WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

[bucky15]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Every players numbers will decrease as they move up in talent level, the issue is that point-per-game junior players come to UW and have their production completely fall off a cliff. While every program has players who can't adjust to the next level, it seems that Eaves has one of those players EVERY single season. Either the talent identification or the talent development or the overall system isn't working and in any case the responsibility is Eaves and Eaves alone as the head of the program.

You have to remember we are looking at the UW program with a microscope and we don't notice the players that fall short at other programs. We only notice the players that are successful at other programs.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Are we seriously blaming Eaves for guys having their production at the D1 level less then what they produced in juniors or high school....AGAIN? We already had this conversation before and it is beyond retarded to expect production not to decrease at every step up the pyramid of hockey as you step up in weight class and are playing the next level.

Don't believe me? Here 4 guys point per game numbers:
Heatley 2.5 in AJHL, 1.46 at UW, & .99 at the NHL level
Toews 1.7 at Shattucks, 1.11 at North Dakota, .90 in the NHL
Kessel 2.35 with USDT-U18, 1.30 at Minny, .72 in the NHL
Crosby 2.8 at Shuttucks, 2.5 in QMJHL, and 1.4 in the NHL

Eaves problem is not systems, developmental, or any other malarchy you want to blame him for. His problem has been the roster is always short one (or more) of those guys that have that ability you can't teach in as much as you either have it or you don't. Whether it is not getting enough of the Kessel, Toews, or Heatleys of the world, or having them leave to soon....that is the real problem. It's not the X's and the O's, it's the Jimmy's and the Joe's.

Every players numbers will decrease as they move up in talent level, the issue is that point-per-game junior players come to UW and have their production completely fall off a cliff. While every program has players who can't adjust to the next level, it seems that Eaves has one of those players EVERY single season. Either the talent identification or the talent development or the overall system isn't working and in any case the responsibility is Eaves and Eaves alone as the head of the program.

I've already made the argument that you can't rely on freshmen and the ppg numbers for those guys in college include their freshman seasons. Philip had 51 points in 39 games as a freshman though. Imagine if he progressed like these guys did/have:

Toews - Fr. 39 pts in 43 games, So. 46 pts in 34 games
Oshie - Fr. 45 pts in 43 games, So. 52 pts in 43 games, Jr. 45 pts in 42 games
Reinprecht - Fr. 20 pts in 38 games, So. 43 pts in 41 games, Jr. 33 pts in 38 games, Sr. 66 pts in 37 games
Goligoski - Fr. 20 pts in 32 games, So. 39 pts in 41 games, Jr. 39 pts in 44 games
Knight - Fr. 13 pts in 37 games, So. 44 pts in 44 games, Jr. 40 pts in 39 games, Sr. 33 pts in 23 games

Wanna know why the Gophers are enjoying the success that they are this season and last?
Bjugs - Fr. 20 pts in 29 games, So. 42 pts in 40 games, Jr. 25 pts in 24 games
Budish - Fr. 17 pts in 39 games, So. 35 pts in 43 games, Jr. 22 pts in 24 games
Haula - Fr. 24 pts in 34 games, So. 49 pts in 43 games, Jr. 29 pts in 21 games
Condon - Fr. 17 pts in 35 games, So. 30 pts in 43 games, Jr. 23 pts in 24 games

The Gophers are developing their talent and now they have a team with lots of upper classmen who can score. These guys came in and had for the most part, pedestrian freshman seasons. They all made good jumps the following season and at least maintained the jump if not increased it.

For some reason, we're not having enough kids progress under Eaves' guidance.

It can't all be attributed to early departures either. The Gophers and Sioux have plenty of those and yet the Gophers at least still have 4 juniors who are averaging at least a point per game.


Looking at our best current upper classmen:
Zengerle - Fr. 31 pts in 41 games, So. 37 pts in 37 games, Jr. 8 pts in 16 games
Lee - Fr. 9 pts in 17 games, So. 17 pts in 40 games, Jr. 11 pts in 17 games, Sr. 17 pts in 20 games
Mersh - Fr. 11 pts in 41 games, So. 16 pts in 37 games, Jr. 18 pts in 22 games
Barnes - Fr. 17 pts in 41 games, Jr. 26 pts in 37 games, Jr. 9 pts in 22 games

 

[Timothy A]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Been a long time since I have been on the USCHO boards...would like to hear what you guys have to say....

I was always a big supporter of Eaves, but I have to agree with the majority (or so it seems) here that believe he is a significant portion of the problem. My question is two fold....1 - will the B10HC be a big enough draw for recruits and a "potential" new coach? I say probably......And 2 - who would be a viable target that you would like to see the Badgers go after if Eaves ever leaves/is not retained.

