Scoring by top HS players - grades 12, 11, 10 and 9

[j4241]

One final cut of this - I consolidated the three spreadsheets into one, then added the names together in a single worksheet (forwards and D on separate pages) and sorted by top 10 scoring, so you can see how the classes compare to eachother more easily.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

The grades are distinguished by color - senior = black, junior = green, sophomore = blue, frosh = red. There is a heck of a lot of green around the top of the consolidated list.

[j4241]

Ugh... having done all this, I should probably add the short list of freshman that warrant inclusion... standby.

[massalsa]

How about Lorelei Nelson (8th grade) from Edina? 12 points for the year (8 goals and 4 assists). Goals agains Minnetonka, Holy Family, and Wayzata (2). All even strength and playing as a 3rd/4th liner.

[j4241]

You're killing me...

Just finished the frosh - shorter list, particularly on the D side.

Lorelai had a great 8th grade season - 4 goals in 10 games against top 10 teams, and 2G and 2A in 7 games against teams 11-20. That's amazing for an 8th grader, but not very high on the consolidated list (by comparison with someone like Makayla Moran who had a strong campaign as a frosh regardless of class). If there are a few others 8th graders that are also worth including, I'll do another page for that class and add them to the consolidated list.

Note there are a number of pretty good seniors missing, too - I just went with the 10 Ms. Hockey finalists and then one other near the top of the season scoring list, and one that would have contended for a finalist spot but for an injury (and was near the top on a point per game basis).

[Thoen88]

I'm big into numbers, and always have been.

Love this spreadsheet.

One thing--Emma was moved to defense after 5 games this year.

In 2 games at D against top-10 teams, she's got 1-3---4 and in 5 games against teams ranked 11-20, she's at 5-7--12. A total of 16 points in 7 games playing defense against top-20 teams.

One final cut of this - I consolidated the three spreadsheets into one, then added the names together in a single worksheet (forwards and D on separate pages) and sorted by top 10 scoring, so you can see how the classes compare to eachother more easily.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

The grades are distinguished by color - senior = black, junior = green, sophomore = blue, frosh = red. There is a heck of a lot of green around the top of the consolidated list.

[j4241]

No doubt - she's had a great season. And it's unclear when it will be over - may be 5 more. Huge part of one of the best teams in MN.

[Thoen88]

No doubt - she's had a great season. And it's unclear when it will be over - may be 5 more. Huge part of one of the best teams in MN.

Some would say they got off to a "slow" start, but their first 5 games were Andover, Warroad, Stillwater, Wayzata and Edina. Not many "stat padding" games in there.

This week should be fun, regardless of the outcomes.

[j4241]

So, since this began as a way to look more closely at Ms. Hockey semifinalists, I added a bit more analysis to compare them to the rest of MN players. I added some "threshold" scoring columns, which allowed me to look at the most favorable set of stats for each candidate and see how many of this list also hit those levels.

- Enright had 0ppg vs 1-10, 1ppg vs 11-20 teams and 2.86ppg vs 21-114. There are 9 other players on this list at or above all of those levels (3 srs and 5 jrs and 1 frosh/Bischoff)
- Burgen had 1.5ppg vs top 20, and 2.9 vs 21-114 I (I ignored the 1.7 vs top 10 since she was lower on the 11-20). 3 others at or above those levels (Boerger, Morrison, Sajevic)
- Kaiser had 1.4ppg vs top 20 and 2.7 vs. 21-114 (left out top 10 since her 10 and 20 were the same). 6 others (Boerger, Burgen, Morrison, Tuttle, Sajevic, Ryskamp)
- Tuttle had 2.0ppg vs top 20 and 2.6 vs 21-114 - 1 other (Boerger)
- Matthews had 1.0 vs top 10, 2.0 next 10, 3.1 vs 21-114 - 3 others (Boerger, Morrison, Sajevic)
- Ryskamp had 1.8 vs top 20 and 3.2 vs 21-114 - 1 other (Morrison)

Jungels at D had no one equal her stats (among those listed). Peschel had 1 (Jungels). Franco had 2 (Jungels and Peschel - and Franco played a significant amount of time at forward, which provides a tail wind for her scoring stats).

