High Performance 16/17

[Lace'emUp]

Here are the updated numbers that everyone has been waiting for.

Of the newly termed "Final 57", on the HP 16 side, 53 of the 57 made the "Final 102" HP 15 Summer Camp in St. Cloud last year as player, or as one of the 9 alternates. That is 93%. One could turn this around and say only 53 of the 109 made it from last year, and that's only 49%. The rebuttal to that is: What would you guess the actual percentage be if they took 102 like they do at HP 15's and not 54 or 57, or whatever they dream up?

There were 25 National Campers last year on the HP 15 side, with 7 alternates. Of that, 24 of the 25 made the "Final 57", and 5 of the 7 alternates made it. In total, that's 91% return rate. Overall, only 4 new players made it to this higher level.

Things are a little more black/white on the HP 17 side since they had a "Final 54" last year. There are 37 players on the "Final 57" that made the "Final 54" last year. That is a 65% return rate.

But of the 20 who are new to this upper level, 13 made their section HP 16 rosters at last year. Only 7 are very new to this higher level. So one could look at the return rate being 50 of 57, or 88%.

Take a look at these numbers, then look back to my post on April 1st with the first round numbers. Then look to the following MN Hockey webpage:
http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... ormance-15

Right in the middle of the page it states:
Traditionally, Minnesota has had about 50% turn over in players selected to national camps from one year to the next. In 2012, there was a 56% turn over from the previous year's 15 list and 40% turn over from the previous year's 16 list. This is proof of the large talent base here in Minnesota, our dedication to a fair, non-biased evaluation process, and the continued development of our players.


Now it's up to you to decide if this is true, or misleading.

This is pretty telling.
I'd be curious how the very first HP selections at 15s translate into who's picked at 17s. It seems very very few girls or boys are ever selected if they don't make that very first cut to 15s camp?

I do not have the 1998's HP 15 Final 102 list from a couple years ago. I do have who made the HP 15 National Camp roster and alternates from that year. There were 16 girls on the invite roster, and 17 as alternates (weird numbers, but that's what it was).

-Of the 16 girls on the HP 15 invite roster, 14 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-Of the 17 girls on the HP 15 alternate roster, 11 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-In total, 25 of the 33 girls invited to the HP 15 National camp two years ago are on a HP 17 "Final 57" roster this year, or 76%.
-Of the 8 above did not make the Final 57 roster this year, 6 have made Section rosters at HP 16, HP 17, or both.
-One of the other absentees is the best hockey player in the state (point-wise) from Rochester Century, who would've made anything at HP 16 or HP 17. But she is also one of the top ranked U18 tennis player in the country (without naming names). My guess that's more important right now

Once again, digest the numbers however you may. And by the way, the selection process, however predetermined one might guess it can be, starts at the MN Selects level. Go look at the past results and you will find lots of these same names from when they were 10U and 8U players. Heck, I count 18 from the MN Select rosters posted from the 2009 tournament (that are on an HP 16 Final 57 roster). Again, this is when they're at 10U and 8U.

Let's not confuse anyone. ALL these girls are good if not great hockey players, and deserve to be where they are. It's the tryout process, and the "facts" that MN Hockey posts, that can be misleading. Sure, there will be a diamond in the rough here and there. But when MN Hockey posts that they have almost a 50% turn-over from year to year? That's misleading and almost fraudulent. They should not post ANYTHING to percentages! Because in the end, the percentages are very low that someone is going to come in off the street and make even a Final 54/57 team that hasn't at least made a District or Section HP roster in the past. MN Hockey is not only in the business of hockey, they're in the business of making money. There's a lot of girls paying that initial $80+$50 bucks to tryout, and MNH is never going change the system to eliminate all that tryout money. What they will do is create more HP levels. They already did with HP 14/15 (with is actually HP 13's). Why not HP 12's or HP 11's? If they do, MN Selects might not be too happy.

[boardguy1998]

Here are the updated numbers that everyone has been waiting for.

Of the newly termed "Final 57", on the HP 16 side, 53 of the 57 made the "Final 102" HP 15 Summer Camp in St. Cloud last year as player, or as one of the 9 alternates. That is 93%. One could turn this around and say only 53 of the 109 made it from last year, and that's only 49%. The rebuttal to that is: What would you guess the actual percentage be if they took 102 like they do at HP 15's and not 54 or 57, or whatever they dream up?

There were 25 National Campers last year on the HP 15 side, with 7 alternates. Of that, 24 of the 25 made the "Final 57", and 5 of the 7 alternates made it. In total, that's 91% return rate. Overall, only 4 new players made it to this higher level.

