HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:58 pm**

YouthHockeyHub has them rated as the fourth best AAA team for 2002s . . . only behind the Blades, Machine Orange, and EuroAmerican Red . . .which begs the question . . . Why are they playing in open tournaments?

They have kids rostered from Canada and Nebraska for Christ sake!

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:05 pm**

GoalieDad23 wrote:YouthHockeyHub has them rated as the fourth best AAA team for 2002s . . . only behind the Blades, Machine Orange, and EuroAmerican Red . . .which begs the question . . . Why are they playing in open tournaments?

They have kids rostered from Canada and Nebraska for Christ sake!

Are the open tournaments closer to Duluth?

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:10 pm**

GoalieDad23 wrote:YouthHockeyHub has them rated as the fourth best AAA team for 2002s . . . only behind the Blades, Machine Orange, and EuroAmerican Red . . .which begs the question . . . Why are they playing in open tournaments?

They have kids rostered from Canada and Nebraska for Christ sake!

Oh Yes!---that hot bed of hockey.......Nebraska

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 4:19 pm**

Pretty sure the Meltdown has an Invite level. They are registered to play in the Open.

Honestly, I think the Meltdown Open division has some pretty good competition in it. Interesting to see the results.

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:12 pm**

The LSS organization is really hard to call. I saw an edition last year that was very impressive. 02 is a loaded year, we know these teams really well. The 02 MG beat Euro today, so things will likely change.

TZ

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:07 pm**

YouthHockeyHub wrote:The LSS organization is really hard to call. I saw an edition last year that was very impressive. 02 is a loaded year, we know these teams really well. The 02 MG beat Euro today, so things will likely change.

TZ

Euro out shot MG 52-18. Goalie stood on his head is the rumor. Nice win for MG...That goalie must feel like the man!

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:17 pm**

SammyOB wrote:
YouthHockeyHub wrote:The LSS organization is really hard to call. I saw an edition last year that was very impressive. 02 is a loaded year, we know these teams really well. The 02 MG beat Euro today, so things will likely change.

TZ
Euro out shot MG 52-18. Goalie stood on his head is the rumor. Nice win for MG...That goalie must feel like the man![/quo

Is that the official count. Relayed through the hotwire to the twin cities......

Posted: **Fri Apr 19, 2013 11:41 pm**

Two things.

First, read this: http://www.youthhockeyhub.com/tony-scot ... s-on-goal/

Second, traded texts with Euro coach today....he's been schooled well in above. Never once mentioned SOG.

SOG: THEY DONT MATTER...PERIOD.

Posted: **Sat Apr 20, 2013 8:00 am**

Saying SOG don't matter without some other qualifying statement is ludicrous. When ONLY reporting who won the game, it certainly doesn't matter, but if your reader is hoping to get a feel for the game that stat is completely relevant. Kudos to your entertaining commentary on your website though, I do enjoy reading it.

Posted: **Sat Apr 20, 2013 9:22 am**

YouthHockeyHub wrote:Two things.

First, read this: http://www.youthhockeyhub.com/tony-scot ... s-on-goal/

Second, traded texts with Euro coach today....he's been schooled well in above. Never once mentioned SOG.

SOG: THEY DONT MATTER...PERIOD.

Gold had three power play goals.. Several break downs on both sides.. Sloppy game IMO ..

Posted: **Sat Apr 20, 2013 9:34 am**

Shots on goal matter to the goalies that is a fact. I think it helps to paint a picture of how the game went.

Posted: **Sat Apr 20, 2013 8:22 pm**

old goalie85 wrote:Shots on goal matter to the goalies that is a fact. I think it helps to paint a picture of how the game went.

Agree, if you hypothetically lose 3 games in a weekend all by the score of 2-1 and in one game you got outshot 50-3, the second game the shots were 25 apiece and the final game you outshot the other team 40-10, it tells you something. You are still 0-3, no denying that, but it does give some indication as to which team controlled the game.

