What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Wisconsin is 13th in the PairWise.

I'm thinking that could be the very last spot this year. I think it's probable that at least 2 conference tournament champions will be teams who would otherwise not qualify (specifically looking at the WCHA and NCHC) - along with the Atlantic auto.

I expected us to be in a better position than this. Must take at least 3 points against Minnesota - or a tournament appearance could be problematic.

Shouldn't be in a position of watching others; but, It would help if Miami & CC start stringing some wins together.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

I expected to be a few games better. Wins against the gofers would probably put us solidly in the top ten, looking at a two seed for the time being. But I'd really recommend focusing on the play of the team, and whether or not we are improving. Eaves is a Bob Johnson disciple and keeping in mind the ol' Badger won exactly one regular season conference title in his tenure, the design is to be the best team at the end of the year. Because the team is aiming for a higher, sometimes more complex, level of play then most programs, a Badger team's potential is seldom fully realized until late in the year. Whether we reach the level we're striving for remains to be seen, but the focus is on getting better every week. There are signs all over that this team is doing so. Not an excuse but it is significant that Barnes and Kerdiles average 2 points/game between them. If you put either of them on all the breakaway chances that Navin and Paape had, it's likely a different weekend.
Regardless, even with them I'd have been satisfied with a split this weekend. Michigan is just hard to play against and we haven't played on a small sheet in months.



Check your calendar. It's February. Despite all your talent, it's about time for the goofs annual slide toward mediocrity to begin, isn't it? Badgers will be happy to help you get off to a good start on that project again this year.

The thing about this team is do you really feel they're championship material? I mean top to bottom because a championship level team requires 19 guys who are absolutely rock solid. My thought is this is a good team not a great team and good teams do not win championships save for possibly MSU under Rick Comley and while I regard Comley as one of the best coaches of the past 30 years that was truly a championship won on luck imo and well that's not the type of path I'd ever want to see UW come out on anyway.

In the championship years for UW (90, 06) that have transpired since I've been attending games (1984 forward) there was a feeling I had (and many many others) that those teams had not only a real chance to win it all but that anything short of winning it all would be a complete failure (and that's based on numerous tangibles and also projections based on watching players grow, and thoughts on incoming recruits etc, one way of explaining that last bit is this, think of Jack Skille and where he was drafted and how highly regarded he was and the fact he was a 3rd line player on that team states everything you need to know about how talented that team actually was). Again, that's just my .02 but I just don't see this current team reaching that level for reasons stated ad nauseum.

I'm not going to freak out over 3 consecutive losses, especially w/arguably their best player being out during that stretch...however UW is IMO pretty clearly a #3 in the B10 and I suspect a 1 and done or possibly 2 and done in the NCAA's meaning they don't make the FF.

Is that good enough for you? Good enough for the majority of the fanbase considering the overall arc of Eaves' tenure?

For me the answer is a resounding "no, it's not good enough". I feel UW Hockey like Notre Dame/Alabama football or IU/Kansas/Kentucky roundball and Minnesota Hockey should be regarded as one of the best programs ever and have the highest of expectations annually. I feel their history demands it and I think Badger Bob's legacy demands it.

As for the parts I emphasized in bold in your statement...man...EVERYONE is tough to play against when you're talking Michigan/Minnesota/BU/BC/Nodak/DU etc, etc. So what? No excuses, if you want to be great you have to beat great teams.

Re: Minnesota...well...I mean I think their record speaks for itself. I wouldn't expect them to have a let down any time soon and even on an off night their immense talent can make up for a lackluster overall performance. They're the best team in the country and they've shown it for the entire season thusfar without question. If Wisconsin wants to live up to their pre-season billing/hype they have to sweep Minnesota this weekend and I just cannot fathom that...Actually to live up to pre-season billing they'd have to win out and that's even more unfathomable. And I'm alluding to all the pre-season stuff about UW winning the B10.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

2 of the top 3 goal scorers in the NHL are from the state of Wisconsin. Pretty insane.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Anyone have Mersch's goal? I would like to show it to some people that missed the game :)
 
If Wisconsin wants to live up to their pre-season billing/hype they have to sweep Minnesota this weekend and I just cannot fathom that...Actually to live up to pre-season billing they'd have to win out and that's even more unfathomable. And I'm alluding to all the pre-season stuff about UW winning the B10.

