HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

SEC # RK PV TEAM RATING RK RATING GP W L T
2 1 Farmington 92.273 61 58.586 29 23 6 0
2 2 New Prague 55.619 58 56.700 30 21 9 0
2 3 Simley 10.539 17 38.074 27 7 19 1
2 4 Richfield 4.172 42 48.846 27 7 20 0
2 5 St. Paul United 2.528 81 71.280 26 10 16 0
2 6 Red Wing 0.262 68 66.208 25 3 22 0

ghshockeyfan
Registered Member
Posts: 5026
(5/14/06 9:03 pm)
Reply | Edit Re: Top team in each section
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NP is a top choice to win it all with the majority of their team returning, but I have a hunch that Farmington in section 2 won't be an easy team to get past... I'm sure that NP won't look past the section, even though they are a very likely state champion.

Section 2A will play with only 6 teams, with 2 QF high-seed-host games on Wed 2/7, and then will play the SF 1p/3p on Sat 2/10 & Championship on Fri 2/16 7PM @ Aldrich. Seeds 1 & 2 both get a bye to the semis.

===============================================

FYI - I DID NOT VOTE FOR MY OWN TEAM, but that doesn't mean that I don't think they can be competitive and scare a team or two... They will be very young this year though with some very talented (but inexperienced) players... Maybe they can pull something together by season's end...

It all will come down to New Prague and Farmington. I am surprised to see that the section is playing at Aldrich. Great arena but a little out of the section area. Get the buses ready, I guess.?

Roman Legion wrote:It all will come down to New Prague and Farmington. I am surprised to see that the section is playing at Aldrich. Great arena but a little out of the section area. Get the buses ready, I guess.?

It should, but I'll enjoy watching this one play out. There are other likely weaker teams in this section that have top notch NDP goaltenders, and we all know about what goaltending can do come sections - it's a prime situations for upset if they're on and any offense can be found for those teams.

NP has the frontrunner for Ms. Hockey I believe, and Farmington a solid returning group. I like the choice of venue for this section being the site of the first girls tourney 10 or so years ago. A little out of the way, but I can see why the choice was made.

It will be intersting to see what comes of the A sections after this year. With the realignment looming once again, and the potential for things to change drastically, I'll be curious as to where the enrollment barriers are set to distinguish between A/AA and also to see if the ruling gets passed re: counting assisted lunch enrollment differently towards classification.

Yeah, I agree Aldrich is a bit out of the way. I was thinking something further south.....Wakota or Burnsville would have made more sense to me.

New Prague has the most talent returning, but for the first time, in their run of success, they actually have lost more than one or two players, so they are going to need some of the JV girls or new girls moving up from youth hockey to step up.

From what I have heard Burnsville turned them down and Wakota did not meet the criteria set forth by the coaches.

The free and reduced lunch thing from the MSHSL is a go. This will have an impact on some schools more than others. We shoud also see another group willing to make a run at "AA". Blake and Breck should be considering for both boys and girls. I am certain that they are losing players to BSM and AHA for both sexes.

It should be a fun section tournament.

Roman Legion wrote:From what I have heard Burnsville turned them down and Wakota did not meet the criteria set forth by the coaches.

The free and reduced lunch thing from the MSHSL is a go. This will have an impact on some schools more than others. We shoud also see another group willing to make a run at "AA". Blake and Breck should be considering for both boys and girls. I am certain that they are losing players to BSM and AHA for both sexes.

It should be a fun section tournament.

BV did decline, but Wakota didn't get considered quickly enough. There was desire to have seperate fan sections (opposite sides of the rink) but I think Wakota still would have received strong consdieration due to geographic proximity and other amenities but Aldrich was quick to propose hosting and that likely sealed the deal.

My humble opinion is that all private schools should go AA, or all public schools that have a certain %/# of OE should be forced to be AA as well. The one exception that I would use is that if an Class A team finished sub .500 with a bunch of transfers or is private, they could stay A. This is kind of like the old tiers that were used for the boys in the early 90's - and while not popular there, I think the approach still has its merits as far as keeping everyone honest based on W/L and team composition, etc.

What I hope we never get to is the state that the boys were at last year. Top 2 teams in A & AA private, 3-4 of top 5 in each class private, almost an all private final in A & AA, etc. That is not right...

[quote="Roman Legion"] Blake and Breck should be considering for both boys and girls. I am certain that they are losing players to BSM and AHA for both sexes.


