HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

By far one of the toughest sections in the state. Have not seen most of the teams play. Who will win?

Sorta cold leaving off the play-in team, the St. Paul Blades. If Tartan and NSP have a chance then so do the Blades.

I know its early, but where is the love for WBL? Is it the loss of #34 or a relatively soft schedule or just so early in the voting?

Is there anyone in the section who can stop #16 @ HM? I like HM emerging, if the goaltending steps up.

Section 4 ramps up tonight, any thoughts? I, personally don't anticipate a first round upset, but then again I am a terrible prognosticator.

WBL is 1-3 without Lowell in the lineup.

Tuesday looks to be a good night of hockey. Anyone like to post their predictions.

I like HM and Roseville to advance to the final.

Hill-Murray 5
WBL 2


Stillwater 1
Roseville 4

One last question, anyone care to share why they aren't giving WBL any love in the poll? Do you all agree with cap?

capitalist wrote:WBL is 1-3 without Lowell in the lineup.

The record is actually 2-2…but your point is well taken

You are correct I'm sure. Still, they sure don't look like the same team.
Status report on H Hill??

H-M is actually rated higher by Krach standards, which is surprising to me. Should be a fun game tomorrow night. I like HM and Roseville to win and Roseville to once again end Hill's season in the finals...

Sparlimb wrote:H-M is actually rated higher by Krach standards, which is surprising to me. Should be a fun game tomorrow night. I like HM and Roseville to win and Roseville to once again end Hill's season in the finals...

I dont think it should be a surprise. Based on the strength of schedule. HM played quite a few of the top teams in the state. WBL had a fairly soft schedule in comparison.

capitalist wrote:Sorta cold leaving off the play-in team, the St. Paul Blades. If Tartan and NSP have a chance then so do the Blades.

Hey Cap, I was actually impressed with the grit and determination of the Blades. What they lacked was defense. Offensively they were pretty good. I especially liked Kelsey Vandegrift. #7 .Forgive me if I spelled her name wrong. She scored two goals against the Bears. I hope they keep that program going for the sake of the kids that want to play. It is a great thing for them and hats off to the people who keep it going. Don't give up on those kids, it's tough to compete with only 14 kids. Promote your game at the youth level and keep the numbers up if you can.

I hate to say I called it, well I don't hate to say it.

Both games tonight were really well played and all 4 teams would be worthy state tournament participants. I thought Stillwater actually outplayed Roseville most of the game but the Raiders eeked out a 2-1 victory.

My HM team rode their horse to a hat trick on the night and HM outlasted White Bear Lake 4-3 to earn another section final with Roseville. Hill was up 2-0 after the first period and thoroughly outplayed WBL. WBL was much better in the 2nd and carried the play scoring 2 goals and missing on 2 other clean breakaways that were saves for McKeever. WBL scrummed in a goal a minute into the 3rd to take a 3-2 lead and things looked grim for Hill. Hill answered a minute later with Hannah Brandt finishing off her hat trick to tie it and Hill's second line provided the winning goal halfway through the period. HM killed off a 2 man (err person) powerplay the final 2 minutes of the game to hold on.

Should be a barn-burner Friday, but I'm not optimistic. I think Hill has only beaten Roseville once ever in a 1-0 game where they were outshot something like 46-7. The one positive is Hannah Brandt looked like the best player on the ice for all 4 teams tonight.

Congrats to Roseville and Hill Murray…well deserved hard fought victories. Either team will represent the Section well.

In the Hill, WBL game Mckeever once again came up big for the Pioneers (she has made a habit of doing so against the Bears). That was the deference in my opinion. Seasoned, confident veteran vs. the promising yet untested freshman. Experience ruled out…as it usually does.

Good Luck to both teams...should be fun

Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

I do have to bring up the "elephant in the room" if you will.

WBL's #34's penalty w/ about 7 seconds left was nothing more than an intent to injure one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

For me it tarnished a well played game on both sides.

Homer wrote:Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

I do have to bring up the "elephant in the room" if you will.

WBL's #34's penalty w/ about 7 seconds left was nothing more than an intent to injure one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

For me it tarnished a well played game on both sides.

Well it was certainly a frustration penalty and was an obvious call. But I wouldn't designate it as overly malicious. It was a cross check in the back near the boards, so that's never good. McKeever was the difference with some huge saves on uncontested breakaways in the 2nd. The game could have gotten out of hand for HM then...

Homer wrote:Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

I do have to bring up the "elephant in the room" if you will.

WBL's #34's penalty w/ about 7 seconds left was nothing more than an intent to injure one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

For me it tarnished a well played game on both sides.

What the heck.....I thought she had a season ending ACL injury. I made my point leading picks with faulty information!!!!!!