Things are a little more black/white on the HP 17 side since they had a "Final 54" last year. There are 37 players on the "Final 57" that made the "Final 54" last year. That is a 65% return rate.

But of the 20 who are new to this upper level, 13 made their section HP 16 rosters at last year. Only 7 are very new to this higher level. So one could look at the return rate being 50 of 57, or 88%.

Take a look at these numbers, then look back to my post on April 1st with the first round numbers. Then look to the following MN Hockey webpage:
http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... ormance-15

Right in the middle of the page it states:
Traditionally, Minnesota has had about 50% turn over in players selected to national camps from one year to the next. In 2012, there was a 56% turn over from the previous year's 15 list and 40% turn over from the previous year's 16 list. This is proof of the large talent base here in Minnesota, our dedication to a fair, non-biased evaluation process, and the continued development of our players.


Now it's up to you to decide if this is true, or misleading.

This is pretty telling.
I'd be curious how the very first HP selections at 15s translate into who's picked at 17s. It seems very very few girls or boys are ever selected if they don't make that very first cut to 15s camp?

I do not have the 1998's HP 15 Final 102 list from a couple years ago. I do have who made the HP 15 National Camp roster and alternates from that year. There were 16 girls on the invite roster, and 17 as alternates (weird numbers, but that's what it was).

-Of the 16 girls on the HP 15 invite roster, 14 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-Of the 17 girls on the HP 15 alternate roster, 11 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-In total, 25 of the 33 girls invited to the HP 15 National camp two years ago are on a HP 17 "Final 57" roster this year, or 76%.
-Of the 8 above did not make the Final 57 roster this year, 6 have made Section rosters at HP 16, HP 17, or both.
-One of the other absentees is the best hockey player in the state (point-wise) from Rochester Century, who would've made anything at HP 16 or HP 17. But she is also one of the top ranked U18 tennis player in the country (without naming names). My guess that's more important right now

Once again, digest the numbers however you may. And by the way, the selection process, however predetermined one might guess it can be, starts at the MN Selects level. Go look at the past results and you will find lots of these same names from when they were 10U and 8U players. Heck, I count 18 from the MN Select rosters posted from the 2009 tournament (that are on an HP 16 Final 57 roster). Again, this is when they're at 10U and 8U.

Let's not confuse anyone. ALL these girls are good if not great hockey players, and deserve to be where they are. It's the tryout process, and the "facts" that MN Hockey posts, that can be misleading. Sure, there will be a diamond in the rough here and there. But when MN Hockey posts that they have almost a 50% turn-over from year to year? That's misleading and almost fraudulent. They should not post ANYTHING to percentages! Because in the end, the percentages are very low that someone is going to come in off the street and make even a Final 54/57 team that hasn't at least made a District or Section HP roster in the past. MN Hockey is not only in the business of hockey, they're in the business of making money. There's a lot of girls paying that initial $80+$50 bucks to tryout, and MNH is never going change the system to eliminate all that tryout money. What they will do is create more HP levels. They already did with HP 14/15 (with is actually HP 13's). Why not HP 12's or HP 11's? If they do, MN Selects might not be too happy.

From what I was told this weekend by an evaluator, one of the 3 kids added at 16's, made the national camp last year at 15's. I guess that MN hockey has a rule, if you make that team you are guaranteed at spot in the 54's, so they added her and two others. Seems to conflict with the whole turnover thing if you guarantee spots, also never saw that in writing anywhere.

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

This is pretty telling.
I'd be curious how the very first HP selections at 15s translate into who's picked at 17s. It seems very very few girls or boys are ever selected if they don't make that very first cut to 15s camp?

I do not have the 1998's HP 15 Final 102 list from a couple years ago. I do have who made the HP 15 National Camp roster and alternates from that year. There were 16 girls on the invite roster, and 17 as alternates (weird numbers, but that's what it was).

-Of the 16 girls on the HP 15 invite roster, 14 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-Of the 17 girls on the HP 15 alternate roster, 11 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-In total, 25 of the 33 girls invited to the HP 15 National camp two years ago are on a HP 17 "Final 57" roster this year, or 76%.
-Of the 8 above did not make the Final 57 roster this year, 6 have made Section rosters at HP 16, HP 17, or both.
-One of the other absentees is the best hockey player in the state (point-wise) from Rochester Century, who would've made anything at HP 16 or HP 17. But she is also one of the top ranked U18 tennis player in the country (without naming names). My guess that's more important right now

Once again, digest the numbers however you may. And by the way, the selection process, however predetermined one might guess it can be, starts at the MN Selects level. Go look at the past results and you will find lots of these same names from when they were 10U and 8U players. Heck, I count 18 from the MN Select rosters posted from the 2009 tournament (that are on an HP 16 Final 57 roster). Again, this is when they're at 10U and 8U.

