2020 Patty Kazmaier

[robertearle]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

Gabel deserved it over Pankowski last year, 73 pts vs 50, slam dunk win over Pankowski. In Watt's case she has played a tougher schedule by far and scored more points. Slam dunk Watts.

I remember being quite surprised that Pankowski even made the final three, and chalked it up to her exemplary off-ice work, etc.(Training "assistance dogs", etc.)

 

[Lindsay]

I remember being quite surprised that Pankowski even made the final three, and chalked it up to her exemplary off-ice work, etc.(Training "assistance dogs", etc.)

She was heating up though by the time the votes were taken if I recall. Plus her 2 OT goals vs Harvard in the fall in a series that gathered eyes from East and west might have helped?

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I remember being quite surprised that Pankowski even made the final three, and chalked it up to her exemplary off-ice work, etc.(Training "assistance dogs", etc.)

Yes, it was a shock for sure. I too thought that was what got her there, and maybe her introspective writings about being the last player bumped off the Olympic team and how that tore her to shreds.

Watts funny is the Badgers badgering the fightin' nurses about it and T3 knows who won.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

To be fair to Timothy and Robert, neither of them claimed last year that Pankowski should have been the winner, although some UW fans did. I don't have a problem with Watts winning this year. I don't have a problem with a lot of different potential winners. The committees try to pick the most deserving winner by the criteria, while also honoring the award precedent.

I just have a problem with the thinking that it MUST be a certain person based on one reason and excluding everything else. There have been years where one player leads statistically, but she hasn't separated substantially from teammates. Meanwhile, someone else is lower statistically, but is clearly carrying her team and bringing them success that it wouldn't otherwise have. I think that all of those players deserve honest, careful consideration. Even if it ultimately is the points leader, the award means more if there was more thought behind it than just: Most_Points = Winner

 

[vicb]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

Gabel deserved it over Pankowski last year, 73 pts vs 50, slam dunk win over Pankowski. In Watt's case she has played a tougher schedule by far and scored more points. LAYUP FOR THE WIN IS GOOD --> Watts.

Fixed your post (if true).

 

[thirdtime's . . .]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I just have a problem with the thinking that it MUST be a certain person based on one reason and excluding everything else. There have been years where one player leads statistically, but she hasn't separated substantially from teammates. Meanwhile, someone else is lower statistically, but is clearly carrying her team and bringing them success that it wouldn't otherwise have. I think that all of those players deserve honest, careful consideration. Even if it ultimately is the points leader, the award means more if there was more thought behind it than just: Most_Points = Winner

Amen.

Needless to say, Patty K. herself would not have won an award based on points, or any strictly quantifiable skill. Committees ideally should find a sweet spot between Cal Ripkin and Hank Aaron, say, unfailingly showing up, and hitting it out of the park. The choice, of course, is impossible, but it’s nice to get somewhat re-centered by looking at the inspiration.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I just have a problem with the thinking that it MUST be a certain person based on one reason and excluding everything else. There have been years where one player leads statistically, but she hasn't separated substantially from teammates. Meanwhile, someone else is lower statistically, but is clearly carrying her team and bringing them success that it wouldn't otherwise have. I think that all of those players deserve honest, careful consideration. Even if it ultimately is the points leader, the award means more if there was more thought behind it than just: Most_Points = Winner

If you look at the history like I did, that runs contrary to this if a F wins. If it was so much more than that, why wouldn't a D have won more than just once? More goalies have won than D. Why? Statistically a goalie's work is easily quantifiable. Their work is easily noticed, just like a F's can be. All those WOW plays. A D does all the dirty work no one notices like make that first pass on the breakout perfectly to get out of the D zone, or block a shot, never get caught pinching or play that odd man or one on one rush perfectly. Some are Captains, some all academically all world and do wonderful things in society. Why is this hypothetical player ignored by PK? Because she had 9G and 21A. Points rule this award, the intangibles might get the #2 scorer over the #1 scorer, but the gap historically has to be 4 pts or less. That is simply a fact. If Giguere can overcome a 10 pt gap over a player who has already demonstrated she HAS the intangibles because she won one, with intangibles that are even better intangibles, good for her. Pankowski overcame a 20 pt gap to make the final 3, that is worth noting.

I just want to say that this is a really fun discussion and I'm not wanting the tone of my to my thoughts to have an argumentative tone, it's just my writing style and I can't control the tone of how someone reads what I post. It's not my intent at all to be argumentative.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I for one am enjoying the discussion and can't wait for the Final 3 to be announced haha

 

[ARM]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

A D does all the dirty work no one notices like make that first pass on the breakout perfectly to get out of the D zone, or block a shot, never get caught pinching or play that odd man or one on one rush perfectly. Some are Captains, some all academically all world and do wonderful things in society. Why is this hypothetical player ignored by PK?

The only times that D do well in the voting is when they pile up points and separate statistically from all of the other D. Part of the reason is that for every great D playing outstanding defense, triggering the breakout, and being a wonderful student and citizen, there is somebody in the next conference doing the same thing. Is one better than the other? Maybe, but look how hard it is to tell with forwards, and we have a bunch of stats to look at. As good as a defenseman may be offensively, her point total usually winds up depending more on the caliber of forwards that she plays with than it does on her own abilities. No argument from me; D are undervalued by this award and just about any hockey award that isn't focused on D specifically.