When was the last time Breck was in the state tournament? (answer-0)Blake was but they haven't dominated for a bunch of years have they? Why would these privates go AA when they aren't consistently dominating A? I wouldn't recommend that, as a coach of an A school I would look to set up games with AA schools for the competition and still play A until a dominant streak emerged.

trilogy wrote:

Roman Legion wrote: Blake and Breck should be considering for both boys and girls. I am certain that they are losing players to BSM and AHA for both sexes.

When was the last time Breck was in the state tournament? (answer-0)Blake was but they haven't dominated for a bunch of years have they? Why would these privates go AA when they aren't consistently dominating A? I wouldn't recommend that, as a coach of an A school I would look to set up games with AA schools for the competition and still play A until a dominant streak emerged.

FWIW - I agree. That was kind of my point in what I said above. There is a difference too between hockey oriented private schools and those that don't attract the top talent but just offer hockey as a sport to participate in. That's somewhat true of public schools too now I think. This is why I'd like to see tiers like the boys of the early 90's. MSHSL wants Classes for participation/experience of HS tourney for many schools beyond those that just ahve the most students to draw from. The flaw in the correlation between school size & team ability is evident far more in Girls Hockey I believe.

I'd like to see the top 64 teams by a power ranking be seeded for regional tourneys to get to 8 8-team Class A or Tier 1 sections.

The remaining teams could do the same for A or T2. The best teams would then be playing for AA/T1 and not playing down at A/T2 and you wouldn't ahve to declare this for 4 years as you have to do now for Class A vs. AA. Someone here has to tell me why we don't do this... The logistics are not that difficult but there needs to be flexibility to determine sections based on which 64 teams make the top vs 2nd level. This isn't that hard as sections now regularly play at one site or teams have to keep home ice open to host as needed as high seed in 1st round (this wouldn't change).

The drawback here (as with approving co-ops sometimes) is that there isn't incentive to work harder for those bigger schools that are just complacent being T2/co-oped. But this would eliminate a team that stays A that really should be AA as they're afraid of the 4 year commitment, or even are a surprise team for a year or two...

If anyoje would complain about this it would be the Class A teams that are in the last few selected for the top 64. Last year for example this would be a team that I'm familiar with, and I'd have no problem with this... It would actually point to "success" I think of A programs that are homegrown to "make" the top/T1 tourney... And maybe force AA programs that aren't co-ops to consider or work to develop their programs...

If we did this, here's the top 64 from last year (T1):

RK CLASS TEAM RATING
1 AA Eden Prairie 5050.090
2 AA Stillwater 721.142
3 AA Benilde-St. Margarets 547.955
4 AA North St. Paul Polars 466.016
5 AA Cloquet/Esko/Carlton 452.276
6 AA Roseville 394.796
7 AA Wayzata 309.030
8 A South St. Paul 244.910
9 AA Cretin-Derham Hall 236.256
10 AA Edina 235.252
11 AA Burnsville 216.981
12 AA Academy of Holy Angels 212.013
13 A Hibbing 211.494
14 A Warroad 204.675
15 AA Bemidji 202.813
16 AA Coon Rapids 190.014
17 A Blake 181.317
18 AA Henry Sibley 169.417
19 AA Centennial 167.802
20 AA Hopkins 157.034
21 AA Eagan 155.744
22 AA Anoka 126.364
23 AA Elk River 104.512
24 AA St. Paul Blades 89.147
25 AA Roch. Mayo 76.659
26 A Farmington 76.271
27 AA Chaska 75.830
28 AA Maple Grove 59.661
29 A New Prague 57.244
30 AA Moorhead 53.391
31 AA Hill-Murray Pioneers 52.401
32 AA Grand Rapids/Greenway 49.772
33 AA White Bear Lake 46.002
34 A Alexandria 45.906
35 A Crookston 45.331
36 AA St. Cld. Tech 44.462
37 AA Chisago Lakes/Pine City 37.806
38 AA Blaine 37.608
39 AA Hastings 33.768
40 AA St. Francis/North Branch 29.964
41 AA Park Center 23.580
42 A Shakopee 23.577
43 AA Forest Lake 20.705
44 A Silver Bay/Two Harbors 20.374
45 AA Bloom. Jefferson 19.934
46 A Mahtomedi 19.605
47 AA Eastview 19.494
48 A Totino-Grace 19.491
49 AA Minnetonka 18.859
50 AA Duluth East 18.715
51 A Austin 18.122
52 AA Proctor/Hermantown/Marshall 17.748
53 AA Prior Lake 16.915
54 AA Sartell/Sauk Rapids Stormn Sabres 16.498
55 AA Lakev. North 16.418
56 A Mankato West 15.461
57 AA Irondale 15.008
58 A New Ulm 13.846
59 AA Cambridge-Isanti 13.800
60 AA Apple Valley 12.268
61 A Roseau 12.245
62 AA Owatonna 9.664
63 A Simley 9.189
64 AA Mounds View 8.226


