Nov 6 - Canucks at Blackhawks - 4:00 PM - SNET

[Potatoe1]

If Cody does well and can help the team, great, but until he can play the defensive side of the game, he's not fooling me.

Ha, and your desperate attempts to save your rep here, aren't fooling anyone either. (smile).

[Hockey Widow]

We don't seem to have the depth that we did last year to weather a lot of injuries. But if the 3rd and 4th lines can continue their good play it will be less noticeable. The Lappy and Higgins acquisitions are proving to be very very valuable indeed.

Manny is back at the top in F/O %, number 2 I think. Last night he had more hustle in his game and was forechecking a lot better. I think he is finding his game again.

How good are the twins when almost anyone can play with them and score Gotta like that but we d miss Burrows out there if for no other reason that it gives us more balanced lines.


Rome had a good game and Alberts was OK too. Luongo with a miserable brain fart but then a superb game after that. Of course it helps when we score on the PP. We are just a completely different team with the lead then without. We get to exploit them with our speed more when we have the lead and they are taking chances.

Hodgson is doing OK. I still don't think he will live up to all the draft hype but I think he will become a valuable bottom six with potential to spot in the top 6. He'll never be fast but he is showing promise of learning the two way game and is quietly getting the points. But has he done enough to stay in the line up when both Raymond and Burrows are back is the question. Right now we just don't have the depth to really bring anyone else up.

[Topper]

If Cody does well and can help the team, great, but until he can play the defensive side of the game, he's not fooling me.

Ha, and your desperate attempts to save your rep here, aren't fooling anyone either. (smile).

You have me confused with dbr, but then you are consistent with misreading of posts, maybe your reading skills and spelling skills are linked.

I know you were late to the party, but this is what I said back in early July.

Unless Cody is capable of playing defence and works his way up through the 4th and 3rd line (once out of the A) he won't be worth a lick.

There isn't a player drafted by the Canucks on the team that did not first prove himself in a defensive role before earning a top 6 job.

http://www.canuckscorner.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=106444#p106444

My message remains consistent.

[tantalum]

Hodgson had a lack of icetime through 40 minutes because of the special teams and how the penalties fell. For part of the first and second the canucks were taking penalties that were spaced by a couple of minutes. After a penalty kill, AV puts the twins on (with Booth right now) and then tries to get back to rolling the lines. Hodgson doesn't kill penalties and is on the second unit PP so when penalties fall the way they did he will struggle to get icetime, especially when the first unit is taking up 90 seconds of the PP. Sure some of the reason he got a lot of icetime in the third was because the game was decided but a good chunk of the reason he didn't see much ice before then was because of how the game flowed and the units he plays on. The kid is getting better each game. He is getting stronger/smarter along the boards and winning far more battles than even 10 days ago. he is also starting to realize what he can do to get himself space. With the exception of Henrik and Daniel, Hodgson seems like he may be the only canuck that can stick handle in a phone booth and create a chance. But he isn't there yet to do it reliably. And he won't get there in the AHL against AHL opponents. He also won't figure out when and how to get his good shot off to create true chances in the NHL while in the AHL.

So while players who aren't that good on the defensive end of things have trouble making the lineup, it is also true that AV has yet to really receive a prospect that has the top 6 talent Hodgson does. I suspect he will be given some space to make mistakes on that side of things.

In a Garrioch column today (yeah yeah I know) he had a drive by comment on hodgson in his Turris article saying that the Sens will not get Turris (no one will) but need to look at the second line center position. He mentioned that Hodgson was a possibility but Gillis had removed him from the market after dangling him earlier in the year.

[Potatoe1]

My message remains consistent.

Orly

As the refugees know, I have long seen the challenges in Cody's game. While true, he is a smart player, it is also true he can not skate. Yes he has been injured, but he has also spent an inordinate amount of time with skating coaches and still has no stride.

If he is to have any sort of an NHL career, he needs to work his thinking game to stay in the league. Unfortunately, what I have seen to date from him are nothing more than plays he can get away with in the OHL and AHL, but NHL defenders are smarter and quicker. he is a boy among men at the NHL level. A small, slow boy.

I'm not sure he'll make the adjustments and I'd prefer to cut bait while there is still life in the worm and possibility of upside.

The playoffs had me leaning more towards career AHL'r and thinking we best get some return for him while there is still an illusion of upside.

But you didn't call him a bust right? I guess a "career AHL'er is a good outcome for a top 10 pick?

With his speed, he'll trail our D on the rush.

Yup I clearly have comprehension problems it's obvious you are a Hodgson fan.

I have yet to see any hint of flash from Cody at the NHL level. What I see are defenders swatting him about as he tries his nifty OHL stickwork.

And this stuff isn't half as bad as what I remember from you at Central.

And who could forget this one

I owe an apology for my comments on Cody last game. I compared him to Ryan Shannon and Jason King and I owe those two an apology. Cody is nowhere near that good.

LOL you're right you have been very consistent on your assessment of this player, consistently WRONG, and consistently over the top in your criticism.

You have called him a bust and ripped basically as long as I can recall and at this point it's clear to basically everyone other then you, that he is going to be "at least" a good NHL player and that's if he only improves marginally.

[Topper]

According to Tant's link, Gillis also was inclined to trade Hodgson, so your point is ???????

[UWSaint]

Hodgson's defensive problem is not generically his defensive play against the man he is marking, though we have seen episodic laziness. It is not that he cannot win puck battles on the boards, though he is not better than average at this point.

His primary defensive liability is that he simply isn't very good at receiving passes/winning battles and *quickly* getting out of the zone via skating, chipping, or passing. This means turnovers or failure to thoroughly gain possession. This issue is exacerbated when he is on the wing, because that responsibility is more pronounced. Think Volpatti.

