HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Duluth 4 wrote:Max Tardy. Plain and simple.

Tardy's numbers won't be big enough for him to win. With the schedule East plays, 45 points from Tardy will be a great year.

Northlandhockey77 wrote:Who will be the Mr. Hockey in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010?

Without a doubt in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 the lead candidate and winner of Mr. Hockey and future Hobey Baker winner will be hands-down Alec Koenen of the Holy Angel's stars

13 wrote:

Northlandhockey77 wrote:Who will be the Mr. Hockey in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010?

Without a doubt in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 the lead candidate and winner of Mr. Hockey and future Hobey Baker winner will be hands-down Alec Koenen of the Holy Angel's stars

Hey do you realize theres a JV forum for you to brag about how great you are on JV

where's the love for herbert in '10

redfirehockey1 wrote:where's the love for herbert in '10

If he is still at Jefferson, but I think Forbort is probably the odds-on favorite for '10, provided he is still at East.

A few junior fowards doing really well this year, could be in contention for Mr. Hockey next year...

Connor Reilly
Chris Westin
Max Gaede
Jake McKee
Archie Skalbeck

The Exiled One wrote:A few junior fowards doing really well this year, could be in contention for Mr. Hockey next year...

Connor Reilly
Chris Westin
Max Gaede
Jake McKee
Archie Skalbeck

Add Jordan Lovick to that list, kid is phenomonal.

Papa Bergundy wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:A few junior fowards doing really well this year, could be in contention for Mr. Hockey next year...

Connor Reilly
Chris Westin
Max Gaede
Jake McKee
Archie Skalbeck

Add Jordan Lovick to that list, kid is phenomonal.

This is the stupidest and most political athletic award given in Minnesota sports. There is no way to fairly measure the 20 players who deserve to win this award. There are six different positions played by many talented players against a far too diverse set of competitors. This is what is wrong with Minnesota Hockey. Too much individual stuff and not enough measurement of what is really valuable. Mikko Koivu might not even make an all conference team in Minnesota High School Hockey because what he does is not valued highly enough, nor rewarded enough in this state. What he does is clearly not valued by the comments I see on this page. Full strength points against top competition, plus minus, quality saves, and many other categories kept in Juniors and at the College level that just seem to get dismissed at the Minnesota high school level in lieu of points. Should be a best 3/5 at each position and let it go at that. Does any one really give a crap who is Mr. Hockey. What does it mean anyway? If you score 80 points against weak competition and win this award, don't all you parents think the kids know it's wrong? I'm pretty certain the kids already think its a joke but would love to win it. That alone tells me it is really like; a cool high school award, like; you know, for sure. That being said, let's let the kids pick him. Then we'll really take the politics out of it, if not, at worst there won't be any adults involved. Finally, wouldn't it be interesting to see who the players think are the top 20 kids? You all know that as of now the coaches choose all conference don't you? Wrong on its face. Last I checked, none of them played a minute against any player. Let the players decide.

cctndr30 wrote:

Papa Bergundy wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:A few junior fowards doing really well this year, could be in contention for Mr. Hockey next year...

Connor Reilly
Chris Westin
Max Gaede
Jake McKee
Archie Skalbeck

Add Jordan Lovick to that list, kid is phenomonal.

This is the stupidest and most political athletic award given in Minnesota sports. There is no way to fairly measure the 20 players who deserve to win this award. There are six different positions played by many talented players against a far too diverse set of competitors. This is what is wrong with Minnesota Hockey. Too much individual stuff and not enough measurement of what is really valuable. Mikko Koivu might not even make an all conference team in Minnesota High School Hockey because what he does is not valued highly enough, nor rewarded enough in this state. What he does is clearly not valued by the comments I see on this page. Full strength points against top competition, plus minus, quality saves, and many other categories kept in Juniors and at the College level that just seem to get dismissed at the Minnesota high school level in lieu of points. Should be a best 3/5 at each position and let it go at that. Does any one really give a crap who is Mr. Hockey. What does it mean anyway? If you score 80 points against weak competition and win this award, don't all you parents think the kids know it's wrong? I'm pretty certain the kids already think its a joke but would love to win it. That alone tells me it is really like; a cool high school award, like; you know, for sure. That being said, let's let the kids pick him. Then we'll really take the politics out of it, if not, at worst there won't be any adults involved. Finally, wouldn't it be interesting to see who the players think are the top 20 kids? You all know that as of now the coaches choose all conference don't you? Wrong on its face. Last I checked, none of them played a minute against any player. Let the players decide.

