brianvf Posted May 5 Posted May 5 3 hours ago, Greenbayguy87 said: Is Pilgrim coming in next year, or ‘26-27? I would bet 26/27. 1 Quote
burd Posted May 5 Posted May 5 John Wayne voice: Well, Pilgrim, ya gonna get on that horse of yours and ride on over here, or are ya gonna just sit there? Boooo? 1 Quote
SuhakiYeahYeah Posted May 5 Posted May 5 8 minutes ago, burd said: John Wayne voice: Well, Pilgrim, ya gonna get on that horse of yours and ride on over here, or are ya gonna just sit there? Boooo? Happy Thanksgiving, Pilgrim! Quote
tnt Posted May 5 Posted May 5 13 hours ago, Clark17 said: Pritchard will be a Gopher - visited UND last Wednesday and UM on Thursday Not to be that guy, but if McMorrow is still a possibility and we have two positions open, who would we prefer, being that most of us would like to see a decent CHL guy as well. Quote
RhettRingers Posted May 5 Posted May 5 7 minutes ago, tnt said: Not to be that guy, but if McMorrow is still a possibility and we have two positions open, who would we prefer, being that most of us would like to see a decent CHL guy as well. We aren't getting a "decent" CHL guy... Quote
RhettRingers Posted May 5 Posted May 5 2 minutes ago, RhettRingers said: We aren't getting a "decent" CHL guy... Zakreski is our guy. Quote
tnt Posted May 5 Posted May 5 6 minutes ago, RhettRingers said: Zakreski is our guy. We'll see if he can make the transition to college, but very disappointed that we can't even be in the running for any of the top CHL guys. 1 Quote
Speed_Kills Posted May 5 Posted May 5 4 minutes ago, tnt said: We'll see if he can make the transition to college, but very disappointed that we can't even be in the running for any of the top CHL guys. I think we will continue to be in the running in the future for those type of players as that transition becomes more popular and more of known entity. There's also no guarantee the top CHL guys even go college route. The top guys in the CHL historically have done well in the NHL. First year of a new dynamic, these kids have a lot to think about. Quote
MGsioux Posted May 5 Posted May 5 12 hours ago, Greenbayguy87 said: Is Pilgrim coming in next year, or ‘26-27? At what point do we get concerned that Pilgrim never makes it to campus ? Loved him at warroad and want him to be awesome. But he has really struggled in the ushl. But maybe I am wrong Quote
tnt Posted May 5 Posted May 5 16 minutes ago, RhettRingers said: We aren't getting a "decent" CHL guy... Quite the departure from you saying that we were going to get Carter Bear. Was he that tied to Berry? Quote
tnt Posted May 5 Posted May 5 2 minutes ago, MGsioux said: At what point do we get concerned that Pilgrim never makes it to campus ? Loved him at warroad and want him to be awesome. But he has really struggled in the ushl. But maybe I am wrong Give him another year to see if something clicks for him. Seems like we weren't patient with a guy like Stephen Halliday, and he had a pretty good college career. Quote
beastandco Posted May 5 Posted May 5 24 minutes ago, RhettRingers said: We aren't getting a "decent" CHL guy... I would rather have a “decent” USHL guy than a “decent” CHL guy. We don’t know how a decent CHL guy translates. I only want top CHL guys. Give me anyone drafted in the first two rounds 1 Quote
RhettRingers Posted May 5 Posted May 5 18 minutes ago, tnt said: Quite the departure from you saying that we were going to get Carter Bear. Was he that tied to Berry? Lots of things happened with him. Still undecided is what my source told me over the weekend. 1 Quote
tnt Posted May 5 Posted May 5 6 minutes ago, beastandco said: I would rather have a “decent” USHL guy than a “decent” CHL guy. We don’t know how a decent CHL guy translates. I only want top CHL guys. Give me anyone drafted in the first two rounds By decent, I mean top 3 round type talent. Really will suck if we aren't able to give Zellers another high end talent to make the most of his skills. Maybe Swanson can take a step and feed him. The Bruins really need him to develop, so if they don't see him getting the kind of support he needs to succeed, they may push him in a different direction. We really need him to be an impact player next year, which isn't ideal being that the transition is different for a lot of players. Quote
