HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

powerplayer wrote:Too bad they don't have a Ms Hockey for the Northern part of the State and a Ms Hockey for the Southern part of the State. Seems a little lopsided to me.

OnTheBench wrote:In response to the recent thread on adjusted stats, I thought I would look at how the Ms. Hockey semifinalists fared vs. top competition. In the table below I've listed each player's overall goals and total points for the season along with those scored in the games they played against my list of the 12 and 29 highest ranked teams. At the bottom I've included the bubble players mentioned in this thread that possibly should have been considered.

My top 12 list of teams includes the top ten teams in class AA mentioned in either the Jan. 29 LPH list or the Feb. 2 KRACH rankings plus Thief River Falls since they made the KRACH overall top 10, the only A team to do so. The AA list includes Hopkins, EP, Minnetonka, HM, BSM, Wayzata, Edina, Blaine, Lakeville N, Irondale, and Maple Grove.

My top 29 list includes the top 20 in AA and the top 5 in A for either the same LPH or KRACH rankings. This group includes the 12 above plus Dodge Co., Stillwater, Mounds View, Burnsville, Lakeville S, Jefferson, CDH, Roseville, Buffalo, Eastview, Robbinsdale A/C, and Chaska/Chan in AA, plus East Grand Forks, Achiever, Blake, Warroad, and Red Wing in A.

I'll leave it to others to comment on who should move up or down.

Code: Select all

                 overall             vs. top 12            vs. top 29 
                Goals Points     Games Goals Points    Games Goals Points
Donovan          39     78         5     6      9        9     8     17
Falck            18     44         3     2      3        6     2      4
Joyce            21     34         4     4      4       15    13     20        
Rodgers          26     52         9     4      9       13     9     20
Schammel         46     82         1     1      3        5     6     14
Pannek           30     73         8     5     16       15    13     35
Reilly           34     65         8     9     16       15    19     34
Astrup           14     31         5     0      3       10     0      7
Baldwin          10     26        13     6     13       17     9     21
Sutton           16     43         3     1      4       11     5     20
And the "overlooked" players mentioned in this thread:
Aney, K.         50     96         0     -      -        1     1      2
Baysoy           22     40         0     -      -        5     1      4
Coleman          30     56         5     6      8       12    10     21
Fawcett          28     58         1     2      2        4     4      6
Klein            17     46        11     6     15       16     6     19 
Power            26     35         7     1      3       17    10     13

Note that the games played listed for each player does account for games that players did not participate in for the cases I was aware of.

Sam David wrote:I'm certain it's been commented on several times, but I don't understand why a girl (or coach) on this list may play 45 minutes a game when her team is up by 6 points? There is that 3rd line just waiting for an opportunity to see some ice. No question she is a VERY talented girl! The SOR is still flawed if someone is trying to look at a single number (which I'm sure most are smart enough to know).

I'm only commenting as it still amazes me that so-called HOCKEY PEOPLE are still so short sighted.

Another example (last year), a Freshman at the time scored a fabulous amount of Rookie goals aligned with a D1 senior. She is still a fabulous TOP player, however...she played at least 35+ minutes a game on a small rostered team.

So the point is simple, you still can't compare even the adjusted SOR numbers side by side though the SOR helps just a little (one part of a complex adjustment).

Then you have the parent statisticians padding the overly liberal 3rd assists with little transparency.

The missing link is still a quite large. Finding anything near the perfect adjustment will remain allusive. Things will remain apples and oranges until one can account for minutes played, power plays and match ups (and line mates).

SOR is still fun but still doesn't do the job. The quest continues.......

OnTheBench wrote:In response to the recent thread on adjusted stats, I thought I would look at how the Ms. Hockey semifinalists fared vs. top competition. In the table below I've listed each player's overall goals and total points for the season along with those scored in the games they played against my list of the 12 and 29 highest ranked teams. At the bottom I've included the bubble players mentioned in this thread that possibly should have been considered.

My top 12 list of teams includes the top ten teams in class AA mentioned in either the Jan. 29 LPH list or the Feb. 2 KRACH rankings plus Thief River Falls since they made the KRACH overall top 10, the only A team to do so. The AA list includes Hopkins, EP, Minnetonka, HM, BSM, Wayzata, Edina, Blaine, Lakeville N, Irondale, and Maple Grove.

My top 29 list includes the top 20 in AA and the top 5 in A for either the same LPH or KRACH rankings. This group includes the 12 above plus Dodge Co., Stillwater, Mounds View, Burnsville, Lakeville S, Jefferson, CDH, Roseville, Buffalo, Eastview, Robbinsdale A/C, and Chaska/Chan in AA, plus East Grand Forks, Achiever, Blake, Warroad, and Red Wing in A.

I'll leave it to others to comment on who should move up or down.

Code: Select all

                 overall             vs. top 12            vs. top 29 
                Goals Points     Games Goals Points    Games Goals Points
Donovan          39     78         5     6      9        9     8     17
Falck            18     44         3     2      3        6     2      4
Joyce            21     34         4     4      4       15    13     20        
Rodgers          26     52         9     4      9       13     9     20
Schammel         46     82         1     1      3        5     6     14
Pannek           30     73         8     5     16       15    13     35
Reilly           34     65         8     9     16       15    19     34
Astrup           14     31         5     0      3       10     0      7
Baldwin          10     26        13     6     13       17     9     21
Sutton           16     43         3     1      4       11     5     20
And the "overlooked" players mentioned in this thread:
Aney, K.         50     96         0     -      -        1     1      2
Baysoy           22     40         0     -      -        5     1      4
Coleman          30     56         5     6      8       12    10     21
Fawcett          28     58         1     2      2        4     4      6
Klein            17     46        11     6     15       16     6     19 
Power            26     35         7     1      3       17    10     13

Note that the games played listed for each player does account for games that players did not participate in for the cases I was aware of.

powerplayer wrote:Of course stats matter. Who are you trying to kid? If these girls did not have good stats, their names wouldn't be associated with MS Hockey. Dahhhh!

powerplayer wrote:WOW 36Guy my bad for taking your post the wrong way but you didn't have to be so snippy about it.

mrleft wrote:I have wondered about that myself from time to time, but have been afraid to bring it up because my name begins with a letter in the front half. But if this theory is correct then Astrup or Donovan will win and Pannek and Rodgers do not have a chance.