Points rule this award, the intangibles might get the #2 scorer over the #1 scorer, but the gap historically has to be 4 pts or less. That is simply a fact.

Well, not exactly. Darwitz had 114 pts in 2005; Wendell won with 104 pts. I don't know what the gap was at the time of the voting. They played on the same team, so all of the strength of team considerations went away. Wendell had a couple of advantages, in that she had the bigger "WOW" factor that you mentioned. She had also had a period of ~ five weeks the season before where she kept Minnesota contending while Darwitz was injured. Wendell herself had been injured the season before, and while the Gophers weren't as strong in 2002-03, they dropped off more w/o her, so there was a perception that remained that Wendell was more valuable. Did the committee make the right choice? It was an almost impossible choice, and UM fans will tell you that. But it certainly wasn't ultimately decided by a handful of points.

I just want to say that this is a really fun discussion and I'm not wanting the tone of my to my thoughts to have an argumentative tone, it's just my writing style and I can't control the tone of how someone reads what I post. It's not my intent at all to be argumentative.

You've been on these forums long enough to know that I've read a lot worse in terms of argumentative. It's all good.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I for one am enjoying the discussion and can't wait for the Final 3 to be announced haha

Come on, leak it! There's only 17 of us who come here anyway, who are we going to tell? I promise not to tweet anything.

 

[TinyViking]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I for one am enjoying the discussion and can't wait for the Final 3 to be announced haha

Weren't the top 3 supposed to be announced yesterday?

 

[Lindsay]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

According to the patty Kaz website top 3 would be revealed yesterday unless I read it wrong.

If I were a voter my top 3 would be:

Maltais, Browning and Roque. I don’t know how you pick a winner among that group, I still need to think about it...I think Roque.

I’m a “body of work” hypothetical voter and put lots of emphasis on gpa, major and community stuff and “have you moved the needle for your program”
Browning seems like a brainiac in engineering and statistically is best goalie on #1 team.

OSU is as good as they’ve ever been with Maltais, and she’s breaking records for her program, great GPA, and went to Costa Rica to serve in a volunteer capacity, and she does reading volunteerism in Cbus.

Roque again with the good GPA, and volunteerism, thougj maybe (I cant really say) not on same level as the two above. But she was a key player on an NCAA winning team on a program that was in a Championship drought by their standards and has I think evolved as a scorer a bit when she was always known as a passer. I think the NCAA championship and her USA play this year (I know it shouldn’t count but it’s influencing me - it was on tv) differentiates her and I’d pick her to win.

So I don’t know if my evaluating techniques are garbage but that’s how I’d vote. V excited to see who gets jt. Giguere will be a top 3 before she’s done.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

According to the patty Kaz website top 3 would be revealed yesterday unless I read it wrong.

The announcement's going to be a bit later. Not sure exactly when but my hunch is early next week. The vote's already done though.

Also I don't want you guys to be mislead about how much I know about the result here. It's a secret ballot, after all. I just thought the conference call was valuable and I'm looking forward to seeing how everyone else voted.

 

[robertearle]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

The announcement's going to be a bit later. Not sure exactly when but my hunch is early next week. The vote's already done though.

Iowa caucus-style recounting going on, no doubt.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

The announcement's going to be a bit later. Not sure exactly when but my hunch is early next week. The vote's already done though.

Also I don't want you guys to be mislead about how much I know about the result here. It's a secret ballot, after all. I just thought the conference call was valuable and I'm looking forward to seeing how everyone else voted.

Will you disclose your choices to us or will you get fired from the Committee if you tell us how you voted? That would be a fun discussion, you are the big dog on the block on this one.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

Will you disclose your choices to us or will you get fired from the Committee if you tell us how you voted? That would be a fun discussion, you are the big dog on the block on this one.

I'd love to, but I can't; the votes are confidential -- maybe after next year when my term is up

Everyone knows I just wrote-in Allie Thunstrom three times anyway.

 

[thirdtime's . . .]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I’m a “body of work” hypothetical voter and put lots of emphasis on gpa, major and community stuff and “have you moved the needle for your program”

How many "body of work" voters/winners do you suppose there have ever been? My guess is it remains an MVP, whatever reasoning people use to get there.

 

[vicb]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

....
I just want to say that this is a really fun discussion and I'm not wanting the tone of my to my thoughts to have an argumentative tone, it's just my writing style and I can't control the tone of how someone reads what I post. It's not my intent at all to be argumentative.

Same here. My argumentative tone is not meant to be that, just like pulling certain (WCHA) fans chains. I take no offense when they are pulling on my chain.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

I'd love to, but I can't; the votes are confidential -- maybe after next year when my term is up

Everyone knows I just wrote-in Allie Thunstrom three times anyway.

Yes but you can create a burner account on this site and tell us that way; we'd never know it came from you. I know Watts player you voted for, unless you are bitter about her leaving and are exacting revenge.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2020 Patty Kazmaier

Same here. My argumentative tone is not meant to be that, just like pulling certain (WCHA) fans chains. I take no offense when they are pulling on my chain.

I have a definite ax to grind against Clarkson. It was great to wax you guys last year, but that didn't make up for the past. I've been contemplating the what if Clarkson got sent to UW in the first round of the NCAA's and honestly I'd be very worried, our D is too mistake prone and Soup's can is a little leaky this year and a great player like Giguere will convert all those mistakes, she plays every shift, right?