His secondary problem is that he is prone to the neutral zone turnover or the high in the offensive zone turnover. Think Sammuelsson.

Some of this I attribute to lack of NHL experience, both generally and on the wing. But it remains to be seen how much of this he will develop out of. I think he should continue to get the shot to do so. The marginal cost at this point in the season is about an even tradeoff with how he marginally improves the potential to score, and if he improves this aspect of the game without deteriorating in other aspects, he is going to be an attribute.

Once in the offensive zone, I think Hodgson has been pretty good. He will create plays others cannot (though risk/reward), and that is only going to improve. He goes to good spaces, e.g., not everyone converts the Lapierre pass because not everyone is there. Perhaps most importantly, until Raymond returns, there really isn't anyone legitimately pushing him out of a spot. His earned it, because he is one of the best 9 forwards on the team, even with his warts. When Booth was acquired, some saw Hodgson as the odd man out. In reality, the opposite was true because Sturm and Sammuelsson had claims to being better than Hodgson at the moment (especially if Sturm picked it up, which I thought he was starting to do).

[Potatoe1]

Hodgson's defensive problem is not generically his defensive play against the man he is marking, though we have seen episodic laziness. It is not that he cannot win puck battles on the boards, though he is not better than average at this point.

His primary defensive liability is that he simply isn't very good at receiving passes/winning battles and *quickly* getting out of the zone via skating, chipping, or passing. This means turnovers or failure to thoroughly gain possession. This issue is exacerbated when he is on the wing, because that responsibility is more pronounced. Think Volpatti.

His secondary problem is that he is prone to the neutral zone turnover or the high in the offensive zone turnover. Think Sammuelsson.

Some of this I attribute to lack of NHL experience, both generally and on the wing. But it remains to be seen how much of this he will develop out of. I think he should continue to get the shot to do so. The marginal cost at this point in the season is about an even tradeoff with how he marginally improves the potential to score, and if he improves this aspect of the game without deteriorating in other aspects, he is going to be an attribute.

Once in the offensive zone, I think Hodgson has been pretty good. He will create plays others cannot (though risk/reward), and that is only going to improve. He goes to good spaces, e.g., not everyone converts the Lapierre pass because not everyone is there. Perhaps most importantly, until Raymond returns, there really isn't anyone legitimately pushing him out of a spot. His earned it, because he is one of the best 9 forwards on the team, even with his warts. When Booth was acquired, some saw Hodgson as the odd man out. In reality, the opposite was true because Sturm and Sammuelsson had claims to being better than Hodgson at the moment (especially if Sturm picked it up, which I thought he was starting to do).

This is fairly balanced and for the most part I agree.

Well except on Sturm(0 points, -7, 12 shots), he had miles to go and doesn't seem to have been any better in Florida.

The defensive issue you focused on (moving the puck from the zone quickly) is one of the primary defensive skill you lean as a winger and given Hodgson has only recently started playing the position at this level, it is not at all surprising he has struggled in that area. He has however improved drastically in a very short time. He was lost for the first 3 games he played after the position change, but has since improved on almost a game by game basis. (on a side note Sammuellson was pure crap in that area despite playing his entire career in that position)

That said once Ramond is back and returns to form, Hodgsons spot will very much be in jeopardy. Although that's assuming the top9 is totally healthy which almost never happens.

Either way it doesn't much matter, Cody is developing at the NHL level but he could also benefit from playing a first line role in the AHL. Not having a spot for a guy who can play is a good thing not a bad thing.

[tantalum]

According to Tant's link, Gillis also was inclined to trade Hodgson, so your point is ???????

Well it was a Garrioch column which means 99% of it was pulled from his ass. WHen Garrioch says dnagling he could just mean there was talk of the Sens being interested in someone like that as they were/are interested in Turris and Gillis wasn't inclined to move him. Essentially Garrioch likely wrote an entire article around what is likely a true fact "Senators want young centerman with top 6 potential".

Would Gillis move Hodgson? Sure why not. I would hope he would move anyone on the roster if he thought it would make the team better now and the future.

[Potatoe1]

Would Gillis move Hodgson? Sure why not. I would hope he would move anyone on the roster if he thought it would make the team better now and the future.

Yes we will take Rundblad, and Chris Neil, they can have Hodgson and Ballard.

Done!

[rats19]

The boys will have a couple days to practice ..should help.. practice five on five please....

[Strangelove]

Let's slaughter the bastards....

7-2 every bounce goes our way..

Ummmm good cal Ratski!

[rats19]

Let's slaughter the bastards....

7-2 every bounce goes our way..

Ummmm good cal Ratski!

Twas.....twas indeed

[dhabums]

It must be time for a dedicated "how did Cody play tonight" thread. Each poster will get to choose an angle to assess:

1. Watched him play under a microscope and didn't even see any other players. If you are this, you are allowed complete license to comment on his play away from the puck even if you are watching the game on TV. Do not be positive.

2. The "I love Cody" group. While always qualifying your love with a "he's just getting started" or "learning a new role" or "he has a bad back" you still must point out his great points from the night, even if it's only to joke about his moustache. You also can bring up The WJC and CHL player of the year every once in awhile.

3. The "when can we trade him and what can we get" group. You guys have to be careful not to infringe on group #1 nor can you gang up on #2. You want Cody to play well enough to have some real value but no so well that you start liking him.

[Benjo]

I'm in group 4, he is average in his rookie year which is average for a #10+ pick. There has been improvement and at least he's putting up some points. Like Gillis has said, you need guys on rookie contracts to outperform their contracts and I hope Cody starts doing that.