jk

bump for skate...

I agree that the Sioux will be plenty good through three lines next year - a lot of puck possession, cycling, and scoring chances, with hopefully a little better finishing. I expected better from the fourth line this year; they looked good pretty often, but the production never appeared. Until it does, I understand skepticism. If second-half travel was a problem last year, then I would add that to the list of concerns for next year, since the schedule is again heavily weighted to being on the road in the second half. I'm a homer, but I will be surprised if the Sioux aren't right there with MN at the end of the year. (Oops, did I say that out loud?)

yellowdog, Apologies for cutting and pasting your post, but I didn't do it to take anything out of context. The relative values of the forward recruits will, of course, be determined over the next four seasons. I do agree that the USHL boys played tougher competition, and you won't see me say anywhere that they're not outstanding recruits. I think over time the Sioux recruits will be shown to be not worse than any other duo out there. We will have to wait and see. It's interesting to me how non-dominant MN's records against those teams are when you list them out like that. MN really got hot at the right time. The only quality opponents MN had an unblemished record against were OSU and Ferris. That's not a rip on MN; I'm just surprised. I can't see where I tried to suggest the Sioux got better at the end. I sure don't think they did. I do think they were a better team in 2002-03 than in 2001-02, even considering the fade. Goaltending. ding.ding.ding.ding. I like a lot of things about the Sioux roster. I think the forwards and defense match up favorably with almost every other team. But you are right that all that talent will be wasted without quality goaltending. Brandt played well in the clutch at the end of the year, so I have some hope for next year; but I do think that goaltending continues to be the biggest questionmark for the team. DAR, I agree that none of the Sioux players should leave, as they are just not ready. The risk is that their NHL team wants them to leave to get them into their development program. I consider this to be an especially bigger risk for NHL-style big physical defensemen. When your future employer tells you that the next step is the AHL, and tells you that you are ready to take that step, and shows you a big check, maybe you go even if you would not otherwise. streaky, As to the Sioux forward depth, I think it will be good. If the first line is Parise, Bochenski, Murray, then I think there are five other forwards who will produce well: Lundbohm, Massen, McMahon, Prpich and Stafford. That's pretty much three full lines that are at the very least solid. The remaining talent available to fill in the fourth line will be of a quality that only about five other teams will better (MN, Michigan, BC and probably a few others).

yellowdog, your first post was so pleasant, then your second was less so. For starters, here are a few general reasons for optimism: UND's top 11 scorers, in order: So, Fr, Jr, So, Sr, So, So, Sr, So, So, Fr. UND's top two defensive pairs for the last half of the year: So/So, So/Fr. Young players get better. We saw that in UND's improvement from 2001-02 to last year, and we'll see more of the same next year. Minnesota turned out to be far better when healthy than UND when not healthy. When the tables were turned, it was more of a push, as we saw in January. No doubt MN comes into next year as a big favorite. Mankato was not "far better" than UND last year. - UND ended up just a touch higher in the PWR, - Mankato won the season series 2-1-1, - UND consistently had the better possession and offensive pressure in their matchups, - but Mankato had the killer finishers. - Mankato led a charmed life last year, winning and drawing games when they were outshot 50-25. - UND was cursed last year, losing and drawing games when they played better than that. UND loses two contributing forwards and a top defenseman they didn't have anyway down the stretch. Mankato loses a similar forward and two key defensemen. Because of the importance of those key defensemen, Mankato loses more than UND. UND's incoming forward duo of Murray/Stafford takes a back seat to no other duo in the country, including Potulny/Irmen, Backes/Morin or Pineault/Rooney. Smaby is arguably in the same league as any incoming defenseman other than Suter. Duluth is coming on, to be sure, but they also lose at least as much up front as UND does. I don't think they bring in as much, either. I'm convinced that UND finishes ahead of Mankato and Duluth next year. Any more Sioux early departures could change that view.

