Re: The 2010 CCHA Championships 3/19-20: FSU, Miami, Michigan, and NMU
Well if that is actually the case, then Michigan has bigger problems than talent....
Okay, since you won't listen to reason, maybe a stat comparison will help. What was your opinion of Michigan's talent and depth last year? Better? A team that didn't win the CCHA regular season, didn't win the tourney but was in the championship game... flamed out in the first round of the NCAA's, won 29 games, 20-8 in conference.
They lost Fardig, Miller, Naurato, Turnbull and Mitera to graduation. They lost Czarnik and Palushaj to defection.
They gained Brown, Treais, Lynch, Sparks, Rohrkemper and Moffie.
Compared to last season, same number of games played (41)- Michigan is down 40 points in net offense production-394 to 354. Why?
1. Palushaj comprised 50 points in production. Czarnik, 16 last season.
2. The remaining core players (Caporusso, Hagelin, Rust, Wohlberg, Lebler) were up a net 26 points from last year. They were expected to contribute more. Czarnik contributed 6 points this season before he bolted.
3. The defense didn't contribute as many points as the year before with the same players.
My point is, their offensive production drop is really due to losing Palushaj early. The seniors that left had their offense replaced by the incoming class, and by the core players. It was the intangibles they brought (size, age, experience, leadership) that has made the difference this season- which has nothing to do with talent or depth. Just the same, Chris Brown was on the All-Rookie team. No lack of talent there.
4. Goaltending. Hogan pretty much had the reins last season. He was 24-6, 1.97 .914 save%. This season, 18-15-1, 2.33 .901 save %. Significant drop.
You have a team this season with less offense due to losing two players and not having the core players step up. The freshman class' production equaled the outgoing seniors, basically, but lack leadership, age and experience. The goaltending suffered. The goals against were still top ten in the country. The PK was still top five in the country. They lacked discipline. Those are intangibles.
You want to know why they finished seventh, there it is. But it wasn't due to "lack of overall talent, or depth." They underachieved.