But he doesn't know how well he'll heal.

Do you think this is the first time a player doubted whether they'd be 100%?

Sometimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong. Have you ever been wrong with a self diagnosis? I know I have—many times.
- Fosco

Dr Vantel never misdiagnosis

I agree that the timing of the trade was bad.

You obviously have a pretty low opinion of Kassian.

Other than "blue chip" untouchable prospects, which would have required more than just Hodgson to get, there aren't too many prospects I'd have wanted more than Kassian.
- Fosco

Why? because I don't think he'll help this team as much as Hodgson? I think Kassian will probably be a solid physical 3rd liner and havoc creator in front of the net on the 2nd unit. But I think Hodgson would have solidified our 3rd line until the world realizes that Kesler is not a good 2nd line C. I think we wouldnt be in this mess for our 2nd PP unit as well. I think this team would be younger with Hodgson over Pahlsson Bozak and Arnott and what ever as our other choices...like our GM keeps preaching....younger?

Don't put words in my mouth Fosco. All I wish is we got a better package at better timing for the player Gillis gave up. To you that means I don't like Kassian... you have a habit of doing this. If I think one of our prospects isnt a blue chipper like another claims, you go on the defensive like I said he wouldnt be NHLer or something. Is it 100% blind loyalty for Gillis that does this? I will like Kassian in his role...I had my eye on Kassian(+) when Gillis was preaching waiting for the right time to trade Schneider... so please, tell me who I obviously have low opinions of...it's laughable.

I think Vantel means a shortened season.
- Nucker101

I did

Trust me Erat would be my choice too but Edlers contract ends next year and so does Horny Qvist. Also Erat is 6 M per that may upset some players
- VANTEL

His cap hit is at 4.5 which is similar to Booth and Burrows so that's fair since all three would be top 6 wingers and his actual salary would be 5.5 for this season(less since there's a shortened season and then 3.75 the year after and then 2.25 the final year). I doubt Nashville trades him though after they just paid him 6 mil and with 2 relatively cheap years still left on his contract which matters to a team like them more than the cap hit does.

In a system where Kassian, who is a year younger, was nearly a point per game last season
- Fosco

You obviously have a low opinion of Kassian.

Even a couple of weeks ago, Hodgson was still in the top 10 for PP points in the AHL. As soon as he got injured, the team struggled for a couple of weeks. They were hot, then not. He's a definite impact player down there regarless of your constant dismissals. He's their #1 centre and Captain. Please, dismiss more.

Look what Goligoski got.

Edler>>>>Goligoski

I'm not saying he'll get a superstar in return, but Gill is garbage, and Hornqvist isn't much better—Hansen is a much better player. Plus, he's not a playmaker.

48 game Edler is rubbish.

48 games of elite Edler maybe. The other 34 games are still pretty solid.
- Fosco

When Goligoski got traded he still had another full year left on his contract and would have been an RFA if I'm not mistaken. That's a big difference to GM's, not to mentioned that Dallas probably believed that they would be able to re-sign him. If a team is trading for Edler there's a lot more risk and they'll have to liekly pay close to open market value for him on a long-term deal since there would be less of a loyalty factor/discount from Edler's side since he would be new to the organization.

Why? because I don't think he'll help this team as much as Hodgson? I think Kassian will probably be a solid physical 3rd liner and havoc creator in front of the net on the 2nd unit. But I think Hodgson would have solidified our 3rd line until the world realizes that Kesler is not a good 2nd line C. I think we wouldnt be in this mess for our 2nd PP unit as well. I think this team would be younger with Hodgson over Pahlsson Bozak and Arnott and what ever as our other choices...like our GM keeps preaching....younger?

Don't put words in my mouth Fosco. All I wish is we got a better package at better timing for the player Gillis gave up. To you that means I don't like Kassian... you have a habit of doing this. If I think one of our prospects isnt a blue chipper like another claims, you go on the defensive like I said he wouldnt be NHLer or something. Is it 100% blind loyalty for Gillis that does this? I will like Kassian in his role...I had my eye on Kassian(+) when Gillis was preaching waiting for the right time to trade Schneider... so please, tell me who I obviously have low opinions of...it's laughable.
- boonerbuck

I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. Maybe "obviously" was the wrong choice of words--perhaps "it seems" would have been better.