Jeez get the stick out of your arse.

There's quite a bit of truth to those comments.

cctndr30 wrote:

Papa Bergundy wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:A few junior fowards doing really well this year, could be in contention for Mr. Hockey next year...

Connor Reilly
Chris Westin
Max Gaede
Jake McKee
Archie Skalbeck

Add Jordan Lovick to that list, kid is phenomonal.

This is the stupidest and most political athletic award given in Minnesota sports. There is no way to fairly measure the 20 players who deserve to win this award. There are six different positions played by many talented players against a far too diverse set of competitors. This is what is wrong with Minnesota Hockey. Too much individual stuff and not enough measurement of what is really valuable. Mikko Koivu might not even make an all conference team in Minnesota High School Hockey because what he does is not valued highly enough, nor rewarded enough in this state. What he does is clearly not valued by the comments I see on this page. Full strength points against top competition, plus minus, quality saves, and many other categories kept in Juniors and at the College level that just seem to get dismissed at the Minnesota high school level in lieu of points. Should be a best 3/5 at each position and let it go at that. Does any one really give a crap who is Mr. Hockey. What does it mean anyway? If you score 80 points against weak competition and win this award, don't all you parents think the kids know it's wrong? I'm pretty certain the kids already think its a joke but would love to win it. That alone tells me it is really like; a cool high school award, like; you know, for sure. That being said, let's let the kids pick him. Then we'll really take the politics out of it, if not, at worst there won't be any adults involved. Finally, wouldn't it be interesting to see who the players think are the top 20 kids? You all know that as of now the coaches choose all conference don't you? Wrong on its face. Last I checked, none of them played a minute against any player. Let the players decide.

What are you talking about? The last four winners of Mr. Hockey were Aaron Ness, Ryan McDonough, David Fischer and Brian Lee. All defenseman, all 1st or 2nd round picks in the NHL draft, all amazing players. I'm pretty sure that those players didn't score 80 points against garbage competition and I'm pretty sure no player would argue with these selections. You can pick a Mr. Hockey. Sure somebody might get ripped off, but who cares, life is not fair. Deal with it. You are also wrong about the kids think it is a joke. Go to the ceremony and see how seriously they take it.

In high school, we don't have the money to have professionally trained scorekeepers and don't have the luxury of replay to make sure all the stats are right, so we make do with what is given and don't whine about it continuously.

If you really want to know who the best players are, you can watch games and decide for yourself. That is what we all do.

Look at the facts before you go running your mouth like the complete moron you are.

cctndr30 wrote:

Papa Bergundy wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:A few junior fowards doing really well this year, could be in contention for Mr. Hockey next year...

Connor Reilly
Chris Westin
Max Gaede
Jake McKee
Archie Skalbeck

Add Jordan Lovick to that list, kid is phenomonal.

This is the stupidest and most political athletic award given in Minnesota sports. There is no way to fairly measure the 20 players who deserve to win this award. There are six different positions played by many talented players against a far too diverse set of competitors. This is what is wrong with Minnesota Hockey. Too much individual stuff and not enough measurement of what is really valuable. Mikko Koivu might not even make an all conference team in Minnesota High School Hockey because what he does is not valued highly enough, nor rewarded enough in this state. What he does is clearly not valued by the comments I see on this page. Full strength points against top competition, plus minus, quality saves, and many other categories kept in Juniors and at the College level that just seem to get dismissed at the Minnesota high school level in lieu of points. Should be a best 3/5 at each position and let it go at that. Does any one really give a crap who is Mr. Hockey. What does it mean anyway? If you score 80 points against weak competition and win this award, don't all you parents think the kids know it's wrong? I'm pretty certain the kids already think its a joke but would love to win it. That alone tells me it is really like; a cool high school award, like; you know, for sure. That being said, let's let the kids pick him. Then we'll really take the politics out of it, if not, at worst there won't be any adults involved. Finally, wouldn't it be interesting to see who the players think are the top 20 kids? You all know that as of now the coaches choose all conference don't you? Wrong on its face. Last I checked, none of them played a minute against any player. Let the players decide.