Bottom line, Jungels.

Of the forwards, I think Enright's season "seems" most impressive to people, but is less impressive than others given the easy schedule. Another level of parsing would be to look at who they play with. Enright plays on a very strong line. The Andover trio at the top of the list benefit a lot from playing together. Same for the Blake trio. (Same for the Tonka forwards, though that didn't translate into comparable production). Kaiser plays in front of good D, but without the same level of complementary forwards. Same for Sajevic (though her D are much better offensively). Same for Matthews, and without great D. I would have thought the same for Tuttle, though she had a frosh not that far behind her in scoring, which diminishes how impressive her stats are against a weak schedule a bit, in my opinion. Burgen has Brunette (another D1 senior), but outpaced her by more than Tuttle outpaced Stramel. That elevates her performance in my mind, albeit against a much weaker schedule than anyone else. Ryskamp's season was impressive, but her top 20 stats (in 4 games) are bolstered by one very good game against Proctor.

Not sure what conclusion I would draw from all of this, but just thought it would be interesting to parse a bit more.

[girlshockey4ever]

Well I got bored today so I did a bit of digging, just trying to keep up with all our stats guys! I looked at who has what coming back next year from the top 5 teams in AA. Here is what it looks like as of today.

Lakeville South loses 197 pts and starting goalie
Holy Family loses 155 pts
Edina loses 120 pts
Andover loses 41 pts
Minnetonka loses 27 pts and a starting goalie

[PhunnsieMcHockeyDad]

Also - what impact does power play time have on stats? Assuming most of these skaters were first team PP but if not...

Full disclosure - asking for a resident of my home who had almost zero no PP time this season but 20 points during 5 on 5 play against a decent schedule...is that something worth pointing out as she tries to pry open the college door?

So, since this began as a way to look more closely at Ms. Hockey semifinalists, I added a bit more analysis to compare them to the rest of MN players. I added some "threshold" scoring columns, which allowed me to look at the most favorable set of stats for each candidate and see how many of this list also hit those levels.

- Enright had 0ppg vs 1-10, 1ppg vs 11-20 teams and 2.86ppg vs 21-114. There are 9 other players on this list at or above all of those levels (3 srs and 5 jrs and 1 frosh/Bischoff)
- Burgen had 1.5ppg vs top 20, and 2.9 vs 21-114 I (I ignored the 1.7 vs top 10 since she was lower on the 11-20). 3 others at or above those levels (Boerger, Morrison, Sajevic)
- Kaiser had 1.4ppg vs top 20 and 2.7 vs. 21-114 (left out top 10 since her 10 and 20 were the same). 6 others (Boerger, Burgen, Morrison, Tuttle, Sajevic, Ryskamp)
- Tuttle had 2.0ppg vs top 20 and 2.6 vs 21-114 - 1 other (Boerger)
- Matthews had 1.0 vs top 10, 2.0 next 10, 3.1 vs 21-114 - 3 others (Boerger, Morrison, Sajevic)
- Ryskamp had 1.8 vs top 20 and 3.2 vs 21-114 - 1 other (Morrison)

Jungels at D had no one equal her stats (among those listed). Peschel had 1 (Jungels). Franco had 2 (Jungels and Peschel - and Franco played a significant amount of time at forward, which provides a tail wind for her scoring stats).

Bottom line, Jungels.

Of the forwards, I think Enright's season "seems" most impressive to people, but is less impressive than others given the easy schedule. Another level of parsing would be to look at who they play with. Enright plays on a very strong line. The Andover trio at the top of the list benefit a lot from playing together. Same for the Blake trio. (Same for the Tonka forwards, though that didn't translate into comparable production). Kaiser plays in front of good D, but without the same level of complementary forwards. Same for Sajevic (though her D are much better offensively). Same for Matthews, and without great D. I would have thought the same for Tuttle, though she had a frosh not that far behind her in scoring, which diminishes how impressive her stats are against a weak schedule a bit, in my opinion. Burgen has Brunette (another D1 senior), but outpaced her by more than Tuttle outpaced Stramel. That elevates her performance in my mind, albeit against a much weaker schedule than anyone else. Ryskamp's season was impressive, but her top 20 stats (in 4 games) are bolstered by one very good game against Proctor.

