All Ivy team announced

[PrincetonFan]

The All-Ivy Team:

First Team
Forward: Jessica Link, Brown, Jr. (Clifton Park, N.Y.)
Forward: Nicole Corriero, Harvard, Jr. (Thornhill, Ont.)
Forward: Gretchen Anderson, Princeton, Sr. (Natick, Mass.)
Defense: Amy McLaughlin, Brown, Jr. (Berlin, Mass.)
Defense Angela Ruggiero, Harvard, Sr. (Harper Woods, Mich.)
Goalie: Megan Van Beusekom, Princeton, Sr. (Loretto, Minn.)
Goalie: Sarah Love, Yale, So. (Bayfield, Ont.)

Second Team
Forward: Gillian Apps, Dartmouth, So. (Unionville, Ont.)
Forward: Sarah Clark, Dartmouth, Sr. (Novi, Mich.)
Forward: Katie Weatherston, Dartmouth, So. (Thunder Bay, Ont.)
Forward: Julie Chu, Harvard, So. (Fairfield, Conn.)
Defense: Louise Pietrangelo, Dartmouth, Sr. (Niagara Falls, Ont.)
Defense: Angela Gooldy, Princeton, Sr. (New Hartford, N.Y.)

Honorable Mention
Krissy McManus, Brown (Jr., F, Dedham, Mass.)
Heather Jackson, Princeton (So., F, Exeter, N.H.)
Erin Duggan, Yale (Jr., D, Beaumont, Alb.)
Ali Boe, Harvard, (Fr., G, Edina, Minn.)

Player of the Year
Angela Ruggiero, Harvard, Sr., D, (Harper Woods, Mich.)

Rookie of the Year
Kim Pearce, Princeton, F (Ottawa, Ont.)

For the full story:

http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/article.asp?intID=3115

[dave1381]

Note that performance in Ivy play tends to have much more weight in selecting any All-Ivy team. If you look at the Ivy-only stats, http://www.collegehockeystats.com/0304/confstats/ivyw then you can see where a lot of these picks are coming from.

Dartmouth is only the second outright Ivy champion and third overall to have no one make the First Team. I was thinking that might happen the other day and thought Pietrangelo was their best shot, but they took McLaughlin who put up more points.

[kashmunnie73]

...how does a Brown junior with 21 points or so beat out her own soph teammate, Keaton Zucker, with 34 points...both are forwards. Somebody working off +/- numbers? kash

[kashmunnie73]

eom

[dave1381]

But you're right about McManus though, only 7 points in Ivy play, 4 of which were against Cornell. Her only other goal in Ivy play was in the first Harvard game when Brown was already down 3-0. It's a pretty suspect pick, probably based more on reputation than anything else.

[BBpucky]

What are the criteria and how are the all Ivy- teams selected? Are these players nominated by their coaches or other coaches in the league or what?

I am suprised by some of the selections, and this is why I ask.

[GreenQuill]

Originally posted by BBpucky
What are the criteria and how are the all Ivy- teams selected? Are these players nominated by their coaches or other coaches in the league or what?

I am suprised by some of the selections, and this is why I ask.

My understanding is that the coaches have a conference call, and each coach talks a bit about his/her players that should be considered. Then the coaches vote, theoretically based solely on performance in Ivy League games.

I may be wrong, but that's what I've heard.

-GQ

[dave1381]

Originally posted by BBpucky
I am suprised by some of the selections, and this is why I ask.
What are you surprised by?
As I said, the Ivy-only scoring numbers come pretty close to perfectly prediciting the first two teams. Obviously, this disrespects players who take on more defensive roles, but that's the way these things always work. Also note that Ivy play is a pretty small sample size, so a lot of different things can happen.

And Cherie Piper's non-selection should come as no surprise since I think she only played for 60 minutes for maybe only half or less than half her teams Ivy games, and of ones she did play in, a lot came right when she was coming back from injury or what not.

[unofan]

What a surprise...Dartmouth gets shafted once again. At least now it's not only a men's team phenomenon (who did better this year than I expected in the Ivy Awards, given the recent history)

The only thing I can think of is that the 3 Dartmouth forwards split their votes - thereby assuring none of em made the 1st team. Still p***es me off, though. 8-1-1 in Ivy play and can't get a single player on the first team...

[GreenQuill]

Originally posted by UNOFan
What a surprise...Dartmouth gets shafted once again. At least now it's not only a men's team phenomenon (who did better this year than I expected in the Ivy Awards, given the recent history)

The only thing I can think of is that the 3 Dartmouth forwards split their votes - thereby assuring none of em made the 1st team. Still p***es me off, though. 8-1-1 in Ivy play and can't get a single player on the first team...

The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Honestly, who is the Big Green's biggest individual threat? You have six players averaging a point per game overall, and three of them (Weatherston, Apps, Piper) averaging better than 1.6

It's also worth noting that all 7 of Clark's goals this season were in Ivy play, including the game-winner in the Brown game that clinched the championship and both Dartmouth goals in the win at Harvard.

