HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

MNHockeyFan wrote:

karl(east) wrote:For the most part, I think strong JV teams tell us that a certain high school is very deep--which is something we can probably already know based on the depth of the varsity squad, or the size of the feeder association. Some good players will earn their dues there and turn into great varsity players, but by in large the players who make good teams great come straight up from bantams.

Agree 100%, but I did notice this comment by Wayzata coach Carl Davis in our local Sun Newspaper, speaking about his team's prospects for 2011-12:

"We lose a lot of our scoring punch for next season, but we are expecting help from our JV team, which had a 23-2-0 record. There is a lot of talent there."

http://www.mnsun.com/articles/2011/03/0 ... wzbhoc.txt

ok. Fair enough. Thanks for your explanation. I do believe that Supertacks and MNhockey did provide some convincing evidence.. As well as the Wayzata coach's statements. Here is some more "food for thought": While Bemidji didn't make it to the big show, I will say this. Their depth was a HUGE strength for them. While they may not have had "superstars", they definitely had more depth than most teams -- wearing down teams like Brainerd and Roseau in the 3rd period pretty easily. That depth came from boys moving up from the prior years jv team which only one loss on a very poorly played game -- And, if I remember correctly, they had only one varsity skater and a goalie that graduated the year before and 18 Bantams -- mostly from a team that took a disappointing 4th place in both state tourneys -- moving up to high school. So.... sophomore Matt Serratore, for example, who is a steller player, played jv... as did a dozen others who played varsity this year..... I find it very hard to believe that there are not many others that could relate the same type of scenerio!

Honestly, like I said before, you do a great job and I find your rankings very entertaining. It's just that the logic on this particular piece does not make sense to me, Being a bit anal and wanting to understand things, I had to ask. Thanks for your patience, explanations, all the time you put in, etc. I honestly do not know how you do it and would not expect you to know everything about each team!!!! Have a fantastic night (or day depending on when you read this)

bbad wrote:

MNHockeyFan wrote:

karl(east) wrote:For the most part, I think strong JV teams tell us that a certain high school is very deep--which is something we can probably already know based on the depth of the varsity squad, or the size of the feeder association. Some good players will earn their dues there and turn into great varsity players, but by in large the players who make good teams great come straight up from bantams.

Agree 100%, but I did notice this comment by Wayzata coach Carl Davis in our local Sun Newspaper, speaking about his team's prospects for 2011-12:

"We lose a lot of our scoring punch for next season, but we are expecting help from our JV team, which had a 23-2-0 record. There is a lot of talent there."

http://www.mnsun.com/articles/2011/03/0 ... wzbhoc.txt

ok. Fair enough. Thanks for your explanation. I do believe that Supertacks and MNhockey did provide some convincing evidence.. As well as the Wayzata coach's statements. Here is some more "food for thought": While Bemidji didn't make it to the big show, I will say this. Their depth was a HUGE strength for them. While they may not have had "superstars", they definitely had more depth than most teams -- wearing down teams like Brainerd and Roseau in the 3rd period pretty easily. That depth came from boys moving up from the prior years jv team which only one loss on a very poorly played game -- And, if I remember correctly, they had only one varsity skater and a goalie that graduated the year before and 18 Bantams -- mostly from a team that took a disappointing 4th place in both state tourneys -- moving up to high school. So.... sophomore Matt Serratore, for example, who is a steller player, played jv... as did a dozen others who played varsity this year..... I find it very hard to believe that there are not many others that could relate the same type of scenerio!

Honestly, like I said before, you do a great job and I find your rankings very entertaining. It's just that the logic on this particular piece does not make sense to me, Being a bit anal and wanting to understand things, I had to ask. Thanks for your patience, explanations, all the time you put in, etc. I honestly do not know how you do it and would not expect you to know everything about each team!!!! Have a fantastic night (or day depending on when you read this)

Thanks for the good discussion.