Thanks all for their thoughts....

I don't think Big 6 hockey cof. will have an impact period on recruits. The coaches and the schools themselves in the conference will draw kids, what conference they will play in isn't even a secondary impact. I think a coach would be drawn to UW by the tradition, facilities and the fact UW is a big 14 school or the fact they are going back to their Alma mater.

Potential coaches....Gwoz, Blaisi, Johnson, Granato, Oseiki, Rohlick, a partial list from memory. Supposedly Gwoz has said UW's chance for him as passed. Johnson is possibly not as committed to travelling for recruiting as he needs to be as evidenced by his Sauer days. I'd offer Blaisi a big bucket of cash. BA has fired coaches in other sports, but they did not have the track record that Eaves does (which in many eyes is underwhelming). The closest parallel was the VB coach, but he hasn't had the team at the top in like 8-9 years. Eaves is 3 yrs removed from the BC debacle and 7 years removed from the championship, the clock has to be ticking.

 

[markwojo]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

I've already made the argument that you can't rely on freshmen and the ppg numbers for those guys in college include their freshman seasons. Philip had 51 points in 39 games as a freshman though. Imagine if he progressed like these guys did/have:

Toews - Fr. 39 pts in 43 games, So. 46 pts in 34 games
Oshie - Fr. 45 pts in 43 games, So. 52 pts in 43 games, Jr. 45 pts in 42 games
Reinprecht - Fr. 20 pts in 38 games, So. 43 pts in 41 games, Jr. 33 pts in 38 games, Sr. 66 pts in 37 games
Goligoski - Fr. 20 pts in 32 games, So. 39 pts in 41 games, Jr. 39 pts in 44 games
Knight - Fr. 13 pts in 37 games, So. 44 pts in 44 games, Jr. 40 pts in 39 games, Sr. 33 pts in 23 games

Wanna know why the Gophers are enjoying the success that they are this season and last?
Bjugs - Fr. 20 pts in 29 games, So. 42 pts in 40 games, 25 pts in 24 games
Budish - Fr. 17 pts in 39 games, So. 35 pts in 43 games, Jr. 22 pts in 24 games
Haula - Fr. 24 pts in 34 games, So. 49 pts in 43 games, Jr. 29 pts in 21 games
Condon - Fr. 17 pts in 35 games, So. 30 pts in 43 games, Jr. 23 pts in 24 games

The Gophers are developing their talent and now they have a team with lots of upper classmen who can score. These guys came in and had for the most part, pedestrian freshman seasons. They all made good jumps the following season and at least maintained the jump if not increased it.

For some reason, we're not having enough kids progress under Eaves' guidance.

It can't all be attributed to early departures either. The Gophers and Sioux have plenty of those and yet the Gophers at least still have 4 juniors who are averaging at least a point per game.

Toews and Oshie don't make your point...they are elite guys that produced like most elite guys do...right from the puck drop as frosh. There is miniscule variance in their numbers in subsequent years after their frosh campaigns. They were point per game guys at the start and at the end. Reinprecht is a stretch with your point as well...he was a nice recruit but was more of an overaged late bloomer and to an extent rode Heatley's coattails too. Nothing about putting up 1.4 points a game as a 18 & 19 year old in the AJHL (nearly 20 by the time he was done there) and being undrafted said elite recruit about Reinprecht. To his credit he blossomed late and took advantage of having an elite talent like Heatley in his senior year (as a TWENTY THREE year old a couple months shy of 24 when that season ended) to put up some really good numbers as a senior.

Budish, Bjugstad, & Haula are exactly the difference between the Badgers and the rodents...namely Juniors that in most cases are long gone before their junior years from Madison (as well as most other places including Minny). Budish and Bjustad in particular have Pro physical features and Haula is not quite as suprising as he is undersized for pros and dmen tend to stay longer too. Having those guys stay means guys like Michaelson, & Skjei get to ease into things and provide great depth instead of being forced into critical situations (PP, top lines playing against other teams best players, ect) AND MORE IMPORTANTLY you are not bringing in players a year earlier then you should be to fill out your roster and letting guys stay in the USHL that really belong there and not high end D1. How did having guys like Kessel, Oposko, Schroeder, & Leddy bailing after 2 seasons or less work for the rodents? I seem to remember a fire Lucia thread (as well as it's all John Hill's fault and when he is gone all is well in Rodentiaville).

