Let's see Jake

[DamStrait]

Just win, baby! Other than that, I don't care if Hak benches the whole senior class.

[The Sicatoka]

Interesting that Sioux hockey should be a welfare state or entitlement program to certain people.  Hakstol, as Blais before him, plays the people who work to earn the position.  Coming into the season, Brandt's job was his to lose.  Well, he lost it.  If he's as good as he should be at this stage of his career, he wouldn't be wearing a tie on game night. 

Dean Blais 101: "Skate or sit."

Dave Hakstol took that course.

I'm guessing that explains it all.

[jnv]

Interesting that Sioux hockey should be a welfare state or entitlement program to certain people.  Hakstol, as Blais before him, plays the people who work to earn the position.  Coming into the season, Brandt's job was his to lose.  Well, he lost it.  If he's as good as he should be at this stage of his career, he wouldn't be wearing a tie on game night. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Welfare state? If you don't think there is a certain amount of politics going on here I think you're mistaken. (my opinion). I have no problem with the 3 goalies. Phillipe is doing quite well, I don't have an issue with him playing, he's doing well. Parise isn't a terrible goalie either.......

However, as far as your comment to wearing a tie, and if Brandt was good, etc.... that has a lot to do with the coach and his decision. I still say he (Brandt) has more experience, and would be as good or better as Parise. (nothing against Jordan)......but how do you not even give a Senior a shot? In my opinion, it wasn't his position to lose.......but rather already was close to being decided well before the opening game! Apparently Jake's personality isn't "meshing" with the coaches.

All the stats show he has the talent to win games. How has he "lost" his position? by playing poorly? hardly.......

again, just my opinion.......

[Old Barn Guy]

Coaches who want to win, don't let a personality rift with a player determine who is going to play (unless there is insubordination, or something similar). Some people (especially parents or friends of players) always seem to want to find a sinister or "under cover" reason for a player not playing. They don't really want to face the reality that someone (the coach) might be right in his evaluation of the player's performance. I speak from many years of coaching experience, coaches who play favorites or hold grudges usually don't stick around very long.

In Hak's case, he began the season as a new head coach. He had to try to evaluate talent and win games as best he could, in a very short amount of time. The short pre-season, loss of very talented offensive players through turning pro and injuries have made this a very challenging situation for any coach, experienced or otherwise.

My opinion is that you, as a coach, must be true to yourself. Do what YOU think is the right thing to do, because if you don't, and things go wrong, guess who will be alone shouldering the blame?

Hak is moving along and doing a great job. If you feel some players (in this particular case, Jake) aren't being given a fair shake, you better start attending the practices to get a better prospective of how a coach formulates decisions. Jake is experienced, but not with a successful end of the season performance. He could probalby still step in and do a credible job, in my opinion, but the coach feels that the other two guys are going to give the team a better chance to win. That's all that matters right now. If you try to coach with only your heart, you will only hurt the team and you will lose your credibiltiy with your players. Don't ever put an individual's welfare ahead of the team's. The players know who should be playing.

The following is a quote that I heard from another coach a few years ago, and I really think that is says it about as well as it can be said (you can substitute "friends" for "parents" and get about the same effect here):

"Parents see their child (player) in technicolor, while coaches see them in black and white."

[ScottM]

However, as far as your comment to wearing a tie, and if Brandt was good, etc.... that has a lot to do with the coach and his decision.  I still say he (Brandt) has more experience, and would be as good or better as Parise.  (nothing against Jordan)......but how do you not even give a Senior a shot?  In my opinion, it wasn't his position to lose.......but rather already was close to being decided well before the opening game!  Apparently Jake's personality isn't "meshing" with the coaches.