Congrats to the good Gopher fans and the program for an unbelievable accomplishment. The last two+ months were remarkable. As for next year, I cannot believe everyone's giving them the free pass. They certainly didn't need any breaks last night, as they were a lot better than UNH. But they'll need them along the way to the three-peat, and I doubt they'll continue to have fortune smile on them to such a degree. The funny thing is, next year they just might be good enough to win even without any good breaks. BC will be "scary good" as they lose basically nobody and bring in a great class. You can't tell me MN was any better than Michigan this year - they would probably split a ten-game series - and while Michigan loses a little more than MN, they also return a ton and bring in their usual stellar class. Last but not least, the Sioux will be right there as well. MN and UND were equals in January, and went in opposite directions from January 30 to the end of the year. UND has the ability to be there at the end if they're healthy and peaking at the right time. To beat MN, I think you need to be solid all the way down the lineup, which powers like BC, Michigan and UND are. You also need to have tough defensemen who are big enough to put a body on Vanek and make the check stick. Michigan was small on defense this year; I don't know about next. BC has some big, good defensemen. UND has a lot of big tough defensemen, which may be why they were able to neutralze Vanek pretty well in January. "sorry but you all deserve it" The funny thing is that some of the Gopher fans who had to suffer through all the stuff that happened between 1980 and 2001 do deserve this. That was a ton of bad karma that probably earned all the great luck and amazing runs they've had the last two years. I'm guessing that you're not one of the fans who suffered those trying times, as you probably weren't born when Broten dove to win the 1979 title.

"Keys for the Gophers are..." HaHaHa. There are no keys for the Gophers. Go up by 2 or 3 goals, win. Go down by 2 or 3 goals, win. This is the ultimate good karma team. They outplay most teams and win. They get outplayed and they still manage to win. Their average goaltenders outgoaltend the other team when needed. I'm sure I'll get heat for this one, too, but it is oh-so-true. A team has to be good and lucky to win a national title. The Gophers have been good, so it's not like they haven't deserved to win. However, they have also had the most amazing two-season run of good fortune in modern college hockey history. 12 of their 15 postseason games have been played in front of the home crowd. They were on the receiving end of lopsided officiating against Maine (any neutral observer admits it's true). They got the key officiating break against Michigan. As the number 3 seed, they somehow managed to draw the worst team in the tournament as their first-round opponent. I also think UND got their fair share of breaks for their last two titles (BU takes out Michigan, Niagara takes out UNH, Maine is missing their senior who got DQd the previous game). But for it to happen two years in a row for MN is remarkable. I would not at all mind if a level-headed Gopher fan came here and agreed with me, rather than bringing out the "whining" label. Because it's true. Luckier than heck. And also good enough with strong enough character to run with their breaks.

Gopher Pucks, Thanks for the input. I hope you don't get flamed because I appreciate the view, even if I don't agree with all of it.

A few things: In scanning Lincoln's box scores, it looks like Bina entered the lineup in mid-December and started slowly. Since about February, he has been a regular presence in the box scores, with quite a few points on the PP. Because he has been in on a lot of goals with some of Lincoln's big names, I gather that he is playing the point on their first PP unit. What I find most interesting is that Bina has been one of Lincoln's five shooters in every shootout in the second half of the year. On an offensive-minded team like Lincoln, it's encouraging that a defenseman would be considered one of the most gifted penalty-shot guys on the team. He's 20-years old, which should help to compensate for his size - having a more mature structure on his smaller frame. On the general question of whether size matters in college, I think that "small" isn't a virtue in itself, but skill is. The problem is that most bigger guys with excellent skill don't play college hockey for long, if at all; they take other routes to the NHL. I loved the small skill guys the Sioux have had (the Panzer, Panzer, Hoogsteen line was a classic for a while in Jeff's freshman year), but a team needs size also to succeed. I think it's interesting that the last Sioux title came with a top goal scorer who was big (Goren) and a first defensive pair that was gigantic (Commie and O'Connell). I don't like big lumbering guys, but as long as they can skate, I don't mind size on the team. I think Massen and Stafford both have the potential to end up being big kids who are skilled and can also skate.

I agree that the end wasn't inspiring, but the team did improve from the previous year, going from a sub-.500 record to 10th in the pairwise rankings. They will improve again next year, as most of the team is back. Regarding the personnel losses, Spiewak and Notermann will be missed for their character, penalty-killing and speed. However, when you return 12 of 14 forwards and bring in 4 more, you should be better just with the added year of strength and maturity for the returnees. Hale was the top defenseman and Leinweber was probably the number seven defenseman. While Hale's departure hurts, the team returns a solid "top four" of three juniors and a sophomore on defense, and I think this mature group will be very good. Jumbo: 1,1,1,0,3. Ouch is right. I think we can reasonably count on good to great production from the following: Lundbohm, Bochenski, Massen, McMahon, Parise, Prpich, Murray and perhaps Stafford. My big question is: who will step up and produce from the rest of the forwards: Palmiscno, Hale, Canady, Connelly, Fylling, Genoway, Porter and Fabian? I personally don't like Ryan Hale on defense. When I watched him, he looked like he was playing a new position, and really had trouble making the right decision with the puck in his own zone. There were times this year when the McMahon, Prpich and Hale line cycled the puck brilliantly, doing everthing but finishing. I'd be satisfied with giving them another shot at it next year, hoping that they finish better. I think the talent is there to be the second-best team in the WCHA, behind MN. I saw enough from Brandt at the end of the year (some saves that were pure thievery) to be a little more comfortable with goaltending than I was heading into this year. If there's anything that concerns me, it's the two-year trend of not improving from Christmas to the end of the year. I had reasonable expectations for this year, even after the fast start. But for next year, my expectations are high. I'll be disappointed if they don't challenge in the conference and nationally.

