Exceptional Player/Move up policy

[HeShootsHeScores]

I know that there are different policies for "exceptional" players to move up. I'm curious what people think of their respective district policy.
Do you think a player is really exceptional if he plays up and makes a b2 team?
I heard of an association that has a policy where if you try out as an exceptional player and don't make the A team you have to play with your age group.
After reading the thread about the age change I began to wonder about this. I think that that subject has been beaten to death, just would like some thoughts about the exceptional/play up policy.

[JoltDelivered]

I never really looked at it as an "exceptional player" play-up rule. Rather I have always thought kids should play or participate at the level that most closely matches their talent and ability. Otherwise, his/her development will suffer. That goes both ways by the way. This also goes for any sport or endeavor in life for that matter.

Look at it this way. We put our kids in honor classes if they are smart enough and can handle the workload because we want them challenged. We put them in advanced piano courses if they are musically inlcined because we want them challenged. Heck...we put kids in preschool because we want them to be up to speed for kindergarten. At the age of 3 we begin challenging them.

For some reason when it comes to sports, lots of people get their undies in a bunch if a 7 year old plays with the 9 year olds. Or if a 12 year old plays with the 14 year olds. But for some reason when high school rolls around, it's OK for the 14 year old freshman to play with the 18 year old senior. That's always been a head scratcher for me.

Being new to the sport of Lacrosse this year, I have come to find out that they put the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th graders all on the same team, at the same level. Holy buckets....can you imagine if we did that in hockey?

[dakotakid]

Does MN hockey let players move up if they can make an A team? Does it have to be cleared by USA hockey? Does any one know

[CRMiteHockey]

Does MN hockey let players move up if they can make an A team? Does it have to be cleared by USA hockey? Does any one know

I believe that the local associations make the decision about the number of teams they will field, the levels, and how those teams will be filled. I have talked to several people at different D10 associations and it seems we all have different policies regarding moving players up.

[yeahyeahyeah]

I think the only MN Hockey rule regarding playing level is that you cannot play into a younger age group. CRMite Hockey is right otherwise.
I know one association requires the player be rated in the top 5 overall of the level in order to award them a spot on the A team and others will not entertain the thought. It is kind of all over the board.

[InigoMontoya]

Some districts have rules about playing up.

[MoreCowBell]

what?

[old goalie85]

I heard that about Roseville. One top Parent took his kid to St. louis to play T-1 AAA Jr. Blues. I think he's one of the top rated 96 players in the country. Roseville would not move the kid up. So the kid is not going to hill like his dad.[Too bad for hill]

[HockeyDad41]

What exactly is the problem with allowing an exceptional 8 year old the chance to try out and make a squirt team if he is good enough? The policy should be "if you are good enough to make the team, you get to be on that team."

And no, I don't have an exceptional 8 year old that I am all hacked off about him having to play mites.

[hockeyfollower]

Totally agree! Let them play where they are capable of playing

[JoltDelivered]

Totally agree! Let them play where they are capable of playing

I think most people feel this way however, where the rub usually comes from is the parent(s) of the 2nd year player(s) who were so close but didn't make the "A" team. They are the first people to call the board member in charge of tryouts and start complaining that the 8 /9-year-old "took away" that spot from an older player who belongs with his age group, friends, etc...Their argument is always the older child "deserves" it more based on his age.

And this happens not only at the "A" level but also the "B" level. Think it's bad to get cut from A to B because of a playup?...Talk to a parent whose child was cut from B to C because of a playup. That's never a fun discussion.

[muckandgrind]

I heard that about Roseville. One top Parent took his kid to St. louis to play T-1 AAA Jr. Blues. I think he's one of the top rated 96 players in the country. Roseville would not move the kid up. So the kid is not going to hill like his dad.[Too bad for hill]

I think the kid you're talking about is going to Shattuck next season, correct?

[InigoMontoya]

What exactly is the problem with allowing an exceptional 8 year old the chance to try out and make a squirt team if he is good enough? The policy should be "if you are good enough to make the team, you get to be on that team."

And no, I don't have an exceptional 8 year old that I am all hacked off about him having to play mites.

