Final Class A Rankings

Older Topics, Not the current discussion

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

Post Reply
MNHockey75
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Bemidji, MN

Final Class A Rankings

Post by MNHockey75 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:14 pm

I haven't seen any final rankings from HSHockeywatcher, so I will take the lead.

1. St. Thomas Academy 25-6 -- Another championship for STA. They were #1 for most of the season.

2. Hermantown 25-4-2 -- I had them at #2 after Breck fell apart. I saw them play during Christmas time against TRF. They looked good then and they looked good in the tourney.

3. Thief River Falls 21-9-1 -- I knew they would be good, but I didn't expect them to beat Breck and Hibbing.

4. Breck 22-9 -- They would've challenged STA if it weren't for that awful third period against Thief.

5. Hibbing 18-11-2 -- I'm a little surprised they layed an egg in the 3rd place game, but they're not the first team to do so.

6. Totino-Grace 21-6-1 -- The best team to not make it to state.

7. Rochester Lourdes 25-5-1 -- Showed their true colors at state.

8. Blake 21-4-2 -- Had a fantastic season, but they crumbled down the stretch.

9. Warroad 19-9 -- Their loss to TRF doesn't look so bad anymore. Not having Timm in the final and a gimpy Foster didn't help the cause.

10. Virginia 20-8 -- Underachieved this season.

11. Duluth Marshall 15-11-1 -- I still think they are one of the top 5 Class A teams I've seen this year. Too inconsistent.

12. Delano 18-8-1 -- Losing Heinonen will hurt big time.

13. South St. Paul 17-10 -- Had a solid season, but were unable to knock off a tough Totino team.

14. Orono 17-10-1 -- Were minutes away from a trip to state.

15. Mahtomedi 13-13-1 -- Had a brutal schedule. They should be better next season.

16. Chisago Lakes 21-6 -- Hats off to Chisago. They were legit, but are in a brutal section.

17. Little Falls 20-4-2 -- A shocking finish to the season doesn't take away there dominance.

18. Lake of the Woods 17-7-3 -- Might deserve to be higher, but they really did have no talent on offense.

19. New Prague 14-12-2 -- Finished the season strong, where other teams on the bubble faded.

20. Duluth Central 13-14 -- Probably the most disappointing team in Class A this year.
Last edited by MNHockey75 on Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2001 & 2006 State Participant

SCC2009
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:40 pm

Post by SCC2009 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:20 pm

i am now dumber for having read some of your commentary behind each teams name. little falls does not belong on that list. weak schedule/embarrassing loss and you still call them dominant?
Who raises their stick after scoring an empty netter?

DanglinDMan27
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:03 am

Post by DanglinDMan27 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:24 pm

i think its funny that you bash little falls... didnt they beat your precious Crusaders? last year you were supposed to be a great team.. beat them 2-0 when they had 8 wins on the year.. two years ago they beat you at their place and then when you guys got a 3-0 lead in the first period in the 3rd place game, you blew the lead and lost 4-3... i dont see how you have any reason to bash them..

PuckU126
Posts: 3769
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Minnesota
Contact:

Post by PuckU126 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:27 pm

SCC2009 wrote:i am now dumber for having read some of your commentary behind each teams name. little falls does not belong on that list. weak schedule/embarrassing loss and you still call them dominant?
Easy there, big shooter. No need to talk that way about MNHockey's ranks.

If you disagree, which obviously you do, you can be more constructive with your perspective.

And you can always post your own rankings as well!

8)
The Puck
LGW

rainier
Posts: 1599
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:30 pm
Location: Earth

Post by rainier » Tue Mar 15, 2011 2:59 pm

I think Hibbing would have beat TRF had they met in the semis. Hibbing was totally gassed after taking Hermantown to the brink the day before, and they were so close to winning I think they were emotionally drained. TRF on the other hand, was never really in the game against STA and thus had a little more to prove in the 3rd place game. Hibbing returns 70% of their scoring next year, and will be much improved after their tourney experience.

SCC2009
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:40 pm

Post by SCC2009 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:29 pm

DanglinDMan27 wrote:i think its funny that you bash little falls... didnt they beat your precious Crusaders? last year you were supposed to be a great team.. beat them 2-0 when they had 8 wins on the year.. two years ago they beat you at their place and then when you guys got a 3-0 lead in the first period in the 3rd place game, you blew the lead and lost 4-3... i dont see how you have any reason to bash them..
did i say cathedral desered to be on this list? no i did not. my argument is about LF being on this list and the commentary that went along with this list
Who raises their stick after scoring an empty netter?

SCC2009
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:40 pm

Post by SCC2009 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:31 pm

PuckU126 wrote:
SCC2009 wrote:i am now dumber for having read some of your commentary behind each teams name. little falls does not belong on that list. weak schedule/embarrassing loss and you still call them dominant?
Easy there, big shooter. No need to talk that way about MNHockey's ranks.

If you disagree, which obviously you do, you can be more constructive with your perspective.

