Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
dagies

Prospective Sioux Recruits

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, siouxforce19 said:

The strength of that team was the d-core, no matter what anyone else says. Not the first rounders. 

Agreed that we had a spectacular D corp.  However, we needed the strength up front also.  Watch the title game and see the Caggula, Schmaltz, and Boesser clinic.  Not only were they high end talent, but they were tenacious off the puck and worked their butts off.  After last year, most fans are concerned that A - we make the tournament this year and B - we don't add a third straight year of no Frozen Four appearances.  And what do us non-insiders have to talk about in the off season - recruiting.  Remember, through the 16 Championship season we have had a great run of Blue Chippers.  Is this the only way to measure recruiting - of course not.  Have we been missing out on desired studs and losing them to other teams? - no one knows.  Has the recruiting philosophy changed?  No one knows.  Do we have the mix that the coaches are looking for?  Probably, but too soon to tell.  Is it getting harder and harder to predict who will up their game in College and who will fold?  Probably.  My point is that during the off season this is what we have to talk about.  After last season, especially up front, a reasonable conclusion is that we need to up our recruiting game.  Blue Chippers are not the end all, but sometimes are seen as an indication that our program is still on top.  We used to be seen as THE school to go to as a step towards the Pros.  And sometimes a slow drip of Studs signing with other teams provokes an over reaction.   Not every wish for some Blue Chippers is a condemnation of the players we have recruited.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, tho0505 said:

I would disagree with your blue Chip comment. Any player going in the first two rounds are top end players. 5/4 star players. A good site is neutral zone they have professional Scouts that rate players. Most of the guys that we have coming in are easily four stars. 

 When fanbases look at team building and scouting you need to look at College eligible players only. In the first round probably 70% of the first round isn't even College eligible! Thus, this notion that a player needs to be a first-rounder and everyone else bug spit, it's just flawed.

Players like second rounders like Mismash, Grimaldi, Kristo. They were all top end College eligible players with offers from all the major programs. Therefore Blue Chip players. Absolutely, we want our players to be drafted high but that's not the only thing that they should be measured on.

Weatherby's a great example. Has a bunch of offers got injured and now is exploding into an amazing player. He's been passed in the draft in previous years. 

Of the 10 projected college players to go in the first two rounds, we have two. Two are already in college (Hughes and Tkch).

 

I think BU recently has skewed the expectations of the number of 1st round picks that college usually gets.   They have been good, but you could make an argument that UND has been better with much less talent.  People talk about Wolanin being our leading scorer as this huge knock on our recruiting, but in fact he had as many points as anybody on BU as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone agrees that you need players to fit into different roles to have a successful team. This hasn't been a trend, but I'd hope Berry looks at the junior class as a cautionary tale. What I mean, is depth guys are important, but you should never have more depth guys than guys you think can be offensive contributors. It's much more common for a guy to struggle at the college level after a solid junior career, than a guy to struggle scoring in juniors and all of a sudden become an offensive force.

Berry did a lot to fix the '18 class (offensively), but the 50 / 50 ratio they are bringing in makes me nervous.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Goon said:

The talentless hack comment was me. I might have embellished that a bit. Sorry. :) I think there's too much of a focus put on 1st round draft choices. There's only what 31 of those, and not all of them are going to play college. Second, UND has to compete with other schools for said, first-round draft choices. BU loaded up on first-round draft choices and it really didn't help them all that much. Four years ago they had Jack Eichel they finished second. The part that makes a team in my humble opinion are the players that develop into first-line players. Tucker Poolman, Paul LaDue, Drake Caggiula. 

Totally agree, you can’t go all in on young players, especially blue chips.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:

Totally agree, you can’t go all in on young players, especially blue chips.  

I am ready for hockey season already.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:

Totally agree, you can’t go all in on young players, especially blue chips.  

A mix of blue chippers and 2, 3 and 4 year players works best.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tnt said:

I think BU recently has skewed the expectations of the number of 1st round picks that college usually gets.   They have been good, but you could make an argument that UND has been better with much less talent.  People talk about Wolanin being our leading scorer as this huge knock on our recruiting, but in fact he had as many points as anybody on BU as well.  

Agreed. Quinn was by far the best recruiting head coach in the country. Fans are now readjusting the "norm." That being said, his teams were short sighted and not built for multiple year runs.

In a normal year the first round only has 6-8 college eligible recruits. To say thats the only blue chippers in college is ridiculous.  

First to second round = 5 to 4.5 *  "Blue Chip"

Third to seventh = 4.5 to 3.5 *

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, tho0505 said:

Agreed. Quinn was by far the best recruiting head coach in the country. Fans are now readjusting the "norm." That being said, his teams were short sighted and not built for multiple year runs.

In a normal year the first round only has 6-8 college eligible recruits. To say thats the only blue chippers in college is ridiculous.  

First to second round = 5 to 4.5 *  "Blue Chip"

Third to seventh = 4.5 to 3.5 *

Sure they are high end recruits, but blue chips are 1st round draft picks

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gfhockey said:

So we don’t want blue chippas?

 

sinple questions 

I guess I've always liked Tortilla Chippas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:

Sure they are high end recruits, but blue chips are 1st round draft picks

His point was really solid. 6-8 each year are first round college players. Why do you get to define what a "blue chipper" is? Haha. I think if ever team in college wants the kid, ala Tychonick, JBD, etc., they are blue chip.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, siouxfan512 said:

I guess I've always liked Tortilla Chippas

I'm more of a Chocolate Chippa kind of guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stoneySIOUX said:

His point was really solid. 6-8 each year are first round college players. Why do you get to define what a "blue chipper" is? Haha. I think if ever team in college wants the kid, ala Tychonick, JBD, etc., they are blue chip.

