Oh yeah. I forgot. Thanks for reminding me.Govie wrote:Obviously if you think he was laying "head shots" left and right YOU are the one who needs glasses.Mite-dad wrote:I think ole Lou needs some glasses.Govie wrote:More like best (clean) hitter on the ice. Him and Connor Sampair, #15. Even Lou Nanne (a guy I am sure is more schooled on the game than you) said they were literally all clean hits. This isn't a sport for someone who fights for the pink team, you know.
Surely you know that pee-wee hitting has just been outlawed in the state? Christ our America and Minnesota has gone completely soft, wussified.
The kid was a beast, plain and simple. One of the more fun players to watch during the entire tournament. In fact the entire Hill team and "style" were the most fun to watch during the tournament - physical, hard-nosed "old time hockey," at its best.
Hockey is not a sport for pansies; hockey is a tough sport for tough kids and players.
I suppose you think the check Scott Stevens laid on Lindros was also a dirty shot? Rule number one in hockey for your info is keep your head UP.
Horton after the game
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
Two comments:
1) First of all the Hill Murray coach didnt get out-coached. Not at all! Three short handed goals, a weird angle goal, and a mis-communication goal is not getting out coached. Hill got outplayed, yes! Not out coached. Getting out coached doesnt involve Guentzel shooting it into the shin pads and leading to a breakaway. It doesnt involve the defenseman and the goaltender to play footsie behind the net, than lets just throw it into the skates of Besse. And so on and so on...
2) Where was HM's Mr. Hockey candidate? Big players need to step up in big opportunities. HM's didnt. My opinion. Didnt anyone notice where #14 is on their power play. He is almost a decoy. So, your two best players #20 and #14 arent even in scoring positions on the power play. I would have put those two across from each other on the PP (if they shoot opposite hand of course). Obviosuly HM must have had a decent pp to be where they were at, but it hurt them in this game.
Thoughts?
1) First of all the Hill Murray coach didnt get out-coached. Not at all! Three short handed goals, a weird angle goal, and a mis-communication goal is not getting out coached. Hill got outplayed, yes! Not out coached. Getting out coached doesnt involve Guentzel shooting it into the shin pads and leading to a breakaway. It doesnt involve the defenseman and the goaltender to play footsie behind the net, than lets just throw it into the skates of Besse. And so on and so on...
2) Where was HM's Mr. Hockey candidate? Big players need to step up in big opportunities. HM's didnt. My opinion. Didnt anyone notice where #14 is on their power play. He is almost a decoy. So, your two best players #20 and #14 arent even in scoring positions on the power play. I would have put those two across from each other on the PP (if they shoot opposite hand of course). Obviosuly HM must have had a decent pp to be where they were at, but it hurt them in this game.
Thoughts?
-
almostashappy
- Posts: 930
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:07 pm
karl(east) wrote:Yes, though admittedly Hill was in a tough place there; they had a surplus of great forwards and only one real standout defenseman. It's easy to say this in hindsight, though this isn't the first time I've seen a high school team stick forwards at the points and watched them struggle defensively.Nostalgic Nerd wrote:Karl, so would you have kept the defensemen at the points on the PP?
And this more or less answers Irish's question, too...it's hard to fault the H-M D-men for the shorthanded goals, because only one of them was on the ice for the PP, and he wasn't really even playing defense.
Live by the sword, give up shorties by the sword....especially when a forward playing "defense" on your first power play unit lacks enough discipline to get off the ice when their legs are tired.
-
flatontheice
- Posts: 883
- Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:48 pm
To say that Ken Pauly "out coached" anyone is a stretch. That simply never happens. He has more talent than anyone by a long shot this year. He had a kid have a magical night but when you win 5-1 and one kid has all the goals and three are shorthanded, I'm sorry to say that has nothing to do with coaching.Irish wrote:Minnscout- Dead on. BSM is a class program and deserved to win the state tournament.minnscout wrote:Sour grapes! The benilde players are great kids that play hard. Hockey is hockey. All of a sudden if Benilde does it, they are a bad program. Oh no they got a penalty, what a bunch of classless players. Come on, just cause they won state and will win again next year if all their guys come back doesnt mean you all have to be haters. Grow up! There is not a better leader in high school hockey than jake horton.
