Arlan: Hey Nicole! I hope you survived the weather over the weekend, including the rain, thunderstorms, ice, and snow that hit the Twin Cities during the WCHA Final Faceoff. Better that than the fatal tornados that hit Iowa, I guess.
Anyway, there’s plenty to discuss. Let’s start with a mention of the final NEWHA Championship that will not result in an NCAA Tournament bid.
Congratulations to Franklin Pierce, and congrats to Grant Salzano, our guest from last week, who correctly predicted they would be the winner! The Ravens entered the tournament’s semifinals as the only one of the four remaining teams without a NEWHA playoff crown to its credit. That’s no longer true, as Suzette Faucher earned tournament Most Outstanding Player honors by shutting out first Sacred Heart and then Saint Anselm. Statistically, Faucher finishes the season as the hardest goalie to score against in the country. About the only thing that she couldn’t do for the Ravens was score, but when Ava Kison netted the final’s only goal on a power play, she made sure it held up for a 1-0 victory over the Hawks.
When RIT accomplished something similar in 2014, the final year that the CHA didn’t own an automatic bid, the Tigers turned it into a practice run, going back to back in a worst-to-first win in 2015. Do you think Faucher can backstop the Ravens to a repeat run in 2023, like Ali Binnington did at RIT? Or how do you see the contenders in our newest league lining up as it enters its NCAA Tournament era?
Nicole: I love that we’ve seen a bunch of different teams take the top spot since NEWHA formed. It’s great for the league and for the universities’ recruiting, which will help build the league’s profile.
I like the rate of growth we’ve seen from all the NEWHA teams. They have wins over D1 opponents and feel like this could be a good transition. My concern is that despite the years that have passed since the CHA formed, the winner makes it to the NCAA tournament as the bottom seed and is promptly dispatched by the top seed. The expanded field might change that for them, but it does make me worry about what gap might exist between the rest of the NCAA field and the NEWHA auto bid winner.
But I’ll save that worry for another day. Stonehill hits the ice next year and NEWHA will have six teams. Expansion is great for the sport and I’m going to choose to look at the positives instead of worrying about possible negatives, as is usually my wont.
I do think it will be interesting to see how other teams add NEWHA squads to their schedule now that they’ve reached full, tournament-eligible status.
Arlan: Elsewhere in the conference tourneys, we saw a lot of come-from-behind wins, including a fair amount of overtime. Syracuse needed the latter, but not the former, in order to vanquish Mercyhurst and reach its second NCAA Tournament. The Orange were up a couple of goals at the midway point before the Lakers stormed back. Undaunted, Sarah Thompson won it for Syracuse 7:32 into the extra session.
Northeastern was another top-seeded host whose seeding held up. Connecticut had a strong showing in the Hockey East Tournament, taking down Boston University and Vermont by identical 3-1 scores to set up an all-Huskies final. UConn scored first but came out on the wrong end of another 3-1 verdict, when Alina Müller scored goals that bracketed either side of the second intermission to give Northeastern its fifth straight Hockey East Tournament Championship.
I watched a lot of the Hockey East Tournament this year, but not a lot of deep analysis is needed. Maine put up a good fight, but it really couldn’t skate with Northeastern; the game was a matter of time. UConn played very well versus both the Terriers and Catamounts, making the key plays in both games and winning with some degree of comfort. Whatever advantage UConn enjoyed in the first two rounds was reversed in the final; had it been playing the version of Northeastern that didn’t include Müller, maybe Connecticut finds a way to come out on top. Müller was there; her team won.
What stood out to you in those tournaments?
Nicole: Connecticut has felt on the edge of breaking out the past few seasons – this was their third Hockey East title game loss in the past five years. They are a team that is particularly good in the postseason and elimination games regardless of how the regular season went. In 2020, they played for the title as the 5th seed. In 2018, they were the 7th seed. Thanks to those performances, I had high hopes for their chances in this year’s final and the longer Northeastern went without scoring, the higher I thought Connecticut’s odds were.
