apuszczalowski

So now because Gary Roberts disagrees, Hodgson being an issue for the Canucks GM isn't true? And even if it is true, whats the big deal? He had issues in Vancouver where they misdiagnosed his injury, and he was stuck behind a couple of superstars for playing time. I wouldn't be surprised if the Canucks GM had to spend alot of time dealing with him and what to do with him. Its also possible that he is now in a place where he will be happier and won't be an issue the GM has to spend alot of time on. I don't think Roberts was there in Vancouver at all to see what was going on and is only going off of his dealing with him in the offseason, away from the team. no one ever said he wasn't a hard worker, or that he wasn't trying, Gillis just said that he spent alot of time dealing with Cody the last few years. The fact that Cody doesn't want to talk about or look back on his time in Vancouver and dispute the comments from Gillis lead me to believe that theres probably alot of truth to Gillis comments, he wasn't happy there and may have had issues with the Canucks management and now he has moved on and is putting it behind him to start fresh. But of course, on this board, everything seems to have to be Black or White, with either Cody being a malcontent who (with a demanding father) will constantly be agrevating and complaining to management, or he is a sweet and innocent kid who some evil GM is trying to defame to cover his own behind in a mistake of a deal

I think it was, as usual, more of the media that determined this was a move for right now then the future. The Canucks GM said yesterday that Kassians type of play and what he can become is something that you don't always find easy, yet Darcy (and many here) believe the same thing about what Hodgson can bring to the team. The Canucks are a team that its beleived have more then enough talent to win it all, but are lacking that grit/toughness, something that kassian was expected to provide when he reaches his potential, along with the skill to score some goals (basically be more then just an enforcer/goon). The Sabres lacked some of this too, but are no where near the same elvel as the Canucks when it comes to skill players, and desperatly lacked skilled Centres, something Hodgson is expected to bring to the table. Kassian and hodgson both may have been able to bring something now to their teams, but the real deal was for the future potential in each. Or maybe Gillis is a fan of this board and has read how its all Lindys fault and that he ruins players of their potential and thought just the change of scenery with a new coach would change things for Kassian and bring back the "killer" in him. (from what it sounds like in earlier interviews with kassian, I don't know if he wants to be that kind of player everyone else expected he would be, he wanted to be more of a player known for his skill and goal scoring, not for throwing around checks and hits

This debate all depends on what side of the fence your sitting on with management and this move. If you loved this move, your gonna brush off the comments by teh GM and say that they are just a guy trying to save face and fabricate something for the media to cling to. If your against the move, or not completly sold on it yet, your gonna believe that he is an immature problem child/lockerroom cancer who the Canucks couldn't wait to deal. I really doubt that Gillis is making this stuff up and just trying to save face. You hear about it all the time that some players can be a hand full (and with some of the younger ones, its their parents that are a handful) and it gets to the point where they become too much of a distraction and its better to let them go. I don't get what this issue with hodgsons dad had to do with any of this, except that maybe he might be the type of person who is controling. But I think it was widely known that Hodgson saw the writing on the wall that he was a 3rd liner for the next few seasons (barring injury) due to the guys playing ahead of him and he wanted out. The Canucks had a valuable assett at the deadline and saw Buffalo was in need of this assett, and Buffalo had something that the Canucks wanted and might be willing to move. You can't always trade away your garbage and get a superstar in return, usually it takes something of value to get something of value in return. The Sabres felt they could give up what kassian could bring to the table cause they felt they needed what Hodgson could bring to the table more. I also doubt that Regier would have any idea if Hodgson was a handful to deal with when he made the deal, i doubt private meetings/dealings between players and NHL GM's are spread over the league. Its possible that the Canucks dumped a possible cancer/headache on the Sabres. its also possible that his issues won't be issues here like they were in Vancouver and he could thrive here. Having a father making moves for you isn't a first in sports, look at the NFL where Peyton & Eli Mannings dad Archie was dictating where Eli was gonna play and where he wasn't. Haven't heard that Archie has been a problem for the Giants GM since that issue

That was such an underrated movie in my opinion, and the best part is watching Lopez kick the bucket!

I had to laugh when I heard it, cause from what it sounds like, they have no intentions to actually use him on the field, they just think that he can be brought into the lockerroom, and with his holy powers, he can bring them together as a team and get rid of the fighting. I think they might get a better deal bringing in a witch doctor or voodoo priest to try and bring peace to that lockerroom.

Tebow won't be coming to the Jets to start, he would be going there as a gadget QB/backup.I have heard that the reason the Jets want him is because they think he can bring the lockerroom together

Drew Stafford? Balls?I think you answered your own question. We could really make this into a fun game, Try and Guess what Lindy said, ending with Stafford Saying "I Know, I Know"

You know, I have always liked Chimps

Vancouver took Boston to 7 games last year and almost won. If it wasn't for poor play from a grossly overpaid goaltender, and Vezina worthy goaltending on the other side from Thomas, they could have won it. Was Carolina considered a very physical team similar to the Bruins?The penguins? The Lightning? The Ducks (aside from maybe Pronger)? Devils won it on defence and goaltending The Avalanche?

