Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Collapse
X
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Originally posted by EPIC97 View PostTim can you edit the title of this thread to spell Kazmaier correctly.Wisconsin Hockey: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 WE WANT MORE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Wisko McBadgerton:
"Baggot says Hughes and Rockwood are centering the top two lines...
Timothy A --> Great hockey mind... Or Greatest hockey mind?!?"
Comment
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Originally posted by EPIC97 View PostTim can you edit the title of this thread to spell Kazmaier correctly.Wisconsin Hockey: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 WE WANT MORE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Wisko McBadgerton:
"Baggot says Hughes and Rockwood are centering the top two lines...
Timothy A --> Great hockey mind... Or Greatest hockey mind?!?"
Comment
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Originally posted by Timothy A View PostI'm not sure, but I felt really stupid screwing that up.Grant Salzano, Boston College '10
Writer Emeritus, BC Interruption
Twitter: @Salzano14
Click here for the BC Interruption Pairwise, KRACH, and GRaNT Calculators
Comment
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Originally posted by Timothy A View PostI figured it out!Wisconsin Hockey: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 WE WANT MORE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Wisko McBadgerton:
"Baggot says Hughes and Rockwood are centering the top two lines...
Timothy A --> Great hockey mind... Or Greatest hockey mind?!?"
Comment
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Originally posted by Eeyore View PostAll it takes is googling .
Originally posted by Eeyore View Postthis is something that has been researched for decades.
It's pretty simple really. If you play great defense and do not give up a goal, you only have to score once to win.
Substitute a different team that isn't quite as good that gives up one goal and they have to to score twice as many to win.
Substitute yet another team even less proficient that gives up two goals and they will have to score three times as many goals to win.
see the pattern yet, Stupid?
No?
OK, an even worse team that gives up three goals is going to have to score four times as many goals to win
And guess what, the team that gives up four ... yes! will have to score five times as many goals to win.
see? it isn't that difficult.Last edited by pokechecker; 03-09-2017, 06:06 PM.
Comment
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Originally posted by D2D View PostRules question: can a referee hand out coincidental 10 minute misconduct penalties?"Everything that rises must converge." Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
Comment
-
Originally posted by pokechecker View Postsee the pattern yet, Stupid?Grant Salzano, Boston College '10
Writer Emeritus, BC Interruption
Twitter: @Salzano14
Click here for the BC Interruption Pairwise, KRACH, and GRaNT Calculators
Comment
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
I think one big argument in ARD's favor is Cece's stats when Ann missed time. If it truly was all about the defense in front of the net and anyone could do well in that position, then Cece's numbers should be comparable to Ann's and aren't. Obviously there's the caveats about small sample size and that she's a rookie. But her GAA is double ARD's in the few games she played, belying that bit of conjecture.
For me, Pannek wasn't really in the discussion once her numbers dropped in the second half. It's difficult to argue about someone being dynamic when it was clear so much of their statistical success hinged on playing with another player. That line had special chemistry, but without Cameranesi, they definitely struggled more. I think it's difficult to argue in Pannek's favor there, especially in the face of what Stalder was doing.
I would have liked more focus on Pankowski, but I'm obviously biased. But she's put herself at the top of all the scoring categories despite a slow start and missing time with Team USA. Yes, great players shouldn't have slow starts and I'm definitely willing to argue that point and decide if it's an automatic disqualification type thing, but the fact is that even without scoring a goal in the first nine games, had Annie not missed four games (MN State and Bemidji) to play in the Nations Cup, she's probably be leading some offensive categories. Obvs there's no way to be sure, but I think she was an underrated candidate that isn't getting talked about enough.It's a great day for hockey!
Comment
-
Re: Patty Kazmaeir 2017
Originally posted by NMH View PostI think one big argument in ARD's favor is Cece's stats when Ann missed time. If it truly was all about the defense in front of the net and anyone could do well in that position, then Cece's numbers should be comparable to Ann's and aren't. Obviously there's the caveats about small sample size and that she's a rookie. But her GAA is double ARD's in the few games she played, belying that bit of conjecture.
For me, Pannek wasn't really in the discussion once her numbers dropped in the second half. It's difficult to argue about someone being dynamic when it was clear so much of their statistical success hinged on playing with another player. That line had special chemistry, but without Cameranesi, they definitely struggled more. I think it's difficult to argue in Pannek's favor there, especially in the face of what Stalder was doing.
I would have liked more focus on Pankowski, but I'm obviously biased. But she's put herself at the top of all the scoring categories despite a slow start and missing time with Team USA. Yes, great players shouldn't have slow starts and I'm definitely willing to argue that point and decide if it's an automatic disqualification type thing, but the fact is that even without scoring a goal in the first nine games, had Annie not missed four games (MN State and Bemidji) to play in the Nations Cup, she's probably be leading some offensive categories. Obvs there's no way to be sure, but I think she was an underrated candidate that isn't getting talked about enough.Wisconsin Hockey: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 WE WANT MORE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Wisko McBadgerton:
"Baggot says Hughes and Rockwood are centering the top two lines...
Timothy A --> Great hockey mind... Or Greatest hockey mind?!?"
Comment
Comment