What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Patty Kazmaier 2014

Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

dave1381 said:
So in the end, it was just the top 3 per game scorers selected for the final three. I assume Brandt will win being the nation's #1 scorer on the nation's #1 team. That pretty much guarantees the Kazmaier.
Click to expand...

It would be sad if that is the criteria used. I would hope that all the voters have multiple viewings of each candidate, preferably live, but as a minimum on tape, before casting their vote. To get a complete view of a player, how they play and their value to a team, is to follow them constantly during the game, both with the play, away from the play and on the bench. JMO. Lacking that, you could get is from "scouts" that watch a player frequently.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

Trillium said:
However, I'm quite curious how mere participation in two of a teams' regularly scheduled league games which presumably would be obligatory activities for all team members, can remotely be viewed at the same time as credit-worthy "off-ice volunteer efforts", simply because those games happened to also be designated by the club to promote awareness of specific causes.

A clear example of resumé padding at it's finest.
Click to expand...

Was there a need for this comment ?. All these players at this level commit themselves fully to the game and the team. If they did not, they would not be at this level. We should be applauding their accomplishments, not rain on it during their time in the sun. JMO.

Besides, I was at one of those DIFD games you referred to. The players don't just play. They get involved in the campaign and do fund raising off the ice as well. I actually went to the Memorial service of the player in question a few years back. That was at the NHL rink where the Sens play. It was one of those awe inspiring events that stay firmly entrenched in your memory. Specially if you have lost one of your own. You would not understand unless you have been through it.

I Was also lucky enough to be at the White Out game. Another one of those great causes, triggered by a tragedy in the hockey community. I know I'm getting off topic, but these type of events show there is more to hockey and hockey players than the stats on the ice.

Peace. Out.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

OnMAA said:
It would be sad if that is the criteria used. I would hope that all the voters have multiple viewings of each candidate, preferably live, but as a minimum on tape, before casting their vote. To get a complete view of a player, how they play and their value to a team, is to follow them constantly during the game, both with the play, away from the play and on the bench. JMO. Lacking that, you could get is from "scouts" that watch a player frequently.
Click to expand...
Everyone will hear from league coaches on the committee regarding the all around skills of each of the top 10. But I think it's hard to stand out collectively in nonquantifiable subjective factors once you get to the very top 2 or 3. Maybe you won't consciously vote for Brandt simply because Minnesota is a better team and she's the higher scorer, but a lot of criteria that favor Brandt might be highly correlated with Minnesota's team success and her individual scoring. That's enough to make the difference, so those facts about Brandt have some predictive power.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

OnMAA said:
Was there a need for this comment ?. All these players at this level commit themselves fully to the game and the team. If they did not, they would not be at this level. We should be applauding their accomplishments, not rain on it during their time in the sun. JMO.

Besides, I was at one of those DIFD games you referred to. The players don't just play. They get involved in the campaign and do fund raising off the ice as well. I actually went to the Memorial service of the player in question a few years back. That was at the NHL rink where the Sens play. It was one of those awe inspiring events that stay firmly entrenched in your memory. Specially if you have lost one of your own. You would not understand unless you have been through it.

I Was also lucky enough to be at the White Out game. Another one of those great causes, triggered by a tragedy in the hockey community. I know I'm getting off topic, but these type of events show there is more to hockey and hockey players than the stats on the ice.

Peace. Out.
Click to expand...

You missed completely the point of my post...perhaps I failed to make the issue clear.

Read my first sentence. I agree wholeheartedly that this player is a worthy candidate for the award. Her on-ice accomplishments speak for themselves. As it happens, I actually know her very well both on and off the ice, and she is also a great person who is not a self-promoter.

Let me say first that I have no issue whatsoever with any athletes who do not do over-and-above volunteer activities. It's hard enough juggling D1 athletics and academics, particularly in an Ivy League school.