Let's not confuse anyone. ALL these girls are good if not great hockey players, and deserve to be where they are. It's the tryout process, and the "facts" that MN Hockey posts, that can be misleading. Sure, there will be a diamond in the rough here and there. But when MN Hockey posts that they have almost a 50% turn-over from year to year? That's misleading and almost fraudulent. They should not post ANYTHING to percentages! Because in the end, the percentages are very low that someone is going to come in off the street and make even a Final 54/57 team that hasn't at least made a District or Section HP roster in the past. MN Hockey is not only in the business of hockey, they're in the business of making money. There's a lot of girls paying that initial $80+$50 bucks to tryout, and MNH is never going change the system to eliminate all that tryout money. What they will do is create more HP levels. They already did with HP 14/15 (with is actually HP 13's). Why not HP 12's or HP 11's? If they do, MN Selects might not be too happy.

From what I was told this weekend by an evaluator, one of the 3 kids added at 16's, made the national camp last year at 15's. I guess that MN hockey has a rule, if you make that team you are guaranteed at spot in the 54's, so they added her and two others. Seems to conflict with the whole turnover thing if you guarantee spots, also never saw that in writing anywhere.

That is false. They specifically say that making team at any level has no bearing on whether you make it the next time around. As laces has shown, that has proven to be pretty much false and there is little turnover from 14s to 17s. But I don't believe anyone HP affiliated told you that MN hockey had such a rule. As for the team additions, those were at 17s. And the allegation is that a coach on the selection committee brought in two kids from his own team and a third to lessen the heat on him.
Maybe our board statistician (laces) will go back and track how school year team affiliation for gms and coaches plays out over the duration of a given years' HP careers?

Crazy to me watching/listening on the girls side. It never got so intense for my son and his friends, but that's not to say a lot of parents weren't upset. But the boys themselves didn't seem as invested. That many more avenues to post hs puck for men that they don't get so wrapped up in it? Interesting question.

[boardguy1998]

I do not have the 1998's HP 15 Final 102 list from a couple years ago. I do have who made the HP 15 National Camp roster and alternates from that year. There were 16 girls on the invite roster, and 17 as alternates (weird numbers, but that's what it was).

-Of the 16 girls on the HP 15 invite roster, 14 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-Of the 17 girls on the HP 15 alternate roster, 11 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-In total, 25 of the 33 girls invited to the HP 15 National camp two years ago are on a HP 17 "Final 57" roster this year, or 76%.
-Of the 8 above did not make the Final 57 roster this year, 6 have made Section rosters at HP 16, HP 17, or both.
-One of the other absentees is the best hockey player in the state (point-wise) from Rochester Century, who would've made anything at HP 16 or HP 17. But she is also one of the top ranked U18 tennis player in the country (without naming names). My guess that's more important right now

Once again, digest the numbers however you may. And by the way, the selection process, however predetermined one might guess it can be, starts at the MN Selects level. Go look at the past results and you will find lots of these same names from when they were 10U and 8U players. Heck, I count 18 from the MN Select rosters posted from the 2009 tournament (that are on an HP 16 Final 57 roster). Again, this is when they're at 10U and 8U.

Let's not confuse anyone. ALL these girls are good if not great hockey players, and deserve to be where they are. It's the tryout process, and the "facts" that MN Hockey posts, that can be misleading. Sure, there will be a diamond in the rough here and there. But when MN Hockey posts that they have almost a 50% turn-over from year to year? That's misleading and almost fraudulent. They should not post ANYTHING to percentages! Because in the end, the percentages are very low that someone is going to come in off the street and make even a Final 54/57 team that hasn't at least made a District or Section HP roster in the past. MN Hockey is not only in the business of hockey, they're in the business of making money. There's a lot of girls paying that initial $80+$50 bucks to tryout, and MNH is never going change the system to eliminate all that tryout money. What they will do is create more HP levels. They already did with HP 14/15 (with is actually HP 13's). Why not HP 12's or HP 11's? If they do, MN Selects might not be too happy.

