PCM

With that statement, you're in no position to call anyone stupid or a moron. I never said he said that. I said that. Do you understand the difference between the words I write and the words he writes? Do you understand why I said that buckyseive is in no position to judge UND's recruiting class for this season until the season is done? It's a fairly simple point. Do you understand it? Or are you going to continue to be obtuse and miss the point in every response to me? I'm belittling the idea that the bs keeps repeating about UND being sunk because this freshman class is far below UND's standards which is somthing that only time can prove. It's a ludicrous statment at this point of the season. It means nothing. Nice personal attack. Take an English class, genius.

Oops.

There's one thing that Spirko would have added that the Sioux are now sorely lacking: experience. There is no subsitute for it. When the game was on the line for Wisconsin on Saturday, Mike Eaves put it in the hands of his most experienced players, his seniors. It paid off with a power play goal by Dowell that was set up by Carlson and two goals by Carlson that were set up by Joudrey. Having Spirko on the power play would be nice, but having him on the penalty kill would be even better.

Please read the stupid, moronic post I made right before this one to find out how much I agree with him. PS: I guess I should have added this to the post you referenced. Apparently you, like buckyseive, are sarcasm challenged.

I can't admit it because...now pay attention... I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TRUE! Do you not understand the idea that most recruits play for more than half a season? Do you not understand that every player isn't an instant success his freshman season? Do you not understand that there's no way you can say such a thing about a highly regarded recruit like Michael Forney who hasn't been at 100 percent for most of the season? When this season is done, then you can more accurately judge the impact of this freshman class. And when their careers are done at UND, you can say with great certainty how weak or how strong this particular class was. But until then, there's no way you can claim that your opinion is objective.

You're right. The season's over for UND. The NCAA might as well give the national championship trophy to the Gophers right now because of their superior freshman class. The Sioux have no chance.

Nope. My answer is that I'm concerned about winning this season with the players we have this season. If it's Lamoureux, that's fine by me. If it's Grieco, that's fine, too. If it's Walski, still fine. My primary point is that we wouldn't be harping on our goaltending so much if the forwards were scoring at a higher rate and we were playing better team defense. Both of those areas need improvement, along with goaltending. So my questions to you are: Are the Sioux scoring at the rate we should expect given the talent they have? Is the team capable of playing better defense in front of whoever the goalie might be? If you're throwing in the towel on the team improving in those areas, then you're correct that we need some sort of super-goalie who's not currently on the roster. And since we don't have that super-goalie, we should just flush the entire season down the toilet because there's absolutely no hope that the team will improve. Is that what you expect me to believe?

No, you can put me in the camp that believes hockey is a team game. Goaltending is but one aspect of UND's game in need of improvement if the Sioux are going to be in the post-season mix.

Just hope that Goon's foresight is much worse than buckysieve's hindsight.

Cool! I like Andy Murray. He's a real class act.

That's not what I said. What I'm saying is that even though Lamoureux deserves some of the blame for some of the goals given up, the events that set up those goals weren't entirely his fault. For example, in Friday's game, Jake Dowell scored a heck of a goal in picking the top corner with a shot that not even Mike Eaves thought he could make. Perhaps you could say that Phil should have made the save, but it happened on a three-on-one rush. The odds were pretty good that the Badgers were going to score on that play, a play that resulted from mistakes made by other members of the team. The first goal in Friday's game came as a result of horrible team defense. Lamoureux stopped two point-blank shots in a row before the third one finally went in. Was it Lamoureux's fault that the Badgers got so many quality chances in close? On Wisconsin's fourth goal Friday, was it Lamoureux's fault that Skille got past Lee and made a centering pass to Ford who was left uncovered directly in front of the crease? Despite that, Lamoureux made a heck of a save on Ford's first shot. How many saves do you expect him to make when he's hung out to dry? On Dowell's first power play goal Saturday, Lamoureux was clearly screened and it was another great shot by Dowell. So why was Dowell allowed to skate unchecked and uncovered all the way from behind the goal line to the top of a circle where he had all the time in the world to unload a blistering slap shot? Was that Lamoureux's fault? On Dowell's game-tying power play goal, how is it that Dowell was able to stand between Chorney and Porter and get two shots off? Why did Porter skate into the crease and interfere with his own goalie -- preventing him from having any chance of making a save -- rather than putting Dowell on his butt where he belonged? Was that Lamoureux's fault? Was it Lamoureux's fault that the Badgers were on the power play at a crucial point of the game? On Carlson's game-winning goal, was it Lamoureux's fault that Finley totally ignored Carlson coming in on the other wing? Sure, you could fault Lamoureux for giving up a big rebound, but if Finley was doing what he was supposed to do, there's no way Carlson ever gets that shot off. I'm not saying this to excuse or put the blame on any single player. The goalie is always the easiest target, so he's the one who usually catches the most blame. But I went back and reviewed every goal Wisconsin scored frame by frame. Other than the one that trickled through, there wasn't a single goal scored by the Badgers that was entirely Lamoureux's fault. Could Phil be playing better? Certainly. Would his job be easier if the defensemen in front of him did their jobs better? Without a doubt. Would his job be easier if the team was averaging 4 goals per game rather than 3? Or even 3.5? You bet it would. Although Hakstol wasn't happy with Lamoureux's performance immediately after Friday's game, I suspect that the reason he started Phil on Saturday was because he did the same thing I did. He reviewed the plays that led to the goals and concluded that there was only one goal allowed that was clearly the goalie's fault. I'm just trying to be pragmatic here. Is it more realistic to hope that Lamoureux or Grieco or Walski will morph into Patrick Roy overnight or is it more realistic to expect our D-men do a better job of clearing screens and preventing second chances? Isn't it more realistic to expect our forwards to pick up their scoring a bit and do a better job of covering their defensive assisgnments in UND's zone? Or should we just write off the season and hope that Hak can recruit the next Marty Turco? Scoring more often and playing better team defense will work wonders for a goalie's stats and the team's won-lost record.

