North Dakota Preps

I see that DL lost 5-2.  Was anyone at the game or did anybody listen to it?  How did both teams look?

yah i was at the game and it looked like DL came out hitting and being aggressive right from the beginning and the game was a lot closer than the score appeals. Reasons because South had 1 empty netter 1 shot went off the glass into the air and onto the ice and DL's goalie wasnt in position and they put it in the net. But DL seemed very agressive and it looked like South didnt come out to play right away

Huh wonder why this post isn't filled with DL comments? Weird!! South wins 5-2. I could stop talking there, but there is no way to make 5-2 a TIGHT game. Sorry DL :(.  Outshot 42-21, that should be enough to tell the story of the game without even being there.  The DL goalie still must have had a very good game to keep it that close though.  Bye DL I am sure it will be a while before I read one of your dumb posts about having a shot in state!!!

i dont think you can judge a game by shots alone because the other day BHS played Hazen and out shot them 72-3 and only beat them 1-0 so you cant go by shots

Saucesauer by that comment are you trying to say Hazen should have won that game?  Csauce pointed out that the shots were 42-21 in favor of South after ndsubball said the game was closer than the 5-2 score.  I would have to say the score of the Bismarck-Hazen game was too close since Hazen mustered up 69 less shots than their opponent.

What i meant by my statement, just to clarify things is that the goalie from DL must have played a good game.. If there was an EN goal his SP was still close to 90%. I am just saying you can't expect a whole lot more from your goalie against a team with the offensive firepower of South.

Csauce123 wrote:What i meant by my statement, just to clarify things is that the goalie from DL must have played a good game.. If there was an EN goal his SP was still close to 90%. I am just saying you can't expect a whole lot more from your goalie against a team with the offensive firepower of South.

Yes, the DL goalie played a great game. only 2 of the 5 south goals were legit goals. one went of the glass behind the net and found its way back infront and into the net. another one was just a little wrister that deflected off of the goalies glove, which should have been an easy save, but just misplayed it, and it fell in. and of course there was the empty netter at the end. but it was a good game to watch, and yes, it was a CLOSE 5-2 game. take away those three goals, youve got yourself a 2-2 game, but lucky goals happen, and thats just how it goes.

DeuceTrey wrote:

Csauce123 wrote:What i meant by my statement, just to clarify things is that the goalie from DL must have played a good game.. If there was an EN goal his SP was still close to 90%. I am just saying you can't expect a whole lot more from your goalie against a team with the offensive firepower of South.

Yes, the DL goalie played a great game. only 2 of the 5 south goals were legit goals. one went of the glass behind the net and found its way back infront and into the net. another one was just a little wrister that deflected off of the goalies glove, which should have been an easy save, but just misplayed it, and it fell in. and of course there was the empty netter at the end. but it was a good game to watch, and yes, it was a CLOSE 5-2 game. take away those three goals, youve got yourself a 2-2 game, but lucky goals happen, and thats just how it goes.

How bout we just take away all 5 of South's goals so DL wins 2-0.  2-0 is a statement, everybody better watch out for powerhouse DL.

DrPepper1 wrote:

DeuceTrey wrote:

Csauce123 wrote:What i meant by my statement, just to clarify things is that the goalie from DL must have played a good game.. If there was an EN goal his SP was still close to 90%. I am just saying you can't expect a whole lot more from your goalie against a team with the offensive firepower of South.

Yes, the DL goalie played a great game. only 2 of the 5 south goals were legit goals. one went of the glass behind the net and found its way back infront and into the net. another one was just a little wrister that deflected off of the goalies glove, which should have been an easy save, but just misplayed it, and it fell in. and of course there was the empty netter at the end. but it was a good game to watch, and yes, it was a CLOSE 5-2 game. take away those three goals, youve got yourself a 2-2 game, but lucky goals happen, and thats just how it goes.