Haha...blue chips have always been first rounders....that’s just the way it is. I never created the term.  And to spin this around, certain posters can’t loosen the blue chip term simply to say we have some.  Haha. Doesn’t mean second to third rounders aren’t absolutely phenomenal to have.  I would love a team full of 2-3 round guys.  I mean, I am satisfied to get a nice crop of drafted players.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stoneySIOUX said:

His point was really solid. 6-8 each year are first round college players. Why do you get to define what a "blue chipper" is? Haha. I think if ever team in college wants the kid, ala Tychonick, JBD, etc., they are blue chip.

Don't get me wrong - I really like some of the guys we have coming in.  However, by your math, if we go a couple of years without a Blue Chipper that means that the top 12 -14 rated players available during that time are going elsewhere.  This is not where I think our program should be on a regular basis.  We used to be one of the main "go to" schools for these guys.  I hope we will be again.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Irish said:

Don't get me wrong - I really like some of the guys we have coming in.  However, by your math, if we go a couple of years without a Blue Chipper that means that the top 12 -14 rated players available during that time are going elsewhere.  This is not where I think our program should be on a regular basis.  We used to be one of the main "go to" schools for these guys.  I hope we will be again.  

I just don't see a large enough trend to say that we aren't...

53 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:

Haha...blue chips have always been first rounders....that’s just the way it is. I never created the term.  And to spin this around, certain posters can’t loosen the blue chip term simply to say we have some.  Haha. Doesn’t mean second to third rounders aren’t absolutely phenomenal to have.  I would love a team full of 2-3 round guys.  I mean, I am satisfied to get a nice crop of drafted players.

So, if JBD and/or Tychonick get drafted at No. 31 instead of 40, this sprinkles the magic fairy dust on them to make them blue chip? 

C'mon. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, scpa0305 said:

Haha...blue chips have always been first rounders....that’s just the way it is. I never created the term.  And to spin this around, certain posters can’t loosen the blue chip term simply to say we have some.  Haha. Doesn’t mean second to third rounders aren’t absolutely phenomenal to have.  I would love a team full of 2-3 round guys.  I mean, I am satisfied to get a nice crop of drafted players.

You show me where that definition is.  Rocco Grimaldi’s name was thrown around as a Blue Chipper, and because he fell just short of the first round doesn’t change that he was considered as the elite.  More people had higher hopes for him than J.T. Miller, and Miller was drafted higher because he fit more into the pro mold.  I’m much more excited about Tychonick and JBD than I ever was for Joe Finley. By your definition Jonathan Toews wasn’t a blue chip recruit coming into college because he wasn’t drafted until after his first year.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stoneySIOUX said:

I just don't see a large enough trend to say that we aren't...

So, if JBD and/or Tychonick get drafted at No. 31 instead of 40, this sprinkles the magic fairy dust on them to make them blue chip? 

C'mon. 

If you get drafted soon after the 31st round and play with a chip on your shoulder, you're a Blue Chippa !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, scpa0305 said:

Sure they are high end recruits, but blue chips are 1st round draft picks

? Says who?  No recruiting site that I've seen define s them like this. Like that gives perfect validation based SOLELY on being one of the first 31 players taken.

Again, only 6-8 players that are college eligible get taken in the first round. Typically UND gets their hands on one or two. This year we have two that could go in the first to early second. To not call them "big chip" would be ridiculous if they went 32 or 40th overall.   Zero logic in that. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Irish said:

Don't get me wrong - I really like some of the guys we have coming in.  However, by your math, if we go a couple of years without a Blue Chipper that means that the top 12 -14 rated players available during that time are going elsewhere.  This is not where I think our program should be on a regular basis.  We used to be one of the main "go to" schools for these guys.  I hope we will be again.  

The top 12-14 players that are NCAA eligble pushes into the second round easily.  Again,  the narrow minded definition of "blue chippers" that they aren't second rounders is short sighted. 

Our program IS there. We land nearly every year top 12-14 NCAA bound players. Ranging from the first and second round. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When fanbases evaluate recruiting classes and players for college, you have to remove players who are international or playing in the CHL (OHL, WHL, QMJHL) . They aren't eligible to play college at that point (especially in CHL case), thus, leaving the NCAA with 6-8 players in the first round. That's why soley basing a definition on the first round is way too specific. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know it’s going to be a long summer when you read page after page of what the definition of a blue chipper is. ;):)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, UNDBIZ said:

Apparently some prefer a more watered down definition of blue chipper....

I don't exactly call Tony Hrkac and Greg Johnson watered down.  There are many players that you heard about that would be the next coming at UND, meaning they would be difference makers from the start, and if you don't call guys like that blue chippers then guys like Gino and Dean didn't have many blue chip recruits.  Like I said, by the 1st round definition, guys like Jonathan Toews wasn't a blue chip recruit coming into college because he hadn't been drafted, ditto Paul Kariya.   They probably would have been drafted high anyway, but a lot of guys fall quite a bit in a year, and a lot of guys improve a lot in a year.  I am sure both Toews and Kariya improved their draft status with their outstanding rookie seasons.  With guys like Hrkac, Johnson, Troy Murray and Jason Blake (even though he transfered), there was so much buzz surrounding their first season that it is hard to consider them anything but blue chip, especially when you rarely had first round picks in college years ago.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×