3/16/2024 - Michigan 2, Minnesota 1 - 21-13-3 (10-10-2-2 B1G) 

Entering this weekend, Michigan Hockey had held a third period lead against an opponent and not won the game in regulation eight different times, out of 36 total games. That doesn't include games that were tied in the third, only to see the opponent edge past the Wolverines late, or the matchup against Michigan State in January that Michigan led 4-1 in the second period, because they blew the entire lead in the second period (four straight goals against in the span of ~seven minutes). To say the Maize & Blue have had trouble finishing games off in the third period is an understatement. It's been the defining theme of this season. 

Poor defense has also been a theme too often. Michigan is only middle of the pack in goals against nationally but considering that they are a team ranked in the tournament picture, it isn't good. Michigan is tied for the most goals against per game among the 16 teams currently in the tournament picture. They have a tremendous offense, top five in goals per game scored with a historically great power play, but the other half of the game they have struggled with often this season. Michigan typically blows leads in the third period because they are not a good team at keeping pucks out of the net, period. 

Against Minnesota in particular, it's been a major problem. Coming into Saturday night, three of those eight third period blown leads came at the hands of Minnesota. Those three games constituted three of the four games that Michigan played against Minnesota this season. They led the first game 3-1 in the second before conceding a goal with one second left in the 2nd period and then two in the third. They led the second game 2-1 entering the third period and ended up having to win in a shootout. And then two weeks back, a backup-goalie meltdown saw Michigan need overtime to win a game that they led 3-0, 4-1, and 5-4, all in the third period. It's been a bit of a broken record of the same problems and especially in this matchup, the same opponent. 

[AFTER THE JUMP: What changed]

-------

[Bill Rapai]

This time around there was no blown lead. Michigan scored early in the first period, shouldered an annoying but correct review that disallowed a second goal, eventually scored one anyway, and then protected that lead through the third period to bring the game to the regulation finish line. They did it by playing as good of a team game as they have played all season, one that finally introduced elements that have been missing from Michigan's games for so long: structure, cohesiveness, situational hockey. Michigan looked clinical in tilting the ice on Minnesota, generating chances necessary to take the lead but not letting up on the gas pedal when it was time to protect that lead. 

Even strength possession in this game was 61-46 in favor of Michigan, rather decisive in the Wolverines' favor. If we narrowed it down to expected goals (data which is not public in college hockey), I presume the gap would be much wider. Even in the last four minutes of the game, with Michigan leading 2-0 and then 2-1, they got the best looks, a breakaway and then another solo rush for Frank Nazar, both of which did not go in. Minnesota scored in the final minutes, but it was on a shot through traffic, a decisively lower quality look. Michigan dominated shot quality throughout this game, when it was tied and when they were leading, something that has seldom happened this season. 

Minnesota came out sharp and had a good first couple shifts, owning the opening two or so minutes. Michigan was on their heels and hung in there, most importantly not surrendering a goal during that stretch of time. Once they got through the opening shifts, Michigan asserted themselves. They pushed play the other direction and got that first goal. From then on forward they were decisively the better team for the remaining 56 minutes. Even when Minnesota went on the power play, they didn't get much in the way of quality scoring chances as Michigan's significantly improved penalty kill muzzled the Gophers. Unlike the Notre Dame series last week, the last minute of play in a one-goal game was not frantic, Michigan as confident as they'd been all game previously. It was like watching a whole new team. 

--------

[Bill Rapai]

The last time Michigan played in Minneapolis, they lost the Friday game in lackluster fashion. After a strong first period, they got buried in the latter 40 minutes and my biggest takeaway that night was Michigan looking small and slow, out-muscled in the corners and losing the 50-50 battles. It's no secret that Michigan is a small team, the 12th-lightest team in college hockey this season and tied for 6th-shortest. They're not a physically imposing group and it has led them to get beaten in those individual battles across the ice. But in this game, they won most all of them by playing with a non-stop energy that Minnesota seemed unprepared to handle. The 4th line was even having its way with the Gophers, winning cycle shifts by jumping on every loose puck and winning the race to recover possession after a shot. Get on it, cycle it to the next forward in the vicinity, or go low-to-high, and be ready to retrieve the next shot. Look at this: 

That's a good minute of offensive zone time from the fourth line, hemming Minnesota in by winning every loose puck. That was Michigan's best defense in this game, being able to soak up possession in the offensive zone and wear out the Gophers so that they didn't have the energy to attack off the counter once they exited the zone. But puck possession and "the best defense is good offense" doesn't tell the whole story, because Michigan was legitimately excellent defensively in a way they have not been this entire season. There was total team buy-in across the board in the commitment to playing defense, which got better late in the game as Michigan finally showed a nose for situational awareness. 

