SSM vs. Mn Rapids

hockeyhead · Post by **hockeyhead** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 7:08 pm

Anyword on the score of this game? I really hope Rapids pulls this off. They have more talent, they just don't have the team chemistry SSM has. It should be a close game! Please post the score if you know it! Hockeyhead

PeterPuck123 · Post by **PeterPuck123** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:17 pm

hehe ya and who was the coach that said, "You didn't lose, you just ran out of time", I would have to say if you look at both rosters, and match up position to position, offensively, defensively, and goalers, i think SSM would come out ahead. like I said in an earlier post, they both have alot of kids in the USA Development program, ya rapids had more, but to say it all comes down to chemistry is not totaly true. remember coaching is a big part of it too.

maroonhockey · Post by **maroonhockey** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:54 pm

Rapids may not be going to the nationals, but nice outfits and matching gear.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 10:43 pm

I really believed that one of the B&A teams this year could win it all. I don't believe that player-for-player that SSM is more talented than the Rapids squad. My guess is that this isn't an issue of coaching either, but instead an issue of not having the entire season to play together and create that chemistry that is needed. This class of 1988's is a far more talented class than I think most realize. I don't believe that any class of talent before, or any that I can see in the near future, will be anywhere near as strong. Congrats to SSM as they beat a team that is essentially packed with D1 talent. Must have been a great game to watch.

hockeygymnast · Post by **hockeygymnast** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:30 am

The game was not as close as the score. SSM pretty much dominated most of the action. SSM won most of the races to the puck and appeared much more confident with the puck. SSM also seemed to be physically stronger as well. Two players for the Rapids who did look good were Hogan and Naslund. They hustled the entire game and created quite a few scoring opportunities. The rest of the "big guns" for Rapids were pretty quiet. Rapids definitely suffered from not being together as a team very long. It was apparent that they were not used to playing together. This was very evident on the power play. Individually, the people that we were sitting with thought that SSM's #'9 & 6 were the top forwards and SSM's #'s 4,5, 16 were the top defenders on the ice. If B & A teams are going to be formed in the future and SSM maintains similar talent, I don't see how SSM will not come out on top. SSM's individual talent was as good or better than Rapids and they play together as a team for 60 - 70 games. Good luck to SSM at Nationals.

hockeyhead · Post by **hockeyhead** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 8:04 am

Peter, First, good luck at Nationals. I hope SSM takes it all. I do beleive they are playing great hockey at this time. Now, the questions is... Do they have more talent then MN Rapids? Just one person opinion... Defense: I'd give the nod to SSM Goaltending: I'd say it's close, but I like the Rapids goalies. Offensively: You'd be crazy to think it's equal! Rapids gets this! Chemistry: You'd be crazy to think Rapids has this. 60 games played together. Living together and practicing everyday together! This goes to SSM! Coaching: Again, this goes to SSM... Teams need consistant coaching and look to their coaches for systems and direction. No offense to the Rapids coaching staff, but it looked like they had no systems set up. Lastly, SSM has a great team with a lot of talent. They play a more physical game then Minnesota High School Girls are used to playing. Good or bad it is what it is what it is... Hockeyhead

maroonhockey · Post by **maroonhockey** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:01 am

Who scored for Rapids?

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:13 am

I agree with hockeyhead. The other interesting thing that we need to look at now is if we will have more teams with the best talent spread out or less teams with the best talent concentrated MN HS B&A team wise. There are arguments to both sides of this I know, and in that the Rapids team didn't win, the thought may be that we need just one MN team with all the top talent, but I would argue that this could go either way. Personally, I'd LOVE to see 3+ MN HS teams of kids that are from the NDP Phase 2 level or higher competing in this if there was the interest. I believe a league & development program could be set up for B&A based on NDP selection, and that two tiers of kids could be looked at at the U19 AND U16 levels. T1 could be comprised of the Phase 2 or higher kids, T2 could be Phase 1 nominations or higher. This could be done based on the spring's NDP and then run through Summer/Fall/next Spring for B&A for U19 & U16 levels. There needs to be a more development oriented approach, especially at the T2 or U16 levels. This would give more players a chance to develop.