Eaves problem is he is always short one of those high end forwards, and when one leaves after one season (or even two), the void in depth only gets exasperated. You can make excuses and what if about had Gagner's dad not gotten a job, had Turris not gotten bad advise to go pro after his frosh year, or had Stepan and Craig Smith not blossomed so quickly (somehow despite Eaves "constraining them") and stayed an extra season...things would have been much different. The problem is all that and more all really happened and Eaves is responsible. He either figures it out...and soon (I believe given his track record of player development, the long overdue upgrade in facilities, and the move to the Big 10 give him the tools he needs)...or there will be new leadership. Between attendance woes, on ice results (a possibility of not making the tourney again for 4 out of 5 years), and the increasing volume from the fanbase, he'll go from a luke warm seat to red hot next season. He really needs the recent resurgence to continue and lead to a tourney birth as well as a team next year that is a top 10ish team. I hope he gets there as that is the less disruptive path then taking a half a step backwards in hopes of a step forward.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Toews and Oshie don't make your point...they are elite guys that produced like most elite guys do...right from the puck drop as frosh. There is miniscule variance in their numbers in subsequent years after their frosh campaigns. They were point per game guys at the start and at the end.

Budish, Bjugstad, & Haula are exactly the difference between the Badgers and the rodents...namely Juniors that in most cases are long gone before their junior years from Madison (as well as most other places including Minny). Budish and Bjustad in particular have Pro physical features and Haula is not quite as suprising as he is undersized for pros and dmen tend to stay longer too. Having those guys stay means guys like Michaelson, & Skjei get to ease into things and provide great depth instead of being forced into critical situations (PP, top lines playing against other teams best players, ect) AND MORE IMPORTANTLY you are not bringing in players a year earlier then you should be to fill out your roster and letting guys stay in the USHL that really belong there and not high end D1. How did having guys like Kessel, Oposko, Schroeder, & Leddy bailing after 2 seasons or less work for the rodents? I seem to remember a fire Lucia thread (as well as it's all John Hill's fault and when he is gone all is well in Rodentiaville).

Eaves problem is he is always short one of those high end forwards, and when one leaves after one season (or even two), the void in depth only gets exasperated. You can make excuses and what if about had Gagner's dad not gotten a job, had Turris not gotten bad advise to go pro after his frosh year, or had Stepan and Craig Smith not blossomed so quickly (somehow despite Eaves "constraining them") and stayed an extra season...things would have been much different. The problem is all that and more all really happened and Eaves is responsible. He either figures it out...and soon (I believe given his track record of player development, the long overdue upgrade in facilities, and the move to the Big 10 give him the tools he needs)...or there will be new leadership. Between attendance woes, on ice results (a possibility of not making the tourney again for 4 out of 5 years), and the increasing volume from the fanbase, he'll go from a luke warm seat to red hot next season. He really needs the recent resurgence to continue and lead to a tourney birth as well as a team next year that is a top 10ish team. I hope he gets there as that is the less disruptive path then taking a half a step backwards in hopes of a step forward.

As far as Toews & Oshie, they didn't drop off either. They maintained or got better. Zengerle has fallen off a cliff this year. I get that he doesn't have much help and that he missed games, but he's disappeared.

In terms of early departures, the vast majority of Wisconsin's have been defensemen, a commodity that we're obviously still just fine with. Of the forwards that have left early in the past 3 years, neither Steppan nor Murray would still be here and Craig Smith would be a senior - something that even Eaves must have known we'd never see.

So no matter how you slice it, this is the roster, minus maybe a defenseman, that Eaves knew he was going to have. This was the plan. What went wrong? Was it the plan or the execution of the plan? Both?

Of those Gopher Juniors, they probably lose at least 3 of them next year. I bet they have a contingency plan. I bet they're developing other players (didn't say "recruiting") to step up and have incoming freshman that will take those players' places and recruits in the pipeline to take the incoming players' places.

I'm betting that York has a similar plan in place. Hakstol and Gwoz too.

It's a myth that early departures are killing our offense. There simply haven't been that many and really none for this year.

 

[Gandalf the Red]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

This team just hasn't recovered from the loss of Eric Springer to graduation.

 

[markwojo]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

As far as Toews & Oshie, they didn't drop off either. They maintained or got better. Zengerle has fallen off a cliff this year. I get that he doesn't have much help and that he missed games, but he's disappeared.

In terms of early departures, the vast majority of Wisconsin's have been defensemen, a commodity that we're obviously still just fine with. Of the forwards that have left early in the past 3 years, neither Steppan nor Murray would still be here and Craig Smith would be a senior - something that even Eaves must have known we'd never see.

So no matter how you slice it, this is the roster, minus maybe a defenseman, that Eaves knew he was going to have. This was the plan. What went wrong? Was it the plan or the execution of the plan? Both?

