COMMITTED UND Recruits

[tho0505]

9 hours ago, AJS said:

No inside information, but I wouldn't worry about JBD not being here in the fall. Guys like JBD, Tychonick, Jost (next year Rizzo, Blaisdell) all made the conscious decision to play Junior A instead of CHL to go the college route. 

The guys UND has had trouble with all came from one program and had no local ties. 

There's nothing to worry about with jbd..  He's super young and defensemen typically take longer to develop than forwards anyways. Will have him for two plus years. A good example is Maker and Fabbro. Both crazy high first-round picks and both will play 2 years of college. 

[tho0505]

http://collegehockeyinc.com/2018-nhl-draft-picks.php

Nice reference for college committed or current NCAA players taken in the 2018 draft.

For incoming defenseman, UND has the 2nd and 4th taken players in the draft. UND proud baby!

 

[Cratter]

Another impressive draft for Boston University.

[tnt]

1 hour ago, tho0505 said:

There's nothing to worry about with jbd..  He's super young and defensemen typically take longer to develop than forwards anyways. Will have him for two plus years. A good example is Maker and Fabbro. Both crazy high first-round picks and both will play 2 years of college. 

Isn’t Fabbro playing his third year?

[tnt]

This draft is a perfect example why blue chip being defined as first round as flawed. Every team had different players rated higher from 12 or so through 50, so each saw players between those numbers as blue chip.  There were fans that lamented us not getting Bode Wilde, yet not only did JBD go higher, Wilde isn’t going to Michigan anyway.  The fact that a standing All American player like Perunovich wouldn’t be considered blue chip further illustrates that point.

[Cratter]

34 minutes ago, tnt said:

This draft is a perfect example why blue chip being defined as first round as flawed. Every team had different players rated higher from 12 or so through 50, so each saw players between those numbers as blue chip.  There were fans that lamented us not getting Bode Wilde, yet not only did JBD go higher, Wilde isn’t going to Michigan anyway.  The fact that a standing All American player like Perunovich wouldn’t be considered blue chip further illustrates that point.

That means the "real blue chips" were 1-12 "or so" this year.

[tho0505]

1 hour ago, tnt said:

This draft is a perfect example why blue chip being defined as first round as flawed. Every team had different players rated higher from 12 or so through 50, so each saw players between those numbers as blue chip.  There were fans that lamented us not getting Bode Wilde, yet not only did JBD go higher, Wilde isn’t going to Michigan anyway.  The fact that a standing All American player like Perunovich wouldn’t be considered blue chip further illustrates that point.

Exactly! When you only look at draft ranking it's completely flawed as it relates to college hockey. The bulk of players drafted aren't even college eligible. This is exactly why I posted that we took two of the top four incoming defensive players from this draft. 

There are far too many comments ripping on our recruiting just on the basis of a draft position. With that thinking, fans would throw a player like Drake caggiula or Wolanin to the curb.  Draft position is only one element of evaluating a college bound player and building a team. 

 

[tho0505]

1 hour ago, Cratter said:

That means the "real blue chips" were 1-12 "or so" this year.

As Hughes and Tkachuk are sophomores to be, in other words, ZERO incoming college recruits were"blue chippers?!"

[Cratter]

21 minutes ago, tho0505 said:

As Hughes and Tkachuk are sophomores to be, in other words, ZERO incoming college recruits were"blue chippers?!"

 Oliver Wahlstrom is an incoming college blue chip for Boston College.

Most like to draw the line at "First Rounders" to be nice and include a few more players.

 

[tho0505]

25 minutes ago, Cratter said:

 Oliver Wahlstrom is an incoming college blue chip for Boston College.

Most like to draw the line at "First Rounders" to be nice and include a few more players.

 

Yeah missed Oliver at 11. I was referring to the 1-12 picks only being blue chips as implied. So one I guess?!  

Not until recently, most years there are only three or four college bound players going in the first round.  Again, just basing college recruiting and a definition solely based on draft position is shortsighted. This doesn't factor in the amount of major Junior and international players going high in the draft (thus pushing down college players down the board).  

 

[Cratter]

42 minutes ago, tho0505 said:

Yeah missed Oliver at 11. I was referring to the 1-12 picks only being blue chips as implied. So one I guess?!  

Not until recently, most years there are only three or four college bound players going in the first round.  Again, just basing college recruiting and a definition solely based on draft position is shortsighted. This doesn't factor in the amount of major Junior and international players going high in the draft (thus pushing down college players down the board).  

Some times the blue chips pick college hockey, some times they pick Major Juniors.

It differs every year. But more and more are picking the college route which is great to see and only hope continues.

