jk

Given that the bolded guys are only 6, 9, 18 and 24 in USHL scoring, it makes one wonder if scoring is just up in that league this year.

It's too early for this, but thinking up front. You wouldn't normally start with a shutdown line, but that seems the most obvious so get it out of the way: Jammer, Senden, Hain Top six in some combination: Caulfield, Gaber, Schmaltz, Costantini, McLaughlin, Blake The rest: Albrecht, Ness, Portz, Kunz, Montgomery, Budy, Strinden For that top 6 to work, Caulfield, Schmaltz and Costantini need to take a big step, and the two frosh have to be as advertised. That's asking a lot. Alternatives at the top could be Kunz if he can gain a step, or James if he comes in. That would allow someone like Costantini to move down, which could add some juice to the bottom of the lineup. At the bottom, a few of the names may not make it to Autumn, but what is left should be at least solid. Overall I feel good about the depth, but concerned about the top. A lot of guys improved from the year before to last year. If everyone can keep taking steps, the top could work out ok.

Maybe they told him he wouldn't play much.

Sad for the mavs, as they had a heck of a team. Pretty much dominated a good chunk of the game but couldn't add to the lead. Then, hockey being hockey, they coughed up one on a rebound and blown coverage, one on the end of a pp off a defenseman's glove, and one on a 2-on-1 when they were pressing. The last of those reminded me of the Sioux loss to BC in 1999. Even the first empty netter came seconds after a bouncer trickled wide of the net behind Chrona. That one had me thinking of a similar near miss in OT against BC in 2001, right before Kolanos. The lesson here is to keep playing, even when you're getting worked, because you never know when it might turn. Like the TO game.

Is the reluctance to make the tough call something you've heard? It sounds like pure speculation.

I'm on board with not wanting to lose them. But what if the coaches think they're not ready to contribute in college? Perhaps in that case a player might be better served playing big minutes in the USHL for another year. Not my call to make, thank goodness.

It was not a great year for forwards or defensemen. Usually one demands the award with his play. That made it a perfect year for McKay to slide in and get it. For the same reasons, if Sanderson had come back and blown up in late Feb and March, it would have been his. They love the U.S. team pedigree. I think McKay was the right choice.

I'm sad to see Calder go. He was pretty high on a list of guys I would most want to see with the puck and a chance. This past year he and the team weren't a great fit, because he's a finisher on a team without setup men. He didn't have the skating ability to create the space himself, so he was a trigger man without ammo. Likewise, I think the skating deficiency (I'm no expert, just how it looked to me) makes him not a great fit for a lower line. UND needs guys down there who can fly around and disrupt, and that's not his game. He needs to find space, receive the puck and shoot it. That's a top 6 role.

The mavs were also disciplined as heck. No penalties, and not even any close ones that might have been called. All while contesting every inch of ice.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why UND is trying to build a team like the mavs and bulldogs, and why they're welcoming Hain and Senden back with open arms. What a performance that was.

Except for five seconds, the mavs have looked great.

They're not danglers or PP guys, but each of Senden, Hain and Jammer ended up at 0.5 points per game, which is good for a shutdown line.

This is a heck of a game.

Jandric was so shaky in the first month, and I was wondering why he was here. But it turns out he was super rusty after not playing the year before, and I thought he got better and better all year. I don't disagree on the spear, but I will on the OT penalty. He did make a mistake, in fanning on the puck as it went by at the point. But he made the only play he could at that point, which was to interfere with the guy about to go on a breakaway. It was the smart play.

Now UND has to avoid falling into the trap of having most of the team back and failing to find the magic. It doesn't just happen because you're back, you have to make it happen. Look at SC this year. The whole "unfinished business" thing seems to often end with the business still not finished.

Wish he woulda won one more game with UMass before heading West.

Just my personal view, I'm fine with a fifth year guy. While they do lose a lot next year, they will have some well-seasoned recruits ready to come in, and there's always the portal next year too.

Many years it's hard to figure out how they'll address the roster issues, and I take comfort in the fact that while I don't know the plan, the coaches do. This year, maybe they don't even know it yet. There are a few moving parts, plus mysteries behind portal door number three. I do know this team was tough to play against at the end of the year, and if they bring back the fifth year guys plus everyone else older and stronger, they will be that and more. However, you also have to get the puck in the net, and in the playoffs you have to do it on the PP, like, in the last 90 seconds of regulation. With that in mind, guys like James and Spicer cannot come out of this game of musical chairs without a chair. If it's a seat the following year, that's fine, as long as the chair is in GF. The coaches are much smarter than I am, and I'm sure they know the squad needs to have slicker players, so it'll be interesting to see how they put it together.

If this came to pass, it would be great for the top 20 programs, but horrible for the sport. The bottom 30 programs or so would be feeders for the top. I understand you were exaggerating a bit, but you may not be far off.

Awesome numbers. Thanks for crunching them.

I think the point of the post I was responding to was that even years when UND failed to qualify, it was in the neighborhood. Finishing 20th means your last few weeks were relevant because you could still play your way up and in. Compare that to examples from this year of former glory: BC 28, WI 37, Miami 46, Maine 51. By UND's standards, 20th is very poor, the worst in two decades. But it's not an embarrassment as those others listed were.

I have to think UND would be tops by that measure. Really only one clunker, 2002, since Blais took over. Maybe Denver and BC are in the discussion. Most of today's top Eastern teams were PWR 40 types 15 years ago. It won't do much for the "natty" counters, but it has meant a consistently competitive, contending, entertaining program for a big chunk of the adult lives of its fans.

It also has a better chance of succeeding on the off chance UNO doesn't qualify. The NCAA wouldn't have to work too hard to get UND or any of a number of MN schools there.

I generally agree with SJHovey. Some of the recent recruiting battles are ominous indicators. The question is how to thrive in the new world. I think the answer is partly to focus on what UND has always been good at, Canadian kids who care more about hockey than they do the bigger sports world that dominates the U.S. Also the team will just have to be older, and pick up late bloomers. It'll be interesting to see how the tourney goes next week, to see if the future is now.

You may be right, I have no idea how they think. On the other hand, not only do they have Sanderson coming in, but they have two first rounders seasoning in the AHL (JBD is one.) Getting crowded maybe.