I'm not suggesting it's a perfect science, maybe one team was just really good at dumping it on net from outside of the blue line, but as OG said, it paints a picture.

Posted: **Sat Apr 20, 2013 8:51 pm**

InThePipes wrote:
old goalie85 wrote:Shots on goal matter to the goalies that is a fact. I think it helps to paint a picture of how the game went.
Agree, if you hypothetically lose 3 games in a weekend all by the score of 2-1 and in one game you got outshot 50-3, the second game the shots were 25 apiece and the final game you outshot the other team 40-10, it tells you something. You are still 0-3, no denying that, but it does give some indication as to which team controlled the game.

I'm not suggesting it's a perfect science, maybe one team was just really good at dumping it on net from outside of the blue line, but as OG said, it paints a picture.

Like the guy on PBS with the fro!

Posted: **Sat Apr 20, 2013 9:39 pm**

Regarding SOG......you are in a 7 game series. Scenario A) After game 1 you were outshot 35-5 but won the game 3-1. Scenario B) After game 1 you outshot the other team 35-5 but lost 3-2.

After which scenario would you feel better about your chances of winning the 7 game series?

Sometimes shots on goal tells you a lot about how two teams compare. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes the goals on the scoreboard tell you a lot about how two teams compare. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes the scoreboard paints a more accurate picture, sometimes the SOG do.

Does it matter at the end of the day when discussing who won that specific game? No. But it can sometimes be a piece of the puzzle when discussing how a hockey game went or how two teams compare.

If it wasn't why would they bother even tracking the stat in the first place?

Posted: **Sun Apr 21, 2013 8:03 am**

Section 8 guy wrote:Regarding SOG......you are in a 7 game series. Scenario A) After game 1 you were outshot 35-5 but won the game 3-1. Scenario B) After game 1 you outshot the other team 35-5 but lost 3-2.

After which scenario would you feel better about your chances of winning the 7 game series?

Sometimes shots on goal tells you a lot about how two teams compare. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes the goals on the scoreboard tell you a lot about how two teams compare. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes the scoreboard paints a more accurate picture, sometimes the SOG do.

Does it matter at the end of the day when discussing who won that specific game? No. But it can sometimes be a piece of the puzzle when discussing how a hockey game went or how two teams compare.

If it wasn't why would they bother even tracking the stat in the first place?

Shots don't matter, quality scoring chances do.. The team that gets the most and/or capitializes on them wins. If your team has three breakdowns a game and the other team capitalizes on them you don't need 40 sog...

Posted: **Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:31 am**

This is: I think you and I see this the same way. Scoring chances mean more to me than SOG. A two on one with a shot just wide is way more relevant than a puck dumped in on a line change that the goalie steers wide. Unfortunately that stat would be way too hard to track because it is way too subjective, versus the more objective SOG.

I understand that SOG is important to a goalie, and they can somewhat tell you a story. But in the end, who had more goals is the only stat that matters.

Posted: **Sun Apr 21, 2013 8:25 pm**

Posted: **Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:11 pm**

Tony, assume I'm coaching a team that is heavily favored. We go out and lose. That's why they play the game.

I'm asked, "How did you LOSE to them!?"

I could answer, "our kids played well. Really put a lot of pressure on the net. Their goalie is excellent and they capitalized with a couple goals when they had a 5-on-3. I think we outshot them 24-8."

If I'm not allowed to quantify that I feel our kids outplayed them it leaves me with what?

They questioner felt our team was certain to win and wants an explanation. I don't know how you do that without referencing shots. Take the Miracle on Ice game. Everyone knows the U.S. won a game that people didn't think they could. When you look at the SOG it shows the CCCP showed up to play.

Just because you don't care to mention SOG doesn't mean others can't. It'd be like me saying a game recap can't mention that a goal was even strength, PP, or SH. After all, a goal is a goal. They all count as one.

Posted: **Mon Apr 22, 2013 8:41 am**

O-townClown wrote:Tony, assume I'm coaching a team that is heavily favored. We go out and lose. That's why they play the game.