Sounds like little Joey here got "cheated" out of his all-conference patch senior year. Mr. Hockey too? Well here on this board you've been crowned MN's best, congrats. So bitter, so little knowledge.

How in your right mind can you say Mr. Hockey is a joke of an award? Sorry Boogaard isn't crowned Minnesota's best, it's given to the player who displays absolute dominance over his competition night in and night out. And Mr. Hockey is also picked by some college and junior scouts who keep track of your precious backchecking stats.

And out of pure curiousity, who's on your list? Because, IMO, Anders Lee should be at the top of everyone's list as of now, and he doesn't "rack up big pts against garbage teams". He racks up pts against the state's best every night. Who should of won it last year? Or the year before? Mr Hockey isn't that biased of an award, the best player wins it, I would love to see your winners for the last 5 years.

BTW Aaron Ness is sorry he scored ungodly amounts of pts. against not top ten teams. He'll try and be born in another city next life so he can have a tougher schedule. Thought I'd get that out there before someone played that card... again. People these days... even have to complain about MN hockey's most prestigous award.

cctndr30 wrote:

Papa Bergundy wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:A few junior fowards doing really well this year, could be in contention for Mr. Hockey next year...

Connor Reilly
Chris Westin
Max Gaede
Jake McKee
Archie Skalbeck

Add Jordan Lovick to that list, kid is phenomonal.

This is the stupidest and most political athletic award given in Minnesota sports. There is no way to fairly measure the 20 players who deserve to win this award. There are six different positions played by many talented players against a far too diverse set of competitors. This is what is wrong with Minnesota Hockey. Too much individual stuff and not enough measurement of what is really valuable. Mikko Koivu might not even make an all conference team in Minnesota High School Hockey because what he does is not valued highly enough, nor rewarded enough in this state. What he does is clearly not valued by the comments I see on this page. Full strength points against top competition, plus minus, quality saves, and many other categories kept in Juniors and at the College level that just seem to get dismissed at the Minnesota high school level in lieu of points. Should be a best 3/5 at each position and let it go at that. Does any one really give a crap who is Mr. Hockey. What does it mean anyway? If you score 80 points against weak competition and win this award, don't all you parents think the kids know it's wrong? I'm pretty certain the kids already think its a joke but would love to win it. That alone tells me it is really like; a cool high school award, like; you know, for sure. That being said, let's let the kids pick him. Then we'll really take the politics out of it, if not, at worst there won't be any adults involved. Finally, wouldn't it be interesting to see who the players think are the top 20 kids? You all know that as of now the coaches choose all conference don't you? Wrong on its face. Last I checked, none of them played a minute against any player. Let the players decide.

Did not winning Mr. Hockey make you this angry?
Don't you think if you let players decide they'll all vote for their teammates and friends? There are going to be politics however you look at it and I think they've been doing a good job the way it is. Get over it.

Does anybody else feel that the way scouts get to vote on Mr. Hockey kind of favors defensemen, especially defensive defensemen? Because they aren't expected to put up points and there's little in the way of +/- tracking, it really gives the scouts opinions' more weight. Not that any of the previous four winners aren't deserving, but I think that's part of the reason we've got four defensman winners in a row (two of which are more defensive specialists). It could be nothing more than my impression, just wondering if anybody else thought like me.

Of course, looking back I think you can really only second guess Lee. Oshie could have gotten the nod. But then again, Niskanen could have too. I'm just rambling now. It's probably better just to ignore me.

The Exiled One wrote:Does anybody else feel that the way scouts get to vote on Mr. Hockey kind of favors defensemen, especially defensive defensemen? Because they aren't expected to put up points and there's little in the way of +/- tracking, it really gives the scouts opinions' more weight. Not that any of the previous four winners aren't deserving, but I think that's part of the reason we've got four defensman winners in a row (two of which are more defensive specialists). It could be nothing more than my impression, just wondering if anybody else thought like me.

Of course, looking back I think you can really only second guess Lee. Oshie could have gotten the nod. But then again, Niskanen could have too. I'm just rambling now. It's probably better just to ignore me.

