Big Ten > NCHC

[SJHovey]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

The conferences being talked about right now may have only been around for 5 years, but the teams that make up those conferences have been around for much longer than 5 years, outside of the obvious Penn St. And the trend I'm talking about goes back much further than 5 years.

If you go back over 2 decades, you can see Michigan winning Titles in 96 and 98, but then struggling to make it back to the Championship game after that. Then Minnesota won back to back Titles in 02 and 03 and after a return to the FF in 05, went 6 years without making it back to the FF. Wisconsin won a title in 06 and outside of a run to the title game in 2010 has struggled to get back since. Mich St won the title in 07 and hasn't made a FF since.

That is B1G teams winning 6 titles over a 12 year period, and starting in 98 making 18 FFs over a 15 year period, and it was BC/BU winning 4 titles those last 5 years of that 15 year period that prevented B1G teams from continuing their run of winning 50% of the titles. But B1G teams finished as Runners Up 4 times from 08 to 14, with NCHC teams only making 2 Title games in the same period.

And to show my theory isn't a biased one, I'll use Denver's back to back titles in 04 and 05 to further my point. DU went 10 years straight without making a FF after those titles. Why? Probably because DU's roster suffered a lot of early losses to the NHL after that impressive run. And UND after their 2 titles in 97 and 2000 went 15 years without winning another title.

But outside of UND and DU, the rest of the NCHC hasn't done much of anything outside of having 1 or 2 decent seasons. Not enough to gain the kind of attention from the NHL that the Big 4 of the B1G have gotten. That was 2/3rds of the B1G conference before this year, and 80% of the B1G teams that existed 10 years ago. On the converse, 75% of the NCHC would struggle to find more than a handful of great NHLers among their alumni.



And I never said the NCHC schools don't have early departures, and in fact I specifically stated that schools like SCSU and NOU, because of recent success have recently or will start to suffer the same thing that B1G schools have historically had to go through if those schools win a Title or two.

Cliff Notes version:

Current B1G teams were great 10-20 years ago.
B1G teams have been decimated recently by early departures.
No explanation for why NCHC, with more early departures, seems to be having success.

Look, if there is one thing that pretty much all knowledgeable college hockey fans can agree on it's that since it's formation five years ago, and notwithstanding overwhelming advantages in terms of size, money, facilities, recruiting, television exposure, etc..., B1G hockey teams have grossly underperformed on a national level. The vast majority of those fans don't expect that to continue indefinitely, but to argue otherwise at this point in time suggests ignorance.

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

According to the College Hockey, Inc., site, and if we go back to early pro signings at the end of the 2012-13 season (the summer before the teams started play in their new conferences), B1G teams have seen 39 early departures for the pros and NCHC teams have seen 46. If you just want to count from after the first season of realigned conferences, it's B1G 30 and NCHC 38.

Obviously, for the first few seasons there were 8 NCHC teams and 6 B1G teams (now 7), but not much difference between the two leagues, and certainly not to the extent represented by you.

http://collegehockeyinc.com/pro-sign...free-agent.php

Well, yes, things are improving for the 8 teams in the NCHC recently, which is reflected in the # of early signings of NCHC players recently, but I'm looking at a wider scope and longer term trends.

And also, trying to include Notre Dame, if you did, and PSU is not really fair in light of the point I am trying to make. PSU only suffered 3 early losses during that time frame, so that would be 36 early departures for the 5 B1G teams with long histories of hockey from 2012-13 season to now. That's 7.2 per team compared to 46 for the 8 NCHC teams which is 5.75 per team.

7.2 > 5.75

But the gap is closing, and may have reversed by now? But if that is true, then I predict it will effect how well teams from the NCHC do in the future when their better recruits start leaving earlier and earlier and it disrupts things for those programs.

Because there is also a difference between some Jr leaving a team with little hope of doing anything his Sr year who goes on to do little to nothing in the NHL and a Frosh leaving a team with high hopes simply because he is so **** good and has NHL stardom awaiting him.

How do you quantify such a thing? Well, not sure, to be honest. But how about the Big 4 of the B1G producing twice as many 300 pt scorers in the NHL compared to the top 4 teams from the NCHC?? Granted some of those players didn't leave early, but a lot of them did.