Like I said. HM coach was out-coached. Plain and simple. No doubt he told the boys to go out and play physical. Game plan back fired! Best team won last night.
HM don't feel bad. Just think about the long bus ride back to Duluth for East. Did any Duluth teams do good this weekend?
-
DannyCalifornia
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:42 pm
"To say that Ken Pauly "out coached" anyone is a stretch. That simply never happens. He has more talent than anyone by a long shot this year. He had a kid have a magical night but when you win 5-1 and one kid has all the goals and three are shorthanded, I'm sorry to say that has nothing to do with coaching."
Probably the most correct information on the web currently.
It is about the kids and always has been.
Have Pauly coach at North Branch or somthing and see how he does.
Probably the most correct information on the web currently.
It is about the kids and always has been.
Have Pauly coach at North Branch or somthing and see how he does.
No kidding. What a joke. Typical bueraucratic BS. These clowns need to realize who pays their salaries.Vapor wrote:The MSHSL needs to wake up. To keep those 2 kids off the ice during the post game celebration was bush-league.
They both should have been on the ice. Regardless of what Horton did, he is a tremendous player and leader who make a dumb move but at the end of the day the MSHSL needs to have some humanity. Grow up MSHSL.
Tigers you are dead on my man. 110% correct.Tigers33 wrote:Two comments:
1) First of all the Hill Murray coach didnt get out-coached. Not at all! Three short handed goals, a weird angle goal, and a mis-communication goal is not getting out coached. Hill got outplayed, yes! Not out coached. Getting out coached doesnt involve Guentzel shooting it into the shin pads and leading to a breakaway. It doesnt involve the defenseman and the goaltender to play footsie behind the net, than lets just throw it into the skates of Besse. And so on and so on...
2) Where was HM's Mr. Hockey candidate? Big players need to step up in big opportunities. HM's didnt. My opinion. Didnt anyone notice where #14 is on their power play. He is almost a decoy. So, your two best players #20 and #14 arent even in scoring positions on the power play. I would have put those two across from each other on the PP (if they shoot opposite hand of course). Obviosuly HM must have had a decent pp to be where they were at, but it hurt them in this game.
Thoughts?
-
UntouchableFlow
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 5:23 pm
- Location: Maplewood
I thought that Hill was having good success in setting up in the offensive zone on their powerplay. The umbrella powerplay formation was working well for them. Guentzel has a great slapshot at the top of the umbrella and I thought that they sustained great pressure throughout the tournament and sections with this formation. Credit Benilde because they did a great job getting in the shooting lanes and blocking shots. They did this much better than any other team that Hill played in the postseason. I thought that Hill seemed tentative to shoot when they had an open lane towards the net, but like others said, maybe they were waiting for for forwards to crash the net. They could have taken more shots but I think that they were taking too long to make those decisions.Tigers33 wrote:Two comments:
1) First of all the Hill Murray coach didnt get out-coached. Not at all! Three short handed goals, a weird angle goal, and a mis-communication goal is not getting out coached. Hill got outplayed, yes! Not out coached. Getting out coached doesnt involve Guentzel shooting it into the shin pads and leading to a breakaway. It doesnt involve the defenseman and the goaltender to play footsie behind the net, than lets just throw it into the skates of Besse. And so on and so on...
2) Where was HM's Mr. Hockey candidate? Big players need to step up in big opportunities. HM's didnt. My opinion. Didnt anyone notice where #14 is on their power play. He is almost a decoy. So, your two best players #20 and #14 arent even in scoring positions on the power play. I would have put those two across from each other on the PP (if they shoot opposite hand of course). Obviosuly HM must have had a decent pp to be where they were at, but it hurt them in this game.
Thoughts?
-
mnhockfan99
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:41 pm
[quote="Tigers33"]Two comments:
2) Where was HM's Mr. Hockey candidate? Big players need to step up in big opportunities. HM's didnt. My opinion. Didnt anyone notice where #14 is on their power play. He is almost a decoy. So, your two best players #20 and #14 arent even in scoring positions on the power play. I would have put those two across from each other on the PP (if they shoot opposite hand of course). Obviosuly HM must have had a decent pp to be where they were at, but it hurt them in this game.
