Tryout ?s

[flpucknut]

Looking for some feedback on some details on how your association does tryouts. Not really looking to hear which one is better or worse, just want to gauge how it is being done elsewhere. Thanks for your time

Association -

Open or Closed -

Number of coach selection at squirt, pee wee, bantam -

In house evaluators or outside?


Now a couple of opinion questions. Do you feel that coach evaluations from previous year should be a part of player evaluations during tryouts?


How would you feel if they weren't called tryouts at all, but team selections? Isn't that really the ultimate goal, is to put kids on the most appropriate team for the teams sake and theirs?

Example...we just did our beginning of the year timed skating drills for our AAA team. One of the best kids on the team fell 3 times during one timed drill and got a poor time as a result, and then fell twice more in subsequent drills thus putting him in the lower half of our added times. Should that kid who everyone knows is fantastic not be placed on an appropriate team because he had three bad drills? If he is pushed through, then its not really a tryout anyway...see what I'm getting at?

Is the goal to place the 14 best kids of tryout week on the A team or is the goal to make the most competitive team?

[DrGaf]

I would just post the rosters on here, we'll pick the teams for you.

Simple enough.


*****seriously though, regardless of the age group. My thoughts are as follows:
- open tryouts.
- outside evaluators chosen by the board. If you have any kids trying out, you do not get a say in the evaluators. Just go home.
- evaluators pick 80% of rosters. (this is 12 on a 15 person roster)
- coach picks the remaining players with approval from the board.

or whatever.

[Froggy Richards]

Looking for some feedback on some details on how your association does tryouts. Not really looking to hear which one is better or worse, just want to gauge how it is being done elsewhere. Thanks for your time

Association -

Open or Closed - Our tryouts are closed. Never really liked that, I think it just breeds secrecy. The only reason for a closed tryout is so that if a parent complains they have nothing tangible to back it up. Makes it easier on the coach. He can simply say, "Well, you didn't see the tryout." Not saying that's right or wrong, but it seems a little sketchy.
Number of coach selection at squirt, pee wee, bantam -

Coach selects the entire team.

In house evaluators or outside?

Outside evaluator comes in to offer feedback, but like I said, that's all it is. Coach picks the team. I happen to agree with this, I think the coach should pick the team. If he chooses to take the evaluator's advice, he can, otherwise he can ignore it. I know some people disagree, but if you're going to volunteer to coach you have a right to pick the players you think give you the best chance. In my opinion, having an evaluator is meant to make it look more legitimate, someone who has no bias and no prior relations with anyone in the Association. Again, parent complains, coach can say, "well, the evaluator and I were in complete agreement." When in fact nobody really knows what the evaluator said or thinks. Just a smokescreen. I don't really disagree with this either, because having an evaluator is also flawed. They also have no idea of the makeup of a kid, how coachable they are, do they just practice well and not play well in games, vice versa, give maximum effort, etc.

Now a couple of opinion questions. Do you feel that coach evaluations from previous year should be a part of player evaluations during tryouts?

I think the coach can use whatever criteria he deems fit. His goal is to pick the best team that gives him the best chance to win. How he does that is up to him.

How would you feel if they weren't called tryouts at all, but team selections? Isn't that really the ultimate goal, is to put kids on the most appropriate team for the teams sake and theirs?

Yes, that is the ultimate goal. Calling them tryouts is more of a formality to make everyone think they have a chance, when we all know that some don't for various reasons. They could be uncoachable, a distraction, etc.

Example...we just did our beginning of the year timed skating drills for our AAA team. One of the best kids on the team fell 3 times during one timed drill and got a poor time as a result, and then fell twice more in subsequent drills thus putting him in the lower half of our added times. Should that kid who everyone knows is fantastic not be placed on an appropriate team because he had three bad drills? If he is pushed through, then its not really a tryout anyway...see what I'm getting at?

If the coach knows the kid is one of the best players, then yes, he should be selected for the team regardless of how he did at tryouts.

