KTF
-
Posts
46 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by KTF
-
-
22 hours ago, tho0505 said:
I disagree completely. It was a great game, but after the top line and a half of each team there was a huge talent gap. Back and forth setting up plays and easy breakouts and transitions. Again, comparing the two leagues is apples to oranges; it just doesn't work.
Again I will say I saw much more time and space in the NoDak - Quinn game than the Memorial Cup game...on NoDak's first goal, 2 on 1 numbers down in the slot, where is the Q Defense?? Gersich all alone was allowed two quick shots, his second goes in. On the 2nd goal, horrible goal tending from Garteig , No. 6 Toews from Q utterly misses his check and lets Boeser easily pass him by for the goal after a misplay from Garteig. 3rd goal, absolute confusion from Q D, Boeser easily takes puck away and passes it to an unmolested wide open Caggiula for the goal. 4th goal, Boeser on a one on one battle going to the net spins around and passes to yet again a streaking and wide open Caggiula for the goal. 5th goal. after Garteig gives up a fat juicy rebound, Poganski all alone shoots it in.
-
47 minutes ago, brianvf said:
This all sounds eerily similar to the NCAA vs NTDP exhibition games that you were saying college programs "give it their best" for despite sitting top players and playing backup goalies.
Fact: Yet despite Schmaltz being on a "lower" line, he still tied the all-powerful Dvorak in points.
Fact: Tkachuk's point total had more to do with Matthews than anything.
Spin it how you want man, but UND still beats London in a 7 game series. Fact.
Those two games were in essence try out games for the Canada hopefuls while the CIS finally got to play on a big stage with a ton of scouts watching...the games meant everything to both sides playing, were hard fought and intense and of course proved that the CIS was in no way superior to what some posters on HFBoards thought...after all the college boys were flat out dominated in the second game
Tkachuk and Mathews complimented each other quite well...who knows, maybe of Boeser was as good as Tkachuk instead of his inferior he might of got to play more with Mathews..
Your last point was merely a biased opinion...I'm still waiting for you all to explain the mighty NoDak depth over London..
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, SiouxFanatic said:
I find it humorous that there's a CHL defender of the faith poster debating CHL vs. NCAA when there's a discussion on HFBoards about CHL vs. CIS where Canadian posters are saying CIS is better hockey than CHL!
CHL is a great alternative for development but when it comes to the level of play, NCAA will be better overall but it's unfair to even compare the two considering the age gap being a huge factor alone.
Hmmm, the best CIS players squared off against a portion of the better CHL players in a pre exhibtion WJC tune up for the Canadian World Junior team. Now keep in mind that the best Canadian CHLers sat out the games because their spot on the team was assured and that many top American, Russian, Swede and Czech CHLers were of course not there. The CIS all star team was of course several years older and in fact many of them were ex CHL players and were from teams like UNB, Alberta and the like that generally do well against NCAA competition. So the best from the CIS faced off against the not so best from the CHL and according to these so called sages from HFBoards, the CIS should of mopped the floor with the much younger and smaller CHL players right.? Well not exactly, the first game ended in a tie but the CIS did win in a shoot out. The CHL players then blew the door off the older, supposedly stronger and more experienced CIS players 5-0 the next game.
So much for the CIS being better...imagine if the CHL actually had all their best players playing...
-
5 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:
what? Schmaltz had just as many pts as Dvorak....while barely getting pp time. Which was odd because he wad arguably the second best pp player on the team, that's on the coach (who clearly sucked at coaching this level).
again you are completely ignoring the point were trying to make, that und had much greater (older) depth.
what did marner do doing the wjc? He definitely didn't light the world on fire and he wad getting top pp time.
Dvorak earned PP time, Schmaltz did not..Marner did much better than Boeser and had the same PPG as Schmaltz...
UND is older but I've proven that age isn't anything and for the upteenth time show me this better depth!
-
3
-
-
17 minutes ago, brianvf said:
And yet Schmaltz finished the tourney tied with Dvorak in points...despite his playing the 3rd line while Dvorak was on the 2nd.