From what I was told this weekend by an evaluator, one of the 3 kids added at 16's, made the national camp last year at 15's. I guess that MN hockey has a rule, if you make that team you are guaranteed at spot in the 54's, so they added her and two others. Seems to conflict with the whole turnover thing if you guarantee spots, also never saw that in writing anywhere.

That is false. They specifically say that making team at any level has no bearing on whether you make it the next time around. As laces has shown, that has proven to be pretty much false and there is little turnover from 14s to 17s. But I don't believe anyone HP affiliated told you that MN hockey had such a rule. As for the team additions, those were at 17s. And the allegation is that a coach on the selection committee brought in two kids from his own team and a third to lessen the heat on him.
Maybe our board statistician (laces) will go back and track how school year team affiliation for gms and coaches plays out over the duration of a given years' HP careers?

Crazy to me watching/listening on the girls side. It never got so intense for my son and his friends, but that's not to say a lot of parents weren't upset. But the boys themselves didn't seem as invested. That many more avenues to post hs puck for men that they don't get so wrapped up in it? Interesting question.

Believe what you want, but yes I was told that. Also additions were at 16's as well, look at the rosters, 57 total kids.

[nu2hockey]

Ntmh is clueless as most other times...boardguy has it right...

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

Ntmh is clueless as most other times...boardguy has it right...

Gee thanks nu2. It's touching you follow me so closely.

And if it IS true, then the many HP affiliated that have spoken on behalf of the program over the years (including MN Hockey's own HP web page) have been LYING about it at least since my son first got in the HP system 5+ years ago. Every year every tryout every letter or website article specifically points to the turnover and "new start" every year. Of course that's untrue, but it has been stated as fact over and over as both a testament to HP impartiality and a sales pitch to bring in new players and returning kids who weren't selected in the past.
If in fact the current evaluators are saying something different, that's a new party line.

[LZ94]

Ntmh is clueless as most other times...boardguy has it right...

Gee thanks nu2. It's touching you follow me so closely.

And if it IS true, then the many HP affiliated that have spoken on behalf of the program over the years (including MN Hockey's own HP web page) have been LYING about it at least since my son first got in the HP system 5+ years ago. Every year every tryout every letter or website article specifically points to the turnover and "new start" every year. Of course that's untrue, but it has been stated as fact over and over as both a testament to HP impartiality and a sales pitch to bring in new players and returning kids who weren't selected in the past.
If in fact the current evaluators are saying something different, that's a new party line.

Maybe the good players one year, are still the good players the next year. Maybe your boy wasn't good enough any of those years. In my experiences, players have their ability level one slot higher than reality, parents have their kids ability level 2-3 slots higher than reality.

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

Not sure how that point is relevant to whether or not previous years' HP picks are guaranteed future HP roster spots or not. Which may or may not be true (depending who you ask) but either way, MN Hockey touts their turnover percentages from year to year to bring in players at all levels.

Your point is extremely valid, however. We are all guilty of feeling our kid was wronged (valid or no) when they get short shifted, don't make varsity or an A team, or get cut at HP. For most reality sets in pretty quickly and our kids realize their success and validation doesn't rest in not getting picked, in hockey and in life. They can either quit or get to work. It probably took a few years but when my son and I realized early on he wasn't top tier level, it made his successes seem higher and his disappointments less defining. And ironically, when he conceded he may never be an elite player, he worked harder putting less pressure on himself and by many measures standards he is now (or at least closer to) an elite athlete.

So my comments are not about how my kid was wronged in HP. In my experience there are about 30 who are obviously going to make it, 10 who definitely won't, and another 30 that have a good chance. I think the other parents who are expressing their frustration aren't taking issue that their kid didn't make the final 54. The issue is whether they even had a chance regardless of their festival performance. Of course the best kids at 15s are probably among the best at 16s, 17s, 18s. But some kids (especially boys) are just coming into their talent - speed, strength, size - and are coming into what has been advertised as a level playing field.

It's not a level playing field.

As I've said before, we all want (or should want) the best of the best to play in front of the college scouts. That keeps them engaged in our programs and seeking talent in MN which helps everyone. The issue is transparency. Not grudge holding non-HP dads who feel their kid was wronged.

[The Cynic]

Referring to an earlier posters reference to HP 14. Minnesota Hockey (or is it USA Hockey) is making a huge mistake in trying label or pidgeon hole kids at such a young age.

There are #'s issues already in girls hockey and the growth of hockey in general. Affordability, time, etc ..... it's all been said before. We don't need to kill the sport.

