PDA

View Full Version : Official 2011-2012 Minnesota State University, Mankato Maverick Hockey Thread



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

MavHockey14
09-27-2011, 05:00 PM
Well, it's time to forget last year's thread and move on to this year. We lose a lot defensively, but we have a pretty decent amount of young scoring returning.

Key Returning Forwards:
SR. Michael Dorr (12-14-26) The highest point scorer returning to this year's Maverick squad.
JR. Eriah Hayes (11-11-22) A big forward who really needs to step up and bury it this year if the Mavs want to be competitive.
SO. Chase Grant (8-12-20) Here's a guy that's poised for a breakout here. He should see extensive power play time, and be on the top line.
JR. Eli Zuck (5-13-18) Here's a guy who can move the puck and get it to a guy, such as Hayes, to bury it.

Key Returning Defenseman:
JR. Tyler Elbrecht (1-7-8) Here's our best defensive player, and possibly one of the hardest working guys on the team;the reason he's a Captain.
SR. Cameron Cooper (3-2-5) I think Cooper could become somewhat offensive as he no longer lives in the shadows of Davis and Youds.

Returning Goaltenders:
JR. Phil Cook 10-13-4 3.01 GAA and a .903 SV % He will be huge if we are successful this year.
SR. Austin Lee 4-5-2 2.59 GAA and a .911 SV % Will push Cook in practice for a job

Guy with the most to prove this year:
Sr. Forward Justin Jokinen (9-8-17) A highly touted incoming recruit, with impressive size, vision, and scoring ability, a 2008 4th round (101st overall), draft choice of the Buffalo Sabres, Jokinen hasn't been very impressive. We've seen a few flashes of the hype surrounding the kid, but never any consistent play at that level. With 86 career games, and only 15 goals and 11 assists, this kid needs to redeem himself and have a big year for the Mavs.

Puck drops in 6 days!

MavHockey14
09-29-2011, 01:48 PM
Great Article by Shaner showing why we were left behind in the dust...


When people like North Dakota athletic director Brian Faison say, “Ultimately, it’s the commitment to the highest level of competition in hockey that drives (the NCHC),” it would be easy to think that Minnesota State made its own bed over the last few years and that it would be in the “Super Conference,” too, if only it had done some things differently.

http://mankatofreepress.com/sports/x1173958766/Frederick-St-Cloud-NCHC-leave-MSU-behind

Map Man
09-29-2011, 08:19 PM
Great Article by Shaner showing why we were left behind in the dust...



http://mankatofreepress.com/sports/x1173958766/Frederick-St-Cloud-NCHC-leave-MSU-behind

Great Article. Great Sports writer. I think he has hit this one correctly. It is a strong commitment to sports programs in general (mainly schools investing in hockey as a prime sport) that drives this league. It would be great to see the National expand and include MSU if they can also add a 9th team such as Notre Dame.

First Time, Long Time
09-29-2011, 08:47 PM
Great Article. Great Sports writer. I think he has hit this one correctly. It is a strong commitment to sports programs in general (mainly schools investing in hockey as a prime sport) that drives this league. It would be great to see the National expand and include MSU if they can also add a 9th team such as Notre Dame.

CC's AD has said they will stay at 8 unless ND joins, then and only then, will they go to 9.

MavsFan
09-29-2011, 09:20 PM
Mankato wouldn't be included if they went to 12.

Shane just made excuses for the program essentially saying we can't expect little Mankato to compete.

MavHockey14
10-03-2011, 02:07 PM
Well, albeit unofficially, the season kicks off tonight! Glad to have hockey season back! Go Mavs!

state of hockey
10-03-2011, 02:48 PM
Well, albeit unofficially, the season kicks off tonight! Glad to have hockey season back! Go Mavs!

UBC has a good goalie. The Gophers outshot them 44-10 last night but only won 3-0. That being said you'll probably fling 7 past him.