Müller had three assists in each of her first two games back, but hadn’t scored. It was only a matter of time and I think it’s clear she’s not experiencing any lag in getting back into the college game after being away for a month at the Olympics. Connecticut’s chances were pretty much erased when she scored twice in a matter of seconds in game play to close the third and open the fourth.
I was really taken in by Vermont’s accomplishments and enthusiasm this season. I was pretty surprised how easily Connecticut handled them in the semifinal. UConn is kind of the under the radar team this season – Northeastern was the presumptive winner, Vermont was the surprise story, but Connecticut went 23-8-4 and really kind of cruised into the tournament title game. I hope this was a tide change for the Catamounts and not just a great single season.
I can’t decide how I feel about the CHA finishing their tournament a week before everyone else. When they’ve had six teams, they’ll play an extra week of regular season before completing their whole tournament in one week. This year they crowned a champion while everyone else was playing quarterfinal series and Syracuse has had a week off before the NCAAs start.
There’s probably a good argument to be had about whether that week off can hurt or harm their chances, but I guess we’ll wait and see how the Orange look in their opening round game and draw our conclusions from there.
I hope they spent their week watching tape and talking about protecting a lead. They’ve been able to mount comebacks against CHA opponents, but don’t think they’ll have that luxury against Quinnipiac.
As for the tournament, everything just felt a little off this season in the CHA. I’d assume it has at least something to do with the Robert Morris saga, but there didn’t seem to be as much competition and fire as we’ve seen. That race and tournament have been so fun the past couple of seasons because the title has been up for grabs and come down to the wire. I felt like we were missing that feeling this season.
Arlan: You’ve made no secret of your fondness for chaos; I imagine that you took some pleasure from the ECAC Tournament? That started in the quarterfinal round, where both of the top two seeds were extended to a third game, and No. 1 Harvard didn’t survive the extension, falling to Princeton. Yale, by virtue of taking the rubber game from St. Lawrence, earned the right to host the last two rounds. The Bulldogs fell into an early hole to the Tigers, but reversed the score in the second frame and advanced.
On the other side of the bracket, Colgate and Quinnipiac played a classic semifinal. The Raiders twice fought back from deficits before Allyson Simpson tallied the deciding goal with under four minutes in regulation. Colgate played from behind in the final versus Yale as well, waiting until the final stanza to answer an early Bulldogs goal. Nearly five minutes into OT, Simpson assisted Kalty Kaltounkova in being the day’s heroine. The 2-1 victory gave Colgate its second consecutive ECAC Championship, although this one capped a campaign that included a full field, as opposed to 2021’s four-team schedule.
In our last column, I chose Harvard as my likely winner of this tournament. So much for that. Readers, when you get deeper into this column and I start to prognosticate regarding how the NCAA Tournament will unfold, remember that I’m the guy who picked the host that didn’t make it out of the quarters.
Enough about me – what did you think of the ECAC results?
Nicole: Well, I’m not sure I’m any better in the predictions department. I was pulling for Yale and Vermont’s historic seasons and I’m so excited to see more teams be competitive at the end of the season. And in my column last week opined that I thought Minnesota Duluth would give the Gophers a run for their money. So basically we’re not very good at this.
But I loved those quarterfinal series. Obviously Princeton was a bit of an upstart as the 8th seed, but they were also much better than your typical eight seed and those series all showed how close this conference was all year.
Maybe it’s because I am used to how things are done in the WCHA, but I’ve always thought one of the down sides of the 12-team ECAC is that teams only play two games against each other. I feel like I get a much better idea of how WCHA teams stack up against each other than I do for ECAC teams. Sweeping an opponent on the season doesn’t necessarily tell me anything in the ECAC, just as a split series doesn’t mean games between the teams are toss-ups. That’s why the ECAC tournament is so interesting to me – I get more data to think about in terms of how the teams are playing and how they compare to one another.
I was more surprised by St. Lawrence taking Yale to the wire than I was Princeton upsetting Harvard, I think. The Saints ended the season at .500 and closed out the regular season with three losses and two ties. They took two wins off Quinnipiac in early February just before that, but those next five games made that feel like a bit of a fluke. Of course, Lucy Morgan is one of the best in the country in net and really gave them such a solid base to build out from.
