Lets hear about it. Some thoughts to start things off:
1. I thought that it was great that Minnesota Hockey / High Performance did not charge a gate fee either weekend. Was really nice that they raised some $$$ at Plymouth for the Humbodlt community at PIC for the 16 & 17 boys & girls Spring Festival.
2. The stats and information that was put on the website post games was done in an efficient and clear manner (both weekends). Last year there was info missing...dont know if it ever was put online. I am not saying that it was perfectly accurate but it was available in my mind in a very reasonable timeframe.
3. It was nice that both weekends were back to back for 16/17 and did not hear that either weekend interfered with spring breaks.
4. Minnesota Hockey was in a tough spot last weekend with the weather situation and travel. I do not have any suggestions about how they should have done it differently. The bonus with the weather last weekend was that there were not girls that missed games because of lacrosse/track meets/etc.
Generally I feel like MN hockey did a great job on the execution of the weekend at site and online...
2018 HP 14/15/16 & 17
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
At a quick glance here were the returning #s from prior year Nat camps (skaters only):
16's:
Red - 2 D & 2 F that did not go to 15's natty camp.
White - 5 F that did not go to 15's natty camp.
Blue - 3 D & 3 F that did not go to 15's natty camp.
15 total skaters of 48 that did NOT make natty camp at 15.
17's:
Red
- 2 66 D, 2 Nat D, 2 none D
- 3 66 F, 3 Nat F, 4 none F
Blue
- 4 66 D, 2 Nat D
- 2 66 F, 4 Nat F, 4 none F
White
- 1 66 D, 3 Nat D, 2 none D
- 2 66 F, 4 Nat F, 4 none F
16 total skaters of 48 that did not make a natty camp at 16. At first glance I saw that at least 2 F and 1 D from 54s last year did not try out. 1 of them made 66.
I think that of the 16 "new" players 8 had not made 15's Nat camp, 7 made 15's Nat camp, and 1 might have moved and/or spelled their name slightly differently...
So...definitely some turnover from year to year.
I would argue that all of this is a funnel of sorts. Making MN 15's and then Natty 15's is easiest. Making 54's is more difficult with the pool being slightly larger at 16 and then it being slightly easier to make 54's at 17 with some of the drop off of girls (& parents) trying out, quitting, or plain just getting tired of hockey and the HP process.
One additional thing that was known but interesting was the sheer # of Minnesota girls that were on the first page of points leaders at both 15's and 16/17 national camp. Felt like at least 1/3 of the girls that were leading points getters were Minnesotans. Representation at these camps is roughly 20-25% MN at 15's and National camp and closer to 40% at "Select" or 66 camp.
Go MN girls hockey!
16's:
Red - 2 D & 2 F that did not go to 15's natty camp.
White - 5 F that did not go to 15's natty camp.
Blue - 3 D & 3 F that did not go to 15's natty camp.
15 total skaters of 48 that did NOT make natty camp at 15.
17's:
Red
- 2 66 D, 2 Nat D, 2 none D
- 3 66 F, 3 Nat F, 4 none F
Blue
- 4 66 D, 2 Nat D
- 2 66 F, 4 Nat F, 4 none F
White
- 1 66 D, 3 Nat D, 2 none D
- 2 66 F, 4 Nat F, 4 none F
16 total skaters of 48 that did not make a natty camp at 16. At first glance I saw that at least 2 F and 1 D from 54s last year did not try out. 1 of them made 66.
I think that of the 16 "new" players 8 had not made 15's Nat camp, 7 made 15's Nat camp, and 1 might have moved and/or spelled their name slightly differently...
So...definitely some turnover from year to year.
I would argue that all of this is a funnel of sorts. Making MN 15's and then Natty 15's is easiest. Making 54's is more difficult with the pool being slightly larger at 16 and then it being slightly easier to make 54's at 17 with some of the drop off of girls (& parents) trying out, quitting, or plain just getting tired of hockey and the HP process.
One additional thing that was known but interesting was the sheer # of Minnesota girls that were on the first page of points leaders at both 15's and 16/17 national camp. Felt like at least 1/3 of the girls that were leading points getters were Minnesotans. Representation at these camps is roughly 20-25% MN at 15's and National camp and closer to 40% at "Select" or 66 camp.
Go MN girls hockey!
https://teamusa.usahockey.com/page/show ... pment-camp
Looks like a few less Minnesota kids than last year. I am surprised there were not a few more 02's selected. No 03's from anywhere.
There was 1 01 Defense that did not make it again (one moved in from Wisconsin and made it) and 2 new 01 Forwards (and one that did not try out as a result of an injury).
Looks like a few less Minnesota kids than last year. I am surprised there were not a few more 02's selected. No 03's from anywhere.
There was 1 01 Defense that did not make it again (one moved in from Wisconsin and made it) and 2 new 01 Forwards (and one that did not try out as a result of an injury).
2001 selectees:
https://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sh ... -selectees
2002 selectees:
https://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sh ... -selectees
https://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sh ... -selectees
2002 selectees:
https://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sh ... -selectees