scpa0305 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Informed that Murphy was on a line with Pattyn and Schmaltz and St.C was with Chyz and Poolman. That was from Monday's practice obviously it could change as we go forward this week. Interesting. I was wondering if Murph would get another look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cberkas Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Really hoping the coaches at least entertain the notion of a Cagg/Schmaltz/Parks line. They were together last weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yelo09 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 I remember Schlossman saying St. Clair will be ready this weekend and he fully expects him to play(or something along those lines). So I think St. Clair takes Murphy's spot. If St. Clair is healthy, he plays....I am thinking those former Force guys may be playing with a little extra edge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InHeavenThereIsNoBeer Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Informed that Murphy was on a line with Pattyn and Schmaltz and St.C was with Chyz and Poolman. That was from Monday's practice obviously it could change as we go forward this week. That Murphy-Schmaltz-Pattyn lines seems odd to me, but they must see something in practice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoneySIOUX Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Informed that Murphy was on a line with Pattyn and Schmaltz and St.C was with Chyz and Poolman. That was from Monday's practice obviously it could change as we go forward this week. That Murphy-Schmaltz-Pattyn lines seems odd to me, but they must see something in practice. Ugh. So much has been made of Murphy being "so good in practice"... It just hasn't translated come game time. I'd must rather see a guy like Saint in and Olson, too. Simo I think is a lock at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlop Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Realize that injuries dictate some of the change, but it sure has the feel of Hak getting too cute with the lines at the wrong time of year. Load up the top 2 lines, have the Gaarder O'Donnel Pog line as a rock solid 3rd line, and have a 4th line that plays rarely if at all. There are 4 games left....not 4 months...time to ride the clydesdales. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Realize that injuries dictate some of the change, but it sure has the feel of Hak getting too cute with the lines at the wrong time of year. Load up the top 2 lines, have the Gaarder O'Donnel Pog line as a rock solid 3rd line, and have a 4th line that plays rarely if at all. There are 4 games left....not 4 months...time to ride the clydesdales. I honestly think that is what he will do however what would be a "loaded two lines"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feff Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 To me the two loaded lines are Cagg/Schmaltz/Parks and OD/Gaarder/Poganski. After that it's a crapshoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 To me the two loaded lines are Cagg/Schmaltz/Parks and OD/Gaarder/Poganski. After that it's a crapshoot. As long as your remaining lines aren't a total liability. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 I think we need to get back to getting bodies in front of the net, and letting our D get some clean shots off. Defensive scoring has been big for us all year. I think Mattson has a big weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
as15 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Hakstol is going to shake things up a bit this weekend, here is the whole lineup he will go with (purely speculation): Mattson-Caggiula-Parks Poolman-Schmaltz-Johnson O'Donnell-Gaarder-Poganski Pattyn-Simonson-St. Clair Schmaltz-LaDue Stecher-Ausmus Thompson-Panzarella Roll 4 lines, ride the two top pairings. Need more skill up front. If it doesn't work, Panz has more than enough experience at forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Anyone else feel like the coaches should give Johnson a stick that was maybe an inch longer? He could have 20 goals rather than 20 whiffs on the season. Seriously though, LJ is a guy they need to step up and be an impact player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxForever Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Anyone else feel like the coaches should give Johnson a stick that was maybe an inch longer? He could have 20 goals rather than 20 whiffs on the season. Seriously though, LJ is a guy they need to step up and be an impact player. What do you mean? His stick is very large for his height. He more than likely is already using a longer stick. He's only 5'11 or 6 ft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InHeavenThereIsNoBeer Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Hakstol is going to shake things up a bit this weekend, here is the whole lineup he will go with (purely speculation): Mattson-Caggiula-Parks Poolman-Schmaltz-Johnson O'Donnell-Gaarder-Poganski Pattyn-Simonson-St. Clair Schmaltz-LaDue Stecher-Ausmus Thompson-Panzarella Roll 4 lines, ride the two top pairings. Need more skill up front. If it doesn't work, Panz has more than enough experience at forward. I don't believe Mattson has played a game at forward his entire UND career, don't think he'll start now. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Naturally, hosting in the Ralph would have been tremendous, but it should still be a pretty solid environment in Scheels. I am hoping that with the size of the building, it may actually get louder in there. Can anyone offer a comparison of the size or build of the arena to the old Ralph? I never made it to a game there but I always hear it was a really intimidating environment. Does Scheels compare in size, or was the old Ralph still way bigger? The old Ralph was around 6,000. Sheels arena hold 5000 for hockey, howerver there will be a lot more than that when you add up the standing room. Having been in both I would sa that they are very comparable. The old Ralph was a little bigger in terms of the size of the building and the height of the rood. Scheels is a bit more intimate with a lower roof. It has the potential to get pretty loud in there if we get a couple early goals on Friday night. The atmoshpere will deffinitely bring back some momories of the Old Ralph! Hopefully we can harness some of the old magic the old Ralph brough as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Hakstol is going to shake things up a bit this weekend, here is the whole lineup he will go with (purely speculation): Mattson-Caggiula-Parks Poolman-Schmaltz-Johnson O'Donnell-Gaarder-Poganski Pattyn-Simonson-St. Clair Schmaltz-LaDue Stecher-Ausmus Thompson-Panzarella Roll 4 lines, ride the two top pairings. Need