Kassian to Vancouver for Hodgson

[That Aud Smell]

absolutely correct sir. Like Aud Smell said: if he has the work ethic, working with Gary Roberts is going to be the best thing for him!

 

i would tweak what menace said as follows: if he is working with Gary Roberts, then he clearly has a strong work ethic.

 

Has the Buffalo "media" picked the story up at all?

 

i'd say so. i saw several references to gillis's comments in my twitter feed from people like harrington, vogl, hoppe, and some others. maybe twitter doesn't count?

 

anyway, it's in the sabres edge blog today as well.

 

i will add this, fwiw: i unfollowed hoppe (i've been close before) based on this nonsense:

 

Mike Gillis paints a picture of Cody Hodgson being really immature. I'm not saying he is -- he never was in my dealings. But he paints that.

 

https://twitter.com/...875097071353857

 

i didn't see that as a fair or even plausible reading of what gillis said. between his (hoppe's) hissy fit on this board and his tendency to distort things on twitter (presumably in order to generate clicks), i'm done with the guy.

 

they were talking about how Gillis really needed to step up and take charge, show Cody who's the boss (Tony Danza). You're going to let some punk kid who has been in the league about a year and a half walk all over you like that? Take charge and put him in his place.

 

totally. gillis's own narrative puts gillis in a poor light.

Edited April 25, 2012 by That Aud Smell

[K-9]

They replayed a portion of the interview on WGR this morning. He definitely said "issues." Chz had the quote right.

 

That's the quote from the Vancouver Sun article on the front page as well.

 

GO SABRES!!!

[LastPommerFan]

Gillis's mistake was drafting a top line center with the 10th pick when he had H.Sundin and Kessler already on the team. The very earliest Cody was going to see top 6 minutes was going to be 2017. Whether Hodgson wanted to be there or not, he was more valuable to the Canucks in a trade than in the lineup. His short term problem is that Kassian didn't have immediate impact. His longer term problem will be ensuring Kassian develops.

[bunomatic]

I listen to the Vancouver sports media every day at work on 1040 and every time Gillis talked about his first draft pick ever he absolutely gushed about the kid. His above average intelligence, his work ethic, his hockey sense ( which was off the board apparently ), his outstanding character, his desire to be the best, yadda yadda yadda. It was all about pumping the tires of the kid he used his first overall pick on and was really him endorsing his own choice in making that pick. Now he does the opposite and attackes the kids character, his motives, his family, yadda yadda yadda. Basically endorsing his choice in making that trade.At this point is anyone surprised that Gillis would throw Cody under the bus while at the same time he pumps Kassians tires ?

[shrader]

At this point is anyone surprised that Gillis would throw Cody under the bus while at the same time he pumps Kassians tires ?

 

That's what basically every single GM does.

[spndnchz]

i would tweak what menace said as follows: if he is working with Gary Roberts, then he clearly has a strong work ethic.

 

 

 

i'd say so. i saw several references to gillis's comments in my twitter feed from people like harrington, vogl, hoppe, and some others. maybe twitter doesn't count?

 

anyway, it's in the sabres edge blog today as well.

 

i will add this, fwiw: i unfollowed hoppe (i've been close before) based on this nonsense:

 

Mike Gillis paints a picture of Cody Hodgson being really immature. I'm not saying he is -- he never was in my dealings. But he paints that.

 

https://twitter.com/...875097071353857

 

i didn't see that as a fair or even plausible reading of what gillis said. between his (hoppe's) hissy fit on this board and his tendency to distort things on twitter (presumably in order to generate clicks), i'm done with the guy.

 

 

 

totally. gillis's own narrative puts gillis in a poor light.

 

Being called a plagiarist and a lazy reporter can do that to people.

 

All of Gillis' comments since the trade took place does paint that picture, like others have said, he needs to save face. They just lost in the first round after being Pres. Trophy winners.