I just hope they don't use the same machine for Johsongrams that they use for mammograms. In all seriousness, I wish Phil Kessel well and hope that he has a full recovery so that his hockey career can resume. No matter which school a player attended, once he makes the pros, I want him to have success.

You can be as positive as you want. That doesn't make it so. I'm positive the 97-98, 98-99 and 03-04 Sioux teams were better than the 96-97 and 99-00 Sioux teams. But which teams won national championships? Using 20/20 hindsight, anyone could make that statement and pretend they're a genius.

I love it when buckysieve comes here and pretends to be the world's foremost expert on UND hockey. As usual, your memory is quite selective, bucky. Last year's Sioux team got off to a very slow start offensively. Stafford, Zajac and Spirko, who displayed such great chemistry the previous season, were split up because they weren't producing. Toews didn't play up to his potential until returning from the World Juniors. Spirko was bothered by an injury for most of the season. Duncan showed flashes of brilliance, but didn't start lighting it up until later in the season when he was paired with Toews and Stafford. The Spirko-Zajac-Oshie line didn't begin to click until later in the season. Last year's team, for all the talent you can see in hindsight, was not that productive for the first half of the season. In fact, that Sioux team that went to the Frozen Four didn't really start to come together until late January. We know that this year's team has three proven scorers in Oshie, Toews and Duncan. Brad Miller has has shown that he can generate offense and was a real bright spot in the Wisconsin series. Chirs Porter has shown that he's capable of providing offense. Will the real Andrew Kozek, the one that Hakstol says is a pure goal scorer, show up? I keeping hoping that he will. For the freshman, Chay Genoway shows great potential, and I think is more valuable right now as a forward than a defenseman. I suspect that after the World Juniors, he'll be a regular at forward. Could he be this season's Duncan? Possibly. I see signs that Chris VandeVelde is starting to become an offensive force. He looks better every time I see him play. Darcy Zajac has shown that he can score goals, too. Heck, he's only one goal behind where Travis was a year ago at this time and he's played fewer games. There's also still time for Michael Forney to emerge and be a contributor offensively. For forwards, I don't think this team is that far away from being able to accomplish what last year's team did offensively. All it will take is two or three players to elevate their games the second half of the season, which is exactly what occurred during Hakstol's first two seasons. I think there are several forwards on the roster with the talent and potential to do that. Will they? Who knows? All I know is that it's way too early to write off the Sioux team and proclaim this freshman class a washout. That's just bunk. Defensively, there's no question that the team needs to be better, but I see no reason why it can't be accomplished. The first half of Matt Smaby's sophomore season, many people were ready to throw him under the bus. By the end of that season, he was playing as well as any defenseman on the team. It could be the same for Joe Finley. I don't think we have seen Brian Lee's true offensive potential. I believe that Kyle Radke has the tools to contribute more offensively, too. There's no question that the D-corps can play better, but that doesn't mean that it can't or won't. The talent and potential are there. And let's not forget that one reason the 04-05 Sioux team went as far as it did in the post-season was because Jordan Parise got hot. It wasn't until late in the season that he became the clear favorite over Lamoureux. I'm not saying that the Sioux can count on one one of their goalies getting hot late in the season, but stranger things have happened. I also think that Lamoureux is a better goalie than most are giving him credit for. Many of the goals scored against have been the result of errors he didn't make. Has he let in some weak ones? Yes, but show me a goalie who doesn't. And one more thing, bucksieve. How many very good forwards would you say the 04-05 Sioux team had? That team had just one line that was truly dominant offensively: Spirko, Zajac and Stafford. There was another line that had a great deal to do with the team's post-season success that came together late and was comprised of players that some had written off. That was the Canady, Massen and Fabian line. So it is possible for players who don't appear to be that talented or that skilled early in the season to make a significant impact later in the season. You problem, bs, is that you look at where this team now and assume that it will never get any better. Based on what's happened during Hakstol's first two seasons, that is not a safe assumption.

Dean Blais had a formula for winning that went like this: Average four goals per game Hold your opponent to 30 or fewer shots per game Have a goalie with at least a .900 save percentage If you can do those three things consistently, you'll win a lot of games, and you won't need world-class goaltending to do it.

We are all out of stock of you.

The loss of Spirko is looming large at this point of the season.

I guess the Sioux should have gone for more punt blocks against GVSU.

From the Grand Forks Herald: [url="http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=19979

Let's go boys!

I'm here. Are you there?

Vaht?

You're right about that. The Sioux wasted a lot of valuable third-period time killing those two penalties when they should have been pressuring for the tying goal.

Posted on US College Hockey Online: COMMENTARY: Empty Cry Of Racism From The Big Green

I sure hope she doesn't break her coccyx. I couldn't take it if Uncle Rico ate all our steak again.