Hockey #4 pre-season.

Submitted by JustGoBlue on

As Michigan gets ready to begin it's first game of the season this Saturday (and the first non-exhibition game of any D-1 men's team!), USA-Today picks U-M #4.

http://www.uscho.com/rankings/?data=usatoday&week=poll

Behind #1 BC, #2 North Dakota and #3 Miami, ahead of #5 Yale.  About half way between Yale and Miami in "points" and not particularly close to either.  The 3 teams in front of us seem pretty solid top 3 teams (though I hasten to point out that despite losing only 2 contributing players from last year's CCHA regular season champs/Frozen Four team, Miami returns slightly LESS scoring than Michigan).  It definitely seems like a fair place, for now, as the three teams above us should all be really solid and nobody behind us really seems like they will be quite at our level. 

Other teams of note:

#8 New Hampshire (only non-conference challenge outside of the Showcase) #12 Alaska, #13 Wisconsin, #15 Minnesota

And since only the top 15 are ranked, the receiving votes teams of interested with rankings extrapolated:

#16 Notre Dame, #19 Ferris State, #22/23 NMU, #23/22 MSU (NMU is listed ahead of MSU, but has only 18 votes to MSU's 21.  But they're otherwise listed in vote order, so the 18 may be a typo for 28)

Looking for Red's 10th CCHA tournament title, 11th CCHA regular season title, 21st (consecutive) NCAA tournament appearance, 11th Frozen Four, 3rd Hobey Baker winner,  3rd National Title (10th for the program) and the first undefeated season since Cornell did it (for the first and so far last time) in 1970.

Should be a great season, GO BLUE!

wigeon

September 27th, 2010 at 8:58 PM ^

been this excited about a single Michigan hockey team in 12-13 years.  Everyone's back, looking for big things out of Hagelin and Caporusso in particular.

 

redwings8831

September 27th, 2010 at 9:01 PM ^

I think we'll learn a lot about this team after the 10/16 game at New Hampshire (preseaosn #8). Single game road trips out east haven't been that successful over the last two years. Besides that, not the hardest start through 11/20.

redwings8831

September 27th, 2010 at 9:01 PM ^

I think we'll learn a lot about this team after the 10/16 game at New Hampshire (preseaosn #8). Single game road trips out east haven't been that successful over the last two years. Besides that, not the hardest start through 11/20.

hockeyguy9125

September 27th, 2010 at 9:06 PM ^

The defense is solid. They return all the big scorers. If they continue the run that they ended last year with, this could be a very special year. National Championship or bust as usual for hockey. I think they have a great chance, and I have a feeling they will get it done this year.

Side Note: Alaska is ranked 12...interesting

lhglrkwg

September 27th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^

we have the talent to be awesome but still relatively unproven goaltending. if the goalies turn out to be solid this year, this team should be frozen four caliber easily

OHbornUMfan

September 27th, 2010 at 9:59 PM ^

I met one of the fellas in the Albany airport this summer.  He seemed like a good kid, and had very good things to say about the team's potential and morale for this year.  Had I only been wearing my M Hockey shirt!

DenverRob

September 27th, 2010 at 10:10 PM ^

I am expecting to win it all this year. I don't usually say that, but this team is explosive.

We have the Swedish sensation that could be our 3rd Hobey Baker winner.

WhatsTheSnapCount

September 28th, 2010 at 12:35 AM ^

so forgive this question:  Is season opener vs Mercyhurst  going to be competitive?  I wouldn't have thought so but it's not listed as an exihibition game so......just deciding if I should go.

redwings8831

September 28th, 2010 at 3:17 AM ^

They went 15-10-3 in the AHA (Atlantic Hockey) last year, finishing fourth in the conference, but were 0-10-0 in non-conference games, losing games at both Alaska schools (not terrible), two at Western Michigan (ok they really suck), netural site games vs Minnesota-Duluth (good, missed tourney) and Alabama-Huntsville (bad, made tourney), at Denver/Colorado College (not bad), and two conference playoff games which count as non-conference games.