Is the goal to place the 14 best kids of tryout week on the A team or is the goal to make the most competitive team?

Most competitive team, without a doubt. Times have changed. Most coaches get an opportunity to watch all of these kids play 9 months out of the year. They know who the better players are, who is committed, and they know who hasn't skated at all in the offseason. Tryouts are more to uncover any surprises, such as a kid making a huge improvement in the offseason that the coach wasn't aware of, or to sort through the bubble kids.

Bottom line is the coach should pick the teams. He is much better equipped to do so than any evaluator. You can't possibly watch a group of kids go through drills for three days and decide who will make up the best TEAM. I know this isn't perfect. Will he pick his buddy's kid over another kid if they are both on the bubble? Maybe. Will he pick against a kid who's dad is a royal pain in the ***? Maybe. Will he pick a first year kid who has more potential over a second year kid who might be a little better at that time? He might. That happens in every aspect of life and hockey is no different. Like I said it's not perfect, but it's the best of all of the other options. All of this is just my opinion, of course.

[57special]

Edina

Open

Both internal(Edina coaches) and external evaluators.

Coach selected.

I do feel that Evals should be part if the process, but there aren't written Evals in Edina. Of course there is always anecdotal info passed along.


You're talking semantics. We have many cases where a top player is injured or sick for the tryouts, yet still make a top team. Against the rules, technically, but usually the right player is taken.

Every year there are are mistakes made, which sucks for the player in question, but I'd say that the right players are chosen for the right team about 90% of the time. My problem with outside evaluators deciding things is that they usually aren't truly outside evaluators, in other words, they do know some people from inside the association, and are, in some way connected with them, which misses the point. They also fall prey to the "workout wonders" who rate high year after year only to fall down once they actually have to play games with a team.

[bestpopcorn]

I have always thought that it would be better if MN Hockey would lighten up a bit on the roster requirements.

Tryouts are much less of a big deal at high school because of the way a player can move from JV to V and the visa versa.

I think it would promote better play as well. If Little Johnny Super Dangle knew he could be bumped to B at any time, he might pass as well in the A game as he demonstrated in tryouts.

I support the coach picking the team any way he sees fit.

I have one son that often played B, his correct spot. We always had a group of a half dozen disgruntled parents convinced their kid got hosed and should have played A. It was strange that with those half dozen on the team we didn't win a few more games....

[about22pandas]

I believe that teams should have the opportunity to move 1 player up or down per month. It would allow teams that are riddled with injuries, or clearly have someone not playing in the right division the chance to move and not spend the entire year on the wrong team.

What would the benefit be for a 13 year old play on the B team and he puts up 40% of the points, when the A team has a kid who definitely shouldn't be there and is getting short shifted? It would help both individuals out if you could make roster changes once a month, or one before new years etc.

[old goalie85]

I like open tryouts. We had open for years. Then switched because a couple parents were nut jobs. Why should I be penalized for one or two nut job dads. I also support letting the coach pick the team.

[SECoach]

I like open tryouts. We had open for years. Then switched because a couple parents were nut jobs. Why should I be penalized for one or two nut job dads. I also support letting the coach pick the team.

How are closed tryouts penalizing you?

[old goalie85]

Because before , [W/my older two I was able to watch]. Now after dads w/ inapropraite [sp?] behavior I'm not. Folks get the feeling of "whats going on in there?" Also I'm the bantam director , if the parents are in the rink they can see for themselves , less phone call for me to deal w/after tryouts !!!

[old goalie85]

Zeta/WBL both have open tryouts !!!

[boomerang]

I like the idea of being able to pay a little extra to skate up one level one practice per week. By that I mean, a B kid can pay an extra hundred or two and practice one night per week with the A kids. I think it would only amount to a couple extra kids on the ice, yet those whose egos are hurt get to practice with the level they think they should be on, and it isn't extra ice time for the association. There's usually a kid or two missing from each practice, so these kids practicing up aren't really a burden. The coach doesn't have to do anything different, and you can just assign the kids to a team to split them up evenly/not on the same nights.