Thoughts?[/quote]
Have to respectfully disagree here. Guentzel runs the top of the umbrella for HM PP1 unit, a definite scoring position - many of the plays run through him directly. Having seen HM multiple times this year he was the engine on that PP. As a F in this role, I'm guessing he must have a lot of trust from his coaches. Yes it didn't work out in the title game but overall he did very well this season as a key decision maker with the puck on the PP.
2) Where was HM's Mr. Hockey candidate? Big players need to step up in big opportunities. HM's didnt. My opinion. Didnt anyone notice where #14 is on their power play. He is almost a decoy. So, your two best players #20 and #14 arent even in scoring positions on the power play. I would have put those two across from each other on the PP (if they shoot opposite hand of course). Obviosuly HM must have had a decent pp to be where they were at, but it hurt them in this game.
Thoughts?[/quote]
Have to respectfully disagree here. Guentzel runs the top of the umbrella for HM PP1 unit, a definite scoring position - many of the plays run through him directly. Having seen HM multiple times this year he was the engine on that PP. As a F in this role, I'm guessing he must have a lot of trust from his coaches. Yes it didn't work out in the title game but overall he did very well this season as a key decision maker with the puck on the PP.
Correct me if I'm wrong. A key part of coaching is getting the boys ready to play in important games.flatontheice wrote:To say that Ken Pauly "out coached" anyone is a stretch. That simply never happens. He has more talent than anyone by a long shot this year. He had a kid have a magical night but when you win 5-1 and one kid has all the goals and three are shorthanded, I'm sorry to say that has nothing to do with coaching.Irish wrote:Minnscout- Dead on. BSM is a class program and deserved to win the state tournament.minnscout wrote:Sour grapes! The benilde players are great kids that play hard. Hockey is hockey. All of a sudden if Benilde does it, they are a bad program. Oh no they got a penalty, what a bunch of classless players. Come on, just cause they won state and will win again next year if all their guys come back doesnt mean you all have to be haters. Grow up! There is not a better leader in high school hockey than jake horton.
Like I said. HM coach was out-coached. Plain and simple. No doubt he told the boys to go out and play physical. Game plan back fired! Best team won last night.
HM don't feel bad. Just think about the long bus ride back to Duluth for East. Did any Duluth teams do good this weekend?
Forwards playing defense on power play?
No doubt telling the boys to play physical getting away from what brought them to the dance?
Sure the stats looked good after the first period, but in the end the score is the only stats that counts. Sure BSM has talent, but so does Duluth East - HM - Minnetonka ect.........
Put it this way. Please tell me the tournament seeding for each team in the tournament? If I'm not mistaken The four lower seeds all won their first round games. My point. A lot of teams have talent. To say BSM has more than all the rest is an injustice.
mnhockfan99 -
Yes I can tell he would do well up there, but typically the top of an umbrella is not a great scoring opportunity. Take a look at Nate Schmitt from the u of m. He has about 30 assists on the season, mainly from running the umbrella. However, he has very few goals from this position. This would be like sticking Rau or Haula on top of the power play. That would be taking away two of your top 4 players from a scoring position. Typically scorers are on the sides of an umbrella with some gritty players down low, or someone who has a knack for the net.
What I am trying to say is Guentzel and Sampair are not in prime goal scoring positions on the power play. I have no doubt that Guentzel has great hands, and is a great playmaker. However, I would put Guentzel and Sampair in a position to score goals on the power play. I didnt really see that. Sampair (Mr. Hockey candidate) was really just a decoy in that power play. He was put in the high slot, which is usually a decoy position to try and creat opportunities for the side guys which I think were #21 and #16. If you saw how many times #16 got the puck around the dot and was so hesitant. I would have rather had sampair or guentzel getting the puck in that position.
Trust me I understand there power play was good to get them there, but I believe I heard their pp percentage was only around 25 percent. At the high school that is not all that great. I might be wrong with those numbers, but most good teams are clipping at about 30 percent or higher.
Yes I can tell he would do well up there, but typically the top of an umbrella is not a great scoring opportunity. Take a look at Nate Schmitt from the u of m. He has about 30 assists on the season, mainly from running the umbrella. However, he has very few goals from this position. This would be like sticking Rau or Haula on top of the power play. That would be taking away two of your top 4 players from a scoring position. Typically scorers are on the sides of an umbrella with some gritty players down low, or someone who has a knack for the net.
