US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

[wwhyte]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

So that means that Brandt is the only 10-finalist for last year's Kazmaier who's going to be eligible this year. Brandt / Skarupa / Erickson as finalists?

 

[UCONN FAN]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Surprised to see Lawler and Steadman not make it. Steadman had a lot of turnovers at the weekend but made a lot of chances too. Lawler was fast and aggressive.

Cuts from Worlds team: Erickson, Rigsby, Schoullis, Steadman.

New: Buesser, Dunne, Pankowski, Pucci, Schaus, Stack.

How are Schaus and Stack new?

 

[96IllinoisDad]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Congratulations to 3 former Chicago Mission players: Coyne, Bozek and Chesson!

 

[wwhyte]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

How are Schaus and Stack new?

New compared to the World's roster. Obviously they were always likely to be on this one.

 

[Bumbles]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

So that means that Brandt is the only 10-finalist for last year's Kazmaier who's going to be eligible this year. Brandt / Skarupa / Erickson as finalists?

Erickson graduated already. Impossible to know right now but maybe Brandt/Skarupa/Rattray (Canadian from Clarkson).

For future cuts, it's going to be 3D and 1F. That will give them the full team of 3Gs, 6Ds and 12Fs for 21 total players.

 

[Hockeysbest]

THIS ROSTER IS A JOKE. WATCH THE CANADIANS GET THE GOLD AGAIN WITH THIS U.S. ROSTER!
Observations
1) Could be a great Team
2) 9 D?
3) Carpenter and Coyne from Hockey East
4) Rigsby back to Wisconsin
5) Brandt McMillen back to MN - Stecklein still in the mix of 9 D
6) Both Twins made it[/QUOTE]

 

[wwhyte]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

THIS ROSTER IS A JOKE. WATCH THE CANADIANS GET THE GOLD AGAIN WITH THIS U.S. ROSTER!

Who would you have kept/cut?

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Who would you have kept/cut?

I think that one that really sticks out is Dunne and strictly because of age/experience (haven't actually seen her play). I'm sure that she is an outstanding player (especially for her age) - would pretty much have to be to get this far. But it is hard to imagine that someone like Courtney Burke isn't a better pick for the team having already proven herself a strong player at the Division 1 level. Picking a 16 year old smells like a recruiting ploy for Harvard (regardless of whether it is or not). In the end, probably won't matter since she likely will get cut in December.

That being said, I do NOT think that this roster is a joke - this is a strong well-balanced team that has a reasonable shot at gold in Sochi.

 

[rangersrule]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Tough decisions no doubt! Surprises may be Pankowski instead of Brandt or Lawler ; and Dunne over Burke IMO. All 41 of the players that attended this camp are terrific hockey players and no matter who was picked, team USA would have a strong team. Just interesting to see who was picked over who and why! Either way this roster is certainly no joke -- Canada will have their hands full!

 

[OnMAA]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

How does it work now for Pankowski? Does she actually start her freshman year the following season with the 2014-2015 incoming freshmen class at Wisconsin that includes Rolfes, Wellhausen, Cianfirano -- all members of this past years U-18 team? If that's the case, this could be a VERY strong incoming class at UW!

Last time around some later cuts sat out the whole year, while others joined their team after the break. Suspect it depends on both the team needs, and possibly the academics as well. Don't recall the detials on the American players, but of the three late Canuck cuts, two skipped the whole season and one played second half of the season.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Erickson graduated already. Impossible to know right now but maybe Brandt/Skarupa/Rattray (Canadian from Clarkson).

For future cuts, it's going to be 3D and 1F. That will give them the full team of 3Gs, 6Ds and 12Fs for 21 total players.

There is a few others that come to mind. Saulnier and Babstock just to mention a couple.

Not sure what the roster limit is, but Canucks usually go with a 23 player roster. IIRC break down is 7D,13F and 3G, giving you one spare at each position on a 20 person squad.

 

[HockeyScholar]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Hmm. Two observations: 1) Wonder if they might be thinking about the future by picking some of the younger/ first time players and 2) Maybe some bias?......

