HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

dangle snipe n' celly- what i was saying is that luverne has a stronger offensive line and a better goalie making them better than the #2 marshall. marshalls d looks better to me.
we watched a lot of the game, missed some of it talking to friends. st peter didn't dominate and lose by a fluke. fun game luverne didnt quit. but st peters not edina either

sssample54 wrote:dangle snipe n' celly- what i was saying is that luverne has a stronger offensive line and a better goalie making them better than the #2 marshall. marshalls d looks better to me.
we watched a lot of the game, missed some of it talking to friends. st peter didn't dominate and lose by a fluke. fun game luverne didnt quit. but st peters not edina either

How can you say luverne has a better goalie when the luvernes goalie stats are worse than marshalls?

[quote="dangle snipe n' celly"][quote="sssample54"]dangle snipe n' celly- what i was saying is that luverne has a stronger offensive line and a better goalie making them better than the #2 marshall. marshalls d looks better to me.
we watched a lot of the game, missed some of it talking to friends. st peter didn't dominate and lose by a fluke. fun game luverne didnt quit. but st peters not edina either[/quote]

How can you say luverne has a better goalie when the luvernes goalie stats are worse than marshalls?[/quote]



if you look closer at the stats its obvious that the stats haven't been updated for a long time....

Chalk_Talk wrote:

computerguy wrote:Got it that Luverne has Jv. But you all are saying that hutch, litchfield, and Nu should play everyone in 3a. So is your argument that they should all play Luverne? If so its still a 3 hour drive and we still have a lot of conference games to play that are 45 min at best.

Computerguy, if you have been following this thread we have been down this road already, look back a few pages. In 2,3 or 4 years Luverne might not want to schedule some of these teams. I understand there are teams closer to home to play, but litch might want to work in more section games so coaches can seed teams to the best of their opinion. You can thank the MSHSL for putting these teams in the same section. I understand that cost is also an issue. I bet that about 75% of the teams in the state play a non-section, non-conference game that is over 3 hrs of drive time. You make it sound like Litchfield must not have played in youth tournaments that were out of town? Those aren't cheap to play in, for the assn. or the parents! But now that the kids are in high school people are going to use that as an excuse to why they don't play more section games. Its called fundraising. Instead schedule Holy Family twice and get beat by a combined 17-1?

Litchfield played 6 section games this year
2 vs Hutch, section and conference team
2 vs Nu
1 vs Redwood
1 vs Marshall

How can the coaches in the section properly seed this team with so few sectin games?

Holy Family is a conference team. Litch has to play them twice. Come on man, you need to do your homework

Observer33 wrote:

Chalk_Talk wrote:

computerguy wrote:Got it that Luverne has Jv. But you all are saying that hutch, litchfield, and Nu should play everyone in 3a. So is your argument that they should all play Luverne? If so its still a 3 hour drive and we still have a lot of conference games to play that are 45 min at best.

Computerguy, if you have been following this thread we have been down this road already, look back a few pages. In 2,3 or 4 years Luverne might not want to schedule some of these teams. I understand there are teams closer to home to play, but litch might want to work in more section games so coaches can seed teams to the best of their opinion. You can thank the MSHSL for putting these teams in the same section. I understand that cost is also an issue. I bet that about 75% of the teams in the state play a non-section, non-conference game that is over 3 hrs of drive time. You make it sound like Litchfield must not have played in youth tournaments that were out of town? Those aren't cheap to play in, for the assn. or the parents! But now that the kids are in high school people are going to use that as an excuse to why they don't play more section games. Its called fundraising. Instead schedule Holy Family twice and get beat by a combined 17-1?

Litchfield played 6 section games this year
2 vs Hutch, section and conference team
2 vs Nu
1 vs Redwood
1 vs Marshall

How can the coaches in the section properly seed this team with so few sectin games?

Holy Family is a conference team. Litch has to play them twice. Come on man, you need to do your homework

They could just play them once and double that games value. It's a good way to free up games outside of conference, especially when the result is pretty obvious.

