The SiouxSports.com WCHA Pre-Season Poll

[diggerdan]

Everyone rank the teams in order of predicted finish for the 2002-2003 either in the thread or by private message. I'll tally up the points on a 10,9,8 etc. basis and publish the results. Then I'll just sit back and wait for the publishing royalties to arrive.*

Here's mine:

1. Denver

2. Minnesota

3. St. Cloud

4. North Dakota

5. Colorado College

6. Anchorage

7. Duluth

8. Wisconsin

9. Mankato

10.Michigan Tech

* Don't worry Jim, you'll get your cut.

[dagies]

1. Mineesohta

2. Denver

3. UND

4. SCSU

5. AA

6. CC

7. Duluth

8. WI

9. Mankato

10. Tech

SCSU's early season defensive problems will put them in a position where they can't catch up in the last half, before the swoon. UND will have a solid season. Minnesota's goaltenders will prove to be solid and the rest of the team just too good to be beaten. Denver's defense not #1 caliber.

Anchorage has a good year, capitalizing on the strength (or lack of it) of the rest of the conference. CC has too many freshmen. Duluth represents my vote of confidence in Sandelin. WI is rebuilding, wait for a year or so...Mankato sucks and I hate them anyway. And so does Tech.

[NDHockey]

1. Minnesota

2. Denver

3. St. Cloud

4. North Dakota

5. Colorado College

6. Wisconsin

7. Duluth

8. Alaska-Anchorage

9. Michigan Tech

10. Mankato

[sprig]

1. Denver

2. SIOUX

3. Minnesota

4. SCSU

5. CC

6. Duluth

7. Wisconsin

8. Alaska-Anchorage

9. Michigan Tech

10. Mankato

[jimdahl]

At the fear of being unpopular for ranking the Sioux too low and the puppies too high:

1. St. Cloud

2. Minnesota

3. Denver

4. Colorado College

5. Wisconsin

6. North Dakota

7. Duluth

8. Alaska-Anchorage

9. Mankato

10. Michigan Tech

[dagies]

At the fear of being unpopular for ranking the Sioux too low and the puppies too high:

1. St. Cloud

2. Minnesota

3. Denver

4. Colorado College

5. Wisconsin

6. North Dakota

7. Duluth

8. Alaska-Anchorage

9. Mankato

10. Michigan Tech

Oh man that hurts. You better be wrong.

[HKNTSMN]

1. Denver

2. Minnesota

3. NORTH DAKOTA FIGHTING SIOUX (NATIONAL CHAMPS AGAIN?)

4. CC

5. SCSU

6. Wisconsin

7. Alaska-Anchorage

8. Mankato

9. Duluth

10. Michigan TECH

[OETKB]

Jim - Wisconsin ahead of UND? Whaz up!

1. Denver

2. Minnesota

3. UND - firepower up front is going to surprise people

4. SCSU

5. CC

6. Wisconsin

7. Mankato

8. UAA

9. Duluth

10. M. Tech

[Goon]

I have a question for everyone, why is SCSU getting so many votes, didn't two of their top guns get ruled inelgible?

Besides I think they have serious question on defense as well as Goalie. Just a thought.

[jimdahl]

I have a question for everyone, why is SCSU getting so many votes, didn't two of their top guns get ruled inelgible?

Besides I think they have serious question on defense as well as Goalie. Just a thought.

It's the old rule of basketball pools -- you don't win by following conventional wisdom or picking the top seeds for each game, sometimes you gotta make a guess.

I say the Badgers climb above the Sioux, though I suspect that will come down to the final games in Madison.

I don't really expect SCSU to win (even win you consider puppy power) but wanted to be more creative than guessing a Gopher repeat :O

[NDHockey]

I have a question for everyone, why is SCSU getting so many votes, didn't two of their top guns get ruled inelgible?

I think of the two players they lose in the first half only Eastman plays a significant role on their team. I don't think one player who isn't really a star is going to affect them that badly.

I'd like to put the Sioux higher but I see at least three teams that I think are better overall.

