scpa0305
-
Posts
9,963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Posts posted by scpa0305
-
-
He's known for developing players because he knows what they need. Getting Grimaldi comfortable and settled in at a familiar position may be what he needs to start. The chances are that Grimaldi isn't going to the NHL after 1 year of college. Chances are pretty good that he will play wing at least part of his college career. But Hak isn't going to start him there just because it may be his eventual position at a higher level. Hak will start him where it is best for his development and for the team, whether that's at center or wing.
I wasn't saying switch Rocco to wing solely because he is small and it would help his development immediately (however that may end up happening someday), I was speaking to the people who left him off the top line simply because they felt he is a "true" center and shouldn't play wing. I was speaking to those people that it wouldn't be farfetched to see him switch to wing to get his "first line offensive skill" on the first line. I was only saying that he belongs on the first line and I would like to see the Mac-Rowney-Parks line stick together, at least to start the season. He has more offensive skill than anyone else on the team (when healthly), hands down. That's why the Panthers drafted a 5'6'' 150 lb kid first pick in the 2nd round.
-
It is also important to call out that any center can play wing, not any wing can play center.
Parise played center both years at UND and switched it up in the NHL- Zach's not as small as Grimaldi, but he isn't a big guy either.
I also agree that Hak is not "concerned" about a position shift of a key player at the next level, but at the same time, in order to continue the great program and tradition, he does have to develop high draft picks into NHL players
Actually he is....because his program is known for developing high quality NHL players...that is the sole attraction (besides the Ralph) of coming to UND for most players. But you kind of noted that in the second part of your post.
-
Where they may play in the future in a professional league isn't going to factor into where Hakstol plays them at the beginning of their career at UND. He will play them where he thinks they have the best chance to succeed at this level, and where it is best for the team. So Hak will decide where Grimaldi plays based on play during practice and the play of others on the team. That may very well be at center. His position may change in the future depending on the needs of the team and Grimaldi's development and development needs.
Yes....obviosuly. I was talking about potential line-ups and why I think Grimaldi should play wing (this year), because our team is stacked but we need his skill set in the top 6.
-
I would start the year with this lineup
Kristo-Knight-Grimaldi
MA.MacMillan-Rowney-Parks
Cagilua-Rodwell-O’Donnell
Gaarder-Pattyn-Chyzk
Senkbeil-St.Clair-Sanderson-MI.MacMillan
Schmaltz-MacWilliam
Forbort-Mattson
Simpson-Gleason
Panzerella
Gothberg
Saunders
Maris
I really like this lineup....except St. Clair will move up to a third liner at some point during the season.
-
That is your opinion, but I will guarantee you that Grimaldi does not play wing.
Aside from development, If you move Grimaldi to wing so the top two lines are Knight with Kristo and Grimaldi and Rowney with MacMillan and Parks, you completely stack two lines and then have a big drop off. If I am coaching against that, I can match my top line and my checking line against those two lines, along with my top 4 defensemen, and then hope to get some bounces or a special teams battle to win.
If you have a physically mature, senior, 18 goal scorer on the third line, that causes me huge headaches- My bottom d-pairing and a second or third scoring line is going to have trouble with him. If you had the Forbert and Mattson D-pairing out with Rowney and O'Donnell, that is a very good offensive threat.
I could see Rocco centering the third line to start the year- get him comfortable and healthy.
Remember, you can have an excellent scoring line as long as you have two skill guys on it, especially if one is a center. You could've put me on the off-wing with Gretzky and Kurri and I would've produced.
Maybe....but name one tiny (and I mean tiny) center that ever played in the NHL. Because Rocco will get his shot at the NHL. It's too tough for little guys like that to win faceoffs against giants. By tiny, I mean the Gerbe's, St. Louis's, Blake's, Fleury's, etc. Guys under 5'8''.
-
I always believe that you roll lines versus stacking one line. I think this Sioux team could roll 3 scoring lines...