I was also a little surprised by Colgate’s comeback win, if only because the Raiders had started the season with such a splash and had sort of faded back into the pack a bit. I knew they were still a good team, but they’d played some close games and I wasn’t sure if they were going to have what it took to gut out the early part of the playoffs.
Kalty Kaltounkova is one of my favorite individual players in the country. I just like her style of play. I like how I’ve seen her develop a smarter game and how to use her body to her advantage. Czechia didn’t have her on their Olympic roster this year and I was really surprised. She’s a player that I think has really blossomed in Colgate’s “We Play Free” philosophy.
A player that doesn’t get mentioned often is transfer Dara Grieg. She wasn’t getting much playing time and went to Hamilton to join the Raiders and immediately showed why the Badgers recruited her in the first place. She’s third on the team in scoring and scored the only goal in their 1-0, OT win in the quarterfinals. She doesn’t draw the attention of the defense in the same way her linemates do and she’s as good at dishing the puck as she is shooting it herself.
I’ll admit I was rooting for Yale to earn their first ever conference tournament title, but as I’ve said before, I don’t think this is the last we’ll hear from the Bulldogs in conference play. It feels like the program has been built up to be a contender year in and year out.
Arlan: Ever since the days when people like David DeRemer quit writing for USCHO and we have lacked writers from the East on the women’s side, we get complaints from readers that we devote more coverage to the WCHA. I shouldn’t speak for you, but I think the reason for this is obvious. We both live in the Midwest, and regularly watch and attend WCHA games.
However, I’ll keep my WCHA Tournament comments respectfully brief. Minnesota-Duluth didn’t seem to have the jump after playing three games to get past Minnesota State-Mankato the weekend before, and lost many races to the puck in falling to Minnesota. Wisconsin had the better of play for much of its game with Ohio State, but the Buckeyes were able to accomplish more during the several-minute stretch of the second period that they dominated. In the final, the Gophers survived a shaky first period to take a two-goal lead after 40 minutes, but couldn’t hold that lead when the Buckeyes pushed back. Maybe Minnesota was able to get a puck into OSU’s net via a third-period powerplay, but there was no video evidence of it. What was certain was Sophie Jaques second-straight goal giving the Buckeyes the title just seconds into overtime.
What did I miss by not observing that tournament in person?
Nicole: Right. I’m a born and raised Wisconsinite and I fell in love with college hockey while watching the 2006 Wisconsin men’s and women’s teams both win the National Championship that year. In a lot of ways, it’s impossible to extricate that from my career covering women’s college hockey. Being a sportswriter is tough and the season can be grueling even on this end. I’m of the firm belief you have to be a fan – you have to love the sport – to cover it. Otherwise it’s a miserable experience.
When I first started this gig, I thought it was important to be at games in person every weekend, but I’ve found a mix of traveling to Madison to see teams and staying home to watch streams seems to be the best way to go about it. I’m set up to have up to three streams going at once – I usually have a primary one I’m paying attention to and have the other two muted so I can check in and possibly switch between if they become more interesting than the one I initially picked.
I both fully understand someone being annoyed that I only attend games in the midwest and also want to make it clear that I do a lot to watch as many games as I can.
The unfortunate state of things is that not all streams are a great way to watch games. It’s not easy to analyze players or teams through netting and glass and a single side-view camera. That means I generally have better knowledge of the teams I actually see in person, which again are almost all WCHA teams. Covid made everything, including scheduling interviews, difficult. I’ve definitely done fewer columns and interviews the past two years than I have in years past and hope to get back to having more of that micro, personalized coverage next season instead of the more big picture stuff I’ve been doing this year.
I suppose that’s a really long winded defense, but I hope that teams and fans know that I’m constantly thinking of ways to expand my coverage and watch more games. I make a conscious and concerted effort to fight against my own natural biases and tendencies and to make sure I’m covering everyone as equally as possible. That being said, I live here and covering women’s hockey isn’t a high-paying gig. Other than the Frozen Four, if I can’t drive to watch the game, I’m just not going to be able to attend in person. I’d love to be able to do more and attend more games, but unless I get a wealthy benefactor or win the lottery, I’m going to keep attending games in Madison, occasionally driving to Minneapolis, sometimes making it to Columbus and watching a whole lot of streaming hockey.