My claim was based on the fact that I can't remember you ever saying anything good about him.

In fact, most times you mention him is when you are pointing out a character flaw, or negatively comparing him to Hodgson.

I agree the timing of the trade was bad, as Hodgson would have helped more in the playoffs, but I don't think a better package would have been available.

edit: to me it's not a Kassian vs. Hodgson scenario. They're entirely different players. They had Hodgson, now they have Kassian. I'm done complaining about the trade (did a lot of that when it happened) and I wish both players the best.

I did
- VANTEL

Thought so, there's another reason why it would be harder to trade Edler and the team that trades for him might get less than 40 games out of him since he may not be traded right away. It's gonna be a tough/bad situation for the Canucks if they can't extend him.

I did
- VANTEL

Look what the asking price for Gleason, a pending UFA, was at the deadline last year; a 1st and a prospect.

Offensive D are far more valued on the trade market.

Goligoski was also an RFA.

Besides, if it's a shortened season, Edler is a beast for the first 35-40 games--that's all the more reason to keep him.

The thing is, very few defenseman are consistent for an entire year. Hell, both Suter and Weber had poor starts last season. The difference is we watch Edler play for an entire 82 games.

Hamhuis also sucked in the playoffs, last season. Trade him!

Thought so, there's another reason why it would be harder to trade Edler and the team that trades for him might get less than 40 games out of him since he may not be traded right away. It's gonna be a tough/bad situation for the Canucks if they can't extend him.
- Nucker101

Edler's value is definitely lower because of this, but it's not exactly low.

This all came about because I asked for an example of playmaking winger options.

He suggested Hornqvist and Gill for Hansen and Edler. That is a poor package for either Hansen or Edler alone.

Hornqvist is no better than Huselius, and isn't a playmaker. Huselius can be had without giving up assets.

Hornqvist is another tweener 2nd/3rd liner who can be easily found. Gill is a steady D but on the decline. Neither have any value to the Canucks.

Look what the asking price for Gleason, a pending UFA, was at the deadline last year; a 1st and a prospect.

Offensive D are far more valued on the trade market.

Goligoski was also an RFA.

Besides, if it's a shortened season, Edler is a beast for the first 35-40 games--that's all the more reason to keep him.

The thing is, very few defenseman are consistent for an entire year. Hell, both Suter and Weber had poor starts last season. The difference is we watch Edler play for an entire 82 games.

I think our best option for right now as a 2 nd line RHF is Hansen. I would give him a try again .

Hamhuis also sucked in the playoffs, last season. Trade him!
- Fosco

What I was actually doing when throwing those two names out from Nashville was giving you an example of a type of trade that could be expected for a return on Edler +

We need a 2 nd liner a Hornqvist type player that can pot 25 goals in a regular season. That player can be from any team. We will not be getting a 40 goal scorer in return for a one year EDLER.

Then we would need to fill a slot on D . Gill is a usable 3 rd pair Dman . He looked good in the playoffs and that is something the Canucks have been missing for a while (a good 3 rd pair Dman)

We need another center, in fact ,like Booner said, it would not hurt to get a 2 nd line center too and move Kesler over.

Between Edler and Lu we need to fill a top 6 forward , another Dman , and a 3rd line center. I doubt we can fill all 3 spots with a goalie who has a 35 year contract and an up and down Dman who has a half a year on his contract left . We need to get creative .

Edler's value is definitely lower because of this, but it's not exactly low.

This all came about because I asked for an example of playmaking winger options.

He suggested Hornqvist and Gill for Hansen and Edler. That is a poor package for either Hansen or Edler alone.

Hornqvist is no better than Huselius, and isn't a playmaker. Huselius can be had without giving up assets.

Hornqvist is another tweener 2nd/3rd liner who can be easily found. Gill is a steady D but on the decline. Neither have any value to the Canucks.
- Fosco

Yes this started when Booner suggested Husselius may be on the radar of the Canucks and you said there isn't much out there . I then said it doesn't have to be UFA/RFA it could be a trade and gave an example

Look what the asking price for Gleason, a pending UFA, was at the deadline last year; a 1st and a prospect.

Offensive D are far more valued on the trade market.

Goligoski was also an RFA.

Besides, if it's a shortened season, Edler is a beast for the first 35-40 games--that's all the more reason to keep him.

