jk

I think it's more going to the portal because the junior player needs another year of development.

That Sandelin interview was something. This is not portal related, but it's my understanding that the MI super teams of the last few years were largely advisor assembled, or at least got a boost from advisor relationships. So when it seems like the high profile guys always end up in the same couple places, that may have a lot to do with it. Sounds like the portal is more of the same. And I say that understanding that UND has been more of a beneficiary there.

I'd say he does some things better than any of the three. But he's physically much less ready than any of them for playing against guys who are made of stone. He's most similar in build to Caggiula, but younger and not filled out yet. The other two had sturdy NHL frames, which he'll never have.

Thanks again for compiling that all season.

I saw somewhere that Wood's dad was an assistant for the MN women's team from 2008-2010. That might help explain what seemed otherwise inexplicable.

He is no doubt the fastest skater on the team, but I'm not sure his hands and vision have kept up with his feet. He had a fair amount of time on higher lines this year, but where he ended the year felt like a better fit for his skills, to me.

Where's beeks? A classic movie in my industry.

Weird little miscommunication between the goalie and defenseman there just left the puck sitting and waiting. Not sure the better team won that game.

BC had hardly sniffed the offensive zone all period, but it just takes one rush.

I know nothing about it (or most anything for that matter), but I would guess for the bigger names it is likely advisor driven. It's easy to imagine the advisor reaching out to programs to gauge their interest, then picking the right spot even before officially entering the portal. It is sad, but again if that's the landscape you're operating in, you'd better participate.

I mean, they were seven years apart. It's not like the players experienced it and then forgot. Only fans got to relive it.

Well, sometimes I think I was watching a different game. First, MI is really good. It's easy to see that their guys have that polish that points to an NHL future, just so fast and slick. But I thought through two periods UND had played a terrific defensive game. Not perfect, because the other team is good too and will have its moments, but how often did you see a developing chance for MI get thwarted by a backcheck or a seam pass get deflected? And how many times was Ludwig asked to make an exceptional save? I'm thinking it was never. This was night and day different from the last game against Omaha, where Hobey faced so many great chances. This'll be the more controversial part, but even when they got caved in to start the third, they actually still covered guys in the defensive zone and limited great chances. MI was going to push at some point, and they did, but the point is to survive those stretches until you can work out of it. MI's fourth goal was pretty, but their first three were hockey bounces, which UND got none of. I thought UND played solid playoff hockey tonight and deserved a better fate. The whole "have to play sixty minutes" thing is a joke. What is that, you have to dominate the other team for sixty minutes? Momentum changes in hockey, sometimes you have it, sometimes the other guys do. They got caved in by Denver in the semis in 2016 for the first 14 minutes of the third period, but they kept playing and came out the other side and eventually won. This team also turned the tide in the last third of the third, and had some terrific one-timer chances (that were better chances than almost anything MI had all game), but could not get them to go. The difference is that Denver didn't get a bunch of hockey bounces like MI did in this game. So, to summarize, I disagree with many here and thought they showed up and played hard and well against a very good team. I was down on their recent performances, but felt like they really turned it around tonight. Despite that, it wasn't meant to be.

That goal had some similarities to Qs last OT goal in the NCAAs.

Those two NCHC teams were on the road in the first round of the conference playoffs.

I was pulling for BU in case Omaha failed. And while I was indifferent to Cornell or Maine, Im hopeful Cornell can succeed where UMass didn't. Hopeful but expecting to be disappointed.

Or Denver as the team who would hot goalie someone to win.

I can't quite get past that Omaha lost because their guy just fell down. The first two were bad turnovers, but the third one? Wow, he must feel bad.

Unreal. He fell down.

Yeah Omaha really wishes they cashed in a couple of those chances.

Cornell has allowed 63 goals all year. Didn't UND give up that many just to CC and Omaha?

So that's two goals for Denver in its last 7.5 periods of tourney play.

Well, crap.

Was planning on watching a lot of hockey, but didn't think it would be just one game.

Having to swap out goalies worked for Duluth.

UMass's offensive creativity is practically non-existent. Just meat and potatoes. Which can work.