Not sure what conclusion I would draw from all of this, but just thought it would be interesting to parse a bit more.

[j4241]

Absolutely! I thought about breaking out 5v5, too - a few kids really stand out in being able to create 5v5 (which in my opinion is probably a better predictor of being a producer in college), and others in being dependent on special teams to score. It would also be worth looking at goal scoring and primary point. But too much work.

If there is someone with better computer science skills than me and is interested in a project, it would be really cool to scrape the stats from the hub and a ranking site into a query able database accessible online. Then queries like “who scored more than 1ppg 5v5 vs top 10 teams” would be a few keystrokes.

[j4241]

See a few comments below:

Well I got bored today so I did a bit of digging, just trying to keep up with all our stats guys! I looked at who has what coming back next year from the top 5 teams in AA. Here is what it looks like as of today.

9 Lakeville South loses 197 pts and starting goalie (and all hope)
4 Holy Family loses 155 pts (and most hope)
2 Edina loses 120 pts (but returns an outstanding goalie - assuming she/they are willing to have her play behind a much weaker group of D)
1 Andover loses 41 pts (with the highest scoring line in MN returning, and the youngest and also best D corp who will grow in year 2 of high school hockey - yikes)
3 Minnetonka loses 27 pts and a starting goalie (and a very good, tough D who's been an anchor for them outside the score sheet - a modest question mark for them)

"Top 5 in AA" - ugh. I know there are some people-created rankings that have LVS there given the win-loss record, but they are borderline top 10, as the remainder of the playoffs will make clear. (I added PageStat rankings before each team name)

If you replace them with Wayzata and BSM, which is the right top 6:

6 BSM loses 152 and a starting goalie
5 Wayzata loses 130 and a starting goalie

Continuing through the top 15:
7 Gentry loses 18 (I think)
8 Maple Grove loses 61 (I think)
10 Rogers loses 117
11 Hill Murray loses 75 and a co-starting goalie
12 Blake loses 20 and a starting goalie
13 Centennial 69
14 Stillwater 33
15 Burnsville 180

Andover next year - yikes - scary. Tonka and Gentry will fight in a state semi to see who gets to scratch and claw to avoid running time against Andover in the final. Tonka has some issues, but a top team. Gentry the same.

Stillwater should take a step forward.

LVS, HF, Edina, BSM, Wayzata, Rogers, Burnsville - big steps back. Most should still be pretty good though. Uma may keep Edina in the top 5ish, rest will likely be 5-15 (except LVS and Burnsville).

Centennial and Maple Grove are a bit of question marks given the pieces they lose (Goudreau for Cent, and Rice+D for MG)

Blake has some question marks, but returns a top line which only Andover contends with as the most dangerous.

Of course, all of the above is before any transfers.

[Eagles93]

Rumor has it Apple Valley and Burnsville are merging next year. If true that would be a team that should flirt with the top 10. Apple Valley returns almost their entire young roster (losing 12 combined points) and add in the few returning pieces for Burnsville, they should be the heavy favorites in the South Suburban/3AA.

[girlshockey4ever]

I haven't seen Tonka or Gentry live this year. What issues do you see? Tonka loses their goalie who is likely to be a finalist for Goalie of the year. (I know this because of the great research done on this site) Not sure what their back up situation is. Gentry will certainly get some kids to move in!

[Eagles93]

I haven't seen Tonka or Gentry live this year. What issues do you see? Tonka loses their goalie who is likely to be a finalist for Goalie of the year. (I know this because of the great research done on this site) Not sure what their back up situation is. Gentry will certainly get some kids to move in!

Tonka has the youngest Hemp waiting to play net for the next three years, that position is well covered. I agree that Andover is in a class by themselves next year, Tonka and Gentry are next tier, then a bunch of teams that will depend on recruits, er, upcoming underclassmen.