Hey, I was a huge WCHA fan, but unlike 99% of the Minnesota and Wisconsin fans out there, was in favor of the formation of the B1G conference, not so much because of the short term benefits to my favorite team, which there are basically none, but for the long term benefits to college hockey in general. Breaking up and spreading out the wealth that was the old WCHA and doing away with the overrated CCHA altogether were both good things for college hockey, at least imo. I think the creation of the B1G was a good thing for Mich, MSU and OSU(as the CCHA was one of the lamest conferences), and obviously PSU, and down the line it could be for Notre Dame as well. And having 3 competitive Western Conferences is better for college hockey in general.

The B1G will bounce back, as it seems is happening this year, with 3 teams very likely to make the NCAA tourney, and maybe 4?

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

with more early departures

???

Not over the period of time you mentioned. At least not on a per team basis.

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

And since this current season hasn't concluded yet, we have no idea what effect last year's early departures will have on this year's teams comes NCAA tourney time.

So excluding the last year, looking at the time frame you mentioned, the 5 relevant B1G teams lost 4 freshmen compared to only 2 for the 8 NCHC teams and those 5 B1G teams lost 3 Sophs with the 8 NCHC teams losing 9 sophs. So to quantify this, I added up the # of years of eligibility lost and it's 18 years for the 5 B1G teams, and 24 for the 8 NCHC teams, or 3.6 years per B1G team and only 3 years per NCHC team.

Just an example how looking at it too simplistically doesn't tell you the whole story.


Remember, I'm not including Notre Dame or PSU in this analysis.

[SJHovey]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

And since this current season hasn't concluded yet, we have no idea what effect last year's early departures will have on this year's teams comes NCAA tourney time.

Well, given that the seven B1G teams lost six players to early departure before this season, while the 8 NCHC teams lost 12 players to early departure before this season, yet the NCHC has 6 of it's teams in the top 16 of the pwr, and all 8 in the top 20 of the pwr, it doesn't look like it's having too terrible of an effect on the NCHC this year. But then again, we're not the ones making excuses about early departures.

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well, given that the seven B1G teams lost six players to early departure before this season, while the 8 NCHC teams lost 12 players to early departure before this season, yet the NCHC has 6 of it's teams in the top 16 of the pwr, and all 8 in the top 20 of the pwr, it doesn't look like it's having too terrible of an effect on the NCHC this year. But then again, we're not the ones making excuses about early departures.

As the fan of a team who went into the NCAA tourney as a #1 seed only to lose in the first round to the #4 seed, I wouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't assume a Yale/Union/Providence won't knock you out early.

And I'm not making excuses, just stating facts. The Big 4 of the B1G are NHL factories, and blow away the NCHC in that regard.

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well, given that the seven B1G teams lost six players to early departure before this season, while the 8 NCHC teams lost 12 players to early departure before this season, yet the NCHC has 6 of it's teams in the top 16 of the pwr, and all 8 in the top 20 of the pwr, it doesn't look like it's having too terrible of an effect on the NCHC this year. But then again, we're not the ones making excuses about early departures.

Btw, as a fan of the old WCHA, having 6 teams in the PWR Top 16 this early in the season doesn't mean 6 teams will make the NCAA tourney, esp when 2 of then are rated #15 and #16. For one, those 6 teams have to play each other and the other 2 NCHC teams and most likely at least one, if not 2, of those 6 teams will not make it into the Top 13-14 or whatever they need to be to make the tourney. And getting 5-6 teams into the tourney is nice, but that won't guarantee one of them will win a Natl Title.

If the tourney started today, both the B1G and NCHC would get 4 teams in with the odds being SCSU vs Notre Dame in the final.

[SJHovey]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Btw, as a fan of the old WCHA, having 6 teams in the PWR Top 16 this early in the season doesn't mean 6 teams will make the NCAA tourney, esp when 2 of then are rated #15 and #16. For one, those 6 teams have to play each other and the other 2 NCHC teams and most likely at least one, if not 2, of those 6 teams will not make it into the Top 13-14 or whatever they need to be to make the tourney. And getting 5-6 teams into the tourney is nice, but that won't guarantee one of them will win a Natl Title.

