UND at Denver

[GForks]

1 minute ago, Irish said:

It's lack of talent up front - pure and simple.  Teams can get snakebit for a game, maybe 2 or 3 in a row, but not for two plus seasons.  The game is faster here and we don't have guys who can keep up.  We don't have the speed or puck skills.  Watch our "Power" Play - when pressured we have an extremely hard time even gaining the zone and setting up.  When we do, we spend an enormous amount of time teeing it up out front - the defense always has time to adjust - we don't have the skills for quick passes and movement.  Of the top 50 freshman scorers in the country there are NO UND players - none.  There is absolutely no excuse for this lack of talent at our school - none.  This with the best facilities, fans, history in the country 3 years after our 8th National Championship.  All "culture" no talent.  It's nice we have guys who will support a teammate in a mile run.   It would be much nicer if we had guys who could also score.  Berry and company have a serious recruiting problem and we see the results on the ice.  Time for Berry to go.  If we are relying on next year's class to save us we are delusional. 

Agree with the fact that it's clearly a lack of talent at this level. However, I just am not sure how a bunch of the guys that were actually high scorers at a high junior level all of the sudden can't produce. Janatuinen, Hoff, Mismash, Adams all put up basically right around a point per game in the USHL.

[Irish]

1 minute ago, GForks said:

Agree with the fact that it's clearly a lack of talent at this level. However, I just am not sure how a bunch of the guys that were actually high scorers at a high junior level all of the sudden can't produce. Janatuinen, Hoff, Mismash, Adams all put up basically right around a point per game in the USHL.

Agree that it is somewhat of a mystery - I think Berry and crew are seriously misjudging who can perform at the next level. There are guys in every sport who cant adjust to the next level - we seem to be getting all of them.   No one can be snakebit for their entire career - let alone everyone. 

[GForks]

1 minute ago, Irish said:

Agree that it is somewhat of a mystery - I think Berry and crew are seriously misjudging who can perform at the next level. There are guys in every sport who cant adjust to the next level - we seem to be getting all of them.   No one can be snakebit for their entire career - let alone everyone. 

I don't know if it's just Berry on those guys though. I believe every one of them was pretty highly sought after by all the top schools. It's not like we were the only ones after them. I'm not saying that makes it any better, just adds to the mystery in my mind.

[Cratter]

It's not that these guys are "that bad." This team is just missing that one or two Grade A players that make everyone around them better. 

"Janatuinen, Hoff, Mismash, Adams," While decent players, aren't players you can build National Championship (or apparently even a NCAA birth ) rosters around.

 

[GForks]

1 minute ago, Cratter said:

It's not that these guys are "that bad." This team is just missing that one or two Grade A players that make everyone around them better. 

"Janatuinen, Hoff, Mismash, Adams," While decent players aren't players you can build National Championship rosters around alone.

 

To clarify, I used those 4 names as guys brought in as "top 6" guys that don't produce like top 6 guys.

[SIOUXELEVENS]

On our power play why don’t we put two guys in front of the net and bomb away, if we can’t tick tack toe then back to the basics, put 26, 22 or 14 in front of the net.

[franchise]

Another loss, and more talk of puck luck?

At some point, everyone will have to accept what this team is.

[gfhockey]

Plain and simple. We ran into a hit goalie

[Oldguy]

#hot-goalie, #puck-luck, #can't-finish-to-save-their-lives

[Oxbow6]

9 minutes ago, gfhockey said:

Plain and simple. We ran into a hit goalie

Yup.......that's typically the case or excuse, depending on one's angle, for any UND loss when our shooting % hovers around 7-9%.

[franchise]

1 minute ago, Oxbow6 said:

Yup.......that's typically the case or excuse, depending on one's angle, for any UND loss when our shooting % hovers around 7-9%.

No doubt that UND wins if Jost were playing...I mean, Poolman

[Oxbow6]

This USHL scoring as it should translate to the NCAA needs to stop. 

[Wilbur]

6 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

This USHL scoring as it should translate to the NCAA needs to stop. 

You mean Simonson wasn't a top 6 guy?  His year in Lincoln told me otherwise.  Lot of bad bounces I guess.  

[Oxbow6]

30 minutes ago, franchise said:

Another loss, and more talk of puck luck?

At some point, everyone will have to accept what this team is.

26 games into the season and UND is one game above .500 and most observers fall in line that the only stat that matters is wins or losses.........

 

[Oxbow6]

13 minutes ago, franchise said:

No doubt that UND wins if Jost were playing...I mean, Poolman

UND at least earns a tie if those two played last night.

[GForks]

10 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

This USHL scoring as it should translate to the NCAA needs to stop. 

I'm going to disagree with you here. The USHL is the top junior league in North America. It obviously isn't a apples to apples comparison, but I would say in general if you are a top offensive guy in the ushl, it will translate into at least a fairly productive college career.

