HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Mariucci sounds pretty empty according to MSBN announcers!

Keep it at Mariucci but make Edina skate around with weights strapped to their skate blades.

Is ridder not Olympic?

Final 10-1 Edina, shots 29-12
Paul Meyer had a hatrick .

green4 wrote:Is ridder not Olympic?

Final 10-1 Edina, shots 29-12
Paul Meyer had a hatrick .

Ridder is NHL size 200 x 85

Bluewhitefan wrote:

Tron wrote: 4. If Giles runs the 4th line lead by Moon, mismatch his line and get odd-man chances.

Not a chance until it's 5-0.

Got in at 8-1

Bluewhitefan wrote:

Bluewhitefan wrote:

Tron wrote: 4. If Giles runs the 4th line lead by Moon, mismatch his line and get odd-man chances.

Not a chance until it's 5-0.

Got in at 8-1

That means they played in about half the game. Good experience

mulefarm wrote:

Bluewhitefan wrote:

Bluewhitefan wrote: Not a chance until it's 5-0.

Got in at 8-1

That means they played in about half the game. Good experience

Or half the third, which was running time!

Curious from those there in person: was Lubbs just missing savable shots, or were many of Hornets goals good snipes, or both? Have ballots been finalized for Brimsek at this point?

1st: Rebound with Edina on PP, not his fault
2nd: Mismash went through the entire B'Ville team, scored, knocked over a B'Ville player right after the goal, and then let the B'Ville student section know what he just did. Only thing Mismash didn't do was go into the stands & start making out with the Burnsville players girlfriends...
3rd: Probably could have been stopped, or at least should be by a guy of his caliber
4th: Not his fault, Edina guy checked into him by his own teammate
5th: Not his fault
6th: Screen from the point. Debate whether he needs to stop that or not his fault. If you're going to beat Edina, you need to save those I guess.
7th: Not his fault
8th: Screened, not his fault.

Honestly, I don't remember the 9th & 10th goals.

I think what's lost in this game is this: Burnsville had only 5 shots on goal in the 2nd & 3rd periods combined.

InYourFace09 wrote:

Lazy Scout wrote:This game is ridiculous. Sections need to be reassigned. Also, get rid of Mariucci as the venue. The big ice will only help Edina even more and they don't need help. Looks like they are on their way to a three peat.

Pretty sure Edina is the only team that gets practice time at Mariucci throughout the year to get ready for sections.

But Wayzata plays on a big sheet and EP, Jefferson and Kennedy have one to practice on. If others want time on big sheets it only takes money to rent it at Plymouth and BIG.

Looks like Edina is rolling again at the right time. State tournament may lose some of its hype if Lakeville N and Edina are not playing Saturday evening.

SimplyPut wrote:Looks like Edina is rolling again at the right time. State tournament may lose some of its hype if Lakeville N and Edina are not playing Saturday evening.

I don't see any teams getting in the way of Lakeville N and Edina on the way to the chip

What was up with the goalie interference and the goal still stands in this game? After the Edina player contacted the goaltender the whistle should have blown the play dead right when he touched the puck.

First time I saw a goal and also an interference penalty called on the team that scored the goal. Still scratching my head how the goal could count, unless Bville knocked the puck in their own net. GB

MissotaGopher14 wrote:What was up with the goalie interference and the goal still stands in this game? After the Edina player contacted the goaltender the whistle should have blown the play dead right when he touched the puck.

I saw it all happen. I think where the refs screwed up was saying that it was an interference penalty when it should have probably been roughing or unsportsmanlike conduct. The Edina guy (Wait, I think) was checked into the goalie by a Burnsville player and immediately after, Mismash stuffed it in, so it happened after the goal. Then after the goal, Mismash started to celebrate & skated right into the goalie, knocking him over.

The penalty was for hitting the goalie after the goal. Like I said, should have probably been called as roughing or unsportsmanlike.

Thanks Doc. Was thinking it was an unsportsman penalty, but they didn't announce that. Makes sense.

You can watch most of the goals here: http://kstp.com/news/stories/s3717486.shtml

Doc Holliday wrote:1st: Rebound with Edina on PP, not his fault
2nd: Mismash went through the entire B'Ville team, scored, knocked over a B'Ville player right after the goal, and then let the B'Ville student section know what he just did. Only thing Mismash didn't do was go into the stands & start making out with the Burnsville players girlfriends...
3rd: Probably could have been stopped, or at least should be by a guy of his caliber
4th: Not his fault, Edina guy checked into him by his own teammate
5th: Not his fault
6th: Screen from the point. Debate whether he needs to stop that or not his fault. If you're going to beat Edina, you need to save those I guess.
7th: Not his fault
8th: Screened, not his fault.