What if:
Scoring 1: Knight with Kristo and Chyzyk (Knight and Kristo make this line a legitimate top line regardless of who plays the other wing)
Scoring 2: Grimaldi with Parks and MacMIllan (keep the chemistry on the wings, insert Rocco)
Scoring 3: Rowney with O'Donnell and Rodwell (could be the best 3rd line in the league)
Energy: St Clair with Pattyn and Gleason (Pattyn and Gleason earned it last year, i think St Clair gets in)
D pairings:
Mac and Schmaltz
Forbert and Mattson
Panzo and Simpson
Well because, there is no way Rowney sits as a bottom six forward (only if he struggles to start the year). The guy was top 2-3 during the second half last year. He scored 18 goals last year (9 on the PP) and he was playing with two freshman. I also believe he had like 1-2 points before the first 15 games. You also don't put Grimaldi in a bottom 6 role. Hak knows all this...so I believe he'll keep both of them in a top 6 role. One will simply have to learn to play wing and I believe that will be Grimaldi as he is tiny.
-
I thought I heard Grimaldi was a natural centerman but I could be wrong
I have heard that too but he is way too small to play center in the league so he better learn how to play wing in college.
-
Here's my try
Grimaldi-Knight-Kristo Another deadly top line, only issue is all 3 are right handed shots
MacMillan-Rowney-Parks Too much success/chemistry a year ago for them not to start out this way
Caggiula-O'Donnell-Rodwell Could be a break out year for both O'Donnell and Rodwell, I have high hopes for Caggiula as a freshman
Chyzyk-Pattyn-St. Clair Good energy line, I think Caggiula and Chyzyk are interchangeable here, Pattyn and St. Clair will provide hard working, honest play.
Yes I like yours way better. That top line SHOULD happen; I don't know why anyone would mess with that 2nd line after last year (plus there is no way you move Rowney off the 2nd line to start the year) and the rest of those lines are nice.
-
Mark MacMillan is listed at 6 feet 168 pounds- this means in reality he is probably 5'11 and 160- that is a THIN college hockey player. He has some great skill and potential- imagine if he was 20 pounds heavier? 180 would not slow him down at all, but would give him that extra mass when going to the net and getting ridden by a dman. Right now he is likely giving up 40 pounds to the average WCHA defenseman...that is a lot...maybe he needs to go lay brick with Fratty's old crew in Alberta- that'll put on 20 pounds of muscle in a summer (I know, I did it laying concrete roads one summer in college).
Actually I rode an elevator with MacMillan and Corban Night at last year's Final Five and Mark is a legit 6'1''. I am a conservative 5'11'' and he was definitely taller than me. I also bet he was like 175 at the end of last year. Hopefully going into this year he can at least get up to 180-185 lbs. He is slender though.
-
I believe Christian Evers, a big '97 defenseman, visited UND yesterday. Here is a profile with some iso footage (#15):
http://reelhockeysco...s-christian-97/
Who is the point man for that red team (on the PP I believe)....he needs to come to visit.
-
Your breakdown of Dell' s skill set is mostly spot on. There are a couple of things I would challenge;
First, I would classify his positioning as better than above average. From my view Dell had some of the best positioning I have ever seen on the college level.
Second I think it is a bit of an over statement to say he had "major" problems with puck control. While puck control was one if his weaknesses, I would put hiss skill in this area as more like slightly below average.
I will throw in one more of each a plus and a minus in the Dell assememt.
He did not have the big save element to his game. Mostly in the big glove category.
He did have very good psychology. He didn't get flustered very often and kept very cool under pressure. And attribute that is quite significant in the book of good tending.
So I think he has potential to get better and have some kind off pro career. He would probably be a good goalie coach as well.
I will throw on my SIOUX jersey and make the 25 mile trek north to the Budweiser Events Center and give him a cheer for the Sioux fans.
Fair. I like your added assessments....but his rebound control I will hold at my very low rating. Lucky for him he had Blood, Macw., and crew to swat away those rebounds. Your exactly right about the big play ability. He never bailed his team out that much....he could make the first save on an average shot but could not get to the upper corners quickly nor was he great with breakaways. But, again, I agree with your assessments.
-
Could not agree more. See Jeff Frazee. Scouts said he was the best American goalie prospect in years to come along but he was total headcase. It doesn't matter that his physical talent is better than most.