I'm asked, "How did you LOSE to them!?"

I could answer, "our kids played well. Really put a lot of pressure on the net. Their goalie is excellent and they capitalized with a couple goals when they had a 5-on-3. I think we outshot them 24-8."

If I'm not allowed to quantify that I feel our kids outplayed them it leaves me with what?

They questioner felt our team was certain to win and wants an explanation. I don't know how you do that without referencing shots. Take the Miracle on Ice game. Everyone knows the U.S. won a game that people didn't think they could. When you look at the SOG it shows the CCCP showed up to play.

Just because you don't care to mention SOG doesn't mean others can't. It'd be like me saying a game recap can't mention that a goal was even strength, PP, or SH. After all, a goal is a goal. They all count as one.

I dont think anyone is saying that the SOG stat doesnt matter at all or doesnt have a purpose for evaluating your teams play. but I here way to often from the losing team "we out shot them by alot and should have won" My answer would be "So". Or They only won because they had a good goalie. My answer "goalies count" the best goalie/hottest goalie in the NHL generally wins the stanley cup. Does that mean they shouldn' have won the cup?

Clown, I could give you a hundred senarios where a team out shoots the other 32-15 and loses. And imo deserved to lose. Maybe they take a few dumb penalties or just alot of penaties and the other team capitalizes. Maybe the other team is getting a ton of shots because their Defencemen or pinching all game and they get burnt for 2-3 breakaway goals and 2 and 3 on 1's.. All this matters.. Maybe the Def. make a bad pass in the slot and the team fires it in.

I could go on and on. Clown if your team outplays another and you lose.. You tell the kids. "Well played, we dominated play and outshot them but we had too many penalties, breakdowns, and Mistakes, and that is why we lost." A good coach will not ever say we should have won, they should look at how they lost. Because the other team surely did something to win.

The best team doesn't always win.. "Thats why we paly the game."

Lemaire coached a very defensive style of hockey where they almost alway got out shot and was very succussful and won some stanley cups.

At the end of the day the team that has the most goals wins and thats all that matters. This isn't figure skating where there is panel of judges who give more goals to the other team for outplaying and outshooting the other team. Thank God right?

Posted: **Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:19 am**

Nuts, I wholly understand.

Now explain to someone that wasn't there how a team could dominate the game play and still lose. You'll mention the goalie and don't pretend citing shots on goal isn't a way to quantify how well that goalie played.

Last I checked SOG isn't the only stat kept during a college or pro hockey game. If it wasn't worth tracking they'd stop.

I have no problem with people looking at SOG.

Posted: **Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:31 am**

O-townClown wrote:Nuts, I wholly understand.

Now explain to someone that wasn't there how a team could dominate the game play and still lose. You'll mention the goalie and don't pretend citing shots on goal isn't a way to quantify how well that goalie played.

Last I checked SOG isn't the only stat kept during a college or pro hockey game. If it wasn't worth tracking they'd stop.

I have no problem with people looking at SOG.

I think we agree.. SOG is a stat worth looking at, but its not why you win or lose.

Posted: **Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:34 am**

STOP TALKING ABOUT SHOTS ON GOAL!

This thread is about the 2002 Lake Superior Stars. Stop hijacking it!

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:14 am**

AND AS A SURPRISE TO NOBODY... THE 2002 LAKE SUPERIOR STARS WIN THE MELTDOWN OPEN.

CONGRATULATIONS BOYS! GOOD LUCK IN YOUR NEXT OPEN TOURNAMENT.

Posted: **Mon May 06, 2013 4:51 pm**

Lake Superior lost to the 2002 Magicians on Sunday in the Northern Wings Showdown Tourney in Duluth.

Posted: **Tue May 07, 2013 1:26 pm**

Who's stronger the Lake Superior stars or rapid fire or northern wings? We recently lost to LSS...so I'm curious how they stand up to the other northern teams.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Lake Superior Stars - 2002

Lake Superior Stars - 2002

Re: Lake Superior Stars - 2002

Re: Lake Superior Stars - 2002