[rickshaw]

I listen to the Vancouver sports media every day at work on 1040 and every time Gillis talked about his first draft pick ever he absolutely gushed about the kid. His above average intelligence, his work ethic, his hockey sense ( which was off the board apparently ), his outstanding character, his desire to be the best, yadda yadda yadda. It was all about pumping the tires of the kid he used his first overall pick on and was really him endorsing his own choice in making that pick. Now he does the opposite and attackes the kids character, his motives, his family, yadda yadda yadda. Basically endorsing his choice in making that trade.At this point is anyone surprised that Gillis would throw Cody under the bus while at the same time he pumps Kassians tires ?

 

Cody needs to hang Gillis' words up on his bathroom mirror just in case he needs reminding he needs to make Gillis eat those words.

 

 

Edited April 25, 2012 by rickshaw

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

That's what basically every single GM does.

 

There is no arguement there. This is the kind of thing that tends to happen at year end press conferences where teams and their management and coaches are held accountable. considering the Sabres are the only team eliminated that has not held one......I guess it's hard for some people to understand what accountability looks like.

 

You now have the GM on record saying that Hodgson was a problem. At the time of the trade......a rational person would ask themself, "Why would a team get rid of a young prospect who seems to be doing well?"

 

At the time, the issues of Hodgson's dad being involved was well reported. He had his son get treatment away from the team medical staff, and the next year had his son skip developmental camp. There were reports that his father wanted a trade. Hodgson himself wouldn't comment on it, and Vancouver did the right thing and waited until the season was over to address it.

 

Now....a rational person would also ask, "What's the deal with this guy's dad getting all up in the business?" Whether or not Hodgson himself is immature or has the potential to become a leader, stories like this don't bode very well in my opinion. So, the day of the trade I did some research and was shocked to see that Hodgson's dad was the central figure in one of the biggest canadian Scandal's the past few decades. i don't expect everyone to have the initiative or time to research the issue at the time, but to dismiss the situation as "manufactured drama" is a joke and shows either a lack of understanding, laziness, or attacking the messenger.

 

Chris Hodgson is Cody Hodgson's father

Chris Hodgson was the head of the Ontario Parks department

A Native Indian tribe took issue that Ipperwash Park was being used for public activities when it was an Indian burrial ground

There was a lengthy protest that was very public and very ugly

Chris Hodgson was in communication with the police in charge of controlling the park and protests

Chris Hodgson was quoted by the Sollicitor-General as telling the commanding officer to "Get those F'n Indians out of MY park."

Hours later, police opened fire on unarmed protestors, leaving one man dead

 

This was a national scandal that took years to sort out and testimony of dozens of people were brought to a National Inquiry and hearing

 

In the end, Hodgson was not charged because another government official stated they thought someone else in the room made the racial comment and order. The SG stuck by her story that she knew Hodgson did so.

 

 

Now.....Villie Lieno's father could be sitting in a jail in Finland for selling tainted herring for all I know, and I wouldn't care. This story from day 1 however centered around a young, talented player who didn't make sense to be moved. The issues of his father disrupting and pressuring Vancouver were public. Is it not logical in the least to at least take interest in the people involved given Hodgson was the most heralded acquisition in years? Would you not also expect the Sabres to research the people and issues involved. Maybe they did, that isn't the point.

 

The point is, this is a highly relevant story that was brought forth at a year end press conference from a team who sadly disappointed yet bit the bullet and faced questions and gave answers, whether people like them or not. The Sabres denied the fans and the press the same "priviledge", so we are left like so many other times, to ask questions and form opinions on our own.

 

I highly resent when people dismiss an obvious valid issue because they lack either the will or work ethic to discover the facts for themselves. It is fun to pigeonhole someone that constantly brings solid facts and opinion to the table against their viewpoint. Instead of bringing the information forward for debate, protect the clique and the "denial bubble" as DeLuca so rightly put it.

