HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

The 00' Machine team should still be at the top for that age group.

O3' 04' 05' Miracle Gold teams should be very strong and their 01' team will be much improved.

Any other programs lose or add out there?

I think the 99 Icemen will be tough to beat. The 99 Nationals look to be good.
03 Blades have a great goalie so that will help them.

Maybe someone with inside knowledge can clarify what's going on with the 01 Blades versus 01 Sweet Hockey Selects, Lance Pitlick's teams??? I was never clear on why two teams with the same core of kids.

It should be fun to see this group (whatever they're called) against the 01 Machine to see who rules the roost this summer. Machine had the edge last year, but got stung once or twice.

MG99's will be much improved as well, more of a tournament team then full blown development thru out the summer.... Added several top end players, not sure if they will be to the level of Icemen, Nats, Blades, or Orange,but time will tell.... 99's are a very deep group with a lot of very talented players

I'm starting to dig in at the AAA level this year.

99: Orange, Icemen, Blades, Nats (loaded birth year)
00: Orange, Euro, Blades...not sure on The Edge and Nats merger
01: Orange, Blades
02: Blades, Orange, Euro (loaded birth year)
03: Blades, MG, Orange (Brick Year always slants toward Blades)
04: Way too early to tell

MG is up and coming at '02, '03, and '04.

I posted a year end review last Summer that drew some attention. Would happily take some information on these 6 classes heading into my Spring Staff Rankings. Please send me a note at editor@youthhockeyhub.com.

Thanks,

TS

imlisteningtothefnsong wrote:I think the 99 Icemen will be tough to beat. The 99 Nationals look to be good.
03 Blades have a great goalie so that will help them.

Are the Icemen going back to having teams at all levels?

The 99 Icemen haven't been around for awhile- Have they ?? 00 group w/Brodzinski coaching should be tough.

OG- I know last year the Icemen got a boost when a big part of the Blades left and joined them. They man handled the orange, and the Nats. They have an impressive roster. The program shows 99,00,01,02. I am looking forward to watching my 99 play that team. We scrimmage the Blades then go to Chicago, that should be interesting.

YouthHockeyHub wrote:I'm starting to dig in at the AAA level this year.

99: Orange, Icemen, Blades, Nats (loaded birth year)
00: Orange, Euro, Blades...not sure on The Edge and Nats merger
01: Orange, Blades
02: Blades, Orange, Euro (loaded birth year)
03: Blades, MG, Orange (Brick Year always slants toward Blades)
04: Way too early to tell

MG is up and coming at '02, '03, and '04.

I posted a year end review last Summer that drew some attention. Would happily take some information on these 6 classes heading into my Spring Staff Rankings. Please send me a note at editor@youthhockeyhub.com.

Thanks,

TS

TS- I think you're missing that MG on the 03 level lost 70-80 percent of their scoring last year. The East side has some great talent on the 03 level. Legacy has a very nice 01, 02 and 03 team that should be considered. all three teams got much better and deeper this year!

Blades will have the best 03 team for sure.

Chi should be fun. We went w/ our little freind coaching 5 or 6 years ago and it was a great tourny full of talent. Nats were out gunned, sounds like you will enjoy more success. Mission/HoneyBaked/ Compuware were all there back then. Marty Nanne brought a team of Mn kids called the Jr North Stars that did quite well. Good luck Down there buddy!!! I'm still Thirsty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[/quote]
TS- I think you're missing that MG on the 03 level lost 70-80 percent of their scoring last year. The East side has some great talent on the 03 level. Legacy has a very nice 01, 02 and 03 team that should be considered. all three teams got much better and deeper this year!

Blades will have the best 03 team for sure.[/quote]

Play, I think your stats are way off.... 20-25 percent at most scoring departed. Player's added strengthen the roster. Team will be better between the pipes and on the blue line... This team will not have issues putting the puck in the net, even with the two departures to the brick team... With two 04's no longer on the 03 roster, overall the team is deeper in talent and in my opinion will be stronger then last years team... but hey what do I know, and anyone can have an opinion. Certainly the departed player is very very good and is one of if not the top 03 player, but it is a team game and one player does not make or break a team.

It is a brick year for 03... Of course the Blades should have the best team...

Seriously...thanks you guys. I'm reading between some blurry lines to begin with. The first couple tournies should clear some things up, I'm sure.