By the same token, Weatherston has five goals against Cornell, but hasn't really dominated against the other Ivies. Against the whole ECAC, on the other hand, she has 36 points, so she is a leading candidate to get the odd combination of second team All-Ivy and first team All-ECAC.

I could look at this all day, but I do have finals, you know. :rolleyes:

-GQ

[BigGreenfan]

Pretty sad that there are no Dartmouth players on the first All Ivy team. They won the Ivy League this year and in looking at the Ivy League stats there are two Dartmouth players in the top five: Katie Weatherston is second with 19 points, only one point less than Jessica Link and Sarah Clark has 16 points and she is tied with Angela Ruggiero. What were these guys thinking????

And is Jessica Link not on defense for Brown. Why is she listed as a forward on the Ivy Team?

[Jerrytas]

At least in the case of Angie, points don't tell the whole tale. She also anchored the best defense in the league (and nation). That being said, Weatherston probably should've been recognized.

[GreenQuill]

Originally posted by BigGreenfan
Pretty sad that there are no Dartmouth players on the first All Ivy team. They won the Ivy League this year and in looking at the Ivy League stats there are two Dartmouth players in the top five: Katie Weatherston is second with 19 points, only one point less than Jessica Link and Sarah Clark has 16 points and she is tied with Angela Ruggiero. What were these guys thinking????

And is Jessica Link not on defense for Brown. Why is she listed as a forward on the Ivy Team?

"These guys" - aka the coaches - are probably thinking about their individual games with the teams involved. Hudak can't vote for his own players, so it's really a question of who played well against your team, and probably who scored among the forwards. So there are five coaches who can vote for Dartmouth players on these teams, and here's my guess as to which .

Stone - Clark, possibly Apps
Murphy - Clark, Apps
Kampersal - Apps, possibly Weatherston
Witt - Weatherston, possibly Hagge (although if she had voted for Hagge, she'd have been honorable mention)
Davidson - Weatherston, possibly Clark

Figure you may want to spread it around a bit, so it's tough to vote for two forwards from the same school, and who got picked is tough.

It's not like Harvard, where Corriero, Ruggiero, and Chu are ALWAYS there, or Brown, where Link is really the star of the team, or Princeton, where you have Anderson, and then Van Beusekom in net. There is no star <b>of</b> the Big Green. There are <u>stars</u> <b>on</b> the Big Green, but no star <b>of</b> the Big Green. Hence the awards.

Still, if Weatherston doesn't get first team all-ECAC, <b>THEN</b> I'll be annoyed.

-GQ

[dave1381]

Jerrytas - Weatherston was recognized, she got Second Team. And no one was disputing Ruggiero should be on the First Team as a defenseman, that comparison with Ruggiero was made to indicate Clark should have been on the first team.

BigGreenFan - Link was first listed as a D because of a weird 2-3 system of listing players way back at the start of the season, but they abandoned it. She's always been a F really.

I think in terms of looking at who the best forwards were in Ivy play in terms of scoring, you'd have to say Link, Clark, and Anderson. Link had big goals in just about every Brown game. Anderson wasn't quite as consistent as Link but when she scored she'd have hat tricks and four-point games that would totally alter the course of games against quality opponents. Then Clark had so many points against Harvard and Brown. I think these were pretty clearly your three most consistent/prolific scorers in the Ivy games.

Corriero and Weatherston each had several important points in Ivy play (Corriero had two of Harvard's three goals last weekend for instance), but I don't think they had quite the scoring impact in Ivy play as the three forwards listed above. Also, five of Weatherston's goals were against Cornell as were six of Corriero's points. So I don't think Weatherston was snubbed at all here, and I'd take Clark over Weatherston. Now I'd like to think that Corriero made this team over Clark because maybe coaches recognized the role Corriero plays on that team aside from scoring, for instance she's a definitely a big part of the Harvard penalty kill that ranks No. 1 in the nation. I think that first Brown game she just about singlehandedly shut down their power play on the forecheck. But unfortunately the more likely explanation is she got voted on more so by default because she was one of the league's three players to make the Kaz Top Ten. Now, I think she was plenty deserving of the Kaz honor, but some of her best scoring performances have been against the best non-Ivy teams Harvard played (St. L, UMD, Providence in particular) and probably should not have played as much a role in these All-Ivy selections if Ivy games are what count.

Lastly, I agree Dartmouth's scoring is more balanced than the other Ivy teams for the most part, but that balance you see in the stats is also smoothed even further (if that makes any sense) just because you've actually had so many of their top six scorers physically being out of the lineup at different stretches of the season. So you can't say Dartmouth is being screwed over for awards simply because of its balanced scoring. Dartmouth is not getting awards because of the combination of the balance and the "balance by force/necessity" if you will that Dartmouth players have brought on themselves by leaving their team for national camps.

[BBpucky]

Originally posted by dave1381
What are you surprised by?
As I said, the Ivy-only scoring numbers come pretty close to perfectly prediciting the first two teams. Obviously, this disrespects players who take on more defensive roles, but that's the way these things always work. Also note that Ivy play is a pretty small sample size, so a lot of different things can happen.