 

I for one have always been a Sabre fan, but have grown tired of trying to help someone that doesn't want to help themselves. The Sabres and the characters involved almost seem to be some fantasy cult that needs to be protected at all costs. If it is good enough for you (not you Shrader, you the candyland gang as a whole), then it should be good enough for me, as the Buffalo Sabres character, values, effort and accountability have failed to represent me for quite some time. In the spirit of tradition and sport, I held out hope that things would change. I am far from an optimist, but I still had hope. Considering Mr. Pegula and Lindy Ruff were sipping Mai Tais at Pegula's lake house a few weeks ago and were playing practical jokes on the kids, this group is too interwoven for honest assesment any further, if there ever was any. While there are still plenty of fans who are objective and appreciate well thought out discourse, it is obvious a certain faction have become as entrenched and pleased with mediocrity as those which they verbally protect.

 

Thank you for your time

 

Dwight Drane - not a PhD

[That Aud Smell]

Being called a plagiarist and a lazy reporter can do that to people.

 

did dude get his feelings hurt by the hurly-burly, lowest-common-denominator world of a sports fan message board? color me unimpressed.

 

All of Gillis' comments since the trade took place does paint that picture

 

gillis's comments paint a picture. and that picture is unflattering. but i don't think the comments in the aggregate suggest that hodgson is "immature." i think the word that hoppe needed there was someting closer to "demanding," "high maintenance," or maybe "self-centered."

 

now, the rejoinder could be that "immature" people are all of those things. fair enough. but the use of "immature" in that context had a specific connotation, at least for me -- namely, that he's a crybaby, a prima donna, that he doesn't take the game/his game seriously enough, that he doesn't prepare the way he should, that he wants things that he hasn't earned or does not deserve.

 

whatever. i've unfollowed the martyred hockey writer from niagara county, so, with any luck, i'm done bickering with his semantics. besides, i would not want to risk hurting his feelings.

[LastPommerFan]

This story from day 1 however centered around a young, talented player who didn't make sense to be moved.

 

This statement is incorrect. It made all the sense in the world to move a great asset that you didn't need. He wouldn't see top 6 numbers for another 4 years. The canucks didn't need him. Fortunately for the sabres, Gillis's judgement may have been clouded on 2 fronts. The "problem" of a top 6 player wanting some assurance he would have a chance at top6 minutes, and his assessment of the impact a certain developing big-bodied winger might have.

 

No ###### Hodgson wanted to be moved. Just like whoever the starting quarterback for the team Manning landed on would want to be moved.

[RazielSabre]

There is no arguement there. This is the kind of thing that tends to happen at year end press conferences where teams and their management and coaches are held accountable. considering the Sabres are the only team eliminated that has not held one......I guess it's hard for some people to understand what accountability looks like.

 

You now have the GM on record saying that Hodgson was a problem. At the time of the trade......a rational person would ask themself, "Why would a team get rid of a young prospect who seems to be doing well?"

Your incorrect. At the time it was largely reported that the trade was made to give the Nucks some size and not just a enforcer, someone with a little potential. Someone to protect the Sedins if they faced a team like Boston. I suspect the fear of facing Boston again drove this more than any other personally but that is beside the point.

 

Also, as LPF said, he was an expendable asset that was never going to crack the top 2 lines, well not for a while anyway. He probably wanted out and the match fitted. The decision burned because all the Nucks fans think Cody would have made all of the difference and can't live with the idea that they got beaten by a better team who played a better, more disciplined system.

[TrueBlueGED]

This statement is incorrect. It made all the sense in the world to move a great asset that you didn't need. He wouldn't see top 6 numbers for another 4 years. The canucks didn't need him. Fortunately for the sabres, Gillis's judgement may have been clouded on 2 fronts. The "problem" of a top 6 player wanting some assurance he would have a chance at top6 minutes, and his assessment of the impact a certain developing big-bodied winger might have.

 

No ###### Hodgson wanted to be moved. Just like whoever the starting quarterback for the team Manning landed on would want to be moved.

 

Right, it's the same logic as always taking the best player available in the draft...even if you don't have an immediate need for them, somebody will, and you can use him to acquire what you do need.