I'll go back to what I said at the end of the last comment; good JV teams are usually signs of depth, and we can usually find signs of depth in other places. I think MNHockeyFan's quote actually supports that--yes, Wayzata had a great JV squad, but that's no great surprise since they have one of the biggest programs in the state, and their bantam team has been near the very top for several years running now. Because of that, we can be pretty confident that, despite the graduations they're about to suffer, they're still going to be a serious threat next year.

Bemidji's program isn't consistently as deep as the giant metro programs, but as you say, they were a very deep team this year. We could probably say the same thing about Grand Rapids. As I said back at the beginning, I may need to take a look at how I assess the strong programs coming out of small northern towns, since I missed on a lot of them (and this annoys me, being a northerner myself who has griped a bit about the metro area bias we see in some coverage of hockey around the state. The logic I use for the bigger metro programs may not apply.

Geez, Karl, you sure don't give my Red Knights much love. Tenth?

If you watched the Wayzata-BSM playoff game, you would not say BSM "fell flat". They outshot Wayzata for the game, controlled large parts of the game and had two goals disallowed that should have counted. Wayzata converted its chances and won that game, but BSM did not "fall flat" You can still find the game on tvtwelve.com. You should watch it.

BSM shoud be ahead of HM And MG, especially with your extra playoff weight. BSM beat both Mg and HM head-to-head. Both of these teams lost in the playoffs to teams that are not even in your top ten. What did either one do in the playoffs that ranks them higher than BSM's finish?

Except for the silly SLP game, this team lost only to EP, Edina, Wayzata and Shattuck (All Top Five Teams). They lost in the playoffs to your No. 4 team.

I appreciate that you put so much into these rankings. Thanks very much. Please try to rank based on results, even if you don't like the Red Knights.

If you want rankings based on results, look at the Star Tribune.
If you want rankings drawn out of a hat, look at the Pioneer Press

bsmguy wrote:Geez, Karl, you sure don't give my Red Knights much love. Tenth?

If you watched the Wayzata-BSM playoff game, you would not say BSM "fell flat". They outshot Wayzata for the game, controlled large parts of the game and had two goals disallowed that should have counted. Wayzata converted its chances and won that game, but BSM did not "fall flat" You can still find the game on tvtwelve.com. You should watch it.

BSM shoud be ahead of HM And MG, especially with your extra playoff weight. BSM beat both Mg and HM head-to-head. Both of these teams lost in the playoffs to teams that are not even in your top ten. What did either one do in the playoffs that ranks them higher than BSM's finish?

Except for the silly SLP game, this team lost only to EP, Edina, Wayzata and Shattuck (All Top Five Teams). They lost in the playoffs to your No. 4 team.

I appreciate that you put so much into these rankings. Thanks very much. Please try to rank based on results, even if you don't like the Red Knights.

It may be a bit harsh, I agree.

But let's take a long at how the season ended for the teams above them who also lost in sections:
MG lost in OT
Burnsville lost in the final minute
Hill lost in 2OT
GR lost in OT
Wayzata lost in 2OT

Benilde was down 4-1 after 2 and never could quite crawl back in. I picked up some of the game on the radio; obviously that's not as good as watching the game since I have to rely on someone else's observations, but the picture I got of that game is rather different than the one you're painting. The game was closer than the score suggests, but in a year when every other top team that went down in sections took their opponent down to the wire, BSM did not. Championship teams overcome adversity and waved-off goals; BSM did not.

Also, just about every team that was pumped as a quality win for BSM (MG, Hill, Tonka, AHA) did not do all that well in sections.

Others might rank them a little higher, and I'd be fine with that. But there are healthy reasons from dropping BSM to #10, and none of them have anything to do with a personal vendetta against a school that I have no reason to like or dislike any more than any other team.

I have to agree with bsmguy. Their section semi loss was very disappointing, but based on their results over the course of the entire season, Benilde deserved better than a No. 10 final ranking.

MNHockeyFan wrote:I have to agree with bsmguy. Their section semi loss was very disappointing, but based on their results over the course of the entire season, Benilde deserved better than a No. 10 final ranking.

I agree with Karl losing to Spring Lake Park and spanking they took in the sections knocks them out of top 10.