Pre-Season Predictions

[icehawk]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

Plus who really cares what he thinks, he is a fan of UAA for crap sake.

How true.

[JDUBBS1280]

I'm not disagreeing with you about Minnesota. I had them ranked #3 on my list, and I agree with pretty much everything you say here. Of course, there will always be the question mark for whoever is in net for Minnesota until he erases that question mark, but again, I agree that whoever winds up in net for the Gophers should do just fine.

Given that, I would take BC or Western over the Gophers this year (as much as anyone can pick a team in July for a hypothetical game to be played in March/April), but Minnesota should be in the mix come NCAA Tournament time.

If you don't disagree with my points on Minnesota, and you agree with me that Milner's numbers will regress (even if we disagree on how much), then I don't understand why you have BC ranked ahead of Minnesota. Minnesota returns far more scoring and should be much better defensively. It would seem that you think Minnesota will see a significant drop in goaltending performance and BC will see otherworldly performance from Milner again. Is this your stance?

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

If he does, then you'll be right, and I'll be wrong. But I'm predicting he finishes with something closer to 2.33 GAA/0.923 SV%. I think he will face significantly more shots this season. And more quality shots than he saw last year.

To put this into perspective, BC would have to average 30 shots on goal allowed to get roughly those numbers (.923 sv% w/2.31 GAA). Over the last 5 years, BC has averaged roughly 27.5 shots on-goal allowed. The best season in that bunch? 2010. That year BC allowed only 26.25 shots on goal. Oh, BC also had 4 Freshman defensemen (that played a combined 128 games) and 3 Sophomore defensemen (that played a combined 84 games) that season. The Eagles had only one upperclassmen defenseman. Now, I forget...how did BC manage that season?

I think Jerry York knows what he's doing.

[LynahFan]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

If he does, then you'll be right, and I'll be wrong. But I'm predicting he finishes with something closer to 2.33 GAA/0.923 SV%. I think he will face significantly more shots this season. And more quality shots than he saw last year.

I'll go out on a limb and predict that 2.33 GAA goaltending would be sufficient for BC to make the tournament anyway. They averaged 3.6 goals per game scored last year, so that could fall by 10% (to 3.3) and they'd still be around +1 goal per game. Only 4 teams were at or better than +1 goal per game last year: BC, Minn, UMD, and Union. There's no way a +1 team misses the tournament.

[JDUBBS1280]

To put this into perspective, BC would have to average 30 shots on goal allowed to get roughly those numbers (.923 sv% w/2.31 GAA). Over the last 5 years, BC has averaged roughly 27.5 shots on-goal allowed. The best season in that bunch? 2010. That year BC allowed only 26.25 shots on goal. Oh, BC also had 4 Freshman defensemen (that played a combined 128 games) and 3 Sophomore defensemen (that played a combined 84 games) that season. The Eagles had only one upperclassmen defenseman. Now, I forget...how did BC manage that season?

I think Jerry York knows what he's doing.

I absolutely think BC will average north of 30 shots against a game. No disrespect to York, or to their program's recent performances, but that guarantees them nothing this season.

No program, or coach, is perfect. There will be down years. They will miss the tourney at some point, even under York. My guess is that is next season.

I think their defensive losses are a lot greater than people realize. There is going to be a lot of pressure on some freshmen. I think Milner will see more shots and more quality shots than he ever has with BC. And I think his GAA will rise significantly because of it.

[JDUBBS1280]

I'll go out on a limb and predict that 2.33 GAA goaltending would be sufficient for BC to make the tournament anyway. They averaged 3.6 goals per game scored last year, so that could fall by 10% (to 3.3) and they'd still be around +1 goal per game. Only 4 teams were at or better than +1 goal per game last year: BC, Minn, UMD, and Union. There's no way a +1 team misses the tournament.

I don't think they will average as many goals this year. They will feel the losses of Kreider, Almeida, and Carey. And they will have some issues getting the puck up to their remaining forwards because of their defensive losses. I think they'll be in the +0.75 goal differential range. Maybe lowet. A bubble team.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

I absolutely think BC will average north of 30 shots against a game. No disrespect to York, or to their program's recent performances, but that guarantees them nothing this season.

No program, or coach, is perfect. There will be down years. They will miss the tourney at some point, even under York. My guess is that is next season.

I think their defensive losses are a lot greater than people realize. There is going to be a lot of pressure on some freshmen. I think Milner will see more shots and more quality shots than he ever has with BC. And I think his GAA will rise significantly because of it.

Now your opinions are based on a feeling and not on facts?

You're nothing but confusion.

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

If you don't disagree with my points on Minnesota, and you agree with me that Milner's numbers will regress (even if we disagree on how much), then I don't understand why you have BC ranked ahead of Minnesota. Minnesota returns far more scoring and should be much better defensively. It would seem that you think Minnesota will see a significant drop in goaltending performance and BC will see otherworldly performance from Milner again. Is this your stance?