To actually answer your question, I’m not sure a stream properly conveyed just how good Minnesota looked in their semifinal. As you mentioned, UMD looked a little worn out, but I’m not sure any team would have looked good in comparison to the Gophers. It was a start to finish top-tier and complete game from them. I saw some of what the relentless Minnesota forecheck can do when they were in Madison back in January, but this was even more smothering. UMD could not do anything without a Gopher in their face, forcing them to make quick decisions. It was just really impressive and one of the best team performances I’ve seen.
What Ohio State did well (and the Gophers, too, to some extent) that might not always be obvious on the stream was create and find open space. Both of Sophie Jaques’ goals were scored with her unmarked in the slot. It’s not as though the Gophers didn’t have plans to keep her very, very marked. Both teams were very good at drawing in defenders and then getting the puck to the open player. She found open space, but that space was there because a teammate was monopolizing the defense’s attention. Minnesota did it on Abigail Boreen’s goal – Ohio State committed to covering Taylor Heise on the breakaway, giving Boreen a clear shot on net.
Arlan: I confess that I had no idea of what to expect in the way of NCAA Tournament brackets. We all understood where the PairWise had the teams ranked, thanks to Grant’s excellent work with his predictive tools, but just how the selection committee would sort through considerations of intraconference matchups and reducing airplane flights was a bit of an unknown.
Overall, the committee did a good job, in my opinion. It would be nice if there had been some way to avoid the reprise of the ECAC final matching Yale and Colgate, with the latter earning the role of host this time, but as the fifth and fourth seeds, they were destined for that Hamilton Regional, the only one with only two teams.
The situation is reminiscent of 2016 when Quinnipiac took the ECAC Championship over Clarkson by a 1-0 decision, but six days later the Golden Knights scored the only goal 10 seconds into their NCAA quarterfinal. I realize that there have been many examples like this over the years, and the conference winner has likely won at least as many as it has lost in the rematch, but that one always sticks out to me because the deciding goal came so early. One of the oft-used cliches in sport is that one team supposedly “wants it more.” For the most part, I don’t buy that, but I can see that especially in the opening minutes, the losing team in a recent meeting might feel just a bit more motivation.
Colgate had a devil of a time scoring on Yale and Gianna Meloni this season, as the Raiders endured eight periods without any positive reinforcement, better known as goals, before finally breaking through. What do you expect the storyline to be in the teams’ fourth meeting? Will it be about Meloni continuing her mastery of Colgate? Yale stepping onto the national stage for the first time? Or the Raiders trying to start a tournament run similar to the one they made in the previous Olympic year?
Nicole: I definitely think Yale is going to be smarting from the come-from-behind, overtime loss in the ECAC final. It has to feel like they really let that one slip through their fingers and I assume that will be a motivating factor. The Bulldogs have created a whole new set of standards in New Haven and I think they really want to have something to show for it. They lost the regular season crown in the final weekend of the regular season and then didn’t take the tournament, either. It has to be weighing on their minds that “NCAA tournament bid” isn’t how they want to look back and define this season.
Colgate’s experience played a big role in the championship game, I think. There’s something to be said for having been there before and knowing how to handle the stress and emotions of playing in such an important game. Yale failed to play a full 60 minutes in that game, which led to overtime. Maybe they were feeling secure in Colgate’s lack of scoring prowess against them, but I think by the time the Elis realized they had a fight on their hands, Colgate had built all the momentum and passed them by.
Absolutely Yale needs a big goaltending performance. They need to stay out of the penalty box and not give the Raiders any additional opportunities. Where Colgate excels is being creative with the puck and reacting to what a team puts in front of them. As a new program with a newer coach who didn’t play last season, I’m not sure the Bulldogs have the confident self-awareness to be reactive in the same way.
Arlan: The most compelling regional looks to be the one that will play out in Boston. It offers a first-round pairing of Clarkson and Wisconsin, teams that met in the title game in 2017 and collided in a semifinal two years later. Each triumphed once, with that win leading directly and indirectly, respectively, to a national championship. The two programs have split the last four crowns, but may be heading in slightly different directions.