The thing is, very few defenseman are consistent for an entire year. Hell, both Suter and Weber had poor starts last season. The difference is we watch Edler play for an entire 82 games.

Hamhuis also sucked in the playoffs, last season. Trade him!
- Fosco

Is Hamhuis asking for 6 + M per year?

What I was actually doing when throwing those two names out from Nashville was giving you an example of a type of trade that could be expected for a return on Edler +

We need a 2 nd liner a Hornqvist type player that can pot 25 goals in a regular season. That player can be from any team. We will not be getting a 40 goal scorer in return for a one year EDLER.

Then we would need to fill a slot on D . Gill is a usable 3 rd pair Dman . He looked good in the playoffs and that is something the Canucks have been missing for a while (a good 3 rd pair Dman)

We need another center, in fact ,like Booner said, it would not hurt to get a 2 nd line center too and move Kesler over.

Between Edler and Lu we need to fill a top 6 forward , another Dman , and a 3rd line center. I doubt we can fill all 3 spots with a goalie who has a 35 year contract and an up and down Dman who has a half a year on his contract left . We need to get creative .
- VANTEL

Fair enough. The reason I was against your suggestion was because my original post that you quoted was asking for examples of viable playmaking wingers, like the Huselius suggestion that was being debated. And by viable I meant attainable without removing significant roster players, which at this point I still consider Edler to be that.

Hornqvist is not a bad player, but I don't think he's that valuable either. He's a less versatile Higgins, who was acquired with a 2nd or 3rd round pick. We have enough of that style of player. They need a playmaker.

I guarantee Edler alone could get a better package than that, despite being a UFA. His defence, even during his bad spells, is not as bad as most on here claim, and his good spells are at a level that few in the league can match.

He offers a skill-set/package/potential that every GM in the league wants, and rarely becomes available.

Using the asking price for Gleason as an example; despite Rutherford not getting the asking price, Edler's value is at the very least equal to that, and I would take a 1st and a prospect over Gill and Horqvist, who, IMO, are redundant.

Back to my original point, and what started all of this;

I would be OK with Huselius on a bargain one year deal, because there are not a lot of other options, even through a trade, in regards to a playmaking winger that they desperately need on the 2nd line.

Is Hamhuis asking for 6 + M per year?
- VANTEL

It's called a negotiation. They give a number, Gillis counters.

Edler's not going to ask for the exact amount he wants--it leaves no room for negotiations.

And I would argue that Hamhuis is worth close to 6 million if he were to sign a new deal this season. So is Edler. He's younger, and I would argue that he's at least as good as Hamhuis was at the same age, with more potential.

Anything too much over 6 million a year, and I agree with you, Edler should be traded. I've been saying that for a while now.

But he's worth more than Gill and Hornqvist, who I wouldn't want on the Canucks if the asking price was zero.

edit: as Nucker pointed out, Erat + would be a better return.

I don't think individual players will hurt as much as the entire NHLPA/NHL will hurt.
Everyone talks that the fans will be back. I really doubt they will. I think the NHL has crossed the drop dead date by the fans.

I don't see Nike Molsons NBC CBC Kraft all ligning up to sign new contracts with these clowns.

I see teams like TB FLA PHX NJ ST.L CAR NYI OTT COL CBJ ANA DAL playing to crowds of under 7 000

Teams like SJ LA DET WASH NASH BUFF playing to crowd under 12 000

The other teams will play to sell outs until they start losing.

I hope this league stays locked out for years and never settles . I hope players come back to 2 million dollars max salaries.

I hope the mayor of Edmonton gets his wish and the Stanley Cup gets awarded to Canada's top amatuer team.

I guess what I am saying is NHL can go Fuk themselves.
- VANTEL

I could see sponsorships drop
And I could see smaller crowds in many of the "marginal" hockey markets
But the ones with good Fam bases will still sell-out games nightly

I can't speak for the other cities u mentioned,
But fans here in buffalo are dying for hockey to come back!
(partly bc watching the bills is so painful, haha)

By the time playoffs come around (assuming there is a season of course),
I think MOST of the fans will be back
Playoff hockey is exciting,
And with nothing else to watch besides the NBA (which many hockey fans could care less about)...
They'll be back,
Maybe begrudgingly,
But ppl will still show up to cheer for their teams,
And against teams they hate
IMO, anyways

It's called a negotiation. They give a number, Gillis counters.