Good point, but it seems that this is more of a recent development and may just be a coincidence, but it is happening quite a lot, seems like the favorite this year is also a defenseman, but more offensive like Ness, in Nick Leddy and my favorite for next year, Forbort, is a defensive defenseman. When talking about Oshie, remember the AA bias for Mr. Hocke, also. Good call and I agree.

scoreboard33 wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:Does anybody else feel that the way scouts get to vote on Mr. Hockey kind of favors defensemen, especially defensive defensemen? Because they aren't expected to put up points and there's little in the way of +/- tracking, it really gives the scouts opinions' more weight. Not that any of the previous four winners aren't deserving, but I think that's part of the reason we've got four defensman winners in a row (two of which are more defensive specialists). It could be nothing more than my impression, just wondering if anybody else thought like me.

Of course, looking back I think you can really only second guess Lee. Oshie could have gotten the nod. But then again, Niskanen could have too. I'm just rambling now. It's probably better just to ignore me.

Good point, but it seems that this is more of a recent development and may just be a coincidence, but it is happening quite a lot, seems like the favorite this year is also a defenseman, but more offensive like Ness, in Nick Leddy and my favorite for next year, Forbort, is a defensive defenseman. When talking about Oshie, remember the AA bias for Mr. Hocke, also. Good call and I agree.

I think the scouts will favor Leddy. Without Budish, Nick probably has the best projected pro upside. However, I don't think anybody would cry foul if Hano or Mattson won it. Lee and Everson are right there too, but they kind of cancel eachother out. This isn't my vote, but in my opinion, I think the votes will play out this way...

1a. Hanowski
1b. Leddy

3. Mattson

4. Lee
5. Everson

6. Pitlick

nikebauer_07 wrote:

cctndr30 wrote:

Papa Bergundy wrote: Add Jordan Lovick to that list, kid is phenomonal.

This is the stupidest and most political athletic award given in Minnesota sports. There is no way to fairly measure the 20 players who deserve to win this award. There are six different positions played by many talented players against a far too diverse set of competitors. This is what is wrong with Minnesota Hockey. Too much individual stuff and not enough measurement of what is really valuable. Mikko Koivu might not even make an all conference team in Minnesota High School Hockey because what he does is not valued highly enough, nor rewarded enough in this state. What he does is clearly not valued by the comments I see on this page. Full strength points against top competition, plus minus, quality saves, and many other categories kept in Juniors and at the College level that just seem to get dismissed at the Minnesota high school level in lieu of points. Should be a best 3/5 at each position and let it go at that. Does any one really give a crap who is Mr. Hockey. What does it mean anyway? If you score 80 points against weak competition and win this award, don't all you parents think the kids know it's wrong? I'm pretty certain the kids already think its a joke but would love to win it. That alone tells me it is really like; a cool high school award, like; you know, for sure. That being said, let's let the kids pick him. Then we'll really take the politics out of it, if not, at worst there won't be any adults involved. Finally, wouldn't it be interesting to see who the players think are the top 20 kids? You all know that as of now the coaches choose all conference don't you? Wrong on its face. Last I checked, none of them played a minute against any player. Let the players decide.

Did not winning Mr. Hockey make you this angry?
Don't you think if you let players decide they'll all vote for their teammates and friends? There are going to be politics however you look at it and I think they've been doing a good job the way it is. Get over it.

Mr Hockey --Me? No. I couldn't wear the jock of the top 50 players in this state. But I do know good ones when I see them. Maybe that is my problem. I'm impressed with too many of them.

I think the players might surprise you with their votes (and wouldn't that be the point). Hockey players are pretty level headed that way. Let's do both for a few years and see who does a better job. It might be interesting.

cctndr30 wrote:

nikebauer_07 wrote:

cctndr30 wrote: This is the stupidest and most political athletic award given in Minnesota sports. There is no way to fairly measure the 20 players who deserve to win this award. There are six different positions played by many talented players against a far too diverse set of competitors. This is what is wrong with Minnesota Hockey. Too much individual stuff and not enough measurement of what is really valuable. Mikko Koivu might not even make an all conference team in Minnesota High School Hockey because what he does is not valued highly enough, nor rewarded enough in this state. What he does is clearly not valued by the comments I see on this page. Full strength points against top competition, plus minus, quality saves, and many other categories kept in Juniors and at the College level that just seem to get dismissed at the Minnesota high school level in lieu of points. Should be a best 3/5 at each position and let it go at that. Does any one really give a crap who is Mr. Hockey. What does it mean anyway? If you score 80 points against weak competition and win this award, don't all you parents think the kids know it's wrong? I'm pretty certain the kids already think its a joke but would love to win it. That alone tells me it is really like; a cool high school award, like; you know, for sure. That being said, let's let the kids pick him. Then we'll really take the politics out of it, if not, at worst there won't be any adults involved. Finally, wouldn't it be interesting to see who the players think are the top 20 kids? You all know that as of now the coaches choose all conference don't you? Wrong on its face. Last I checked, none of them played a minute against any player. Let the players decide.