[kr]

1 Denver

2 CC

3 Minnesota

4 St Cloud

4 UND

6 Wisconsin

6 UMD

6 UAA

9 MTU

10 Mankato

[mksioux]

1. Minnesota

2. Colorado College

3. St. Cloud

4. Denver

5. North Dakota

6. UAA

7. Minnesota-Duluth

8. Wisconsin

9. Michigan Tech

10. Mankato

Minnesota is just too strong and will win easily (but maybe choke in the NCAA's???) I think the point gap between second and last will be much closer this year than in recent memory. I also think there will be ties somewhere in the standings, but my predictions factor in the tie-breakers. Many of the positions won't be determined until the last weekend of the regular season.

[jk]

Not to be usurping someone else's authority here, but so far for UND it's 4,3,4,2,6,3,3,4,5.

I think it's safe to say there aren't a lot of homer fans on this board (just Sprig). I hope the boys prove the doubters wrong by having a very good year.

I haven't posted my list yet, because I'm still trying to reconcile my heart with my head. For all the line combos we've drawn up (hey, at least we only use guys on the roster), everything's up in the air until a goalie steps up. If I recall correctly, the Sioux had some pretty good talent in the late 80s and early 90s that was undone by inadequate goaltending.

If someone steps up, though, it can really change not just the results but the way the team plays - with less fear and a more freewheeling attack. We will have to just wait and see.

Edit to note this to Sprig: I'm just having fun, but I hate to use those darn smilies, so I don't.

[jimdahl]

I haven't posted my list yet, because I'm still trying to reconcile my heart with my head. For all the line combos we've drawn up (hey, at least we only use guys on the roster), everything's up in the air until a goalie steps up. If I recall correctly, the Sioux had some pretty good talent in the late 80s and early 90s that was undone by inadequate goaltending.

That's certainly why I gave the (so far lowest) 6 vote. I remember 90-96 all too well. The offense was decent, guys like Johnson and Naumenko scored, but our goaltending was not top-5 WCHA caliber. I don't see what's changed between last year and this. Perhaps a year later and whatever training has gone on, someone will step up. If not, well, last year's finish was lower than 6.

[sprig]

I think it's safe to say there aren't a lot of homer fans on this board (just Sprig).

Guess I've been found out. Since there are no polls that mean anything, I refuse to pick the Sioux below MN and SCSU. Not sure why I didn't put them above Denver also.

[Goon]

That's certainly why I gave the (so far lowest) 6 vote. I remember 90-96 all too well. The offense was decent, guys like Johnson and Naumenko scored, but our goaltending was not top-5 WCHA caliber. I don't see what's changed between last year and this. Perhaps a year later and whatever training has gone on, someone will step up. If not, well, last year's finish was lower than 6.

I will add on that statment. In fact I will totally disagree with that statement. Last year was a fluke, an enigma, it won't happen again for a long time. I believe that UND is a different team. For those of you that forgot UND is the Florida State and Miami of College hockey, Blaiser won't put up for being a loser for two years in a row, (oh course FSU lost to UofL tonight so that ruins my anology) UND is not SCSU, UND is a superior program and will not be allowed to lose to SCSU again like they did last year. Don't think that Blaiser is chomping at the bit to get back at Dahl. Craig left his number one power play on the ice after the Sioux were down big time that is a bush league move... I hope UND hammers SCSU hard this season.

Lastly, have some faith in the boys this season, I sure as hell do, sure I am drunk as I right this right now but I know hockey talent when I see it and UND is going to be good this season. I think UND might be able to get away with mediocre goal tending and still be a winner, UofM proved this theory, I think UND can repeat it. Honestly, I think some of you guys are selling your selling our team short. Have some confidence. Don' t listen to what the rest of the fans think around the league. I could care less what some half wit from another WCHA team thinks about UND.

Peace brothers...

[diggerdan]

You go Goon!!

Teams have won with less that stellar goaltending, Minnesota last year is one (although Hauser played very well in the Frozen Four). UND does not have that history; when they've won, they've been rock solid in net (Although one could argue that Schweitzer was an average goalie who simply didn't have to face many quality shots in a game).

Anyway, I'd like to post interim results but I don't know how to do columns on a message board so if someone could please tell me, I'd appreciate it.

