Fighting Sioux 23

Personally, I want the team to win the national title. That result is more likely if North Dakota plays Robert Morris in the First Round rather than Northeastern. I really couldn't care less if we backed our way through the tournament and won a national championship. I don't believe the '83 Badgers put an asterisk on their National Title banner, and our '97 banner is still pretty nice.

No worries. I guess we'll just have to cheer for North Dakota to win and Quinnipiac, SCSU, and Minnesota to lose. Then we won't have to worry about Northeastern.

I think it is highly likely that Northeastern gets sent to Cincinnati or St. Paul. If Northeastern makes the tournament they are locked in as a #4 seed and can't play Providence. If Quinnipiac wins they will be the #1 overall seed, and Northeastern would be sent to either Cincinnati or St. Paul. IMO, the only way Northeastern stays east is if Quinnipiac loses and is the #3 overall seed, which requires both North Dakota and SCSU to win.

Agreed. Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled we got some scoring punch coming in, but I also wouldn't be overly optimistic that these guys are going to come in and be great. Given that this is an expectation thread, my expectations from each of them would be something around 10-12 goals, and maybe 25-30 points.

Not quite as good as this year's crop, but in 2008-2009, Mike Cichy led the USHL in goals, Michael Forney was a top 15 guy, and Danny Kristo was a top 20ish guy. Cichy and Forney combined for a total of 5 goals in their combined 67 games for the Sioux. Kristo turned out okay Also interesting, USHL Goal Leaders: (School - Freshman Stats in Parenthesis) 2002-2003: Ryan Potulney (MN - 6-8-14) 2003-2004: Matthew Ford (WI - 5-5-10) / Mike Erickson (WM - 13-11-24)* 2004-2005: Andrew Carroll (UMD - 13-10-23) 2005-2006: Matt Schepke (MSU - 3-2-5)** 2006-2007: Jacob Cepis (BGSU - 15-16-31) 2007-2008: Jason Gregoire (UND - 12-17-29) 2008-2009: Mike Cichy (UND - 2-2-4) / Andy Taranto (AK - 18-24-42) 2009-2010: Matt White (UNO - 14-11-25) / Tyler Barnes (WI - 5-12-17) / Anders Lee (ND - 24-20-44) 2010-2011: Danill Tarasov (DNP) 2011-2012: Kevin Roy (NE - 17-17-34) 2012-2013: Taylor Cammarata (MN - 10-17-27) 2013-2014: Matt Iacopelli (Still in USHL - committed to WM) *Erickson started out at Minnesota, then went back to USHL and transferred to Western. Those stats represent his Junior Season, or first year at Western. ** Schepke started out at Michigan Tech, then went back to USHL and transferred to Michigan State. Those stats represent his Sophomore Season, or first year at Michigan State.

Agreed. 4.00 is essentially what the 2010-2011 team did, and I don't think the offensive talent is really close to what that team had. I think somewhere between 3.50-3.75 is realistic, but it wouldn't surprise me if we got a bit more...especially if we have a couple of breakout seasons from Grimaldi, MacMillan, and Caggiula. I think all three have the talent to put up somewhere around 20-25 goals. So, while realistically I think we'll be more in the 3.50-3.75 range, I think if we get those sort of breakout seasons from a couple different guys, we could push 4.00.

Haha! That would be great. That brings up another point about next year's team, and that is if our special teams can be more effective, that could easily add another 5-10 goals to the equation. Needless to say, our powerplay this past season was less than stellar.

I forgot that he got a redshirt. He was listed as a junior this season for USCHO. Thanks for the catch...although it doesn't really affect how I see his season going. I think he's a 5-10 goal guy this year, depending on minutes. However, given that he's most effective on the PK, I could see him struggle to reach the upper end of that range.

That could very well be true, but if they are playing significant minutes that will take away minutes from some of the other players mentioned. I do think I was on the "optimistically cautious" side in my predictions though. I wouldn't be surprised if this team scores closer to 3.75-4.00 goals/game.