Of those Gopher Juniors, they probably lose at least 3 of them next year. I bet they have a contingency plan. I bet they're developing other players (didn't say "recruiting") to step up and have incoming freshman that will take those players' places and recruits in the pipeline to take the incoming players' places.

I'm betting that York has a similar plan in place. Hakstol and Gwoz too.

It's a myth that early departures are killing our offense. There simply haven't been that many and really none for this year.

Yes and no. Early departures have a much longer tail of effect then their own eligibility length. When you lose a guy like Turris, Murray, Stepan, or Craig Smith a year earlier then you are anticipating (generally over the Summer and often late)...you simply are not replacing them in the near term (that season) as that kind of talent is not sitting around hoping for a scholarship (those guys already committed elsewhere and have a scholarship). For example, if you knew Turris was gone after his frosh year...you would have been able to offer one of your 18 scholarships to a much better caliber of player for what would have been his sophmore year. Instead you lose Turris last minute with no viable option talentwise and either plug the hole with the best you can and try to use his money for the following season or punt. Eaves problem is not the early departure of good college level forwards, it's that he has generally been short one (or more) of those kind of guys and when one does leave early it makes a more pronounced impact. Minny & UND have had a little bit more depth at forward and when they lose a guy up front it just is easier to overcome. Buck stops with Eaves so he is responsible for figuring that out and making it work.

Zengerle's "drop off" is an awefully small sample size. 16 games is certainly enough games to perhaps see a pattern...but not sure it tells the whole story given there was an injury and perhaps trying to compete at something less then optimal conditions when he returned helathwise. Further...I think the impact of Schultz leaving is being understated some as the straw that stirred the drink...that dude was pretty special.

 

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

This team just hasn't recovered from the loss of Eric Springer to graduation.

Nailed it!

Must spread rep....

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Yes and no. Early departures have a much longer tail of effect then their own eligibility length. When you lose a guy like Turris, Murray, Stepan, or Craig Smith a year earlier then you are anticipating (generally over the Summer and often late)...you simply are not replacing them in the near term (that season) as that kind of talent is not sitting around hoping for a scholarship (those guys already committed elsewhere and have a scholarship). For example, if you knew Turris was gone after his frosh year...you would have been able to offer one of your 18 scholarships to a much better caliber of player for what would have been his sophmore year. Instead you lose Turris last minute with no viable option talentwise and either plug the hole with the best you can and try to use his money for the following season or punt. Eaves problem is not the early departure of good college level forwards, it's that he has generally been short one (or more) of those kind of guys and when one does leave early it makes a more pronounced impact. Minny & UND have had a little bit more depth at forward and when they lose a guy up front it just is easier to overcome. Buck stops with Eaves so he is responsible for figuring that out and making it work.

Zengerle's "drop off" is an awefully small sample size. 16 games is certainly enough games to perhaps see a pattern...but not sure it tells the whole story given there was an injury and perhaps trying to compete at something less then optimal conditions when he returned helathwise. Further...I think the impact of Schultz leaving is being understated some as the straw that stirred the drink...that dude was pretty special.

I think you make many good points. I think that we're both using some circumstantial stuff to our own argument's advantage.

Two things though:

1) Minny and UND have more than just a "little bit" more depth at forward. In addition, I still maintain that they are doing a better job of developing their forwards. Making average players solid, solid players good & good players great (something that we're clearly doing well with our defensemen).

2) Schultz stayed through his junior year, which is one more season than anyone could have hoped for. Again, Eaves had to know that he wouldn't have him beyond that.


We may not agree on exactly what the problems are, but it seems that we both agree that the buck stops with Eaves. Like you, I'd like nothing more than for him to turn it around (right away) and not have to go through a coaching change. Problem is that we were talking about these same issues in 08 & 09 and then he got a reprieve with the run to being obliterated by BC. Not sure anything can change.

 

[TJbadgerfan]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Whether it is not getting enough of the Kessel, Toews, or Heatleys of the world, or having them leave to soon....that is the real problem. It's not the X's and the O's, it's the Jimmy's and the Joe's.

Kessel never gave a crap about playing defensive and no coach made him give a crap about it. He was on the ice to do one thing. Heatley didn't do a lot defensively either. If a coaches X's and O's are making the 1st and 2nd lines play the same defensive checking roles as the 3rd and 4th lines, it is the coaches X's and O's. That's what it looks like. This team plays as 2- 3rd lines and 2- 4th lines. Not because of the talent they have but the system they are coached to play.