I guess when you put it this way Dave, it does make sense. However, despite it being an "All Ivy" team, I thought the voters would take into account the overall strength and perfomance of a player and not just the points. I just think that there are some players who make more of an impact on their teams and who are better quality overall and I do not think that these teams necessarily reflect the best players in the Ivy league, but rather who could put up the most points against weaker league opponents. Perhaps though other players will get honored down the line when more is taken into account. Don't get me wrong because for the most part they honored great hockey players, but there were a few that made me scratch my head. But I also know that most awards are based on points alone and that plays a large role.

[dave1381]

Well you can always look out box scores and figure out who scored when.

In terms of predicting the ECAC First Team and Weatherston will make it. For starters, I imagine Corriero and Anderson are pretty much a given to make the First Team again.

That would leave one forward spot for Kingsbury, Weatherston, Link, Chu, Hagge... just to list off the top remaining scorers. Now to filter through the stats of those five, first let's see how they rank in terms of performance vs. ECAC playoff teams (i.e. ex. Union/Vermont). So these are going to be 14-game stats.
1. Link 15-10 25
2. Kingsbury 12-12 24
2. Chu 5-19 24
4. Weatherston 11-11 22
5. Hagge 5-12 17

And to narrow it even further, look at performance vs. Top 5 ECAC teams (which I think we can agree is pretty much where the huge drop off is). So these are 8-game stats.
1. Link 8-5 13
1. Chu 1-12 13
3. Kingsbury 7-4 11
4. Weatherston 3-6 9
5. Hagge 2-3 5

So like with Ivy teams, I don't think you can call it a blatant snub if Weatherston doesn't get First Team ECAC. By the way, for point of comparison, Anderson and Corriero have 12 and 13 goals against ECAC playoff teams, respectively, and 7 and 6 goals against Top 5 teams. So they're right where they should be there. Also, I'd add that the scoring margins separating these players are not that large for the most part, and voters should consider other factors beyond scoring.

[empire2000]

Dave1381- To be fair, instead of handing spots to Corriero and Anderson, let's just include them in your lists. Points aren't everything as you say, but I don't see them as locks for the first team.

vs ECAC playoff teams:
1. Link 15-10 25
2. Kingsbury 12-12 24
2. Chu 5-19 24
4. Weatherston 11-11 22
5. Corriero 13-8-21
6. Anderson 12-8-20
7. Hagge 5-12 17

8-game stats among top 5 ECAC teams.
1. Link 8-5 13
1. Chu 1-12 13
3. Anderson 7-5-12
4. Kingsbury 7-4 11
5. Corriero 6-3-9
5. Weatherston 3-6 9
6. Hagge 2-3 5

[dave1381]

wow. I didn't expect anyone else would check those numbers.

I accidentally understated Corriero and Anderson's goals against ECAC playoff teams in my previous post because I looked at the wrong column of a stat sheet and left out their goals against Cornell, but your numbers are right. I've corrected my post. Thanks for pointing that out. Our numbers against top five teams match.

[ushockey]

While Corriero and others built up their stats in Union games Brown's Jess Link volunteered to sit out the second game so a team mate who hadn't played could dress for the first time. That speaks volumes for a class player and captain.

I'm sure there are also a lot of unsung defencemen out there who play defensively so get no notice from anyone but their coaches and teammates. In fact I'm a little sceptical of defencemen with big stats. Should they get the credit or should their teammates and defensive partners who cover for them. Obviously this information is not easy to put numbers to, so is overlooked in large part.

As much as I like watching Angela Rugiero from Harvard it isn't fair comparing her stats to other players who get more normal ice times. She rarely comes off the ice. If anyone thinks this is good for team morale I suggest they talk to anyone sitting on any bench on any team who likes to play hockey. The hockey players I know want to play hockey and even with a positive attitude about the team winning will not enjoy the game as much as if they were playing.

[dave1381]

As for Angela, the stats that speak most clearly for her are 25-3-1 and 104-12-5, Harvard's overall record this season, and Harvard's all-time record in games Angela has played in. That more than anything is why she's winning these awards. Also, I remind you that Harvard's had two-to-three defensemen injured at various points of this season, and Harvard had to move one of its forwards back to compensate, and most of the defensemen were extremely inexperienced at the college level the start of the season. All this and Harvard still has the lowest goals per game in the country.

And of course it's Harvard who gets picked on for running up scores and no one else, ever. How about Gina Kingsbury, who scored three goals and an assist in the third period of a game that was 9-0 at the last intermission, and two were at even strength. That to me is far worse evidence of intent to run up the score than any other performance against Union (to Kingsbury's credit, she had just two assists in the second game). Corriero, on the other hand, had zero even strength goals in the third period (one sh goal came on a dump-in I think) in Harvard's first win over Union, zero goals in the second and third periods of Harvard's second win. It appears if she had wanted to maximize her stats those games, she would have had 30 points, not 16. Also, recall these were Harvard's first two games of the season. You prepare for weeks to play your first games and you're not going to play all-out for less than three periods of out of six. I've posted this before of course, but that thread is long since dead so I've got to reiterate. It's an entirely different situation than what St. Lawrence faced last weekend.