Seven first rounders this year are playing or will be playing college hockey next year. That's great to see!

[Irish]

2 hours ago, tho0505 said:

Exactly! When you only look at draft ranking it's completely flawed as it relates to college hockey. The bulk of players drafted aren't even college eligible. This is exactly why I posted that we took two of the top four incoming defensive players from this draft. 

There are far too many comments ripping on our recruiting just on the basis of a draft position. With that thinking, fans would throw a player like Drake caggiula or Wolanin to the curb.  Draft position is only one element of evaluating a college bound player and building a team. 

 

I hear what you are saying, but I think we are making too much of the term "blue chippers".  Look at the championship team - we were loaded with studs whether it was first rounders (Schmaltz an Boesser) or undrafted (Cajula).  The point is we were loaded with talent and have been for at least the past 10 years.  Guys with pro aspirations wanted to come here if they went the college route.  The recruiting complaints started when we had a blank sophomore (next year's junior) class.  Watching last years team was night and day talent-wise from our championship year.  On offense we were brutal.  So ya, after a championship season fans expect more talent to want to come here, not less.  Many feel that given our program, facilities, fans, and tradition we should be in the running for almost all top talent and get more than our share.  Sounds like we are starting to do that again.  

[scpa0305]

16 hours ago, Irish said:

I hear what you are saying, but I think we are making too much of the term "blue chippers".  Look at the championship team - we were loaded with studs whether it was first rounders (Schmaltz an Boesser) or undrafted (Cajula).  The point is we were loaded with talent and have been for at least the past 10 years.  Guys with pro aspirations wanted to come here if they went the college route.  The recruiting complaints started when we had a blank sophomore (next year's junior) class.  Watching last years team was night and day talent-wise from our championship year.  On offense we were brutal.  So ya, after a championship season fans expect more talent to want to come here, not less.  Many feel that given our program, facilities, fans, and tradition we should be in the running for almost all top talent and get more than our share.  Sounds like we are starting to do that again.  

A team can’t have 4-5 blue chip 18 year olds and that’s it.  Not in today’s college hockey.  Need to have a blend of blue chips/higher end players and some overage grind players that wear a team down.  Look at the last three national champions.

[Irish]

1 hour ago, scpa0305 said:

A team can’t have 4-5 blue chip 18 year olds and that’s it.  Not in today’s college hockey.  Need to have a blend of blue chips/higher end players and some overage grind players that wear a team down.  Look at the last three national champions.

Totally agree, but I feel high end talent is needed also - take away Boesser and Schmaltz from the title season and see what you would have.   We can't afford classes without any high-end talent either.  Watching last year's team try score was brutal.  

[tnt]

9 minutes ago, Irish said:

Totally agree, but I feel high end talent is needed also - take away Boesser and Schmaltz from the title season and see what you would have.   We can't afford classes without any high-end talent either.  Watching last year's team try score was brutal.  

We definitely had trouble scoring at times last year, but so did Duluth down the stretch, and like us their leading scorer was a defenseman, a freshman one at that. They also had a first rounder that was a sophomore. I guarantee that if we had a sophomore first rounder last year (Jost), we score a lot more and we don’t have a defenseman lead our team in scoring.

 

[SiouxForever]

2 minutes ago, tnt said:

We definitely had trouble scoring at times last year, but so did Duluth down the stretch, and like us their leading scorer was a defenseman, a freshman one at that. They also had a first rounder that was a sophomore. I guarantee that if we had a sophomore first rounder last year (Jost), we score a lot more and we don’t have a defenseman lead our team in scoring.

 

Jost stays too, (pretty confident) they a win a few more games and make the natty. 

[AJS]

20 minutes ago, Irish said:

Totally agree, but I feel high end talent is needed also - take away Boesser and Schmaltz from the title season and see what you would have.   We can't afford classes without any high-end talent either.  Watching last year's team try score was brutal.  

Correct. 

I have never seen anyone say that you don't need players to fill different roles, because you definitely do. That being said, where this team is currently in trouble (in my opinion) is you should never recruit more "depth guys" than players you see being impact scorers. It's much more likely that a guy you see being an offensive player doesn't materialize into that role, then someone you bring in specifically for depth or to play a defensive game to be an impact scorer.

I pick on this class a lot, but the soon to be junior class is a problem right now. Counting Johnson as a Forward (which I know he wasn't brought in to be), you have 5 guys in that class that combined for an entire 12 goals last year. You had Jost (elite), Hoff (expected to make an offensive impact) and then Bowen, Yon and Smith who based on their junior performance couldn't have been brought in as potential impact scorers, but more defensive / depth guys. That's 2 out of 5 who fit the "offensive" role. Hoff took a step back and now you have 4 guys from that original class that aren't bringing any offense. That's a problem.