Honestly, I don't remember the 9th & 10th goals.

I think what's lost in this game is this: Burnsville had only 5 shots on goal in the 2nd & 3rd periods combined.

Agree it was one sided in every aspect of the game. Given that Burnsville scored 1 goal on 12 shots they would have had to have 132 shots on goal to score the 11 goals needed to win this game!

C-dad wrote:

InYourFace09 wrote:

Lazy Scout wrote:This game is ridiculous. Sections need to be reassigned. Also, get rid of Mariucci as the venue. The big ice will only help Edina even more and they don't need help. Looks like they are on their way to a three peat.

Pretty sure Edina is the only team that gets practice time at Mariucci throughout the year to get ready for sections.

But Wayzata plays on a big sheet and EP, Jefferson and Kennedy have one to practice on. If others want time on big sheets it only takes money to rent it at Plymouth and BIG.

Edina practiced at BIG last week... lots of full ice, full width drills. They were ready.

C-dad wrote:But Wayzata plays on a big sheet and EP, Jefferson and Kennedy have one to practice on. If others want time on big sheets it only takes money to rent it at Plymouth and BIG.

EP's 2nd rink was downsized a few years ago. But I agree with your overall point; there are opportunities for teams to find olympic ice to practice on. This is not some unique advantage only provided to Edina.

Plus, I do believe that Mariucci is narrowing the rink in the next year or two. I thought I read that they're going to dig down, adding a row of seats, and that the rink, while not fully going to 85 width, will be closer to it than 100'. That's at least what I remember hearing, don't know if the plan is still taking action.

Doc Holliday wrote:

C-dad wrote:But Wayzata plays on a big sheet and EP, Jefferson and Kennedy have one to practice on. If others want time on big sheets it only takes money to rent it at Plymouth and BIG.

EP's 2nd rink was downsized a few years ago. But I agree with your overall point; there are opportunities for teams to find olympic ice to practice on. This is not some unique advantage only provided to Edina.

Plus, I do believe that Mariucci is narrowing the rink in the next year or two. I thought I read that they're going to dig down, adding a row of seats, and that the rink, while not fully going to 85 width, will be closer to it than 100'. That's at least what I remember hearing, don't know if the plan is still taking action.

Bloomington is also going to be downsizing BIG 3 to 200x85

It's not about practicing on big ice once or twice before games. It's about teams that are very skilled and fast have the advantage on larger, more open ice. I believe Edina would have still beaten Burnsville but the score would have been narrower on regular ice. You can't give a team like Edina with the speed of Wait, Malmquist and Masterman open ice. Burnsville couldn't even handle it and the shots on goal of 12 showed it.

Lazy Scout wrote:It's not about practicing on big ice once or twice before games. It's about teams that are very skilled and fast have the advantage on larger, more open ice. I believe Edina would have still beaten Burnsville but the score would have been narrower on regular ice. You can't give a team like Edina with the speed of Wait, Malmquist and Masterman open ice. Burnsville couldn't even handle it and the shots on goal of 12 showed it.

Edina's passing was much more prominent than their speed last night. Burnsville did not get it out of their zone much so Edina never really had to use their speed to its full potential. There was not a lot of full ice rushes or anything like that.
The biggest issue was Burnsville just stood around the whole game, you wondered if they were even trying in the last two periods.

Lazy Scout wrote:It's not about practicing on big ice once or twice before games. It's about teams that are very skilled and fast have the advantage on larger, more open ice. I believe Edina would have still beaten Burnsville but the score would have been narrower on regular ice. You can't give a team like Edina with the speed of Wait, Malmquist and Masterman open ice. Burnsville couldn't even handle it and the shots on goal of 12 showed it.

No one had more speed and depth than the undefeated and no. 1 ranked Holy Angels team in 2007 but an unranked and ten loss team from Burnsville, similar to this squad, took them down at Mariucci 6-4. Giles' first section title in 2000 came with an unranked and seven loss team that beat a very fast 20-1-1 Eden Prairie team (ranked no. 2 behind Elk River) 4-3 at Mariucci. It isn't about the size of the ice but who shows up and plays the better game.

