is also getting more quality icetime right now on the Sabres. And not scoring.

The only "they" I have heard questioning his heart are fans doing the typical run down the old guy and build up the new guy.

Both are young players. It isn't heart that leads to inconsistencies it's being young. You don't think Hodgson was somehow a completely consistent player in vancouver do you? He wasn't. Both teams got what they want in the deal. Early on only one of the players has truly contributed to the team. That may certainly change but Kassian's 3 strong games are more than acceptable at this point.


Dont you think that the sabres found something in this guy that turned them off??? why WOULD they let go a prospect of his caliber ?? I am not saying the sabres won the trade, as a matter of fact i hated the trade. i was looking forward to kassian being an important part of the team for years to come, but some on this board seem to think it was a slam dunk that the canucks came out better. looks like a pretty even trade to me, except the fact that the sabres gave away they desperately need in toughness....when he decides to play tough
jkibler
AHL Prospect
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Canucks get Zack Kassian

Postby tantalum » Fri Mar 09, 2012 8:21 pm

jkibler wrote:Dont you think that the sabres found something in this guy that turned them off??? why WOULD they let go a prospect of his caliber ?? I am not saying the sabres won the trade, as a matter of fact i hated the trade. i was looking forward to kassian being an important part of the team for years to come, but some on this board seem to think it was a slam dunk that the canucks came out better. looks like a pretty even trade to me, except the fact that the sabres gave away they desperately need in toughness....when he decides to play tough



I can say the same thing about Hodgson. But of course the reason is pretty straightforward. The Sabres have no depth at center ice and no good prospects at center (not to mention center was a huge immediate need if they expect to complete the run to the playoffs).

The canucks are lacking young NHL ready depth on the wing but had very good center ice depth.

I don't see anyone saying it's a slam dunk win for the canucks in that they got the best player. That is something no one will know for several more years. I believe the deadline deals very much balance out the organization for this season and going into the future. In that sense it's a "win" for the canucks. But it's also a win for the Sabres as they achieve the same thing...or at least it should be but so far it hasn't been. If (when?) hodgson picks it up he'll start to contribute. Problem for the Sabres is they want him to contribute from the top 6 when he doesn't appear to be ready for that. The canucks want Kassian to contribute from the bottom 6. A role he can fulfill.

You also have to remember that a young kid can look terrible or off his game when hes really just a half step behind reading the play due to the speed and talent in the NHL. For big kids that like to hit that can mean not getting in quick enough to make the hit so instead of taking a penalty for hitting a guy late they turn away. It looks weak and lazy but it really isn't.
User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Boston Canucker, Island Nucklehead, Zamboni Driver and 6 guests