 

Also, telling somebody to "get those F'n Indians out of my park" is not the same as saying "shoot the ###### and carry them out in body bags!" I can't believe anybody believes that Hodgson's dad telling officers to get them out of the park is the same thing as telling the officers to open fire. And to those who do believe this, well, I have some more bad news for you.....http://berkeley.intel-research.net/arahimi/helmet/

[Weave]

I highly resent when people dismiss an obvious valid issue because they lack either the will or work ethic to discover the facts for themselves.

 

Just responding to this part; You are painting with a broad brush. I dismiss it because it just isn't important to me. I give it a big meh.

 

 

Oh, and as far as the meddling dad and "issues" with the GM and trade demands, I give you Eric Lindros. I say that only to present the idea that a player can be an issue for one team but be a fierce and loyal competitor for another. I'll wait to get my dander up when I have hindsight as my friend.

 

But that's just me.

[dEnnis the Menace]

<short story>

 

1) I write off the Hodgson stuff as: is anyone on the team saying he's a problem? not yet at least. I really don't care what kind of character issues a GM who needs to save face is toting around. I have seen two other people bring facts to the table (I figured I didn't need to repeat them). Gillis did nothing but talk up this prospect until the end of this year. If you're just looking to get rid of a player for those reasons, don't you try to at least get a little more for them in return? Vancouver definitely could've looked to another team for some sort of grit, rather than Buffalo for a big question mark. I don't buy for one second that he dumped him because of his father. SEE: LPF's post above.

 

 

but to dismiss the situation as "manufactured drama" is a joke and shows either a lack of understanding, laziness, or attacking the messenger.

 

2) I am doing just that: dismissing the situation, as it is someone else's problem, not this Sabre fan's problem. Did his dad do it? I read the article(s), but i wasn't there. I try not to get myself wrapped up in he said, she said. There's always two sides of a story, and the truth is somewhere in the middle. Was something said? probably along those lines, yeah. Does it have ANY bearing on how CODY Hodgson develops as a center for the Buffalo Sabres? ummm...NO!

 

The Sabres denied the fans and the press the same "priviledge", so we are left like so many other times, to ask questions and form opinions on our own.

 

3) I do believe that every one important in a management position (i.e. TB, TP, LR, and DR) all did an interview on WGR or elsewhere where the FANS (instead of the oh so wonderful Buffalo media that everyone around here praises ( :doh: )) got to ask questions. I do believe that's a better situation. My apologies if you didn't get to call in and ask a question.

 

 

It is fun to pigeonhole someone that constantly brings solid facts and opinion to the table against their viewpoint. Instead of bringing the information forward for debate, protect the clique and the "denial bubble" as DeLuca so rightly put it.

 

Solid facts? you got one thing right, you bring your opinion ALL the time. I am not in a denial bubble, and neither are a lot of other posters here. I find it insulting that you throw that around so often, touting around on a high horse as if you and DeLuca with your oh so great vision know all. I already said that i know there needs to be change and that the team isn't quite where I had hoped it would be.

 

I don't really know how to run a hockey team, and you're NOT running the team, so excuse me when I disagree with what you suggest, and excuse me when I don't have the proper solution. At no time does that put me in a denial bubble, or have me clinging to status quo. I have an idea of who what players I dislike, and what players I like, and I have an idea of who is performing to their contract and who isn't. Those are all my opinions, and at no time am I going to present those as facts.

 

it is obvious a certain faction have become as entrenched and pleased with mediocrity as those which they verbally protect.

 

A few last things: I don't care much for the drama of Team Apathy, Team Sunshine and Kittens, and Team Storm cloud. I just like to come on this board and read nice HOCKEY discussions. I like everyone's OPINIONS on where the team stands, and certain players. At no time am I going to LAMBAST them for their opinions. It's the differing opinions that make these conversations fun and entertaining. When you present your opinions as facts is when I have an issue (and not just you, but anyone). I'm not entrenched and pleased with mediocrity, and neither is most of this board. It's why we're mostly here. Discuss what changes can be made, argue a little here and there, and then go back to our lives after. You seem to want to put yourself on a pedestal, while making it known that YOU know best for this team. It's kind of annoying.

