WHAT WILL BE THE OUTCOME PARK RAPIDS VS. LOW

Stiff-Shaft · Post by **Stiff-Shaft** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:47 pm

WHAT WILL BE THE OUTCOME?

Flin Flon · Post by **Flin Flon** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:55 pm

If Park doesn't win by at least 8 goals then they might be the most overrated team ever because LOW is just awful.

Stiff-Shaft · Post by **Stiff-Shaft** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:16 pm

schwang17 · Post by **schwang17** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:22 pm

Flin Flon wrote:If Park doesn't win by at least 8 goals then they might be the most overrated team ever because LOW is just awful.

I Falls must be the most overrated team ever then...

boblee · Post by **boblee** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:49 am

Flin Flon wrote:If Park doesn't win by at least 8 goals then they might be the most overrated team ever because LOW is just awful.

LOW took I'Falls to overtime...

PuckRanger · Post by **PuckRanger** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:16 am

boblee wrote:
Flin Flon wrote:If Park doesn't win by at least 8 goals then they might be the most overrated team ever because LOW is just awful.
LOW took I'Falls to overtime...

I would word it more like the goaltender took I Falls to overtime... 54 saves can do that... The ice was heavily tilted toward the LOW end for most of the game. The question is: Can it be done again, and will it be enough to win this time? My hunch is no, because they've lost a lot of other lopsided affairs with the same goalie.

Irishmans Shanty · Post by **Irishmans Shanty** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:54 am

Flin Flon wrote:If Park doesn't win by at least 8 goals then they might be the most overrated team ever because LOW is just awful.

FF...... I know you know this novel well. We've been reading it for the better part of two years now but I will analyze the word overrated.

In what poll is PR ranked high?

Overhyped....possibley, but that is the 'glue' of this bored.

Look on the bright side, there's another PR thread.

SB24 · Post by **SB24** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:04 am

And another aptly named member of the peanut gallery...

SB24 · Post by **SB24** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:06 am

Oh, and also, LPH has them ranked 15 i believe....that is WAY overrated.

PASTRAPIDSFAN · Post by **PASTRAPIDSFAN** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:57 am

LOW BY 1

stxnpux · Post by **stxnpux** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:34 am

Stiff-Shaft wrote:WHAT WILL BE THE OUTCOME?

One team will win....... Unless of course it ends in a tie in which case all bets are off!

newsguy35 · Post by **newsguy35** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:41 am

SB24 wrote:Oh, and also, LPH has them ranked 15 i believe....that is WAY overrated.

What makes an undefeated team overrated at #15? They did play EGF and beat them (whether there were players missing does not go into the fact they beat them). They are playing good hockey, winning games and whether they play an easy schedule or not there are teams who are just not as good as them.

Undefeated has to be ranked at this stage of the season...

SiouxRecruit · Post by **SiouxRecruit** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:11 am

Flin Flon wrote:If Park doesn't win by at least 8 goals then they might be the most overrated team ever because LOW is just awful.

Go tell Youso that that one haha

...the flopper just doesnt stop...

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:20 am

PS2 rankings - which are historically very accurate in predicting section game winners has Section 8 teams

1 Warroad #4 single A
2 EGF #15
3 TRF #22
4 Bemidji #26
5 Park Rapids #29 (#82 overall)

I don't put much stock in rankings, but, as stated, historically they have been very accurated in predicting section game winners.

SB24 · Post by **SB24** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

newsguy35 wrote:
What makes an undefeated team overrated at #15?
A worse than cupcake schedule.
They did play EGF and beat them (whether there were players missing does not go into the fact they beat them).
Yes it does, especially when its all of your best players, goalie included.
Undefeated has to be ranked at this stage of the season...

Ranked? yes, i think PS2 has it about right.

Undercover Hockey Lover · Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:10 pm

135 AUSTIN 1A 0 12 0 20 77 10.18
136 PINE CITY 5A 6 8 0 50 53 10.17
137 RIVER LAKES 8AA 1 13 0 22 80 10.13
138 MOOSE LAKE 5A 4 8 1 46 52 9.98
139 WINDOM 3A 7 7 0 74 60 9.83
140 MANKATO EAST 1A 2 10 1 37 79 9.59
141 DULUTH CENTRAL 7A 2 13 0 26 114 9.48
142 LUVERNE 3A 6 6 0 47 56 9.30
143 WALKER 8A 0 10 0 11 54 9.26
144 MORRIS/BENSON 6A 4 8 1 31 67 9.22
145 LESUEUR 1A 4 11 0 21 74 8.93
146 BECKER BIG LAKE 8AA 2 12 0 32 86 8.79
147 SILVER BAY 7A 2 14 1 34 122 8.48
148 WASECA 1A 3 11 0 37 99 8.30
149 REDWOOD VALLEY 3A 3 9 0 36 63 8.15
150 WORTHINGTON 3A 5 8 0 58 66 7.95
151 NORTH BRANCH 5A 1 9 0 24 71 6.81
152 BAGLEY 8A 0 15 0 31 96 6.77
153 FAIRMONT 3A 2 10 0 25 73 5.34
154 SLEEPY EYE 3A 0 5 0 7 41 3.13

Here's this week's list of the 20 bottom feeders...you figure it out.

newsguy...I don't have to look up very far to see your squad. Looks like you have bigger things to worry about than hyping PR.

schwang17 · Post by **schwang17** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:18 pm

MOREANDMOREBSWITHEVERYPOST wrote:Yes it does, especially when its all of your best players, goalie included.

