BEST COLLEGE!!

[wisconsinprephockey]

Is this why the Gophers have helped put more defensemen in the NHL recently than Eaves and Co. have? Not to mention, it is only a matter of time before EJ and Goligoski get there in the next year or two. Heck, maybe even Vannelli.

Put more defensemen in the NHL recently than Eaves and Co.? If only you knew of which you speak...

Eaves took over at the beginning of the 2002-2003 season, we will start at the 2003-2004 season as to allow Eaves to get a recruiting class in, and establish his system and help players to develop.

Badgers in Pro ranks since 2003 (defensemen only)
Ryan Suter (selected 1st round)
Tom Gilbert (selected 4th round)
Joe Piskula (made NHL debut on March 23rd)

Gophers in Pro ranks since 2003 (defensemen only)
Jake Taylor (selected 6th round)
Keith Ballard (selected 1st round)

and since you always want to throw in the maybes (guys that might make it)...

Badgers maybes
Jamie McBain
Kyle Klubertans
Jeff Likens
Heck, maybe even Drewiskie

Gopher mabyes
Goligoski
"EJ" P.J. Anderson
Heck, maybe even Vanelli

Wisconsin is more about a conservative, defensive system than it is about developing defensemen. If you sit back and simply try to clog things up like they do, it may keep the scoring down but it isn't doing much to develop guys for the more wide open NHL of today.

Yes Wisconsin is more conservative, but is also about disciplined play, staying in the passing lanes (instead of chasing forwards around the zone and getting caught out of position) physical play while in your own zone, neutrilizing the forwards in front of the net, and patiently waiting for a mistake your team can capitilize on. Which are all skills needed to play in the NHL. You need disciplined defensemen that dont get caught out of position, as well as player that can neutrilize the forwards in the front of the net, and a defenseman that is in position to help your team capitalize on mistakes.

It helps to know hockey before you try to speak it...

[Gopher Blog]

Ahh, I see. Take 2002 and 2003 players out of the equation. How convenient to your side of the argument. The problem with that is you criticized the system. So you had better include the players that have gone through that system (a la Paul Martin and Leopold). Even if the coaching years don't match up perfectly, it is the amount I was discussing.

PJ Anderson? Who the heck is that? You mean RJ Anderson? Or PJ Atherton? Were they spliced together with DNA? LOL. For a guy who thinks he knows so much, you can't even get a player's name right.

The defensive zone actions that you act like are so earth shattering by Eaves is something every team teaches. If you knew as much hockey as you claim in that post, you would understand that. The difference is Eaves' defensemen have generally been inept beyond that. Gilbert is really the only guy in the last few years that has been able to do more than one thing well. Some of those other names you mention (in particular, Likens and Klubertanz) are not what you are trying to make them into.

Yeah, Eaves' d-men do fine in their own zone. But once they are called upon to do anything more than that, the weaknesses get exposed. They generally have little ability to create for their teammates and they have generally not been very good in the transition game. If you consider a d-man's sole job as being in the defensive zone, you won't develop as many players for the next level. Especially when the game is opening up more in the NHL.

A major flaw in Eaves' system is offense. The offense many times is generated in the transition game and that often starts with the defensemen. It is no shock that Eaves' teams have faltered offensively and it is often because the backline guys are not very good at this part of the game. Of course, he doesn't really develop much forward talent so that exacerbates it but it still helps to have defense that can get the ball rolling.

While they may be capable of covering an area in the defensive zone (which is not exactly a challenge for a player on that level), they don't provide a lot beyond that.

The NHL has become far more about creativity and transition game than sitting back in a conservative system playing the trap. Even Lemaire doesn't run that style anywhere near as much as he used to.

Look in the mirror next time before you try to talk down on anybody else's knowledge of the game.

[wisconsinprephockey]

I took out 2002-2003 because those players are not a product of the Eaves generation, and you were referring to Eaves if you remember right.

Next I see you want to compare the 7-8 years of gophers in NHL to the 4 years under the Eaves generation. I guess thats what you have to do to make your argument look somewhat respectable. Also I didn't criticize the system, simply pointed out a flaw, one single flaw, thats it. The NHL needs defensemen that can score too and Minnesota has those, my intent was never to take anything away from the gophers at all, as I respect every aspect of that program, I was simply comparing.

