Maple Grove
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
Maple Grove
What is going on in Maple Grove... They were the preseason favorite for the section and they have been a disaster so far! 11 goals allowed? I thought they were supposed to have an incredible tandem of goalies?!?! I am not trying to call anyone out in particular but what gives here? I have never seen a double digit score against Maple Grove! Feel free to correct me if I am wrong...
Re: Maple Grove
Classic Hockey Parent. Point the finger at the goaltending, easiest excuse in the game. Both these goalie are good tenders always have been. Not easy to sit in that net last night and take the beating and keep competing.Stars67 wrote:What is going on in Maple Grove... They were the preseason favorite for the section and they have been a disaster so far! 11 goals allowed? I thought they were supposed to have an incredible tandem of goalies?!?! I am not trying to call anyone out in particular but what gives here? I have never seen a double digit score against Maple Grove! Feel free to correct me if I am wrong...
Plenty other areas to point the finger at before those two!
I guess that is my question... Where is the finger to be pointed? My point was the goal tending historically has been good from these two... Is it coaching? Is it an attitude? Early season hiccups? I can honestly say I have followed the NWSC for 15+ years and a Stefano team NEVER took a beating like this... Also with the struggles the ELKS have seen in net the game seemed overly obnoxious...
Re: Maple Grove
11 goals on 29 shots last night. Playing an offensive team like Elk River that is what i would expect in regards to number of shots. I don't think it is out of the question to ask about the goalies after a game like that.Eagle86 wrote:Classic Hockey Parent. Point the finger at the goaltending, easiest excuse in the game. Both these goalie are good tenders always have been. Not easy to sit in that net last night and take the beating and keep competing.Stars67 wrote:What is going on in Maple Grove... They were the preseason favorite for the section and they have been a disaster so far! 11 goals allowed? I thought they were supposed to have an incredible tandem of goalies?!?! I am not trying to call anyone out in particular but what gives here? I have never seen a double digit score against Maple Grove! Feel free to correct me if I am wrong...
Plenty other areas to point the finger at before those two!
The defense is another question mark, giving up 54 shots to EP and 39 to Holy family.
Both seem to be struggling.
Re: Maple Grove
Well, sometimes the goalies are bad. I see lots of times when the goalies look great until somebody actually gets in on them and then they fall apart. 11 goals on 29 shots is a terrible outing unless the bulk of the goals were on a PK or were those classic back door goals in which case the D gets the blame. I bet though that at least (guessing here) 5 or 6 of the 11 were the goalie's fault, off on the angle, missed glove, bad 5 hole control or etc. If that is the case, then yes, the goalies were bad. As far as sitting in the net and taking the beating they had the chance all along the way to skate out and avoid it and the fact that they chose to be a goalie means they signed up for the beating.Eagle86 wrote:Classic Hockey Parent. Point the finger at the goaltending, easiest excuse in the game. Both these goalie are good tenders always have been. Not easy to sit in that net last night and take the beating and keep competing.Stars67 wrote:What is going on in Maple Grove... They were the preseason favorite for the section and they have been a disaster so far! 11 goals allowed? I thought they were supposed to have an incredible tandem of goalies?!?! I am not trying to call anyone out in particular but what gives here? I have never seen a double digit score against Maple Grove! Feel free to correct me if I am wrong...
Plenty other areas to point the finger at before those two!
See related discussion on a different thread
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 10:17 am Post subject: Reply with quote
GolfGuy7900 wrote:
Curious about Maple Grove as I've followed the kids for a few years. Were they over rated, or simply not show up last week? I realize they played two good teams in WAY and EP, but losing to HF seems concerning
A lot of youth there, especially on defense. Also took a lot of untimely penalties against HF. Not a loss the Crimson want to have, but there's plenty of time left. I guess we'll know more after this week.