I also think associations need to remind parents of a couple of things every year. First of all, it's a numbers game, so you're always going to have kids that "should" be playing up or down a level. Second, it's youth hockey, for cripes sake! Playing B's or C's isn't the end of the world and has no bearing on what the player is capable of because puberty changes everything. You'll have kids who were nobodies suddenly become stars, and kids who were stars all through youth hockey hit puberty and everyone else catches up, or they get distracted with everything else going on in high school, etc. Basically, the level you play at youth means nothing. It's still possible for little Johnny or Susie to become a superstar if they're willing to put in the work to get there. Playing squirt B's isn't the end of the world.

[InigoMontoya]

Basically, the level you play at youth means nothing.

In fairness to those that get pretty whipped up around tryout time, in many associations, it means a lot. Not everyone is blessed to have 20 former D-1 dads and a half dozen former NHLers willing to jump on the ice and teach the kids what they know. Some associations only have a few guys with experience above being a 3rd liner on a mediocre high school team, and only one or two of them are any good with the kids - and those guys are coaching the A team. On the girls' side it can be even worse, the B team could have on the bench a couple very well-meaning dads that didn't play any sports, much less hockey. I completely agree with you, 5 or 6 months of winter hockey should be a fantastic experience for everyone - unfortunately, it isn't.

[Froggy Richards]

Basically, the level you play at youth means nothing.

In fairness to those that get pretty whipped up around tryout time, in many associations, it means a lot. Not everyone is blessed to have 20 former D-1 dads and a half dozen former NHLers willing to jump on the ice and teach the kids what they know. Some associations only have a few guys with experience above being a 3rd liner on a mediocre high school team, and only one or two of them are any good with the kids - and those guys are coaching the A team. On the girls' side it can be even worse, the B team could have on the bench a couple very well-meaning dads that didn't play any sports, much less hockey. I completely agree with you, 5 or 6 months of winter hockey should be a fantastic experience for everyone - unfortunately, it isn't.

This is exactly right. The B team is not a good situation in many Associations. That's why there is so much riding on tryouts for a lot of people. In a larger Association with high numbers, I agree that it doesn't matter that much.

[InThePipes]

Looking for some feedback on some details on how your association does tryouts. Not really looking to hear which one is better or worse, just want to gauge how it is being done elsewhere. Thanks for your time

Association -

Open or Closed -

Number of coach selection at squirt, pee wee, bantam -

In house evaluators or outside?


Now a couple of opinion questions. Do you feel that coach evaluations from previous year should be a part of player evaluations during tryouts?


How would you feel if they weren't called tryouts at all, but team selections? Isn't that really the ultimate goal, is to put kids on the most appropriate team for the teams sake and theirs?

Example...we just did our beginning of the year timed skating drills for our AAA team. One of the best kids on the team fell 3 times during one timed drill and got a poor time as a result, and then fell twice more in subsequent drills thus putting him in the lower half of our added times. Should that kid who everyone knows is fantastic not be placed on an appropriate team because he had three bad drills? If he is pushed through, then its not really a tryout anyway...see what I'm getting at?

Is the goal to place the 14 best kids of tryout week on the A team or is the goal to make the most competitive team?

For these questions, is the coach a parent or non-parent?

[Goose21]

Basically, the level you play at youth means nothing.

In fairness to those that get pretty whipped up around tryout time, in many associations, it means a lot. Not everyone is blessed to have 20 former D-1 dads and a half dozen former NHLers willing to jump on the ice and teach the kids what they know. Some associations only have a few guys with experience above being a 3rd liner on a mediocre high school team, and only one or two of them are any good with the kids - and those guys are coaching the A team. On the girls' side it can be even worse, the B team could have on the bench a couple very well-meaning dads that didn't play any sports, much less hockey. I completely agree with you, 5 or 6 months of winter hockey should be a fantastic experience for everyone - unfortunately, it isn't.