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

I've already made the argument that you can't rely on freshmen and the ppg numbers for those guys in college include their freshman seasons. Philip had 51 points in 39 games as a freshman though. Imagine if he progressed like these guys did/have:

Toews - Fr. 39 pts in 43 games, So. 46 pts in 34 games
Oshie - Fr. 45 pts in 43 games, So. 52 pts in 43 games, Jr. 45 pts in 42 games
Reinprecht - Fr. 20 pts in 38 games, So. 43 pts in 41 games, Jr. 33 pts in 38 games, Sr. 66 pts in 37 games
Goligoski - Fr. 20 pts in 32 games, So. 39 pts in 41 games, Jr. 39 pts in 44 games
Knight - Fr. 13 pts in 37 games, So. 44 pts in 44 games, Jr. 40 pts in 39 games, Sr. 33 pts in 23 games

For no reason at all, I feel this list should include:

Mike Eaves - Fr. 54 pts in 38 games, So. 43 pts in 34 games, Jr. 81 pts in 45 games, Sr. 89 pts in 43 games.

Mark Johnson - Fr. 80 pts in 43 games, So. 86 pts in 42 games, Jr. 90 pts in 40 games, Sr. DNP


Oddly, Eaves developed considerably while Johnson barely got any better. Go figure.

 

[bucky15]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

For no reason at all, I feel this list should include:

Mike Eaves - Fr. 54 pts in 38 games, So. 43 pts in 34 games, Jr. 81 pts in 45 games, Sr. 89 pts in 43 games.

Mark Johnson - Fr. 80 pts in 43 games, So. 86 pts in 42 games, Jr. 90 pts in 40 games, Sr. DNP


Oddly, Eaves developed considerably while Johnson barely got any better. Go figure.

Tough to get much better when you already average almost 2 points a game as a freshman. What we need now is 2 players that can put those numbers up, but I think the goalies and playing style were a bit different in those times.

 

[markwojo]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Kessel never gave a crap about playing defensive and no coach made him give a crap about it. He was on the ice to do one thing. Heatley didn't do a lot defensively either. If a coaches X's and O's are making the 1st and 2nd lines play the same defensive checking roles as the 3rd and 4th lines, it is the coaches X's and O's. That's what it looks like. This team plays as 2- 3rd lines and 2- 4th lines. Not because of the talent they have but the system they are coached to play.

I don't disagree with most of your thoughts, but to say guys with skill don't have freedom to create offense is disingenuos. Guys like Earl, Davies, Turris, and Zengerle have been extremely productive under Eaves and other then Zengerle to a point....none would be mistaken as Selke candidates. The problem is Eaves never seems to have enough of those kind of guys on a roster at the same time. This years style of play is as much about talent as it is systems. Which guys on the Badger roster would be top line guys or even get PP time at Minny, North Dakota, Denver, or BC?

 

[Thecalkid]

For no reason at all, I feel this list should include:

Mike Eaves - Fr. 54 pts in 38 games, So. 43 pts in 34 games, Jr. 81 pts in 45 games, Sr. 89 pts in 43 games.

Mark Johnson - Fr. 80 pts in 43 games, So. 86 pts in 42 games, Jr. 90 pts in 40 games, Sr. DNP




Oddly, Eaves developed considerably while Johnson barely got any better. Go figure.

Points don't neccessarily dictate whether he developed or not

 

[TUSCHWI]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

FWIW, Wisconsin is tied for 19th in the PWR. It's almost not even fathomable how far they've come.

Said they had to go 16-6-4 to give themselves a chance at the tournament. They've gone 8-0-3 since then. 8-6-1 gets them close, although they might have to even be better. Crazy.

It's too bad they dropped back to 25th in PWR. But if they keep beating teams they should beat, and a few other teams above them reach the TUC criteria, WI's PWR will go up. A sweep this weekend is a must.

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Points don't neccessarily dictate whether he developed or not

Bah. If that Johnson kid would have just developed like Eaves and those other guys and just put up 150 pts his Junior year, we'd have that 7th banner already hanging.

So, anyway, several weeks ago I was listening to Chuck's podcast as he described AA's difficulties in recruiting/retaining high end talent, leading them to play a system which relies on strong goal tending and a heavily defense oriented strategy to keep games close and give them a chance late against obviously more talented teams. Chuck touted this 'formula for success' for AA's situation as the best way for them to play in the WCHA. I totally agree with his assessment.

