Wayzata Squirts in D3 Tourney

Toomuchtoosoon · Post by **Toomuchtoosoon** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:16 am

Wayzata Squirts had a good year-
A won District - Up and down year.

B1-Took 1st, 2nd and 3rd
Blue was 4 for 4 in regular season tourneys, only loss came to gold in districts
Gold went 2 fo 4 in reagualar season tourneys, with 6 losses (4 to Wayzata, 2 to outside association)
Navy wins district, goes 4 for 4 in regular season tourneys, 5 losses all year with 3 of those outside the association.

B2 Royal Win the District playoffs -came on strong at the end.

When these kids get older, WYHA-do the right thing and make sure these kids get a chance to compete.

TheIceGuy · Post by **TheIceGuy** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:36 am

By the looks of their records, it appears the kid's from WYHA and other associations would benefit if they added a 2nd A team....

vikes40for60 · Post by **vikes40for60** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:24 am

TheIceGuy wrote:By the looks of their records, it appears the kid's from WYHA and other associations would benefit if they added a 2nd A team....

Doing something like that would require some strategy, insight, and a focus on development for their top end talent. From what Ive seen at most of their B levels its all about winning NOW. They would rather beat up other teams at B and win B level championships.

That being said, winning at Squirts never correlates to winning in High School. And that is CLEARLY obvious for Wayzata High School...

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:22 pm

vikes40for60 wrote:
TheIceGuy wrote:By the looks of their records, it appears the kid's from WYHA and other associations would benefit if they added a 2nd A team....
Doing something like that would require some strategy, insight, and a focus on development for their top end talent. From what Ive seen at most of their B levels its all about winning NOW. They would rather beat up other teams at B and win B level championships.

That being said, winning at Squirts never correlates to winning in High School. And that is CLEARLY obvious for Wayzata High School...

I think the lack of success at the HS level has more to do with much of their top talent leaving to play for private schools...but I agree, Wayzata could EASILY run two top notch "A" teams at ALL levels and still be successful.

Toomuchtoosoon · Post by **Toomuchtoosoon** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:40 pm

Wayzata has a bunch of Trophy chasers. Given so many leave for other high schools, they should broaden their top level. I know they used to ask the current level B coaches how many of their kids have a chance to make the A team next year. It is usually around 20 in good years. The fatal flaw in that logic is that the A team is ususally one of the best in state. The question should be directed at how many could make an A team in district 3. Then that number would be much higher.

The current Bantams could have easily fielded 2 A teams and still had a B team in state. If gold did not have to play blue, their chances would have been better.

vikes40for60 · Post by **vikes40for60** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:51 pm

That even makes their decision worse by not having "2" A teams today. They know they will lose top top talent (as do other associations/high schools) yet they forgo the opportunity to develop a greater number at the top when their numbers/skill could accommodate.

To answer a previous poster, at least 12-14 of their Squirt B1 kids could have made "A" teams within District 3, IMHO.

Snowmass · Post by **Snowmass** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:32 pm

Wayzatas current Squirts (Peewees next year) are very deep. Hopefully the powers that be will take notice and consider 2 A Peewee teams next year (or in '10-'11). Some skilled kids could have easily played A this past year.

MNWILD2009 · Post by **MNWILD2009** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:47 pm

Snowmass wrote:Wayzatas current Squirts (Peewees next year) are very deep. Hopefully the powers that be will take notice and consider 2 A Peewee teams next year (or in '10-'11). Some skilled kids could have easily played A this past year.

In the same boat as Wayzata include: Edina, Eden Prairie, Elk River, Osseo/MG, to name a few.

Snowmass · Post by **Snowmass** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:56 pm

Edina did 2 A Squirt teams this year (no idea how it went) but all 3 Wayzata B1 teams rolled. Other than Way vs Way competition it was a joke. One team went 32-1-2, and other 2 had maybe 2-3 losses to non Wayzata teams. Maybe it would/could 'dilute' the A team(s), but were no tin this to go undefeated. We (th ekids) are in this to develop.

Xcel-lent · Post by **Xcel-lent** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:45 pm

The two Edina squirt A teams did not go well. They were unbalanced. The Green team went 35-3-1. The White team went 4-25-2 overall. I heard they are not going with two A teams next year.

IMHO there are couple of hurdles to overcome in the large associations before you can do two A teams:

1-The teams have to be balanced or it's never going to work. If an association like Edina cannot have two successful unbalanced Squirt A teams, who can?