Boeser and Schmaltz were paired together at the WJC because of their chemistry on the same line at UND. The order of the lines means nothing. If it did, then how the heck did lowly Schmaltz manage to tie mighty Dvorak in points? Must have been luck.Fact, Dvorak centered the 2nd line while Schmalts centered the third...Fact, Tkachuk was on the first line. If it was only about chemistry then why were two players that were part of the best line in college hockey on the third line and why did Tkachuck finish with a point total that equaled that of Schmatz and Boeser combined??
Spin it how you want but when the two best players on NoDak played with the two best players from London, the NoDak players were second fiddle..
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:
We talking lines, teams, or CHL v NCAA?
If we are talking teams, UND wouldn't have put CBS out against London's top line. London's top line would have seen a whole bunch of UND's Heavy Line. The Heavy Line shut down Michigan's CCM line and everyone else they were matched against.
I understand that, and I've already been over the line combinations, my point was and remains (and is quite valid) that London's top line would have been among if not the outright best line in all of NCAA hockey.
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, yzerman19 said:
The bigger deal with getting paid in the CHL is signing your NHL contract at 18 and collecting your signing bonus.
I watched a lot of WHL this year, and its great hockey. No doubt about it.
The CHL usually draws the most gifted offensive talent, and they can display it in the style of game that is more like that played in the NHL.
CHL players are not paid to play. They receive a monthly stipend to offset living expenses in much the same way college athletes now receive cost of attendance subsidies.
Sorry for high jacking your thread, but it always made me laugh the way many college fans, who for the most part are completely unfamiliar with the level of play in the CHL dismiss the league as being second rate.
In terms of development, it is hard to argue against the CHL route but there are many players who would be better served going through the college route. The fact is, that if you are an elite prospect that is almost guaranteed to have a NHL career then the CHL is the preferred option, now that doesn't mean its the only option however. If you are a border line NHL prospect then the NCAA offers you more advantages, with the greatest being the time it allows you to develop. You can enter college at 18, 19 or even 20 and give yourself a full four years to strengthen your body and hone your skills and then hit the pros as a very mature and well rounded 23-24 year old.
I happen to know more than a few agents from various agencies and that is generally the advise they give. The high end prospects are steered toward the CHL while the rest are told the merits of the D-1 route. Now of course many elite prospects will take the NCAA way while many marginal ones will go on the CHL path but by and large that is the way it is increasingly playing out over the past decade or so.
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Benny Baker said:
Riiiight. This explanation makes even less sense. So now you're trying to claim that London's top line is better than UND's top line simply based on the fact that 2/3 of London's top line played on two separate lines apart from 2/3 of UND's top line during a bronze medal game in an international tournament.
That would be like me trying to argue that Nick Schmaltz is better than Christian Dvorak because, in that same bronze medal game, Schmaltz had more points (3) than Dvorak.
Fact is that Mathew Tkachuk was tied with Auston Mathews as the leading point getter on the team and Dvorak was the teams second line center and had more than double the points of Boeser while Schmaltz centered the third line...small sample size but what evidence do you have that would suggest that NoDak's top line is better...let me know when the crickets stop chirping.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, stoneySIOUX said:
70 lines of adorable, right there.
Ahh thanks hon...
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Benny Baker said:
While I think it's great that you can admit that your comments about one international hockey tournament failed to provide any evidence that the CHL is better than the NCAA, I'll reiterate my earlier suggestion as a friendly reminder: please try to stay on point. The US U-20 team is not a CHL team.
The assertion made was that London's top line was a cut below that of NoDaks but the best two London players, when placed together with the two best NoDak ones, proved to be better.
-
3
-
-
32 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:
Bravo! Your argument that the CHL is better than the NCAA has now digressed to merely pointing out that two London Knights players were on two separate lines, which did not include any North Dakota players, at a brief international hockey tournament between 10 countries. Next time, try to stay on point, please. Thank you.
Not at all, just that the two London Knights were on the top two lines while the two best NoDak players rounded out the bottom lines.
-
36 minutes ago, brianvf said:
I'm not sure why you're being so persistent with this. You're on a UND message board trying to convince us that your Knights would take it to the best team that UND has put on the ice in many years. You're not going to convince us just like we're not going to convince you.
