USA National Select teams 14,16,18

hockeyrube7 · Post by **hockeyrube7** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:23 am

ghshockeyfan wrote:I will say that I don't believe kids that belong in Phase 3 will miss Phase 1 oportunity. It's just hard for me to believe that a kid that belongs at P3 wouldn't even get nominated by their coach, or not get the votes needed to get into P1, etc.

I do agree with this for most of it, and very rarely are Phase III kids missed, but I have to say there are those that do get missed, and could make it to Phase II, and possibly Phase III. Not many, and not too often but it does happen. No process is perfect, and this is one of the best I have seen, but there are those that "Fall through the cracks" so to speak.

hockeydad · Post by **hockeydad** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:52 am

Bensonmum wrote:Wow--it sounds like a very thorough process. This should eliminate any and all complaints from girls and parents who are left out

Thanks guys.

At first I thought that was the most naive comment I'd ever read on this board.

then I noticed your smiley.....nice touch.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 3:55 pm

hockeyrube7 wrote:
ghshockeyfan wrote:I will say that I don't believe kids that belong in Phase 3 will miss Phase 1 oportunity. It's just hard for me to believe that a kid that belongs at P3 wouldn't even get nominated by their coach, or not get the votes needed to get into P1, etc.
I do agree with this for most of it, and very rarely are Phase III kids missed, but I have to say there are those that do get missed, and could make it to Phase II, and possibly Phase III. Not many, and not too often but it does happen. No process is perfect, and this is one of the best I have seen, but there are those that "Fall through the cracks" so to speak.

I will agree to disagree on this one. I just don't think that a kid that belongs at P3 is not getting into the process at all.

OntheEdge · Post by **OntheEdge** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:48 pm

ghshockeyfan wrote:
hockeyrube7 wrote:
ghshockeyfan wrote:I will say that I don't believe kids that belong in Phase 3 will miss Phase 1 oportunity. It's just hard for me to believe that a kid that belongs at P3 wouldn't even get nominated by their coach, or not get the votes needed to get into P1, etc.
I do agree with this for most of it, and very rarely are Phase III kids missed, but I have to say there are those that do get missed, and could make it to Phase II, and possibly Phase III. Not many, and not too often but it does happen. No process is perfect, and this is one of the best I have seen, but there are those that "Fall through the cracks" so to speak.
I will agree to disagree on this one. I just don't think that a kid that belongs at P3 is not getting into the process at all.

Only the "Shadow Knows" GHS. All good points by everyone.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:21 pm

OntheEdge wrote:
ghshockeyfan wrote:
hockeyrube7 wrote: I do agree with this for most of it, and very rarely are Phase III kids missed, but I have to say there are those that do get missed, and could make it to Phase II, and possibly Phase III. Not many, and not too often but it does happen. No process is perfect, and this is one of the best I have seen, but there are those that "Fall through the cracks" so to speak.
I will agree to disagree on this one. I just don't think that a kid that belongs at P3 is not getting into the process at all.
Only the "Shadow Knows" GHS. All good points by everyone.

Amen.

OntheEdge · Post by **OntheEdge** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 11:57 pm

ghshockeyfan wrote:
OntheEdge wrote:
ghshockeyfan wrote: I will agree to disagree on this one. I just don't think that a kid that belongs at P3 is not getting into the process at all.
Only the "Shadow Knows" GHS. All good points by everyone.
Amen.

GHS,

I don't know all of the 92s that have been invited but I have heard of a few girls that weren't picked that in my opinion (and other's opinions)should have had the opportunity. You are probably right that P3 girls are all there but knowing some of the left outs I think some of the potential P1s were in my opinion overlooked. Obviously I don't want to get into mentioning names. Without knowing the complete process I'm not sure how this happens but I now believe good players don't get invited.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:53 pm

OntheEdge wrote: GHS,

I don't know all of the 92s that have been invited but I have heard of a few girls that weren't picked that in my opinion (and other's opinions)should have had the opportunity. You are probably right that P3 girls are all there but knowing some of the left outs I think some of the potential P1s were in my opinion overlooked. Obviously I don't want to get into mentioning names. Without knowing the complete process I'm not sure how this happens but I now believe good players don't get invited.

OK - why do you think this? What is the background of these kids? Any reason why maybe they were "overlooked?"

