Patty Kaz 2010

[ARM]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

How many Europeans have been in TOP 10 or TOP 3 among the years ?

Clicking on the "click here" link on this page yields a list of all finalists. From that, I found:
<pre>
NAME SCHOOL POS. HOMETOWN TOP 10 TOP 3 WINNER
Emma Laaksonen The Ohio State University D Espoo, Finland 2002
Kim Martin Univ. of Minnesota Duluth G Stockholm, Sweden 2008 2008
Maria Rooth Univ. of Minnesota Duluth F Angelholm, Sweden 2000, ‘01, ‘02, ‘03
Riitta Schaublin Univ. of Minnesota Duluth G Basel, Switzerland 2006 2006
</pre>

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

How many Europeans have been in TOP 10 or TOP 3 amnong the years ? It would be interesting to know. So far I know only goalies. Kim Martin TOP 3 and now Noora + Florence TOP 10.

Schaublin was top 3 in 2006, and Martin top 3 in 2008. Those are the only top 3.

Maria Rooth was top 10 all four years of her career. She and Ruggiero are the only to ever make 4 top 10s.

Emma Laaksonen made top 10 in 2002.

Florence Schelling top 10 in 2010.

And that's all. I guess I'm surprised there weren't more.








http://www.usahockey.com/uploadedFi...aier/Menu_Previous_winners/KazAllTime0209.pdf

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

Ha, I was too slow by a minute

 

[ARM]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

Ha, I was too slow by a minute

You took time to pretty yours up.

I guess I'm surprised there weren't more.

Who are some of the best to not be finalists? Holst and Holmlov come to mind. Gavrilova's career was pretty short. Lanzl didn't put up huge numbers. Puputti and Sautter didn't have off-the-charts stats in net. Sikio, Holst, and Holmlov would appear to be those closest to getting a nod, and the first two were likely victimized to some extent by the "2 nominees per team" limitation.

 

[DC78-82]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

You took time to pretty yours up.

Who are some of the best to not be finalists? Holst and Holmlov come to mind. Gavrilova's career was pretty short. Lanzl didn't put up huge numbers. Puputti and Sautter didn't have off-the-charts stats in net. Sikio, Holst, and Holmlov would appear to be those closest to getting a nod, and the first two were likely victimized to some extent by the "2 nominees per team" limitation.

Mari Pekhonen? I don't know if she had the numbers, but she comes to mind as a strong European player.

 

[ARM]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

Mari Pekhonen? I don't know if she had the numbers, but she comes to mind as a strong European player.

Yup, she was a good player. I don't know that she ever cracked 30 points in a season, so as a forward, she was probably a little under the Kaz radar.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

Who are some of the best to not be finalists? Holst and Holmlov come to mind. Gavrilova's career was pretty short. Lanzl didn't put up huge numbers. Puputti and Sautter didn't have off-the-charts stats in net. Sikio, Holst, and Holmlov would appear to be those closest to getting a nod, and the first two were likely victimized to some extent by the "2 nominees per team" limitation.

True. Having Ouellette and Potter limited the extent of some UMD players' nominations.

2001 and 2002 are the years I would have expected more. In 2002, UMD players just didn't have big years statistically for whatever reason, though Holst finished with the same # of points as Rooth. 2001 though is the year that surprises, because Sikio had 68 points, 4 short of Rooth's 72, so it surprises me she didn't make the cut that season. I think you could definitely have made the case for eastern bias at the time , and the respect for UMD's program we have now just wasn't there yet.

The other factor of course is that selections are made early in the season, and UMD didn't schedule around 4 Nations that season, got blown out by the Gophers, and spent part of the year on the cusp of the top 10. That was probably a factor in coaches' reluctance to vote Sikio into the top 10.

 

[just_a_fan]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

and the respect for UMD's program we have now just wasn't there yet.

Wait. What? You mean... there's respect for UMD's program outside of their own fans? Huh.

 

[ARM]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

I think you could definitely have made the case for eastern bias at the time ...

There seemed to be a perception in the early years that the numbers western players were putting up were merely a product of weak competition. And yeah, they were inflated to some extent by playing over-matched opponents, but they did well against top competition as well. So they had to perform at the national tournament and convince voters that they were worthy, although by then it was too late. That produced results like Muzerall having a monster season in 1999-2000 and being left out, and making the top ten a year later with a so-so effort. I'm sure the Bulldogs had the same problem.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

This discussion actually has some relevance today with regards to the CHA. I think there are certainly good reasons for why the most recent three winners beat out Agosta, but I expect she was also hurt by some lingering "Mercyhurst players put up good numbers only because they play a weak CHA schedule" sentiment.

Now hopefully that phony sentiment is almost gone by now with respect to this year's candidates -- Mercyhurst surely gained respect by reaching the NCAA final last year, Mercyhurst played the nation's 2nd-toughest schedule according to the NCAA's measure, and the 2nd-tier CHA teams scored plenty of upsets in nonconference play. Also, I'd note that a player like Bendus lit up Clarkson for 7 points in one weekend, and also had one big game against Cornell, and they're two of the best defensive teams in the country. But we'll see.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

However small and significant the Question of the Week poll may be, I noticed Blais was No. 1 right now by a thread. It doesn't look like ballot box stuffing either which happens on occasion. I think she's good, but I think she's been a bit under the radar relative to Paton and Bendus as candidates. What do people here think?

