Key Friday Night Results

SLU 3, Clarkson 1 — Game draws 781, a little disappointing given last year’s crowd but not surprising considering the time of year. For the second week in a row, Clarkson fails to answer the bell and gives up a goal in the opening seconds. SLU dominated this game, but given the way Clarkson rebounded in game two against Mercyhurst last weekend, the Saints shouldn’t take anything for granted on Saturday. The SLU videocast was a welcome addition.

UNH 2, Brown 0 — Not too many surprises here in Brown’s opener. Maybe I expected UNH to score a little more, but Brown has had strong goaltending in recent years, whether it be Nicole Stock or O’Hara Shipe (just ask Princeton from the ECACHL semifinals). On the offensive end last year, Hayley Moore and Keaton Zucker were Brown’s only consistent scorers, and now Zucker’s gone, so this team has plenty of questions on the offensive end. For UNH, still only two goals combined this season from Sadie Wright-Ward and Jennifer Hitchcock after they combined for 58 a year ago — not quite sure how to explain that.

Thanks to Richter547 on the message board for posting the link to the Clarkson videocast for Saturday’s game against SLU. Between that, the Minnesota-Wisconsin USCHO Game of the Week, and Dartmouth-Mercyhurst there will be plenty of action to follow tomorrow afternoon.

46 COMMENTS

    • Alternative:

      High above Cayuga’s waters, rose an awful smell/
      It might be Cayuga, but more likely it’s Cornell.

      Sorry Big Red-ers, but I can’t resist a good parody.

      • No need to apologies. Cornell sucks. There are more verses but I feel as though I may get booted of the sight for saying them. Good picks this week Brian.

  1. Alternative:

    High above Cayuga’s waters, rose an awful smell/
    It might be Cayuga, but more likely it’s Cornell.

    Sorry Big Red-ers, but I can’t resist a good parody.

  2. No need to apologies. Cornell sucks. There are more verses but I feel as though I may get booted of the sight for saying them. Good picks this week Brian.

  3. Actually I think you are off the mark on your comments about Minnesota, Paula. Yes, the Gophers gave up 4 PP goals to Duluth on Sunday, but that can happen where you have a bad day on the PK. All of the goals were very nice passing plays with well placed shots that Wilcox had no chance on. Duluth wad 0-7 on the PP on Friday and really the Notre Dame series was the only other time where the PK had any problems. Of much more concern is the Minnesota PP. For a team that averages more than 4 goals a game the PP has been in the 13-14% range all year. Even worse the PP isn’t generating any offense with a meager 1.2 shots per PP. Yes, they got 2 PP goals Sunday, but both were seeing eye point shots. Of the 10 PP’s Minnesota had they spent a good part of the time spinning their wheels and even gave up a shorty. Very few shots or offensive zone time. After Sunday’s game I am much more apt to push the panic button on the PP rather than the PK. After watching all the games this season, that is what I see. I am left wondering if you watch the games you comment on or just review the box score.

    amore apt to push the panic button on the PP rather than
    the PK.

    • I agree with you that UMD made some nice passes on the power play, but we got beat 3 times on the back door. Fool me once, fool me twice, fool me THREE times… The penalty kill may have had an “off night” but for a D1 program like Minnesota, how do you not make an adjustment when all UMD wanted to do on the PP was hit the back door? Special teams in general hasn’t been great for the Gophs this year (43rd in the country on the PP at just over 15% and tied for 44th in the country on the PK at just under 78%). We allow teams to score on the PP 22% of the time

      • I agree, although I will toss the 5-3 goal because 5-3 it is pretty hard to defend the back door, so they really got beat twice. I am not saying the PK isn’t a concern, I am just saying I am *more* concerned about the PP at this point of the season. Hopefully they can make corrections on the PK, but you are right special teams have been woeful this year for the Gophers and that will catch up with you sooner or later, just glad this is the beginning of the season rather than the end of the season.