Of course your comment along with your plea to reorganize sections to make it harder for Edina demonstrates what your real issue is. What is so wrong with the best teams making it to state? Will you only be happy if a less deserving team wins because another team upset Edina (and perhaps Lakeville North as well?)

And what other no. 1 seed has a harder section than Edina? Lakeville North? Both Burnsville and Prior Lake were ranked higher than either South or Farmington. Why aren't you trying to make section one harder? Or St. Thomas maybe? Cretin and Eastview, again, are weaker than Edina's section two opponents. Hill Murray? Well, this year I'll grant you that White Bear was better than Edina's competition, but not by much, and that's rarely the case. But Hill won't even have to play the Bears since they were upset by unranked Stillwater. Perhaps Edina should play in section five instead of Blaine. But Anoka and Centennial are not as highly-regarded as Prior Lake or Burnsville. Elk River has to play one of two teams on the bubble of the top 20 this year. Section eight? Wouldn't you be screaming if Edina got to play in section eight?

Section six is the only section that is typically deeper with top 10 teams. How would Edina have done in section six? They did tie their first games with Wayzata and Minnetonka, and EP took them to overtime. Since then, however, they blew past section six teams 8-0 and out scored them 45-13, typically on regulation sized rinks.

And of course you would weaken other sections just to load up section two, but the only thing that would likely accomplish would be to make it much harder for more strong teams to get to state.

Tell you what. Let's put whatever team you root for in section two. If it's a team that ever makes it to state in its current section, we'll see how much better it does in section two.

Rich Clarke wrote:

Lazy Scout wrote:It's not about practicing on big ice once or twice before games. It's about teams that are very skilled and fast have the advantage on larger, more open ice. I believe Edina would have still beaten Burnsville but the score would have been narrower on regular ice. You can't give a team like Edina with the speed of Wait, Malmquist and Masterman open ice. Burnsville couldn't even handle it and the shots on goal of 12 showed it.

No one had more speed and depth than the undefeated and no. 1 ranked Holy Angels team in 2007 but an unranked and ten loss team from Burnsville, similar to this squad, took them down at Mariucci 6-4. Giles' first section title in 2000 came with an unranked and seven loss team that beat a very fast 20-1-1 Eden Prairie team (ranked no. 2 behind Elk River) 4-3 at Mariucci. It isn't about the size of the ice but who shows up and plays the better game.

Of course your comment along with your plea to reorganize sections to make it harder for Edina demonstrates what your real issue is. What is so wrong with the best teams making it to state? Will you only be happy if a less deserving team wins because another team upset Edina (and perhaps Lakeville North as well?)

And what other no. 1 seed has a harder section than Edina? Lakeville North? Both Burnsville and Prior Lake were ranked higher than either South or Farmington. Why aren't you trying to make section one harder? Or St. Thomas maybe? Cretin and Eastview, again, are weaker than Edina's section two opponents. Hill Murray? Well, this year I'll grant you that White Bear was better than Edina's competition, but not by much, and that's rarely the case. But Hill won't even have to play the Bears since they were upset by unranked Stillwater. Perhaps Edina should play in section five instead of Blaine. But Anoka and Centennial are not as highly-regarded as Prior Lake or Burnsville. Elk River has to play one of two teams on the bubble of the top 20 this year. Section eight? Wouldn't you be screaming if Edina got to play in section eight?

Section six is the only section that is typically deeper with top 10 teams. How would Edina have done in section six? They did tie their first games with Wayzata and Minnetonka, and EP took them to overtime. Since then, however, they blew past section six teams 8-0 and out scored them 45-13, typically on regulation sized rinks.

And of course you would weaken other sections just to load up section two, but the only thing that would likely accomplish would be to make it much harder for more strong teams to get to state.

Tell you what. Let's put whatever team you root for in section two. If it's a team that ever makes it to state in its current section, we'll see how much better it does in section two.

Very strong post which really can't be argued. The truth is, 7 of the top 15 ranked teams exist in sections 2AA and 6AA. Neither section should be considered easy, even if a team rises above the field and gets hot.

Each section contains at least one very good team (top 12 or better), but most sections don't have much competition for those teams.

I'm really looking forward to this tournament and hoping for no upsets in the sections. This should make for some great games with deserving teams and I'm alright with that.