All the stats show he has the talent to win games.  How has he "lost" his position?  by playing poorly?  hardly.......

again, just my opinion.......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If he's that damn good as a senior, then he shouldn't be watching JParise (soph) and Lammy (frosh) doing his job. As far as Brandt's "personality" not meshing with the coaches', I think that's a load of crap. 2/3 of them have been around him since he started playing at UND, and Eades probably knew him to some degree from his HS days. Frankly, given some of his off-ice antics in the past, he should consider himself lucky Blais didn't dump him before last season. Even though most goalies are bizarre prima donnas, the best goalies still manage to play, regardless of who's at the helm.

[Goon]

I don't think Brandt was given a fair shot.  Plus, we were playing Tech this weekend.  Best chance for Brandt to play and in comes Parise again.  Now you are talking about not playing Brandt for like 2 months.  For a goalie that has done quite well for us, it just seems like he's being thrown away.  Yes Lammy has established the #1, but I like the experience of Brandt and I don't think he's been given a shot at #2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

None of us are in practice, so do we really know he wasn't given a shot? Brandt is done after this season, he has gotten his chance and now its time for Lammy and Jordan. These kids are the future of UND hockey, we know what the past brought us with Brandt. Lack of concentration, sub standard periods of goaltending. If anyone is confused rewind to the Final Five against UofM.

Remember in 2001 when Blais lost confidence in Andy Kohlar Blaiser went out and recruited another goalie, hence Sievebida showed up. That in my opinion is not what I would call an endorsement of Brandt ability. If I had been Jake I might have left after that season. So I am not shocked that he isn't playing.

Besides in Brandts 4 years of hockey I haven't seen him come close to the displays that Lammy has put up. if Brandt would have play in Wisconsin it would have been 10-1 both nights.

I think Jordon starting over Brandt last season in the NCAA's was an indication of what is to come. Remember Zach refered to him as the starting goalie.

[jnv]

[

[ScottM]

Do you even know what "off ice" antics you are referring to?  any of the details?  If you knew, you wouldn't be so quick to jump all over him.  Did he make a mistake?  Yes......nothing earth shattering!  He served his 1 game suspension....get over it!

If you don't think most players have certain things that go on "off ice" then you're mistaken.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ya mean like getting busted for ripping off pull tabs with some skirt, and then not having the stones to tell your coach, leaving him to find out from the press? Must be that "personality thing" you keeping harping about.

[jnv]

Ya mean like getting busted for ripping off pull tabs with some skirt, and then not having the stones to tell your coach, leaving him to find out from the press? Must be that "personality thing" you keeping harping about.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[BringDeanBack]

I think ripping off the pull tabs is the whole story. No excuse, no mitigating circumstances, cut and dry, he did it.

There may be lots of politics in hockey but Lamourex starting over Brandt is solely due to a big talent gap.

[jnv]

I think ripping off the pull tabs is the whole story.  No excuse, no mitigating circumstances, cut and dry, he did it.

There may be lots of politics in hockey but Lamourex starting over Brandt is solely due to a big talent gap.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As you say......

[schmidtdoggydog]

I could see Brandt's lack of playing time being an issue if UND's goaltenders weren't faring well up to this point, but that is not the case.

Goals against overall - 2.31 per game

Goals against league - 2.33 per game, which ranks third, .17 from being the best in the league.

As fans of the TEAM what more could a person ask for from the position?

[NorthDakotaHockey]

I am all for Jake getting a start this weekend. I may be not recollecting the early season, but I don't think that he had a shaky outing early, if he has even had an outing at all!!

Sure, Lammy appears to be the real deal. Wouldn't hurt to spell him here and there and from where I sit, I'd much rather have Jake as the backstopper than I would JPar.

Anybody looking for Saturday Duluth tickets? Looks like I have four that I may not be able to use. On the ice, section K, two or three rows up. I know that this is not the place, but what the hey.

[BringDeanBack]

[tnt]

What opportunity did Nate Ziegelmann have to show his abilities? Life is not always fair. I'm not saying that Jake shouldn't be given a chance, but there hasn't been a lot of awful goaltending to remove one of the other guys yet. A few bad games and he'll most likely get a chance to prove himself again, although I am one Sioux fan that hopes he won't have that shot because it means the other guys aren't giving him that crack to get his foot back in the door. If there should have been chronic complaining about Jake not getting in the lineup, it should have been from years past, certainly not this year.