And then the year he bolted from MN he went on to be an AHL all-star and (I believe) AHL goalie of the year...could be wrong on the second piece. Either way, almost got called up to the show until he imploded the next year.
-
I think that luck and timing are involved. But I think that focus and maturity and consistency are often what separates the ones that make it from the ones that don't. That's why goalies often take longer to make the NHL. The good ones have to be on 60 or more minutes per game, 60-80 games per year or even more depending on the playoffs. A lot of goalies have enough talent to make it. They just have to learn how do it night in and night out.
True....that can be said with all positions within the game. I grew up with some really good hockey players....but they simply couldn't bring it that much. A lot changes when hockey becomes your job.
-
This made me think about that list of goalies and how long it took a lot of them to get to the NHL and stay there. Makes me wonder if there are almost too many good goalies out there and luck and timing seems to play a big part in how far they go. Or are there just really little things that seperate goalies in the N from the A and the A from the E?
I know a scout and he has said the same thing many times...what is different now, from 10-20 year ago, is that there are a lot of good goalies who have great fundamentals. Most likely because they focus on one sport, or play year round, or are trained from day 1. But they have to because the game has evolved so much. But, there are always the new types of goalies that make me reconsider this....Rinne, Quick, etc.
-
Sorry to just get back to you, but seriously?
There are 486 players on that list...do you really think that I know the careers of all of them? What little research I had time to do...at least 7 of them did and that is leaving off in the B's.Which either way, your original statement said that there was no chance of going anywhere. Unless I quoted you wrong? The point of my original post was to say that there is a CHANCE of going somewhere else. Is it small? Yes. Does Dell have a chance? Yes. Do I think it is a huge chance? No. However, even a 2-5% chance is a chance.
Sorry to rain on your parade but the goalies you listed (I believe that was you) were great goalies on some pretty terrible teams before the made in further professionally. This simply weren't noticed or were drafted and stuck behind layers of good goalies in the minors. There is a big difference, Dell was on a great team. Lets get one thing straight here, while Dell wasn't terrible for us (except for the beginning of last year) by no means was he an absolute stud. He is a big goalie with above average positioning but has major puck control problems which most people that pay a lot of attention to the game can see. This is most likely why no AHL team signed him and why he bounced to the E a year early....because Gothberg will end of stealing his job and he will be out of other options.
-
1
-
-
Didn't Duncan play there also? That would be a pretty sweet part of the world to make a living playing puck.
Yes, I believe they played for the team (could be wrong though).
-
So you are saying that Phil was much better than Dell who holds the team record for 30 wins in a season? To each their own I suppose.Right now Phil is without a team I believe. Be interesting to see how far Dell goes up the pro ladder or if stays where he is at. They are both former Sioux so all is good.
I believe he plays in Austria, where he makes much more than he would in the E. He won the ECHL goalie of the year a few years back as well.
-
Phil better than Dell? I beg to differ. The Floppin Frenchman scared the hell out of me when he was inthe net. Good goalie but I wouldn't give him the edge over Dell.
Hahaha, funny nickname. But yes....Phil was much better.
-
The ECHL isn't quite the hockey career graveyard that many people make it out to be, specifically for goalies. The following goalies in the 2012 NHL Playoffs played in the ECHL: Jonathan Quick, Tim Thomas, Mike Smith, Joey MacDonald, Johan Hedberg, Martin Biron, Alex Auld, Jason Labarbera, Thomas Greiss, Jaroslav Halak, Braden Holtby, Michael Neuvirth, Dany Sabourin, and Thomas Vokoun.
That's a pretty big list and just from the teams who made the playoffs.
There are some good goalies in there.
-
Dell was a great college goalie, my favorite at UND since Goehring, and really only Goehring and Belfour are in the discussion since I started watching in the 1980s. His success was not a product of a good team in front of him; he was in fact a huge reason the teams in front of him were good. He had some easier playoff games and did his job, but he also had difficult ones and did an exceptional job keeping the team in those games. Memorably, the team had no legs left in OT in the 2011 Final Five title game against Denver, but he held on while the team recovered. One year later, UND was completely outclassed for 35 minutes against MN, and should have trailed by much more than 3-0; only Dell made it possible for UND to mount that historic comeback.