Remember - P1's have to be nominated, then voted in... Why didn't these kids receive votes is what should be asked I suppose...

OntheEdge · Post by **OntheEdge** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:14 pm

ghshockeyfan wrote:
OntheEdge wrote: GHS,

I don't know all of the 92s that have been invited but I have heard of a few girls that weren't picked that in my opinion (and other's opinions)should have had the opportunity. You are probably right that P3 girls are all there but knowing some of the left outs I think some of the potential P1s were in my opinion overlooked. Obviously I don't want to get into mentioning names. Without knowing the complete process I'm not sure how this happens but I now believe good players don't get invited.
OK - why do you think this? What is the background of these kids? Any reason why maybe they were "overlooked?"

Remember - P1's have to be nominated, then voted in... Why didn't these kids receive votes is what should be asked I suppose...

To be honest GHS I don't know why it happens but I'm certain that some girls are overlooked. As with anything in life I guess nothing can be completely fair or objective and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The 92 class is very strong but I was surprised at some of the girls that didn't get selected. It could be because some girls play U14A and some girls play JV and Varsity. Its difficult to judge objectively when players are not playing against each other. Also, I know that sometimes coaches don't bother to vote.

I don't know if everyone gets nominated but the few girls I thought would be selected and weren't were in fact nominated but for whatever reason not selected. I don't think I'm alone in my surprise because some of them have been mentioned as up and comers in other threads.

The only people that know the deficiencies of the selection process, if there are any, are the people at NDCP for they probably have a good idea of what is happening with the process.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:56 pm

I believe the youngest group of kids is often the hardest to judge as they have not been seen enough. In that they are playing at different levels - U14 vs HS JV/V, etc. may have an impact, but I believe that there are methods in place to address some of this.

I guess I wasn't asking anyone to give an expert opinion on the potential flaws in the system, but instead get the perceptions out there and discussed to get to the reality instead - unless of course these are the same! (but this is rare).

The players in particular that you mention as being overlooked... did they play U14?

SEMetro · Post by **SEMetro** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:01 pm

some girls play JV and Varsity

Are there many JV kids invited to these camps? Most programs have at least 2-4 kids from 8th or 9th grade on the roster - including top AA teams. I know Edina and maybe one-two others refuse to let 8ths play high school so I understand the need to keep track of U14s.

Maybe a lot of kids from JV are going in early years. But that would seem odd to me.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:07 pm

JV 8th's/9th's have made it before, as have U14's. I don't think this is that uncommon.

I think it just depends on the rules, program, community, HS team situation, etc.

As far as keeping track of all I think this is important.

The best example I can think of is a U14/JV kid in EP or other stacked HS programs... You would think that they may not be playing V for various reasons, but most of all just due to amazing older players in front of them @ V vs. them.

Not all HS programs have 13 7th & 8th graders on the V roster as one HS did last year... Interestingly some may think this phenomenon is likely a product more of small numbers in older grades, but the truth is that often they can be quite talented too...

OntheEdge · Post by **OntheEdge** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:32 pm

ghshockeyfan wrote:JV 8th's/9th's have made it before, as have U14's. I don't think this is that uncommon.

I think it just depends on the rules, program, community, HS team situation, etc.

As far as keeping track of all I think this is important.

The best example I can think of is a U14/JV kid in EP or other stacked HS programs... You would think that they may not be playing V for various reasons, but most of all just due to amazing older players in front of them @ V vs. them.

Not all HS programs have 13 7th & 8th graders on the V roster as one HS did last year... Interestingly some may think this phenomenon is likely a product more of small numbers in older grades, but the truth is that often they can be quite talented too...

I know of quite a few U14 and JV players that have been selected. It will be interesting to observe the P1. I'm open minded but I want to see if I was correct in my assessment that at least a few very good players were left off.

As far as HS programs with 7th and 8th graders, for the most part, I think its lack of numbers. Even though I think there are girls that can compete at such a young age I think, in general, they are not strong enough or developed enough to be effective against some of the stronger HS teams. I'm not sure which program GHS is referring to but I would guess that the team with 13 7th and 8th graders would have a hard time competing with an EP or Edina or other teams with bigger, stronger and more experienced players.

rwb1351 · Post by **rwb1351** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:54 pm

OntheEdge wrote:I'm not sure which program GHS is referring to but I would guess that the team with 13 7th and 8th graders would have a hard time competing with an EP or Edina or other teams with bigger, stronger and more experienced players.

