jk

Peter Cartright scored. Is he Hoss's kid or Little Joe's? Anyone listening to Hennessy know who was on the ice for the Sioux for the UAA answer goal? After all of DU's answer goals, to have it happen again really frosts me.

McMahon gets one and Murray sets up the second. You think the Sioux missed them against Denver?

I watched it again tonight after attending the game, and I couldn't disagree more. I thought goaltending cost UND that game. It is really quite sad that UND didn't bring home #8 last year, because that was one great UND team. I was also struck at how well David Lundbohm was playing at the end of the year. We all talk about Parise and Bucks, but losing Lundbohm hurt also. One other observation is that Stafford was really dynamic in that game; now I remember why I had such high expectations for him this year. I haven't seen too much of the Sioux this year, but from what I have seen, Stafford hasn't quite reached the level he showed in this game. And McMahon celebrates his return to the lineup with a goal.

This is no fun so far, but Matt Watkins just scored his 33rd goal of the year for Vernon.

Here's the deal. I agree that things are brought up on this board that are either ridiculously pro-Sioux or anti-Gopher. Most Gopher fans who come here let that stuff pass without comment because they recognize who the writers and readers are. You like to respond to them, sometimes with facts. Likewise, things are mentioned on the Gopher board (formerly POI, now GPL) about UND that are equally ridiculous and can also be refuted by facts. I, and most Sioux fans, let it go because we recognize who the writers and readers are. If you wanted, you could contribute to the conversation in ways other than sparring over a comment that you think sounds like it might have come from a partisan Sioux fan. Talk about hockey, talk about a high school game you saw, talk about recruits. But the little jabs here and there don't add to the discussion.

"Murray will play wing on a line this weekend with center Colby Genoway and wing Rory McMahon. The line of Travis Zajac with Drew Stafford and Rastislav Spirko remains intact, while Quinn Fylling will center Chris Porter and Mike Prpich. A combination of Brian Canady, James Massen and Erik Fabian will form UND's fourth line." From the Herald. Interesting lines. I like Porter and have no issues with him creating space on the top two lines (where he has been a fixture during his two years here), but it looks like they are trying to load up the top two lines with their six best forwards. The third line looks competitive. As for the fourth line, I was wondering what people think of the idea of Bina taking a spot there. I have heard that he seems to make things happen when he's out there, so maybe he should be out there in place of some of the guys who haven't produced much. (Also, hi Mom and Dad.)

A work of art, dagies.

I have no problem with stuff like this being posted and discussed, so that's not my point here. What I would like to point out is that this stuff is completely meaningless with five weekends of hockey left to play. UND is tied for 9th in the PWR with three other teams, which is another way of saying they are tied for 9th through 12th. 12th, when attempting to qualify for a tournament with a field of 12 or 13 teams (considering autobids) is not a comfortable place to be. Adding bonus points might give UND a little extra cushion, but then again Maine also has to play a lot of hockey yet, and if Maine slips just a bit then UND has no bonus points. If the Sioux don't start winning more games than they lose, all the bracket analysis will be meaningless, because I don't think they will make the tournament. Most of the PWR comparisons with the teams just above and below UND are pretty close, so a slightly different RPI or TUC record could swing some of them either way. We just don't know until more hockey is played. And ... if they do make the tournament, I don't care who is in their bracket or where it is. I'll take my chances to win two games against anyone.

We lament the lack of scoring, and there the boys are on the same line again.

sagard, Honestly the karma thread wasn't an attack on MN, it was meant to get UND back on track. On that front, it has so far failed. Maybe the hockey gods misinterpreted it as well, thus MN's troubles. Good luck to you, and please cut it out with the sweep thing.

