jk

This is each person's own preference, but I'll have to pull for MI now, as they're probably the only team that can keep up with MN. Sorry for disrespecting Q, but they pretty much got worked by OSU in the regionals. The cost is high, a potential additional title for MI, but it's one I would pay.

I have thought of that team when looking ahead to the upcoming year, in this unfortunate way. That team probably had the best top 6 UND has seen since the early 80s, but the young defense was not ready and as a result they fell short of a title. This year should have a very good forward group, but will history repeat itself on the back end? Not that this year's forwards will compare to 2005-06. Zajac, Oshie, Spirko and Stafford, Toews, Duncan. Ridiculous, even if young.

Some Badgers might be hitting the portal soon also. Just a guess. If the Mavs displace some guys.

I'm sorry but this is incredibly sad. I'm totally on board with Hastings movin on up in the world, but does he have to tear the program apart on his way out the door?

They probably decided they wanted him after that one-man PK shift. It has to be in a very particular role, but there can be room for a big guy who can skate. Hopefully he can carve out that niche.

As for portal signings, UND may have gotten one of the top two available players at each position so far. At forward, I can run with the current group. If they have to add another one or two, whether that's Albrecht or a minor portal grab to get the numbers up, that's fine. But I can draw up awesome lines from the current roster. At defense, UND appears to need one more player who can anchor a line. Then you can go with two portals and four frosh, with another frosh in reserve. And probably add another portal to get the numbers up. In goal, either Hobie or a portal to be the backup, but largely set here. The last few days have set the team up for an exciting year. Exciting (scary) early and hopefully exciting (we are winners, mf'er) by the end.

I might be imagining things that don't happen, but I would guess Anaheim would have a pretty good idea of what it will take to sign Caulfield before trading for his rights. Not tampering or anything like that, but agents and GMs have a way of getting their messages across. So I'll be surprised if he doesn't sign.

You'll have to outbid the Vancouver Canucks for him, as he already signed.

I'm just relieved they got one of them. My uneducated view is the gap between them may be small, but the gap to the next option beyond these two is huge. They may also have felt they absolutely know Person, having seen a lot of him over the years. Which is different from last year.

Lol

We needed a day like this. The team, yes, but especially the message board.

If Knott stays, there's a chance it keeps rolling.

brianvf, thanks for presenting it by class like that. It's exactly how I like to think of it. Also, I think Pyke should be listed as a Gr, although I'm open to discussion on that.

Whether Motzko could meld his talent at finding and developing older players with the young superstars he'd have access to at MN was an open question, since answered. Now we'll see if Hastings can do it. I'm guessing yes.

That three-week stretch beginning mid-October against MN, Mankato and BU should be an eye-opener for the new defense.

One thing 2001-02 has in common with this year is Brad Berry, who was an assistant from 2000-06 and probably had much to do with that defensive group becoming so good.

How this works out will depend on who's on the roster next fall, which we should have an idea of soon. It is reminiscent of 2001-2, which saw only three freshmen defensemen, but they were leaned on pretty heavily. Schneider, Fuher, and Jones would be part of a core group that would contend for titles. But not that year - it was a struggle. Comparing that year to this, obviously there will be more new faces on defense now. But another difference is the forwards that year were also young and just getting going, while this year's seem ready to go.

They've had to make hard decisions every off-season, always in the interest of improving the team, but some disagree with their choices.

Someone will be getting a nice energetic player in Portz.

Cherry picking is choosing a smaller subset of data to make a point. He actually chose the data in its entirety, which is the opposite of cherry picking. Now, if he had chosen one year's data, for instance, while ignoring surrounding information, to make his point, that would be cherry picking.

Although the exact circumstances probably vary widely, to me there are three general flows in the portal. 1. Fifth line forwards or fourth pair defenders from big schools who want to play more. They generally go to "lesser" schools. Think Blaisdell to UNH. 2. First or second year studs at lesser schools, who became more than their recruiting profile suggested, who want the big school contending experience. 3. Guys near the end of their eligibility, sometimes from lesser schools, but not necessarily, who want to contend or just want a change of pace. Sidorski and Farmer both fit that profile. I don't really think we want much of (1) above. Budy might kind of fit that. (2) is promising, but comes at the expense of your pipeline. Could be good if you have a hole in the pipeline. (3) seems to be where we're shopping.

Just have to hope the batch of defensemen coming next year can get up to speed by then. If so, they could be really good. If not, there'd be a lot of 5-4 games.

Boy the board is crabby.

If Blake could still be here when Panzer arrives, all would be right with the world.

Looking at next year's opponents, after my one day of being an SCSU fan, fifth year decisions will have a huge impact on them next year. Of their 14 top scorers, five are graduates and five are seniors. If they all left, it would be time to start over. On the other hand, of their top eight scorers, only one is a graduate and four are seniors, so they could bring almost all their best players back if they choose to stay. I have no idea what the prospects are for their return.