Yea I made a typo on RJ's name just as you did with EJ another solid point in your argument while comparing systems.

Yes Wisconsins defensemen don't create scoring opportunities while holding the offensive zone, thats where the conservativeness in Eaves system comes into play, they stay in position to prevent the oddman rushes, not a weakness on their part, just part of the plan.

Lack of scoring can be considered a weakness in Eaves' system I have never denied this, but it is not because off lack ability by the defensemen, or lack of Eaves developing forwards. You should know this... but it is lack of forwards that Wisconsin can recruit. Wisconsin relies on the transition game to score (go to a game once, you should figure this out) this is also why wisconsin struggles to recruit offense, lack of individual stats.

Wisconsin had two excellent forwards (Pavelski, and Earl) that could capitalize in transition, and they won a title right. The offense doesnt need to score 6 a game for the system to be effective, they just need a couple of excellent forwards that can capatilize in transition. But i thought we were talkin about defense, or are you just grasping at straws at this point?

Back on the defensive side
03-04 GA
Gophers 127
Wisconsin 93

04-05 GA
Gophers 109
Wisconsin 91

05-06 GA
Gophers 105
Wisconsin 79

06-07 GA
Gophers 101
Wisconsin 83

If if it is not difficult to cover your defensive area why is there such a large difference consistantly every year? Apparently it is a challenge for Gopher defensemen.

1. Just because a statement makes sense doesnt make it reality
2. Get your facts straight
3. Don't try to manipulate the numbers (using 8 years of gophers players in the NHL vs 4 of the Badgers)
4. Figure out which point you want to argue and drive it home, dont start with defensemen in the NHL, then switch to the deffensive system, then switch to offense.

Follow these guidelines and you may be more effective

[Gopher Blog]

I took out 2002-2003 because those players are not a product of the Eaves generation, and you were referring to Eaves if you remember right.

No, you were critical of a supposed flaw in their system and I poked a hole in that by pointing out it can't be too bad when it has lead to a number of guys making it in the NHL since he arrived at the U. Eaves was merely a by-product of the point.

Next I see you want to compare the 7-8 years of gophers in NHL to the 4 years under the Eaves generation. I guess thats what you have to do to make your argument look somewhat respectable.

Leo left in 02, Martin in 03. Since my point was guys he coached at MN and then eventually made the NHL, it made sense to include them. It's not as if I went back 15 years to make a point (going back five years to include a player is not way beyond what you wanted to focus on). I suppose there are many different ways to split hairs on it but it was never my point to make an exact comparison. I just meant to expose a flaw in your original logic.

But i thought we were talkin about defense, or are you just grasping at straws at this point?

Nope. Simply pointing out that they don't provide enough help in other areas of the game and that exacerbates their offensive problems. Developing defensemen isn't just about focusing on teaching solid play in 1/3 of the rink.

Back on the defensive side
03-04 GA
Gophers 127
Wisconsin 93

04-05 GA
Gophers 109
Wisconsin 91

05-06 GA
Gophers 105
Wisconsin 79

06-07 GA
Gophers 101
Wisconsin 83

Like I said, Eaves plays a conservative system. The above numbers only validate that.

I guess it comes down to how you want to define developing a guy. Some may look at it as developing them for the next level. Others may see it as developing them to fit into an individual system. Eaves does a fine job developing defensemen for what his system requires. But I don't agree that he does any better of a job preparing them for the next level. For a "defensive minded" coach (like Eaves is said to be), its not like he is doing any better getting defensemen prepared for the next level than some of his more offensive minded peers (Lucia, Hakstol, etc.).

Your argument also ignores the fact that the one place Eaves has generally had an advantage over the Gophers since he took over is better goaltending. Both Elliott and Bruckler erased a good percentage of mistakes by their defensemen. Obviously that is going to make the team defensive numbers (and the guys in front of him) look better. A great goalie can cover up flaws. Look no further than 05-06 when Elliott was out. Everything was the same except the goalie and what happened? The Badgers looked terrible. Coincidence? Hardly.