I see Boston College being a dominant team out East, getting a #1 seed, and being a force in the NCAA Tournament. I think they will be very strong offensively and should be very good again defensively. Added to the fact that I think Milner will have a very strong season (albeit not as strong as last season), I think BC wins somewhere around 26-29 games in the regular season.

I see Western Michigan being a force defensively, and they should get very good goaltending. Add to that a great coach and a strong group of forwards, and I think the Broncos are also a #1 seed. They should finally have enough experience to make a run in the NCAA Tournament, and I see them playing BC in the title game at this point of the year.

I see Minnesota being very strong offensively, and a solid group on the blue line. They do have a big question mark in net, but their ability to score goals should outweigh any drawback in play from their netminder. My biggest concern with Minnesota is that they are prone to taking games off, and have had trouble in big games defensively (see Frozen Four and Final Five from last season). They should improve somewhat there, as their defensive corps gets another year older. Ultimately, I'll take a more sound Western Michigan or a more potent and experienced BC over Minnesota to start the season.

I'll throw North Dakota in this mix as well, as I see them being neck and neck with this group as well. The Sioux return a ton offensively, and should have an elite D-corps (rivaling Western). If they can get solid play from their goalie tandem and avoid the injury bug, then I think the Sioux will push Minnesota in the WCHA (MacNaughton will likely be decided by their series in January, which the Gophers have the edge as host), and get a #1 seed (along with the Gophers). Similar to Minnesota, I think the Sioux can make a run to the Frozen Four, but I don't see them getting by either BC or Western at this point in time.

FWIW, I don't think having Minnesota #1 is a crazy idea or anything. They are going to be very good and are deserving of the top ranking early on. I just see them and North Dakota being just a smidge behind BC and Western. As you've said many times, we'll see what happens.

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

Thanks FS23. I can certainly respect that. Thanks for taking the time to explain your rational.

See how fun rational discussion without name-calling can be on a slow summer day?

We all have our opinions. As long as you explain why you feel a certain way, and avoid attacking other's opinions, I don't see why we can't just disagree and move on

[JDUBBS1280]

Now your opinions are based on a feeling and not on facts?

You're nothing but confusion.

I believe I explained why I think Milner will see an increase in shots and shot quality. What didn't you understand?

- They lost 3 high quality defenders that will be replaced with freshmen
- Defense is the hardest position for players to transition into the NCAA

I think this translates into more defensive zone time. More defensive zone time means more shots. And the drop off in defensive play usually means an increase in the quality of shots.

What part of this are you disputing?

[sterlippo1]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

I keep repeating it because I am constantly attacked on this board.
.

here you go again............wait, let me get the violin out. I know this is your schtick. You purposely incite people by saying asinine things then when they blow it in your face you play the sympathy card. Hard to understand why you intentionally act (maybe it's not an act) like a sphincter, like the person who no one wants to show up at the party...........

[J.D.]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

No program, or coach, is perfect. There will be down years. They will miss the tourney at some point, even under York. My guess is that is next season.

At some point? They've already had down years under York, like 2001-2002 and 2008-2009. Nobody is arguing that it doesn't happen to every program. People are simply arguing that the talent is in place to have another good season.

[JDUBBS1280]

here you go again............wait, let me get the violin out. I know this is your schtick. You purposely incite people by saying asinine things then when they blow it in your face you play the sympathy card. Hard to understand why you intentionally act (maybe it's not an act) like a sphincter, like the person who no one wants to show up at the party...........

I've backed upevery one of my statements with explanation of why I feel that way, and it has ultimately led to the best hockey discussion this board has seen in a few months (once people stopped attacking me and started engaging in rational discussion).

And I'm not playing a sympathy card. I understand some of my opinions are unpopular, and I'm not expecting everyone to agree with them. However, I do expect people to avoid using personal attacks. I don't think that is too much to ask. In fact, I believe it is required by the boards TOA.

[LynahFan]

Re: Pre-Season Predictions

I don't think they will average as many goals this year. They will feel the losses of Kreider, Almeida, and Carey. And they will have some issues getting the puck up to their remaining forwards because of their defensive losses. I think they'll be in the +0.75 goal differential range. Maybe lowet. A bubble team.

Number of teams did that better than +.75 last year: 8
Number of them that made the tournament: 8
1, 2, or 3 seeds: 7

The only 4-seed with a +.75 or better scoring average was Air Force.

The team with the highest goal differential who missed the tournament was Quinnipiac at +0.6 per game. The highest HEA team who missed the tournament was Merrimack at +.52.

Bottom line: if BC puts up +.75 goals per game next season, they are a lock for the tournament, nowhere near the bubble.

[JDUBBS1280]

At some point? They've already had down years under York, like 2001-2002 and 2008-2009. Nobody is arguing that it doesn't happen to every program. People are simply arguing that the talent is in place to have another good season.

And they certainly could have another good season this year. I certainly have never claimed to always be right. I just don't see it this year. I think they'll be a bubble team. And I admit that I'm going out on a small limb predicting they won't make the tourney. If I'm wrong, I'm sure I'll pay the consequences. But I'll be right here to take it