      • I agree, Ryan. I’m mostly concerned with the PK, as they have shown they can score 5-on-5 without a problem. I’m just puzzled by the PP, as they seem to have good chemistry and, again, often score at full strength. In any event, if they can significantly improve both PP and PK by playoff time–look out!

      • No, I am saying that they had PK problems in 2 *games* not 2 series. UMD was 0-7 on the PP on Friday night, so I don’t really think that is as much of a concern as PP that has been poor all year.

        • Cherry picking the data does not work. UMD went 4/17 over the weekend. 24%. Notre Dame went 3/9. 33%. That is not an effective penalty kill. Agree on the PP, but the PK needs some work. The goals that UMD scored were not of the screened goalie, deflected shot, bad bounce variety. They were structural.

          • Not sure that I would call that cherry picking data especially given the nature of the series in question. Both the Notre Dame and UMD series, the first game was totally different than the second game. How a team plays can change from one game to the next, that goes for the PK as well as the score. If you had watched these games you would know that is was not just the final score that was different but the pace, flow, speed and style of play was different, so it is not totally out of the question that Minnesota could play well on the PK one game and not so well the next. However, even when the style suited Minnesota’s play the PP still struggled. I agree that in the UMD Sunday games it was structural issues that led to the goals, however as I stated before, a couple of bad games and I am not ready to push the panic button on the PK, but I am for the PP which has languished all year.

    • This is right on, it’s definitely the PP that needs work. It’s almost as if the gophs were worse on the PP than even strength, and that UMD was capitalizing on this by getting a ton of penalties.

      • The PP was so bad in the Sunday game, I was wishing that there was an option to decline the penalties that were being called on UMD.

  4. Actually I think you are off the mark on your comments about Minnesota, Paula. Yes, the Gophers gave up 4 PP goals to Duluth on Sunday, but that can happen where you have a bad day on the PK. All of the goals were very nice passing plays with well placed shots that Wilcox had no chance on. Duluth wad 0-7 on the PP on Friday and really the Notre Dame series was the only other time where the PK had any problems. Of much more concern is the Minnesota PP. For a team that averages more than 4 goals a game the PP has been in the 13-14% range all year. Even worse the PP isn’t generating any offense with a meager 1.2 shots per PP. Yes, they got 2 PP goals Sunday, but both were seeing eye point shots. Of the 10 PP’s Minnesota had they spent a good part of the time spinning their wheels and even gave up a shorty. Very few shots or offensive zone time. After Sunday’s game I am much more apt to push the panic button on the PP rather than the PK. After watching all the games this season, that is what I see. I am left wondering if you watch the games you comment on or just review the box score?

    • I agree with you that UMD made some nice passes on the power play, but we got beat 3 times on the back door. Fool me once, fool me twice, fool me THREE times… The penalty kill may have had an “off night” but for a D1 program like Minnesota, how do you not make an adjustment when all UMD wanted to do on the PP was hit the back door? Special teams in general hasn’t been great for the Gophs this year (43rd in the country on the PP at just over 15% and tied for 44th in the country on the PK at just under 78%). We allow teams to score on the PP 22% of the time

      • I agree, although I will toss the 5-3 goal because 5-3 it is pretty hard to defend the back door, so they really got beat twice. I am not saying the PK isn’t a concern, I am just saying I am *more* concerned about the PP at this point of the season. Hopefully they can make corrections on the PK, but you are right special teams have been woeful this year for the Gophers and that will catch up with you sooner or later, just glad this is the beginning of the season rather than the end of the season.

      • I agree, Ryan. I’m mostly concerned with the PK, as they have shown they can score 5-on-5 without a problem. I’m just puzzled by the PP, as they seem to have good chemistry and, again, often score at full strength. In any event, if they can significantly improve both PP and PK by playoff time–look out!

      • No, I am saying that they had PK problems in 2 *games* not 2 series. UMD was 0-7 on the PP on Friday night, so I don’t really think that is as much of a concern as PP that has been poor all year.

