ECAC Preseason Coaches/Media Polls

[Trotsky]

And unlike most deities, the Woofing Gods are empirically demonstrable.  And violently Old Testament.  They also have a strong sense of irony.

[Hillel Hoffmann]

I've always thought of evocation of the woofing gods as an etiquette tool. It's the nicest possible way to say: "Shut the F up -- your overconfidence embarrasses me, and [coach or player on your favorite team] would whup you upside the head if he heard you doing it."

[Steve Rockey]

Here is my take on the Preseason Coaches Poll

1. Cornell (11) 121
A no brainer.  Returns great goaltending and defense and Moulson.  We need to improve offensive output even though we were 3rd highest scoring team in ECAC league play.  This is possible with a large senior class now diminished by the loss of Hynes.   There is a deep roster with a talented crew of incoming freshman that should contribute. This could be a very good year.  

2. Dartmouth (1) 94
Sounds reasonable.  They return a lot and they can score goals--tops in league play 74 goals compared to Cornell's 70.  They graduated Stempniak (top scorer), the goalie, a starting defenseman, and two checking line wings.  Plus Jessiman who would have been a senior turned pro.  Looks to me like another very talented recruiting class.  If the promising freshman goalie (league all star in juniors) or a returning goalie comes through they could be very good.  They do need to significantly improve defensively with 49 goals allowed last year compared to Cornell's 26 and their coach has not show the knack for defense like he has for offense.  This team could be impressive if the defense and goaltending are adequate.
 
3.  Harvard 93
Hard to say but may be overrated here.  Lost a lot but returns much of the scoring although the graduation of Cavanagh may be hard to replace.  Like Cornell they also need to score more goals.  Still has a solid core of 4 excellent defenders but the #5 & #6 players will be a question mark--the returning players with almost no game experience and recruits do not look as good as what Cornell will have in the 5-8 slots.  With the graduation of Grumet-Morris and the failure to recruit a new goalie, goaltending will be weaker relying on returning players with little game experience but who were good recruits when they came in.  I think the talent level of the team has been declining for 3 recruiting cycles.  The recruits they are getting are obviously much better that what Union is getting but not as good as they used to get or what Dartmouth is getting.  I do not think they will be as good as last year.

4. St. Lawrence 89
Seems high to me.  Last years team finished 7th in the league with a sub .500 record and was not a young team only 5 Fr. or So. getting significant ice time.  In contrast to a very young Brown team I wonder about how much they will improve.  Goaltending is a big question mark with a graduation loss of the goalie who played almost every minute.  With no recruit and they will rely on two not very highly heralded sophomores with little game experience.  Return most of the team and have several recruits that look like solid starters.  Offense was respectable with 70 goals scored in league play.  Need to improve significantly on defense where 3 starters and a NHL draft pick goalie are gone.  They allowed 73 goals against in league play.  They have 4 freshman defenders coming in -- a lot rides on them being better than the departed seniors.  Then again with 73 goals allowed it could very well be team defense not the play of the defensemen.  

5. Colgate 86
I guess I expect them in the top 5.  Goaltending will be weaker due to graduation. They loose 3 starters from defense.  Large senior class is gone but much of the scoring returns.  They need to significantly increase their scoring only 55 goals in league play compared to Cornell's 70.  Recruits look good to me and they are bringing in 5 frosh defenders.  Could be ok if defense is good enough and returning goalie (they did not get a recruit) with little game experience is adequate.  The loss of so many seniors and the goalie could easily put them lower.

6. Brown 80
I think this is too low -- they should be in the top 5.  They were a very young team with 7 of the top 9 scorers Fr. or So.  They need to significantly increase their goal scoring since they scored 54 goals one less than Colgate.  They have very good goaltending with a very high save % but they allowed 60 goals in league play.  They clearly need to improve their defensive play and their coach has a history of producing good defensive teams.  They have a couple recruits that seem very promising.  Unlike Harvard they have been increasing the talent level of the team for the last 3 recruiting cycles.  They should be better than last year.  Maybe a lot better.

7. Clarkson  64
Who knows.  Lost 3 off the top 4 scorers but most of the defense returns.  They need to significantly improve offensively and defensively (44 scored and 66 allowed in league play).  This will be a young team with only 3 seniors.  Starting goaltender thrown off the team and they do not have a goalie coming in--the returning goalies may be ok but will not carry the team.  Clarkson has some serious talent on the roster but does not play well or consistently as a team.  They have another very good recruiting class with 3 NHL draft picks to bring the total to 9 NHL draft picks on the roster.  Hard to say if they will be better or worse based on last years bad play and the goaltending question.  Perhaps the departure of the seniors and the goalie (they were left over from the old coach) might actually help the team chemistry.

8. Union 51
They were 8th last year and could finish the same.  They did not loose much.  They return good goaltending (top returner .912 save %).  However, they allowed 72 goals in league play so the defensive play is lacking.  Need a significant offensive improvement having scored only 43.  Recruits do not look like they will score a lot right away so they need the returning players to increase their output.  I think the new coach has been incrementally increasing the talent level of the team for a couple of cycles.  Should be slightly improved but I am not sure this will translate into a higher finish.

9. Rensselaer 39
Seems optimistic to me.  It think RPI has sort of lost their way and is not recruiting the level of talent they used to get.  They return a lot and that could make them better although their leading scorer is being treated for testicular cancer and may or may not be able to play. They return one goalie who is not as good as Princeton's--.888 versus .908-- and the recruit they added does not excite me.  They have fundamental problems on offense and defense and I do not see them on a path to improve.