My '03 knowledge is getting stronger every day.

I'm well aware of the Legacy teams...not sure where they land quite yet.

TS

YouthHockeyHub wrote:Seriously...thanks you guys. I'm reading between some blurry lines to begin with. The first couple tournies should clear some things up, I'm sure.

My '03 knowledge is getting stronger every day.

I'm well aware of the Legacy teams...not sure where they land quite yet.

TS

Last season's best '03 team

1. Blades
2. MG
3. Orange
4. Lake Superior Stars
5. Legacy
6. EuroAmerican

YouthHockeyHub wrote:I'm starting to dig in at the AAA level this year.

99: Orange, Icemen, Blades, Nats (loaded birth year)
00: Orange, Euro, Blades...not sure on The Edge and Nats merger
01: Orange, Blades
02: Blades, Orange, Euro (loaded birth year)
03: Blades, MG, Orange (Brick Year always slants toward Blades)
04: Way too early to tell

MG is up and coming at '02, '03, and '04.

I posted a year end review last Summer that drew some attention. Would happily take some information on these 6 classes heading into my Spring Staff Rankings. Please send me a note at editor@youthhockeyhub.com.

Thanks,

TS

It's been my personal observation that IMHO that the 2000 birth year is a more loaded birth year than the 99's. Though I am lookign at it more through a national scope than just MN but I include MN within that.... just what I have observed

I heard the 99 Machine/Iceman played a game on Saturday. Any scores available?

Icemen and Machine skated to a 4-4 tie tonight at Richfield.

JSR wrote:

YouthHockeyHub wrote:I'm starting to dig in at the AAA level this year.

99: Orange, Icemen, Blades, Nats (loaded birth year)
00: Orange, Euro, Blades...not sure on The Edge and Nats merger
01: Orange, Blades
02: Blades, Orange, Euro (loaded birth year)
03: Blades, MG, Orange (Brick Year always slants toward Blades)
04: Way too early to tell

MG is up and coming at '02, '03, and '04.

I posted a year end review last Summer that drew some attention. Would happily take some information on these 6 classes heading into my Spring Staff Rankings. Please send me a note at editor@youthhockeyhub.com.

Thanks,

TS

It's been my personal observation that IMHO that the 2000 birth year is a more loaded birth year than the 99's. Though I am lookign at it more through a national scope than just MN but I include MN within that.... just what I have observed

That's a fun debate that would be fun to have over a beer. I could either way. I think that 00 has more star power, but 99 may have more depth. Just my .02. I think that '02 is the best class in youth hockey right now...goaltending is only weak link.

YouthHockeyHub wrote:

JSR wrote:

YouthHockeyHub wrote:I'm starting to dig in at the AAA level this year.

99: Orange, Icemen, Blades, Nats (loaded birth year)
00: Orange, Euro, Blades...not sure on The Edge and Nats merger
01: Orange, Blades
02: Blades, Orange, Euro (loaded birth year)
03: Blades, MG, Orange (Brick Year always slants toward Blades)
04: Way too early to tell

MG is up and coming at '02, '03, and '04.

I posted a year end review last Summer that drew some attention. Would happily take some information on these 6 classes heading into my Spring Staff Rankings. Please send me a note at editor@youthhockeyhub.com.

Thanks,

TS

It's been my personal observation that IMHO that the 2000 birth year is a more loaded birth year than the 99's. Though I am lookign at it more through a national scope than just MN but I include MN within that.... just what I have observed

That's a fun debate that would be fun to have over a beer. I could either way. I think that 00 has more star power, but 99 may have more depth. Just my .02. I think that '02 is the best class in youth hockey right now...goaltending is only weak link.

I agree with both of you that the 99-00 years are the, in my opinion, best overall youth classes we've seen in youth hockey.

I am very excited to see this group start skating in high school. And the talent is spread out all throughout the metro. Great times ahead!

DrGaf wrote:

YouthHockeyHub wrote:

JSR wrote: It's been my personal observation that IMHO that the 2000 birth year is a more loaded birth year than the 99's. Though I am lookign at it more through a national scope than just MN but I include MN within that.... just what I have observed

That's a fun debate that would be fun to have over a beer. I could either way. I think that 00 has more star power, but 99 may have more depth. Just my .02. I think that '02 is the best class in youth hockey right now...goaltending is only weak link.

