Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

[Stauber1]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

The loss to Vermont hurt. They should have done better in that.
This series? Given the personnel, and the experience discrepancy? I was expecting they were going to be swept. There is no surprise in that. The disappointment was in the first period, and then the immediate goal given up in the 2nd. After that, though, I liked the way they responded. My feeling on that is very much influenced by the "quality" these two teams put up against each other. And again, I have to disagree slightly. I don't think Duluth was content to give up that much zone time. The final 12 minutes of the 2nd was good, hard-nosed hockey - even if it didn't result in scoring chances (for either team). The 3rd looked much more like a Duluth team that was just trying to hold a lead; and I think the fact they took up that posture is a testament to the way MN played in the 2nd period.

The talent for MN clearly needs to be refined. I can't fault (most) the players in that. That can only come with game and role experience. If they keep working, and improving, we will see it come through.

I just hope it is enough, and in time, to extend the season.

And FWIW, of course this is a fan's perspective. If any of the players roll into practice on Monday feeling like they did enough this weekend, that is a serious problem. But from what I saw the last part of this game I don't think that is going to be an issue.

[HarleyMC]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

We just surpassed the 2009-10 record tonight for three consecutive losses inc. two shutouts. The Gophers didn't make the NCAA tournament that year.

Fri. Oct. 16: 0 @ North Dakota 4 L
Sat. Oct. 17: 3 @ North Dakota 3 T/OT
Fri. Oct. 23: 0 Denver 3 L
Sat. Oct. 24: 0 Denver 3 L

[Stauber1]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

I'm also curious what shot attempts were per period. It seemed MN attempted quite a lot of shots those final 2 periods, but didn't get that many through. My feeling was that was a combination of Duluth's defensive zone performance and MN's poor job of finding shooting lanes/hitting the net. The latter is a "quality" issue that can, and I expect will, be improved upon.

[HarleyMC]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

Gophers: 64 total shot attempts
25 Wide
18 Blocked
21 Saved

UMD: 56 total shot attempts
11 Wide
11 Blocked
30 Saved
1 Hit Post
3 Goals

On second look not sure on the scoring chances.

[Slap Shot]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

Welp

[5mn_Major]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

The Gopher D was very passive, had no intensity and pressure on UMD in the Gopher's zone and let the Bulldogs setup time and time again.

If it wasn't clear to folks after three games, it will be soon. The D effort is adequate. Our forwards are way out manned.

[JLS81]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

If it wasn't clear to folks after three games, it will be soon. The D effort is adequate. Our forwards are way out manned.

Not a Gopher fan but you are correct on the forwards. Your coach cannot develop the talent that lands in his lap year after year. Upperclassmen rarely improve and it shows against veteran teams like UMD.

[Biddco]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

TCB, liked what I saw from UMD, shows the potential for this team. Makes me excited for the rest of the year

[D2D]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

If it wasn't clear to folks after three games, it will be soon. The D effort is adequate. Our forwards are way out manned.

The numbers clearly support this contention. It's not that we're getting blown out. It's that we have no offense.

[HarleyMC]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

The numbers clearly support this contention. It's not that we're getting blown out. It's that we have no offense.

Tell me, which numbers are those R2D2? You mean like being outshot in the first period 17-2 and chasing UMD around in our zone without getting dirty and hitting someone? Or do you mean not being able to clear the zone for long stretches for three straight games and being outshot in ALL three? Or do you mean the Gopher D being outblocked in shots 39-26 in three games?

Or maybe you mean Bischoff being totally out of position allowing Toninato to waltz into the zone untouched last night while trying to apply a pee wee effort poke check:

GOAL: Dom Toninato gets @UMDHockey on the board first to give The Bulldogs a 1-0 lead over @gopherhockey. http://t.co/mV5fRGv6sI

— FOX Sports North (@fsnorth) October 18, 2015

Or maybe you mean allowing opponents to set up, leaving Schierhorn out to dry resulting in 9 goals in three games despite his best efforts in net? Or do you mean the following +/- numbers over the past three games:

Bischoff -3
Brodzinski -2
Collins -1
Glover -2
Johnson -3
Seeler 0

Or maybe you mean allowing Jared Thomas to get behind Johnson with Brodinski in no man's land and score on a breakaway:

GOAL: @UMDHockey Jared Thomas gets his 2nd goal in as many nights against Minnesota. 3-0 Bulldogs. @gopherhockey http://t.co/6DGEpdr6sA

— FOX Sports North (@fsnorth) October 18, 2015

Now what numbers were you referring to R2D2?

I actually thought the Gopher D would be much better than they are at the start of the season. But this crew is disappointing and entirely too soft and confused in the offensive zone, hanging Schierhorn out to dry in EVERY game and his play in net is the ONLY reason we're not being blown out. They were unengaged for much of the game last night while skating around chasing the puck instead of taking bodies out and protecting their zone. The only decent D we have is Seeler and he knows how to take a man out of the play. If they don't right this ship asap, this team has the dubious potential of being the worst ever in Lucia's tenure.

[Biddco]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

I fully expect the Gophers to score a goal in this series. Write it down.

Go Gophers!!

This was a genius call.

[D2D]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

Tell me, which numbers are those R2D2?

R2D2? Really? No need to take it out on one of your fellow Gopher hockey fans, someone who's cared enough to buy season tickets for over 40 consecutive years while sharing opinions with other loyal fans in this Forum. Needless to say I think we're all a little frustrated with the Gophers' slow start, but I do believe we'll manage to live through it and better times lie ahead.