What I am trying to say is Guentzel and Sampair are not in prime goal scoring positions on the power play. I have no doubt that Guentzel has great hands, and is a great playmaker. However, I would put Guentzel and Sampair in a position to score goals on the power play. I didnt really see that. Sampair (Mr. Hockey candidate) was really just a decoy in that power play. He was put in the high slot, which is usually a decoy position to try and creat opportunities for the side guys which I think were #21 and #16. If you saw how many times #16 got the puck around the dot and was so hesitant. I would have rather had sampair or guentzel getting the puck in that position.
Trust me I understand there power play was good to get them there, but I believe I heard their pp percentage was only around 25 percent. At the high school that is not all that great. I might be wrong with those numbers, but most good teams are clipping at about 30 percent or higher.
-
hockeyfan893
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:25 am
-
mnhockfan99
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:41 pm
[quote="Tigers33"]mnhockfan99 -
Yes I can tell he would do well up there, but typically the top of an umbrella is not a great scoring opportunity. Take a look at Nate Schmitt from the u of m. He has about 30 assists on the season, mainly from running the umbrella. However, he has very few goals from this position. This would be like sticking Rau or Haula on top of the power play. That would be taking away two of your top 4 players from a scoring position. Typically scorers are on the sides of an umbrella with some gritty players down low, or someone who has a knack for the net.
What I am trying to say is Guentzel and Sampair are not in prime goal scoring positions on the power play. I have no doubt that Guentzel has great hands, and is a great playmaker. However, I would put Guentzel and Sampair in a position to score goals on the power play. I didnt really see that. Sampair (Mr. Hockey candidate) was really just a decoy in that power play. He was put in the high slot, which is usually a decoy position to try and creat opportunities for the side guys which I think were #21 and #16. If you saw how many times #16 got the puck around the dot and was so hesitant. I would have rather had sampair or guentzel getting the puck in that position.
Trust me I understand there power play was good to get them there, but I believe I heard their pp percentage was only around 25 percent. At the high school that is not all that great. I might be wrong with those numbers, but most good teams are clipping at about 30 percent or higher.[/quote]
Agree with many of your points. Run properly I definitely think the guy at the top point of the umbrella is definitely a scoring threat, and maybe the key player on that unit. I think also sometimes coaches put guys up there they trust to make the right reads with the puck, who can fit passes in the tight windows available, and who can get pucks through to the net or shoot for sticks in front.
But I do see your point for sure.
I can see too the reason their PP % went down in sections/state is you face better teams and PK units, and teams have more time to scout, watch tape, etc. since they can lock in on one opponent.
Yes I can tell he would do well up there, but typically the top of an umbrella is not a great scoring opportunity. Take a look at Nate Schmitt from the u of m. He has about 30 assists on the season, mainly from running the umbrella. However, he has very few goals from this position. This would be like sticking Rau or Haula on top of the power play. That would be taking away two of your top 4 players from a scoring position. Typically scorers are on the sides of an umbrella with some gritty players down low, or someone who has a knack for the net.
What I am trying to say is Guentzel and Sampair are not in prime goal scoring positions on the power play. I have no doubt that Guentzel has great hands, and is a great playmaker. However, I would put Guentzel and Sampair in a position to score goals on the power play. I didnt really see that. Sampair (Mr. Hockey candidate) was really just a decoy in that power play. He was put in the high slot, which is usually a decoy position to try and creat opportunities for the side guys which I think were #21 and #16. If you saw how many times #16 got the puck around the dot and was so hesitant. I would have rather had sampair or guentzel getting the puck in that position.
Trust me I understand there power play was good to get them there, but I believe I heard their pp percentage was only around 25 percent. At the high school that is not all that great. I might be wrong with those numbers, but most good teams are clipping at about 30 percent or higher.[/quote]
Agree with many of your points. Run properly I definitely think the guy at the top point of the umbrella is definitely a scoring threat, and maybe the key player on that unit. I think also sometimes coaches put guys up there they trust to make the right reads with the puck, who can fit passes in the tight windows available, and who can get pucks through to the net or shoot for sticks in front.
But I do see your point for sure.
I can see too the reason their PP % went down in sections/state is you face better teams and PK units, and teams have more time to scout, watch tape, etc. since they can lock in on one opponent.