 

[freak]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

What do people here think?

Wait, the Kaz is predicated upon more than on-ice performance, right? In that case....

 

[ARM]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

I think she's good, but I think she's been a bit under the radar relative to Paton and Bendus as candidates.

She's always been a thorn in the Gophs side, being both fast and quick, so hard to defend all over the ice. Plus, she can finish. She's done a good job putting up numbers, and the Bulldogs have really needed her to do so, because Fridfinnson is playing hurt, Touminen has had to juggle national team commitments, and their other threats are young. If there was a comeback player of the year, she'd definitely get my vote, because IIRC, she was just in the teens for points last year. Even though the Kaz is a one-year award, players tend to build momentum from season to season, and she didn't carry a lot of buzz into this one.

 

[LakersFan]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

Vicki Bendus was named CHA player of the year. Does this separate her from her fellow Mercyhurst candidates? Personally, she gets my vote, based on the fact that if I was starting a team right now, I would pick her first and make her the captain.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

Vicki Bendus was named CHA player of the year. Does this separate her from her fellow Mercyhurst candidates? Personally, she gets my vote, based on the fact that if I was starting a team right now, I would pick her first and make her the captain.

She was pretty well separated already, for reasons discussed below.

A trend I noticed yesterday, and can't believe I hadn't before -- EVERY Kazmaier winner after 1998 has come from a team with a 2nd player in the top 10 list (the first winner Brandy Fisher in 1998 is the one exception). Splitting votes has never been a problem.

 

[CrazyDave]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

However small and significant the Question of the Week poll may be, I noticed Blais was No. 1 right now by a thread. It doesn't look like ballot box stuffing either which happens on occasion.

Well, it appears that there is definitely some ballot box stuffing happening now, with Schelling now leading by a huge margin. You would think that folks would take seriously the only new poll of the entire season.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

Well, it appears that there is definitely some ballot box stuffing happening now, with Schelling now leading by a huge margin. You would think that folks would take seriously the only new poll of the entire season.

Well I wouldn't blame folks in general. All it really takes to stuff the box these days is for one Northeastern student to mention the poll in their facebook status.

 

[ARM]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

All it really takes to stuff the box these days is for one Northeastern student to mention the poll in their facebook status.

Which I guess isn't all bad; at least it brings a little awareness of women's hockey to an audience where it is usually lacking.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

EVERY Kazmaier winner after 1998 has come from a team with a 2nd player in the top 10 list.

I could see possible interpretations of this, one negative, one positive. Anyone else have opinions on this?

negative interpretation -- this shows that it's impossible to win the Kazmaier unless you're surrounded by talented players and have a great overall record. An elite player surrounding by mediocre talent will never win the Kazmaier, even if she's the perfect candidate and gets the absolute most out of that mediocre talent.

positive interpretation -- the fact that a Kazmaier candidate makes players around her better, to the point where one her teammates makes the top 10, is pretty much a necessary condition for a Kazmaier winner. It's a positive signal if an elite player can work with another excellent player and both push each other and get the best out of each other. Just having the talent doesn't make success inevitable. There have been plenty of teams with talented players who didn't have the same kind of success as these past Kaz winners and their teammates. Also, regarding the above negative interpretation, it's possible that the elite player isn't getting the most out of mediocre talent, rather the elite player is surrounded by decent talent and not making her teammates better.

 

[LakersFan]

Re: Patty Kaz 2010

negative interpretation -- this shows that it's impossible to win the Kazmaier unless you're surrounded by talented players and have a great overall record. An elite player surrounding by mediocre talent will never win the Kazmaier, even if she's the perfect candidate and gets the absolute most out of that mediocre talent.

Wow Dave, quoting yourself. You must really want to discuss this

I think it is important to look at who was ranked #1 or #2 in the opinion polls when the top 10 are determined. My guess is the top 2 teams are the ones that get multiple candidates (e.g. Mercyhurst this year, Wisconsin last year) and the award goes to the best player on the best team (pre NCAA tournament). Is there a poll archive somewhere on the internet? Was Harvard ranked #1 or #2 in 2006-2007? I recall Merychurst being ranked high, but only Agosta getting a top 10 nomination from the team. This would be easier with the poll archive.

positive interpretation -- the fact that a Kazmaier candidate makes players around her better, to the point where one her teammates makes the top 10, is pretty much a necessary condition for a Kazmaier winner. It's a positive signal if an elite player can work with another excellent player and both push each other and get the best out of each other. Just having the talent doesn't make success inevitable. There have been plenty of teams with talented players who didn't have the same kind of success as these past Kaz winners and their teammates. Also, regarding the above negative interpretation, it's possible that the elite player isn't getting the most out of mediocre talent, rather the elite player is surrounded by decent talent and not making her teammates better.

I think this is true if two forwards are nominated. But if the nominees are a forward and a goalie, I am not sure how you can draw the connection between one helping the other, save for the number of team wins. Bendus/Bram/Scanzano benefit from playing on the same PP line (they are rarely together even strength), but did having Vetter in goal make the Wisconsin forwards better?