ECAC began announcing its awards today.
From the Dartmouth thread
I would agree Hudak is the appropriate choice for ECAC Coach of the Year. After graduating Parsons and Cunningham from a team was 9th in the ECAC last season, there was definitely a possibility the Dartmouth was headed for further mediocrity. Contrast them with the trajectory of other top teams from last decade, like Brown, which made the ECAC final in 2006, missed the playoffs soon after, and then never made them again. Or SLU which has been a league average team the last 2 seasons. And though SCSU is not a top team, they lost a similar senior scoring punch and almost didn't win a game all year! So for Dartmouth to turn things around and finish 3rd in the conference and presently rank 2nd in the polls within the conference is impressive.
Taking a bit longer view, however, I wouldn't give too much credit to Hudak. Dartmouth won the ECAC postseason title in 2008-2009. I think by any standard the 2009-2010 team underachieved by missing the playoffs. So I think to judge this team's expectations on a higher baseline. I still think this was an excellent coaching job by Hudak, but not as great as you might expect from a "9th place to 2nd place" improvement.
I'm not surprised by Seeley getting the 3rd nomination, but not sure he deserves it. He definitely deserved honors last season. Seeley was just as rapidly successful at Qunnipiac as he was at Clarkson. However, under Seeley Clarkson never quite make the jump from top 4 ECAC team to national championship contender. I though Quinnipiac should've been a solid top 2 ECAC team and solid top 10 team, esp. with Babstock. I've criticized Quinnipiac's inconsistency before this year, and posters reply back and tell me that they're young, but lots of the teams are young. This team should've moved forward this year but didn't.
That said, I don't think anyone really stands out as a slam dunk choice for the third nominee. I think Katey Stone's continued to do well. Her young team consistently played at a high level and placed 2nd in the conference, actually an improvement in the standings from a year ago. The team did less well at the national level, but that's more a reflection of the pattern of Olympians returning -- in the past Harvard has been on the other end of that! Yet by Harvard standards it was a down year so I wasn't expecting any such recognition for Katey.
From the Dartmouth thread
I would agree Hudak is the appropriate choice for ECAC Coach of the Year. After graduating Parsons and Cunningham from a team was 9th in the ECAC last season, there was definitely a possibility the Dartmouth was headed for further mediocrity. Contrast them with the trajectory of other top teams from last decade, like Brown, which made the ECAC final in 2006, missed the playoffs soon after, and then never made them again. Or SLU which has been a league average team the last 2 seasons. And though SCSU is not a top team, they lost a similar senior scoring punch and almost didn't win a game all year! So for Dartmouth to turn things around and finish 3rd in the conference and presently rank 2nd in the polls within the conference is impressive.
Taking a bit longer view, however, I wouldn't give too much credit to Hudak. Dartmouth won the ECAC postseason title in 2008-2009. I think by any standard the 2009-2010 team underachieved by missing the playoffs. So I think to judge this team's expectations on a higher baseline. I still think this was an excellent coaching job by Hudak, but not as great as you might expect from a "9th place to 2nd place" improvement.
I'm not surprised by Seeley getting the 3rd nomination, but not sure he deserves it. He definitely deserved honors last season. Seeley was just as rapidly successful at Qunnipiac as he was at Clarkson. However, under Seeley Clarkson never quite make the jump from top 4 ECAC team to national championship contender. I though Quinnipiac should've been a solid top 2 ECAC team and solid top 10 team, esp. with Babstock. I've criticized Quinnipiac's inconsistency before this year, and posters reply back and tell me that they're young, but lots of the teams are young. This team should've moved forward this year but didn't.
That said, I don't think anyone really stands out as a slam dunk choice for the third nominee. I think Katey Stone's continued to do well. Her young team consistently played at a high level and placed 2nd in the conference, actually an improvement in the standings from a year ago. The team did less well at the national level, but that's more a reflection of the pattern of Olympians returning -- in the past Harvard has been on the other end of that! Yet by Harvard standards it was a down year so I wasn't expecting any such recognition for Katey.