[NDHockey]

Goon,

I am as big a Sioux fan as any other guy but I can make up my own mind outside of what other fans have to say. I am not some robot that can't make up his own mind and have to use other people to decide. That didn't play into my rankings at all and I would doubt it did for others either. I feel I put the Sioux in a very realistic spot in 4th place. I hope they prove to be better but 4th place is realistic in my mind.

Unlike the Gophers of last year, we don't return a 3 year veteran goalie, an all-American and Hobey candidate defenseman or a guy who is a strong candidate to lead the nation in points. I don't believe we have the depth the Gophers showed. Yes, it pains me to say such things.

Your Florida State and Miami analogy is flawed (I'd guess the booze was doing some talking for you though). Does anybody here remember the early 90s? A lot of the high praise we give Blais was certainly given to Gino back in his heyday too. There is no such thing as a program that can't have down periods and I feel it shows a Gopher-like arrogance to act like we are immune to it. As much as I dislike the Gophers, they are a top program that proved even the best of them is not immune to short term down periods.

I am in no way saying this will be any extended down period for our team. I think we will be a lot more competitive this year but I don't see us as being the caliber of the other top teams (yet).

[OETKB]

It seems like those who are saying ND will not be competitive this season are selling our talent short. UND only had 12 returning players on the roster last season; all those freshmen forwards and defensemen took their lumps and, I think, learned from them.

Bochenski, Massen, McMahon, & Fylling will have excellent sophomore years, I believe. Parise will be the WCHA ROY (I hope). Both Brandt & Siembida will be more consistent in net.

Sure, other teams have more "proven" talent, but I think UND will be this years surprise WCHA team that noone will want to draw in the playoffs.

[sprig]

I'm hopeful for a top (1-3) finish for one reason. I don't think this team will play third periods the way they played them last year. Except for the home series vs. UAA and Kato, the Sioux looked really good for two periods in almost every game (that I saw), only to play exceptionally ugly in the third (I know, I've posted this often).

The ugly third periods included those in the GLI, where the Sioux played excellent for two periods, only to go into the swoon in period 3; lucky to get those wins in OT.

Never was the pattern of last year's team more apparent than in that huge lead at Wisco, who were playing ugly hockey the way they did so often last year, only to have the Sioux allow them to look like a national power with the period 3 back-in.

So, once more, play good hockey in the third periods last year, and the Sioux had a good shot at being an NCCA tourney team. I'll be real disappointed if they don't finish in the top half, and even more disappointed if the third period D looks like it did last year.

I think both Siembeda and Brandt are good goalies, and most of the "lots of rebounds" comments, and "less than stellar play" comments stemmed from the third period back-in. With your entire team standing (backed-in) in front of you, allowing opponents to easily gain the slot and fire shots through a Sioux created team screen, initial saves were a result of positioning and luck, because the G's sure didn' t see the puck. Little chance to control a rebound when you don't see the puck and are just hoping it hits you. If that doesn't change (and as I said I think it will) it'll be another tough year.

Don't particularly like the NC schedule followed by being almost entirely on the road after Jan. 1, but the team should have a good record (actually have to have a good record) by the 1st. THe two SCSU series before Christmas should tell us something, as the series' prior to and around the SCSU series' are against fairly weak opponents for the most part. May be tough to change gears against SCSU, but will have to in order to have a chance at a top 3 WCHA finish.

[mksioux]

I picked UND 5th. I wouldn't be shocked if they finished higher because I think there is a possibility that this team can be really good if a few key players step up. I think the phrase that describes my feelings is "cautious optimism." If the team finishes higher than my prediction, then I will be happy to be wrong. Plus, for me, "prediction" gradually becomes "expectation" and that's not good for the mental health if the team starts to struggle.