If the tourney started today, both the B1G and NCHC would get 4 teams in with the odds being SCSU vs Notre Dame in the final.

We've already done 6. We're aiming for 7.

I hope you're right about Notre Dame. I always think it's a shame when a conference regular season champion can't even make the tourney.

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well Stratus, tiny little schools HAVE TO have good relations with their town/community, because what they do/the benefits of what they do, only in limited ways, benefits anything or anyone beyond the town or community they are located in, and rarely does anyone outside of that community care about their sports teams, either.

In contrast, the B1G schools WHO PLAY HOCKEY, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan St & Ohio St are not tiny little niche schools who need to kiss the butts of the town/city they are located in. Why? Because the community I said that they represent was entire states and the community they serve goes well beyond even their entire states. Their states are their primary focus, but indirectly their impact goes well beyond the states they represent. The B1G schools do BILLIONS of dollars of research every year that benefits not just their local communities, and not only their state, and not only the country as a whole, but the whole world. If you ranked conferences according to their research dollars, the 2nd best conference would only pull in HALF as much as the B1G pulls in. And these schools train and educate so many doctors and lawyers and businessmen and teachers, etc., that their entire states benefit as well as many communities outside of their states, and their alumni bases are so large that they are spread out all over the country.

And I'd bet that YOU PERSONALLY have benefitted in a very significant way by the contributions of at least one, if not several of the B1G schools that you seem to despise. Btw, 3 of the 4 schools you listed as examples are not land grant schools and JH and ND are not part of the B1G outside of playing in the B1G in just one sport.

The amount of false statements in your posts, and the amount of backtracking is truly comical.

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well, yes, things are improving for the 8 teams in the NCHC recently, which is reflected in the # of early signings of NCHC players recently, but I'm looking at a wider scope and longer term trends.

"Sure the NCHC is better NOW, but back 20 years ago is what is really important."

And also, trying to include Notre Dame, if you did, and PSU is not really fair in light of the point I am trying to make. PSU only suffered 3 early losses during that time frame, so that would be 36 early departures for the 5 B1G teams with long histories of hockey from 2012-13 season to now. That's 7.2 per team compared to 46 for the 8 NCHC teams which is 5.75 per team.

7.2 > 5.75

"PSU has only been around since the formation of the B1G and was in fact the reason for its formation. To include them wouldn't be fair, because it undermines my already debunked argument. If you will look at the data I have cherry-picked, you will see that I can select specific teams from the B1G, while including ALL of the teams from the NCHC, and manipulate the numbers to make me right"

But the gap is closing, and may have reversed by now? But if that is true, then I predict it will effect how well teams from the NCHC do in the future when their better recruits start leaving earlier and earlier and it disrupts things for those programs.

"Even if I am wrong, eventually I will be right, despite having no hypothesis for why that will be the case. Let's see how the NCHC teams like North Dakota, Denver and St. Cloud do in the future once their players start leaving early."

Because there is also a difference between some Jr leaving a team with little hope of doing anything his Sr year who goes on to do little to nothing in the NHL and a Frosh leaving a team with high hopes simply because he is so **** good and has NHL stardom awaiting him.

How many B1G players have left after their freshman year to go pro? Dylan Larkin is the only one I can think of.

How do you quantify such a thing? Well, not sure, to be honest. But how about the Big 4 of the B1G producing twice as many 300 pt scorers in the NHL compared to the top 4 teams from the NCHC?? Granted some of those players didn't leave early, but a lot of them did.

"Back to my point about how it's ok for the B1G schools to be bad at hockey. I pulled some more cherry-picked data out of my butt, and it shows me that the B1G is better than the NCHC schools at producing 300 point scorers in the NHL. Which is the main purpose of B1G schools, as I said in my first post."

The B1G will bounce back, as it seems is happening this year, with 3 teams very likely to make the NCAA tourney, and maybe 4?

Yeah, but how many 300 point scorers in the NHL will they produce this year? That's all that really matters.

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

The amount of false statements in your posts, and the amount of backtracking is truly comical.

What false statements are you talking about Tipsy?

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

How many B1G players have left after their freshman year to go pro? Dylan Larkin is the only one I can think of.