Edler's not going to ask for the exact amount he wants--it leaves no room for negotiations.

And I would argue that Hamhuis is worth close to 6 million if he were to sign a new deal this season. So is Edler. He's younger, and I would argue that he's at least as good as Hamhuis was at the same age, with more potential.

Anything too much over 6 million a year, and I agree with you, Edler should be traded. I've been saying that for a while now.

But he's worth more than Gill and Hornqvist, who I wouldn't want on the Canucks if the asking price was zero.
- Fosco

The reason we are watching sports movies on TSN and SNET is because too many GMs believe Hamhuis is worth 6 M . I think 4.5 M per for Hamhuis is exactly what he is worth.

Edler is not our best Dman (please don't bring up his potential) . I am perfectly ok with paying him 4.3 to 4.7 per . That is my top cap hit for him. He misses a lot of games and is very inconsistent. He is great to watch when he is on but has way too many off nights.

The reason we are watching sports movies on TSN and SNET is because too many GMs believe Hamhuis is worth 6 M . I think 4.5 M per for Hamhuis is exactly what he is worth.

Edler is not our best Dman (please don't bring up his potential) . I am perfectly ok with paying him 4.3 to 4.7 per . That is my top cap hit for him. He misses a lot of games and is very inconsistent. He is great to watch when he is on but has way too many off nights.
- VANTEL

He does not miss a lot of games.

He's not far off from being the team's best defender, and the team's best defender signed his contract 2 years ago, and has played the best hockey of his career AFTER signing that 4.6 million dollar deal. Its not 2010 anymore. Prices have gone up.

Sorry, but you do have to pay for potential--we're seeing examples of this more than ever. Edler is only 26. There is a high likelihood he will continue to improve.

Look at the comparables for Edler; Enstrom, Boyle, Phanuef, Campbell, Byfuglien, Suter, Bouwmeester....and there are many more. All are making over 5 million a year. How do you justify giving Edler less when he's better than several on that list.

I could see sponsorships drop
And I could see smaller crowds in many of the "marginal" hockey markets
But the ones with good Fam bases will still sell-out games nightly

I can't speak for the other cities u mentioned,
But fans here in buffalo are dying for hockey to come back!
(partly bc watching the bills is so painful, haha)

By the time playoffs come around (assuming there is a season of course),
I think MOST of the fans will be back
Playoff hockey is exciting,
And with nothing else to watch besides the NBA (which many hockey fans could care less about)...
They'll be back,
Maybe begrudgingly,
But ppl will still show up to cheer for their teams,
And against teams they hate
IMO, anyways
- jdfitz77

I think teams like MTL WPG CGY OTT DET CAR FLA COL need to win or their fan base will drop off. I even think if Vancouver have a bad year the fans will stop coming. I see more fans dropping from the game than coming back this year.

Merchandise sales will drop dramatically

I think teams like MTL WPG CGY OTT DET CAR FLA COL need to win or their fan base will drop off. I even think if Vancouver have a bad year the fans will stop coming. I see more fans dropping from the game than coming back this year.

Merchandise sales will drop dramatically
- VANTEL

I'd like to see a damn season so we can find out!!!

I think teams like MTL WPG CGY OTT DET CAR FLA COL need to win or their fan base will drop off. I even think if Vancouver have a bad year the fans will stop coming. I see more fans dropping from the game than coming back this year.

Merchandise sales will drop dramatically
- VANTEL

So much of Vancouver's ticket base is season tickets and if people drop them, others will buy them. They are an asset.

I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. Maybe "obviously" was the wrong choice of words--perhaps "it seems" would have been better.

My claim was based on the fact that I can't remember you ever saying anything good about him.

In fact, most times you mention him is when you are pointing out a character flaw, or negatively comparing him to Hodgson.

I agree the timing of the trade was bad, as Hodgson would have helped more in the playoffs, but I don't think a better package would have been available.

edit: to me it's not a Kassian vs. Hodgson scenario. They're entirely different players. They had Hodgson, now they have Kassian. I'm done complaining about the trade (did a lot of that when it happened) and I wish both players the best.
- Fosco

Show me where I'm negative on Kassian when I was talking about Huselius. In fact, you were the one that brought the politics of the trade into the conversation....not me. "He wanted out. End of story" seems like a rather arrogant statement. I followed up with asking questions.

