PDA

View Full Version : D-III Player of the Year finalists announced



Pages : [1] 2

Derek Dunning
03-15-2010, 04:39 PM
http://www.ahcahockey.com/news/0910/0315wats.html

Favorites have to be Selleck, Martinson, and Klinger IMHO.

No disrespect to Dahlinger intended but I dont see him getting it over any of these three.

norm1909
03-15-2010, 04:50 PM
http://www.ahcahockey.com/news/0910/0315wats.html

Favorites have to be Selleck, Martinson, and Klinger IMHO.

No disrespect to Dahlinger intended but I dont see him getting it over any of these three.

Bryan Hince 2.63gaa (http://www.woaasrhockey.com/sites/3333/page.asp?Site=9898&LeagueID=9898&page=news_league) :p :cool: :mad:

bakdraft21
03-15-2010, 05:55 PM
Bryan Hince 2.63gaa (http://www.woaasrhockey.com/sites/3333/page.asp?Site=9898&LeagueID=9898&page=news_league) :p :cool: :mad:

funnnnnnnnnnyyyyy

egon_getts
03-18-2010, 02:16 PM
I'd go with Martinson.

NU Fans
03-18-2010, 02:47 PM
Klinger or Musslewhite seem like the logical choices with edge to Musslewhite as NU has played great team D limiting shots, scoring chances etc. GO WICK

PSUChamps2001
03-18-2010, 02:53 PM
Klinger or Musslewhite seem like the logical choices with edge to Musslewhite as NU has played great team D limiting shots, scoring chances etc. GO WICK

Ummm sure maybe if Musslewhite was NOMINTATED??

i think it goes to Klinger as it probably should go to Selleck, but with Selleck just being a soph. he will have more hardware to win in years to come.

AC Bulldog
03-18-2010, 09:24 PM
Here is the player of the year.

http://www.ahcahockey.com/news/0910/0318wats.html

Congratulations to all those nominated.

MountieBoyOz
03-18-2010, 09:53 PM
I thought Selleck or Klinger should have won. Martinson has some good stats, but in the words of The Miz...

REALLY?

Great Laker2000
03-18-2010, 10:10 PM
Honestly I could be a little biased but how does Selleck not win? The guy led the nation in scoring for one on a team that was ranked number for a good portion of the season? Maybe it is just me.

one_to7
03-18-2010, 10:15 PM
I thought Selleck or Klinger should have won. Martinson has some good stats, but in the words of The Miz...

REALLY?
And how many times did you see him play? Really?

norm1909
03-18-2010, 10:17 PM
Honestly I could be a little biased but how does Selleck not win? The guy led the nation in scoring for one on a team that was ranked number for a good portion of the season? Maybe it is just me.

First, while I do agree that he deserves to be named, the fact that he was "on a team that was ranked number for a good portion of the season", IMO doesn't help his cause. It is much easier to play and score when you're on a great team. A standout on the team certainly, but "Player of the Year" - being on a number one ranked team, raises the bar.

GB Puck Fan
03-18-2010, 10:17 PM
Honestly I could be a little biased but how does Selleck not win? The guy led the nation in scoring for one on a team that was ranked number for a good portion of the season? Maybe it is just me.

Western bias? ;)

I hear what you are saying. Not unprecedented. An example off the top of my head: back a few years (2000 maybe?) Wisconsin finished the year ranked #1 and I'm pretty Steve Reinprecht led the nation in scoring but Mike Mottau won it... so, lots of factors...

PrezdeJohnson09
03-18-2010, 10:27 PM
I think Martinson deserves it.

The man is an absolute beast around the net. Not saying Selleck isn't but having seen both players play, I'd give the edge to Martinson.

Martinson's linemates weren't nearly as talented as Fox/Lags and I think if you take Selleck out, Oswego is still a top five team.

You take Martinson off GAC, they are borderline top 15.

Martinson was probably also aided by his senior status.

Arete19
03-18-2010, 11:45 PM
I think Martinson deserves it.

The man is an absolute beast around the net. Not saying Selleck isn't but having seen both players play, I'd give the edge to Martinson.

Martinson's linemates weren't nearly as talented as Fox/Lags and I think if you take Selleck out, Oswego is still a top five team.

You take Martinson off GAC, they are borderline top 15.

Martinson was probably also aided by his senior status.

I agree. I attended the SNC vs. GAC game in Mankato last year knowing very little about GAC going in. I came out with one name - Martinson. The guy was a montster last year and followed it up with better year this year.

Congratulations!

Josh Carey
03-19-2010, 01:42 AM
I thought Selleck or Klinger should have won. Martinson has some good stats, but in the words of The Miz...