10. Princeton 32
I would pick them higher.  The new coach turned the team around and they played much better hockey last year.  They have minimal graduation losses but have major defensive problems having allowed 81 goals in league play.   OK goaltending returns and they add a recruit.  Offensively they produced 59 goals that is sort of respectable.  They are bringing in 10 players that will improve the skill level of the team and one player who scored 98 points in the AJHL last year that should have some offensive talents.  They should be improved.  

11. Yale 28
I would pick them higher.   They were a very young team last year and have essentially zero graduation losses.   I think they had a few very talented players on the roster last year.  They have 2 NHL draft picks in their freshman class and 4 other freshmen who were Central Scouting Service rated.   This is a hell of a freshman class--that would have been Harvard's freshman class in years past.   Defense was appallingly bad with 89 allowed and goaltending (which all returns) weak.  They bring a prep school CSS rated goalie who should become the starter and improve on the goaltending.  How did Harvard miss this kid to replace Grumet-Morris?   A  year older and more good players should make them better.  Maybe a lot better.
 
12.  Quinnipiac 15  
Hard to say.  They loose 3 of their top 5 scorers but strangely enough 4 of their top 8 scorers were freshmen.  Graduated a very good senior goalie but return a junior with .907 save % in 8 appearances.   They are bringing in two freshmen goalies.  Outside their league they played 5-7-1 and overall they were 21-13-3.   It is hard to gauge their offensive or defensive potential because of the level of play in league games but the numbers look ok.  They are bringing in 11 recruits even though they are only graduating 7 starters.  At least 3 of the recruits have offensive stats that look pretty impressive to me and they are descent sized.  It looks to me like they got better recruits than RPI and Union.  They may be building up a good talent base.  My guess is that they will be hungry and competitive and not finish last.

[KeithK]

[q]12. Quinnipiac 15
Hard to say. They loose 3 of their top 5 scorers but strangely enough 4 of their top 8 scorers were freshmen. Graduated a very good senior goalie but return a junior with .907 save % in 8 appearances. They are bringing in two freshmen goalies. Outside their league they played 5-7-1 and overall they were 21-13-3. It is hard to gauge their offensive or defensive potential because of the level of play in league games but the numbers look ok. They are bringing in 11 recruits even though they are only graduating 7 starters. At least 3 of the recruits have offensive stats that look pretty impressive to me and they are descent sized. It looks to me like they got better recruits than RPI and Union. They may be building up a good talent base. My guess is that they will be hungry and competitive and not finish last. [/q]I'm not surprised that Q is bringing in a large class or that a lot of their best scorers last year were freshman.  The team will probably be able to get better talent now that they are playing in the ECAC rather than AH/MAAC.  Makes sense for them to try to bring in a lot of guys who are hopefully of a higher skill level in orde to improve their team.  As for last year's freshmen, I can't remember when the ECAC decision admitting Q was made, but I think it was early enough that it might have helped their recruiting for the class of '08.  At the very least you know that their coach used the prospect of ECAC admittance in his appeals to recruits.

Quinnipiac is also increasing their number of scholarships from the AH limit to the NCAA limit.  I don't know how quickly they are getting to higher level, but this could be more of a reason than the "ECAC appeal" cited above.

[Drew]

[Q]Steve Rockey Wrote:
.

7. Clarkson  64
Who knows.  Lost 3 off the top 4 scorers but most of the defense returns.  They need to significantly improve offensively and defensively (44 scored and 66 allowed in league play).  This will be a young team with only 3 seniors.  Starting goaltender thrown off the team and they do not have a goalie coming in--the returning goalies may be ok but will not carry the team.  Clarkson has some serious talent on the roster but does not play well or consistently as a team.  They have another very good recruiting class with 3 NHL draft picks to bring the total to 9 NHL draft picks on the roster.  Hard to say if they will be better or worse based on last years bad play and the goaltending question.  Perhaps the departure of the seniors and the goalie (they were left over from the old coach) might actually help the team chemistry.

[/q]

Pretty good assessment, no argument from me.  The talent is there and it is young....   I still think we are a year or two away.

[Josh '99]

[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:
St. Lawrence will also be tough.[/q]Everyone has been saying that about St. Lawrence every year since they won those two titles back-to-back.  Since then they've finished 9th, 9th, 10th, and 7th.  In my book they've moved into "I'll believe it when I see it" territory.  They're a long way removed from those two championship teams.

[ugarte]

[Q]Trotsky Wrote: And unlike most deities, the Woofing Gods are empirically demonstrable.  And violently Old Testament.  They also have a strong sense of irony.[/q]If this is true, can someone explain the success of the Gophers?

[Hillel Hoffmann]

[Q]ugarte Wrote:

 [Q2]Trotsky Wrote: And unlike most deities, the Woofing Gods are empirically demonstrable.  And violently Old Testament.  They also have a strong sense of irony.[/Q]
If this is true, can someone explain the success of the Gophers?[/q]
The Woofing Gods have a hard time understanding a strong Great Lakes accent, an adaptive trait that may account for Minnesota's many championships, the Red Wings recent Stanley Cups, and the sporadic success of the Green Bay Packers.

[French Rage]

[Q]Hillel Hoffmann Wrote:

 [Q2]ugarte Wrote:

 [Q2]Trotsky Wrote: And unlike most deities, the Woofing Gods are empirically demonstrable.  And violently Old Testament.  They also have a strong sense of irony.[/Q]
If this is true, can someone explain the success of the Gophers?[/Q]
The Woofing Gods have a hard time understanding a strong Great Lakes accent, an adaptive trait that may account for Minnesota's many championships, the Red Wings recent Stanley Cups, and the sporadic success of the Green Bay Packers.
[/q]

Plus when you live in shitholes like that God has to give you something.