It's a fair question. Assuming we don't lose anyone early (big assumption right now) we don't lose that much in scoring (13g-23a-36p). Of course, we also weren't scoring a ton this year (3.02 goals/game). To be a dominant team, you generally have to have a goal differential around +1.5-2.0. This year we gave up 2.43 goals, but given the progression of our defense, and Gothberg playing better, that number should creep down towards 2.00. So, can we get to 3.5-3.75 goals/game next season? To do so would require about 145-160 goals (based on a 42 game season). This year, we scored 127. Take away the 13 goals lost, and we have 114 coming back. So, how are we going to score those extra 30-45 goals? THE SOURCES First, I don't expect our blueline to do much more than they did this season. They were the #1 offensive group in the country, and it probably isn't fair to expect much more out of them. With progression, perhaps Simpson's 7 goals can be replaced. So from our entire blueline, I'll add 7 goals to the mix. Incoming Freshman - From what I've read and seen, N. Schmaltz is more of a playmaker like Rocco. That doesn't mean that he can't score goals, but to expect anything big from him would probably be unrealistic. I think 10g-20a-30p would be a great season from him, so I'll add 10 goals from Schmaltz. The rest of the incoming group probably won't get that much play time, so I'll throw in another 2 goals to get to 12 goals from the incoming freshman. Anything above that would be great...anything below that would be somewhat disappointing. Senior Class: - Michael Parks - Went 12g-18a-30p this past season, and I am looking for him to step up similar to what Brad Malone did his senior year and put up something along the lines of 15 goals. - Mark MacMillan - Went 10g-16a-26p this past season. I think he's the one most capable of significantly improving his goal numbers next season, but I still wouldn't expect much more than 15 goals out of him either, although I think he has the ability to get to 20. - Brendan O'Donnell - Went 7g-11a-18p this past season. He reminds me a lot of Kozek in his scoring ability (not so much his shot), so I wouldn't be surprised if he doubled his production. That being said, he look likely to be a third or fourth line guy, and to expect anything more than 10 from that position is probably unrealistic. I'll go with 10. - Connor Gaarder - Went 9g-8a-17p this past season. I loved what he did in the clutch this year, but I really don't expect any more scoring than this past season. I'll stick with 9. - Steph Pattyn - 7g-9a-16p this past season. If he gets more powerplay time, I could see him upping his goal scoring totals, but probably not astronomically. I'll put him down for 10 as well. - Colton St. Clair - 3g-2a-5p this past season. I think St. Clair has the ability to put up numbers similar to Gaarder and Pattyn, so I think 7 goals is realistic, and I wouldn't be surprised by anywhere from 5-10. - Andrew Panzarella - 1g-1a-2p this past season. He showed flashes of great play towards the end of the season, but I just don't trust him to put up significantly better numbers. I think he's probably good for 2-3 goals, but anything more would be unrealistic. Senior Class Overall: This past season 49g-65a-114p. Goal expectations for next season 68 goals (+19) Junior Class: - Rocco Grimaldi - 17g-22a-39p this past season. While Grimaldi has all the talent in the world, I don't see him scoring much more. I think he pushes 20, but won't go any further than that. - Drake Caggiula - 11g-13a-24p this past season. I could see Caggiula improving significantly. While I don't think he gets 20, I think 15 is very realistic. With his shot, I could see him being a 25 goal guy by his senior...just not next season. - Bryn Chyzyk - 4g-5a-9p this past season. Similar to St. Clair, I think Chyzyk could push 8-10 goals this season. For a realistic guess, I'll go with the low side of 7. Junior Class Overall: This past season 32g-40a-72p. Goal expectations for next season 42 goals (+10) Sophomore Class: - Luke Johnson - 8g-13a-21p this past season. I see Johnson continuing to improve. He has a very good shot, but just misfired too often to be a double-digit guy this season. I don't expect him to put up mindboggling numbers, but I do expect 10-12 goals from him next year. I'll go with the low end of 10. - Wade Murphy - 0g-3a-3p this past season. He has the talent, but just needs to work harder. I don't expect him to put up tremendous numbers given that he's likely to share playing time, but I think 2 goals is a realistic expectation from him. Sophomore Class Overall: This past season 8g-16a-24p. Goal expectations for next season 12 goals (+4) So, we have a +19 from our Senior Forwards, +10 from our Junior Forwards, +4 from our Sophomore Forwards, +12 from incoming Freshman, and a +7 from our blueline. That equals a +52, but subtract the 13 goals we lose from Seniors, and that gives us a +39 for a projected total of 153 goals. Over 42 games, that's 3.64 goals/game. So, to answer your question, I think this team will not have too many issues scoring, and should be better on defense. My guess is that we'll see more 4 goal performances than 3 goal ones, but 3 goals should still equate to a victory. Needless to say, I'm pretty optimistic that this team can push 30 wins next season, get to the Frozen Four, and have a good chance at winning #8.