Later in the same podcast, (though I'm sure not making a conscience comparison at all) when talk turned to the Badgers, Chuck accurately described Bucky's 'formula for success': Strong goal tending, defense first, keep it close, and so on. All the same words and phrases he used to describe AA. Again a very good assessment, but it struck me--Why in the world does Wisconsin have the same 'formula for success' that perrennial WCHA bottom dweller AA has?
I have no idea, but it is the case. I guess I generally agree with Almington: It's the sytem that is frustrating fans and the scoreboard. As fans, when it works we're satisfied because a 1-0 win trumps a 6-5 loss every time. But when it doesn't, we're doubly unhappy because losing 2-0 and 3-1 a lot just sucks to watch.

"Wisko you moron, you've been huffing Zamboni fumes again haven't you? It's not the system at all, it's that we don't have enough studs up front!"

Yes, I have, and no, it's not. Actually, I believe it's that we don't have the studly offensive defensemen. The Eaves system starts with defense. What it relies on is NHL caliber defensemen to start the offense, make the passes, jump into the high slot, and anchor the powerplay. When it's really clicking, the system can turn the puck over and lead the nation in scoring-- even take you to the NC game. But not without super-studs on the blue line.

Adding two high flying forwards to this team would make it better of course, but would it be a top five team? I don't believe so. Because the system is not designed to work that way and unless Eaves changed things up (which he has not shown to be very willing to be flexible) those high flyer's impact would be muted by the style of play. Instead, add a couple of all star D-men to the mix. With the goaltending and guys we already have up front... The way the system works it just might make this team a contender. (Albeit one that is going to need to win 2-1 and 3-2 a lot, but that is exactly what it's supposed to do.)

So what am I saying? Just that all this longing for another Heatley, a Reinprecht, a Shuchuk, a Granato, a Lecy, a Johnson, or dare we hope-- a second coming of Bert DeHate? (Don't look at me like that. Yes, I said Bert Dehate. 47 goals - 31 games played in '67-'68.) All this longing for big time scorers is wasted breath, because as long as Eaves is in charge, what we need to pray for is more Justin Schultz, Jamie Mcbain, Craig Anderson, Brian Rafalski, Barry Richter, Theran Walsh, and Chris Chelios. Give him three Craig Norwich's and three Gary Suter's and Eaves' system (although kind of boring) is going to win a lot of games. But barring that, it's going play a lot like a better staffed AA and it's not going to be all that fun to watch.

 

[srkbadger]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Bah. If that Johnson kid would have just developed like Eaves and those other guys and just put up 150 pts his Junior year, we'd have that 7th banner already hanging.

So, anyway, several weeks ago I was listening to Chuck's podcast as he described AA's difficulties in recruiting/retaining high end talent, leading them to play a system which relies on strong goal tending and a heavily defense oriented strategy to keep games close and give them a chance late against obviously more talented teams. Chuck touted this 'formula for success' for AA's situation as the best way for them to play in the WCHA. I totally agree with his assessment.

Later in the same podcast, (though I'm sure not making a conscience comparison at all) when talk turned to the Badgers, Chuck accurately described Bucky's 'formula for success': Strong goal tending, defense first, keep it close, and so on. All the same words and phrases he used to describe AA. Again a very good assessment, but it struck me--Why in the world does Wisconsin have the same 'formula for success' that perrennial WCHA bottom dweller AA has?
I have no idea, but it is the case. I guess I generally agree with Almington: It's the sytem that is frustrating fans and the scoreboard. As fans, when it works we're satisfied because a 1-0 win trumps a 6-5 loss every time. But when it doesn't, we're doubly unhappy because losing 2-0 and 3-1 a lot just sucks to watch.

"Wisko you moron, you've been huffing Zamboni fumes again haven't you? It's not the system at all, it's that we don't have enough studs up front!"

Yes, I have, and no, it's not. Actually, I believe it's that we don't have the studly offensive defensemen. The Eaves system starts with defense. What it relies on is NHL caliber defensemen to start the offense, make the passes, jump into the high slot, and anchor the powerplay. When it's really clicking, the system can turn the puck over and lead the nation in scoring-- even take you to the NC game. But not without super-studs on the blue line.

Adding two high flying forwards to this team would make it better of course, but would it be a top five team? I don't believe so. Because the system is not designed to work that way and unless Eaves changed things up (which he has not shown to be very willing to be flexible) those high flyer's impact would be muted by the style of play. Instead, add a couple of all star D-men to the mix. With the goaltending and guys we already have up front... The way the system works it just might make this team a contender. (Albeit one that is going to need to win 2-1 and 3-2 a lot, but that is exactly what it's supposed to do.)

