Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

2023-24 University of North Dakota Hockey Season


AlphaMikeFoxtrot

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, scpa0305 said:

He’s really never played. I mean, I guess I’m not overly disappointed he left. But I’m not oblivious to fact his only minutes were 4 line minutes. 

My eyes saw a young man that couldn’t handle the speed and strength of D1 hockey. He’s not a very good skater to begin with. There’s a reason he never saw the ice much, but that’s besides the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, SuhakiYeahYeah said:

This is getting ridiculous.

OIG-2024-01-12T215757_115.thumb.jpeg.24207aa87169572a04f97c02fbb9bdb3.jpeg

And that's a little surprising, given the speed, stick skills, and snipers they have.   After the first two OT wins this year, I thought they'd welcome OT against anybody.   But they have to be more careful with the puck and play D too.   I think they'll get some of those back over the next several months.  Overall, they need to get a little more vertical in their game, which is why James is so valuable to them now, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, SiouxFanSince1990 said:

Have you played the game? Everyone who skated, has a role. You don’t see what Albrecht brings to the table. You don’t eat.

Yes, Mr. Snarky, I have played the game. I'm not saying we don't need 4th line players. I'm saying don't keep a 5th year 4th line player.

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 wins is generally the cut line vicinity for the tournament assuming no bad losses.

We currently have 15 wins, 4 OT losses, and 1 tie.

10 wins were at home in regulation, worth .8, so 8 wins.

1 was home OT, worth .8 * .67, so 0.5 wins.

3 OT losses at home, worth .8 * .33 each, so 0.8 wins.

Tie was at home, so .5*.8= 0.4 wins.

On the road, 3 wins * 1.2 is 3.6 wins.

1 OT win on the road is 1.2 * .67= 0.8 wins

1 OT loss on the road is 1.2 *.33 = 0.4 wins

Summed up we have 14.5 wins, which we can round up to 15 with the quality win bonus. Sweep, or at least no losses to the two pairwise poison opponents left (Miami and Duluth) and we can handle some losses to more formidable opponents along the way and still be in position to make the tournament. 14 games left, with 8 on the road.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/13/2024 at 3:43 PM, nodakvindy said:

If you think you have a title contending team I'd argue that's exactly who you keep.

So everyone that thought before the season started, with eight new defensemen and two new goalies, that UND would be a title contending team this season raise your hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been wondering if the teams recent performance vs. beginning of the season is because in the beginning thr questions about the "new" defense spurred the forward group to put in extra effort into thier defensive responsibility.  Fast forward a few months....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, AlphaMikeFoxtrot said:

20 wins is generally the cut line vicinity for the tournament assuming no bad losses.

We currently have 15 wins, 4 OT losses, and 1 tie.

10 wins were at home in regulation, worth .8, so 8 wins.

1 was home OT, worth .8 * .67, so 0.5 wins.

3 OT losses at home, worth .8 * .33 each, so 0.8 wins.

Tie was at home, so .5*.8= 0.4 wins.

On the road, 3 wins * 1.2 is 3.6 wins.

1 OT win on the road is 1.2 * .67= 0.8 wins

1 OT loss on the road is 1.2 *.33 = 0.4 wins

Summed up we have 14.5 wins, which we can round up to 15 with the quality win bonus. Sweep, or at least no losses to the two pairwise poison opponents left (Miami and Duluth) and we can handle some losses to more formidable opponents along the way and still be in position to make the tournament. 14 games left, with 8 on the road.

Fair assessment ... noting also that our Strength of Schedule is very high, which bumps our RPI compared to other teams in that 20 win range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been wondering if the teams recent performance vs. beginning of the season is because in the beginning thr questions about the "new" defense spurred the forward group to put in extra effort into thier defensive responsibility.  Fast forward a few months....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, siouxfaninseattle said:

So everyone that thought before the season started, with eight new defensemen and two new goalies, that UND would be a title contending team this season raise your hand.

Well the media picked them second in nchc and they started in top 10 in the national poll so that shows someone did. I figured Persson was a huge upgrade in goal and that offense would be better and hold things up until d corps settled in.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, siouxfaninseattle said:

So everyone that thought before the season started, with eight new defensemen and two new goalies, that UND would be a title contending team this season raise your hand.