REALLY?


Honestly I could be a little biased but how does Selleck not win? The guy led the nation in scoring for one on a team that was ranked number for a good portion of the season? Maybe it is just me.

Hockey exists outside of western/central New York.


I think Martinson deserves it.

The man is an absolute beast around the net. Not saying Selleck isn't but having seen both players play, I'd give the edge to Martinson.

Martinson's linemates weren't nearly as talented as Fox/Lags and I think if you take Selleck out, Oswego is still a top five team.

You take Martinson off GAC, they are borderline top 15.

Martinson was probably also aided by his senior status.

It frightens me to say this, but, I agree with Prez.

gojackets
03-19-2010, 03:26 AM
And how many times did you see him play? Really?

thats irrelevant

one_to7
03-19-2010, 04:12 AM
thats irrelevant
So when voting for player of the year for the entire nation, it doesn't matter if you've seen one second of him playing or not?

Not knowing how fast or skilled someone is, what system they play in, if they cherry pick, if they're a tremendous finisher, etc etc etc doesn't matter at all?

Just throw up their goals and assists and take it from there? If yes, glad to see your support of Adrian's top forwards the past couple of seasons.

GreatLaker2000: Selleck scored 4 more pts than martinson in 2 less games. But he also scored 8 fewer goals. Oswego was the top scoring offense not named Adrian this year, scoring 1.6 goals per game more than Gustavus. If martinson had that many people around him popping goals in, I'm pretty sure he'd have gotten quite a few more assists as well.

Martinson was the only player in the nation to average a goal per game, and that's despite not scoring in his final three games. He's got 7 power play goals and 3 shorties. He obviously kills penalties, is an incredible finisher, and finds ways to get himself open, even when other teams are keying on stopping him. He was dangerous anytime he was on the ice, and a lot of fun to watch as well.

Throw in the bonus of him being a senior, and coaches often using awards like this to reward careers as well as individual seasons, and you've got your player of the year. And honestly, while you might have guys you want to throw into the argument, absolutely no one should be able to dismiss Martinson as this choice, there's simply no grounds to do so.

norm1909
03-19-2010, 05:58 AM
And how many times did you see him play? Really?


that’s irrelevant


So when voting for player of the year for the entire nation, it doesn't matter if you've seen one second of him playing or not?

....

IMO, it MUST be irrelevant - UNLESS - you have seen EVERY player play EVERY game, at best relying on what you saw from watching only SOME of the players play some of their games will form a bias.


... and, I respect the opinion of those people that have seen him play (such as Prez), and congrats to him for winning the award.

But sometimes you can't just take stats at face value and summarize a player's value by simply viewing his goal per game average.

I would hope, that as a member of a group, "voting for player of the year for the entire nation", that they would at least inquire on "the opinion of those people that have seen him play", because I totally agree, as Laker87Tiger97 says, "sometimes you can't just take stats at face value and summarize a player's value by simply viewing his goal per game average".

Laker87Tiger97
03-19-2010, 07:43 AM
Martinson was the only player in the nation to average a goal per game, and that's despite not scoring in his final three games. He's got 7 power play goals and 3 shorties. He obviously kills penalties, is an incredible finisher, and finds ways to get himself open, even when other teams are keying on stopping him. He was dangerous anytime he was on the ice, and a lot of fun to watch as well.


I'll readily admit I do not follow D3 hockey very closely -- kinda hard to do when living in Orlando, FL :) . So, I took a quick look at Martinson's stats and was surprised to see the following:

-- 8 goals in 2 games (two '4 goal' games)
St. Olaf (5-4 win)
Bethel (6-5 loss)

-- 8 goals in 4 other games (four '2 goal' games)

So, he scored 16 goals in 6 games against weak(er) competition, and 13 goals in 23 other games, including no goals in the last 3 games against very good competition.

IMO, if you take away just one of those 4 goal games, he probably does not win the award.

Of course, that's not reality -- I mean, he did score those 4 goals, so it's a moot point to discount them... and, I respect the opinion of those people that have seen him play (such as Prez), and congrats to him for winning the award.

But sometimes you can't just take stats at face value and summarize a player's value by simply viewing his goal per game average.

cetihcra
03-19-2010, 09:50 AM
You take Martinson off GAC, they are borderline top 15.


I think that's the key -- Take Selleck off OSU, they're still top-5. Take Klinger off NU, probably still top-5. Regardless of how phenomenal those two players' seasons were, their stats were helped tremendously by the teams they were on. While obviously unable to prove the statement, I don't think GAC makes the tourney, or even wins the MIAC without Martinson.

r