Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

[Dirty]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

BC fanboys never have valid points.

[mnstate0fhockey]

It's a college hockey board, he has every right to voice his opinion... I was also expressing mine. Maybe a bit more snarkily, if that word even exists.

Agreed, and I think your points were valid too. It's an interesting discussion. I can see both sides.

[willythekid]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

Agreed, and I think your points were valid too. It's an interesting discussion. I can see both sides.

I actually can see both sides as well... If Grimaldi were to win ROTY there would be many that thought some other "true" freshie got screwed. If I had to guess, I would think that Rocco could care less about this stuff and just wants to be out there playing hockey. I think he will be going for Hobey anyhow...

[icehawk]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

I actually can see both sides as well... If Grimaldi were to win ROTY there would be many that thought some other "true" freshie got screwed. If I had to guess, I would think that Rocco could care less about this stuff and just wants to be out there playing hockey. I think he will be going for Hobey anyhow...

Exactly. I would hope Rocco would be more concerned about winning a National title rather than some pointless ROY. The Hobey would be nice though.

[mnstate0fhockey]

I actually can see both sides as well... If Grimaldi were to win ROTY there would be many that thought some other "true" freshie got screwed. If I had to guess, I would think that Rocco could care less about this stuff and just wants to be out there playing hockey. I think he will be going for Hobey anyhow...

Not totally out of the question, which says something about his talent.

[SCSU Euro]

I actually can see both sides as well... If Grimaldi were to win ROTY there would be many that thought some other "true" freshie got screwed. If I had to guess, I would think that Rocco could care less about this stuff and just wants to be out there playing hockey. I think he will be going for Hobey anyhow...

Exactly.... Rocco doesn't have time to worry about ROTY... he is too busy worrying about girls showing too much skin

[Dirty]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

Exactly.... Rocco doesn't have time to worry about ROTY... he is too busy worrying about girls showing too much skin

Get with the times. That was last year, this year The Minister is all about the boobies.

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

Come on. Agree with him or not, they were valid points.

FWIW, all the players mentioned in that line of posts are '93s (Grimaldi, Mike Reilly, Schmaltz, and Mario Lucia).

Does 4 games and practicing with a strong college team for a few months give a player that much of an advantage against players who played a full season last year and practiced with inferior teams? IMO, it is probably a wash. What Grimaldi gained (the college life experience) is probably equal to what he lost (playing/practice time and growing as a player). I don't think Grimaldi cares, but IMO because he is a freshman, he should be considered at that level in determining awards.

[mnstate0fhockey]

FWIW, all the players mentioned in that line of posts are '93s (Grimaldi, Mike Reilly, Schmaltz, and Mario Lucia).

Does 4 games and practicing with a strong college team for a few months give a player that much of an advantage against players who played a full season last year and practiced with inferior teams? IMO, it is probably a wash. What Grimaldi gained (the college life experience) is probably equal to what he lost (playing/practice time and growing as a player). I don't think Grimaldi cares, but IMO because he is a freshman, he should be considered at that level in determining awards.

I would go back and re-read the conversation

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

I would go back and re-read the conversation

I get the line of the conversation I was merely inputting my thoughts that I consider Grimaldi a Freshman, and an equal to just about any other freshman in the country.

[mnstate0fhockey]

I get the line of the conversation I was merely inputting my thoughts that I consider Grimaldi a Freshman, and an equal to just about any other freshman in the country.

Never disagreed with any of that. Just pointing out that the other guy's points were legit as well

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

Never disagreed with any of that. Just pointing out that the other guy's points were legit as well

Did I say they were not valid? Certainly from a pure academic standpoint they likely are. Did Grimaldi take enough credits to be considered a Sophomore? Should anyone who spent 1 year on campus be considered a Sophomore? What about a high school student that takes enough credits to be considered a Sophomore? Should they not be considered a Freshman? What is more important, the time on campus or the credits taken? What if I spend just one semester on campus, but earn enough credits to be considered an academic Sophomore? On the converse, what if I spend 2 years at the school, yet only go part-time and have not acquired the credits necessary to be considered a Sophomore...am I a Freshman? A Junior? All of these (along with many more) questions are valid in relation to the question of whether someone should be considered a "Freshman."

However, this is a hockey board. Consequently, I would argue that the academic arguments are moot. Few people care if Thomas Vanek or Zach Parise are considered "Juniors" or "Seniors" or if they have graduated. They have no athletic eligibility any longer. All that truly matters is what the governing body (NCAA) says about a player's eligibility. If they conclude that Rocco Grimaldi is still a Freshman (which they have), then he should be on the same level as any other Freshman coming into college hockey this season. Why? Well, that's what I discussed in my post as far as why I feel that Grimaldi should be on the same level.