HKNTSMN, Nice to see you here. Bearson is Jason's cousin, huh? That's a very impressive tournament for a 15-year old. I hope the Sioux keep an eye on him.

I couldn't find all of the Easton skills challenge results. Thanks for the info. Stafford really seems to be coming on. While I was browsing the USA site, I did see that the 14U fastest skater competition was won by Mario Lamoreaux. He finished third in scoring in his age group with 7-8-15 in six games. The "North Dakota 88" team made it to the championship game, where it lost 4-3. It sure would be fun to cheer for a hockey team with a brother trio named Phillipe, Jacques and Mario Lamoreaux. Now that sounds like hockey!

SSM won their national tournament today. In six games, Crosby was 10-8-18, Stafford was 6-12-18, and Duncan was 5-5-10. Of course, only Stafford is a Sioux recruit at this itme. Congrats to Drew and Matt Smaby.

5' 7" 170 lbs. 34 games, 4-9-13, +7 Jan 83 birthdate. I guess a local boy comes home. Anybody have any idea of his strengths? He's obviously not a big guy. This makes me wonder if the Hale leaving rumors are in fact true.

SSM won their third game 3-1, finishing the preliminary round. Crosby, Duncan and Stafford with the goals.

The Red Line Report from last week has quite a lot about Crosby, but also has a few nice words about Smaby and Stafford. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/colu...-woodlief_x.htm

Shattuck is playing in the midget national tournament this week. They are 2-0, with the last preliminary game later today. In a 7-4 opening win, Drew Stafford went 1-2-3. He followed that lackluster effort with a stellar 2-5-7 in Shattuck's 7-3 win. Another SSM name that has been linked to UND is junior Ryan Duncan (his dad may have some ties to UND). This year he put up 27-29-56 in 45 games. In the first two tournament games, he has 2-2-4. Matt Smaby is also playing and probably smashing some poor unsuspecting youths.

On the class of sophomore forwards, I understand calling it a bust and I understand dagies' point of view as well. Going into it, I thought we had a good shot of having three stars - Fournier, Bochenski and Massen. I expected solid contributions from McMahon, Canady and Connelly, and I wasn't expecting much from Faul. Bochesnki is a star. Despite my (and obviously others) frustrations with him, Massen is very close to being on a star track. He was the sixth leading scorer on the team as a sophomore, and averaged 1.00 point per game in league play. Here are his numbers: Fresh. - Overall: 34 games, 5-8-13. WCHA - 26 games, 4-3-7 Soph. - Overall: 42 games, 15-20-35 WCHA - 28 games, 12-16-28 My frustration with him stems from observing some of the things he is capable of. He made a jaw-dropping move to lose a UAA defenseman in GF earlier this year that resulted in a Notermann rebound goal. At the Final Five, he came out of the corner with the puck, using his long reach to maintain possession, and got a great shot off. These flashes of exceptional offensive skill make me wonder why we can't see it more often. Despite that, he really improved from his freshman year to the next, and I can't get too down on him. Fournier's gone, and while the team obviously was better off from a chemistry perspective, in the end they probably missed his offensive creativity more than I and many Sioux fans would like to admit. I have gotten the solid player I was hoping for in McMahon, but I wish he scored a little more. I understand being down on Canady based on some of the things cited, but I can't do it based on the kind of year he had. He ended last year with a pretty serious injury, started this year with another one, and then had another in the second half this year. I believe you stick with someone when they're down, rather than bailing out on them. As for Connelly, I have seen glimpses of real ability and have defended him here in the past, but even I have to shake my head at the lack of production. Among the biggest disappointments would have to be a guy who came in with these guys, although he wasn't eligible to play his freshman year, Genoway. I really thought he would come in and score but it sure didn't happen. So for me... At or above expectations: Bochenski, Massen, McMahon, (Faul) Below expectations: Connelly, Genoway, (Fournier) Incomplete: Canady

No disrespect to the original poster, but I'll believe it when I hear it from someone that is credible to me. That said, I won't be at all surprised if it turns out to be true. If so, good luck, Mr. Hale.

I would join you, GE, but I already committed my extra funds to the "Vanek Calder Trophy Fund."