So what am I saying? Just that all this longing for another Heatley, a Reinprecht, a Shuchuk, a Granato, a Lecy, a Johnson, or dare we hope-- a second coming of Bert DeHate? (Don't look at me like that. Yes, I said Bert Dehate. 47 goals - 31 games played in '67-'68.) All this longing for big time scorers is wasted breath, because as long as Eaves is in charge, what we need to pray for is more Justin Schultz, Jamie Mcbain, Craig Anderson, Brian Rafalski, Barry Richter, Theran Walsh, and Chris Chelios. Give him three Craig Norwich's and three Gary Suter's and Eaves' system (although kind of boring) is going to win a lot of games. But barring that, it's going play a lot like a better staffed AA and it's not going to be all that fun to watch.

I see some merit in your analysis. If true, do you think it's easier to find these defensemen with the described characteristics, or forwards? I would contend that such a defenseman is much more rare, and thus it's not wise to predicate your success on a system which relies on acquiring such defensive talent year after year.

 

[markwojo]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Bah. If that Johnson kid would have just developed like Eaves and those other guys and just put up 150 pts his Junior year, we'd have that 7th banner already hanging.

So, anyway, several weeks ago I was listening to Chuck's podcast as he described AA's difficulties in recruiting/retaining high end talent, leading them to play a system which relies on strong goal tending and a heavily defense oriented strategy to keep games close and give them a chance late against obviously more talented teams. Chuck touted this 'formula for success' for AA's situation as the best way for them to play in the WCHA. I totally agree with his assessment.

Later in the same podcast, (though I'm sure not making a conscience comparison at all) when talk turned to the Badgers, Chuck accurately described Bucky's 'formula for success': Strong goal tending, defense first, keep it close, and so on. All the same words and phrases he used to describe AA. Again a very good assessment, but it struck me--Why in the world does Wisconsin have the same 'formula for success' that perrennial WCHA bottom dweller AA has?
I have no idea, but it is the case. I guess I generally agree with Almington: It's the sytem that is frustrating fans and the scoreboard. As fans, when it works we're satisfied because a 1-0 win trumps a 6-5 loss every time. But when it doesn't, we're doubly unhappy because losing 2-0 and 3-1 a lot just sucks to watch.

"Wisko you moron, you've been huffing Zamboni fumes again haven't you? It's not the system at all, it's that we don't have enough studs up front!"

Yes, I have, and no, it's not. Actually, I believe it's that we don't have the studly offensive defensemen. The Eaves system starts with defense. What it relies on is NHL caliber defensemen to start the offense, make the passes, jump into the high slot, and anchor the powerplay. When it's really clicking, the system can turn the puck over and lead the nation in scoring-- even take you to the NC game. But not without super-studs on the blue line.

Adding two high flying forwards to this team would make it better of course, but would it be a top five team? I don't believe so. Because the system is not designed to work that way and unless Eaves changed things up (which he has not shown to be very willing to be flexible) those high flyer's impact would be muted by the style of play. Instead, add a couple of all star D-men to the mix. With the goaltending and guys we already have up front... The way the system works it just might make this team a contender. (Albeit one that is going to need to win 2-1 and 3-2 a lot, but that is exactly what it's supposed to do.)

So what am I saying? Just that all this longing for another Heatley, a Reinprecht, a Shuchuk, a Granato, a Lecy, a Johnson, or dare we hope-- a second coming of Bert DeHate? (Don't look at me like that. Yes, I said Bert Dehate. 47 goals - 31 games played in '67-'68.) All this longing for big time scorers is wasted breath, because as long as Eaves is in charge, what we need to pray for is more Justin Schultz, Jamie Mcbain, Craig Anderson, Brian Rafalski, Barry Richter, Theran Walsh, and Chris Chelios. Give him three Craig Norwich's and three Gary Suter's and Eaves' system (although kind of boring) is going to win a lot of games. But barring that, it's going play a lot like a better staffed AA and it's not going to be all that fun to watch.

So when we won a title in '06 and were an utterly dominating squad (other then a little hiccup around Elliott getting nicked up), who were these multiple stud Dmen that were driving Eaves system? Other then Gilbert, there isn't anyone that even remotely resembles a stud NHL caliber dman (unless you consider Piskula who had a couple cups of coffee or Drewiske who has carved out a niche as a parttimer who's never been much more then a #7 dman in the NHL). That team won by having 2 absolute stud college scoring threats (Pavs/Earl) and had an otherwsie deep team of talent up front (Burish, McMurchy, Dowell, Joudrey, Street, Skille, Carlson, ect) and some solid depth pieces around Gilbert on the backend with a stud in net.