I found FOUR of them, 3 plucked early from Michigan's roster
Dylan Larkin, who has 30 pts this year in the NHL, ranking him 47th in the NHL right now.
Jacob Trouba, who has 12 pts this year in the NHL, 117 so far for his career.
Kyle Conner, who has 26 pts this year in the NHL, ranking him 67th in the NHL right now.

Not a big surprise Michigan has struggled some recently.

And Jack Dougherty from Wisconsin.

[icehawk]

Well, given that the seven B1G teams lost six players to early departure before this season, while the 8 NCHC teams lost 12 players to early departure before this season, yet the NCHC has 6 of it's teams in the top 16 of the pwr, and all 8 in the top 20 of the pwr, it doesn't look like it's having too terrible of an effect on the NCHC this year. But then again, we're not the ones making excuses about early departures.

Nice box 👍

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

What false statements are you talking about Tipsy?

B1G schools primary mission is not to win National Titles, or make Frozen Fours, it is to improve the quality of living in the states they represent.

This is BS.

A lot of one and dones and two and dones and three and dones on B1G men's hockey rosters.

This is BS.

Just look up how many players B1G programs have sent and send to the NHL compared to NCHC programs, and there is really no comparison.

You have been thoroughly debunked on this.

Now the B1G schools, at the time of the formation of the B1G conf, had FAR MORE successful histories than the NCHC schools had, up to the time of the formation of the NCHC.

This is BS.

But the formation of these 2 new conferences came at a time when the NHL poaching of B1G rosters was at a sort of peak, or at least the negative effect of the poaching was at a peak, while the NCHC programs were not similarly affected, at least not yet.

This is totally BS.

But if programs like UMD and Omaha and now SCSU continue to thrive, NHL teams will start targeting their players and in a few years those programs could suffer through similar down periods as MSU, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan all have in the last decade, decade and a half.

If you think that scouts pay attention to players because they go to certain schools, you are an idiot. Players are drafted before they play college hockey. If you want to match up how many NHL players the NCHC schools have produced vs. how many the B1G have produced since the formation of their conferences, the NCHC would win.

Well Stratus, tiny little schools HAVE TO have good relations with their town/community, because what they do/the benefits of what they do, only in limited ways, benefits anything or anyone beyond the town or community they are located in, and rarely does anyone outside of that community care about their sports teams, either.

In contrast, the B1G schools WHO PLAY HOCKEY, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan St & Ohio St are not tiny little niche schools who need to kiss the butts of the town/city they are located in. Why? Because the community I said that they represent was entire states and the community they serve goes well beyond even their entire states. Their states are their primary focus, but indirectly their impact goes well beyond the states they represent. The B1G schools do BILLIONS of dollars of research every year that benefits not just their local communities, and not only their state, and not only the country as a whole, but the whole world. If you ranked conferences according to their research dollars, the 2nd best conference would only pull in HALF as much as the B1G pulls in. And these schools train and educate so many doctors and lawyers and businessmen and teachers, etc., that their entire states benefit as well as many communities outside of their states, and their alumni bases are so large that they are spread out all over the country.

And I'd bet that YOU PERSONALLY have benefitted in a very significant way by the contributions of at least one, if not several of the B1G schools that you seem to despise. Btw, 3 of the 4 schools you listed as examples are not land grant schools and JH and ND are not part of the B1G outside of playing in the B1G in just one sport.

This is just a transparent snow-job that has nothing at all to do with the topic at hand and is full of irrelevant crap. This is a hockey forum. Not a forum about research dollars. But whatever makes you feel better about the BTHC being a joke.

But outside of UND and DU, the rest of the NCHC hasn't done much of anything outside of having 1 or 2 decent seasons. Not enough to gain the kind of attention from the NHL that the Big 4 of the B1G have gotten. That was 2/3rds of the B1G conference before this year, and 80% of the B1G teams that existed 10 years ago. On the converse, 75% of the NCHC would struggle to find more than a handful of great NHLers among their alumni.

1 or 2 decent seasons in the past 10 years? Since the B1G formed? Why do you keep trying to bring up how great the B1G schools were in the 90s and 00s? It has nothing to do with what is going on now.

And I never said the NCHC schools don't have early departures, and in fact I specifically stated that schools like SCSU and NOU, because of recent success have recently or will start to suffer the same thing that B1G schools have historically had to go through if those schools win a Title or two.