        • Cherry picking the data does not work. UMD went 4/17 over the weekend. 24%. Notre Dame went 3/9. 33%. That is not an effective penalty kill. Agree on the PP, but the PK needs some work. The goals that UMD scored were not of the screened goalie, deflected shot, bad bounce variety. They were structural.

          • Not sure that I would call that cherry picking data especially given the nature of the series in question. Both the Notre Dame and UMD series, the first game was totally different than the second game. How a team plays can change from one game to the next, that goes for the PK as well as the score. If you had watched these games you would know that is was not just the final score that was different but the pace, flow, speed and style of play was different, so it is not totally out of the question that Minnesota could play well on the PK one game and not so well the next. However, even when the style suited Minnesota’s play the PP still struggled. I agree that in the UMD Sunday games it was structural issues that led to the goals, however as I stated before, a couple of bad games and I am not ready to push the panic button on the PK, but I am for the PP which has languished all year.

    • This is right on, it’s definitely the PP that needs work. It’s almost as if the gophs were worse on the PP than even strength, and that UMD was capitalizing on this by getting a ton of penalties.

      • The PP was so bad in the Sunday game, I was wishing that there was an option to decline the penalties that were being called on UMD.

  5. Nagelvoort and Michigan only have one shutout win this season and it was against Niagara. They have won 4 games where they have allowed one goal and are 5-2 in one goal games (including two in OT) plus one OT tie.

  6. Nagelvoort and Michigan only have one shutout win this season and it was against Niagara. They have won 4 games where they have allowed one goal and are 5-2 in one goal games (including two in OT) plus one OT tie.

  7. Thinking back on the UMD championship year, they were stellar with Connolly et al on the PP. They’d park somebody a little off to the side of the goal, then someone else took a shot from the top. Numerous times, that shot either went in or deflected to the guy hanging out by the goal, who rammed it home. I think every coach/player gets this idea, but that UMD team executed it with aplomb.

    UMD’s PP percentage is only 17.2% this year, so I guess it really takes some good players to score consistently.
    But it clearly takes more than that, b/c MN has all the players to be that good, and their PP is worse than UMD’s.

    • Minnesota has plenty of talent this year and frankly I like the chemistry, grit and desire of this team a hell of a lot more than last years team, but it seems when they get on the PP, the are looking to make the perfect play and the result is that they pass the puck around until they eventually turn it over or loose it, this is evidenced by the fact that not only are they not scoring, they are getting any shots or even attempting shots on the PP. They need to simplify the PP and just work on taking shots and good things will happen. However with Wisconsin on the schedule next weekend I am not looking for some miraculous turnaround this weekend.

  8. Thinking back on the UMD championship year, they were stellar with Connolly et al on the PP. They’d park somebody a little off to the side of the goal, then someone else took a shot from the top. Numerous times, that shot either went in or deflected to the guy hanging out by the goal, who rammed it home. I think every coach/player gets this idea, but that UMD team executed it with aplomb.

    UMD’s PP percentage is only 17.2% this year, so I guess it really takes some good players to score consistently.
    But it clearly takes more than that, b/c MN has all the players to be that good, and their PP is worse than UMD’s.

    • Minnesota has plenty of talent this year and frankly I like the chemistry, grit and desire of this team a hell of a lot more than last years team, but it seems when they get on the PP, the are looking to make the perfect play and the result is that they pass the puck around until they eventually turn it over or loose it, this is evidenced by the fact that not only are they not scoring, they are getting any shots or even attempting shots on the PP. They need to simplify the PP and just work on taking shots and good things will happen. However with Wisconsin on the schedule next weekend I am not looking for some miraculous turnaround this weekend.

  9. Where oh where have my Spartans gone? Oh where oh where could they be? They cannot score, they cannot skate. They are just like this poem, Bad.

  10. Where oh where have my Spartans gone? Oh where oh where could they be? They cannot score, they cannot skate. They are just like this poem, Bad.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here