I just believe in telling the truth. IMHO merely participating in charity games is part and parcel of a team's schedule. It's not an off-ice activity. My point actually had nothing at all to do with her specifically, but with those who put together the verbiage promoting specific players for various awards. This is typical of the type of puffery that regularly goes on when a players' off-ice accomplishments are listed for activities that sometimes take little to no time and/or are indistinguishable from mandatory on-ice activities. I suppose the motivation for this is to make one team's candidate sound more special than another's.

My objection is that the typical puffery in profiles like this has the effect that it fails to accurately differentiate on a comparative basis versus the truly impressive accomplishments of those few individuals who do choose to invest a significant percentage of their time giving back in the community. Many student-athletes spend 10+ hrs/wk or more on their own initiative on volunteer work, in addition to what's the minimum done as required team activities.

There is a huge value in teams holding events such as DIFD, White-Out for Mandi, etc. and I frankly think every team should do something like this annually. I do not intend to minimize at all such events. It certainly gives both participants and fans a valuable perspective and added meaning to the game, as well as being a great team-bonding experience. While some team members step up and take key leadership roles of logistics and fundraising to make them more successful, putting in considerable behind-the-scenes effort into planning and executing such events, others are basically "passengers" who may do nothing more than play in the games. I just don't think it's appropriate that both extremes of participation around such events be talked about as if they are equivalent. Within annual events such as these, some years they are far more successful fundraisers than others only because a couple of individuals really stepped up to go above and beyond. Those are the type of accomplishments that should be recognized.

Peace. Out.
 
Last edited:
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

Trillium said:
You missed completely the point of my post...perhaps I failed to make the issue clear.
Click to expand...

Sorry I missed your point. Misread it completely.

Agree with many of your follow-up points.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

Congrats to Rattray. Thought the top three was wide open on who might win.

Would love to see some love in the future for defensemen.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

mnpokecheck said:
Congrats to Rattray. Thought the top three was wide open on who might win.

Would love to see some love in the future for defensemen.
Click to expand...

Congratulations to Jamie Lee and all of the finalists. I don't know how the judges choose between 3 candidates that are so deserving.

As far as future love for defensemen … Erin Ambrose 2016. :D
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

mnpokecheck said:
Congrats to Rattray. Thought the top three was wide open on who might win.

Would love to see some love in the future for defensemen.
Click to expand...

ABSOLUTELY! I really thought Ambrose should have been Final Three this year, although the three chosen were very worthy.

At least it is nice to see a deserving winner from a different school, rather than from the same 3 year after year. I very much doubt when Rattray committed to Clarkson that she expected she would be playing in the NC Final as her last game. It's better for the sport when top players opt for unexpected destinations, creating further ripple effects.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

Trillium said:
ABSOLUTELY! I really thought Ambrose should have been Final Three this year, although the three chosen were very worthy.

At least it is nice to see a deserving winner from a different school, rather than from the same 3 year after year. I very much doubt when Rattray committed to Clarkson that she expected she would be playing in the NC Final as her last game. It's better for the sport when top players opt for unexpected destinations, creating further ripple effects.
Click to expand...

A couple of interesting notes about Rattray from Clarkson's website. The first is the "also recruited by" section… Minnesota, Minnesota-Duluth, St. Lawrence, Wisconsin, Mercyhurst and Cornell. It was clearly apparent she was going to be a top player from when she was playing in juniors.

Second in the "Why Clarkson?" section … "People always ask me why I chose Clarkson, when I think they should really question why I wouldn’t choose Clarkson. As a student-athlete Clarkson has all the right ingredients: great hockey program filled with great coaches and a fantastic team. On my visit I already felt a part of the team. Clarkson also has strong academics and great academic-support. I also chose Clarkson because of the feeling I got when I stepped on campus. I felt right at home. The day I committed was the day I was ready to start."
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

Trillium said:
At least it is nice to see a deserving winner from a different school, rather than from the same 3 year after year.
Click to expand...