[kr]

When I posted my guesstimate as to WCHA end of season my thoughts were on where they'd finish in the league, not as to what type of post-season the team would have. Minnesota (as returning NCAA champion) gets a vote of of respect (to borrow a SCSU term) for a top 3 finish as does Denver (the goalie tandem is so important in this league). SCSU and CC have some very good talent. Playing so many games on the road in the second half of the season, I believe, really limits the team's chance of being a 1-2-3 WCHA team when you look at the talent/ability of those 4 teams. HOWEVER, that many road games against solid oppoents can and will more than likely be a huge boost to team-building and self confidence. Other than (possibly) the first playoff series, every playoff game is on the road. By the time playoffs start we may not be a "1-2-3" WCHA team but, I think, we'll be one of the "scariest" teams in the nation, the team other teams don't want to meet in a playoff situation. And that's the situation in which Coach Blais' teams shine.

If, however, JS or JB pulls a "KG" this season, top 3 is where they'll be found!!

[forecheck]

Does Brandt remind anyone else of Karl Goerhing? I know we haven't seen him play much, and he was still adjusting to the WCHA last year, but a friend and I were analyzing Brandt in the first game of the year against Manitoba, and found a lot of similarities in the two goalies' style of play. He even stretches like Karl. (JK know what I'm talking about.) Jake seems to play with a lot of adreneline and gusto, while Josh is more laid back. I think they are going to make a pretty decent two goalie tandem, with plenty of healthy competition between the two. I recall Blais mentioning on the coaches show last year that Jake, and maybe Josh too, I can't remember, was coming in on his own at 8am to practice, and made one of the coaches come and shoot pucks at him. They know that they need to improve in order to get playing time with Blais, or else he'll just bring another goalie in at Christmas. Plus, as someone else mentioned, the defense is bigger, stronger, and more experienced this year, which should help out a lot. Not to mention if the younger forwards learn what it means to backcheck.

My picks:

1. Denver

2. Minnesota

3. UND

4. CC

5. SCSU

6. Duluth

7. Wisconsin

8. AA

9. Mankato

10. Tech

I agree with NDHockey that it shows a little Gopher-like arrogance to assume that last year was a fluke and that we will never finish that low again as long as Blais is around. There is only so much a coach can do before injury, burnout, sickness, inexperience, and just getting into a slump starts to take over. I believe the Sioux are going to be much improved this season, but we have to remember that the rest of the league is still just as strong as ever, and there are some pretty good coaches out there besides Blais. I mean, how else can you explain Lucia winning with Hauser in net? Let's just cheer on the team without putting the pressure on them that I think they were feeling last year.

Just a side note with all of this talk about goalies. A doctor gave a lecture in our Medical Science class this week about vision, and mentioned a certain Sioux goalie who came in for some eye therapy last season. He described it a little, and let me tell you, it didn't sound like fun.

[jk]

Nice doctor-patient confidentiality.

As to the program's durability, the examples used so far were Gino's Sioux days and the Gophers' recent slide. You could add Sauer's Badger teams to that list. In all three cases, the slide was marked by a long-time coach who wasn't getting the job done any longer. The Gophers and Badgers stopped getting some recruits they typically would have gotten, but I wasn't really following the recruiting angle ten years ago (no internet) so I can't speak to whether the same was true for Gino near the end.

So in asking whether this is a little slump brought on by a confluence of negative factors (unexpected goaltending problems, big freshmen class, unfamiliar new arena) or the beginning of a cyclical downturn, a la Gino, Woog and Sauer, you need to ask whether the game is starting to pass by Blais the way it did the others.

I think that he is not yet entering that uncomfortable twilight, and I look to recruiting as the clearest evidence. Not only is Blais not starting to miss key guys, he's getting guys he didn't when he started. The biggest names around were mentioned for Bochenski and Massen, Jones was apparently ticketed for Madison, and the Shattuck boys had many, many options. But they're coming to Grand Forks. The only key misses lately seem to have been Ballard and Guyer, but anytime you're going up against Minnesota for a Minnesota boy, you are the underdog. I think those results say more about Lucia's arrival than Blais slipping.

Arguments for Blais slipping would be last year's results and the fact that he's now been here a while (I think only Dahl has more tenure). Even long-tenured coaches don't necessarily have to slip, though, as Berenson and Mason continued to compete nationally many, many years into their careers.

To conclude, I don't think it's simply arrogant to think that last year was just a hiccup. If anything, it's just plain reasonable to expect the team to do well, based on the recent success of the program. The proof will be in this year's play, but I don't think the program is starting to slide.