2-You have to convince your association's members to go with two balanced A teams and even though they are used to winning, rethink winning and think development and be prepared to possibly not be the top dog in your district.

Good luck.

Woodbury had two balanced Squirt A teams this year and I believe both teams did well. And their numbers are smaller than an Edina or Wayzata. Would like to hear some comments from someone familiar with their program.

vikes40for60 · Post by **vikes40for60** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am

Xcel-lent wrote:The two Edina squirt A teams did not go well. They were unbalanced. The Green team went 35-3-1. The White team went 4-25-2 overall.

If the only measurement of a successful season is wins/losses then no way will the concept of two "A" teams work. That has been Wayzata's argument for a number of years.

This is a direct quote from a Wayzata representative "We tried 2 "A" teams a few years back and it didn't work, the "lower" team didn't win enough." The irony is that I believe that year class of Squirts ended up making it to the HS State Tournament.....go figure....

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:27 am

Xcel-lent wrote:The two Edina squirt A teams did not go well. They were unbalanced. The Green team went 35-3-1. The White team went 4-25-2 overall. I heard they are not going with two A teams next year.

IMHO there are couple of hurdles to overcome in the large associations before you can do two A teams:

1-The teams have to be balanced or it's never going to work. If an association like Edina cannot have two successful unbalanced Squirt A teams, who can?

2-You have to convince your association's members to go with two balanced A teams and even though they are used to winning, rethink winning and think development and be prepared to possibly not be the top dog in your district.

Good luck.

Woodbury had two balanced Squirt A teams this year and I believe both teams did well. And their numbers are smaller than an Edina or Wayzata. Would like to hear some comments from someone familiar with their program.

Agreed. You need to balance the top 2 teams. That could easily be accomplished though a draft.

sorno82 · Post by **sorno82** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:29 am

Each situation is different. This years Edina's squirts are not as deep as last year, and this year they had to deal with the choice league. Also, Edina is in District 6 which is predominately AA schools with good programs. Next year, if Edina sticks with one peewee A team, they should take first and second in the state B tourney.

Wayzata is in a weak district with only one other strong AA association, and two declining (armstrong and hopkins). This years squirts and bantams could have had a second competitive A team, but not the peewees. Most of the Bantam b and squirt b games were not even close if you look at the websites. I talked with some of those parents and they thought it was just a complete waste of time to play in these lopsided affairs

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater when making these decisions. Something should be done or that next level of player may not have an adequate opportunity to challenge themselves outside of practice.

flattop · Post by **flattop** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:24 pm

Isn't there a limit on the number of games a squirt team can play? I thought it was 35. It look like Edina had 39. anyone know what the rule is?

TheIceGuy · Post by **TheIceGuy** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:52 pm

The Squirt game limit is a combination of 35 games, scrimmages and controlled scrimmages, but does not include the District Tournament games.... Edina had a posted recored of 32-3-1....

WayOutWest · Post by **WayOutWest** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:54 pm

muckandgrind wrote:
I think the lack of success at the HS level has more to do with much of their top talent leaving to play for private schools...but I agree, Wayzata could EASILY run two top notch "A" teams at ALL levels and still be successful.

Migrating talent has been far LESS of an impact than the incompetent coaching.
I don't care what kind of talent you give the Wayzata H.S. coaching staff, they'll find a way to squander it.

yeahyeahyeah · Post by **yeahyeahyeah** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:48 pm

I was told by our district that District tourney games are included in the 35 limit.

flattop · Post by **flattop** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:58 pm

If the limit is 35 and edina and others are over does Minnesota hockey do anything or are some associations above the rule?

spin-o-rama · Post by **spin-o-rama** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:58 pm

flattop wrote:If the limit is 35 and edina and others are over does Minnesota hockey do anything or are some associations above the rule?

Only Edina is above the rules. It's the bubble clause.
Last year Wayzata squirt A had a penalty for being 1 or 2 games over.

yeah^3: d6 counts d6 squirt tournament as 2. You do the math.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:02 pm

Was that penalty assessed by MN Hockey or District 3?

Snowmass · Post by **Snowmass** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:31 pm

InigoMontoya wrote:Was that penalty assessed by MN Hockey or District 3?

Wayzata coach was suspended for a few weeks (I could be wrong on length of suspension, but suspended none the less). This was last year as in 2007-2008, not this past season.