What's with the negative vibes, Moriarity? :-)

You've seen enough Gopher/Badger tilts to know that the standings/rankings mean very little when the puck drops.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Start by just saying I always appreciate and respect your opinions solo, (and other Badger fans, regardless of whether I agree or not) and the time invested in putting them down on virtual paper here. I understand what you say about having that 'feeling' about some teams. Some Badger teams were so loaded that not winning it all seemed almost unthinkable and I agree that that is not necessarily the case with this team. I'm not sure that in today's NCAA hockey world that is really going to be the case the way it once was. (like 80-83 for example) There is just so much more talent available in total that today a handful of teams are way less likely to get all the best players... Spencer Naas from BSM committed to UCONN last week for example. UCONN! ... UCONN???

The days of chuckling at the idea that the ECAC could produce a team more than once in a generation to even begin to threaten Western Power are long gone. New England hockey infrastructure is close to par with the Evil Empire whether anyone wants to admit it or not and there are lots of good kids around the country. Keeping and developing kids is as much if not more the key.

Actually, let me put it another way, I think the difference between the quality of players available around is much less. Kids that early on are maybe considered second tier recruits develop into top end players with more frequency. Not trying to excuse any Badgers recruiting issues, but any problems there, are related to not being able to even out recruiting classes moreso than not getting quality kids. I honestly don't know the answer to the imbalance, but that's a different subject.

The heart of the matter is your first question: "Are this year's Badgers Championship material?" First I'd just point out that this team has one more loss than the '06 team at this point, and one more loss and two less ties than the '10 title game team. Are we as good as '06? Pretty hard to argue we are, given what those guys have done since college. Are we as good as '10? There I think we can make some argument as I think we are better in goal,(which is huge) obviously not nearly as good on the Blue line, (i.e Brendan Smith, Ryan Mcdonaugh) but McCabe, Schultz, and maybe even Wittchow all have star potential, and the other three can all probably play well beyond college if they want to. I'll probably get arguments, but I really think this team is top to bottom, better up front with everyone healthy. Sr. Zengerle is going to have similar totals to Sophomore Derek Stepan, Blake was a special player, but his goal totals were almost a result of HAVING to carry the load for that team. Craig Smith as a Freshman was a very good player but his game was so much better suited to the pros than college IMO and he took a ton of penalties. I think Kerdiles is the most complete forward we've had since Pavelski; Zengerle has taken a giant leap forward in becoming a very good two way player in addition to his puck skills, Mersch and Barnes can score with anyone. Healthy, this team is better balanced, has three legitimate scoring lines, and a fourth line that can control play. Paape, a guy who has 71 games in 2 years as a Badger coming in, probably wouldn't have played more than a couple without injuries. Maybe none. Quite pleased with his contributions, btw. Depth and experience are hard things to discount.

Obviously health is key, and no one can control that. It hurts big for Kerdiles and Barnes to miss time that they presumably would be using to get better in addition to contributing to wins. If a bunch of guys go down the rest of the way, we're not going to win a title, or have a good finish, but what can you do? Lose Gilbert and Pavs, or Brendan Smith and Blake Geoffrion, and where are those teams?

To boil this down further, if you are arguing MN is the best team, (personally I'd take BC in one game, all things being equal, no one has yet come up with an answer for Gaudreau, but regardless) then what you're really asking is can the Badgers beat the best team in the country, i.e. Minnesota?

Fortunately for us, we get to find out!

I'd assume a sweep would go along way toward negating many questions about whether or not this team is good enough. Possibly, a split would do nearly as much, depending on how well it goes.

I think we out played them on Saturday at the mooch and lost. (I take nothing from Friday's whistlefest loss either way.) Just my opinion and I accept that opinions will vary. The biggest difference between us and MN right now is key injuries and most importantly, CONFIDENCE. They are rolling and we are snake bitten on occasions. I think this is the challenge we need right now, and if successful, folks will be believers, if not successful, doubts will grow.

Here's what I like most about this team: They learn from their mistakes. I don't see this team doing the same things wrong over and over again. (They find new things to do wrong and learn from those! )As an example, Faust and Drake got murdered by Guptil and others Friday night. First rush I see Faust defending, he skates Copp right off the puck to the wall instead of hanging back. (like you might normally on a bigger sheet, not wanting to get caught too far out.) I like that.

I disagree with several people that MI is better than a healthy Badger team. Barnes is a threat to score anytime he takes the ice. Little is almost never a threat to score. Cavallini impressed me, but he's less of a threat than Little. Kerdiles can take over a game by himself. As far as pointing to fluky goals we scored at home: Well once they go in, we don't take them out to see if we can't score a better one. Even fluky goals generally come from what are, or will be, quality chances. And with a lead we generally play a somewhat different game. I felt we were better more of the time at home and better more of the time on Saturday. I think we'd beat MI 6 or 7 out of 10 all season long. Again, opinions vary. It's ok.

In conclusion:

Can we beat MN? Yes.