I would guess he is referring to his own squad.

SEMetro · Post by **SEMetro** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:56 pm

I don't know. 92's on varsity is pretty common with all the programs even the better ones.

Was there any team in the state tournament (A or AA) that didn't have at least a couple 92s on the roster?

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 3:11 pm

I would agree that a lack of numbers and too many HS V teams likely is what drives the majority of young players to V so soon. Ideal? Not always, but sometimes the best solution in challenging circumstances - although I must say that it helps if those kids are young AND talented, and not just young...

Someone long ago pointed out to me that 7th/8th and even some 9th graders just "hit a wall" and "slump" or "fall-off" a bit by mid-season as they aren't acclimated to the duration of an extremely taxing physical season relative to U12 or U14. I didn't believe this at first, but since I have to say that it is usually the case.

By the way, I think many 7th/8th's are actually 93's if not 94's... And these kids are NOT eligible yet for NDP. I'm sure there are 92's in 8th/9th grade though too.

As to 7th/8th's not being competitive for a # of reasons with older teams, I agree that that is usually the case, and a strong SOS can really wear on even the best young players. There was a Kennedy team like this a number of years ago that frustrated a lot of older/more experienced teams but usually lost by a goal or two + all year to many of the best teams.

OntheEdge · Post by **OntheEdge** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:07 pm

SEMetro wrote:I don't know. 92's on varsity is pretty common with all the programs even the better ones.

Was there any team in the state tournament (A or AA) that didn't have at least a couple 92s on the roster?

I don't think a couple of 92s would be unusual. Actually I think its good to have a couple of talented freshman (older 92s) on a varsity team to develop and bring along slowly. They could be groomed by playing with the more experienced girls and in some cases can thrive with bigger bodies around them to protect them from too much wear and tear but I think a team with too many young players will have trouble competing with the better teams. Remember there are lots of bad teams out there in which players can look good no matter what their age.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:00 pm

OntheEdge wrote:Remember there are lots of bad teams out there in which players can look good no matter what their age.

Indeed. This is why it is important to have a bigger group to compare a player to than just her team. It's all relative!

nothernewguy · Post by **nothernewguy** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 7:39 pm

Are there lists online of phase 1 participants, or does that not happen until phase 2?

rwb1351 · Post by **rwb1351** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 8:09 pm

nothernewguy wrote:Are there lists online of phase 1 participants, or does that not happen until phase 2?

doesn't happen until P2

boblee · Post by **boblee** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:50 pm

Best of luck to Emily Erickson and Molly Arola

boblee · Post by **boblee** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:36 am

...and also Bessie Havel, Dana Gallop, and Morgan Illikainen.

keepitreal · Post by **keepitreal** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:00 am

Goodness, should we be that worried about a 1992 player possibly getting overlooked in her first year of eligibility? Won't the cream rise to the top in the 9th, 10th, 11th, or even 12th grade year? What are the chances one slips through the cracks for FIVE consecutive years? Especially given all the exposure opportunities to many coachess in the summer too?

Relax folks, they're 14 & 15 year olds...

Mark Johnson can wait.

OntheEdge · Post by **OntheEdge** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:56 am

keepitreal wrote:Goodness, should we be that worried about a 1992 player possibly getting overlooked in her first year of eligibility? Won't the cream rise to the top in the 9th, 10th, 11th, or even 12th grade year? What are the chances one slips through the cracks for FIVE consecutive years? Especially given all the exposure opportunities to many coachess in the summer too?

Relax folks, they're 14 & 15 year olds... Mark Johnson can wait.

Good post Keepitreal. I agree. It would be interesting to see the changes in invites over the 5 year period and try to determine whether it was a flawed system in the first year or just the normal differences in development.

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:12 pm

I believe you are only eligible for 4 years, it's USA hockey ages not MN Hockey and I think this year we are talking 89/90, 91 and 92. An eligible 8th grader this year won't be as a senior.

keepitreal · Post by **keepitreal** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:27 pm

xk1 wrote:I believe you are only eligible for 4 years, it's USA hockey ages not MN Hockey and I think this year we are talking 89/90, 91 and 92. An eligible 8th grader this year won't be as a senior.

Yes, that is correct. My mistake.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

USA National Select teams 14,16,18

post 7377

post 7379