What has been missing in the recent lean years has been the 2 studs up front...some secondary scoring depth and the stud goaltending. 2010 we had most of the pieces with some depth up front...but not the elite level goaltending. Unfortunately, we are there on the goaltending and missing some of the depth elsewhere now.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

I see some merit in your analysis. If true, do you think it's easier to find these defensemen with the described characteristics, or forwards? I would contend that such a defenseman is much more rare, and thus it's not wise to predicate your success on a system which relies on acquiring such defensive talent year after year.

Yeah, I agree that he raises an interesting point of view. Never thought of it that way.

The problem is that playmaking defensemen are a fairly rare commodity and you almost always suffer on the defensive side with those guys. Certainly wouldn't want 6 of them on a team, even if you could find 6. Guys like Schultz & Chelios are quite hard to find, or at least I'd think they are.

The '06 team didn't have them in spades. I'm remembering Gilbert, but the rest of them weren't even elite defensive defensemen.

I mean, Drewiske, Engel (sp?), Likens & Klubbertanz... they were solid and played good team defense, but not on the par of the 2010 unit. Klubby was good, but I don't remember him as elite.

 

[Gandalf the Red]

Re: WISCONSIN Hockey Vol. XXIV - Craziest Season Of All Time

Bah. If that Johnson kid would have just developed like Eaves and those other guys and just put up 150 pts his Junior year, we'd have that 7th banner already hanging.

So, anyway, several weeks ago I was listening to Chuck's podcast as he described AA's difficulties in recruiting/retaining high end talent, leading them to play a system which relies on strong goal tending and a heavily defense oriented strategy to keep games close and give them a chance late against obviously more talented teams. Chuck touted this 'formula for success' for AA's situation as the best way for them to play in the WCHA. I totally agree with his assessment.

Later in the same podcast, (though I'm sure not making a conscience comparison at all) when talk turned to the Badgers, Chuck accurately described Bucky's 'formula for success': Strong goal tending, defense first, keep it close, and so on. All the same words and phrases he used to describe AA. Again a very good assessment, but it struck me--Why in the world does Wisconsin have the same 'formula for success' that perrennial WCHA bottom dweller AA has?
I have no idea, but it is the case. I guess I generally agree with Almington: It's the sytem that is frustrating fans and the scoreboard. As fans, when it works we're satisfied because a 1-0 win trumps a 6-5 loss every time. But when it doesn't, we're doubly unhappy because losing 2-0 and 3-1 a lot just sucks to watch.

"Wisko you moron, you've been huffing Zamboni fumes again haven't you? It's not the system at all, it's that we don't have enough studs up front!"

Yes, I have, and no, it's not. Actually, I believe it's that we don't have the studly offensive defensemen. The Eaves system starts with defense. What it relies on is NHL caliber defensemen to start the offense, make the passes, jump into the high slot, and anchor the powerplay. When it's really clicking, the system can turn the puck over and lead the nation in scoring-- even take you to the NC game. But not without super-studs on the blue line.

Adding two high flying forwards to this team would make it better of course, but would it be a top five team? I don't believe so. Because the system is not designed to work that way and unless Eaves changed things up (which he has not shown to be very willing to be flexible) those high flyer's impact would be muted by the style of play. Instead, add a couple of all star D-men to the mix. With the goaltending and guys we already have up front... The way the system works it just might make this team a contender. (Albeit one that is going to need to win 2-1 and 3-2 a lot, but that is exactly what it's supposed to do.)

So what am I saying? Just that all this longing for another Heatley, a Reinprecht, a Shuchuk, a Granato, a Lecy, a Johnson, or dare we hope-- a second coming of Bert DeHate? (Don't look at me like that. Yes, I said Bert Dehate. 47 goals - 31 games played in '67-'68.) All this longing for big time scorers is wasted breath, because as long as Eaves is in charge, what we need to pray for is more Justin Schultz, Jamie Mcbain, Craig Anderson, Brian Rafalski, Barry Richter, Theran Walsh, and Chris Chelios. Give him three Craig Norwich's and three Gary Suter's and Eaves' system (although kind of boring) is going to win a lot of games. But barring that, it's going play a lot like a better staffed AA and it's not going to be all that fun to watch.

I think this is a good analysis overall. The current blue line, while doing fine defensively as of late, is not what we have grown accustomed to as fans the last several years. The 2010 team had four currently NHL players on the roster. The 2006 team had more forward talent, but the blue line wasn't too bad either, w/ two of them in the NHL. Elliot was a stud in net, Gudmandson was good, but no Elliot.

McCabe certainly has all the talent, but he needs help and the rest of the blue line is just not that offensively gifted. And there isn't anything coming in the door next year. In 2014 the blue line recruits are promising, but will take time to develop.

If what Wisko is saying is accurate then it will be more of the same for the next several winters.