[scorengoren]

ScottM- You don't think Brandt has the stones, eh.

You should ask Blais if Brandt has the stones.

Roseau is a small town. I'm sure news travels pretty fast. Trust me, if he could have told coach first he would have. And IF he would have talked to coach first, i'm almost certain that none of us would have even known it had happend.

In no way am i justifying what he did. As you know, there's usually more than one side to a story, and around here often times people don't even here the story at all. You should maybe know the guy before you rip him.

[redwing77]

Can we drop the past issue? If past was as big of an issue then we'd have a lot of problems justifying Bochenski cracking the lineup after his money scandal and Phil cracking the lineup because of JPar's stellar freshman campaign. What about Massen last season? If he didn't play well last season why is he in the lineup at all this year?

The fact is, pulltabs or not, history has very little to do with why Brandt isn't cracking the lineup. It has to do with current performance. Talent gap is subjective, truly. Brandt did well last year and so did JPar. What has to do with everything right now is what works and what isn't working. Right now Phil is working as the starter and JPar is close behind during practice (I guess). I don't know really what seperates JPar and Brandt from #2 and #3 goaltenders. I'm not sure any of us do. WHat we do know is that Phil is doing GREAT in games and we would be stupid to take him out of the game.

JPar has had 2 bad games so far. Brandt has had less bad games and less starts. If JPar could keep his regular playing status through the shaky and bad games he's played, then doesn't that speak volumes about Brandt's practice habits?

[scorengoren]

"If JPar could keep his regular playing status through the shaky and bad games he's played, then doesn't that speak volumes about Brandt's practice habits?"

I tend to dissagree. Sports is alot of politics. Hak has to keep the boys from the cult coming...Keep Daddy happy.

However, #2 or #3 shouldn't really matter. I think we would all agree Phil is playing like the starting goalie right now. So why would you ever play anyone but him?? Until he has a bad game or two. Keep Parise on the bench right along with Brandt for the time being.

[ScottM]

  You should maybe know the guy before you rip him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What? Are you his homeroom teacher, or just another hockey groupie?

[scorengoren]

No, I'm his kid.

[Poncho & Lefty]

Hey guys Poncho here, I think i'll stay out of the little catfight we have going on in here and throw my thoughts in. I hope Lammeroux continues to play and play well. Brandt hasnt impressed me in his 3 years of regular playing time. Jordan Parise hasn't impressed me at all through these two years so if i was making the call i'd have him as the three. i think you need to stick with your hot hand and keep you eggs in your own basket and not anybody elses. I realize this is a hard job, i bet you guys wish you had a given number 1 like Montoya over here for the boys in blue.

[redwing77]

Hey guys Poncho here, I think i'll stay out of the little catfight we have going on in here and throw my thoughts in.  I hope Lammeroux continues to play and play well.  Brandt hasnt impressed me in his 3 years of regular playing time.  Jordan Parise hasn't impressed me at all through these two years so if i was making the call i'd have him as the three.  i think you need to stick with your hot hand and keep you eggs in your own basket and not anybody elses.  I realize this is a hard job, i bet you guys wish you had a given number 1 like Montoya over here for the boys in blue.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Having been burned over saying something like this in the past, I can now say with all honesty: No, I don't.

I respect Montoya but Michigan can have him. I respect your opinion, but I think you are wrong. JPar was among the top 10 in goaltenders last year. To say his performance last year was not impressive, well, doesn't impress me at all. I wouldn't trade the goaltenders we've got for any trio out there. Not anymore. Goaltending is the least of our issues. I'd rather have a great D and good goaltending than vice versa. It so happens that we have great D and great goaltending this year. If our offense were a bit more explosive, this thread probably wouldn't exist.