I agree with both of you that the 99-00 years are the, in my opinion, best overall youth classes we've seen in youth hockey.

I am very excited to see this group start skating in high school. And the talent is spread out all throughout the metro. Great times ahead!

depending on how many players are recruited to go private... Ooops wrong forum, couldn't resist a private bash, asking for forgivness now!

DrGaf wrote:

YouthHockeyHub wrote:

JSR wrote: It's been my personal observation that IMHO that the 2000 birth year is a more loaded birth year than the 99's. Though I am lookign at it more through a national scope than just MN but I include MN within that.... just what I have observed

That's a fun debate that would be fun to have over a beer. I could either way. I think that 00 has more star power, but 99 may have more depth. Just my .02. I think that '02 is the best class in youth hockey right now...goaltending is only weak link.

I agree with both of you that the 99-00 years are the, in my opinion, best overall youth classes we've seen in youth hockey.

I am very excited to see this group start skating in high school. And the talent is spread out all throughout the metro. Great times ahead!

Agree, 99's were the first huge group of kids to play Summer Hockey at the youngest available age. Quite a few 00's played up with the 99's that year too.

Kind of...AAA hockey really started to explode at the 97 age level when those boys were 8 and 9. We saw teams pop up everywhere. The Blades and Machine were particularily strong at that age level not to mention several other programs. High School coaches are now enjoying the fruits of those labors. See the sophemore and freshman classes this past year. Lots and lots of major contributors.

Sort of.. The number of first year eligible 97 teams went up from previous birth years, but then the 99's nearly had double after those two years. Maybe not all of high caliber, but way more teams.

I think it bodes well for Minnesota Hockey, in spite of the the Chicken Littles out there ("we're losing ground to Tier 1 AAA and Canadian Juniors!) as well as the Grumpy Old Men ("kids should be fishing and golfing in the summer!")

I've been doing some research on summer hockey elsewhere in the US, and it either isn't happening in any measurable way, or people don't know how to use the internet in the summer. Some of the Tier 1 teams keep chugging along, of course, and maybe put together tournament teams. Nothing like MN though. On a separate thread, I think we've counted more than 40 AAA summer programs at just the 02 level??? That's approaching like half the total number of winter associations!

YouthHockeyHub wrote:

JSR wrote:

YouthHockeyHub wrote:I'm starting to dig in at the AAA level this year.

99: Orange, Icemen, Blades, Nats (loaded birth year)
00: Orange, Euro, Blades...not sure on The Edge and Nats merger
01: Orange, Blades
02: Blades, Orange, Euro (loaded birth year)
03: Blades, MG, Orange (Brick Year always slants toward Blades)
04: Way too early to tell

MG is up and coming at '02, '03, and '04.

I posted a year end review last Summer that drew some attention. Would happily take some information on these 6 classes heading into my Spring Staff Rankings. Please send me a note at editor@youthhockeyhub.com.

Thanks,

TS

It's been my personal observation that IMHO that the 2000 birth year is a more loaded birth year than the 99's. Though I am lookign at it more through a national scope than just MN but I include MN within that.... just what I have observed

That's a fun debate that would be fun to have over a beer. I could either way. I think that 00 has more star power, but 99 may have more depth. Just my .02. I think that '02 is the best class in youth hockey right now...goaltending is only weak link.

I know they are way too young to definitvely say this BUT, based on what I remember about the 1999's and 2000's when they were the same "age" I have been watching some younger ages recently and the 2003 class seems to lack star power and lacks depth relatively speaking (this is not a rip on these kids it's just a relative observation within this broad based discussion so don't go ballistic), whereas the 2004 and 2005 kids seems like there are tons of good players with tons of potential. Again way too young to definitively say but relative to their older peers this is what I have observed thus far. As for 2002's, I am not as well versed on that class, it sort of hits a "gap" of how old my kids are, and thus also not knowledgeable on them in MN but what little I have seen of them locally they do not appear to be an especially strong group here in WI. Fun to watch and see as they grow older and change though....

YouthHockeyHub wrote:Icemen and Machine skated to a 4-4 tie tonight at Richfield.

Did I see some former MM players rostered on the Iceman teams this season or am I mistaken??