Here would be T2:

65 A Breck 8.148
66 AA Woodbury 7.906
67 AA Brainerd 7.818
68 AA Rob. Armstrong 7.799
69 AA Andover 6.922
70 A Faribault 6.682
71 AA Buffalo 6.678
72 AA St. Cld. Icebreakers 6.547
73 AA River Lakes Stars 6.492
74 A Lakev. South 6.335
75 AA Spring Lake Park/St. Anthony 6.101
76 A Marshall 5.623
77 A Albert Lea Tigers 5.380
78 AA Winona Winhawks 5.082
79 AA Park of Cottage Grove 4.325
80 AA North Wright County River Hawks 4.098
81 A Richfield 3.655
82 A Detroit Lakes 3.302
83 A St. Paul United 2.881
84 AA Minneapolis Novas 2.865
85 A St. Louis Park 2.830
86 AA Roch. John Marshall/Century 2.661
87 A Mound-Westonka 2.590
88 A Fergus Falls 2.561
89 AA Duluth Central/Denfeld 2.316
90 A Northfield 2.280
91 A Hutchinson 1.907
92 AA Osseo 1.777
93 AA Rosemount 1.659
94 AA Rob. Cooper 1.618
95 A International Falls 1.468
96 AA Champlin Park 1.467
97 AA Bloom. Kennedy 1.408
98 AA Rogers 1.365
99 A Thief River Falls 1.197
100 A Orono 1.138
101 A East Grand Forks 1.017
102 A Long Prairie-Grey Eagle/Wadena-Deer Cr 0.909
103 A Morris/Benson/Hancock 0.889
105 A Waseca 0.767
104 AA Dodge County 0.767
106 A St. Agnes/St. Bernards/Concordia Academy 0.646
107 A Lake of the Woods 0.567
108 A St. Peter/Lesueur-Henderson 0.541
109 A Park Rapids 0.428
110 AA Tartan 0.394
111 A Minnehaha Academy 0.344
112 A Litchfield/Dassel-Cokato 0.343
113 A Red Wing 0.286
114 A Mankato East 0.213
115 AA Tri-City 0.201
116 A Eveleth 0.140
117 A Babbitt-Embarrass 0.129
118 A Moose Lake 0.126
119 A Willmar 0.119
120 AA Fairmont 0.088
121 A Princeton 0.062
122 A Little Falls 0.054
123 A Windom Area Eagles 0.050
124 A Luverne 0.006
125 A Worthington 0.001
125 A Redwood Valley 0.001

The boys already tried this and it was a complete failure. It relegates the 2nd group of teams to a totally meaningless tournament. Who is going to care about this second tourney. Most of the teams wouldnt even have .500 records.

Remember. The point of A isn't so stacked/transfer A or private A can win state. The point is for small schools to get the chance and to distribute the experience. MSHSL is NOT an entity that cares about competition - they care about participation. Does anyone truly think that the thrust of the Class A is to make the most competitive tourney on par with AA? I highly doubt it.

The problem with the boys is that anything that took over for the one-class tourney was bound to fail. The reason that people didn't like the "tier" setup too (I think) was that it catered to the misison of the MSHSL (Spreading the participation while not worrying about the quality).

No one will care about a T2 tourney, except for the participants. What the Class A has become is a place (typically) for teams that belong at AA to play. There are some exceptions, but...

But, I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time and certainly wouldn't be the last! You have to try though.

And, we have to remember that what worked or didn't work for boys may/may not for the girls & vice versa...

KRACH SAYS:

PV TEAM RATING SOSRK SOSRATING GP W L T PTS GF AVG GA AVG PCT
1 Simley 52.886 83 70.000 14 12 2 0 24 53 3.79 21 1.50 0.857
2 Richfield 23.530 70 65.000 15 11 4 0 22 42 2.80 20 1.33 0.733
3 New Prague 20.754 50 52.538 13 6 5 2 14 57 4.38 32 2.46 0.538
4 Farmington 18.332 71 65.615 13 8 4 1 17 56 4.31 31 2.38 0.654
5 St. Paul United 4.610 88 72.583 15 7 7 1 15 42 2.80 32 2.13 0.500
6 Red Wing 0.699 80 67.909 12 3 9 0 6 25 2.08 64 5.33 0.250

i heard the first 2 seeds in this section gets a bye this year is this true?

thehockeygurl wrote:i heard the first 2 seeds in this section gets a bye this year is this true?

This is true!