Pretty sure it wasn't ALL OF EGF'S BEST PLAYERS...Also, don't blame PR for EGF players' stupidity they shoulda been in the game, not watching it...if these 2 play again it's gonna be a helluva game...knowing this, they should be pretty close to each other in the rankings..I personally don't feel PR is top 10, but top 15 isn't giving them more than what they deserve based on past history...

MOREANDMOREBSWITHEVERYPOST wrote:Ranked? yes, i think PS2 has it about right.

PS2 has it wrong. Roseau is the defending champs and should still be #1. Bemidji is ranked too high. I myself see several inaccuracies with it. Like Elliott says, it's a good guide most of the time. However, we might as well make this a bowl system and have 38 champions if you're gonna use this as a meter for rankings...Roseau hasn't lost and has a good chunk of their team back that won a State Title last year, to the best of my knowledge that ISN'T listed anywhere in these rankings...

schwang17 · Post by **schwang17** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:20 pm

Undercover Hockey Lover wrote:newsguy...I don't have to look up very far to see your squad. Looks like you have bigger things to worry about than hyping PR.

This coming from a guy who talks about PR in Roseau threads and everywhere else on this bored...

Flin Flon · Post by **Flin Flon** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:24 pm

SiouxRecruit wrote:
Flin Flon wrote:If Park doesn't win by at least 8 goals then they might be the most overrated team ever because LOW is just awful.
Go tell Youso that that one haha ...the flopper just doesnt stop...

I guess if you want to have a pet name for me i guess i will take that as a compliment. Just don't try and spread your evil rhetoric on me.

newsguy35 · Post by **newsguy35** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:29 pm

Undercover Hockey Lover wrote: newsguy...I don't have to look up very far to see your squad. Looks like you have bigger things to worry about than hyping PR.

Not overhyping, just giving credit where its due. Not sure where you would put them (I am sure its no where near where they deserve based on your trolling in other threads) but I am willing to give them top 15 status. I wouldnt put them in the top 10 but I sure wouldnt put them outside of the top 15 with their record and skill.

I have no problem with you bashing in Bagley, they are young and inexperienced as well as missing on cylinders. They will be young for next year as well but they have had some successes:
4 first career goals
Goaltending has improved over the year
2 full lines coming back next season that have improved vastly
gained 2 kids who had left the sport but wanted to return to it

I am not claiming Bagley will be good but improved, yes. Shows class to knock a team with 13 skaters with new coaching staff and only 3 seniors, 2 of which had little to no experience last season.

schwang17 · Post by **schwang17** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:33 pm

newsguy35 wrote:I am not claiming Bagley will be good but improved, yes. Shows class to knock a team with 13 skaters with new coaching staff and only 3 seniors, 2 of which had little to no experience last season.

You should see how big he is in Roseau(the stronger side of the family)...

Undercover Hockey Lover · Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:39 pm

newsguy...not knocking THE PLAYERS AT ALL...just THE COACH who is on here giving excuses about losses and hyping the other bottom feeders. Like I said before maybe a little more coaching and less posting and you would already have your first head coaching win.

SHWAG...go pound sand.

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:11 pm

schwang17 wrote: PS2 has it wrong. Roseau is the defending champs and should still be #1. Bemidji is ranked too high. I myself see several inaccuracies with it. Like Elliott says, it's a good guide most of the time. However, we might as well make this a bowl system and have 38 champions if you're gonna use this as a meter for rankings...Roseau hasn't lost and has a good chunk of their team back that won a State Title last year, to the best of my knowledge that ISN'T listed anywhere in these rankings...

Why am I reminded of the prize fighter who wins the belt without ever fighting the top contenders, and afterwards only fights tomato cans so he can keep it.

PS2 is right. This year is this year.

schwang17 · Post by **schwang17** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:26 pm

Neutron 14 wrote:PS2 is right. This year is this year.

Roseau has beaten everybody on their schedule...take last year out of the equation it still makes no sense...

I think we've seen several times(BCS) that computers can only detour you from the real truth...

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:51 pm

schwang17 wrote:
Neutron 14 wrote:PS2 is right. This year is this year.
Roseau has beaten everybody on their schedule...take last year out of the equation it still makes no sense...

Tomato can after tomato can.

Park Rapids should be #1 in Class A then?

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

WHAT WILL BE THE OUTCOME PARK RAPIDS VS. LOW

What will be the outcome? PR vs. LOW

WHAT WILL BE THE OUTCOME PARK RAPIDS VS. LOW

post 9545

Re: post 9545

Re: WHAT WILL BE THE OUTCOME PARK RAPIDS VS. LOW