But if you need a better example of what a "blow out" is in the game of hockey, check out what the Gopher Women are doing to their competition. In their last two series against St. Cloud State and Penn State, they've averaged 9 goals a game while giving up only 1. No need to look at SOG or anything else; the scores tell the story and define what a hockey "blow out" really means.

So far the Gopher men have given up 3 goals in each of their first three games, right around a half goal more than last year's team. Not good, but after just 3 games certainly not a reason to panic. We have a new goalie with zero D1 experience, and that alone could account for the half goal increase to start the season.

But as others have pointed out the big difference this year is that the team is not scoring. Last year's team averaged 3.5 goals over the course of the season. If the current Gophers would have matched that average in each of the first three games - while giving up the 3 in each of them as they did - we would not be off to a 0-3 start. Of course we're a very long ways from averaging 3.5 goals a game. In fact I think it's safe to say our current lineup is simply not capable of averaging 3.5 goals a game over the course of the entire season. I'm just not seeing where all that goal production is going to come from. To have what most of us would regard as a successful season it appears we'll need to emphasize defense much more than typical Gopher teams have done historically. Instead of giving up 2.5 goals a game we'll probably need to get that down to something closer to 2.0, while scoring 2.5 - 3.0. That said, I think it's fair to ask if the current personnel is capable of adopting a clamp-down, opportunistic trap style of game, or if the coaching staff would ever want to implement such a system, something that's never been in the Gopher DNA in the 40+ years I've been following the team.

I'm hoping we'll see the young squad make steady improvement throughout the first half. If we don't I'm afraid it's going to be a very long and very frustrating season.

[The Rube]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

R2D2? Really? No need to take it out on one of your fellow Gopher hockey fans, someone who's cared enough to buy season tickets for over 40 consecutive years while sharing opinions with other loyal fans in this Forum. Needless to say I think we're all a little frustrated with the Gophers' slow start, but I do believe we'll manage to live through it and better times lie ahead.

But if you need a better example of what a "blow out" is in the game of hockey, check out what the Gopher Women are doing to their competition. In their last two series against St. Cloud State and Penn State, they've averaged 9 goals a game while giving up only 1. No need to look at SOG or anything else; the scores tell the story and define what a hockey "blow out" really means.

So far the Gopher men have given up 3 goals in each of their first three games, right around a half goal more than last year's team. Not good, but after just 3 games certainly not a reason to panic. We have a new goalie with zero D1 experience, and that alone could account for the half goal increase to start the season.

But as others have pointed out the big difference this year is that the team is not scoring. Last year's team averaged 3.5 goals over the course of the season. If the current Gophers would have matched that average in each of the first three games - while giving up the 3 in each of them as they did - we would not be off to a 0-3 start. Of course we're a very long ways from averaging 3.5 goals a game. In fact I think it's safe to say our current lineup is simply not capable of averaging 3.5 goals a game over the course of the entire season. I'm just not seeing where all that goal production is going to come from. To have what most of us would regard as a successful season it appears we'll need to emphasize defense much more than typical Gopher teams have done historically. Instead of giving up 2.5 goals a game we'll probably need to get that down to something closer to 2.0, while scoring 2.5 - 3.0. That said, I think it's fair to ask if the current personnel is capable of adopting a clamp-down, opportunistic trap style of game, or if the coaching staff would ever want to implement such a system, something that's never been in the Gopher DNA in the 40+ years I've been following the team.

I'm hoping we'll see the young squad make steady improvement throughout the first half. If we don't I'm afraid it's going to be a very long and very frustrating season.

To be fair, the women's team is not of this earth. /Domination

Have listened to a couple games this year. This past Sat, left my place at puck drop, drove 3 blocks to bar, and MN was up 3-0. Just sayin'.

[Stauber1]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

But it's still a fair point. This team has been anemic on offense and made some big mistakes defensively and in goal - but still haven't been blown out on the scoreboard. And considering they were down 3-0 on Saturday 22min into the game, that could have very easily turned embarrassing on the scoreboard. It didn't. And I think the guys deserve *some* credit for that. I don't buy that the reason the Bulldogs didn't score more goals is that they were just sitting around twiddling their thumbs the last 35min of that game.

I think it all comes down to expectations. Coming into this year, looking at the personnel and the experience on the team, I really had no expectations for them to be racking up wins (especially not to start the year). I'm not sure how good they will look by the end of the season, but I've seen improvement and I've seen some compete, and that at least gives me reason to be a little optimistic...and yeah, that optimism is influenced by no real high expectations. But we have to be realistic.

If people want to criticize the coaching staff for the way they recruited, OK. But given what we have, the number of new faces, the number of role players being asked to fill bigger shoes...I'm not sure what anyone was really expecting. Especially against a Duluth team that is stacked with proven, veteran players and is generally considered to be in the upper echelon of college hockey teams this year.

I'd also like to reiterate that the lack of offense, it seems to me, can be partly attributed to the type of D (or the lack of a certain type of D) that we have this year. The forwards bear blame, but so do the guys on the back end. M. Reilly was obviously key to the Gopher offense last year, but guys like Marshall, Skjei, Holl a couple years ago...they didn't put up the numbers, but they were key facilitators. We don't seem to have those kinds of defensemen this year.

[D2D]

Re: Minnesota vs UMD: 10/16 & 10/17

To be fair, the women's team is not of this earth. /Domination

Have listened to a couple games this year. This past Sat, left my place at puck drop, drove 3 blocks to bar, and MN was up 3-0. Just sayin'.

Perhaps a bit of an unfair comparison, just trying to define what defines a "blow out" when it comes to hockey. But if you look at Wisconsin's and BC's women's teams you will find similar examples of blowout victories in their results as well. Each have /Domination way beyond 3-0.