I give credit to Kassian when it's due. Like I said in this very thread, I had my eye on him. Earlier this season I was calling him a man among boys. Alot has happened since then and any negative mention of him are of things out in the wide open. His suspension, the game he cost the team with his big mouth from the bench, the period of time that he disappeared, then the scratch for his lazy play and poor timed penalties.... I don't fill in with a bunch of BS about him at all... I have nothing against him what so ever. Even when others brought up his assault charge and hotel room thrashing, the farthest I went to say is "Im concerned". I simply havent seen enough good things out of him yet and paired with his rep in Buffalo, I'm not ready to waive the pom poms yet. That doesnt equal low opinion or hate as some others like to label. My very first criticism of Gillis here was met with the label "hates gillis" even though I was his lone supporter originally while everyone was still bawling over Nonis. DRAMA!

You are more or less saying Gillis had *no choice but to trade Cody on that very day for that very player*.... and you keep saying it. I get it already. I disagree it's that simple. Shall we never speak of the hole in the middle again because it's linked to the Hodgson trade? Don't count on it.

Show me where I'm negative on Kassian when I was talking about Huselius. In fact, you were the one that brought the politics of the trade into the conversation....not me. "He wanted out. End of story" seems like a rather arrogant statement. I followed up with asking questions.

I give credit to Kassian when it's due. Like I said in this very thread, I had my eye on him. Earlier this season I was calling him a man among boys. Alot has happened since then and any negative mention of him are of things out in the wide open. His suspension, the game he cost the team with his big mouth from the bench, the period of time that he disappeared, then the scratch for his lazy play and poor timed penalties.... I don't fill in with a bunch of BS about him at all... I have nothing against him what so ever. Even when others brought up his assault charge and hotel room thrashing, the farthest I went to say is "Im concerned". I simply havent seen enough good things out of him yet and paired with his rep in Buffalo, I'm not ready to waive the pom poms yet. That doesnt equal low opinion or hate as some others like to label. My very first criticism of Gillis here was met with the label "hates gillis" even though I was his lone supporter originally while everyone was still bawling over Nonis. DRAMA!

You are more or less saying Gillis had *no choice but to trade Cody on that very day for that very player*.... and you keep saying it. I get it already. I disagree it's that simple. Shall we never speak of the hole in the middle again because it's linked to the Hodgson trade? Don't count on it.
- boonerbuck

Who's putting words in whose mouth?

I've said on more than one occasion today that I agree that the timing of the trade was bad. The reason being is that Hodgson would have helped more in the playoffs.

I don't think the package would have been any better if he'd waited. This is where we seem to disagree.

My response was to you stating they traded away a young playmaker. Yes, they did. A young playmaker who didn't want to be a Canuck. Would it have been better if he waited? Yes.

You are the one who keeps bringing this up; "they traded away a young playmaker..." Why am I not allowed to give my opinion if you are the one who brought it up? Is it not worth noting that Hodgson's desire to leave was a factor in Gillis's decision to trade said "young playmaker"?

Forgive me if I'm wrong (I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth), but it seems as if by bringing up Hodgson as an alternative to Huselius, you think Hodgson would have been an option for this season—I disagree. You don't keep a player who doesn't want to be part of the team, long term.

My reference to you speaking ill of Kassian had nothing to do with anything in this thread—I was referencing earlier discussions.

I already stated in my followup post that I chose poor wording, and I apologize for that, but can you really blame me for thinking this? I never said you haven't said anything good about Kassian, but compared to the negative things you say about him, the good comments are few and far between.

Again, I could be wrong, but from many of your comments I get the feeling that you think Kassian is not a good return—hence my comment about you not thinking very highly of him.

edit: the hole in the middle, and the hole on the wing on the 2nd line are two different things. Cody wouldn't have filled both of them.

Who's putting words in whose mouth?

I've said on more than one occasion today that I agree that the timing of the trade was bad. The reason being is that Hodgson would have helped more in the playoffs.

I don't think the package would have been any better if he'd waited. This is where we seem to disagree.

My response was to you stating they traded away a young playmaker. Yes, they did. A young playmaker who didn't want to be a Canuck. Would it have been better if he waited? Yes.