As of Fri PM KRACH said:

1 New Prague 28.756 39 48.889 18 9 7 2 20 76 4.22 47 2.61 0.556
2 Farmington 26.724 73 66.100 20 14 5 1 29 85 4.25 44 2.20 0.725
3 Richfield 17.732 68 61.632 21 13 7 1 27 52 2.48 35 1.67 0.643
4 Simley 16.292 75 66.526 20 13 7 0 26 64 3.20 34 1.70 0.650
5 St. Paul United 5.614 86 72.750 19 10 8 1 21 60 3.16 39 2.05 0.553
6 Red Wing 0.664 78 68.389 19 5 14 0 10 44 2.32 98 5.16 0.263

any predictions in seedings?? the race for #1 seed seems really tight right now

I think it's going to come down to the last few head-to-head games for these teams & also some of them still have "common opponent" match-ups with SSP among others that are important too in close calls where head-to-head was split or close...

Here's what I wrote last week:

You do have to add the Farmington/NP & SSP/Richfield games from last week to this list too now (bold below)...

ghshockeyfan wrote:
Re Section 2A teams:
As said above, Farmington is playing best hockey of season when it counts. My Simley squad saw them Jan 2 and lost 2-1 in OT, SSP saw them Jan 6 and lost 4-2 - they are very solid - esp. Johnson & Ripley, and McNamara does a nice job in nets for them. IMHO NP has something that few other Class A teams have in two AMAZING players @ F in Kilpatrick & Ambroz. Richfield is a team that no one should take lightly.

Right now, if I had to seed my own section, it's tough with Farmington, NP, & Richfield fighting for the top slots. Head-to-head Richfield has beat both NP & Farmington. NP beat Farmington round 1 (edit - both rounds) in conf. play. Simley lost to Farmington 2-1 OT on Jan 2 and beat Richfield round 1 in conf. play to add to the confusion. Outcome of round 2 RF/SIM & FARM/NP conf. play may well determine final seeding for this section, or make it harder to do. Then, I assume you have to look at common opponents, and the games against SSP will come into play as all teams will have played them once + (Richfield (W 2-1, L 5-0), NP (W 4-2, L 4-3 OT), & Simley (L 3-0, 2nd round?), Farmington 1x only - (W 4-2)...

With all this comparison, I still struggle putting Farmington ahead of NP in a LPH ranking since NP beat Farmington 5-3 head-to-head (and again now 5-2). Similarly, Simley beat Richfield 2-0 EN head-to-head so I can't do that either easily. SSP also lost 2-1 to Richfield on Fri 12/15 and Richfield lost 2-0 EN to Simley on Tue 12/19 in back-to-back games - BUT SSP beat Simley 3-0 head-to-head on 12-22. So, SSP should go ahead of Simley, but how do you address the rest? And, I always try to remember that "one game doesn't a season make..."

Head-to-head says (make sure you look at shot & penalty counts where available...):


Simley (2-0 EN) over
Richfield
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/hock ... eID=303306

Richfield (3-2) over
NP
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... e3fc534372

Richfield (3-2) over
Farmington
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... 077cec48e6

Richfield (2-1) over
SSP
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... 5a7a528957

SSP (5-0) over
Richfield
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... e450fcaa8a

***Richfield is the only team to beat everyone on this list (but Simley) so far... could change with round 2 games of course...

NP (5-2 2EN) over
Farmington
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... 4d1a23967a

NP (5-2) over
Farmington
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... e2e6ecc1f7

NP Split with SSP (4-2 NP, 4-3 OT SSP)
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... 752ca12b62
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... 605608ba75

Farmington (2-1 OT) over
Simley
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/hock ... eID=303311

Farmington (4-2 W) over
SSP
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/BoxSco ... 47cab7d956

SSP (3-0) over
Simley
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/hock ... eID=303308

Hmm... Seems that this is a tough group to rank, and probably all pretty equal...

KRACH as of 1-24 AM:

RK TEAM RATING SOS RK SOS RATING GP W L T PTS GF AVG GA AVG PCT
1 Farmington 35.808 72 63.095 21 15 5 1 31 88 4.19 46 2.19 0.738
2 New Prague 34.798 48 51.810 21 12 7 2 26 98 4.67 54 2.57 0.619
3 Simley 18.536 73 65.400 21 14 7 0 28 68 3.24 35 1.67 0.667
4 Richfield 15.736 63 59.900 22 13 8 1 27 53 2.41 39 1.77 0.614
5 St. Paul United 4.052 87 73.235 20 10 9 1 21 61 3.05 41 2.05 0.525
6 Red Wing 0.536 75 66.368 20 5 15 0 10 45 2.25 106 5.30 0.250