I think this is just another one of those "Theres only one way to build a team" myths that exist in all sports. The best way to build a team is always in teh exact same mould as the team that just won the championship the year before. If Vancouver had won (which they came close to doing without being known as a tough and physical team), there would be talks about how teams need tkilled players who can out skate the bigger, tough guys. Boston wins so its all about having big, tough guys who play physical and try to outplay you and beat you up. Its all about Balance and having the best players you can get playing at every position. Theres no right or wrong way to build a team

well, according to Lindy this morning on the radio, he feels that Ennis has found a home as a Centre The guys on the radio after the interview said that he reminds them of Briere (not a comparisson, just that he reminds them of him), although one said he reminds (again not comparison) to Gretzky (He looks like he tries to play a style similar to gretzky, not that they think he will be like him) I don't know why people are down on Gerbe in here. The guy is one of the only ones on the team that plays with over 100% effort every night and plays well. He might not have the numbers yet to show for it, but he has shown signs of being able to produce in the NHL regardless of his size.

I really can't hate the Giants. I know they beat the Bills in their first Super Bowl over 20 years ago (I really do wisah that the TV announcers would give Norwood and the missed FG a rest though), but it was a close game that came down to a missed FG to win, I can't hate another team for winning such a close game when the Bills had the chance to win it at the end. Redskins and Cowboys on the other hands, those were embarrassing beat downs that stung a little more As for the Pats, being a division rival, and one that has embarrassed the Bills many times over the last decade, I could never cheer for them Divison rival (Pats, Jets, Dolphins) trumps losing in the Super Bowl 20 years ago +/- (Giants, 'Skins, Cowgirls)

Do you really think Vin Diesel would make a really good Hockey Player? He might draw in a larger female crowd to games, and I'm sure his hockey playing skills have to be better then his acting abilities........

You won't get Kane for just Pomminstein, maybe for Vanek or Myers straight up Kane was a #1 overall pick and younger then Pomminstein, he has also been a better player in his short career then Pomminstein. A little slump he is in now will not have the 'Hawks trading him for just anyone

Thats what I figured, just wasn't 100% sure. I knew they had to pay the out the remainder of the contract. And someone would definitly claim him on re-entry waivers. Theres also a very good chance that a team with cap space would claim him on waivers just to take a chance on the whole "change of scenery" idea.

Sorry, meant to say the oilers might have to throw in a pick (Probably a 3rd or later) to sweeten the deal. If you are Edmonton, you are getting a player who has potential and may just need a change of scenery to get back his production from last year and they get to dump Hemsky. The advantage for the Sabres taking Hemsky back is that they get him for a few months to see if he can be a better replacement for Stafford and re-sign him this offseason, or they let him walk and save over $4mil in cap space for next season. If you send Drew down to the minors, you get nothing in return, still have to pay him out his contract, AND is there not still a partial cap hit they would face?

But they are getting a player that might just need a change of scenery and they can control for a few more seasons. Buffalo is helping them out by clearing cap space for a guy they would lose at the end of the year for nothing. Basically the Sabres are doing them a favour giving them stafford for Cap relief this offseason. If they truly want Stafford to upgrade their team, they may have to give up a pick and Hemsky to sweeten the deal for Buffalo. It may not be for a pick, but it gives them cap space this offseason for taking Hemsky til the end of the season. No one is saying Hemsky would be part of the rebuild

Atleast we know your sarcasim detector is functioning properly As for Hemsky, theres that chance that the change in scenery helps him, same thing the Oilers would be thinking about Stafford. The Sbres might have to sweeten the deal because Hemsky becomes a UFA at the end of the year so the deals basically a salary dump for the Sabres.

Stafford for Hemsky straight up, get'r done Darcy! Solves 2 problems, Sabres get rid of Stafford to a place where he has family and is possibly wanted, Edmonton gets rid of a player they are looking to deal It doesn't get Buffalo another C, but it does get Stafford out of here

Isn't that pretty close to Edmonton? This is my problem with trading these underachieving guys away, many of the buyers that might make a deal to try and get one fo these players are probably better teams that are gonna make the playoffs. I would really hate to see guys like Roy and Stafford get a pass and leave here, only to go on to better teams and play in the playoffs while the Sabres miss out. I would rather see them end up on worse teams with less chances for success. But I guess at the moment that might limit trading partners to the Blue Jackets only. Would they be interested in a Roy and Stafford for Nash deal?

In other words "They discussed it with me, and I will judge it on a case to case basis, making my ruling based on the player and team they play for"

Who is now waiting for Shanny to call in Miller and suspend him 4 games for making those comments about Lucic after the game?

New Face, same BS He looked good at first cause he seemed like he was out to take away dangerous hits, talking about how players still have to be responsible out there when making hits, yet here (when its time to discipline a Bruin)he is satisfied by the answer he gets from that player that he didn't mean to hit him

Would they have time between playing fashion show in Roys closet?

Couldn't this be said about any cheap shot into the boards too? "Its not player X's responsibility to protect player Y when he has his back turned and head down by the boards" it is everyones responsibility to protect all the players on the ice when they are out there. They are all human beings with lives and families outside the rink trying to make a living playing the game. You can't be out there trying to hit someone and end careers, unless you want someone else to do that to you.