How's that? Sounds like pity to me. Are you saying because others go to a school that wins more they should be penalized?
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

Golden Tuuk said:
How's that? Sounds like pity to me. Are you saying because others go to a school that wins more they should be penalized?
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying

(1) It's good to see the very best players choosing to go to a wider variety of schools, not just the ones perennially at or near the top of the standings, because that's ultimately better for the sport. If you can have a standout performance to that extent on a team not at the top of the rankings, that is worthy of recognition (all else being roughly equal).

(2) But also, it is arguably easier to have a stand out performance on a top-ranked roster. The top-ranked programs automatically get lots of profile, and since you are also very likely to be playing with the best of the best, it tends to enhance a strong performance even further. If Brandt or Rattray were playing for Penn State, they would still be seen as great players, but would have nowhere near the stats they have. Being surrounded by other great players allows them to shine to their full potential.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

FireKnight said:
A couple of interesting notes about Rattray from Clarkson's website. The first is the "also recruited by" section… Minnesota, Minnesota-Duluth, St. Lawrence, Wisconsin, Mercyhurst and Cornell. It was clearly apparent she was going to be a top player from when she was playing in juniors.
Click to expand...

Her mother also told me she visited BU.

Second in the "Why Clarkson?" section … "People always ask me why I chose Clarkson, when I think they should really question why I wouldn’t choose Clarkson. As a student-athlete Clarkson has all the right ingredients: great hockey program filled with great coaches and a fantastic team. On my visit I already felt a part of the team. Clarkson also has strong academics and great academic-support. I also chose Clarkson because of the feeling I got when I stepped on campus. I felt right at home. The day I committed was the day I was ready to start."
Click to expand...

Jamie Lee (as well as many other players at the victory party) also mentioned the small school and small town atmosphere that they loved. When I told them I graduated from Potsdam State, their faces lit up, because they knew I understood what they were talking about.
 
Re: Patty Kazmaier 2014

Trillium said:
No, I'm saying

(1) It's good to see the very best players choosing to go to a wider variety of schools, not just the ones perennially at or near the top of the standings, because that's ultimately better for the sport. If you can have a standout performance to that extent on a team not at the top of the rankings, that is worthy of recognition (all else being roughly equal).

(2) But also, it is arguably easier to have a stand out performance on a top-ranked roster. The top-ranked programs automatically get lots of profile, and since you are also very likely to be playing with the best of the best, it tends to enhance a strong performance even further. If Brandt or Rattray were playing for Penn State, they would still be seen as great players, but would have nowhere near the stats they have. Being surrounded by other great players allows them to shine to their full potential.
Click to expand...



I agree with you about it being good for the sport. I think one of the negatives when I think of Women's Cbb, is that its been Tennessee/UConn for it seems like forever with Notre Dame maybe taking Tennessee's place?! I'm not saying there aren't other good teams, but they always have to beat UConn on their way to the Title, or that's how it seems. On the Men's side of things, there just seems to be more variety and more teams with a legit chance to win the title, makes it more interesting. Men's hockey is getting to be like that, with teams like Union and Quinnipiac now being programs that have to be taken very seriously, along with the BCs and Minnesotas and North Dakotas, etc..



But I am not sure I agree about it being easier to stand out when on a roster full of great players. A player like Rachel Bona seemed to shine when playing tough opponents, and she seemed to kind of fade into the background vs lesser opponents, probably because her teammates were piling on the points vs those lesser opponents. Seems she's the kind of player that if she was on a lesser team would have to rise up and kick butt every game, and would probably get a lot of points vs lesser opponents. Granted, it does help when you have skilled teammates who can pass you the puck and set you up for more scoring chances, but as could be seen on the Gophers this year, without Kessel around, those 100 pts she scored, basically were just scored by all the other players on her team and with more good choices to pass to, the scoring got more evenly spread out, possibly hurting everyone on the team's chances of sticking out and looking spectacular. But its hard to say for sure and its probably different for different players, with some being helped by it, and others being held back by it. That's the one thing I like about these women getting to compete for Team USA, it allows for us to see them playing with the same teammates, evens things out a little.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top