FSDOG · Post by **FSDOG** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:14 am

THUNSTROM ZEBRO BUGANSKI ? I BELIEVE .. I HAVE BEEN CORRECTED AS I WAS UNSURE ABOUT THIS ONE .. COULD NOT HEAR THE ANNOUNCEMENT , NICE CROWD !!! IT WAS ANNA MCDONALD , THANKS FOR CORRECTING ME ... Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... g>FSDOG</A> at: 3/20/06 12:49 pm

playit · Post by **playit** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:55 am

Anna McDonald scored, not Buganski

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:10 pm

BC gals came through for the Rapids!!!

brookyone · Post by **brookyone** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:59 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>BC gals came through for the Rapids!!!<hr></blockquote> Ahem...and... ZEBRO <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> I'd be interested in knowing the "M Rapids" complete roster if anyone has the info...and time / inclination to post it. Thanks much!!

hockeyhead · Post by **hockeyhead** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 1:08 pm

Brookyone, Here is the list of the MN Rapids. A very loaded team! Maybe there wasn't enough pucks for them! 35 Alannah McCready 19 Ashley Nixon 10 Christina Lee 13 Allie Thunstrom 9 Jonnie Bloemers 15 Caitlin Hogan 7 Jenna Kilkpatrick 14 Megan Sandall 17 Holly Roberts 11 Anna McDonald 25 Kala Buganski 12 Whitney Naslund 16 Katie Horner 8 Kathryn Farni 26 Michelle Maunu 4 Amy Udvig 23 Kathleen Rosso 2 Jackie Robertson 20 Alexandra Zebro 21 Berit Johnson Hockeyhead

brookyone · Post by **brookyone** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 1:13 pm

Thanks head -- I was wondering because I noticed a "Minnesota Rapids" sweatshirt or two at Ridder Friday night...#26 <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> but had never heard of the team. Quite a roster indeed.

BossySCx4 · Post by **BossySCx4** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:01 pm

of course the rapids don't have the team chemistry that ssm does, but just think of how amazing their team would be if they did?

PeterPuck123 · Post by **PeterPuck123** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:28 pm

when does a team get that "team chemistry" you speak of? 10? 20? 30? 40? games...when. theyplayed 20 games together didn't they? thats 1/3 of the Thoroughbreds and SSM. weren't some of the top players from the same H.S. teams anyways? there is chemistry there, no? don't get me wrong i was rooting for the rapids, but why won't any of you consider that maybe the kids on SSM are just as talented as the All star team. most of there team was represented at the USA selects too.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:32 pm

I'm not in this discussion, but let me say that sporadic 20 games spread out with another season in-between with various kids making only various games, and all the other drama that accompanies such a scheudle is not conducive to creating chemistry and cohesion that SSM has. In my opinion, SSM has SOME players as good or better than Rapids kids. I think player for player anyone woudl take Rapids over SSM as far as INDIVIDUAL talent is concerned. I think this is the classic example of the difference between an awesome "team" with all the talent in the world, and a great "team" with chemistry, cohesion, and consistency. Best talent doesn't always win. That's why we play the games! I too underestimated the cohesion/chemistry factor... Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... ckeyfan</A> at: 3/22/06 4:34 pm

PeterPuck123 · Post by **PeterPuck123** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:52 pm

well said ghsf, but I have seen the Lamereaux twins play before, and being only in the 10th grade, I would have to say they are just as good if not better than any girl on the rapids team, I can't wait to see these girls as seniors, also remember i don't know off hand but aren't most of the ssm kids juniors or younger, i know they have some freshman on there team, one of them being one of the top goal scorers. I know almost all the girls on the rapids are D-1 players, but so are the SSM's girls (i would imagine).

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:57 pm

Lamereaux's - read the ND thread on here - they were the show stoppers of the North NDP a couple years back - simply amazing. Should be scary good by time they are seniors! No doubt that SSM has many D1 kids. SSM has some underclassmen - but Rapids couldn't bring underclassmen by the rules... My point being, both great teams. One may not have been as deep talent wise, but had chemistry/cohesion on their side. Also - as to the physicality factor that was brought up - those MWEHL games are prety much like a war. You have to get tough to play in that league, but I would say that you get away with stuff there that you wouldn't in the WCHA, and subsequently I don't know if finess players are best served playing in the MWEHL.

PeterPuck123 · Post by **PeterPuck123** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:01 pm

Amen, agreed.