more skill up front. If it doesn't work, Panz has more than enough experience at forward. WTF? Mattson at F? Also, your last two sentences are contradicting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 What do you mean? His stick is very large for his height. He more than likely is already using a longer stick. He's only 5'11 or 6 ft. I was joking. Eluding to the fact that the kids swings and misses more than anyone I've seen. He has a hell of a shot when he doesn't lose control of the puck. If he can get a handle on the puck, he could really increase he scoring. Definitely some power behind his wrist shot though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoneySIOUX Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Hakstol is going to shake things up a bit this weekend, here is the whole lineup he will go with (purely speculation): Mattson-Caggiula-Parks Poolman-Schmaltz-Johnson O'Donnell-Gaarder-Poganski Pattyn-Simonson-St. Clair Schmaltz-LaDue Stecher-Ausmus Thompson-Panzarella Roll 4 lines, ride the two top pairings. Need more skill up front. If it doesn't work, Panz has more than enough experience at forward. I don't believe Mattson has played a game at forward his entire UND career, don't think he'll start now. Yeah, sorry, but not a chance a senior defenseman who's scored the team's leading point total since Christmas moves from the point for the first time in his career in the NCAA tournament lol. Also, moving Panz to forward doesn't add more skill. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
90siouxfan Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Hell, let's put 5 defensemen on the ice for opening faceoff and really mess with heads, you can speculate whose head I am referring too, but it will give the boards some material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
as15 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 WTF? Mattson at F? Also, your last two sentences are contradicting. "Need more skill up front"=Mattson at forward. "If it doesn't work" (meaning Mattson at forward) "Panz has more than enough experience at forward". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
as15 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Yeah, sorry, but not a chance a senior defenseman who's scored the team's leading point total since Christmas moves from the point for the first time in his career in the NCAA tournament lol. Also, moving Panz to forward doesn't add more skill. "Need more skill up front"=Mattson at forward. "If it doesn't work" (meaning Mattson at forward) "Panz has more than enough experience at forward". Jake Marto played defenseman basically his whole career, but played 2nd line LW for down the stretch in 2010-2011. Similar situation in the sense that 8 of the top 18 skater's on the team are defenseman. Mattson is our best offensive player right now, something absolutely needs to change with our forward group (either personnel, or play) if this team is going to get out of the regional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jk Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 The team is deep with athletic guys who can generate good chances through hard work and straight-up hockey plays, like shots from the point through traffic, etc. The only line I felt could have been "loaded up" this year, and one I expected to see in the NCAA tournament, was Mac-Parks-Caggiula. Mac's gone, and I really think Caggiula is not 100%, so I don't think there's any loading up to do. Just roll lines and tell them to play hard. And get dynamic offensive contributions from that slick defense. And turn opposing Grade A chances into Grade B chances, as they did all year long until last weekend, when they gave out Grade A's like candy at a parade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoneySIOUX Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 "Need more skill up front"=Mattson at forward. "If it doesn't work" (meaning Mattson at forward) "Panz has more than enough experience at forward". Jake Marto played defenseman basically his whole career, but played 2nd line LW for down the stretch in 2010-2011. Similar situation in the sense that 8 of the top 18 skater's on the team are defenseman. Mattson is our best offensive player right now, something absolutely needs to change with our forward group (either personnel, or play) if this team is going to get out of the regional. How long will we have to figure out if the Mattson experiment will work? 1 period? It's win or go home. So then if it didn't work, you'd move Panz there and completely make the Mattson experiment irrelevant. By that move, you reduce all-around skill on the forward group when improving skill was the reason for the move in the first place. It's just not gonna happen. Marto had a bunch of games down the stretch to get ready for that kind of change. Throwing Mattson in as a F in the NCAA tournament is just too risky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 How long will we have to figure out if the Mattson experiment will work? 1 period? It's win or go home. So then if it didn't work, you'd move Panz there and completely make the Mattson experiment irrelevant. By that move, you reduce all-around skill on the forward group when improving skill was the reason for the move in the first place. It's just not gonna happen. Marto had a bunch of games down the stretch to get ready for that kind of change. Throwing Mattson in as a F in the NCAA tournament is just too risky. ...and not overly smart. This isn't a video game, Mattson is 100% a D, not a F. The offense he provides is from the point, I can almost guarentee he would be useless up front, he's a little too timid. He needs time and space to operate. In the offensive zone, the offense is designed to play on the walls and in the corners. I don't think mattson would have the grit to play there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InHeavenThereIsNoBeer Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 "Need more skill up front"=Mattson at forward. "If it doesn't work" (meaning Mattson at forward) "Panz has more than enough experience at forward". Jake Marto played defenseman basically his whole career, but played 2nd line LW for down the stretch in 2010-2011. Similar situation in the sense that 8 of the top 18 skater's on the team are defenseman. Mattson is our best offensive player right now, something absolutely needs to change with our forward group (either personnel, or play) if this team is going to get out of the regional. If it "doesn't work" the season is over. Jake and Mattson's situations are apples and oranges. While we're at it why not throw Jordan Schmaltz up to Forward? Parks seems physical and maybe could play some D so they could switch spots throughout the game if it doesn't work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.