I doubted him when he first took over for Eidness. His first appearance that year was shaky, and I remembered subpar efforts from the year before. But he won me over with his play (not numbers). No overcommitment, very quick recovery and most of all, he didn't spend a lot of time laying in the crease hoping the puck didn't find the wrong stick. With his size and sound positioning, he blocked a lot of shots just by being there.
I personally think he will play in the NHL eventually. His route out of college might seem a bit unorthodox, but I think he'll succeed in time. I thank him for his huge contributions the last two years and wish him nothing but the best.
We'll have to agree to disagree. His positioning is slightly above average but his rebound control was well below average. He played good this year in the playoffs and I felt he played really well against U Mich in the Nat'l Championship two years ago. But to say he is as good as you are saying I cannot agree with. Also, Phil L. was better than Dell.
-
1
-
-
Did you read the post I quoted? Obviously you didn't. It said "Those type of kids are steered, without exception, to Major Junior,". That is a patently false statement, as I pointed out in my post. I listed 7 exceptions, plus there were a few European players that I didn't list. So the post that said they play Major Junior without exception can't possibly be true. That's what happens when you make absolute statements, they can be very hard to support because there are usually exceptions of some kind. In my post I also said that the vast majority do play Major Juniors. That is a fact. No one is disputing it. But there are players that don't go through Major Juniors and still are top end talent. They are rare, but they do happen. If you could see through your Major Junior obsession you would see that.
Actually, now that I read your post, I still slightly disagree, because more and more kids ARE steered the major junior route. Hopefully with these fines coming down there will be a more level playing field. Also, more and more Europeans ARE coming to the CHL. For time's sake, google the last 3-4 drafts and check out where the kids came from and/or where they are going to play. From a kid I skate with that played for the NTDP a couple years back, their "advisors (or agents I call them)" really push hard for the real good kids to go play in the CHL. But you are correct in that a small amount of top end kids do come to the NCAA, hopefully that number continues to grow again. I miss the middle 2,000's where a decent number of top end kids started coming to college...then as fast as it started, it stopped. On the filp side, I'm starting to notice that more and more late bloomers are coming out of college and really making an impact in the pros. I like that as well.
-
Did you read the post I quoted? Obviously you didn't. It said "Those type of kids are steered, without exception, to Major Junior,". That is a patently false statement, as I pointed out in my post. I listed 7 exceptions, plus there were a few European players that I didn't list. So the post that said they play Major Junior without exception can't possibly be true. That's what happens when you make absolute statements, they can be very hard to support because there are usually exceptions of some kind. In my post I also said that the vast majority do play Major Juniors. That is a fact. No one is disputing it. But there are players that don't go through Major Juniors and still are top end talent. They are rare, but they do happen. If you could see through your Major Junior obsession you would see that.
Sorry, you're right....I didn't read the entire post. My bad. I have simply been reading the same biased posts for 3 months now so I assumed you would be bashing major junior and saying how college hockey is the best way to go. I read your post....makes sense.
-
But if this could be your one shot at following your dream would you not take it? This may sound a little off color but maybe he also left because of an insight as to how Hak was going to treat him this season. He saw what Hak has done to others in a similar situation as himself. He saw how Brad was treated and maybe he figured the same thing was in store for him. He may not make the big bucks in the E but he is chasing his dream and probably has as good of a chance in Colorado, if not better, than he would have had here. I like guys who have the cajones to go for the ring.
Yeah, this makes sense. He may only have a year left in school so he can always get that done relatively quickly. And you are correct, I believe if he would have struggled early at all (like last year's debacle) he would have lost his job for good. Makes sense.
-
So who does everyone think is going to be the #1 Goalie going into the season? Gothberg seems to be the favorite, but Saunders may compete for the #1 spot. Should be a good battle. I don't see Maris beating wither of those guys out. I would bet they split games for the first 3 months till one of the two breaks out and proves they are the guy. Should be a great battle!
While I believe Gothberg will come out the starter, I agree with your statement. Let him and Saunders split time until one of them proves they should be the starter. Should be fun to watch.
2012-13 Season
in Men's Hockey
Posted
Exactly.