I'm not sure what to think about this weekend. UAA has recently taken Denver to OT, split with SCSU and obviously took 3 of 4 points from MN in Mariucci. They obviously are a quality team that can play with anyone. On the other hand, they did give up 110+ shots to MN in two games, which is a lot even if a bunch of them were not grade A chances. Generally, I think if a team throws that much rubber at the net, they will eventually get a few bounces (deflections, rebounds, etc.) to win the game. It might not happen in a particular game, but I think a team is living dangerously to think it can be on the downside of that equation and survive for very long. I have seen (or listened to) plenty of UND/UAA games in the last three years where the UND defensemen stood up the UAA rush at the center red line. UAA's game plan was to: 1) not get scored on, 2) finally get the puck out of the zone, 3) dump it in and go for a change, 4) start over with "1" again. More seriously and just a touch more accurately, they would wait for an opening and try to capitalize on it, without taking any unnecessary chances in the process. They worked that formula to perfection last weekend. It has also been pretty effective against UND, as UAA has stolen games, and stayed in other games they had no business being in. We know what to expect from UAA. The big question is whether UND can take its nearly full roster and break out and win some games. They have improved elements of their play as the season has progressed (better PP, fewer penalties, etc.), but have failed to put it all together. They lately have played just well enough to lose. I cannot predict this weekend's results. I would not be surprised to see UND finally do some things right and come home with four points, nor would I be surprised with a split against a good team. I would be surprised if UND were to get swept. And this is what it has come to: With a sweep, UAA would enter into a tie with UND at 21 points in the WCHA standings. A UND sweep would bury UAA and all the other 7-10 teams, and would come close to doing the same to UMD, considering their remaining schedule. I think it speaks to the competitive compression of the WCHA and college hockey in general (gap between the very good and very bad teams seems to have shrunken considerably), but I think this about UND's chances: I feel like UND could skate with, and beat, anyone: Michigan, BC, CC, even Denver. I also think UND could easily lose to any WCHA team, and and of the mid-level teams in the other top leagues (OSU, UNH, Lowell type teams).

I think everyone likes to see the lower teams steal games from the top teams, and I'm no different there. I'm having a little trouble reveling in our rivals' misfortunes, though, since UND has earned a grand total of two league points in 2005. If UND could just go out and gather some WCHA points, I would feel a lot better about things.

That's all lovely (and I appreciate the information), but my recollection from reading the link at the top of this thread is that UND's path to the NCAA tournament is clear. Win four or more of the last six and they have a great chance to qualify for the tournament. Win three, and it's a very uneasy spot on the bubble. Two and they can probably break out the golf clubs. If they end up in a tenuous spot, then I suppose we will be pulling hard for Maine and Bemidji and Canisius. It would be nice if they would just make things simpler by winning some games.

I am personally sad to see POI go, as there was a ton of information there, and some pretty good guys. dagies makes a great point about this site. It is terrific, and I echo his thanks for all the hard work.

From today's GF Herald: --------------------- "Oshie was the difference," Senior High coach Jim Scanlan said. "He's the best player I've seen in my nine years of coaching here. He sees the ice well, he uses his linemates well, and he's a sniper. Not many players can score the goals he does. Actually, nobody does." --------------------- It's just Class A HS hockey, so Oshie has some serious adjusting to do when the competition gets tougher, but it's nice to read such praise from an opposing coach. I'm excited to see if Oshie is able to have a presence in the USHL after the HS season ends.

Considering that Hakstol was arriving at UND around the time I was leaving, he seems far too young to be losing a parent. My condolences to him and his family.

I don't think this is the place to be pointing fingers at other players for low point totals.

I can play if we need, but I use the word "play" lightly. Before we commit to Jerred I would like to make sure the commitments to play are pretty solid regardless of whether UND is in the Final Five (newsflash: they might not make it). I live in the Metro, so I'm here anyway.

I was referring to the tournament driscol referenced above. Play begins today, and I think the U.S.'s first game is tomorrow. Chorney was added to that team, and sprig wondered whether Toews was playing for Canada. I was just letting him know that Canada is not playing in the tournament under discussion.

Looks like the U18 tournament in Sweden has as its participants: Sweden, Finland, Russia, Czechs, USA, so Toews will not be there playing for Canada. The U17 tournament field is: Slovakia, Germany, Switzerland, USA.

Since the visitor had to trot out the massive 228 points lost last year by another team, I'll just add that the 1999 Sioux team I referenced earlier lost 311 points. And won the national title the following year. Each team is different. You just never know how it will come together.