P.S. As a BU fan, really happy to see Coyne and Carpenter will be away for NU and BC . Evens out with us losing Poulin.

Not sure if this is what you were implying, but in terms of your second concern of bias, my first reaction to the final roster/camp roster was in fact a bit of surprise to see so many from Harvard on this final roster and at the camp to begin with, given my general impressions of the pool of talent. Checked some of the players college stats, and seems that some of the Harvard players' points (in college) appeared to be lower than the stats of others on the roster. Points of course don't always tell the whole story, particularly for defensemen. I didn't see the selection camp, so can only rely on past observations of players/stats.

With that said, it seems to me that bias is a problem only if Stone picked players for the roster *because* they played for Harvard. However, also possible that Stone liked something about these players to begin with, which is why she recruited them to Harvard in the first place, and consequently, we should not be surprised to see a lot of Harvard names on the roster. In short, she may be legitimately biased towards (ie value) whatever unique talents and roles these women can bring to a hockey team (any team), and not necessarily biased toward their status as former/current Harvard players. It's not in Stone's or the selection com.'s interest to select anything less than the best team possible. If there is any college-bias, it will come back to hurt the team in the end. That's unfortunate, unjust, and unfair if it does occur, but it does mean that there is a self-enforcing punishment mechanism for not basing selection on merit in the long-term, and that makes me less worried about the first kind of bias.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Not sure what the roster limit is, but Canucks usually go with a 23 player roster. IIRC break down is 7D,13F and 3G, giving you one spare at each position on a 20 person squad.

Answering my own question on roster size. Look like at the moment it is 21, but could increase to 23 based on this excerpt from:

http://globalnews.ca/news/511030/twenty-seven-women-take-first-step-to-sochi/

"Church had a 23-player roster for the world championship, but the International Olympic Committee hasn’t yet increased the size of the women’s hockey rosters from 21 to 23 for Sochi.

International Ice Hockey Federation Rene Fasel did not know at the women’s world championship whether the IOC would allow for two more skaters per country in Sochi.

“We’re operating under the assumption it may be a 23-player roster, which is why we arrived at the number we did,” Church said."

 

[joehockey]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

P.S. As a BU fan, really happy to see Coyne and Carpenter will be away for NU and BC . Evens out with us losing Poulin.

Will BU be without both Poulin & Kohanchuk for this season?

 

[WCHFan]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Tough decisions no doubt! Surprises may be Pankowski instead of Brandt or Lawler ; and Dunne over Burke IMO. All 41 of the players that attended this camp are terrific hockey players and no matter who was picked, team USA would have a strong team. Just interesting to see who was picked over who and why! Either way this roster is certainly no joke -- Canada will have their hands full!

I like most of the roster. Schoulis is the the one that surprises me. She's big, can skate and owns the front of the net. Would give Canada trouble. Lawler is a nice player but has had her chance.

 

[whoop87]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Joehockey - Kohanchuk graduated from BU this past year so she won't be back. She has used up her college eligibility. She red-shirted the 2011-2012 season after playing in only 7 games...I'm guessing you are thinking she has one more year left due to the red-shirt season but she already used it. Heck of a player, great hands and a dynamic duo when paired with Poulin.

 

[joehockey]

Joehockey - Kohanchuk graduated from BU this past year so she won't be back. She has used up her college eligibility. She red-shirted the 2011-2012 season after playing in only 7 games...I'm guessing you are thinking she has one more year left due to the red-shirt season but she already used it. Heck of a player, great hands and a dynamic duo when paired with Poulin.

Thanks I thought she had 1 more year my error!

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

Not sure if this is what you were implying, but in terms of your second concern of bias, my first reaction to the final roster/camp roster was in fact a bit of surprise to see so many from Harvard on this final roster and at the camp to begin with, given my general impressions of the pool of talent. Checked some of the players college stats, and seems that some of the Harvard players' points (in college) appeared to be lower than the stats of others on the roster. Points of course don't always tell the whole story, particularly for defensemen. I didn't see the selection camp, so can only rely on past observations of players/stats.

