Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, stoneySIOUX said:

So, are you hoping for him to come out and tell you/us out of this? That just isn't going to happen.

Wasn’t expecting all the details but it would be nice if the head coach would give us some info on what direction this program is going.

Posted
21 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Serious Question: Did this start with Hakstol before he left or is it mainly a Berry problem?

Great question - in my opinion it is really hard to asses, but for sure some of the dead weight were in the pipeline under Hak.  My opinion is that Hak had a great knack of adding to his classes with some real studs added later in the process (see Schmaltzs and Boesser - try to imagine a championship without them).  Berry has not shown much in this area.  In addition, with the necessity to recruit younger and younger we have to constantly update and juggle our classes as their more mature performances show out.  If Hak were here I really don't see us just standing pat either with our recruiting class or with keeping the dead weight on the roster.  Berry seems to be content to just stand pat. We also seem to have lost out on several recruiting battles lately -   This is just my two cents. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
59 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Serious Question: Did this start with Hakstol before he left or is it mainly a Berry problem?

Berry and Hak worked together to recruit. Sure, we can put the onus on the HC, but they both had a hand. So, we can put Jost on both Bubbs and Hak, but we can also put Hoff on both, as well, IMO. If I'm not mistaken, the first true "Bubbs class" is the Kawaguchi, Mismash, Adams class. So, it's all Bubbs (and crew) from here on out.

Posted
Just now, siouxforce19 said:

Guch was a Berry recruit, but the others in that class were largely committed under Hak. This upcoming freshman class will be the first class that 100% committed completely under Berry. Harrison Blaisdell and Judd Caulfield were the first to commit post 2016 National Championship. 

Thanks for clarifying that!

Posted
4 minutes ago, siouxforce19 said:

Guch was a Berry recruit, but the others in that class were largely committed under Hak. This upcoming freshman class will be the first class that 100% committed completely under Berry. Harrison Blaisdell and Judd Caulfield were the first recruits to commit post 2016 National Championship. 

That is good to know. Thanks!

Posted

My personal theory is this.  That starting around 2010 or 2011 you really started seeing some of the "bluebloods" in college hockey (including us) taking commitments from kids who were 15 or 16 years old.  Honestly, most of the time you miss on those guys.  Yeah there are the Schmaltz's and Boeser's of the world out there, but they are few and far between.

Go back and look at Chris Heisenberg's recruits lists for those years.  The guys who ended up here and who ended up playing often committed at age 17-19.  The lists are littered with people who committed to us at 15 or 16 and never crossed the Red River.  Cakebread, Evers, Rowe, Pelnik, Mitch Mattson, etc...

We're not alone in that, which is why I think you've seen teams like Michigan, Minnesota, BC, (and now us) struggle a bit recently.

I predict we'll see a lot fewer 16 year old recruits.

Posted
1 hour ago, SJHovey said:

My personal theory is this.  That starting around 2010 or 2011 you really started seeing some of the "bluebloods" in college hockey (including us) taking commitments from kids who were 15 or 16 years old.  Honestly, most of the time you miss on those guys.  Yeah there are the Schmaltz's and Boeser's of the world out there, but they are few and far between.

Go back and look at Chris Heisenberg's recruits lists for those years.  The guys who ended up here and who ended up playing often committed at age 17-19.  The lists are littered with people who committed to us at 15 or 16 and never crossed the Red River.  Cakebread, Evers, Rowe, Pelnik, Mitch Mattson, etc...

We're not alone in that, which is why I think you've seen teams like Michigan, Minnesota, BC, (and now us) struggle a bit recently.

I predict we'll see a lot fewer 16 year old recruits.

Which IMO would be a mistake. Look at the NTDP camp going on right now, most are already committed and are currently the best players in the country in that age group. Can and will that change? Definitely, some will drop off and others will ascend. You'll still see a fair amount of those kids as the best in two years.

To me, the recruiting philosophy should be going after the best 15 / 16 year old recruits and monitor from there. It's much easier to part ways with a recruit that didn't materialize and like you mentioned, there's a lot of them, then it is to find the next game changer at a later date. To be honest, it's kind of how things have been. 

It's been brought up ad nauseam, but it's true. I'm convinced this is a one class mess that was kind of a perfect storm. Misstep that had local players with the combination of Berry's nice guy personality and couldn't make the tough decisions to make changes when he should have. 

Posted

Kawaguchi - Blaisdell - Pinto

Mismash - Rizzo - Caulfield

Hain - Senden - Smith

Adams - Hoff - Bowen

Keane - Weatherby - Yon - Johnson

 

Here's a crack on next year lineup, still only two true Right Wingers on this team Pinto and Caulfield.  I read a lot about dropping dead weight on this team, does this really happen in college hockey?

Posted

Kawaguchi - Blaisdell - Pinto

Mismash - Rizzo - Adams

Hain - Senden - Smith

Caulfield - Weatherby - Bowen

Hoff - Keane - Albrechdt (Sp) - Yon - Johnson

Just like the last couple of years, I actually like the forward group on paper. We'll see if it finally translates. Mix and match the high end freshman with the experienced forwards with talent until it works. Like most, I have high expectations for this Freshman class, give them a lot of ice time and a chance to acclimate. The most important part is they are bringing talent, which this forward group lacked last year.

Posted
2 hours ago, UNDBIZ said:

He was a senior. 

Not sure when the last game took place that he played, but he may be eligible to apply for an extra season.  My understanding is that if he played less than 50% of the games and did not play in the second half of the season, he could possibly be allowed to play another season.

Posted
8 minutes ago, fsioux said:

Not sure when the last game took place that he played, but he may be eligible to apply for an extra season.  My understanding is that if he played less than 50% of the games and did not play in the second half of the season, he could possibly be allowed to play another season.

He last played January 4, at Canisius. I think because of that, he’s not eligible. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, siouxforce19 said:

He last played January 4, at Canisius. I think because of that, he’s not eligible. 

Playing in that game by my understanding would have disqualified him.  A lot of ifs ands, and buts for this past season.

Posted
1 hour ago, siouxforce19 said:

He last played January 4, at Canisius. I think because of that, he’s not eligible. 

I already asked JJ has played too many games. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Goon said:

I already asked JJ has played too many games. 

According to what I can find, JJ played in 14 of our 37 games this season.  The number of games would not disqualify him because he played in less than 50% of the games.  However, he played on Jan. 4 against Canisius which was our 19th game of the season and thus the start of our second half which disqualified him. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...