And how many championships, runner-ups, appearances?
Scoring prowess, yes. But aer we looking at the big picture or just scoring prowess?
I am a big fan of Spehar, but if we are just grading on scoring, fine, top five (top two) for sure.
Hockey Hub Top 100 Players
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 9:50 am
-
- Posts: 6462
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
- Contact:
3 appearances, 1 title and two 3rd-place finishes.elliott70 wrote:And how many championships, runner-ups, appearances?
Scoring prowess, yes. But aer we looking at the big picture or just scoring prowess?
I am a big fan of Spehar, but if we are just grading on scoring, fine, top five (top two) for sure.
Spehar played varsity as a freshman (on the top line), when East lost to Virginia in the Section 7 Tier I Quarterfinals.
In 94, his sophomore year, East lost 2-1 to Jefferson (en rute to their 3rd straight title). If my math is right, he figured in 7 of East's 8 goals in that tournament.
In 95, East won it all with the 5-0 stunner over Jefferson in the first round and Spehar's game-winning penalty shot in the final.
In 96, East lost to Apple Valley in 5 OTs. Spehar assisted Locker on a game-tying goal with 30-some seconds to go in regulation. That game was the only one in the 95 and 96 tourneys in which he didn't have a hat trick.
Still, I agree that scoring shouldn't be everything. He had some help from Locker and a very strong and deep group of defensemen who fed him the puck and played strong enough defense that he didn't have to backcheck the way he might have had to on a thinner team. Top 5 IMO, but not #1, and probably not #2 either.
There were only six teams back then, and if you weren't Canadian, you didn't get much of a look. If you played college, well, that pretty much was the nail in the coffin, so to speak.Shinbone_News wrote:Question: Why didn't Mayasich play pro? He was clearly a standout in college as well (Gophers all-time points leader), and though not many Americans played in the NHL back then, there were occasional exceptions. Anyone know why?
-
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 9:50 am
-
- Posts: 7260
- Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:28 pm
-
- Posts: 6462
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:03 pm
- Contact:
The Hub is having a live chat on the process starting at 11:30; I'll be on a plane at the time and won't be able to join in, but I figured I'd plug it here.
My biggest question is one of what exactly went into players' high school ratings. They had a list of things that they considered, but those 185 high school points were pretty nebulous. Did they break that down into sub-categories, or was it all pretty subjective? Did they have a bunch of people rate the players, or was this all Loren Nelson?
All in all it's been great to follow; I just wish there had been a little more clarity. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with saying it's subjective--how we perceive and remember players does matter, and these people (plus the people they interviewed) know MN HS hockey well enough to have some authority.
My biggest question is one of what exactly went into players' high school ratings. They had a list of things that they considered, but those 185 high school points were pretty nebulous. Did they break that down into sub-categories, or was it all pretty subjective? Did they have a bunch of people rate the players, or was this all Loren Nelson?
All in all it's been great to follow; I just wish there had been a little more clarity. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with saying it's subjective--how we perceive and remember players does matter, and these people (plus the people they interviewed) know MN HS hockey well enough to have some authority.