Because Kassian brings 2 elements sorely lacking and 1 specifically Hodgson did not have... size. Kassian is a far better fit, and I dare say Schroeder plays a better overall game getting dirty making plays... that is what Hodgson would not and after watching a few Sabres games, still does not do. He is a smart player for sure, but he did not work the way Schroeder did, and Kassians size is almost impossible to find.
Ryan Kesler In Practice With The Canucks Today
- Thread starter Keifer
- Start date
Because Kassian brings 2 elements sorely lacking and 1 specifically Hodgson did not have... size. Kassian is a far better fit, and I dare say Schroeder plays a better overall game getting dirty making plays... that is what Hodgson would not and after watching a few Sabres games, still does not do. He is a smart player for sure, but he did not work the way Schroeder did, and Kassians size is almost impossible to find.
Kassian on the 4th line is a big disappointment.
The whole point of adding him was to bring in someone who could bring size and toughness to the top 6.
Hodgson didn't want to wait around and see if that was going to happen. His camp felt he was entitled to 1st line minutes and now he's getting them on an awful hockey club. If Cody would rather look good and lose, then look bad and win, he's not the player we thought he was.
I think he and Burrows are interchanable depending on the opponent, how the series will go... Vancouver has alot of options, and all I want is for AV to continue to use the 4th line. Give them meaningful minutes so tht you don't wear down your top 3 lines.
Fat Tony
Fire Benning
- Nov 28, 2011
- 3,012
- 0
Or he wants to be on the ground floor of team that's building up to something. "Look bad and win." I don't think anyone wants that. To not contribute in what he feels in a meaningful way and be a passenger. I don't want to get in the background stuff because, quite frankly, it looks bad for both sides. I don't know what's in his head. Just offering an alternative scenario to yours.
Drop the Sopel said:
I don't think Kesler has ever complained about him not getting the #1c position that Henrik has so if Hodgson and his agent really thought that, then I guess we're all happy he is elsewhere because Hodgson will never have anything on Kesler. Regarding Kassian, I really do like what this guy has brought this year, and I'm a little bit pleasantly surprised.
Responding to BCF I hope Schroeder can continue to develop into a player that is equal or superior to Hodgson, but he definitely needs some finish to his game right now. Maybe it is a case of getting the monkey off the back because I really do like his game right now. Hell if you can throw Kesler on his wing I'm all for that. Or like someone else mentioned in this thread or another about having an odd mix of the second and third lines that mash the style of the traditional roles of those lines. I get frustrated just thinking about opposing teams trying to deal with that second line...
Sedin Sedin Kassian
Burrows Kesler Hansen
Raymond Schroeder Booth
Higgins Lappy/Malhotra Weise/Volpatti
vanuck
Now with 100% less Benning!
- Dec 28, 2009
- 16,799
- 4,016
There you go. I remember I'd read it somewhere! Anyhow, very interesting... I guess they might want to try it if they actually acquire a 'traditional' shutdown 3C. And then, like with Sundin when he was here, JS and RK switch positions in the D zone?
YogiCanucks
Registered User
Ice time saga aside I believe the Canucks felt Hodgson/Schroeder were similar type players as undersized skilled centermen (Schroeder better defensively and faster, Hodgson more complete offensively).
Shareefruck
Registered User
BoHorvat53
Crabs!
Has Kesler himself said that he would be willing to move to wing? It would be nice to know if Kesler was willingly doing it rather than being forced to.
Kesler's not a coach. He plays where he's told. There's no matter of 'willing' involved.
YogiCanucks
Registered User
Booth doesn't work, he's a fast shoot first player with poor hockey IQ.
Hodgson doesn't work, he's a slower play maker with great hockey IQ.
Who the HECK do you think works with Kesler?
Shareefruck
Registered User
Did I say Booth doesn't work?
But to answer your question Burrows and Hansen
And Higgins... and The Sedins..
Anyways, I wasn't making a dismissive statement-- I just mean they didn't look effective together when they played, which is the reason he wasn't moved to wing to make it work. Hodgson with Hansen looked more effective than Hodgson with Kesler.
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
Use the 4th line as a shutdown line (instead of a meaningless plugger's line) and roll with 3 scoring lines.
Shareefruck
Registered User
But then your 4th line ends up playing more meaningful minutes than your scoring lines, which has better players.
Only if you match them shift for shift with the other team's top lines. Let Kesler take some of the workload too.
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
- Sep 18, 2008
- 6,718
- 3,494
In the playoffs its great if you have great depth and can role 4 lines. If you can't, your top lines will invariably be worn down by the opposition.
Think about the Boston Bruins in 2011. Their best forwards only averaged 18 minutes of icetime per 60 minutes.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010030411
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010030413
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010030414
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010030415
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010030416
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010030417
Shareefruck
Registered User
You still do not want to go with 3 scoring lines and one shutdown line, IMO. Even if you need your 4th line to be effective, you should not be relying on it more than your other lines.
Ideally you go with
1 - top scoring line (Sedin - Sedin - Kassian)
2 - all-situations line (Burrows - Kesler - Hansen)
3 - secondary scoring line (Raymond? Schroeder? Booth?)
4 - secondary defensive line (Higgins - Lapierre - Weise/Malhotra?)
Shareefruck
Registered User
There's nothing preventing a scoring line from going out against another scoring line. If another team puts out their top line for a defensive zone draw, and we put out the Sedins, does that make it a shutdown line?
If you only match the 4th (shutdown) line against the opponents top line for defensive starts they won't play more than the other three lines.
Two points, if the team can win without, you keep the depth, and soon as the rosters expand you bring him back up.
Virtanen2Horvat
BoHorvat53
I predict Kesler will return against the Stars on the 21st of February and Booth will be back for the game against the Kings on Saturday March 2nd.
DL44
Status quo
Booth sounds like he'll be awhile..
When everyone's healthy,, i can't to see if this has chemistry...
Higgens - Kesler - Kassian
Booth - Schroeder - Raymond
We know these will be fine...
22-33-14
Lappy - Malhotra - Weise/Volpatti
When everyone's healthy,, i can't to see if this has chemistry...
Higgens - Kesler - Kassian
Booth - Schroeder - Raymond
We know these will be fine...
22-33-14
Lappy - Malhotra - Weise/Volpatti
If some of the higher-ups in Vancouver management think Kesler may work better on the right wing I wonder if any of them envision him as the ideal Sedin linemate? Kesler has been extremely successful with the twins on the PP and with his excellent RH shot and ability to do all things Burrows does well that could be a trio we see a lot of...
What better way to bring Kesler back from injury than lining him up with our 2 best players?
What better way to bring Kesler back from injury than lining him up with our 2 best players?