It started with good structure in the neutral zone, not allowing much of anything to come through in a dangerous variety. Minnesota was severely limited in creating odd-man opportunities off the rush, no breakaways, no 2v1s, completely choked off in the neutral zone. The stick-work from the Michigan defensemen at the blue line was phenomenal, nullifying plays coming into the zone and forcing dump-ins that Michigan was then hasty to recover. Their break-outs were extremely clean, puck management was sharp, there are so few things to criticize. Even when Minnesota got into the zone with possession and had opportunities that began to develop, Michigan's coverage made up for it and shut those opportunities down. How about this from Seamus Casey: 

MICH #26

First he uses his body well to shoulder the attacking forward down the wing away from the puck, protecting it and getting it along to his defense mate, Luca Fantilli. Casey then wanders into the slot before going behind the net to get in position to receive the potential D --> D behind the net from Fantilli. When Fantilli is overwhelmed by the forechecker and turns it over, Casey springs into action, slicing into the slot and getting his stick into the lane just in time, poking it away from the Gopher attacker all alone. It lands on the stick of Nick Moldenhauer, who skates it out for Michigan. 

Casey, for all his brilliance as an offensive defenseman, has been weak as a defender this season. This was his best game in his own zone, his awareness and coverage so much better than normal, with that clip being the finest example. Likewise, Steve Holtz is a player who has struggled a good bit this season, but he had a terrific box out on Oliver Moore on the back-post during a play where it looked like Minnesota might have a chance developing. Jacob Truscott was good, Marshall Warren was good. There are so few complaints defensively for a team that has had a laundry list of them this season. 

-----

Can Michigan keep it going? I don't know. You should never overreact to one game, but this was significant. Michigan has been a solid team all season but by and large they've only won one way. Their previous best games, a 7-1 win over MSU, a 5-1 win over Wisconsin, were the same sort of story, their offense ripping a team apart and Barczewski not doing much because the ice is tilted towards the other end. This was significant because it was a great team effort, well-organized, structured, synced up and Michigan beat a top 10 team playing a different kind of game. To win four NCAA Tournament games you have to be able to win multiple ways and Michigan showing the ability to win a tightly checked, lower scoring game where the objective is simply to get a small lead and protect it, is huge. And to do it so comfortably is an attention grabber. 

This Saturday's championship game matchup with Michigan State is less likely to be that low scoring. Both squads are high scoring, offensive teams, but just because the firepower is better and the play-style of the opponent is more offensive doesn't mean that the lessons of this game should be irrelevant. If Michigan is able to get a lead on MSU, the habits they showed against Minnesota ought to translate to that one too. It should be a reminder that this team is capable of playing a more "playoff hockey" sort of game and doesn't have to lean on their offense. Whatever work Brandon Naurato's staff put in during practice to put together this Minnesota effort should continue to be polished up because it will be very useful over the next few weeks. 

 

[Bill Rapai]

HockeyBullets 

- The offside review: Michigan had a goal disallowed in the first period that would've made it 2-0 due to an offsides review coming long before the goal, when the puck narrowly exited the zone on a Gopher attempted exit. Connor Kurth was coming up the wall and tried to pass it to the center lane, when it deflected off a Michigan skate and pinballed back into the zone. That entry play happened right around the 14:00 remaining mark, setting up a sizable sequence leading up to the goal. Kienan Draper got a look all alone right off the failed exit but was turned aside by Justen Close. Michigan then embarked on a long cycle possession, eventually ending in a great cut by Luca Fantilli to the net and an equally great pass by Philippe LaPointe, shouldering contact and feeding Fantilli for the goal. 

The goal went in with 13:28 remaining in the first period, over 30 seconds after the disputed play at the line. Minnesota challenged and though the play was very close, I do believe the puck crossed the blue line and the right call was made. Offsides at the line, goal taken off the board. The reason I bring this whole thing up is it's something I've been complaining about for some time, coming up on the HockeyCast a few weeks back. I am a firm believer that there needs to be a statute of limitations on offsides reviews, that if a goal does not come within a timely matter of the incorrect entry call, you cannot challenge it because it is irrelevant to the goal being scored. Come up with some amount of time you want, 8 seconds, 10 seconds, 15 seconds, I don't really care, but it damn sure can't be 35 seconds like in this case.