In the January 21-27th issue of CITY PAGES, yes I said, City Pages they had a cover story called "GAME MISCONDUCT: The Assault on the State of Hockey"....someone mentioned "the emphasis in athletics has gone from participation to selectivity. It's an elitist attitude now. Everybody is striving to be in an elite setting." My take away was, this elitist setting especially at young ages drives athletes away. I think HP 14 is a very bad thing especially being sponsored by the same organization trying to grow the sport!

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

They had 2001s on most of those Fall festival teams in addition to 2000s. HP13s.

[nu2hockey]

I think HP 14 is a very bad thing especially being sponsored by the same organization trying to grow the sport!

Really? 13 year old kids are 8th graders....Jr High kids compete every where in the country but Mn hockey kids can‘t handle it? Kill the sport? Don't sign your wallflower rec/social players up then, because there are plenty of driven girls that want to play to win and be the best player they can be. You should applaud their drive instead of fearing it.

[The Cynic]

More my point was, the governing body which is trying to grow the sport is also alienating many via the selectiveness. To elaborate further, the corruption, politics, posturing of the selection process is mind boggling. I used to say even when they got list down to the national campers, they usually got that right but.... Connect the dots at the 54s (connections), reverse logic sometimes to make things look random and the power coaches all rise....it isn't hard to figure out how some make it, and then HOW SOME MAKE IT and the ones that don't often haven't hired/aligned the right lobbyist. Just very weird (and blatant).

[InigoMontoya]

At the 14's level, the only corruption would be within the district. There is no selection process past the festival.

Honestly, on the girls' side, they'll find a spot for most kids, if they really want to play in the festival and can skate from blueline to blueline without hurting themselves. A couple districts field 2 teams and a couple districts are short of numbers and will accept kids from big-number districts.

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

This is pretty telling.
I'd be curious how the very first HP selections at 15s translate into who's picked at 17s. It seems very very few girls or boys are ever selected if they don't make that very first cut to 15s camp?

I do not have the 1998's HP 15 Final 102 list from a couple years ago. I do have who made the HP 15 National Camp roster and alternates from that year. There were 16 girls on the invite roster, and 17 as alternates (weird numbers, but that's what it was).

-Of the 16 girls on the HP 15 invite roster, 14 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-Of the 17 girls on the HP 15 alternate roster, 11 girls are on the HP 17 "Final 57".
-In total, 25 of the 33 girls invited to the HP 15 National camp two years ago are on a HP 17 "Final 57" roster this year, or 76%.
-Of the 8 above did not make the Final 57 roster this year, 6 have made Section rosters at HP 16, HP 17, or both.
-One of the other absentees is the best hockey player in the state (point-wise) from Rochester Century, who would've made anything at HP 16 or HP 17. But she is also one of the top ranked U18 tennis player in the country (without naming names). My guess that's more important right now

Once again, digest the numbers however you may. And by the way, the selection process, however predetermined one might guess it can be, starts at the MN Selects level. Go look at the past results and you will find lots of these same names from when they were 10U and 8U players. Heck, I count 18 from the MN Select rosters posted from the 2009 tournament (that are on an HP 16 Final 57 roster). Again, this is when they're at 10U and 8U.

Let's not confuse anyone. ALL these girls are good if not great hockey players, and deserve to be where they are. It's the tryout process, and the "facts" that MN Hockey posts, that can be misleading. Sure, there will be a diamond in the rough here and there. But when MN Hockey posts that they have almost a 50% turn-over from year to year? That's misleading and almost fraudulent. They should not post ANYTHING to percentages! Because in the end, the percentages are very low that someone is going to come in off the street and make even a Final 54/57 team that hasn't at least made a District or Section HP roster in the past. MN Hockey is not only in the business of hockey, they're in the business of making money. There's a lot of girls paying that initial $80+$50 bucks to tryout, and MNH is never going change the system to eliminate all that tryout money. What they will do is create more HP levels. They already did with HP 14/15 (with is actually HP 13's). Why not HP 12's or HP 11's? If they do, MN Selects might not be too happy.

From what I was told this weekend by an evaluator, one of the 3 kids added at 16's, made the national camp last year at 15's. I guess that MN hockey has a rule, if you make that team you are guaranteed at spot in the 54's, so they added her and two others. Seems to conflict with the whole turnover thing if you guarantee spots, also never saw that in writing anywhere.

Hold up.
At 15s 102 players are selected for national camp in St. Cloud.
At 16s and 17s 54 (or 57) players are selected for spring festival final weekend.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE as some here have said that if a kid makes it at 15s they are guaranteed at higher levels.

??????????????????