Developing skill sets

[skillbuilder]

Many of you may not know that last summer a proposal for a multi tiered district team structure squirt to bantam was offered to Minnesota Hockey and they roughly presented it to some district directors who didn't think they could sell it. It looks like this. A1, A2, B1, B2, B3, C1, & C2. The theory is, players develop best when playing and practicing with kids close to their skill level, and playing against the same. Depending on how big an association was, would determine how many and which of these teams they would have. Example: Club 1 with 120 Peewees would be allowed to have one team at every level with an extra B3 or C1 team say. Club 2 with 60 kids would not be allowed by MN Hockey to have an A1 team as their numbers would not support a high enough skill level to compete with the big clubs. Club 2 would have an A2 a B2 a C1 and a C2 for instance. Club 1's second 15 players would play club 2's top 15. The idea is that the math does not lie and a formula to create parody can be created. As a student of real development, I like the concept but I'd like comments from all sides.

[mnwild04]

Something like that might work for the metro teams, but in the north where numbers are lower they would only be allowed to compete as B teams, yet they might have a top A1 team.

[54fighting]

This would not work, I see 2 big reasons why.

#1- who is going to tell a team like Grand Rapids or Warroad that they will not be allowed to compete at the highest level just because they don't have big numbers.

#2- It does not solve the biggest problem facing small associations. How do you provide a good experience for all your kids when you have 1-2 A level kids on a team that has 2-3 B2 level kids on it. The top kids can't even run most of the drills in practice full speed.

Once again we try to make this a numbers issue. You can have great skill with small numbers and you can have awful skills with big numbers. If you look at the teams that are consistant I think you will find associations that have a combination of good numbers and great leadership. Boards that can see beyond this year and make decisions that will be better in the long run. Too many boards are taken over by short sighted people who are only interested in what team their son or daughter lands on.

[skillbuilder]

Great dialog... I think northern MN does present some unique challenges with a numbers system but it can work there too. The range gets more skill out of lower numbers but that can be shown over past years and built into the formula along with less than 15 skater 2 goalie teams and other modifications. MN hockey could also allow petioned exceptions based on a club showing they have more skilled kids than normal math might speculate. I'm a math guy and it's only a matter of care and data that can make a formula come together at some point. The main question remains: Do you think kids playing with and against kids very close to their skill level is the way to go. Example: Do you think the kid that was number 16 in Wayzata's squirt tryout last year benefited from playing on a line with the number 90 skilled player.

[elliott70]

Numbers are significant to a program, but only to a point.

Athletic kids with sufficient ice time, quality coaching and support of the program are more important.

One of the best programs in the state is Roseau. They seldom have more than enough kids for two teams. Yet thye are always considered top twnety material. And this year they may have the best high school team in the state.

You may have 100 kids in your peewees, but you may not be a top thirty team.

And this idea was not presented to Minnesta Hockey.

[greybeard58]

Minnesota Hockey has A,B,C and House levels. The Districts then went to B1,B2.Some have tried A1, A2, but few associations would not move to the A2, they either stayed at the A or B1 level. When all this happened beacuse of the B2 level more and more parents wanted their players to be B2 traveling rather than at the C level where they should have played and probably enjoyed more. The C level has declined, not because of Mn Hockey or the District Directors but more with each and every local association board, who is afraid to stand up to the parents and say" We are going to field teams at the level where they can compete, not where they will always win or always lose". If it calls for placing 2A level teams then so be it, it could also mean less B level and More C level teams. Math is not the solution(it helps), it is common sense, courage and looking to the future that will go far to solve some of the problems.

[skillbuilder]

Math is only part of the equation. It is a good starting point because it doesn't lie or have ego's although there are always exceptions to any math formula. We need to take some of the emotion, and pride out of the equation for the benefit of kids. Our club had two players that probably should have played A peewees (neither are my kid) but instead each now plays on one each of two B1 teams. If they had been on an A2 team with the next 15 players instead of the next 30 they would be in a more competitive environment for their skill level and the parents would have felt a little better about their plight I'm sure.

[54fighting]

If you had enough talent to skate 2 B1 teams and both are competitive than you should have played A. If you have 2 B1 teams and neither one is competitive than you should have combined them to make 1 B1 team. That way your top 15 kids are skating together. If there was too big of a gap between your top 2 kids and the others then the district should have stepped in and allowed the kids to waive out if they wanted.
No need to create new classifications. They already exist if they are used correctly.

[elliott70]

SKILLBUILDER was under the assumption that the method he used would bring his idea to the MN Hockey Board.
It did not and as such a disservice was afforded him and his idea.

I hope he has the opportunity to present his idea as every member of MN Hockey has that right.

For all of us, please be sure to contact MN Hockey President, executive director or your only elected representitive, your local Dsitrict Director, to present any idea, comment, concern or complaint you have regarding MN Hockey activities.

Mark Elliott
MN Hockey Board Member

[skillbuilder]

To clarify our clubs status for 54fighting, we have an A peewee team and our two B1's were ranked in LPH at the start of the year. The point I continue to try to make is that rarely should players of widely varying skills play together as it does not challenge the best players and is over the head of the least skilled players. My point about Wayzata's 5 B squirt teams last season is a blatent case in point. I see District 3 has added the B2 squirt level this year and it's a start. However 2 B1's and 3 B2's still does not put like skilled players together. Hockey is a team sport but only if the entire team can contribute to the cause not 2-4 players doing 95%.
Thank you Elliott for acknowledging my submitted idea that I attempted to send through the ranks of MN Hockey did occur although not through the needed channels.

[skillbuilder]

Hello again,
I'm considering submitting my multi tiered team idea to MN Hockey (again through the proper channels this time) but I'm still looking for more feedback on how to tweak it and if it's even a main stream idea that people like yourselves may embrace. As a bubble parent from a big club I would love to have my skater playing with the next 15 kids deep if he doesn't make the A Peewee team next year as opposed to a group of the next 30 kids. Bubble parents are encouraged to comment... P.S. Burnsville Peewee A recently beat Kennedy Peewee A 8-1. That's exactly what I'm talking about. I'd be willing to wager that if the # 16 - 30 peewee kids at Edina were all on a team they would play Kennedy to within 2 goals either way.