If a goal occurs more than 15 seconds after an incorrectly called play at the blue line, at that point the entry just isn't that important to the goal and thus shouldn't be eligible to nullify a goal. You can legitimately gripe about the role the entry plays if the goal is scored off the rush, directly because of the entry, but that's not why this goal happened. It happened because, like the whole game, Michigan beat Minnesota's ass on the forecheck, cycling incredibly well, dominating puck possession, and winning the puck battles. Bringing up the offsides, which was illegal by a millimeter at most, as a reason to disallow this goal is everything that is wrong with replay review. 

[Bill Rapai]

A sign that you know this system is broken is the BTN announcers picked up on it live. They were talking DURING THE PLAY about how a challenge would be coming if a goal went in and then saying as soon as the goal was scored "we'll see! Michigan scores and they lead 2-0. Luca Fantilli". Those were the first words out of the PxP's mouth! Not about the goal or excitement about the moment, but already thinking ahead to the coming review. We were all saying the same on the Watchalong broadcast Saturday night. 

I am in favor of replay review. We need it to correct serious cases of human error because referees are indeed prone to significant error in the way all humans are. It should be used to right legitimate wrongs that impair the ability to enjoy the game, the famous offsides that led to replay review in the NHL years ago, a play that was obvious and flagrant and bafflingly missed. We need it to give Armando Galarraga justice. What replay review shouldn't be used for is this, a get out of jail free card for teams that can't win on the ice, one that rewards psychotic video coaches sleuthing for minute errors. We should be trying to keep goals on the board, not looking for ways to take them away. It makes these games less enjoyable to watch and the product would be improved by stopping offsides reviews unrelated to the goals they are taking away. 

- Give praise to the 4th line. They should've scored two goals in that first period if we had a sensical replay review system, but they only officially got credit for one. Oh well. But that shouldn't stop us from giving them praise. They shined in this game, partially because a tight checking game naturally suits fourth liners and allows them to have a more prominent role in the team defense, but the offense was also more notable than usual. The goal they scored was a gift, an atrocious rebound by Justen Close on a non-threatening shot he saw all the way off the stick of Chase Pletzke: 

Drapes gives Michigan a 1-0 lead! #GoBlue〽️ pic.twitter.com/5mknIMPC1V

— Michigan Hockey (@umichhockey) March 17, 2024

But hey, you gotta take what the goalie and the defense gives you, Kienan Draper driving the net and collecting the loose change. Good on him. The goal they should've gotten credit for on the offsides was much more classic 4th line, putting pucks on net, competing with heart and hustle to win the retrieval battles, cycling low to high and eventually, into the slot from Lapointe --> Fantilli. Good stuff! 

I haven't written much about the 4th line this season because they haven't been notable but they should be mentioned after this game. They were a key part to Michigan winning and looked like a more viable line you can lean on in playoff games. A line that can give you good, hard shifts that can take some energy out of the opposition. Doing that and not getting scored on is mostly what you want from your 4th line; any offense is an added bonus.

I do want to recognize Draper specifically because he's the one providing the offense, now up to 4-8-12 on the season in 33 games. Only two of those points are Lindenwood/Stonehill, so he's been scoring against real teams. Over 82 games, that's a 10 goal, ~33 point pace, which any NHL team would take for their fourth line center. After showing little pulse at all as a freshman last season, Draper has started to blossom a bit and given that he's likely a four-year player, he could be very useful the next two seasons, chipping in some offense, centering a 4th line, and being a key cog on the PK. Michigan took a little while to replace Garrett Van Wyhe but now we're starting to see some returns on the Grow-A-Ginger-GVW we planted a couple years ago. 

One more note: the assist Chase Pletzke got for that Draper goal was his first assist since January 9, 2021, nearly 100 games ago. I flagged this oddity in the preseason and we've been following it all year, because it is extraordinarily difficult for a forward to go that long without an assist. Because sometimes, like this goal shows, you can get one without doing much of anything (in this case, softly throwing a puck to the goal). At long last, Michigan Hockey's strangest statistical storyline has found an answer. 