MaizeRage
10-03-2011, 03:31 PM
Mankato wouldn't be included if they went to 12.

Shane just made excuses for the program essentially saying we can't expect little Mankato to compete.

Your personality that constantly complains about the university being broke should sit down for coffee with your personality that constantly complains about the university not putting enough effort(which = money) into the hockey program.

MavsFan
10-03-2011, 03:48 PM
Your personality that constantly complains about the university being broke should sit down for coffee with your personality that constantly complains about the university not putting enough effort(which = money) into the hockey program.You are the one equating effort with money. I'm more wondering why a coach with an eleven year record like ours has is still behind the bench, and the answer that I see is that the university is simply non-committal about the program. I certainly could be wrong, but I've seen no evidence of concern.

In eleven years the Mavs have had home ice twice, converted that to a final five appearance once, and gotten to the NCAA tourney once. Note that half the teams in the league get home ice, half make it to the final five, and over 25% of the teams in the country make the NCAA. That is not a record that should ensure continued employment for the head coach in a D-I program.

Biddco
10-03-2011, 05:36 PM
Can someone explain to me why MSU's colors are purple and gold and yet they use black and purple as their jerseys? Purple and gold > black and purple

MavHockey14
10-03-2011, 05:56 PM
UBC has a good goalie. The Gophers outshot them 44-10 last night but only won 3-0. That being said you'll probably fling 7 past him.
Gophers Talent >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mavericks Talent.

:(

Can someone explain to me why MSU's colors are purple and gold and yet they use black and purple as their jerseys? Purple and gold > black and purple

not a question we could answer..:p

MavHockey14
10-03-2011, 06:15 PM
Shane had a good preview article in the Free Press today:
http://mankatofreepress.com/sports/x597290860/Mavericks-know-close-won-t-cut-it-in-WCHA

Some good quotes:


“We weren’t happy with the way last year played out,” coach Troy Jutting said. “While we were close almost all the time, close doesn’t cut it.”

“I think that woke us up,” he said. “You realize that every day in practice, if you miss that one pass or you make a mistake, you’ve got to make sure you don’t make it again because it could be the reason that those two minutes happen in a game.”

“Seeing that stat last year was a punch in the stomach,” junior defenseman Tyler Elbrecht said last week, “especially when your season’s over. You see that and say, ‘Wow, that’s not a very long time.’

Also, a quote from Shane's blog in which he was watching the first official practice on Saturday...


"For a first practice it was very good," coach Troy Jutting said afterward. "The intensity was good. We've got some learning to do, but I thought, in terms of being prepared for practice, that it was very good."

When I showed up to the rink, workers were cleaning up a section of glass that had been shattered during the workout. Apparently, it occurred when defenseman Tyler Elbrecht checked forward J.P. Burkemper into the boards.

MavHockey14
10-04-2011, 12:44 PM
My thoughts on last night's game:

Zach Lehrke is gonna be a player. The kid looked like our best player out there last night, he was quick, made good decisions, scored a nice goal, and is fast.

Phil Cook looked very sharp all night, had good rebound control, and made every save. He only played 30 minutes, but he looked good in those thirty minutes.

I would've liked to see our power play more than once last night, but the one chance we got, we looked horrific because nobody wants to shoot the puck. Everyone waits, tries to make the perfect pass, etc. PUT THE PUCK ON NET! (Of course, a few seconds after the power play ended we had a beautiful one time happen down low and scored a goal, so whatever.:p

We looked very disciplined defensively, which surprised me, but we'll see more this weekend. Palmquist seemed like he is a kind of guy who gets in the rush, and isn't afraid to play down low in the offensive zone.

Watch for Max Gaede to be a good player. He has a ton of skill, and he's got a good frame at 6' 3" which will help him get some extra scoring opportunities using his body.

We did indeed throw the body around a lot as well, which is always good to see.

All in all, I don't really have anything in depth as it was fairly tough to get a good look at what this team's going to be like.