Please forgive what is certain to be terrible formatting: Jason Dupuis-G (3/4/03) Merritt (BCHL) 3-19-82 54-3034-176-3.48 Brett Arcand-Kootenay-LC (1/8/03) Powell River (BCHL) 6'1 180 1-23-83 53-28-46-74-106 || 60-23-23-46-103 Justin Bourne-RC (11/26/02) Vernon (BCHL) 6' 185 12-12-82 60-32-44-76-52 || 60-27-28-55- #Mark Smith-RD (11/12/02) Sherwood Park (AJHL) 5'10 170 4-13-83 54-9-23-32-41 || 62-9-30-39-38 #Chad Anderson-D (10/22/02) Tri-City (USHL) 6'2 202 6-16-82 59-8-19-27-119 |60-3-10-13-53 Chris Fournier-LC U.North Dakota 5'7 175 4-10-82 Transfer eligible 2003 http://members.aol.com/cheisenber/Recruit03.htm

As to the question of challenging MN next year, I think MN will be among a handful of very good teams next year. BC fans think next year belongs to them, as they don't lose much, return a team with stars and depth, add Patrick Eaves back to the mix, and add some high-profile newcomers to a team that is a 2OT loss away from being exactly where MN is right now. Michigan has a lot of young guys that will be maturing. UND will have the team to contend, but goaltending will continue to be a huge question until it is consistently answered. (I was pleased with Jake's finish, but that doesn't mean the problem has been solved.) As for the direct MN/UND comparison, it's tricky. I think UND can play right with MN, and I don't think the talent difference between the two teams this year is that great. However, and it pains me to write this, the biggest difference is in the teams' play in crunch time. MN got better in the second half, and UND didn't. I don't think it was just the schedule getting tougher. For instance, when UND handled MN for five periods in Mariucci in January, the team moved the puck better than they did at the end of the year. More importantly, they didn't make the ugly mistakes they made later. Was it coaching, or something to do with the makeup of the team? I don't know, but along with the goaltending, this is something that we will need to see solved before we know if the team can seriously contend.

skate, Just a few clarifications: Murray is 18. His DOB is 8-17-84, making him 20 days younger than Parise. Also, his all-star recognition was first-team Interior Division, as the BCHL has two all-star teams, much like the NCAA has East and West All-America teams. Despite that, I think Panzer will end up being a good comparison for Murray. I've only seen him once, but I thought he was just a touch quicker than Parise in the game I watched. Also, he seems to be quite small, which will end up being another good comparison point with Panzer. I miss seeing Panzer's sweater flapping in the breeze as he flew up the ice. I hope Murray is able to bring that element back. One other positive Murray point for me is that he spent the year in a rough league like the BCHL. Since he is small, I'm glad that he's had a taste of nasty Canadian hockey. All that said, he will still have to adjust to the NCAA, as all freshmen do. Stafford will be exceptionally young next year. His DOB is 10-30-85, so he will be a full three months younger as a freshman than Parise was this year. His adjustment period should be longer, but he does have good size to help him adjust.

Two days too late for the Sidd Finch reference. Nice though.

Subjectively, that may be true; you may think MN lost more. But objectively it's hard to make that case. UND lost the nation's top goal scorer, its first line center, its first defensive pair, and some depth forwards. MN lost the nation's top goal scorer, its first line center, its top defenseman, and some depth forwards. And Hauser. So that's the difference. UND lost another top defenseman and MN lost Hauser. Basically a wash, objectively.

My opinion on roster size would be to lean toward having a few extra players around. Of course you have to have some guys who can accept not playing, but you really need the injury insurance. I think the ideal roster has about 14 or 15 forwards, 8 defensemen and 3 goalies. I thought the Sioux were too thin at defense this year with only 7. Obviously trimming the number of goalies from 6 will be a necessity. At the risk of violating the Sicatoka's scholarship discussion rule, I think Brandt, Siembida and Sedevie are probably scholarship goalies, with Sofie, Ranfranz and Ziegelmann walk-on candidates. Competition should be fierce. Forward lines for next year? I start with: Parise, Bochenski, Murray Lundbohm, Massen, Fylling McMahon, Prpich, Hale pick 'em from the rest: Palmiscno, Genoway, Connelly, Canady, Stafford, Porter, Fabian From the top three lines, I think Fylling and Hale would have the best chance of moving down if someone shows up to camp really ready to contribute. I consider the other seven players on the top three lines to be very difficult to bump out of their spots. If everyone returns to the defense, how about: Hale, Schneider Jones, Greene Fuher, Smaby Ouch!