[Bill Rapai]

- Admire this Gavin Brindley rip. Not much else to say, just admire it: 

Brindley goes high blocker on the stretch pass from Schifsky and it's 2-0 Michigan! pic.twitter.com/Jo65ufEThu

— Michigan Hockey (@umichhockey) March 17, 2024

Michigan is shooting 12.1% as a team, top six in the NCAA because they have players like this. They don't have as many pure snipers as they've had in past years, but Brindley can really shoot the puck as a 22.2% SH% (!!) will attest to, as well as his team-leading 24 goals. I don't really think he has true top six upside in the NHL, but his combination of a motor that never stops humming, his willingness to go into the corners and play bigger than his size, his value as a PKer, and then that shot... that might be a profile of a legit 3rd liner in the pros who can pop in 20 goals in a season. Bottom six guys with finishing talent have a soft spot in my heart and I like that Brindley has that pro profile. 

- Jake Barczewski reset game. I went into it in the narrative section but Barczewski didn't have to do much thanks to the spectacular defense in front of him. That's fine by me because it gets him a clean mental reset, the opportunity to win a big game without doing too much. After a period of time where he was really struggling, Barczewski closed out the Notre Dame series with a few huge saves, then got to win this one with a pretty clean evening. He made one flashy glove save on a puck that may have been going wide on and otherwise, not a ton else was needed from him. Michigan will have to ask him to do more at points in the coming weeks, but the best way to have him feeling good and confident for when it's time to deliver for his team is to get him a game like this one, a good win for the mojo without taxing him. 

 

Bracketology, one week to go

[College Hockey News]

Michigan's bid for the NCAA Tournament was basically sewn up last week, it was even more sewn up after Friday's action across the country (up to 99.8%), and is now officially 100% after the win. Hurrah. We also have total certainty on their seed line, which is a 3-seed. Michigan will finish either 10th or 11th in PWR with minuscule probabilities of being 9th or 12th and 0% probability of being anything else. A 3-seed it is. 

Elsewhere in the bracket things have continued to solidify. BC has locked in the #1 overall seed no matter what happens this weekend and BU has locked in the #2 overall seed. Denver, NoDak, and MSU are competing in the 3-5 slots, so two of those teams will get the last two 1st seeds and the latter will be the top 2-seed. Since Denver and NoDak are in the same conference, it seems pretty likely they'll pair one of those two with MSU regardless of who is the 1 in the region and who is the 2. Based on the probabilities, I assume that MSU needs to beat Michigan to get a 1 seed, plus a little bit of help in the NCHC Tournament. 

Wisconsin and Minnesota are clustered in the 8/9 slots but can't play each other because they're both B1G teams. Whoever gets the 2 seed will play an NCHC team on the 3 line and whoever gets the 3 will play either QPac or Maine, while Michigan gets the other. Nothing has changed on that front for Michigan. They're locked into the 3 line (as I mentioned) and QPac/Maine are locked into the 2 line. The pairing seems inevitable, so do your advance scouting on the Bobcats and Black Bears now.

[University of Maine Athletics]

Who Michigan would get as their top seed in that region is unclear and the venue is also unclear, for the same reason it's been unclear for several weeks now: UMass making it in as a 4 seed would throw the regional locations into disarray since they are host in the Springfield regional. Under that scenario you probably see one of Denver/NoDak/MSU get shipped out to Springfield to take on UMass in the 1/4, while BU gets ejected from their own backyard and would have to go out to either St. Louis or Sioux Falls to play an NCHC team. This is the most stupid tournament in sports. 

On the bubble, we're down to 15 teams with any real chance of getting an at-large spot, plus Cornell at 15 whose only path to moving up in PWR to get an at-large involves winning the ECAC Tournament, which is very doable. We're up to 12 teams with spots basically sewn up, plus UMass, who is feeling good at 91%. Colorado College is the team on the hot seat, who want QPac to win the ECAC Tournament and who want St. Cloud State to not make a run of any kind in the semis/finals of the NCHC Tournament. There's limited room for chaos in the conference tourneys this weekend, because the Hockey East's final four teams are all in the top 13 of PWR, the B1G's two remaining teams are both in, and the NCHC's four remaining teams only feature one possible bid stealer, St. Cloud. Them and the ECAC (if Cornell or anyone not QPac win) are the possible bid-stealers but even then those aren't dramatic. 

 

MSU Preview 

Coming on Friday. B1G Championship Games get full stand-alone previews.