Will we beat MN? I think a split is likeliest outcome.

If we sweep MN will we go to the FF? No idea.

If we get swept by MN, will we go to the FF? No idea.

(Too Long; Didn't read: Wisconsin is the best team in the history of the world.)
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

<a href="http://www.collegehockeystats.net/1314/boxes/mbc_min1.o27">Actually...</a>

Actually..... Jdubbs, your a troll who can't seem to keep in your teams thread. I guess with the rodent spelling-bee coming to town this week there would be more Goof trolls around. But at least you live in a good state. Glad you help fund the UW by paying taxes.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Wisconsin is 13th in the PairWise.

I wonder when we will start seeing some urgency?? If the Badgers get swept this weekend it will be play-in time again through the league tourney if they want to get a birth in the NCAA's!

Took a look at the pairwise for the first time today, and was really surprised how poor the strength of schedule the was this year. Outside of Minnesota, we don't play anybody in the top 20 for the rest of the year. Kind of hard to gain ground when you can't get quality wins. After the must win Minnesota games, we have 2 games at Ohio State (24th Pairwise), 4 games with Michigan State (40th Pairwise) and two games at Penn State (54th Pairwise).

I think you can make a pretty good assessment of the quality level of this squad by looking into how they fared against the other teams in the pairwise:

Top 10: 2-4-1
20th -30th 3-3-0
31st -59th 9-1-1

Every team has injuries, every team has to make adjustments to rink size on the road, but most important is top 10 teams win games on the road!
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

I wonder when we will start seeing some urgency?? If the Badgers get swept this weekend it will be play-in time again through the league tourney if they want to get a birth in the NCAA's!

Took a look at the pairwise for the first time today, and was really surprised how poor the strength of schedule the was this year. Outside of Minnesota, we don't play anybody in the top 20 for the rest of the year. Kind of hard to gain ground when you can't get quality wins. After the must win Minnesota games, we have 2 games at Ohio State (24th Pairwise), 4 games with Michigan State (40th Pairwise) and two games at Penn State (54th Pairwise).

I think you can make a pretty good assessment of the quality level of this squad by looking into how they fared against the other teams in the pairwise:

Top 10: 2-4-1
20th -30th 3-3-0
31st -59th 9-1-1

Every team has injuries, every team has to make adjustments to rink size on the road, but most important is top 10 teams win games on the road!

I strongly suspect any combination of 6 wins in our last 10 games will probably give the Badgers a tournament berth. Beat MN and maybe only 5. Not sure what you mean about strength of schedule. It's 12th right now and will move into the top ten after this week. If preseason #2 Miami didn't fall off a cliff for whatever reason, it would be higher yet. The rest of the way we have to play the teams in our conference regardless if they are good or not.

While I don't disagree entirely with the last part, a blanket statement about every team having injuries is just not very meaningful to me. The Packers had a key guy missing and couldn't muster much this year without him. So the conclusion is they must still suck when he's healthy? I just don't subscribe to that.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

While I don't disagree entirely with the last part, a blanket statement about every team having injuries is just not very meaningful to me. The Packers had a key guy missing and couldn't muster much this year without him. So the conclusion is they must still suck when he's healthy? I just don't subscribe to that.


I don't think there's a hockey equivalent to the Packers losing Rodgers.

Even a top goalie shouldn't have that drastic of an effect and I realize that people will bring up Els, but that team should have been better without him and in talking to Oz at the time, he said the coaches were perplexed at the "mental weakness" (his words) that the players were exhibiting due to Els being out.

I agree that good teams should be able to overcome limited injuries and the Badgers' injuries have been just that. Should at least be able to tread water if not better.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

I don't think there's a hockey equivalent to the Packers losing Rodgers.

Even a top goalie shouldn't have that drastic of an effect and I realize that people will bring up Els, but that team should have been better without him and in talking to Oz at the time, he said the coaches were perplexed at the "mental weakness" (his words) that the players were exhibiting due to Els being out.

I agree that good teams should be able to overcome limited injuries and the Badgers' injuries have been just that. Should at least be able to tread water if not better.

Fair enough. I just don't think you can make a blanket statement about it. Losing Little alone is different then losing Kerdiles and Little, and now Kerdiles and Barnes.

Kerdiles played about four minutes of monster hockey since the WJC and then went down. Different team without him. How would we have faired without Heater? (not to compare the two, but it makes a big difference as to who goes down.)
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Fair enough. I just don't think you can make a blanket statement about it. Losing Little alone is different then losing Kerdiles and Little, and now Kerdiles and Barnes.

Kerdiles played about four minutes of monster hockey since the WJC and then went down. Different team without him. How would we have faired without Heater? (not to compare the two, but it makes a big difference as to who goes down.)