This is exactly right. The B team is not a good situation in many Associations. That's why there is so much riding on tryouts for a lot of people. In a larger Association with high numbers, I agree that it doesn't matter that much.

I would also add that making the right team(s) can mean a big difference in additional and future hockey opportuntities.

[JSR]

In fairness to those that get pretty whipped up around tryout time, in many associations, it means a lot. Not everyone is blessed to have 20 former D-1 dads and a half dozen former NHLers willing to jump on the ice and teach the kids what they know. Some associations only have a few guys with experience above being a 3rd liner on a mediocre high school team, and only one or two of them are any good with the kids - and those guys are coaching the A team. On the girls' side it can be even worse, the B team could have on the bench a couple very well-meaning dads that didn't play any sports, much less hockey. I completely agree with you, 5 or 6 months of winter hockey should be a fantastic experience for everyone - unfortunately, it isn't.

This is exactly right. The B team is not a good situation in many Associations. That's why there is so much riding on tryouts for a lot of people. In a larger Association with high numbers, I agree that it doesn't matter that much.

I would also add that making the right team(s) can mean a big difference in additional and future hockey opportuntities.

This is very true.... there are alot of kids who get "opportunities" based on their helmet sticker or winter team designation regardless of how effective that player really is or is not

[nahc]

Best: Open tryouts with outside, UNBIASED, evaluators. No coach picks. The scores are what they are........ Take the top 15 or so kids and go with it. NO bubble kids/scores. It is a HUGE deal for kids tryout and make the A team, compared to the B team and C team. The one caveat is that there could be movement between teams so the kids had better play their best or movement could occur, up or down. Also should be non-parent coaches........ In my opinion.........

[Docs_88]

I don't see a benefit in opening the tryouts to the parents. Is dad's presence going to change their kids score? No. Will it eliminate the hard feelings of those who feel that their kid was placed on the wrong team? No. It will most likely only make those hard feelings worse as most parents see their kids abilities differently than the evaluators will and in the end cause more behind the scene's bickering.

3 Coach picks at PeeWees and maybe a couple more at Bantams. At those levels, the coach may be looking for something specific in a player that may be on the bubble. Johnny and Billy grade out equally but Johnny can add some size to the line up etc.

Squirts 1 or 2 at the most. Going strictly by evaluation scores always results in a couple of head scratchers.

Outside evaluators for sure but they should have access to the player evaluations from the previous year if they actually exist. They are kind of like Bigfoot in our association, you hear about them, never actually see one, but there are people that swear they exist.

[black sheep]

if your tryouts are closed are you presented tryout information?

if a formal evaluation procedure is in place there would be value for all in seeing where your players ranks in speed, acceleraton, shooting, puck control etc...

but there should always be "open spots available". there is always an injury, illness or gamer that needs to be on the "A" team and everyone knows it.

common sense should prevail...but...

[bestpopcorn]

Outside Evaporators? From where?

In the southern MN all of the "hockey guys" can recognize and name most of the players within an hours drive.

I think it's funny. We go out of our way to put our kids in anonymous uniforms. Again, most can be recognized at 100 yards by the way they skate.

[SCBlueLiner]

Outside Evaporators? From where?

In the southern MN all of the "hockey guys" can recognize and name most of the players within an hours drive.

I think it's funny. We go out of our way to put our kids in anonymous uniforms. Again, most can be recognized at 100 yards by the way they skate.

No kidding. I can tell you who is going to be on the Bantam A team two years from now, provided the kid doesn't quit hockey. Life in a small association. Yet the parents still insist, and get all worked up about having tryouts.

[bestpopcorn]

I was once run up the flag pole because you could read a kids name on the back of his jersey through the somewhat translucent tryout penny.

The kid was the tallest kid in our assn and skated like an ostrich. You could have put him in the Mr. Kool-Aid suit and everyone involved would still know who is was.