How bout we just take away all 5 of South's goals so DL wins 2-0.  2-0 is a statement, everybody better watch out for powerhouse DL.

im not trying to take anything away from anyone, unlike you and everyone else on this board who has a grudge against DL for no apparent reason. i was just trying to say that the game was closer than the score indicated, and i wasnt making excuses on why DL lost, i was explaining. south played a good game, and is a good team, but DL just had some bad luck that led to some lucky goals for south. thats all i was trying to say.

you have to realize people are so thick headed on this board that if their favorite team isnt the best and most dominating team they are going to try to bring everyone down when the funny thing is probly about 7/8 s of the people posting wouldnt make Souths jv team so they didnt do squat but they are going to take all the credit and if there is a team that even kind of played with them they are absolutly terriable and dont deserve to be on the same ice as them let alone IN THE STANDS THAT MOST OF THE POSTERS ARE SITTING IN.

WELL PUT SAUCESAUER! Don't hold it against the team because people that haver never put skates on are posting. DL is an OK team. South is an awesome bunch of individuals and if they ever decide to play as a team LOOK OUT.

i don't know if i can agree with dismissing someone's opinion just because they didn't play the sport. hating on a team is hating on a team...but someone's opinion is just that, regardless of how foolish/misinformed/stupid/etc it is.

i never played hockey (fat guy on skates....*shudder*) but i'm also pretty sure i can tell which teams are better than one another. its called just taking a step back and looking at what you are seeing. maybe i'm wrong, but if someone is putting their opinion out there, they shouldn't be crucified for it. of course, if they are saying something that is obviously intended to get a rise out of someone else...eh...go for it.

you get the word 'fan' from the word 'fanatics'. fanatics have no reason.

RazorsEdge wrote:WELL PUT SAUCESAUER! Don't hold it against the team because people that haver never put skates on are posting. DL is an OK team. South is an awesome bunch of individuals and if they ever decide to play as a team LOOK OUT.

I dont know if you can even call DL an ok team.  Everyone says how bad the west is and DL lost to Jamestown and barely beat minot in overtime by a penelty shot.

I don't get why everyone here is so heck bent on scores.. For example, if what you are saying is true, then is Grafton a bad team since they lost to North once this year as well?

big_tyme_hockey wrote:I don't get why everyone here is so heck bent on scores.. For example, if what you are saying is true, then is Grafton a bad team since they lost to North once this year as well?

at one point early in the season, yes, grafton looked like they were going to be terrible and north was going to be a competitor. but things change over the course of the season, as you can tell with both of those teams. the score of a game is a good indicator of how the game went, but sometimes it can be misleading.

ndfootball wrote:

RazorsEdge wrote:WELL PUT SAUCESAUER! Don't hold it against the team because people that haver never put skates on are posting. DL is an OK team. South is an awesome bunch of individuals and if they ever decide to play as a team LOOK OUT.

I dont know if you can even call DL an ok team.  Everyone says how bad the west is and DL lost to Jamestown and barely beat minot in overtime by a penelty shot.

If DL isnt even an ok team i want to know what you think the UND hockey program is this year because i am not thinking it is ok

DeuceTrey wrote:

DrPepper1 wrote:

DeuceTrey wrote:

Csauce123 wrote:What i meant by my statement, just to clarify things is that the goalie from DL must have played a good game.. If there was an EN goal his SP was still close to 90%. I am just saying you can't expect a whole lot more from your goalie against a team with the offensive firepower of South.

Yes, the DL goalie played a great game. only 2 of the 5 south goals were legit goals. one went of the glass behind the net and found its way back infront and into the net. another one was just a little wrister that deflected off of the goalies glove, which should have been an easy save, but just misplayed it, and it fell in. and of course there was the empty netter at the end. but it was a good game to watch, and yes, it was a CLOSE 5-2 game. take away those three goals, youve got yourself a 2-2 game, but lucky goals happen, and thats just how it goes.

How bout we just take away all 5 of South's goals so DL wins 2-0.  2-0 is a statement, everybody better watch out for powerhouse DL.

im not trying to take anything away from anyone, unlike you and everyone else on this board who has a grudge against DL for no apparent reason. i was just trying to say that the game was closer than the score indicated, and i wasnt making excuses on why DL lost, i was explaining. south played a good game, and is a good team, but DL just had some bad luck that led to some lucky goals for south. thats all i was trying to say.

How many games do you watch that not even one lucky goal comes into play? Weird bounce off the boards/glass or whatever. So what if DL got some lucky goals in the minds of the South players? Lucky goals are still goals any team will take a lucky break its hockey, let alone its a high school sport things happen