MHGr8ness wrote:

Observer33 wrote:

Chalk_Talk wrote: Computerguy, if you have been following this thread we have been down this road already, look back a few pages. In 2,3 or 4 years Luverne might not want to schedule some of these teams. I understand there are teams closer to home to play, but litch might want to work in more section games so coaches can seed teams to the best of their opinion. You can thank the MSHSL for putting these teams in the same section. I understand that cost is also an issue. I bet that about 75% of the teams in the state play a non-section, non-conference game that is over 3 hrs of drive time. You make it sound like Litchfield must not have played in youth tournaments that were out of town? Those aren't cheap to play in, for the assn. or the parents! But now that the kids are in high school people are going to use that as an excuse to why they don't play more section games. Its called fundraising. Instead schedule Holy Family twice and get beat by a combined 17-1?

Litchfield played 6 section games this year
2 vs Hutch, section and conference team
2 vs Nu
1 vs Redwood
1 vs Marshall

How can the coaches in the section properly seed this team with so few sectin games?

Holy Family is a conference team. Litch has to play them twice. Come on man, you need to do your homework

They could just play them once and double that games value. It's a good way to free up games outside of conference, especially when the result is pretty obvious.

You must not understand the dynamics of a conference. Teams don't have the ability to say, "we are only playing HF once". I understand Luverne's frustration, but no one "owes" them a game. In the end, it doesn't matter what your seed is, the section winner has to win the games come playoff time.

Gretzky9 wrote:Hey everyone. Was talking hockey with a couple guys today and we got in to 3A hockey. One guy said Brody Peterson wasn't even all-conference last year. We pulled up Hockey Hub and he led their conference in scoring but we couldn't find anything that said either way. Anyone out there know anything? It would seem strange that the leading scorer in the conference wouldn't make all-conference!

We have a little wager on this...so any help would be appreciated.

Anything out there??????

This section forum is worst then ive ever seen before!! Quite embarrassing. Hutch and New Ulm losing in the quaterfinals? Luveren and Marshall just stick to playing hockey and stop spending so much time on here!

Heres the hubs breakdown on the section
http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/news_article ... 32770-news

And heres the brackets
http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/bracket/show ... ason=66599

Gretzky9 wrote:

Gretzky9 wrote:Hey everyone. Was talking hockey with a couple guys today and we got in to 3A hockey. One guy said Brody Peterson wasn't even all-conference last year. We pulled up Hockey Hub and he led their conference in scoring but we couldn't find anything that said either way. Anyone out there know anything? It would seem strange that the leading scorer in the conference wouldn't make all-conference!

We have a little wager on this...so any help would be appreciated.

Anything out there??????

I don't know anything, but keep in mind, there can be other factors that make athletes ineligible for the award. I am not saying that is the case in this situation, just something to consider

Observer33 wrote:

Gretzky9 wrote:

Gretzky9 wrote:Hey everyone. Was talking hockey with a couple guys today and we got in to 3A hockey. One guy said Brody Peterson wasn't even all-conference last year. We pulled up Hockey Hub and he led their conference in scoring but we couldn't find anything that said either way. Anyone out there know anything? It would seem strange that the leading scorer in the conference wouldn't make all-conference!

We have a little wager on this...so any help would be appreciated.

Anything out there??????

I don't know anything, but keep in mind, there can be other factors that make athletes ineligible for the award. I am not saying that is the case in this situation, just something to consider

All conference (2011)
Zach Hoffmann, Kaleb Juntenen, Blake Burgau, Adam Loose and Aaron Pfaff was honorable mention.

Sheetice wrote:

Observer33 wrote:

Gretzky9 wrote: Anything out there??????

I don't know anything, but keep in mind, there can be other factors that make athletes ineligible for the award. I am not saying that is the case in this situation, just something to consider

All conference (2011)
Zach Hoffmann, Kaleb Juntenen, Blake Burgau, Adam Loose and Aaron Pfaff was honorable mention.