I don't really have too many problems with this particular subset of rankings. From a historical perspective, Tech, CC, and Cornell are extremely close. Tech has the extra title, but CC and Cornell have been more consistent of late. I would point out as well how dominant Tech was back in the '60's and '70s. They not only played for the title 6 times in those twenty years (they also played for it another time in 1956), but they also missed the tournament with over a .700 winning percentage three times. In 1970-1971 they were 25-6-2 (.788). In 1965-1966 they were 23-6-1 (.783). Both of those seasons they won the MacNaughton Cup...yet MISSED the NCAA Tournament with a near 80% winning record. That's insane. To put that into perspective, when CC missed the NCAA Tournament in 1994 after winning the MacNaughton they had a winning percentage of about 65% (23-11-5). Moreover, between 1957 and 1994, the Tigers had 0 seasons where they were above .600. Their only NCAA Tournament Appearance in that stretch came with a losing record when DU was essentially barred from NCAA play. Keep in mind too, that the Tigers once went 0-23-0. Yes, Tech has had some bad seasons of late, but nothing quite that bad! Again, I think the three programs are tremendously close for that #10 spot, and I'm fine if you want to have CC above Tech. Personally, I have Tech edging CC (and Cornell for that matter)...but it's close.

I completely agree with you about Colgate over RIT. The one thing I would add about Yale's "stretch" of missing the NCAA Tournament is how difficult it was to even make the tournament back then. The Bulldogs went 15-2-1 in 1951, and nothing. They were above .600 eight times during that stretch, and were .500 or better 19 times. If the tournament field had 16 teams this whole time, the Bulldogs would have certainly made the NCAA Tournament significantly more often.

So you discount Yale's previous success, but count Colgate's? Your logic doesn't really make sense to me. It would seem if you're going to discount Yale's success from when Union wasn't even a program (along with their NCAA appearance in 1998), that you would discount Colgate's success prior to RIT becoming a D-1 program. Yale has done more than Union, but has had more years to do it (about 3x as long). You pick Union. Colgate has done more than RIT, but has had more years to do it (about 7x as long). You pick Colgate. That makes no sense to me.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I simply disagree with you. Personally, I see Yale and Union's recent success being essentially equal. Yale won it last year, Union won it this year. I don't think Union's program is in any better position for the future than Yale's. Given that the program's are essentially equal recently, Yale's enormous history tips the balance well in their favor. Let me ask you this, would you rank RIT over Colgate?

The "problem" with Minnesota's pre-NCAA history is that there isn't really much of a way to quantify it in relation to today, or even other teams of the same era (unless they played). There was no NCAA Tournament, no real conferences or conference tournaments. The game wasn't played on a national level. Does Minnesota have a better pre-NCAA history than Boston College? What about Yale? What about Boston University? What about...you get the point. Given how the game was essentially played on a regional level, it's near impossible to say that Minnesota had a better pre-NCAA history than say, Harvard. As a result, any ranking done today should really just focus on the NCAA era. That being said, I would argue that a national title earned in 1954 should be viewed the same as a title in 1984, and the same as 2014. The path to get there has changed, but the meaning is the same. Should that mean Gopher fans shouldn't take pride in pre-NCAA era accomplishments? Hell no. However, they just aren't comparable to NCAA era accomplishments, and shouldn't be compared. At least, that's my opinion.

Again, I'm not sure how you can possibly say that Union's achievements "outweigh" Yale's. I get that you want to focus on the last couple years...but my goodness, don't forget about a program's past just because it happened awhile back. Plus, it's not like Yale and Union are all that different of late... Since 2008-2009 (last 6 seasons) Overall Record: Yale - 128-64-17 (.653) Union - 144-66-29 (.663) National Titles: Yale - 1 Union - 1 NCAA Tournament Appearances: Yale - 4 Union - 4 NCAA Frozen Fours: Union - 2 Yale - 1 NCAA Regional Finals: Yale - 3 Union - 3 So, winning 1 more game at the Regional Final level (both of Yale's Regional Final losses (in 2010 and 2011) were to the eventual National Champion BTW), and about 1% of their games overall over a six year period trumps 800 more victories, another Frozen Four, two extra trips to the NCAA Tournament, and a big advantage in individual accomplishments in the rest of the programs' history? To me, that's absolutely absurd.