As of 2-2 Krach says

1 Farmington 39.173 73 66.625 18-5-1
2 New Prague 31.468 44 49.875 13-9-2
3 Simley 15.419 70 65.348 15-9-0
4 Richfield 13.317 59 58.182 13-10-1
5 St. Paul United 3.390 81 69.286 11-12-1
6 Red Wing 0.347 76 67.333 5-17-2

xk1 wrote:As of 2-2 Krach says

1 Farmington 39.173 73 66.625 18-5-1
2 New Prague 31.468 44 49.875 13-9-2
3 Simley 15.419 70 65.348 15-9-0
4 Richfield 13.317 59 58.182 13-10-1
5 St. Paul United 3.390 81 69.286 11-12-1
6 Red Wing 0.347 76 67.333 5-17-2

This is an interesting one... Here's the other info:

Farmington (FM):
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/prin ... amID=84916
New Prague (NP):
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/prin ... amID=84922
Red Wing (RW):
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/prin ... amID=84919
Richfield (RF):
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/prin ... amID=85033
St. Paul United (SPU):
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/prin ... amID=84963
Simley (SIM):
http://www.esportsdesk.com/leagues/prin ... amID=85037


============================================================
1) Rankings & Overall Results:

Rankings:
LPH (2/1/07):
http://www.letsplayhockey.com/915rankings.pdf
7) FM
9) NP
11) SIM
13) RF
**RW & SPU not ranked in top 20 as of 2/2/07

KRACH (2/2/07):
http://www.bgoski.com/rank/Rankings.htm
8.) FM
10) NP
13) SIM
16) RF
25) SPU
38.) RW

QRF (1/31/07):
http://www.minnesota-scores.com/classqr ... 10&class=2
8.) FM
9) NP
17) SIM
18.) RF
25) SPU
37) RW

Overall Results/SOS (from KRACH RK=SOS rank in state, AVG RK = Average rank of opponent - both the LOWER the better):
http://www.bgoski.com/rank/Rankings.htm
SOS
TEAM GP W L T PTS GF AVG GA AVG PCT RK AVG RK
FM 24 18 5 1 37 108 4.50 50 2.08 0.771 73 66.625
SIM 24 15 9 0 30 71 2.96 44 1.83 0.625 70 65.348
NP 24 13 9 2 28 112 4.67 63 2.63 0.583 44 49.875
RF 24 13 10 1 27 55 2.29 43 1.79 0.563 59 58.182
SPU 24 11 12 1 23 72 3.00 58 2.42 0.479 81 69.286
RW 22 5 17 0 10 46 2.09 122 5.55 0.227 76 67.333
============================================================



============================================================
2)"Head-to-Head:"


1) SPU ahead of RW (W (7-0) head-to-head by SPU)

2) FM ahead of SPU (W (3-2) head-to-head by FARM)

3) NP ahead of FM (2x W (5-2 2EN & 5-2) head-to-head by NP)

4) RF ahead of both NP & FM (both beat (3-2) head-to-head by RF)

5) SIM ahead of RF (2x W (2-0 EN & 4-1) head-to-head by SIM)

6) FM ahead of SIM (W (2-1 OT) head-to-head by FM)***this forces reconsideration of #3-5...
============================================================

http://www.bgoski.com/simley/06-07_GH_S ... racket.pdf

http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/showbrackets.asp?tournid=534

KRACH SEED TEAM RATING
1 2 Farmington 38.103
2 1 New Prague 30.876
3 4 Simley 13.761
4 3 Richfield 13.333
5 5 St. Paul United 3.365
6 6 Red Wing 0.336

GHS

Can I assume the link to the pairings you posted a link to are correct?

1-New Prague
2-Farmington
3-Richfield
4-Simley
5-SPU
6-Red Wing

As of right now they are not posted on the MSHSL site.

hockeydad wrote:GHS

Can I assume the link to the pairings you posted a link to are correct?

1-New Prague
2-Farmington
3-Richfield
4-Simley
5-SPU
6-Red Wing

As of right now they are not posted on the MSHSL site.

Yes. They are correct. Opening round games:

RW @ RF 7:30PM Wed

SPU @ SIM 7PM Wed

Winner of SPU/SIM @ NP 1P @ Aldrich on Sat

Winner of RW/RF @ FM 3P @ Aldrich on Sat

A very competitive section. Should be fun to watch. It will be a much harder section for New Prague.

Of all sections in class A this is the one to watch; easily the most competitive (with a nod to section 8A). Some great teams, star players and some sleepers. The semi-final games should be very, very competitive!