[j4241]

Gentry is thin offensively and suspect in goal. Goaltending will be fine at Tonka - Hemp and Hazlett will compete and push eachother - likely sharing the net for three years. Tonka is also deep offensively, but the top end has been below elite levels producing against top teams. They have also underperformed their talent. Not sure why - probably multiple possible causes (bad luck, coaching, locker room).

[girlshockey4ever]

Interesting take on the Tonka team. While I readily admit that I don't have the research capabilities that many on here have, I'm not sure I can agree with Tonka top talent underperforming. While their "Top Kids" (up for debate) don't have massive numbers like some other kids, they do have lots of kids with lots of goals. Their team appears to have the most goals of any team in AA. Maybe they are spreading the wealth instead of just relying on 1 kid (South, Wayzata, HF, Gentry, Elk River, Rosemount) For example, It looks like they play Friday against HF. Stats break down looks like this:
Over 50 pts- Tonka 1 HF 1
40- 50 pts- Tonka 1 HF 0
30- 40 pts- Tonka 3 HF 1
20- 30 pts- Tonka 4 HF 3

My point in that is that I feel in girls hockey too much focus is placed on Elite players and we look at just their numbers. For example Tuttle in the South Suburban. Yes, she's going to have huge numbers. Rosemount only runs 2 lines. All game every game. And she is taking the majority of the shots. To say that a team's Elite players are underperforming seems unfair when they do have lots of points but the wealth is spread around. Edina is in the same boat. Kuehl and Lindborg each only have 14-13 goals. Are they underperforming? Or is it that they spread the wealth and don't take all the shots for their team. Again, the west side seems to be a different animal than the SSC.

[j4241]

If your argument is usage, and that the Tonka forwards are just as good as top forwards on other teams but don't get as much ice time, I don't agree. Andover has rolled 3+ lines all year. If it is that Tonka's team offense is elite because they get scoring at a very good, good and solid level from their three lines, I do agree - that's what makes them dangerous, and why I've always said they have the most talent in the state. But wins in big games need big players. They are looked at as a team that has big players. And their big players haven't been that big in big games so far. The balance may be enough - somewhere between 1 and 4 games to see.

[j4241]

And your comment about Kuehl and Lindborg - they are both solid high school hockey players. I don't think 13 and 14 goals are underperforming for them. They're on the ice a lot, and that's about the level of their offensive talent, in my opinion. It's not like they are choosing not to score as much as they could.

[girlshockey4ever]

Oh I agree they are not underperforming. It's just that they are not needed to score for their team to win. Which is my point.

[j4241]

We may still have some gap in our communication around the phrase "not needed." Every player will have some expected scoring rate against a given level of competition. Theirs is solid, but pretty low compared to top players, in my opinion. Are you saying they could score more, but aren't because it is "not needed?" I guess I'm not sure what you mean. Tonka's top forwards have a higher rate than theirs, but also lower than the best. I don't think that's about usage or role or "spreading shots around," I think it's because their expected scoring rate is lower than top players when facing top defenses and goaltending.

[j4241]

"Top 5 in AA" - ugh. I know there are some people-created rankings that have LVS there given the win-loss record, but they are borderline top 10, as the remainder of the playoffs will make clear.

Well that didn't take long...

[j4241]

Too snarky - sorry. Probably better to read this as a strong statement by Malecha about the Ms. Goalie award.

[j4241]

Only 4 Ms. Hockey semifinalists still playing - down go Tuttle, Burgen, Enright, Matthews, Franco and Christian. Only one of Peschel and Jungels survives tomorrow.

[Eagles93]

Too snarky - sorry. Probably better to read this as a strong statement by Malecha about the Ms. Goalie award.

I didn't see the game, but based on the box score, I'd say you are correct that this was far more about Malecha than South. I still put South in the area of 5-10 in the rankings. They could compete with the BSM and Wayzata's etc. on any given night. South had a different approach this year, the last two years their top 3 guns were on the same line. This year they put Enright on a different line, at least in the few games I saw, which were spread out over the season. Except power play of course. I think this helped with their lack of depth. Their defense and goaltending were not spectacular but passable enough for the top end talent to win games. Tonight it looks like they just ran into a really good goalie at the top of her game.

I'm not a South fan or parent, just my observations.