What criteria are you using to rank these teams? I'm shocked that a program like Union has already jumped Yale in your rankings. Union vs. Yale - National Championships: Tied at 1 - Frozen Fours: Tied at 2 - NCAA Tournament Appearances: Yale - 6, Union - 4 - Regular Season Conference Titles: Tied at 3 - Conference Tournament Titles: Union - 3, Yale - 2 Through here, they are very similar, but looking more in depth... - All-Americans: Yale - 18, Union - 10 - Hobey Baker Finalists: Yale - 6, Union - 2 - All-Time Winning Percentage: Yale - 49.82%, Union - 44.98% - All-Time Victories: Yale - 1199, Union - 373 I would have Yale over Union...although depending on how you weight certain data it would be close. Again, I'd be very interested to see your criteria on how you got Union over Yale.

You're talking about BC beating Wisconsin in 2000. North Dakota was also at that regional. Let's compare the two... Wisconsin losing in 2000: 1) Lost to Boston College (who would go on to play for the National Championship) 2) Lost 4-1 in a bit of a snoozer 3) Minnesota wasn't even playing at that regional (missed the NCAAs for the third straight year) Minnesota losing in 2006: 1) Lost to Holy Cross...no #1 seed had ever lost to a #4 seed prior to that game. Probably the biggest upset in NCAA Tournament history at that time. 2) Lost 4-3 in overtime in a back and forth game 3) North Dakota was playing in the regional against Michigan immediately following the game The two are apples and oranges. As others have said, the loudest point was when North Dakota took the ice for the Michigan game. That was insane.

It's a fair assessment. Miami will certainly not be a pushover. I think if North Dakota comes out with the intensity they did to start the game on Sunday, the Sioux will advance. I don't see it being a 9-2 game, but probably a 1-2 goal game similar to how the Sunday game vs. CC went down. If they come out and get down early like they did on Friday and Saturday, I think Miami will win. In other words, I think North Dakota controls their outcome. If the Sioux play their game, they will win. Simply put, North Dakota is a better team than Miami. However, that doesn't mean that they don't have to show up and skate for a full 60 (or more if required). That being said, my guess is that if I were to go over to GPL and say I think the Gophers would lose their semifinal in the B1G tournament and flame out in the First Round of the NCAA Tournament based on their Saturday performance against Michigan, there would be a lot of "thin skinned" Gopher fans criticizing me for being a troll...even though that may be my honest opinion. Also, my guess is that you would prefer Miami to beat North Dakota...just like I would prefer Ohio State to beat Minnesota...even though I couldn't care less who wins the B1G.

Fort Yates made the A tourney in '69, '70, '71, and '73.

Wilbur already explained. He was talking in general about how Minot has choked over the years, and you could ask a lot of players from a lot of different Minot teams about choking. Then, he went into his personal experience from 2000 when Minot was playing Central with Phil as their goalie (and Wilbur as Minot's goalie, IIRC). I'm very happy for Minot. Hopefully they can keep the magic alive for at least one more night.

Maybe he'll room with Bryn Chyzyk.

I wouldn't mind if he could score goals like his brother, who put up 26-19-45 his freshman season.

Even this year, the tournament would have looked like this... Autobid to League Tournament Champion: #1 Quinnipiac vs. #8 Canisius* #2 Minnesota vs. #7 Wisconsin* #3 Massachusetts Lowell* vs. #6 Union* #4 Notre Dame* vs. #5 Miami Autobid to League Regular Season Champion: #1 Quinnipiac* vs. #8 St. Cloud State* #2 Minnesota vs. #7 Niagara* #3 Massachusetts Lowell* vs. #6 Boston College #4 Notre Dame vs. #5 Miami* * - Autobid

My biggest problem with Bjugstad is that so much of his production comes with the man advantage. He only scored 6 even strength goals, and only 4 even strength assists. Now, he's probably one of the best players in the conference with the man advantage, and I would love to have him on my team. I just couldn't justify putting him on any of the three teams with only 10 even strength points in a full season. That being said, I think there is a very strong chance that he does get on one of the teams (probably not first) based largely on his reputation. It happened with Genoway a few years ago, so it isn't unprecedented.