_________________
"Virtual high five to chest bump" (MP)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
minnscout
Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 288
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 12:45 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Maple Grove seems to be lacking speed and high end skill.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GolfGuy7900
Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 24
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 1:47 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the context from both of you
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WestMetro
Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Posts: 248
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 8:15 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Maple Grove has a lot of very good experienced talent and 2 potentially great goalies. But MinnScout is correct that talent is not high end great
I had hoped team would have matured and be more disciplined than last year, but some of the old habits reappeared against HF, a game they could and should have won. Also, the score against EP shouldnt have been more lopsided than the Wayzata loss
At this point its correct to drop out of top 10, but the bottom of the top 10 is still fluid and if they get act together they could reappear and should still be competitive with Blaine for the section finals.
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 10:17 am Post subject: Reply with quote
GolfGuy7900 wrote:
Curious about Maple Grove as I've followed the kids for a few years. Were they over rated, or simply not show up last week? I realize they played two good teams in WAY and EP, but losing to HF seems concerning
A lot of youth there, especially on defense. Also took a lot of untimely penalties against HF. Not a loss the Crimson want to have, but there's plenty of time left. I guess we'll know more after this week.
_________________
"Virtual high five to chest bump" (MP)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
minnscout
Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 288
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 12:45 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Maple Grove seems to be lacking speed and high end skill.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GolfGuy7900
Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 24
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 1:47 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the context from both of you
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WestMetro
Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Posts: 248
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 8:15 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Maple Grove has a lot of very good experienced talent and 2 potentially great goalies. But MinnScout is correct that talent is not high end great
I had hoped team would have matured and be more disciplined than last year, but some of the old habits reappeared against HF, a game they could and should have won. Also, the score against EP shouldnt have been more lopsided than the Wayzata loss
At this point its correct to drop out of top 10, but the bottom of the top 10 is still fluid and if they get act together they could reappear and should still be competitive with Blaine for the section finals.
-
bubblehockey27
- Posts: 283
- Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 2:28 am
Re: Maple Grove
Wet Paint wrote:Well, sometimes the goalies are bad. I see lots of times when the goalies look great until somebody actually gets in on them and then they fall apart. 11 goals on 29 shots is a terrible outing unless the bulk of the goals were on a PK or were those classic back door goals in which case the D gets the blame. I bet though that at least (guessing here) 5 or 6 of the 11 were the goalie's fault, off on the angle, missed glove, bad 5 hole control or etc. If that is the case, then yes, the goalies were bad. As far as sitting in the net and taking the beating they had the chance all along the way to skate out and avoid it and the fact that they chose to be a goalie means they signed up for the beating.Eagle86 wrote:Classic Hockey Parent. Point the finger at the goaltending, easiest excuse in the game. Both these goalie are good tenders always have been. Not easy to sit in that net last night and take the beating and keep competing.Stars67 wrote:What is going on in Maple Grove... They were the preseason favorite for the section and they have been a disaster so far! 11 goals allowed? I thought they were supposed to have an incredible tandem of goalies?!?! I am not trying to call anyone out in particular but what gives here? I have never seen a double digit score against Maple Grove! Feel free to correct me if I am wrong...
Plenty other areas to point the finger at before those two!
19 GA in their last two games means something is going on defensively. Both goalies have been solid in the past, leading me to believe that there's either something systematically wrong, or the personnel they have in place are inexperienced. They didn't have this problem last year rotating between Goodman and McKenney.
At this point, I think it's safe to assume MG just isn't as good as everyone thought they were going to be. Lost some good talent last year and those shoes haven't been filled yet. They've had a couple years of talent, but it looks like this is going to be a down year for them. They could end up being .500 team.
"Virtual high five to chest bump" (MP)
While Blaine dealt with some bad bounces (and bad decisions), MG had some that should have hit twine too. Clearly a step in the right direction. Younger guys are starting to get the hang of the speed.IMHO wrote:Heard they tried one of their top forwards at D against Coon Rapids. If they leave him there is could be interesting tonight vs. Blaine.sanryam wrote:No defense.
Beat Blaine and now Centennial. Looks like moving the forward was a good idea. Let's see what MG does Saturday against Hill Murray.IMHO wrote:Heard they tried one of their top forwards at D against Coon Rapids. If they leave him there is could be interesting tonight vs. Blaine.sanryam wrote:No defense.