Clarkson missed out on the tournament in 2020-21, in what was a strange year everywhere, and in the ECAC in particular. There, competition was reduced to four teams and a schedule that included a marathon series pairing Clarkson with Colgate. The Golden Knights are back in the event this year, but only because the bracket expanded to 11 teams and the NEWHA did not yet have an autobid. Next year, their conference looks to be ultracompetitive once more, as teams below return players away during the Olympic year. Clarkson can’t take it for granted that they’ll be back next year, so it could give extra urgency to this tournament, particularly after being reduced to a spectator for the ECAC semifinals.
Wisconsin is also in the unfamiliar role of a visitor for regional competition, instead of opening in the familiar confines of LaBahn Arena. Except for last year when the entire tournament was played in Erie. Or the year before, when the tournament wasn’t played at all. In any case, the Badgers didn’t earn one of the top four seeds for the first time since 2013. Why not? One reason is that they shared a league with the top two seeds. Their roster was also thinned by Olympic year departures that left them especially susceptible to injuries. That minutes of zone time and barrages of shots don’t always result in goals is a problem not limited to this particular team or Wisconsin as a whole. The larger issue is that the back end has been more vulnerable than it usually is, increasing the cause for concern if the offense sputters.
Even if this is a down year for the Golden Knights and Badgers, one of these squads will advance to face Northeastern. If it is Wisconsin, that regional final will be a rematch of last season’s NCAA Championship. Clarkson has already played 13 games (4-8-1) versus the tournament field. The Badgers played 15 games versus tournament teams (6-7-2). Neither has been particularly hot of late: Wisconsin won just once in its last eight games versus the field; Clarkson lost its final six contests against the teams that are still playing.
Still, whichever team advances on Thursday will be on a one-game winning streak and have played at least 14 games against the tourney field. Northeastern has yet to play one. That’s hard to do with the expanded field. Syracuse also emerged from a circuit where it was the only team to advance, but it still played four non-conference games against tourney teams. The Huskies had some bad luck. Cornell and Princeton could have been expected to finish higher. Losing in the first round of the Beanpot meant they didn’t see Harvard. They’ve played a number of games against the next tier of teams like Cornell, Princeton, UConn, and Vermont, so it might not be an obstacle.
Over the years, we’ve questioned how well a number of Hockey East contenders were prepared by their conference schedule. Am I making too much of an issue of it this time? Can Northeastern’s obvious talent and home ice carry them through a game against a seemingly more battle-tested opponent?
Nicole: I feel like I’ve talked about this before and I don’t want to sound like I’m piling on the Huskies, but no, I don’t think you’re making too much of an issue. It’s a concern in theory, but it was also proven correct in last year’s tournament.
In the first round of team availability in Erie, the Huskies came off as unconcerned about facing Minnesota Duluth. Both coach Dave Flint and the players were dismissive of the idea that the semifinal would be different or more difficult than any other game they’d played that season.
Then the first period happened and UMD controlled the puck and the pace of play and outshot Northeastern 13-4. Flint looked shell shocked in his first period interview.
They managed to eke out an OT win there and they adjusted a bit, but were still trying to build plays out of the back and take time to make decisions as they were happening. If they come in with that mentality again, I’m not sure they will make it out of this regional. And even if they do, I think they’re going to be full on steamrolled if they have to face Minnesota or Ohio State, who are playing far faster than UMD did in that semifinal.
One has to imagine that they’re more prepared this time around, but I was shocked at how cavalier they were before that game last season, so I’m not sure the same overconfidence won’t still be an issue.
Clarkson had a truly dismal February and is in this tournament by the skin of their teeth and, I think, in part thanks to the relative weakness of Hockey East. It was at the start of the season, but as they’re taking on a WCHA team, I can’t help but go back to their tie and loss against Bemidji State as a reason I have a hard time picking them against the Badgers. I really like Caitrin Lonergan and I think her speed and using her in transition to catch the depleted Wisconsin defense out of position is probably the Golden Knight’s best chance at getting the win here.