Everyone has their own opinions. Ultimately, I don't think anyone really cares too much one way or the other. If a voter who is deciding a Freshman of the Year Award (or more commonly called "Rookie of the Year" in the WCHA) decides to overlook Grimaldi because of the 4 games from last season, that is their choice. They certainly have arguments in their favor. My point is that I feel those arguments are flawed.

[icehawk]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

Did I say they were not valid? Certainly from a pure academic standpoint they likely are. Did Grimaldi take enough credits to be considered a Sophomore? Should anyone who spent 1 year on campus be considered a Sophomore? What about a high school student that takes enough credits to be considered a Sophomore? Should they not be considered a Freshman? What is more important, the time on campus or the credits taken? What if I spend just one semester on campus, but earn enough credits to be considered an academic Sophomore? On the converse, what if I spend 2 years at the school, yet only go part-time and have not acquired the credits necessary to be considered a Sophomore...am I a Freshman? A Junior? All of these (along with many more) questions are valid in relation to the question of whether someone should be considered a "Freshman."

However, this is a hockey board. Consequently, I would argue that the academic arguments are moot. Few people care if Thomas Vanek or Zach Parise are considered "Juniors" or "Seniors" or if they have graduated. They have no athletic eligibility any longer. All that truly matters is what the governing body (NCAA) says about a player's eligibility. If they conclude that Rocco Grimaldi is still a Freshman (which they have), then he should be on the same level as any other Freshman coming into college hockey this season. Why? Well, that's what I discussed in my post as far as why I feel that Grimaldi should be on the same level.

Everyone has their own opinions. Ultimately, I don't think anyone really cares too much one way or the other. If a voter who is deciding a Freshman of the Year Award (or more commonly called "Rookie of the Year" in the WCHA) decides to overlook Grimaldi because of the 4 games from last season, that is their choice. They certainly have arguments in their favor. My point is that I feel those arguments are flawed.

Screw the ROY just bring #8 home ****it.

[mnstate0fhockey]

Did I say they were not valid? Certainly from a pure academic standpoint they likely are. Did Grimaldi take enough credits to be considered a Sophomore? Should anyone who spent 1 year on campus be considered a Sophomore? What about a high school student that takes enough credits to be considered a Sophomore? Should they not be considered a Freshman? What is more important, the time on campus or the credits taken? What if I spend just one semester on campus, but earn enough credits to be considered an academic Sophomore? On the converse, what if I spend 2 years at the school, yet only go part-time and have not acquired the credits necessary to be considered a Sophomore...am I a Freshman? A Junior? All of these (along with many more) questions are valid in relation to the question of whether someone should be considered a "Freshman."

However, this is a hockey board. Consequently, I would argue that the academic arguments are moot. Few people care if Thomas Vanek or Zach Parise are considered "Juniors" or "Seniors" or if they have graduated. They have no athletic eligibility any longer. All that truly matters is what the governing body (NCAA) says about a player's eligibility. If they conclude that Rocco Grimaldi is still a Freshman (which they have), then he should be on the same level as any other Freshman coming into college hockey this season. Why? Well, that's what I discussed in my post as far as why I feel that Grimaldi should be on the same level.

Everyone has their own opinions. Ultimately, I don't think anyone really cares too much one way or the other. If a voter who is deciding a Freshman of the Year Award (or more commonly called "Rookie of the Year" in the WCHA) decides to overlook Grimaldi because of the 4 games from last season, that is their choice. They certainly have arguments in their favor. My point is that I feel those arguments are flawed.

Easy turbo. Not going to argue about something I never intended to argue about in the first place, so I will make this short. You quoted and replied to my comment, not vice versa.

I was just pointing out that the guy made valid points and didn't deserve the snarky response. I didn't say or imply anything else. Not sure why you felt the need to quote me, but I logically took that as you misread the premise of my response

I genuinely don't care one way or the other, which is why I don't want to argue with you about it.

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Prospective Top Freshman in 2012-13

Screw the ROY just bring #8 home ****it.

Agreed.

Easy turbo. Not going to argue about something I never intended to argue about in the first place, so I will make this short. You quoted and replied to my comment, not vice versa.

I was just pointing out that the guy made valid points and didn't deserve the snarky response. I didn't say or imply anything else. Not sure why you felt the need to quote me, but I logically took that as you misread the premise of my response

I genuinely don't care one way or the other, which is why I don't want to argue with you about it.

No worries Chester. Hopefully next time we understand where each other is coming from earlier.