We'll wait and see, but luckily it's a smaller class, but when you look at the incoming Freshman it's a 2 / 2 split, I think that's a problem too.

You need a mix, but you need more players that can score than can't. 

[Fetch]

I don't know how many more winters my body can take winters here 

I think I have had season tickets for 34 yrs - I want a yr where we totally dominate & have the best at all positions 

[Irish]

58 minutes ago, AJS said:

Correct. 

I have never seen anyone say that you don't need players to fill different roles, because you definitely do. That being said, where this team is currently in trouble (in my opinion) is you should never recruit more "depth guys" than players you see being impact scorers. It's much more likely that a guy you see being an offensive player doesn't materialize into that role, then someone you bring in specifically for depth or to play a defensive game to be an impact scorer.

I pick on this class a lot, but the soon to be junior class is a problem right now. Counting Johnson as a Forward (which I know he wasn't brought in to be), you have 5 guys in that class that combined for an entire 12 goals last year. You had Jost (elite), Hoff (expected to make an offensive impact) and then Bowen, Yon and Smith who based on their junior performance couldn't have been brought in as potential impact scorers, but more defensive / depth guys. That's 2 out of 5 who fit the "offensive" role. Hoff took a step back and now you have 4 guys from that original class that aren't bringing any offense. That's a problem.

We'll wait and see, but luckily it's a smaller class, but when you look at the incoming Freshman it's a 2 / 2 split, I think that's a problem too.

You need a mix, but you need more players that can score than can't. 

Totally agree - I think what got many posters going is the idea that maybe the Junior class wasn't just bad luck but a change in recruiting philosophy.  We have plenty of grinders right now.  What we need are scorers. It really doesn't matter what round they go in, but guys who can handle the puck, pass accurately, and hit the net (especially when it's wide open).  There is no reason we shouldn't be able to get plenty of these players.   

[burd]

1 hour ago, Irish said:

Totally agree - I think what got many posters going is the idea that maybe the Junior class wasn't just bad luck but a change in recruiting philosophy.  We have plenty of grinders right now.  What we need are scorers. It really doesn't matter what round they go in, but guys who can handle the puck, pass accurately, and hit the net (especially when it's wide open).  There is no reason we shouldn't be able to get plenty of these players.   

What I find surprising is that our coaches, with all their experience, haven't been trying to get plenty of players who can handle the puck, pass accurately, and score. 

[scpa0305]

2 hours ago, Irish said:

Totally agree, but I feel high end talent is needed also - take away Boesser and Schmaltz from the title season and see what you would have.   We can't afford classes without any high-end talent either.  Watching last year's team try score was brutal.  

That’s why I said a blend of high enders and role players

[Irish]

10 minutes ago, burd said:

What I find surprising is that our coaches, with all their experience, haven't been trying to get plenty of players who can handle the puck, pass accurately, and score. 

Nice sarcasm and I get your point.  However us diehard fans can point to our recruiting advantages over many schools - a strong tradition of winning and National Championships, the best arena in college hockey, lead the nation in attendance and fans travel like no other team, a proven record of turning out NHL talent, and coaches with player development experience, and probably the program with the best tradition in the country.  While every recruit is different, I like to think we have some recruiting advantages over many other schools.  Maybe I am wrong but I don't think so.  I do admit, however, that in my head I can't understand why anyone would want to go elsewhere so maybe I am overestimating our drawing power.  I know that the coaches are the experts, but I still don't get what happened to our Junior class.  

[Irish]

7 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:

That’s why I said a blend of high enders and role players

Not specifically directed at you, but at those in general who think there is too much emphasis on getting the high round draft picks.  

[tnt]

I will be watching guys like Tyler Weiss, who was drafted higher than Hain. Another guy that interested me was Grant Cruikshank who is going to CC.  The reason Senden is coming in is because another role player isn’t coming.  With the inequities we had last year I wouldn’t have minded if we would have made a late move for guys who might have a higher offensive upside, even if it meant stepping on a few toes.  

[Irish]

35 minutes ago, tnt said:

I will be watching guys like Tyler Weiss, who was drafted higher than Hain. Another guy that interested me was Grant Cruikshank who is going to CC.  The reason Senden is coming in is because another role player isn’t coming.  With the inequities we had last year I wouldn’t have minded if we would have made a late move for guys who might have a higher offensive upside, even if it meant stepping on a few toes.  

I believe Cruikshank was on our radar for quite a while - maybe even a verbal - what happened?