Shoot! I just lost a bet. I know I am fighting against myself from a previous post on Peterson but someone explain to me how he leads his team AND conference in scoring and not only doesn't he get all-conference but not even honorable mention???? I know he is a one-way player but that people is just dumb!

SECTION 3A PLAYOFFS

Play in game
#9 Redwood Valley (2-21) @ #8 Worthington (4-13-1)
season series
Split season series 1-1
Prediction
During the regular season saw the home teams win both games in the series, Worthington winning the most recent meeting. But I think the trend will be broken and I think Redwood Valley will come through with revenge after their overtime loss last week. And will move on to play #1 New Ulm.

Quarterfinals
# 9 Redwood Valley (3-21) @ #1 New Ulm (14-11)
season series
No games played
Prediction
This is a pretty obvious one. New Ulm easily has more skill in this one. up front, at D, and between the pipes. This one is a game that goes into running time without a doubt.

#5 Windom (11-7) @ #4 Hutchinson (9-16)
season series
No games played
Prediction
Closer than most think. yes Hutch has the most success in the past and yes Hutch has Windom number in past playoffs (but barely) Overall the first line of Windom with Janssen and Eisenmenger is pretty deadly and I think will be able to knock off Hutch in this one. Hutch really doesnt have much for goal scorers either. Yes they have the Cowgers and Adams. But Windom's top goal scorers will top Hutch's. It will be sort of high scoring due to the weak goalies. I got Windom winning 6-4.

#7 Fairmont (5-17) @ #2 Marshall (15-7)
season series
Marshall wins series 1-0 with an 8-3 win.
Predictions
Fairmont will probably come out firing but its still Fairmont. And even though Marshall has struggled down the stretch, its still playoffs and they will handle Fairmont easily. Maybe not running time due to Marshall struggling but an easy 4 or 5 goal win.

#6 Litchfield (5-20) @ #3 Luverne (19-3-2)
season series
No games played
Prediction
I dont care what the records say. This will be a barn burner. But in my opinion Luverne should be the 2nd seed but really cant because Marshall won their conference. But I think Luverne comes out on top and we will see then who is should have got the 2nd seed if they meet at Gustavus.

Observer33 wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote:

Observer33 wrote: Holy Family is a conference team. Litch has to play them twice. Come on man, you need to do your homework

They could just play them once and double that games value. It's a good way to free up games outside of conference, especially when the result is pretty obvious.

You must not understand the dynamics of a conference. Teams don't have the ability to say, "we are only playing HF once". I understand Luverne's frustration, but no one "owes" them a game. In the end, it doesn't matter what your seed is, the section winner has to win the games come playoff time.

I understand the dynamics of a conference. Things aren't set in stone and things can be adjusted to meet the CHANGING dynmaics of a team. What does winning the conference mean? You get to put up a pretty little banner and say we the in confernce whoope! Does winning the section and having a shot at a state title mean more, I sure would hope so. I think you are smart enough to figure out which games are more important.

Holy Family is trying to move thier program in a different direction, to play with the big boys, this one example of making a minor adjustment to conference play would be benefical to both teams!

Chalk_Talk wrote:

Observer33 wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote: They could just play them once and double that games value. It's a good way to free up games outside of conference, especially when the result is pretty obvious.

You must not understand the dynamics of a conference. Teams don't have the ability to say, "we are only playing HF once". I understand Luverne's frustration, but no one "owes" them a game. In the end, it doesn't matter what your seed is, the section winner has to win the games come playoff time.

I understand the dynamics of a conference. Things aren't set in stone and things can be adjusted to meet the CHANGING dynmaics of a team. What does winning the conference mean? You get to put up a pretty little banner and say we the in confernce whoope! Does winning the section and having a shot at a state title mean more, I sure would hope so. I think you are smart enough to figure out which games are more important.