BossySCx4 · Post by **BossySCx4** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:42 pm

when i first heard the idea of the rapids i wondered whether or not the team would be cohiesive due to the fact that majority of the girls are standouts that carry their individual teams. after i saw them play i didn't see much selfish play at all. it was nice to see the girls are ready to take the next step into the division I world of team play as opposed to being the heroes of their teams. hats off to them for that.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:29 pm

I totally agree about the team play! I think some people mistake a lack of cohesion as selfishness, but I don't think this (selfishness) is the issue with the Rapids. I do believe though that there is an adjustment going to a team packed with top players from a team that you were one of only a few top players in addition to other chemistry/cohesion adjustments. But, these Rapids gals will be making that adjustment soon too at the college level, so maybe this was a good experience.

hockeygymnast · Post by **hockeygymnast** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:17 pm

I think if a totally neutral, unbiased observer watched the SSM v Rapids game, he or she would not think that the Rapids had superior individual talent. In fact, if hypothetically that game was used as a try-out for some higher team, I think many more SSM players would be selected for this hypothetical team. I think the typical MN girls high school fan/observer is overly impressed by performances by our top players against typical girls high school teams. As an aside to this, I am not sure what the B&A advocates are attempting to accomplish. This Rapids team definitely had the top players (with the notable absence of Jones) that Minnesota has to offer. Yet, they were defeated by a clearly superior team. If the goal for a B&A team is to get to Nationals, I think under the current B&A format, they will be headed for repeated defeats. I think the only way for a MN team other than SSM or the T-Breds to make Nationals is for a team made up of star players and grinders to play an entire season together. HS rules obviously will not allow that to occur. It is definitely a dilemma. You can have players play at the HS level or play on teams like the T-breds. You can't do both. It is very similar to gymnastics. The top gymnasts are competing for private clubs. If you had a gymnastic meet with the top HS gymnasts going against a top level gymnastics club, it would be no contest. As mentioned at the beginning of this post, I am not sure what the ultimate goal of the B&A folks is. If the goal is to send a team to Nationals, IMO, they will have to create teams like the T-Breds, SSM, etc. The efforts should be to create a league made up of club teams to compete against the T-Breds and SSM. However, that would obviously be the end of girls HS hockey as we know it. Note: I am not advocating either position; just making observations.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:07 pm

I agree that in a tryout based on one team being together all year and another team not, that it's far more likely for the players that have played together to look better. I think that we are impressed by best HS players more in HS season for the increased inferior players on the rink, but also for how these elite players play within their team system, which usually highlights the standout player. I still believe, as NDP proves, that the B&A team has more of the best individual talent. Both teams are highly talented though. At this point in time, I hope we don't create more TB/SSM like teams, but in some respects we're heading that direction. I agree that it would destroy the HS game as we know it and force us into a gymnastics like scenario. I think at one time the goal of B&A was a Nat'l Championship, but I think that we should instead look at an approach that allows for at home participation at the Elite level in a B&A setup for the most players possible based on a non-political tryout process. At this point in time, private efforts run the show as they're the only ones that have been willing to step up and make this viable. I should add that we should be thankful that the current private entities have stepped up to give the kids this option. I'd just like to see this extended to the younger/16 kids and also think we could get 3+ quality teams at each level in a couple tiers based on NDP nomintions/tryouts/etc. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... ckeyfan</A> at: 3/22/06 10:14 pm

BossySCx4 · Post by **BossySCx4** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:17 pm

And we can't forget that for the rapids it was like just playing in another spring/summer league. Many of those girls had already participated in state tournaments and felt that kind of glory. The SSM girls work their entire season with this being the prize at the end of the road. The Rapids had nothing to lose, but Shattuck had their entire season to lose.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

SSM vs. Mn Rapids

SSM vs. Mn Rapids

Re: SSM vs. Mn Rapids

Re: SSM vs. Mn Rapids

Re: SSM vs. Mn Rapids

Re: SSM vs. Mn Rapids

Re: SSM vs. Mn Rapids

SSM v. Rapids

Re: SSM vs. Mn Rapids

MAROON HOCKEY - RAPIDS GOAL SCORERS

rapids goal scorers

Re: rapids goal scorers

Re: rapids goal scorers

Re: rapids goal scorers

Re: rapids goal scorers

chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry

Re: chemistry