[Taro T]

Your incorrect. At the time it was largely reported that the trade was made to give the Nucks some size and not just a enforcer, someone with a little potential. Someone to protect the Sedins if they faced a team like Boston. I suspect the fear of facing Boston again drove this more than any other personally but that is beside the point.

 

Also, as LPF said, he was an expendable asset that was never going to crack the top 2 lines, well not for a while anyway. He probably wanted out and the match fitted. The decision burned because all the Nucks fans think Cody would have made all of the difference and can't live with the idea that they got beaten by a better team who played a better, more disciplined system.

Add onto that, their trading for Pahlsson earlier that day, and now that they have a more prototypical 3rd line center, the case could be made that he wouldn't be expected to crack the top 3 lines this season, at least at center.

 

Whether it turns out to have been a good trade LT for Van-City remains to be seen, and in hindsight it is a bit of a head scratcher as to why Gillis wanted a rookie to be the additional toughness on the wing for THIS playoff run, but people here thought Zach would be the 2nd coming of Bertuzzi at a minimum; looks like Gillis got caught up in the 'killer' Kassian hype as well IF this move was made for this season's run.

 

People seem to be thinking this deal was for this year, but after Pahlsson got picked up and Cody didn't have an obvious fit in the lineup for this season, I'm not certain that this wasn't simply a case of Gillis not seeing a place for Hodgson on the top 2 lines for several years and seeing a chance to pick up a guy that might end up a power forward on a top 2 line in the near future (though obviously not at present). Zach wasn't playing on the top 2 lines in Buffalo, which has a glaring need for that power forward up there, not sure why people assumed he should have been fit into that role right off the bat on a team much deeper at forward.

 

And, as the 'Nucks don't have a glaring need for a top 2 center for another 2-4 years, and they've clearly managed to draft several good ones, they probably feel confident that they can bring another one into the system by the time he's needed. If Kassian turns out as good as his hype, LT the deal will work out for them. As many stated back on deadline day, this trade could work out for both teams.

 

Gillis is now pointing out random reasons to get rid of Hodgson, but had he kept Hodgson and Daniel didn't get concussed AND the 'Nucks still went out in the 1st round (quite possible, they were 1-1 with Daniel in the lineup) then he's trying to explain why his team had ~7 centers on it and why Hodgson was playing C on the 4th line or out of position at W on the 3rd line.

[SwampD]

Hmmm. A father involved in his twenty-one year old son's life,.. better call Child Protective Services because that is straight up abuse.

[darksabre]

I just want to know what kind of danger our team is in if he continues to play for us? What if he decides he doesn't like Buffalo? Would daddy take it upon himself to covertly bankrupt Pegula, thus costing us our Sabres? Plus gas prices would go up and truckers wouldn't be able to afford to ship goods, so the economy would tank, spiraling us into some Depression 2.0.

 

I better get my apocalypse bunker ready. Cody Hodgson could be the end of us all.

[That Aud Smell]

A few last things: I don't care much for the drama of Team Apathy, Team Sunshine and Kittens, and Team Storm cloud. I just like to come on this board and read nice HOCKEY discussions. I like everyone's OPINIONS on where the team stands, and certain players. At no time am I going to LAMBAST them for their opinions. It's the differing opinions that make these conversations fun and entertaining. When you present your opinions as facts is when I have an issue (and not just you, but anyone). I'm not entrenched and pleased with mediocrity, and neither is most of this board. It's why we're mostly here. Discuss what changes can be made, argue a little here and there, and then go back to our lives after. You seem to want to put yourself on a pedestal, while making it known that YOU know best for this team. It's kind of annoying.

 

bang on, brotha.

 

full disclosure: i do occasionally use the paradigm of stormcloud/sunshine-kittens (i actually preferred "candyland", but sunshine-kittens seems to have stuck), but mostly as a touchstone, or frame of reference -- or just for comedic effect.

 

i also want to say that i got chris farley's bennet brauer character in my head when you went to ALLCAPS.

