February
12. 2005
ESPN.com's
'The Show': INCH Overtime
As
hard as we try, it's virtually impossible to address every question
we receive during our weekly half-hour of college hockey chat
on ESPN.com's 'The Show'. So we thought, why not take the best
submissions that didn't get answered and post responses on INCH?
The
result is INCH Overtime. When warrented, we'll tackle everything
that we didn't quite get to during 'The Show.' We see it as a
win-win: your question gets answered, and we get talk hockey in
a less formal setting.
Below
you'll find what we had left in the mailbag after we wrapped our
Feb. 10 chat.
Do
you think Bowling Green has a chance of stealing a couple of points
here in Columbus against OSU this weekend? Jon (Columbus,
Ohio)
Nate Ewell: Any team with Jordan Sigalet
has a great chance to steal a couple of points. What should help
the Falcons, too, is that they come in with a bit of confidence,
riding a four-game unbeaten streak after a bit of a tough stretch.
The teams they’ve played in that stretch haven’t been
as strong as Ohio State, of course, but BG will still have a good
shot.
Mike
Eidelbes: Bowling Green has thrived in recent weeks because
of remarkable offensive balance. Everyone is pitching in. In that
respect, OSU and BG are very similar.
How about a little northern love. My Nanooks have done
a lot better than I expected with such a young team and rookie
coach. what do they need to do against MSU this weekend and what
are their chances of getting home ice in the CCHA playoffs
James (Fairbanks, AK)
Nate
Ewell: When the Nanooks play good defense, like they
did Saturday at Northern, they’re a dangerous team. They
get a good chance to do that this weekend against an MSU team
that has struggled to score goals. Home ice may be tough, since
MSU and Lake Superior State have games in hand, but with games
against MSU and Miami remaining, UAF controls its destiny.
But to follow
up on your first statement, they definitely deserve credit. They’ve
got some talented freshmen on that team and should only improve
in the next couple of years.
Mike
Eidelbes: To follow up on Nate’s comments, I think
UAF might be able to capitalize on MSU’s letdown following
last week’s emotional ties against Michigan. If you saw
either of those games, you know that they were more like wins
for the Spartans and felt like losses to the Wolverines.
What was your opinion of Boston College's #1 ranked hockey
team losing in the Beanpot on Monday night to Boston University,
and then not even 24 hours later, seeing Boston College's undefeated
basketball team lose to Notre Dame on Tuesday night? TG
(Boston)
Nate Ewell: We predicted that. The Irish
handed the hockey team its first loss, too.
Maybe it’s
time for the BC basketball team to switch leagues so they don’t
have to play ND anymore.
Looking at Jim Slater's (MSU) numbers, why has his numbers
fallen off (esp. +/-), and how do you see him fitting in with
the Thrashers and the NHL? Nak (Pittsburgh)
Mike Eidelbes: II’ll take the second
question first. In my opinion, Jim is an NHL-caliber player, but
he’ll likely be a checking center rather than a scorer.
His biggest asset is his strength, and he uses his muscle effectively.
As far as
his offensive output this season, he’s still scoring better
than a point a game…you’ve got to take into account
his slow start and the drop-off in production of linemates Mike
Lalonde and Tom Goebel, who have 22 points between them. Slater’s
plus-minus rating is a little deceiving – he fell into a
deep hole early in the year and was something like -12, so to
be at -7 right now is a pretty strong recovery for a guy whose
team plays so many tight-scoring games.
How do my WI Badgers match up against DU? Any predictions?
Matt (Denver,
CO)
Nate Ewell: Sounds like you’re in
enemy territory, Matt. These are two very talented, very well
coached teams. I like the way Denver can win any type of game,
it seems, and home-ice may give them an edge – if you believe
home-ice is still an advantage in the WCHA. All things considered,
this has all the makings of a split.
How’s
that for a weasely answer?