Fair point(s) and I don't want to try and rank them.

Long and short is that we're scuffling along again this season and each year, there are excuses. It'd be cool to overcome adversity and overachieve for once.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Fair point(s) and I don't want to try and rank them.

Long and short is that we're scuffling along again this season and each year, there are excuses. It'd be cool to overcome adversity and overachieve for once.

I know. And I feel like I've become a Badger apologist of sorts, when that is not at all the role I want to play.

I've watched a lot of NCAA hockey, the last few years especially with more tv availability and I just try to assess what I see in games. I think that I see a season as a process to go through to get where you want to be, rather than a situation where you dominate from the start. It just doesn't happen often. In college hockey most championship teams evolve throughout their seasons. Even more so now with much greater parity. In the Badgers I see a team progressing, and one that's shown itself capable of a very high level of play. The question is, can they get to a point where they have learned to sustain it before they run out of season? I don't know. That's the plan though.
 
I know. And I feel like I've become a Badger apologist of sorts, when that is not at all the role I want to play.

I've watched a lot of NCAA hockey, the last few years especially with more tv availability and I just try to assess what I see in games. I think that I see a season as a process to go through to get where you want to be, rather than a situation where you dominate from the start. It just doesn't happen often. In college hockey most championship teams evolve throughout their seasons. Even more so now with much greater parity. In the Badgers I see a team progressing, and one that's shown itself capable of a very high level of play. The question is, can they get to a point where they have learned to sustain it before they run out of season? I don't know. That's the plan though.

I think that this team, from a fan perspective, has run headlong into a wall of expectations. If this was expected to be "the year" and with it looking like the next two seasons would be painful rebuilding years (based on experience). Frankly, very few teams can carry the expectations of three seasons and not fail to live up to those expectations.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Have to agree with Wisko on this one (hope you don't mind me interjecting).

Wisconsin has a talented team this year, and have a lot of the pieces needed to make a run. They just haven't put it all together consistently yet. But they have shown flashes. Not saying they are a shoe-in for the Frozen Four, but who is in this day and age with all of the parity in college hockey? You just need to get in and be playing your best hockey at the end. Look at Yale last season.

You guys are catching the Gophers at the right time IMO. They haven't been playing their best hockey the past few weeks. Granted, they have shown a resiliancy that past Gopher teams haven't shown, and are a very deep and balanced team, but they aren't head and shoulders more talented than the Badgers. I think both teams are strong in net, have solid defensive corps, and have a good group of playmaking forwards.

If Wisconsin can sweep (or even split in two well played games) this weekend, the Badgers could build some real momentum going into the comference tournament. Personally, I will be stunned if the Badgers don't make the Tourney. And once you get there, anything can happen. That's the mindset you have to have these days because the years where one team is clearly head-and-shoulders better than the rest of the nation are few and far between these days.

Personally, I get tired of the fans who think our team is destined for doom every time we don't blow a team out. I'm guilty of negative thought too, but the season is a grind and what really matters is how the team is playing at the end of the season (assuming you've done well enough to get in).
 
Last edited:
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Random thoughts....
It was a pretty unrealistic outcome to expect UW to sweep UM on the road missing 2 of their top 5 players.
There is absolutely no excuse for UW's pp to be epically bad, even missing 2 of their top 5 players.
The OSU loss was more painful than the UM outcomes, but the OSU sieve wasn't so holey.
Friday night @ UM Mersch and Zengerlee had golden chances to tie and didn't score, that's hockey.
I'm not discouraged by the pairwise. It's like worrying about your 401k investments when you are 45.
The b6 is as tough a conference as any. There really aren't any gimme games except for psu, and they aren't a pushover.
The rodents seem to be poised to lead the b6 for a long time.
The 2 bad, 1 decent and 1 very good cycle sucks and needs to get fixed. If the rodents can bring in a fr class who scores a lot, why can't UW?
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Just keep the faith Badgers. I think Almington makes an astute observation.

From what Eaves said, seems probable Kerdiles will play, Barnes probably not. Wish it wasn't a separated shoulder as those seem prone to re-occurrence. Fingers crossed at least one of them is ready to go Thursday.

Badgers are 4-3-1 without Kerdiles and Little or Barnes. Could construe that as treading water per Gurt's point, I suppose. It's certainly an improvement over last year! On the other hand, the way I've been building up Kerdiles value to the team, he probably needs 16 goals to live up to the hype.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Badgers are 4-3-1 without Kerdiles and Little or Barnes. Could construe that as treading water per Gurt's point, I suppose.

Please don't interrupt my perceptions with your facts. :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top