As for the baseless condescending remarks, feel free to keep it up. Not only does it take away from your arguments, it also makes you look insecure.

[huskyhawky]

SCSU should be on the list. They have consistently produced a lot of NHL players in the past ten years. The program is on the rise and although they need to get it done in the post season that is coming up right around the corner, with Motzko and the recruits that are starting to come in. I would have to put them with the Sioux and the Gophers as the best three to go to. All have great coaches and a lot of players producing at the next level.

[Gopher Blog]

SCSU should be on the list.

Not sure how you figure they belong in this discussion on defensemen. Outside of Duvie Westcott, they really haven't produced any defensemen in the last six or seven years that has stuck in the NHL for any length of time. Finger got a chance due to some injuries on the Avs late this season so we'll have to see if he can stick in the long run.

In terms of college performance, they haven't had any all American defensemen since Pudlick in 2000 (who made the 2nd team) and their last defenseman to make an all WCHA team (either the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team) was back in 2001 with Westcott on the 2nd team. That is a long dry spell.

Given all of the above, I don't see how it can be said that they belong in the discussion.

[wisconsinprephockey]

I guess it comes down to how you want to define developing a guy. Some may look at it as developing them for the next level. Others may see it as developing them to fit into an individual system. Eaves does a fine job developing defensemen for what his system requires. But I don't agree that he does any better of a job preparing them for the next level. For a "defensive minded" coach (like Eaves is said to be), its not like he is doing any better getting defensemen prepared for the next level than some of his more offensive minded peers (Lucia, Hakstol, etc.).

It's obvious both teams play with a succesfull system, and I have acknowledged that Minnesota has produced excellent defensemen. All I had stated was they are more focused on scoring goals then playing defense. Wisconsins defensemen focus on defense rather than scoring. Both are needed at the NHL level and both are successful, I am not saying Minnesotas defensemen are bad just saying the play with a different mindset. The big problem I have is you keep insisting that because Wisconsins defensemen do not score as often you are saying they are not flawed players. They are simply playing the system thats why they dont score as much. and then you say this system doesnt prepare you for the NHL, but Eaves has only been in town for 5 years and porduced 3 NHL defensemen already with more on the way. You were the one that said Minnesota produces more than Eaves so I simply made the comparison as to who has produced more in the time Eaves has been there.

Your argument also ignores the fact that the one place Eaves has generally had an advantage over the Gophers since he took over is better goaltending. Both Elliott and Bruckler erased a good percentage of mistakes by their defensemen. Obviously that is going to make the team defensive numbers (and the guys in front of him) look better. A great goalie can cover up flaws. Look no further than 05-06 when Elliott was out. Everything was the same except the goalie and what happened? The Badgers looked terrible. Coincidence? Hardly.

Yes Wisconsin has great goaltending nobody can deny that, they have the ability to develop goaltenders like nobodys business, but the system helps these goaltenders to. The system we have been talking so much about isnt designed to block all shots together, its to stop high percentage shots, and to not allow the offense to move the puck freely through the zone. So where you see a shot on goal as a mistake this may not be the case. A defensemen in Wisconsin will allow a low percentage shot while talking a away the passing lanes. While this seems like the basics (as most everyone tries to practice this) Wisconsin takes it to the next level, by going beyond the obvious situations where you would take away the passing lane and give up a low percentage shot.

[Bench Major]

UND to NHL D - Commodore, Greene, Hale, Jones, Roche and Stafford. More on the way in Finley and Lee. There are a bunch of forwards too. There must be something in that Red River water. The 200 X 85 North American rink has been a good home for these prairie trees.

[boblee]

Small detail:

It is Denver University, not the University of Denver.

Before you say it doesn't matter...think about this...

University of Minnesota or Minnesota University...

A smaller detail although it matters little but DU is now known as the University of Denver, go figure. Everyone knows it as Denver University (DU) but the scholars seemed to have made the change to mess with our minds.

Life at DU
The 4,432 undergraduate students at the University of Denver come from all 50 states and all over the world. For all their differences, DU students have one thing in common: They value close relationships with faculty mentors and the chance to learn by doing.

That's too confusing for me. I'll just call them Denver