Holy Family is trying to move thier program in a different direction, to play with the big boys, this one example of making a minor adjustment to conference play would be benefical to both teams!

No teams in the Wright would allow this to happen. You do not understand conference dynamics. The fact that you feel a whole conference should change their format to allow for a single game against Luverne is ridiculous. Pitch lost EVERY conference game this year, but that doesn't mean they should ask to play every conference team once. It will NEVER happen. If you think this idea is realistic, you just don't "get it". HF may want to play with the big dogs, but still didn't even win the wright county conference. If Luverne wants games they will need to make a run in playoffs so teams have an interest in playing them.

Observer33 wrote:

Chalk_Talk wrote:

Observer33 wrote: You must not understand the dynamics of a conference. Teams don't have the ability to say, "we are only playing HF once". I understand Luverne's frustration, but no one "owes" them a game. In the end, it doesn't matter what your seed is, the section winner has to win the games come playoff time.

I understand the dynamics of a conference. Things aren't set in stone and things can be adjusted to meet the CHANGING dynmaics of a team. What does winning the conference mean? You get to put up a pretty little banner and say we the in confernce whoope! Does winning the section and having a shot at a state title mean more, I sure would hope so. I think you are smart enough to figure out which games are more important.

Holy Family is trying to move thier program in a different direction, to play with the big boys, this one example of making a minor adjustment to conference play would be benefical to both teams!

No teams in the Wright would allow this to happen. You do not understand conference dynamics. The fact that you feel a whole conference should change their format to allow for a single game against Luverne is ridiculous. Pitch lost EVERY conference game this year, but that doesn't mean they should ask to play every conference team once. It will NEVER happen. If you think this idea is realistic, you just don't "get it". HF may want to play with the big dogs, but still didn't even win the wright county conference. If Luverne wants games they will need to make a run in playoffs so teams have an interest in playing them.

I'm not having this discussion to try and change a conference, Just trying to bring some competitive games to the section. If a conference isn't willing to change their "this is how it is going to be done because it has always been this way and we aren't going to change attitude" some people should maybe move on from their job. Time changes things maybe need to be adjusted along the way.

This is way off the topic, Obserer you seem pretty tied into this conferece thing. If things are non adjustable the way you are explaing them, How is Holy Family not even in this conference for other sports? Boys BB example.

Back to Hockey talk now sorry!!

Observer33 wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote:

Observer33 wrote: Holy Family is a conference team. Litch has to play them twice. Come on man, you need to do your homework

They could just play them once and double that games value. It's a good way to free up games outside of conference, especially when the result is pretty obvious.

You must not understand the dynamics of a conference. Teams don't have the ability to say, "we are only playing HF once". I understand Luverne's frustration, but no one "owes" them a game. In the end, it doesn't matter what your seed is, the section winner has to win the games come playoff time.

If both teams agree to it and possibly the rest of the conference then yes they could. I think Grand Rapids does or has done this with the Iron Range? Maybe Benilde as well?

MHGr8ness wrote:

Observer33 wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote: They could just play them once and double that games value. It's a good way to free up games outside of conference, especially when the result is pretty obvious.

You must not understand the dynamics of a conference. Teams don't have the ability to say, "we are only playing HF once". I understand Luverne's frustration, but no one "owes" them a game. In the end, it doesn't matter what your seed is, the section winner has to win the games come playoff time.

If both teams agree to it and possibly the rest of the conference then yes they could. I think Grand Rapids does or has done this with the Iron Range? Maybe Benilde as well?

But the conference has to agree to it. Look at the CSC, Richfield and Simley play everyone only once now, but Sibley refused and everyone still plays them twice. Once team can't just dictate what they do in conference play.