Best of luck to you, good sir.I understand I will never convince any NoDak fan otherwise, but I will correct the many misconceptions college hockey fans have of the CHL, the first being that the league is comprised of mainly a single talented but very young line of 16/17 year olds and a bunch of weak 17 and 18 year old players rounding out the other lines..nothing can be further than the truth and while you may never believe that London would beat NoDak, you at least have to concede that London is a very deep and talented team that would be among the best NCAA D-1 teams.
-
20 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:
you're comparing him to two undrafted players. Anyways I'm done with this pointless argument. I am a fan of both leagues...but still say UND wins 7 or 8 games out of ten games against London. Our D core alone would be way way too much to handle. Shaw would put up good number in that league, and that is not a knock on Shaw. I'm just saying.
I was comparing him to two players on your own team that had rather difficult freshman seasons yet came back to be regular contributors during their sophomore campaigns. Chyzyk and Simonson are not considered busts so why should Piccinich?? And who exactly is the second NCAA "bust" on London's roster??
Believe what you want about your Dcore being too much to handle but that is only your opinion, I don't see how they would manhandle the London Knights as so many of you hope they would.
I think I've more than proven that age isn't everything. You can make all the excuses you want about exhibition games but there is no way that any college program takes the NTDP lightly and treats it as a no show game. The NTDP has shown time and time again that a bunch of 16 and 17 year old high school seniors can go up against players 5 to 6 years their senior and compete. If exhibition games are meaningless and do not tell us anything then I suppose the Canadian CIS teams are just as good as NCAA clubs..
Many of you here dismissed London's talent saying they had no depth but their top line would have easily been the top line on any college hockey team including North Dakota. Their second and third lines could easily have handled playing and thriving in the NCAA. Some posters have tried to claim that London's defense is weak. Tell me, who on NoDak's vaunted defense has the talent and skill as a Olli Juolevi? The young (18 year old weakling as so many of you like to describe CHL players) stud is a sure fire top 10 pick in this year's draft and will most likely crack a NHL roster in four months time. You think a young 18 year old Dman like Mattinen would struggle against NoDak and other NCAA competition simply because of age? The kid is talented enough to be drafted this year (ranked 139) and has the size and strength to compete against any grown man in college hockey. He stands at 6'3 and weighs in at 230, and he's quite mobile and has a cannon of a shot. Oh by the way, this player is on the bottom pairing on the Knights Defense roster. Victor Mete, there other youngster had full ride scholarship offers from B.U., Notre Dame and Michigan and stands an excellent chance of being a late 2nd/high 3rd NHL pick this summer. If he were American he easily would have been on the NTDP, you know that team that plays against D-1 teams and actually wins some games...
-
2
-
-
46 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:
I actually think their top line would be one of the best NCAA lines, my some damage was tongue in cheek. in regards to your other post, about their lineup, u had two former NCAA busts.
Pretty harsh to say Piccinich was a bust since you really don't know how he would have did on B.U.s team as a sophmore this year if he did not leave...I mean I'm not quite sure what the deal was with John Simonson freshman season where he only played 22 games and registered 5pts but he did manage to play in all the games this year and tripled his point totals. Even Chyzyk didn't have the best freshman season did he? Also scouts some something in Piccinich to make him a 4th round NHL pick.
Explain more about the second NCAA bust?
-
20 minutes ago, brianvf said:
I didn't realize that hockey was a one line game.
What about the depth of the next 3 lines or the d-corps?
If London and UND played, Berry would put the heavy line against the Tkuchuk line to shut them down much like they did against the Connor line from UM and the Heinen line from DU. Tkuckuk would be ticked about the lack of space...he's used to just being free to dangle around the offensive zone...and take some sweet penalties. Stecher would then blast a couple one-timers on the PP to put London down by two entering the 2nd period.
The CBS line would destroy whatever 16/17 year old kids they got matched up against on the 2nd or 3rd line and UND wins by 4+.