Did not winning Mr. Hockey make you this angry?
Don't you think if you let players decide they'll all vote for their teammates and friends? There are going to be politics however you look at it and I think they've been doing a good job the way it is. Get over it.

Mr Hockey --Me? No. I couldn't wear the jock of the top 50 players in this state. But I do know good ones when I see them. Maybe that is my problem. I'm impressed with too many of them.

I think the players might surprise you with their votes (and wouldn't that be the point). Hockey players are pretty level headed that way. Let's do both for a few years and see who does a better job. It might be interesting.

So who do you think deserves Mr. Hockey? Or has in the past? Just curious.

The Exiled One wrote:I think the scouts will favor Leddy. Without Budish, Nick probably has the best projected pro upside. However, I don't think anybody would cry foul if Hano or Mattson won it. Lee and Everson are right there too, but they kind of cancel eachother out. This isn't my vote, but in my opinion, I think the votes will play out this way...

1a. Hanowski
1b. Leddy

3. Mattson

4. Lee
5. Everson

6. Pitlick

A top flight defensemen can play the vast majority of the game (even more so than a lot of top forward) and I think the added opportunity to show their stuff doesn't hurt. That is probably one big reason why there has been a bit of a trend. Of course, you also have to consider the defensive talent as a whole has been excellent.

I think the big issue for Hanowski is that scouts don't focus on stat lines like the fans do. Even if he breaks the state scoring record, scouts don't get caught up in the numbers when they break down player attributes.

Fair or not, the competition variable will also likely play a part in the voting (which probably plays a role in the lack of Class A winners). It is easier for a scout to justify voting for a guy that plays/excels against a more difficult schedule than it is a guy that plays/excels against a mostly weak schedule.

Personally, I think Leddy and Mattson have a better chance at winning it than Hanowski. Maybe even Lee depending on how Edina continues to play. It is hard to deny the best player on the best team (which Edina clearly is to this point). His candidacy probably wouldn't be hurt by the overall athlete angle either.

Gopher Blog wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:I think the scouts will favor Leddy. Without Budish, Nick probably has the best projected pro upside. However, I don't think anybody would cry foul if Hano or Mattson won it. Lee and Everson are right there too, but they kind of cancel eachother out. This isn't my vote, but in my opinion, I think the votes will play out this way...

1a. Hanowski
1b. Leddy

3. Mattson

4. Lee
5. Everson

6. Pitlick

A top flight defensemen can play the vast majority of the game (even more so than a lot of top forward) and I think the added opportunity to show their stuff doesn't hurt. That is probably one big reason why there has been a bit of a trend. Of course, you also have to consider the defensive talent as a whole has been excellent.

I think the big issue for Hanowski is that scouts don't focus on stat lines like the fans do. Even if he breaks the state scoring record, scouts don't get caught up in the numbers when they break down player attributes.

Fair or not, the competition variable will also likely play a part in the voting (which probably plays a role in the lack of Class A winners). It is easier for a scout to justify voting for a guy that plays/excels against a more difficult schedule than it is a guy that plays/excels against a mostly weak schedule.

Personally, I think Leddy and Mattson have a better chance at winning it than Hanowski. Maybe even Lee depending on how Edina continues to play. It is hard to deny the best player on the best team (which Edina clearly is to this point). His candidacy probably wouldn't be hurt by the overall athlete angle either.

I don't know what they're thinking when they vote, but Spehar and Guyer were undrafted. Pohl went 255th overall in the 9th round in the same year that Pat O'Leary was taken in the 3rd round at 73rd overall. Just sayin' there's precendent for a player like Hanowski to win it.

They may not think the same way I do while they're casting their vote, but they might not think the same way you do either.

The Exiled One wrote:I don't know what they're thinking when they vote, but Spehar and Guyer were undrafted. Pohl went 255th overall in the 9th round in the same year that Pat O'Leary was taken in the 3rd round at 73rd overall. Just sayin' there's precendent for a player like Hanowski to win it.