SCSU has had early departures since the mid 90s. Just because you don't pay attention to them doesn't mean they didn't happen. Most importantly, THAT IS THE TRADE OFF. You recruit a stud player, you probably aren't going to keep him for 4 years. Coaches should know that when they recruit those players. That isn't an excuse for having a bad team. It doesn't seem to have hindered North Dakota or Denver. There are plenty of highly touted Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan recruits that did stay all 4 years and weren't any better when they left than when they got there.

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

And also, trying to include Notre Dame, if you did, and PSU is not really fair in light of the point I am trying to make. PSU only suffered 3 early losses during that time frame, so that would be 36 early departures for the 5 B1G teams with long histories of hockey from 2012-13 season to now. That's 7.2 per team compared to 46 for the 8 NCHC teams which is 5.75 per team.

I have already pointed out your garbage cherry-picking of data in here.

But the gap is closing, and may have reversed by now? But if that is true, then I predict it will effect how well teams from the NCHC do in the future when their better recruits start leaving earlier and earlier and it disrupts things for those programs.

The best teams in the NCHC have had their players leaving early SINCE BEFORE THE NCHC was formed. If you think Michigan and Minnesota have had more early departures over the past decade than Denver and North Dakota, you are smoking crack. Compare the top teams to the top teams. The middle teams to the middle teams. The bottom teams to the bottom teams. Has Ohio State and Michigan State had more early departures than St. Cloud and Miami? Hell no.

I think the creation of the B1G was a good thing for Mich, MSU and OSU(as the CCHA was one of the lamest conferences), and obviously PSU, and down the line it could be for Notre Dame as well. And having 3 competitive Western Conferences is better for college hockey in general.

I am sure Michigan State is delighted to be the whipping boy of the B1G. Ohio State has made the tournament once. Let's not pretend they are now a powerhouse.

The B1G will bounce back, as it seems is happening this year, with 3 teams very likely to make the NCAA tourney, and maybe 4?

I am going to predict that on December 8th, two of Ohio State, Minnesota and Penn State will no longer be in the top 14 of the pairwise.

???

Not over the period of time you mentioned. At least not on a per team basis.

This was proven to be BS.

And since this current season hasn't concluded yet, we have no idea what effect last year's early departures will have on this year's teams comes NCAA tourney time.

So excluding the last year, looking at the time frame you mentioned, the 5 relevant B1G teams lost 4 freshmen compared to only 2 for the 8 NCHC teams and those 5 B1G teams lost 3 Sophs with the 8 NCHC teams losing 9 sophs. So to quantify this, I added up the # of years of eligibility lost and it's 18 years for the 5 B1G teams, and 24 for the 8 NCHC teams, or 3.6 years per B1G team and only 3 years per NCHC team.

Just an example how looking at it too simplistically doesn't tell you the whole story.


Remember, I'm not including Notre Dame or PSU in this analysis.

If you aren't including Penn State in your analysis, you shouldn't include them in your number of B1G teams that you think are going to make the NCAA tourney.

As the fan of a team who went into the NCAA tourney as a #1 seed only to lose in the first round to the #4 seed, I wouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't assume a Yale/Union/Providence won't knock you out early.

And I'm not making excuses, just stating facts. The Big 4 of the B1G are NHL factories, and blow away the NCHC in that regard.

Again. Total BS. The top 4 B1G teams do not blow away the NCHC teams in the number of NHL players produced.

Btw, as a fan of the old WCHA, having 6 teams in the PWR Top 16 this early in the season doesn't mean 6 teams will make the NCAA tourney, esp when 2 of then are rated #15 and #16. For one, those 6 teams have to play each other and the other 2 NCHC teams and most likely at least one, if not 2, of those 6 teams will not make it into the Top 13-14 or whatever they need to be to make the tourney. And getting 5-6 teams into the tourney is nice, but that won't guarantee one of them will win a Natl Title.

If the tourney started today, both the B1G and NCHC would get 4 teams in with the odds being SCSU vs Notre Dame in the final.

If the tourney started today, the NCHC would get 5 teams in and Denver already beat Notre Dame, so I don't know why you are penciling Notre Dame into your likely title game.