Arm up.  I was optimistic on here once the portal sorted out.  Loved the forwards and G and thought the D had a chance to be good.  Had heard good things especially about Pyke and Zmolek.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After last year had no visions of UND being this good in the first half of the season.  Still waiting for them to decide if they are going to be elite or just another good team that goes throught the normal ups and downs of a season.  Got my tickets to the Frozen Four along with 5 lifelong friends/UND grads so planning on them being there and cheering like crazy.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Blackheart said:

After last year had no visions of UND being this good in the first half of the season.  Still waiting for them to decide if they are going to be elite or just another good team that goes throught the normal ups and downs of a season.  Got my tickets to the Frozen Four along with 5 lifelong friends/UND grads so planning on them being there and cheering like crazy.

It's kind of weird, but we've lost one time in 2024 and it was in OT. Remove that three-game OT loss streak, UND is 15-2-1 with wins over Minnesota, DU, BU and Wisconsin.

I understand the four OT losses don't feel great, but I feel like we're almost ignoring what they've already done based on that three-game streak, and four OT losses. 

Just feels so weird.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, siouxfaninseattle said:

Great argument for moving the regionals to home sites.

I tend to agree.  But here are a couple of counterpoints for the sake of discussion:

1. Neutral sites actually have the potential to increase exposure.  Hosting postseason games in hockey hotbeds and successful markets, while rewarding the home teams, will primarily serve existing fans and season-ticket holders.  And regional sites are almost always larger than many campus venues, so assume best case scenario - college hockey completely takes off from a spectator standpoint, even in underserved markets - demand will far outpace supply.

2. Notwithstanding the vagaries of neutral site selection and geographical seeding, fans can actually be assured of seeing their team at least occasionally with minimal travel or hassle.  Let's say you support a program that is consistently in the second eight of the PW, and your school is modestly successful at bidding to host OR stands to benefit from geographical seeding.  Under a home-site model, you would virtually never see your team in the postseason without (1) travel, and (2) fighting host fans over tickets.  The neutral site model allows fans to buy tickets to a specific regional, plan well in advance, and if the stars align and their team qualifies - and is placed locally, take in some post season hockey.  Worst case scenario, the team isn't placed, the fans can either go as non-committed spectators, or sell their seats to fans of the qualifiers.

UND's success at bidding for regionals seems to have benefited UND fans more often than not, and has allowed locals access to important post-season action, even when the Sioux have not been in the mix.  For example, watching huge upsets like HC over UMN, or AIC over SCSU, in person just hits different, and the thought of losing that for 'just one more game at the Ralph' might be a close call for some.  Maybe someone can crunch numbers and see if the recent spate of Fargo/SF regionals have ultimately netted more 'home' games for UND than a theoretical home site model.

Fun questions to kick around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

I tend to agree.  But here are a couple of counterpoints for the sake of discussion:

1. Neutral sites actually have the potential to increase exposure.  Hosting postseason games in hockey hotbeds and successful markets, while rewarding the home teams, will primarily serve existing fans and season-ticket holders.  And regional sites are almost always larger than many campus venues, so assume best case scenario - college hockey completely takes off from a spectator standpoint, even in underserved markets - demand will far outpace supply.

2. Notwithstanding the vagaries of neutral site selection and geographical seeding, fans can actually be assured of seeing their team at least occasionally with minimal travel or hassle.  Let's say you support a program that is consistently in the second eight of the PW, and your school is modestly successful at bidding to host OR stands to benefit from geographical seeding.  Under a home-site model, you would virtually never see your team in the postseason without (1) travel, and (2) fighting host fans over tickets.  The neutral site model allows fans to buy tickets to a specific regional, plan well in advance, and if the stars align and their team qualifies - and is placed locally, take in some post season hockey.  Worst case scenario, the team isn't placed, the fans can either go as non-committed spectators, or sell their seats to fans of the qualifiers.

UND's success at bidding for regionals seems to have benefited UND fans more often than not, and has allowed locals access to important post-season action, even when the Sioux have not been in the mix.  For example, watching huge upsets like HC over UMN, or AIC over SCSU, in person just hits different, and the thought of losing that for 'just one more game at the Ralph' might be a close call for some.  Maybe someone can crunch numbers and see if the recent spate of Fargo/SF regionals have ultimately netted more 'home' games for UND than a theoretical home site model.

Fun questions to kick around.

Good points. And I could see a team with a very small arena hosting a regional. That would re-ignite the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...