You are the one who keeps bringing this up; "they traded away a young playmaker..." Why am I not allowed to give my opinion if you are the one who brought it up? Is it not worth noting that Hodgson's desire to leave was a factor in Gillis's decision to trade said "young playmaker"?

Forgive me if I'm wrong (I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth), but it seems as if by bringing up Hodgson as an alternative to Huselius, you think Hodgson would have been an option for this season—I disagree. You don't keep a player who doesn't want to be part of the team, long term.

My reference to you speaking ill of Kassian had nothing to do with anything in this thread—I was referencing earlier discussions.

I already stated in my followup post that I chose poor wording, and I apologize for that, but can you really blame me for thinking this? I never said you haven't said anything good about Kassian, but compared to the negative things you say about him, the good comments are few and far between.

Again, I could be wrong, but from many of your comments I get the feeling that you think Kassian is not a good return—hence my comment about you not thinking very highly of him.

edit: the hole in the middle, and the hole on the wing on the 2nd line are two different things. Cody wouldn't have filled both of them.
- Fosco

You are allowed to say what ever you want Fosco and I'm not putting words in your mouth. You keep making a black and white statement about what happened, not me. I believe it is you that has had it with what I've said... but I'm catching flack for stuff you admit I havent said in this thread. In fact, I'm catching flack for stuff I never said to the degree you are claiming at all. What kind of negative things have I said about Kassian that are not in headlines? Also, what praises have I missed an opportunity to give? I really don't understand what you are talking about. The best you could probably come up with is I havent made excuses for his bumps along the way ...thats a far cry from being low on a player. I'm guilty of not being an apologist, thats all.

If Kassian gets benched and I tell people on here he's been benched...it's hardly fair to score that as a negative. Don't be so narrow minded.

I was only comparing the need for a playmaker in the mix and stated my dislike of the idea of replacing Cody with old washed up players... and with only Schroeder as the only young playmaker possibly making the jump any time soon. Somehow you think I'm trying to block your opinion. Wasnt it you that put your foot down...end of story?

edit: I didnt put these words in your mouth. Thats what I mean by black and white.

Who didn't want to be a Canuck. End of story.

Here's the kind of post you must be referring too. It's an honest opinion is all. It was in response to Lefty's post about Arneils comments...which is all I was saying aside from comparing the two players. Forever the two players will be compared and I've made it clear where I stand.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/h...012/12/05/hockey_hearsay/

Booner:

I've commented on some of this stuff myself. He is taking way too many penalties either late in the game or late in the period. We also don't need anymoe players who rag on the refs. Kassian has gone as far as getting suspended for it already.

So far this season Kassian has been benched a couple of times, a healthy scratch and suspended for ref contact. I'm a little concerned since he was traded for a very diciplined player who is far superior offensively.

I even say Kassians scratch was a bit drastic in this thread in a later post. So the coach apparently thinks lower of him than I.

Here I'm blaming AV for Kassian not being dressed in the playoffs and admitting I fancied Kassian as a TDL pick up. I don't shy away from the fact I think we should have gotten more but clearly my stance on Kassian isnt what you make it out to be.

I fancied ZK as well...I said it the day Hodgson was traded..." I had my eye on Kassian as a TDL pickup... but just Kassian for Hodgson?!?!.... I was shocked. Later I thought,,, "what was I thinking" when Kassian couldnt crack the lineup when we were short on muscle and offence in the playoffs and Raymond is on the 1st line naturally. AV is not even going to give me a chance to warm up to this trade. FAIL

I also defend Kassian against the punk saying hes going to be the next Ben Eager. You were all over this thread Fosco...you seem to only pick out what you want to see.

You are not going to see me rag on Kassian unless he deserves it and this is far from ragging on a player. Historicly, I've been in most prospect's corners. The thread this is from has people saying worse than I. The next blog was in response to the discussion about Kassian. I made not a single post because I felt I said it all the day before... there was lots of opportunity to though.

It's clear I havent liked the trade since day 1 but it's nothing personal against Kassian. I'm not wired that way. Gillis could find a 3rd line C that is successful on the 2nd unit and bury the critics providing Kassian learns how to bring his physical game on a regular basis. At this point, he hasnt done much to change that rep though... I hate to say. I'll be as patient as the situation allows. At this point, the hole from that trade hasnt been filled yet and Kassian is not dominating anything in the AHL.