2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

[Rightnut]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

I concur, Pankowski will probably end up the top rookie when all is said and done. Cianfarano added to the BADgers freshemn would have been a big SIN

Would be nice to see a California girl like Pankowski pick that up. First of hopefully many more girls to come.

[pokechecker]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

it is really Pankowski's award to win.

...she may be only the 3rd best on her team

I said may

[brookyone]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

I concur, Pankowski will probably end up the top rookie when all is said and done.

I'm certainly coming around to this train of thought.

Still...keep eyes on Burt also.

[ARM]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

I'm certainly coming around to this train of thought.

I'd still give my edge to Cianfarano based on her importance to her team's offense and overall start. They have the same number of goals, but Pankowski has played three more games. Pankowski has five more assists, but then her team scores a lot more overall, so she has more chances to pick up an assist. For example, Pankowski has assists on 21% of the goals she didn't score; Cianfarano has assists on 24%. In terms of importance to her team's offense, Pankowski has a point on 29.7% of the Badgers' goals, and Cianfarano has a point on 38.9% of the Bobcats' goals. Perhaps some of that can be offset by Wisconsin playing a tougher schedule so far.

[NMH]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

This convo has me crying about the loss of Cianfarano all over again. Pankowski and Clark have developed into a spectacular combo. Can't imagine adding TT into that. SIGH

[stanleycup]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

This convo has me crying about the loss of Cianfarano all over again. Pankowski and Clark have developed into a spectacular combo. Can't imagine adding TT into that. SIGH

Add Victoria Bach from Boston University name to the Rookie of the year discussion. She has 12 points in 14 games so far this season and will be an offensive force for BU and Team Canada (just named to 2015 Development team) for years to come. Very talented player!

[pokechecker]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

Add Victoria Bach from Boston University name to the Rookie of the year discussion. She has 12 points in 14 games so far this season and will be an offensive force for BU and Team Canada (just named to 2015 Development team) for years to come. Very talented player!

hopefully she'll learn how to play defense
it was only one game that I saw back in OCT, but I was more impressed with BU's 3rd line and Rebecca Leslie

[stanleycup]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

hopefully she'll learn how to play defense
it was only one game that I saw back in OCT, but I was more impressed with BU's 3rd line and Rebecca Leslie

Good point, needs to learn to play at both ends of the ice. Among BU team leaders (in a bad way) for +/-. That said, having a player that can consistently score is hard to find in women's hockey.

[Supernaut]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

I'm going to avoid some of the superstars playing on the D1 all star teams and suggest some players that may not get the respect they deserve because of their teams lower ranked status. When looking at players for an award I always ask myself, where would that team be without that player? Or how would that player impact a last place team? I have no doubt Wisconsin would just keep rolling along without pankowski and clark and maybe the two of them would move a providence or Syracuse type of team up but they are on atop three with great players as a support system. So why does everybody keep mentioning these players? The team and their rank has a lot to
do with it. Cianfarano is making a huge difference for Quinnipiac so yeah very legit contender. How about grossi for the cuse? This team is nowhere near contending but she's tied 3rd overall in fr scoring on A very sub par team? Robello for mercy, second in scoring but has a bit More support. This is not even considering defence and goaltending where there are certainly more candidates. I like the underdogs that don't always get the respect they deserve because they are not on the super teams.

[brookyone]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

I'm going to avoid some of the superstars playing on the D1 all star teams and suggest some players that may not get the respect they deserve because of their teams lower ranked status. When looking at players for an award I always ask myself, where would that team be without that player? Or how would that player impact a last place team? I have no doubt Wisconsin would just keep rolling along without pankowski and clark and maybe the two of them would move a providence or Syracuse type of team up but they are on atop three with great players as a support system. So why does everybody keep mentioning these players? The team and their rank has a lot to
do with it. Cianfarano is making a huge difference for Quinnipiac so yeah very legit contender. How about grossi for the cuse? This team is nowhere near contending but she's tied 3rd overall in fr scoring on A very sub par team? Robello for mercy, second in scoring but has a bit More support. This is not even considering defence and goaltending where there are certainly more candidates. I like the underdogs that don't always get the respect they deserve because they are not on the super teams.