London's 2nd Line RW Berisha (21 year old 5'10 190) C Cliff Pu (ranked 75th by NHL CSS likely 3rd round pick in 2016 draft, possible 2nd, listed as 6'1 188) LW Daniel Bernhardt (20 year old 6'3 194 NHL 4th round pick)
London's 3rd Line RW JJ Piccinich (19 year old 4th round NHL pick 6' 185) C Owen MacDonald (20 year old 5'9 180) LW Max Jones (17 year old 6'3 200lbs ranked 14th over-all by NHL CSS and a sure fire 1st round pick)
No way these two lines get dominated by anyone...there are no 16/17 year old 5'10 155 lbs weaklings here
-
6 hours ago, tho0505 said:
I rooted for London all year long, solid team and will have a bunch of NHLers on the roster. As for them beating the Sioux, not going to happen. I watched two of their games in the Memorial Cup (best of the best) and the pace and flow compared to an NCAA tournament game is completely different. The lack of physicality and excessive time and space is clear. You're not going to see a team get beat 9-1 in the Frozen Four.
I saw far more time and space in NoDaks 5-1 win over Quinnipiac than I did in London's 3-2 OT win over Rouyn-Noranda
-
6 hours ago, scpa0305 said:
Bingo. I don't doubt their top line wouldn't do some damage in college hockey. Marner, Tkuchuk, Dvorak, and Jones are all top notch studs. They also have a decent tendy and that Finnish Dman. But it's a completely different game up there; the top dogs put up video game numbers due to playing against other teams' lower lines. Most of those lower line guys end up in the CIS. While there is more top end talent in the CHL, the depth is no where near NCAA hockey (and I'm not even going to bring up the age difference again).
I understand this is a pro NCAA board and all but some of these comments are really out there....London's top line would do "some damage" but hey they wouldn't dominate in the mighty NCAA right? Well Tkachuk and Dvorak were the top forwards for the U.S, along with Mathews, at the recent WJC...but yeah I know, I'm sure you all believe that even the WJC is a touch below the vaunted NCAA and their tough bruising style with there massive 25 year old Dmen who would crush those puny 18 year old Finns and Canucks...except that this U.S. U-20 team featured two of the best forwards from NoDak who shockingly were behind the depth chart of the top two players from London. How is that possible?!?!?!?
Link to the Bronze medal line up http://www.worldjunior2016.com/en/games/2016-01-05/SWE-vs-USA/#lineup-tab
Umm clearly London's top line would do as much and probably more damage then NoDak's top line did in the NCAA
-
Just now, UNDBIZ said:
I agree they'd be "competitive" games. The 2015-16 UND team would win 8 of 10.
Curious as to why you feel that NoDak would win so handily?
-
3 hours ago, OshieRoll said:
The shots were 45-22 that game with BU only managing 15 saves. I think UND was the measuring stick most of us were looking for and we beat them 4-1 without two of our best players in Boeser and Schmaltz while using 3 goalies.
I also think you have to factor in that 4 of the NTDP's games this year were against 3 of the bottom 4 teams in the pairwise and they needed OT twice.
What matters is the final score and not the shot count, which by the way we all know can be inaccurate. The fact of the matter is that a team like the NTDP proves that age is not the mitigating factor many of you are making it out to be. A young talented team can beat an older squad. B.U. is a good team that featured 9 NHL drafted players but none of them were high end elite first round talented types. The NTDP will most likely have two players selected within the first 20 picks of the draft and will have a dozen players picked through out the 7 rounds. In short they are a very young but talented team. Now I've never said they could compete for a NCAA championship but merely used them as proof that 17 year olds can hold their own against your vaunted 24 year old 500lb beasts..do players get better with age, of course they do and I'm sure that if you take this same U-18 team and have them play as an U-20 then they very well could compete for a national NCAA title.
Now a team like London is every bit as talented as the NTDP, featuring 8 current drafted players and 8 player ranked in the upcoming draft, three of them in the top 20 and two of them in the top 10. There is no reason to think that they could not compete against a team like NoDak.
-
37 minutes ago, brianvf said:
BU is typically a very good NCAA team, but would certainly have not been considered elite this past season. Next year they will be stacked with 1st round talent, but this year they were a few levels below after Eichel left. BU got absolutely throttled to end their season by a team that had their season ended by UND shortly afterwards.