Biddco
10-04-2011, 01:33 PM
not a question we could answer..:pFAIL! :angry:

MavHockey14
10-04-2011, 01:39 PM
FAIL! :angry:

Everyone hates our jerseys...now that's why we're not in the NCHC!;)

MaizeRage
10-04-2011, 03:43 PM
You are the one equating effort with money. I'm more wondering why a coach with an eleven year record like ours has is still behind the bench, and the answer that I see is that the university is simply non-committal about the program. I certainly could be wrong, but I've seen no evidence of concern.

With two years left on his contract, the cost of buying him out alone is way more than the university could afford to spend. When Western Michigan wanted to show they were serious about their hockey program this summer with an eye towards the NCHC, that meant paying their head coach a little more than twice what Jutting makes, and paying both assistant coaches close to what Jutting makes. So yes, that commitment would have a price tag somewhere around $300k-$500k

Bale
10-04-2011, 06:23 PM
I really think that this idea that the administration doesn't care is a lot of conjecture and of little substance. I have criticized Jutting more than my fair share, but the reality of his situation is that he's had really good (some might say lucky) timing. If you take a look at what he's done it makes sense as to why he's still here even though his record has been less than stellar.

He started here before the 2000 season. From there, he took us to the NCAAs in his third season (2002-2003). That was a very good team that got hot and won him the coach of the year. I think we can all agree that it made sense to sign him back. In June 2003 he signed a new 4- year contract. That takes us through 2007. Now, the administration has a decision to make. Sign him to a 2 year contract or go another direction. Jutting had a good recruiting class that came in 2006-2007 (the Harrison, Kalinski class). They could choose to allow Jutting to work with them for another 2 years or cut ties. It really does make sense that he gets the chance to work with that class past their freshmen year. So they sign him to a 2-year contract (the minimum allowable by MnSCU standards). He goes out and has the run with his recruiting class as juniors in 2007-2008, wins COY and has most of his big recruiting class coming back for their senior year. The next year does NOT go well, but, really, it's only one year removed from a pretty impressive run and a COY award. Again, it's decision time for the administration on Jutting. This time they are required by MnSCU rules to either let him go or sign him to a 4-year contract. I know this one was a tough one for the administration, but realistically, how do you get rid of a guy that just won a COY a year ago. So it's time to sign him for 4 years.

Now, we're 2 years into that contract and have had 3 bad, bad years. What do we do? Can MSU truly make the argument that they can eat just over $150K per year on a coach that isn't there (plus assistant coaches salaries) and sign a new high profile coach for $250K year and pay the assistants $150K per year. So, realistically you're adding just over a half million dollars of extra expense. Can this program really absorb that kind of a hit? Probably not with the fact that we're D2 in other sports, we have a bad lease with the arena and a historically weak region for hockey relative to the rest of the state.

I know it's not what we want to hear, but these are the facts. Analyze them how you will, but at least understand the reasons that go into the decisions. Also, realize the administration does care. They just have a lot of variables involved.

MavsFan
10-04-2011, 07:17 PM
My negativity about the whole thing is probably a drag, so I'm going to drop it. My last statement will be to point out that winning COY for a 4th place finish just shows how low the expectations are for the program.

MavHockey14
10-04-2011, 07:34 PM
My negativity about the whole thing is probably a drag, so I'm going to drop it. My last statement will be to point out that winning COY for a 4th place finish just shows how low the expectations are for the program.

very interesting point here...

Bale
10-04-2011, 08:12 PM
My negativity about the whole thing is probably a drag, so I'm going to drop it. My last statement will be to point out that winning COY for a 4th place finish just shows how low the expectations are for the program.

You're right. That is point. Winning it for that is a pretty low bar to hit. I won't disagree with that. It should have been the next step, not the high point.

Trust me, I understand your negativity. I was there for a long time and still am to a degree. I just refuse to let the negative past affect my outlook on things. If I didn't, I would really hate my college hockey cheering life.