[Oxbow6]

If I had to put gfhockey's money on the game tonight I'd bet on UND winning. After watching UND get dismantled last Friday vs SCSU they then come back and play terrific the next night and get the win. Wouldn't be surprise if that happened again tonight.

[SIOUXELEVENS]

Jekyll and Hyde 

[Wilbur]

For home ice purposes it's almost a must win game.  And we know how this group finishes their chances in must wins.....

I think a better Denver team shows up tonight and beats UND 4-1. 

[fightingsioux4life]

11 hours ago, MafiaMan said:

Your two favorite random assumptions:

1)  Hakstol would have never won a national title.  No reason why not, just because he is cursed or has never won a title at any level.

2)  We’re all OK with a string of down years as long as a natty comes around once a decade — as if that natty is guaranteed to happen.

This is a false choice.

This isn't an either/or question: 1 NCAA title and years of mediocrity vs. O NCAA titles and years of 25+ wins.

The idea is to have a consistent winner and also win NCAA titles when all the pieces are in place to do so, which isn't the case every year.

That shouldn't be a problem at UND. The fact that it is should bother people. But it doesn't seem to right now.

There is a high school mentality in this athletic department right now (as long as the kids work hard, play hard and get good grades, nothing else matters).

And as long as we have that, we won't win anything in any sport anytime soon.

[scpa0305]

2 hours ago, GForks said:

Look at the shot chart from last night and tell me all the shots were from the perimeter. Especially in the first period when they dominated. I count at least 10 shots that resulted in saves in the first period alone that were from between the circles and below the faceoff dot.

I watched the game.  Everything starts at the point when it should be the other way around.  90% of those closer shots result after the defensive player already has taken the perimeter shot.  Either one of our forward scrambled to retrieve it and fire something on net.  It’s not a “quality scoring chance”.  Name me one time the forwards were able to create something themselves that didn’t appear to be 4th line grind material.  Any backdoor passes? Creating space and finding an open forward in the slot?  Never.  When the forwards get the puck they only look to get it back for a perimeter shot.  100% of the time.

we had a couple scoring opportunities last night.  Should have more than a couple every period.

[GForks]

7 minutes ago, scpa0305 said:

I watched the game.  Everything starts at the point when it should be the other way around.  90% of those closer shots result after the defensive player already has taken the perimeter shot.  Either one of our forward scrambled to retrieve it and fire something on net.  It’s not a “quality scoring chance”.  Name me one time the forwards were able to create something themselves that didn’t appear to be 4th line grind material.  Any backdoor passes? Creating space and finding an open forward in the slot?  Never.  When the forwards get the puck they only look to get it back for a perimeter shot.  100% of the time.

we had a couple scoring opportunities last night.  Should have more than a couple every period.

I also watched the whole game. Regardless of if the shot originated at the point or not, I would consider a rebound attempt from in the slot to be a quality scoring chance. This team is not talented enough in general to be looking for backdoor passes or beating a defender one on one to find an open forward in the slot. We don't have a Nick Schmaltz or anything in the same stratosphere. We don't have a Brock Boeser or anything in the same stratosphere. Our d are the team's best asset, why wouldn't they use that to their advantage?

Based on the above, unless a player creates it themselves or it's a tic-tac-toe play, do you not consider it a "scoring opportunity"? Look, I'm as frustrated as anyone at the obvious lack of talent at forward on this team. It isn't puck luck, it's just that they aren't very good. But to suggest they should play a "prettier" style of hockey and look for backdoor passes, or creating their own space and finding an open forward...I'm sorry, I just can't agree with that for this year's team.

[Oxbow6]

8-9-1

UND's record when outshooting opponents by double digits

[SiouxBoys]

2 hours ago, GForks said:

Agree with the fact that it's clearly a lack of talent at this level. However, I just am not sure how a bunch of the guys that were actually high scorers at a high junior level all of the sudden can't produce. Janatuinen, Hoff, Mismash, Adams all put up basically right around a point per game in the USHL.

Because scoring isn't something that just translates no matter what level to level. There are plenty of examples of players who weren't big point producers in juniors and something clicked once they reached college, and vice versa. It's all about recognizing who can bring it at the next level and who can't. This staff is having a seriously tough time doing that and it's not down to just "puck luck".

[GForks]

Just now, SiouxBoys said:

Because scoring isn't something that just translates no matter what level to level. There are plenty of examples of players who weren't big point producers in juniors and something clicked once they reached college, and vice versa. It's all about recognizing who can bring it at the next level and who can't. This staff is having a seriously tough time doing that and it's not down to just "puck luck".

I understand it doesn't just translate by default. They swung and (so far) missed on all four of those guys. To go 0 for 4 isn't normal. Again, the part I struggle with is it's not like UND's staff is the only staff who wanted these guys. Every top school did. That does not make it any better or easier to swallow. It makes it more confusing as to how it happened to everyone they got.