And you can always post your own rankings as well!

8)
how convenient? if i dont agree with the rankings, just make up my own? i like the rankings actually with the exception of small falls making the list..to be honest it discredits the rest of the rankings and makes me take the list with more skepticism
Who raises their stick after scoring an empty netter?

GordonBombay99
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:11 am

Post by GordonBombay99 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:34 pm

SCC2009 wrote:
PuckU126 wrote:
SCC2009 wrote:i am now dumber for having read some of your commentary behind each teams name. little falls does not belong on that list. weak schedule/embarrassing loss and you still call them dominant?
Easy there, big shooter. No need to talk that way about MNHockey's ranks.

If you disagree, which obviously you do, you can be more constructive with your perspective.

And you can always post your own rankings as well!

8)
how convenient? if i dont agree with the rankings, just make up my own? i like the rankings actually with the exception of small falls making the list..to be honest it discredits the rest of the rankings and makes me take the list with more skepticism
Despite their bad loss to Apollo, they still beat a ton of great teams such as Tech and Sartell. The 20 wins is enough to make it on the list I think.

MNHockey75
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Bemidji, MN

Post by MNHockey75 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:34 pm

SCC2009 wrote:
PuckU126 wrote:
SCC2009 wrote:i am now dumber for having read some of your commentary behind each teams name. little falls does not belong on that list. weak schedule/embarrassing loss and you still call them dominant?
Easy there, big shooter. No need to talk that way about MNHockey's ranks.

If you disagree, which obviously you do, you can be more constructive with your perspective.

And you can always post your own rankings as well!

8)
how convenient? if i dont agree with the rankings, just make up my own? i like the rankings actually with the exception of small falls making the list..to be honest it discredits the rest of the rankings and makes me take the list with more skepticism
Little Falls was a top 15 team all season. One bad loss (a game in which they "dominated") shouldn't ban them from the list. I probably could've gone with a top-15 because there wasn't much depth in Class A this year, but I thought I'd give props to teams like LOW and New Prague. I know it seems like a decade ago but Little Falls did beat Hibbing 7-1 in Hibbing. When the Flyers wanted to play, they could play. As far as the list as a whole, I whipped it up in 15 minutes. I don't see many flaws with my rankings, but my commentary is a bit sloppy and rushed. My sincere apologies. :)
2001 & 2006 State Participant

mitchrapp
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:35 am

Post by mitchrapp » Thu Mar 31, 2011 6:45 pm

Just still can't get over the fact that minnhock has a team ranked #9 that lost to a team ranked #15 twice - once at home and once on a neutral site that should have favored #9 (marshall) - explanation??????

7aHockey
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:35 pm

Post by 7aHockey » Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:39 pm

I really wish Int'l Falls could have been more consistent this year. When they showed up to play they could play with most of the top 20 teams.

2-3 Loss to Hibbing

2-2 Tie with Little Falls

2-1 Win over Virginia

2-3 Loss to LOW

2-3 Loss to Marshall in the section quarters, they score with a minute left in the game.

Sucks because the falls do this every year. Solid squads and underacheive in playoffs.

MNHockey75
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:12 pm
Location: Bemidji, MN

Post by MNHockey75 » Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:14 pm

mitchrapp wrote:Just still can't get over the fact that minnhock has a team ranked #9 that lost to a team ranked #15 twice - once at home and once on a neutral site that should have favored #9 (marshall) - explanation??????
Minnhock.com has computer rankings. Although those rankings do a good job calculating strength of schedule, they aren't 100% accurate. For example Warroad is still ahead of TRF. That simply doesn't make sense. Computers can be helpful, but should never decide anything (ex: BCS Standings).

As for Int. Falls. I think if they didn't have off-ice issues and played as a unit all season, than things might have ended up differently.
2001 & 2006 State Participant

HShockeywatcher
Posts: 6848
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:21 pm

Post by HShockeywatcher » Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:23 am

MNHockey75 wrote:
mitchrapp wrote:Just still can't get over the fact that minnhock has a team ranked #9 that lost to a team ranked #15 twice - once at home and once on a neutral site that should have favored #9 (marshall) - explanation??????
Minnhock.com has computer rankings. Although those rankings do a good job calculating strength of schedule, they aren't 100% accurate. For example Warroad is still ahead of TRF. That simply doesn't make sense. Computers can be helpful, but should never decide anything (ex: BCS Standings).

As for Int. Falls. I think if they didn't have off-ice issues and played as a unit all season, than things might have ended up differently.
Based on the bias/rating that was used the make the ranking, I would assume they are 100% accurate. Is that to say that every team ranked above another would win 100 out of 100 against them? No. It's simply saying that based on a what this particular rating system measures, teams are where they are.

You have to remember that one game doesn't make a season. In a non-hockey, recent example, would any say that VCU has had a top 4 season? Or if they go 2-0 in their next two games, would anyone say they had the best all around season? I doubt, even winning it all, they'd break the top 10 in a ranking system similar to PageStat2.

Post Reply