Seems simple, but can get a little complicated. How exceptional does he need to be? If he's good enough to make a squirt C team, does he move up? Does he have to make a b2 team, b1, a? How many can move up? A whole team's worth? Each quality player taken from the mite program reduces the skill level for all the players that remain. Many times it also reduces the level of coaching that remains at the mite level, as well.

[muckandgrind]

What exactly is the problem with allowing an exceptional 8 year old the chance to try out and make a squirt team if he is good enough? The policy should be "if you are good enough to make the team, you get to be on that team."

And no, I don't have an exceptional 8 year old that I am all hacked off about him having to play mites.

Seems simple, but can get a little complicated. How exceptional does he need to be? If he's good enough to make a squirt C team, does he move up? Does he have to make a b2 team, b1, a? How many can move up? A whole team's worth? Each quality player taken from the mite program reduces the skill level for all the players that remain. Many times it also reduces the level of coaching that remains at the mite level, as well.

I would say that player needs to tryout for both levels (Squirt and PeeWee, for example). If he makes the PeeWee A team, good for him, he plays there. If he doesn't, and assuming he was good enough to make the Squirt A team, then he plays on the Squirt team. He shouldn't be playing PW B1, B2 or C.

[MoreCowBell]

Is there any difference when they allow girls to play on boys traveling teams, in my opinion thats worse than allowing an exceptional boy to move up.

[JoltDelivered]

He shouldn't be playing PW B1, B2 or C.

Muck...that's an interesting take. Why not?

As I sit here and think about it, if it were my son, I would probably rather him play A squirts over B pee wees...but your statement sounds more like he shouldn't be allowed to play B pee wees. So in your opinion does that hold true for mites playing up to B squirts too? If you don't make the A team, then head back down?

Does this get back to we don't want younger kids taking spots from older kids?

[muckandgrind]

He shouldn't be playing PW B1, B2 or C.

Muck...that's an interesting take. Why not?

As I sit here and think about it, if it were my son, I would probably rather him play A squirts over B pee wees...but your statement sounds more like he shouldn't be allowed to play B pee wees. So in your opinion does that hold true for mites playing up to B squirts too? If you don't make the A team, then head back down?

Does this get back to we don't want younger kids taking spots from older kids?

Because if he can't make the "A" team, he isn't "exceptional". I would say the same is true for Mites......you have to draw the line somewhere, and I think this makes the most sense.

[Night Train]

MCB, Worse for who?

It's very tough to generalize as each association can have very different situations. Most of these decisions are made at the association level because of that. I like the idea that the player must finish top 5 in A tryouts to move up otherwise they play on the age appropriate A level team. A only or you have all kinds of fussers. Then they're not taking bubble spots but are truly special players that deserve the move up. Generally it's not that common and I don't think a real good idea. First year at any level can be difficult already and you'd like to keep the kids together. I'd rather see a player shine, be a leader, and build confidence at the correct level. Most second year bantams push most first year bantams around like they're squirts.

[dreampuck]

Let me tell you how it works in our associaiton:

Section 14.3
Exceptional Player Move-Up:
An exceptional player may skate at a higher age level if the following criteria have been met:
The individual played at the "A" traveling level the previous year. Has received a written
recommendation from the player's "A" coach to skate at a higher level. The request is approved by the
Traveling Committee.
If all criteria have been met, then a player will be allowed to tryout at a higher level. Under this
provision, an exceptional skater must make the top five or a goalie must make the top two in order to play
at a level above their age group. If a player fails to make this number, the player will play at the level the
player played last year.

In my opinion this is actually very simple, and provides that oportunity for that truely exceptional player. Make the top 5 in the age group you want to move up to and you are good to go.

In my 9 years in our association no one has made it and only a couple have tried.

We are a medium sized associaton usually fielding 3-5 teams at each level.

Just some info on how our association does it and it seems to work ok.

[HockeyDad41]

What exactly is the problem with allowing an exceptional 8 year old the chance to try out and make a squirt team if he is good enough? The policy should be "if you are good enough to make the team, you get to be on that team."

And no, I don't have an exceptional 8 year old that I am all hacked off about him having to play mites.