I think I am learning that each team is its own animal, and what a team lost or brings back doesn't necessarily seem to matter. It's more important how a team comes together. The most any Sioux team has "lost" in the current era has to be the Spring of 1999. That powerhouse lost a big group of senior forwards, including stars and many good players. So the next year they go and win #7. Going into this year, I thought the offseason losses were survivable. Hale was a good team guy but really contributed along the lines of the seniors we complain about this year. Lundbohm could stickhandle in a phone booth and had his moments, but with him I always felt like he had the ability to do more; the problem may have just been my expectations. There's no denying Parise's and Bochenski's star quality, but teams do lose their best players and eventually replace them. In this case, Murray and Stafford seemed like they were in the same ballpark talent-wise. In watching games last year, I often felt like there was not a whole lot of difference between Parise's and Murray's impact on the ice. Murray might have been faster and a better offensive threat, and Parise had that dynamic all-around game that you had to see to appreciate. Anyway, I personally felt Murray did well last year because he was an integral part of that line, not because he got fat playing with the Hobeys. I think Stafford has shown the talent to be Bochenski's equal, not as a goalscorer but as an all-around force. Unfortunately, his play has just not been as high in NCAA play as it was over the holidays. So I thought Murray and Stafford had a chance to at least ease the pain of losing the Hobeys. Partly because of injuries, they haven't come close. Then the key would be to have the incoming freshmen replace the impact that Murray, Stafford and Porter had last year. Generally speaking, that hasn't been a problem, as the freshmen have been among the team's best forwards. Sorry for the rambling. My point is that I thought the team could overcome those losses, and so far they haven't.

OK, You've got me on Massen. I just cannot reconcile his sophomore year with what has followed. I think more highly of Greene and Prpich than you do, but otherwise I don't disagree too much. This is just another way of saying "the senior class is the problem," but I think the basic issue is that UND has not made the transition to younger blue-chip recruits very well. The powerhouse Blais teams of the '90s were generally made of older recruits who stayed four years. UND wasn't competing with BC and Michigan for a lot of these recruits. With success and the rink came the ability to recruit more blue-chip true freshmen. Some don't develop as hoped, which can happen when you're looking at 16 and 17 year olds. Some really develop and leave early. This year, you are left with two top scoring lines that go like this: Freshman, Sophomore, Sophomore (Zajac, Stafford, Murray) Freshman, Sophomore, Senior (Spirko, Porter, Genoway) It's tough to win when you are counting on kids like that, and it's not fair to blame the kids for not producing like upperclassmen when they aren't. Last year, the top line was: Freshman, Sophomore, Junior The year before, it was: Freshman, Sophomore, Other (someone with Parise and Bochenski). If (a big one) everyone stays, next year would finally have a team with experienced forwards on the scoring lines, as all those names above save for Genoway would be back. Of course, all the defensemen will be freshmen, but what can you do? I'm honestly still looking to this year, though, and hoping for the long-awaited revival. --------------------------- Calder was one of my favorites. The line extends to Notermann, then it was supposed to go to Canady, then McMahon. Unfortunately, none have had the combination of grit and scoring that Calder had.

sprig, I'm curious if the big defenseman for SSM, Dowzak, stood out. He's supposed to be a giant, with pretty good feet. I think he's from the Fergus area, so sort of a tweener for UND and MN. (I'll bet he's never been called a tweener before).

To be fair, the following players were recruited before Hakstol arrived at UND: Schneider - 11/99 Fuher - 11/99 Connelly - 1/00 Canady - 2/00 Brandt - 3/00 The following committed after the assistants turned over (Sandelin and Bowen out, Berry and Hakstol in) Jones - 9/00 McMahon - 11/00 Faul - 11/00 Fournier - 12/00 Massen - 12/00 Genoway - 1/01 Bochenski - 3/01 There are four good to great college players in the class Hakstol recruited (and two busts and one enigma (Massen)). That's not really too bad. We also have no idea how involved Hakstol was in recruiting this class, since he had just started. As for the junior class, it was only four players deep: Parise Greene Prpich - solid role-player; great late pickup Marvin - legacy utility man, doubt there's much money involved I have no issues with the junior class. There is no disputing the lack of production from the senior forwards, though, and that has been the big problem, with only three of them becoming good college players (McMahon, Genoway, Bochenski).