Keep voting For McKee

[Greg Berge]

So it's probably best to keep pimping McKee, since (1) he's higher to begin with and (2) he's more likely to gain coaches votes and actually get through to the real finalists.

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]jkahn Wrote:

 [Q2]Greg Berge Wrote:

 McKee 4th, Moulson 20th.  How many make it to the next round?  Is there any advantage to McKee being higher, or should we reverse the McKee/Moulson votes to bring Moulson up?[/Q]
Ten advance, but it's not the fans' top ten that you see in the current standings.  From the Hobey website:
"Preliminary Voting: Running from Monday, Jan. 24, through Sunday, March 6, fans may cast one ballot per day for their first-, second- and third-place choices for the Hobey Baker Award. The fans' tally will be combined with the votes of the 58 Division I head coaches to determine the 10 finalists for the award."
So the fans' vote is likely only 1/59 of the total.  How the fans' vote is combined with the coaches' vote is a mystery, as the coaches don't vote for a top ten, but "Every head hockey coach at an accredited Division I NCAA school receives one ballot. Coaches are asked to pick the top three players in their league and the top three players in the nation (two separate rankings, three players each; a player may be listed in both places, and a coach can vote for his own player).
Coaches from 58 schools are eligible. The ballots are tabulated by an accounting firm, and the top ten candidates are named. "[/q]
And the results are kept in a hermetically-sealed mayonnaise jar on Funk & Wagnalls's porch.

[Greg Berge]

Although to be honest, I think Moulson is starting to make a compelling argument for being a legitimate contender himself.

[atb9]

Anyone want to explain to me how Brendan Bernakevitch is Harvard's #2 vote getter, while Welch, with half the votes of Bernakevitch, is a distant 3rd?  Am I missing something?

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]atb9 Wrote:

 Anyone want to explain to me how Brendan Bernakevitch is Harvard's #2 vote getter, while Welch, with half the votes of Bernakevitch, is a distant 3rd?  Am I missing something?[/q]
Goons don't attract voters?  ::nut::

[atb9]

[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:

 [Q2]atb9 Wrote:

 Anyone want to explain to me how Brendan Bernakevitch is Harvard's #2 vote getter, while Welch, with half the votes of Bernakevitch, is a distant 3rd?  Am I missing something?[/Q]
Goons don't attract voters?[/q]

Ha!  I'm fine with that but what about Cavanagh?  Maybe I'm looking into this too much...I just saw the name Bernakevitch and did a double-take trying to picture him in my head...that doesn't happen often with Harvard players.

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]atb9 Wrote:

 Ha!  I'm fine with that but what about Cavanagh?[/q]
Can't help you regarding Cavanagh.  I'm just glad he's finally graduating.

[Avash]

[Q]atb9 Wrote:

 [Q2]Al DeFlorio Wrote:

 [Q2]atb9 Wrote:

 Anyone want to explain to me how Brendan Bernakevitch is Harvard's #2 vote getter, while Welch, with half the votes of Bernakevitch, is a distant 3rd?  Am I missing something?[/Q]
Goons don't attract voters?[/Q]
Ha!  I'm fine with that but what about Cavanagh?  Maybe I'm looking into this too much...I just saw the name Bernakevitch and did a double-take trying to picture him in my head...that doesn't happen often with Harvard players.[/q]


If I'm not mistaken, in the 2003 ECAC Final, I believe it was Bernakevitch who made a nice power move to go right around Charlie Cook and drive the net. The puck appeared to go in as the whistle was blown, but the goal was called off.

[jeh25]

[Q]ursaminor Wrote:

 [Q2]Brian Wrote:

   I imagine the are related (maybe even twins), are they really that good?[/Q]
They are five years apart in age, so it is unlikely that they are twins. [/q]

Actually, the record is 110 days. :-O

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=539248

[ugarte]

[Q]jeh25 Wrote:

 [Q2]ursaminor Wrote:

 [Q2]Brian Wrote:

   I imagine the are related (maybe even twins), are they really that good?[/Q]
They are five years apart in age, so it is unlikely that they are twins. [/Q]
Actually, the record is 110 days.[/q]Shouldn't the "record" go to twins that both survived the pregnancy?

[Greg Berge]

[Q]ugarte Wrote:
Shouldn't the "record" go to twins that both survived the pregnancy?[/q]
Give the record to the mother (or you'll never hear the end of it.)

[Bio '04]

5125   Colin Murphy   Michigan Tech   F   Sr.
5094   Jordan Sigalet   Bowling Green   G   Sr.
4729   Marty Sertich   Colorado College   F   Jr.
4192   David McKee   Cornell      G   So.
3758   Keni Gibson      Northeastern   G   Sr.
3410   Scott Mifsud   Vermont      F   Sr.
3374   Bernd Bruckler   Wisconsin      G   Sr.
2953   Barret Ehgoetz   Niagara      F   Sr.
2888   Jason Guerriero   Northeastern   F   Sr.
2808   Brent Walton   Western Michigan   F   Jr.
2578   Tuomas Tarkki   Northern Mich   G   Sr.
2356   Brett Sterling   Colorado College   F   Jr.
2341   Kevin Croxton   Rensselaer      F   Jr.
2105   Jonathan Sigalet   Bowling Green   D   So.
1967   Ryan Potulny   Minnesota      F   So.
1918   Ryan Gale      Niagara      F   Sr.
1900   Matt Moulson   Cornell      F   Jr.
1875   Danny Irmen   Minnesota      F   So.

Looks like a lot more people are voting for Jordan Sigalet as of late since he's moved up to 2nd in voting.  McKee is in 4th and Moulson's moved up to 17th. :-)

[KeithK]

[q] Although to be honest, I think Moulson is starting to make a compelling argument for being a legitimate contender himself.[/q]Oh please.  Moulson has been fantastic of late and he's certaonly carrying a lot of the offensive load for the team.  But he doesn't show in the top 20 in scoring (NCAA).  There is absolutely no chance that he'll get a Hobey nomination, let alone win.  The basic numbers (goals, points) rule the day for this kind of award, not any sabermetric stats we can devise (which on another thread Bill Howard showed do not favor Moulson that much anyway).

[Brian]

However, Cornell is known as a defensive team, so to see Moulson tear it up as he has of late, he could get considered by voters.  He needs to stay consistent through this stretch run.  Based on the games this past weekend Moulson deserves the first place votes over McKee, not saying McKee was horrible but he was outplayed by McKenna.

[atb9]

[Q]Brian Wrote:
Based on the games this past weekend Moulson deserves the first place votes over McKee, not saying McKee was horrible but he was outplayed by McKenna.[/q]

Was McKee really outplayed by McKenna?  Because McKenna faced more shots?  Nothing went by McKee and it sounded like he was controlling his rebounds--sounds perfect to me.

Now if you want to talk about the two Clarkson goals...