 

 

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/weekend-update-segment-chris-farley-as-bennett-brauer/1348957

[TrueBlueGED]

Hmmm. A father involved in his twenty-one year old son's life,.. better call Child Protective Services because that is straight up abuse.

 

Careful now, by not fully buying into a grand conspiracy theory you're in danger of getting drunk on status quo :rolleyes:

[apuszczalowski]

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

[Weave]

Careful now, by not fully buying into a grand conspiracy theory you're in danger of getting drunk on status quo :rolleyes:

 

Wait now. We have several perfectly good booze threads. If someone has gotten drunk on status quo we need a review of it in the appropriate thread.

[darksabre]

Wait now. We have several perfectly good booze threads. If someone has gotten drunk on status quo we need a review of it in the appropriate thread.

 

I've heard you either like it or you don't. Like Vegemite, or Moxie.

[RazielSabre]

I just want to know what kind of danger our team is in if he continues to play for us? What if he decides he doesn't like Buffalo? Would daddy take it upon himself to covertly bankrupt Pegula, thus costing us our Sabres? Plus gas prices would go up and truckers wouldn't be able to afford to ship goods, so the economy would tank, spiraling us into some Depression 2.0.

 

I better get my apocalypse bunker ready. Cody Hodgson could be the end of us all.

 

Lmao.

[apuszczalowski]

Add onto that, their trading for Pahlsson earlier that day, and now that they have a more prototypical 3rd line center, the case could be made that he wouldn't be expected to crack the top 3 lines this season, at least at center.

 

Whether it turns out to have been a good trade LT for Van-City remains to be seen, and in hindsight it is a bit of a head scratcher as to why Gillis wanted a rookie to be the additional toughness on the wing for THIS playoff run, but people here thought Zach would be the 2nd coming of Bertuzzi at a minimum; looks like Gillis got caught up in the 'killer' Kassian hype as well IF this move was made for this season's run.

 

People seem to be thinking this deal was for this year, but after Pahlsson got picked up and Cody didn't have an obvious fit in the lineup for this season, I'm not certain that this wasn't simply a case of Gillis not seeing a place for Hodgson on the top 2 lines for several years and seeing a chance to pick up a guy that might end up a power forward on a top 2 line in the near future (though obviously not at present). Zach wasn't playing on the top 2 lines in Buffalo, which has a glaring need for that power forward up there, not sure why people assumed he should have been fit into that role right off the bat on a team much deeper at forward.

 

And, as the 'Nucks don't have a glaring need for a top 2 center for another 2-4 years, and they've clearly managed to draft several good ones, they probably feel confident that they can bring another one into the system by the time he's needed. If Kassian turns out as good as his hype, LT the deal will work out for them. As many stated back on deadline day, this trade could work out for both teams.

 

Gillis is now pointing out random reasons to get rid of Hodgson, but had he kept Hodgson and Daniel didn't get concussed AND the 'Nucks still went out in the 1st round (quite possible, they were 1-1 with Daniel in the lineup) then he's trying to explain why his team had ~7 centers on it and why Hodgson was playing C on the 4th line or out of position at W on the 3rd line.

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

[shrader]

I just want to know what kind of danger our team is in if he continues to play for us? What if he decides he doesn't like Buffalo? Would daddy take it upon himself to covertly bankrupt Pegula, thus costing us our Sabres? Plus gas prices would go up and truckers wouldn't be able to afford to ship goods, so the economy would tank, spiraling us into some Depression 2.0.

 

I better get my apocalypse bunker ready. Cody Hodgson could be the end of us all.

 

Daddy Hodgson will tell someone that he wants his son off the Sabres. That person will promptly shoot Darcy Regier.

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.

 

Hodgson was causing them issues. There's no doubt to that. Gillis' face saving moment was making all of this public. This kind of stuff happens in some form or another all over sports, whether it's the guy who is wallowing in misery in the corner, or the guy who just doesn't fit what the team currently needs. The vast majority of the time, the GM doesn't feel the need to disclose all of it.