I never brought up draft status as the main factor. Nor did I mean to imply that the guy who is likely to be picked highest would be the winner. Obviously we know that isn't always the case.

I simply stated they don't get caught up in the stats as a main factor like some fans do. Fans get caught up in box scores. Scouts don't tend to look at it quite that shallow.

As for some of the names you mentioned, you also have to remember that Spehar and Pohl were the main figures on state championship teams in their junior year. Right or wrong, that is going to have some influence on voters since it gives them a leg up from the get go as a senior.

PS - Guyer was a 5th rounder for Dallas.

Gopher Blog wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:I think the scouts will favor Leddy. Without Budish, Nick probably has the best projected pro upside. However, I don't think anybody would cry foul if Hano or Mattson won it. Lee and Everson are right there too, but they kind of cancel eachother out. This isn't my vote, but in my opinion, I think the votes will play out this way...

1a. Hanowski
1b. Leddy

3. Mattson

4. Lee
5. Everson

6. Pitlick

A top flight defensemen can play the vast majority of the game (even more so than a lot of top forward) and I think the added opportunity to show their stuff doesn't hurt. That is probably one big reason why there has been a bit of a trend. Of course, you also have to consider the defensive talent as a whole has been excellent.

I think the big issue for Hanowski is that scouts don't focus on stat lines like the fans do. Even if he breaks the state scoring record, scouts don't get caught up in the numbers when they break down player attributes.

Fair or not, the competition variable will also likely play a part in the voting (which probably plays a role in the lack of Class A winners). It is easier for a scout to justify voting for a guy that plays/excels against a more difficult schedule than it is a guy that plays/excels against a mostly weak schedule.

Personally, I think Leddy and Mattson have a better chance at winning it than Hanowski. Maybe even Lee depending on how Edina continues to play. It is hard to deny the best player on the best team (which Edina clearly is to this point). His candidacy probably wouldn't be hurt by the overall athlete angle either.

Of the four you noted, who goes on to the next level of play without having to play Jr? Answer: probably 3 of the 4. Who should be drafted higher? Pro scouts weigh in, correct?

If Lee is that good of a player the U would have offered him a deal. Mr. Lucia & Mr. Hill have seen him many times. Mr. Guentzel has seen him many times. He was draft eligible last year and went un-drafted. Not sure if he is the best forward on Edina. Mr. Everson would probably argue that one.

Gopher Blog wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:I think the scouts will favor Leddy. Without Budish, Nick probably has the best projected pro upside. However, I don't think anybody would cry foul if Hano or Mattson won it. Lee and Everson are right there too, but they kind of cancel eachother out. This isn't my vote, but in my opinion, I think the votes will play out this way...

1a. Hanowski
1b. Leddy

3. Mattson

4. Lee
5. Everson

6. Pitlick

A top flight defensemen can play the vast majority of the game (even more so than a lot of top forward) and I think the added opportunity to show their stuff doesn't hurt.

Disagree on exposure being the answer. Top forwards are out every other shift like top D. Was Baker out on the ice more than Everson, Budish and Lee in State Tournament last year? If so, not by much.

breakout wrote:If Lee is that good of a player the U would have offered him a deal. Mr. Lucia & Mr. Hill have seen him many times. Mr. Guentzel has seen him many times. He was draft eligible last year and went un-drafted. Not sure if he is the best forward on Edina. Mr. Everson would probably argue that one.

The U doesn't have infinite scholarships either. There are good players that go elsewhere without an offer from the hometown team. Gorowsky was a similar style player (physical player, top team, good production)... yet no offer from the U but won it. He was anything but a high pick too.

I am not saying Lee should win. I am simply stating the circumstances he is in (tough schedule, top team, good production) will make him a strong candidate.

I am a big Everson fan. Very nice sniper. I just feel Lee is the more valuable player of the two and he certainly has garnered more attention because of his overall athletic endeavors.

breakout wrote:Disagree on exposure being the answer. Top forwards are out every other shift like top D. Was Baker out on the ice more than Everson, Budish and Lee in State Tournament last year? If so, not by much.

First, I didn't say it was "the answer". I believe it is a part of the equation.

Most teams I watch play three lines (though they shorten the bench when the situation warrants it). A top defenseman that can play both ends of the rink well tend to play more (in my experience watching HS hockey over the years).