If Wisconsin plays like they played against Ohio State last weekend, I like their chances all the way through this tournament. They showed some fight and flashes of the team that swept Ohio State early on and came back for a 5-1 win after losing to UMD in early February. The short turnaround and travel might affect them the most – they’ve had a depleted roster and have seemed to feel the strain of their missing and injured players as the season winds down.
The Badgers are at their best when they trust themselves and use the chemistry they’ve built to make quick decisions, read where their teammates will be and move the puck cleanly. In Columbus a few weeks ago, even the veterans were making the simple things complicated, taking too long to make decisions and turning over the puck without much provocation. The problem for Badger fans is worrying about which version of the team will show up for any given game. The team hasn’t always been great at putting all its potential pieces together and executing smoothly.
However, no offense to Northeastern, but if I’m Wisconsin, I’m looking at this bracket and thinking this is one of the better case scenarios for making the Frozen Four. That’s not to imply either game will be easy for them, but any route that doesn’t require playing Ohio State or Minnesota is an appealing one. Both are so smothering that it makes it difficult for opponents to play the game the way they’d like. Northeastern may very well still win their regional, but for a Badger team that’s been thin on defense and not always at the top of their game, the idea that they might be able to move the puck around the way they want to and not be forced into quick decisions is a definite confidence boost.
Arlan: If Wisconsin finds its bracket appealing because no other WCHA teams are in its quarter, Ohio State is the only WCHA team in the Buckeyes’ half of the bracket. How valuable is that? I don’t know if it matters beyond any other top-seeded team which figures to have an easier route, than say, a No. 3 seed. The OSU half also is devoid of Northeastern, who has been the top Eastern team for the last couple of years. We can claim it is an attractive bracket, but that will be of little consolation to Ohio State if Quinnipiac or Colgate or some other supposedly “desirable” opponent ends its season.
If Nadine Muzerall’s team does emerge on top, my thought is that it will be because she’s built a darn good hockey team. They definitely stuck with it last weekend, and kept plugging away when they fell behind each day to teams that have had success playing with a lead. Jaques showed everyone why she’s the favorite of many to win the Patty Kazmaier Award, and Amanda Thiele proved she’s more than some goalie who was filling in while Adrea Braendli went to the Olympics.
Should the seeds hold, Ohio State would be running into a Colgate team at the Frozen Four that doesn’t look that different from the Buckeyes. No, it doesn’t have a Jaques on the blue line, but it has a formidable one-two punch in Kaltounkova and Danielle Serdachny, who each have piled up 53 points. Plus, it has the depth to match lines, as they are just two of the 16 Raiders who have hit double digits in points. In Hannah Murphy, Colgate also has a less-experienced goaltender who has emerged as the starter.
Not saying it couldn’t also be true of some other pairing, but I think Ohio State and Colgate could make a riveting semifinal. What do you think?
Nicole: It puts me in mind of the 2018 semifinal between Wisconsin and Colgate, which I think was the Raiders’ coming out party, so to speak, on the national stage. These are obviously two different teams, but Greg Fargo commented after the 2018 win that he was excited for power plays because that was about the only time his team was able to move the puck on the ice. That the Raiders were able to win a game in which they were outshot 48-24 and couldn’t move the puck as much as they wanted is a good sign that they’d be ready to weather what Ohio State has to offer. Back in 2018, the Raiders won partly because of the play of their goalie, Julia Vandyk, so your comment about Murphy might prove to be prescient.
Ohio State definitely earned their right to that top spot and the less crowded side of the bracket. I was voting them above the Gophers for much of the second half, though it’s probably a coin flip between the two teams. I was really impressed with how they responded in the third period of the WCHA title game.
You mention Muzerall built a great team, and that’s absolutely true – they’re my pick to win it all. But I think most important is that she’s built a great program. Under her leadership, the program has become a regular national contender and that doesn’t seem like it will change after this year. In a relatively short time, she made the Buckeyes a perennial top program in the WCHA, which is no easy feat. Beyond their success on the ice, I am most impressed with the way I’ve seen players blossom while being a part of this program. There’s no arguing that Nadine’s methods work and her players respond to them – and her. I love seeing a loud, assertive and brash woman be successful and urge her young players to be unabashed in their confidence, desire to win and finding their voice.