Seems simple, but can get a little complicated. How exceptional does he need to be? If he's good enough to make a squirt C team, does he move up? Does he have to make a b2 team, b1, a? How many can move up? A whole team's worth? Each quality player taken from the mite program reduces the skill level for all the players that remain. Many times it also reduces the level of coaching that remains at the mite level, as well.

Good point. It might make sense if I were from Edina or some other mega association who's Squirt C team could beat my associations Squirt A team. Our advanced mites could have creamed our C Squirt team so moving a player up to that team would make no sense.

[JoltDelivered]

Sounds like a solid policy...at least you have a printed policy which is a step ahead of alot of associations.

However one chink in the armor. How are the kids rated? Are the kids scored? Ranked on some sort of objective point scale? If it's like the association I am apart of, it's usually up to a few coaches...and maybe the travelling director of where the kids "rank". My guess is where kids are ranked during tryouts isn't public knowledge. They probably don't post a list of 1-20 ranked in order of talent.

So when the policy states, the skater must make the top 5, I am assuming that is subjective in the eyes of the coach. And because it isn't public knowledge it really can't be challenged by the masses. (i.e. Is #5 really better than #6?)

One final note: As you get older (pee wees, bantams, etc) move-ups beceome increasingly rare although I have seen it. And usually when it happens, the move up decision is made long before tryouts. Tryouts are used to simply confirm what everybody already knows.

Look, if there is a star coming through the ranks, he is often discovered long before pee wee or bantam tryouts.

[dreampuck]

Actually our assocaiton hires all outside evaluators and our process is as transparent as possible. If you request your kids score you can get it and they will share your rank, just not anyone elseses. Parent coaches have 0 say in any kid and non-parent coaches can pick only the final 5 players, so no coaches affect the top 5 players at all. The evaluators wouldnt even know who is trying out as an exceptional player. We go out of our way to make sure our evaluators dont know any of the kids or parents...at least as much as possible.

Its not a perfect system thats for sure and many would argue good coaches know the players better than outside evaluators who get to look at the kids for a total of about 5 hours, but it works ok for us.

There's always issues, but not usually with the top 5.

[Night Train]

All associations should be evaluating their players at the end of each season. After ranking 8-9 in his class each season it would be unusual for a player to jump to #3. The evaluations can also be used in parent/player meetings to discuss what the player should work on during the off season. Parents and players are both looking for transparent feedback. Beyond the on ice grades each player is given points for attendance, attitude, and parent behavior. The bubble this fall is broken based on historical data regarding the player. When it's all said and done I'll take the player with a good attitude, that's a positive influence, doesn't skip practice, and no parental baggage, every time.

Beyond skaters I find it really unusual that more goalie data isn't used. The kid has been playing goal for 4 years now. Has a winning percentage and a goals against average. To rely on outside evaluators to watch a couple hours of scrimmaging and select goalies seems stupid based on all the available statistics.

[JoltDelivered]

The evaluators wouldnt even know who is trying out as an exceptional player. We go out of our way to make sure our evaluators dont know any of the kids or parents...at least as much as possible.

Dreampuck, one thing I have always been curious about with this sort of system. Seeing that your evaluators are in the dark about past performance, behavior of individual players, parents, etc...have you ever seen a returner get cut? I am assuming the outside evaluators don't know who is a returning A player and who isn't. Or do you avoid this by giving the coach final say on the bottom 5 players therefore ensuring a returner wouldn't get cut?

It's not unthinkable to have a returner show up for tryouts and look average or even uninterested. I have seen it but again...I realize it's not common.

One final comment...whether or not the evaulator is the coach or an outside evaluator...there is and always will be bias. The bias will just be in different catagories. Actually, the very reason for tryouts is to develop bias for and against players.

[dreampuck]

Hey Jolt, yes we actually had at least a couple players that were PeeWee A's last year and did not make it this year. It happened to be a parent coached team, so they did not get any choices. If given the choice, I'm sure the coach would have changed a few players.

I'm in total agreement with you on most things here, and like I said previous, its not a perfect system and we have problems with whatever we've tried it just seems like we have less with our current process.

One thing to keep in mind about players who were on a A team one year and not the next, some players develop later, work harder in the summer, grow, get stronger etc...so it is quit posible even if they made an A team one year they may not the next.