And your exhibition game comment shows that you've never actually watched a NCAA exhibition game.
B.U. may not have been the creme dela creme but they certainly were an above average D-1 team, sporting a .603 winning percentage. The NTDP also managed to beat the NCHC playoff champions St Cloud State as well this year.
I've been lucky enough to have seen the NTDP play D-1 teams a few times and the games seemed as intense as any regular season game as the college boys hate to lose to a bunch of high school kiddies.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, yzerman19 said:
Didn't team USA finish dead last in the Eastern Conference of the USHL? Is that not the NTDP? This is not a knock. The team is under 18 and is focused on development rather than winning games. This is not a debate on which league or teams have the most talent...the original question was about where to develop, the debate has turned into who has the best team.
I do not think the NTDP would compete with the elites of the CHL which have over 18ers, many of whom have already signed pro deals...
The NTDP is split into an U-17 and U-18 team. The U-18's generally win most of the games played against the USHL teams while the U-17s generally have a below .500 record.
15 hours ago, brianvf said:Those games are exhibitions for the NCAA teams, and they play them as such.
Many of the NCAA teams sit their higher end players or guys needing a break/recover from injury. You'll also see many backup goalies being played and lines experimented with during the games against the NTDP.
Just a random look at the game between B.U., a very good to elite hockey program from an elite conference, showed that B.U. played their very best players (and started their top players) and yet still lost to the U-18s. They may be "exhibition" games but as you know, in college where few games are played, even exhibition ones are treated as the real deal. The reality is that this year's NTDP was a solid squad and did well against D-1 competition despite the players being several years younger. Yes you had that "16" year old "lightweight" go up against that "behemoth" 24 year old and the youngster not only survived but prevailed..
A uber talented team like London would hold their own against any D-1 program and it would be one hell of a game between them and North Dakota.
-
54 minutes ago, yzerman19 said:
London would beat NTDP. OHL is stronger than USHL. UND would beat any junior team, just based on age, strength, and experience of players.
I believe the following.
Elite NCAA teams > Elite CHL teams > Elite USHL teams > Elite Canadian Junior A teams
I don't really consider the NTDP U-18 as a USHL team. They merely use the USHL in order to give the U-17's playing time against older competition. They do not participate in the USHL draft nor do they trade with other USHL clubs and they often times do not even honor the commitments made by some players to specific USHL teams.
Age and experience are important but they are not the only factors to consider. If they were the NTDP would not have gone 7-5-2 against D-1 teams. A young squad with an average of around 17.5 years more than proves talent can trump age. If a team comprising of high school seniors can give many of the better NCAA squads a game, what makes you think a stacked team like London could not??
-
5 hours ago, scpa0305 said:
you're right they are deeper than I had originally thought however the NTDP definitely could beat them. I would guess it would be 50/50.
I'd say it would be 50/50 between London and NoDak...London would be too much for the NTDP.
-
10 hours ago, scpa0305 said:
unds team would be so much older. London may win, sure. But und would win more often. London had several high end guys but the depth isn't there.
the NTDP would probably beat London. They literally have one line.
NTDP is a great team, this year they had a winning record against D-1 competition but highly unlikely they beat a London team that features the like of Marner, Dvorak and Tkachuk...as for London having little depth, their roster has 8 drafted NHL players and 8 players currently ranked by the NHL CSS, five of them in the first four rounds and three in the first round. Obviously the depth is there.
The Great Debate: CHL vs NCAA
in Men's Hockey
Posted
Wow, what a well thought out response..don't even know how to reply to such deep insight and analysis....
Well something tells me I overstayed my welcome here. I understand that in this day and age having a countervailing position to the general (group think) consensus is quite frowned upon on American college campuses. I would hate to get in trouble with the though police down there, especially during my annual fall trip to the Big House to see Michigan play.
To yzerman 19, you seem like a well informed poster who is not quite so provincial minded, even though I'm sure you feel NoDak is better, perhaps you could continue to educate some of these college fans about the merits of the CHL.