Or instead of Litchfield dropping good conference games against Holy Family they could drop non-conference games against Wadena, Prairie Centre, Morris-Benson, or St. Peter for a section game against Luverne. There are a lot of options there for game openings. And dropping a game against Wadena for a game against Luverne wouldn't make Litch's schedule worse, it'd probably make it better.

theoldref wrote:Or instead of Litchfield dropping good conference games against Holy Family they could drop non-conference games against Wadena, Prairie Centre, Morris-Benson, or St. Peter for a section game against Luverne. There are a lot of options there for game openings. And dropping a game against Wadena for a game against Luverne wouldn't make Litch's schedule worse, it'd probably make it better.

Thanks for saying that, that is all I was trying to say.

Here are my section predictions

Worthington over Fairmont

New ulm over Worthington by a wide margin

Hutch over windom, by a wide margin

Luverne Barely over Litchfield

Marshall way over Fairmont

New Ulm Over Hutch barely

Luverne over Marshall

Luverne VS New Ulm in Championship

Good Luck to all the Teams, unless of course, your playing my team....

HShockeywatcher wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote:

Observer33 wrote: You must not understand the dynamics of a conference. Teams don't have the ability to say, "we are only playing HF once". I understand Luverne's frustration, but no one "owes" them a game. In the end, it doesn't matter what your seed is, the section winner has to win the games come playoff time.

If both teams agree to it and possibly the rest of the conference then yes they could. I think Grand Rapids does or has done this with the Iron Range? Maybe Benilde as well?

But the conference has to agree to it. Look at the CSC, Richfield and Simley play everyone only once now, but Sibley refused and everyone still plays them twice. Once team can't just dictate what they do in conference play.

Thanks for the confirmation.

One Section 3A Playoff Game tomorrow night

Here is my Preview:

#8 Seed Worthington Trojans (4-16-1)
They will go as far as Ethan Stofferan (14-8-22) and Alex Kremer (15-3-18 ) can carry them up front. Worthington only has around 12 skaters they hustle and grind with the best of them. They lack scoring depth well they lack depth in general.

The Trojans will go as far as Rylan Scholtes will take them in the nets. The athletic Junior is use to facing a lot of shots and can steal a game.

#9 Seed Redwood Valley Cardinals (2-21-0)
The Cardinals are paced up front by Chris Verdoes (11-15-26), Colin Bailey (12-12-24) and Jordan Skeie (14-4-18 ). They rely heavily on their trio of seniors up front. Redwood typical only plays two lines and depth is an issue especially on the blue line.

Like the Trojans their net minder Senior Parker Revier will determine the Redwood Valley’s success. He is a big goaltender who is use to taking a lot of shots. Redwood Valley is a funny team they have lost to some bad teams but have player Marshall and Luverne close in both of their meetings.

Prediction:
These teams have met twice this year and went to overtime in each game. This should be a fun one just because both goaltenders are solid. I will Take Redwood Valley winning because of their 7 seniors who play major minutes compared to the Trojans who are mostly Juniors.
Redwood Valley 3 Worthington 2 OT

Well it starts tomorrow night should be fun. To all players good luck lay every shift likes it is your last!

MHGr8ness wrote:

HShockeywatcher wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote: If both teams agree to it and possibly the rest of the conference then yes they could. I think Grand Rapids does or has done this with the Iron Range? Maybe Benilde as well?

But the conference has to agree to it. Look at the CSC, Richfield and Simley play everyone only once now, but Sibley refused and everyone still plays them twice. Once team can't just dictate what they do in conference play.

Thanks for the confirmation.

I love it when posters figure out they're wrong all on their own

HShockeywatcher wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote:

HShockeywatcher wrote: But the conference has to agree to it. Look at the CSC, Richfield and Simley play everyone only once now, but Sibley refused and everyone still plays them twice. Once team can't just dictate what they do in conference play.

Thanks for the confirmation.

I love it when posters figure out they're wrong all on their own

Who did that?

MHGr8ness wrote:

HShockeywatcher wrote:

MHGr8ness wrote: Thanks for the confirmation.

I love it when posters figure out they're wrong all on their own

Who did that?

No one cares