I've read similar, even identical sentiments posted many times during discussions of individual players where an official award or recognition is at stake. Can't argue with the clear deserving nature of the high impact players on teams outside of those highly ranked and judged as deeper in talent. They should be promoted and merit as much consideration and respect as other contenders.

It is an individual award. I don't claim to know what those who vote consider or to what degree they may analyze or dissect...say, a players stats, or other player attributes.

But again, it is an individual award...so while successful freshmen from outside the higher profile teams certainly deserve equal consideration I'm always a little uncomfortable with suggestions that the team of any contender should be a factor. It may well be a factor for those voting. That's reasonable, but if it's me...I'm going to try and decide by attempting to strictly compare player(s) individual performances. The team obviously does impact a players success so it may not be easy, or entirely possible to weigh one against another, on individual merits alone, with perfect accuracy.

Basically my concern is that the strength of a contenders team not be a negative for their consideration. Not held against them.

Plus, it would seem likely to me that voters throughout D-I conferences would likely not have seen all legit candidates play...live and in person. Right?

[Supernaut]

I've read similar, even identical sentiments posted many times during discussions of individual players where an official award or recognition is at stake. Can't argue with the clear deserving nature of the high impact players on teams outside of those highly ranked and judged as deeper in talent. They should be promoted and merit as much consideration and respect as other contenders.

It is an individual award. I don't claim to know what those who vote consider or to what degree they may analyze or dissect...say, a players stats, or other player attributes.

But again, it is an individual award...so while successful freshmen from outside the higher profile teams certainly deserve equal consideration I'm always a little uncomfortable with suggestions that the team of any contender should be a factor. It may well be a factor for those voting. That's reasonable, but if it's me...I'm going to try and decide by attempting to strictly compare player(s) individual performances. The team obviously does impact a players success so it may not be easy, or entirely possible to weigh one against another, on individual merits alone, with perfect accuracy.

Basically my concern is that the strength of a contenders team not be a negative for their consideration. Not held against them.

Plus, it would seem likely to me that voters throughout D-I conferences would likely not have seen all legit candidates play...live and in person. Right?

Agreed, always a tough decision regardless and everybody has a different perspective when choosing.

[pokechecker]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

I'm going to avoid some of the superstars playing on the D1 all star teams and suggest some players that may not get the respect they deserve because of their teams lower ranked status. When looking at players for an award I always ask myself, where would that team be without that player? Or how would that player impact a last place team? I have no doubt Wisconsin would just keep rolling along without pankowski and clark and maybe the two of them would move a providence or Syracuse type of team up but they are on atop three with great players as a support system. So why does everybody keep mentioning these players? The team and their rank has a lot to
do with it. Cianfarano is making a huge difference for Quinnipiac so yeah very legit contender. How about grossi for the cuse? This team is nowhere near contending but she's tied 3rd overall in fr scoring on A very sub par team? Robello for mercy, second in scoring but has a bit More support. This is not even considering defence and goaltending where there are certainly more candidates. I like the underdogs that don't always get the respect they deserve because they are not on the super teams.

I agree with you, the problem is that players on the top teams accumulate more points because they are playing with better players. So when you compare stats, the players on the top teams look more impressive.

Minnesota State has yet to win a game, their leading goal scorer and also total points, freshman Nicole Schammel has 1/3 of their goals.

[Supernaut]

I agree with you, the problem is that players on the top teams accumulate more points because they are playing with better players. So when you compare stats, the players on the top teams look more impressive.

Minnesota State has yet to win a game, their leading goal scorer and also total points, freshman Nicole Schammel has 1/3 of their goals.

Agreed. I missed her as I just looked at the top d1freshmen scorers, not individual team scorers.

[Plus-Minus]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

I agree with you, the problem is that players on the top teams accumulate more points because they are playing with better players. So when you compare stats, the players on the top teams look more impressive.

Minnesota State has yet to win a game, their leading goal scorer and also total points, freshman Nicole Schammel has 1/3 of their goals.

I agree. When evaluating players, consideration should be given to leading goal scorers, and/or assisted goal scorers on weaker teams...after all where would Gretzky be without Messier. Playmakers can be as important as goal scores, and even more so on weaker teams. It's not hard for an opponent to determine who the leading goal scorer is and assign a shadow for that player.

[brookyone]

Re: 2015 National Rookie of the Year Cordial Dialogue

Kelly Pannek, gaining some momentum.