Silent But Deadly wrote:What the heck.....I thought she had a season ending ACL injury. I made my point leading picks with faulty information!!!!!!

Obviously the attempt to throw you off your game didn't work!

I also remember #34 suffering the ACL injury that was supposed to end her season. Assuming it's the same #34, how was she able to play and wouldn't that just make it worse?

Sparlimb wrote:It was a cross check in the back near the boards, so that's never good.

I go to a lot of D1 mens games and the penalty for what you describe happened here is almost always a 5 minute major plus a game disqualification. It is then subject to further video review by the league, and depending on the severity it can result in an additional suspension. There is good reason why the penalties for these infractions are so severe. I wish high school refs (for both boys and girls hockey) were as diligent in calling these as opposed to just a two minute minor.

Ah, yes - apparently #34 overcame both a season-ending injury and being terrorized to play the game last night. Talk about leaving a bad taste in everyone's mouth...

Sparlimb wrote:

Homer wrote:Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

I do have to bring up the "elephant in the room" if you will.

WBL's #34's penalty w/ about 7 seconds left was nothing more than an intent to injure one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

For me it tarnished a well played game on both sides.

Well it was certainly a frustration penalty and was an obvious call. But I wouldn't designate it as overly malicious.

It was a cross check in the back near the boards, so that's never good. McKeever was the difference with some huge saves on uncontested breakaways in the 2nd. The game could have gotten out of hand for HM then...

Are you kidding me? I think everyone there could see it coming as they approached the boards. I assume Hannah knew it to and protected herself. Call it frustration, whatever, but she was trying to injure her. I would like to think, if it wasn't at the end of her last H.S. game she would have gotten a more severe penalty. Not to mention it was the second time she took a run at her.

Homer wrote:

Sparlimb wrote:

Homer wrote:Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

I do have to bring up the "elephant in the room" if you will.

WBL's #34's penalty w/ about 7 seconds left was nothing more than an intent to injure one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

For me it tarnished a well played game on both sides.

Well it was certainly a frustration penalty and was an obvious call. But I wouldn't designate it as overly malicious.

It was a cross check in the back near the boards, so that's never good. McKeever was the difference with some huge saves on uncontested breakaways in the 2nd. The game could have gotten out of hand for HM then...

Are you kidding me? I think everyone there could see it coming as they approached the boards. I assume Hannah knew it to and protected herself. Call it frustration, whatever, but she was trying to injure her. I would like to think, if it wasn't at the end of her last H.S. game she would have gotten a more severe penalty. Not to mention it was the second time she took a run at her.

I stood up and yelled too. I just didn't see it as malicious as some hits I've seen in hockey before, but I suppose this is ladies. Game is over, Hill won and no one is hurt. The Hill girls better forget about it and concentrate on Roseville who they have such a hard time beating. I'll be there this year, so maybe that will be good luck.

I guess i feel somewhat vindicated for my previous comment that a zebra doesn't really ever change their stripes. i took some heat regarding this comment about #34 at the time. I was not at the game last night, but from what i am hearing, it sounds like she never really changed at all, in fact, if the penalty was taken with just a few seconds left in the game, as was reported, then she appropriately enough ended her HS career in the penalty box.....hmmmm anyone surprised?

Sparlimb wrote:

Homer wrote:Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

I do have to bring up the "elephant in the room" if you will.

WBL's #34's penalty w/ about 7 seconds left was nothing more than an intent to injure one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

For me it tarnished a well played game on both sides.

Well it was certainly a frustration penalty and was an obvious call. But I wouldn't designate it as overly malicious. It was a cross check in the back near the boards, so that's never good. McKeever was the difference with some huge saves on uncontested breakaways in the 2nd. The game could have gotten out of hand for HM then...

I would have to say McKeever and of course HANNAH BRANDT with 3 goals were the difference.

Homer wrote:Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

..........one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

In my opinion, history will prove Hannah Brandt to be the best female hockey player to ever come out of Minnesota and one of the best in the country and the world as well. And to think that she is not done with her development yet. Wow!

iceage wrote:

Homer wrote:Congrats to Roseville and HM. Both earned the right to advance to the finals. A couple of great games at Aldrich.

..........one of the best young women's hockey player in the world.

In my opinion, history will prove Hannah Brandt to be the best female hockey player to ever come out of Minnesota and one of the best in the country and the world as well. And to think that she is not done with her development yet. Wow!

I had a daughter who played for Irondale (graduated last year) and I'd say Brandt is very comparable to Meghan Lorence of Irondale. I saw a lot of similarities in their game and ability to take over the game. Best player to come out of MN is pretty heady. I'm not sure either is Darwitz or Wendell though. Time will tell...