RhettRingers Posted May 5 Posted May 5 12 minutes ago, beastandco said: I would rather have a “decent” USHL guy than a “decent” CHL guy. We don’t know how a decent CHL guy translates. I only want top CHL guys. Give me anyone drafted in the first two rounds Exactly. Who knows what type of numbers McKenna puts up in the NCHC. Quote
nascar99 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 23 minutes ago, beastandco said: I would rather have a “decent” USHL guy than a “decent” CHL guy. We don’t know how a decent CHL guy translates. I only want top CHL guys. Give me anyone drafted in the first two rounds Decent USHLers are typically better defensively. Decent CHLers are typically better offensively. We'll see how the middle tier CHLers adapt to the NCAA. I do think the best guys will produce regardless. I really like the Shea Van Olm and Oliver Tulk commitments for Penn State and Wisconsin respectively. Both appear to be high impact offensive forwards right away in the NCAA, but we'll see. Quote
.357 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 47 minutes ago, RhettRingers said: We aren't getting a "decent" CHL guy... Please elaborate. Is it because UND wasn't interested or they didn't have any luck? Kind of odd that UND would be in the running for McKenna & not pursue anyone else from the CHL if he fell through. Quote
RhettRingers Posted May 5 Posted May 5 Just now, .357 said: Please elaborate. Is it because UND wasn't interested or they didn't have any luck? Kind of odd that UND would be in the running for McKenna & not pursue anyone else from the CHL if he fell through. Define "decent", if "decent" is McKenna then the guys we are talking with don't come close to that. Quote
beastandco Posted May 5 Posted May 5 21 minutes ago, tnt said: By decent, I mean top 3 round type talent. Really will suck if we aren't able to give Zellers another high end talent to make the most of his skills. Maybe Swanson can take a step and feed him. The Bruins really need him to develop, so if they don't see him getting the kind of support he needs to succeed, they may push him in a different direction. We really need him to be an impact player next year, which isn't ideal being that the transition is different for a lot of players. I do think having guys like Zellers and Swanson works both ways when dealing with NHL teams. If a center is committing that is already drafted, I would assume their NHL team wants him to play in a situation that would help his development. Playing between guys like Zellers and Swanson is something that a lot of teams cannot provide. Swanson will make a step next year. 1 Quote
RhettRingers Posted May 5 Posted May 5 McKenna is generational talent. Will be at whatever college he chooses for one year. Maybe we are looking at guys that are the after thoughts. The guys who will buy into the program and be here for 3-4 years. That's the model that seems to win in early April. Quote
.357 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 1 minute ago, RhettRingers said: Define "decent", if "decent" is McKenna then the guys we are talking with don't come close to that. Decent as in 1st-3rd round NHL kind of decent. Was it because the coaching staff wasn't interested or didn't have any luck? Quote
fightingsioux4life Posted May 5 Posted May 5 Just now, .357 said: Decent as in 1st-3rd round NHL kind of decent. Was it because the coaching staff wasn't interested or didn't have any luck? The coaching change and having one assistant position unfilled does add some uncertainty to the mix. Which may give some prospects pause to come here. Quote
RhettRingers Posted May 5 Posted May 5 Just now, .357 said: Decent as in 1st-3rd round NHL kind of decent. Was it because the coaching staff wasn't interested or didn't have any luck? We very much had interest in McKenna, especially with him being a Western Canadian. Problem is who his advisors are. Quote
sioux24/7 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 Just now, RhettRingers said: We very much had interest in McKenna, especially with him being a Western Canadian. Problem is who his advisors are. McKenna always sounded like a stretch but a bit further down the road Landon DuPont might be attainable. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.