With that said, it seems to me that bias is a problem only if Stone picked players for the roster *because* they played for Harvard. However, also possible that Stone liked something about these players to begin with, which is why she recruited them to Harvard in the first place, and consequently, we should not be surprised to see a lot of Harvard names on the roster. In short, she may be legitimately biased towards (ie value) whatever unique talents and roles these women can bring to a hockey team (any team), and not necessarily biased toward their status as former/current Harvard players. It's not in Stone's or the selection com.'s interest to select anything less than the best team possible. If there is any college-bias, it will come back to hurt the team in the end. That's unfortunate, unjust, and unfair if it does occur, but it does mean that there is a self-enforcing punishment mechanism for not basing selection on merit in the long-term, and that makes me less worried about the first kind of bias.

You raise some really good points about Stone being more likely to pick players for the national team that she recruited to Harvard because they fit the set of skills she values most (which is why she recruited them in the first place).

I can't speak to the personal likelihood of bias by Coach Stone and how much impact she personally has on the final roster selections. But I would dispute the fact that it is not in Stone's favor to be biased if indeed she had the opportunity to do so (and again - I don't know that she did) and that there is some sort of self-enforcing punishment. Stone is at Harvard as the coach likely for life if she chooses to be, barring some egregious mis-steps or errors in personal judgement, and this is pretty much the pinnacle of success as a coach in women's hockey. Her success or failure as a US Olympic coach will have little impact on her status at Harvard and is a positive for the school regardless of the Olympic performance ("Coach Stone was the 2014 Olympic team coach..." will never be a bad thing). I have heard from numerous recruits how their visit to Harvard revolved almost exclusively around the cult of Katey Stone (some liked it, some did not) and the Olympic experience will only reinforce that. Similarly, the ability of Harvard to claim that "under Coach Stone, X players have gone on to play for the US Olympic team" will also only be a positive. So if Coach Stone could load up the Olympic team on current Harvard and ex-Harvard players (and a potential Harvard recruit in the case of Dunne), this would only be a good thing for Stone and Harvard - there is no self-correcting mechanism or punishment for this behavior that I can think of. The only control is the oversight of USA Hockey in monitoring the selections and many have observed that that is historically spotty.

 

[HockeyScholar]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

You raise some really good points about Stone being more likely to pick players for the national team that she recruited to Harvard because they fit the set of skills she values most (which is why she recruited them in the first place).

I can't speak to the personal likelihood of bias by Coach Stone and how much impact she personally has on the final roster selections. But I would dispute the fact that it is not in Stone's favor to be biased if indeed she had the opportunity to do so (and again - I don't know that she did) and that there is some sort of self-enforcing punishment. Stone is at Harvard as the coach likely for life if she chooses to be, barring some egregious mis-steps or errors in personal judgement, and this is pretty much the pinnacle of success as a coach in women's hockey. Her success or failure as a US Olympic coach will have little impact on her status at Harvard and is a positive for the school regardless of the Olympic performance ("Coach Stone was the 2014 Olympic team coach..." will never be a bad thing). I have heard from numerous recruits how their visit to Harvard revolved almost exclusively around the cult of Katey Stone (some liked it, some did not) and the Olympic experience will only reinforce that. Similarly, the ability of Harvard to claim that "under Coach Stone, X players have gone on to play for the US Olympic team" will also only be a positive. So if Coach Stone could load up the Olympic team on current Harvard and ex-Harvard players (and a potential Harvard recruit in the case of Dunne), this would only be a good thing for Stone and Harvard - there is no self-correcting mechanism or punishment for this behavior that I can think of. The only control is the oversight of USA Hockey in monitoring the selections and many have observed that that is historically spotty.

Excellent points. I think you've changed my mind on whether one can count on some kind of self-enforcing punishment for not picking on merit.

 

[driventoit]

Re: US National Teams: U30s & Mrs. Potter, U22s, U18s Part II

So, Coach Stone would rather lose Olympic gold with Harvard players than win Olympic gold without Harvard players??????