JustGoBlue

September 28th, 2010 at 8:53 AM ^

But what Mercyhurst has going for it, is that neither team has had very much practice at all. 

However, every game at Yost is definitely worth going to, whether the game seems competitive on paper or not. 

As for games not appearing competitive in advance, see Massachusetts, The University of,  Horror, The, Toledo, The University of etc.

the_big_house 500th

September 28th, 2010 at 1:14 AM ^

I've still got a bitter feeling at Miami after that semi final game. This year I think Michigan's going to be even stronger and I'm looking forward to seeing us winning another CCHA title and going back to the NCAA Tournament! Is Hunwick still the starter in goal?

JustGoBlue

September 28th, 2010 at 8:49 AM ^

But it WILL be interesting to see who starts each game this weekend, considering Saturday is a real game and Sunday is an exhibition.  I don't think it will mean a lot, but it might be a hint as to who Red thinks has the slight edge.  Considering, you know, that (I believe) full practices start the same day as our first game, meaning Red has had about 2 hours a week for a couple weeks so far this year to decide who gets the first start...

BlueAggie

September 28th, 2010 at 9:18 AM ^

This thread is pretty optimistic.  I think goaltending is still too much of a question mark to have Michigan this high.  Hunwick's success had a lot to do with stopping the first shot and the team outworking the opposition to clear the juicy rebounds.  I'm not sure how sustainable that is over the course of the year.

Perhaps Hogan has a Sauer-esque bounce-back year, and the team is unstoppable.  If I had to guess though, I would think Hogan turns in an average year and is slightly better than Hunwick.  Michigan loses some frustrating games and finishes as a low 2 or a high 3 seed, but one that nobody wants to play in the tournament.

JustGoBlue

September 28th, 2010 at 10:38 AM ^

that we NEED unstoppable goaltending.   I think we only need average goaltending.  Defense is a slight concern as a position, but defense as a team statistic doesn't concern me.  The biggest problem with the D is that there isn't a certifiable top-pairing shutdown pair, but instead we have the Hagelin-Rust-pick-a-winger line that should be perfetly capable of shutting down anybody in either end.

Also, look at the Wings with Ozzie.  I love him as much as anybody but his career statistics of 2.49 GAA (would have ranked 11th/46 in the NHL last season) and sv% .905 (33rd/46 in the NHL last season, while a career season high of .917 would have ranked 11th this season) aren't really much better than average and the Wings generally do OK.

We don't have Turco/Shields/Montoya/Blackburn like some of Red's great teams, and Hogan and Hunwick both have probably already used up their respective 2008 Sauer seasons.  Regardless, I think, as a team, Michigan is cetainly still good enough to go up against anybody and have a reasonable expectation of beating them.  Are a gazillion trophies and an undeafted season extremely optimistic?  Duh.  But I think the poll ranking is pretty accurate.  Yale is really good offensively, but their defense/goaltending is even more questionable than ours, I don't know enough about SCSU to really judge, Maine has questionable goaltending, so does, UNH, Duluth should be pretty good but I don't really know enough to say, Cornell will be really good defensively like always, but doesn't have a great offense, Denver has goalie questions and is really young.  And I would say that only Yale, if them, can match our offense. That brings us to Alaska.  Do you really think Alaska is better than us (demon polar bear, or no)?

BlueAggie

September 28th, 2010 at 10:49 AM ^

This is a good point. I really didn't consider how Michigan compared to everyone else, instead I was comparing the current roster to past Frozen Four caliber teams.

This is a bad approach on my part though, because unlike college football, where the overall talent level is relatively constant, college hockey is much more prone to detections and decommits. The OHL seems to be up currently, and the salary cap seems to be making the NHL younger, so an overall decrease in the talent of college teams makes some sense.