Arlan: While I like what the top of the bracket has to offer, it’s no secret that the name recognition lives in the bottom half, which contains the four programs that have won all of the NCAA Tournaments contested to date. Even the two that have yet to hoist the trophy have reached the final, four times in Harvard’s case. Meanwhile, the five programs found in the top half of the draw have a total of one Frozen Four victory between them.
Of course, much of that is ancient history. It’s been a dozen years since UMD last won, and last year was the first time the Bulldogs even made it back to the Frozen Four. Harvard played in the final in 2015, but that was its only FF trip since 2009. Even Minnesota has won only one game at the Frozen Four since its last championship in 2016.
Those three squads find themselves in the same regional; can any of them win it all? I can easily see either the Crimson or Bulldogs winning two games. Winning four? That sounds like a long reach. Harvard got on a nice roll in January, but hasn’t been at the same level. UMD’s streaks of that length have come at the expense of primarily lesser teams.
How about the Gophers? They’re definitely a veteran group, with 10 seniors that play heavy minutes. I’ve always felt that to be successful at this time of year, you need your seniors to lead the way, playing at a championship level. On Saturday, the Gophers got that. Lauren Bench made big saves. The three seniors anchored the blue line. All five of their goals came from seniors. Sunday? When they needed 20 strong minutes to finish out a win over OSU, the senior leaders couldn’t maintain that caliber.
Brad Frost has talked about wanting his team to be more gritty. I think that they got what they needed from the depth players on the roster, but the top-line kids didn’t make the plays that they needed to make. Not score more goals, but make the little plays. Gritty plays. One let Sara Saekkinen get her stick free on the edge of the crease to start the comeback. Another made a soft attempt at a clear just inside her own blue line and the tying goal soon followed. Finally, another put the puck on Jaques tape in the slot instead of clearing it or pinning it in a safe area.
Yes, the Buckeyes made good plays in all three cases. Teams trying to win a tournament will do that. In order to win one yourself, you have to be able to prevent them from doing so with solid, gritty plays when needed.
So now that I’ve trashed those teams, who does win it all? I’d say Ohio State is about 35 percent probability to emerge as the champion. I don’t know if anyone else is more than a 20 percent favorite, and that’s being too generous. It might just be a bunch of teams that are around 10 to 15 percent favorites to get it done.
Do you have something sharper than my fuzzy numbers?
Nicole: The Buckeyes are so good at recognizing those breakdowns and exploiting them. They can be so patient and wait for the right window to strike and that’s just one of the reasons they’re my favorite to win. I’d probably put their percentage higher than you did. They certainly aren’t infallible and they’ve lost to both Wisconsin and Minnesota this season. But they did not panic in the third period of the WCHA championship game. They did not start to play out of character or abandon their plan. They just honed in on the areas they could exploit and then did so. They are playing their very best at the right time, riding a high of confidence and are absolutely sure they can and should win it all. I’m not sure any other team matches their combination of talent and swagger.
That point about the Gophers and grit in an interesting one. They are definitely trying to be more of a finesse team and that’s not always going to work for them. Their top line, particularly, has such a high hockey IQ and does such a great job of reading defenses that they’re often skating and passing right around people. That may have left them somewhat unprepared for when they are put in a more physical game where things get a lot less pretty and a lot more contested. Finesse isn’t always going to work, passes aren’t going to be complete and the ability to fight for a puck on the boards and come away with it cleanly is one of the most underrated parts of the women’s game.
One thing I’ll be keeping a close eye on is how teams adjust and adapt. Whether it’s line matchups, specific player matchups, faceoffs, a short bench or something else, one of the best parts of this time of the season is seeing how the coaches’ minds work in real time and what machinations they’re willing to try when it’s win and go home.
Regardless of the outcomes, we are in for four days of high-level, entertaining, skilled and fun hockey. I hope the Olympic year and the higher profile this year bring in more fans to see the high level of competition women’s college hockey has.
