del

Discussion of Minnesota Youth Hockey

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

My apologies:
So what you are saying is that if you don't understand something you take a shot at the person writing the post rather than asking for clarification? I hope that works out for you.

I didn't pass judgement on anyone or their beliefs
It just wouldn't be the same without your rapier like wit. Well, maybe it would.

It's more enjoyable to poke fun at the crazies though.

down the throats of 6 year olds
averaged about 7 years old



Maybe I'm just bored, but it seems to me that a lot of nice people keep trying to answer questions that you either don't understand or don't want to hear answers to. Or they are responding to OpEd pieces you write about how they're bad parents. All I ask is where do you really stand? Are you going to rake a guy for offering advice before 7 year olds play a MASH game, or are you going to rake a coach for not offering advice to 6 year olds at a practice? Are you going to condemn parents for trying to provide opportunities for their kids, or are you going to get defensive and jump on northwoods oldtimer when you seem to be acting in the same manner? I don't have a problem with a guy that takes his kid to the rink all 31 days in July. I don't have a problem with a guy that won't allow his kid to see ice when the outdoor temperature is above 60. I am, however, interested in the motivation behind a guy who seems to take both sides. Maybe I'm just bored.
HockeyDad41
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:40 pm

Post by HockeyDad41 »

del
Last edited by HockeyDad41 on Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
gdahl
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:37 pm

Post by gdahl »

I responded to this original question assuming the poster was talking about his 6 year old. When a six year old gets a shift on the ice...how much of that time is spent handling the puck...whether stickhandling or passing? It is obvious that as a six year old if you have superior skating skills you will dominate and the stickhandling passing skill are not as important. I believe at the younger ages it is critical to only develop excellent skating...and as you get older the more the shift of focus to stickhandling to passing to neutral regroups to gap control to team systems. I admit I did become Irate when I saw pucks in the first half of a first and second year Mite practice last winter. The first drill after the kids did a couple of laps was for the coaches to shoot pucks down the ice and these 5 and 6 year olds were to avoid being hit. The second drill was for the kids to do circles around the face off circles while carrying a puck. Not one of them could even skate a circle properly much less skate with a puck in a straight line. I stand by my belief that at the 6 year old level you teach almost exclusively skating. 7 and 8 year olds...sure introduce some stickhandling and passing...but the skating to puckhandling ratio in practice still should be about 75percent skating...and if it becomes more than 50 percent puckhandling at the mite age I do become irritated. I have never never never seen any mite age kid handle the puck 50 percent or more of the time during a game....but I have seen a mite age kid handle it about 25 percent of the time during a game, scoring a couple 13 or 14 goals....and guess what? He was the best skater on the ice.
HockeyDad41
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:40 pm

Post by HockeyDad41 »

del
Last edited by HockeyDad41 on Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
watchdog
Posts: 886
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:54 am
Location: weak hockey country

Post by watchdog »

the european teach individual skill and skating at young ages and very little team play yet they seem to pump out alot of good hockey players.. hmmmmmm :roll:
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

Fair enough.

I think the challenge of mite hockey is the variance of ability and experience. Some kids start skating when they're 4, and by the time they're 6 they have a pretty decent foundation established; some kids don't hit the ice until they're 8 or, in fewer cases, even older. If an association breaks the kids into groups based on age at all, the 6 year old is skating with kids on walkers for several weeks, and so could the 8 year old. There are also some kids that mature earlier, have good balance earlier, work harder (often because they enjoy what they're doing), or (sometimes due to family scheduling conflicts) just make it to more practices than the other kids; so even after the start of the season the skills within a particular group start to seperate.

There are probably as many opinions about how to handle this as there are dads on the ice. Probably the most common sense approach I've heard was from a hockey mom who asked why it doesn't work like Red Cross swimming lessons - certain skills are required to be passed as adequate or mastered before moving on to the next level. It doesn't matter how old you are, how big you are, whether you're the star on your soccer or baseball team, or whether your dad is on the ice - in the best case the kids would always be getting what they need - nothing more, nothing less. You can't learn the backstroke until you've learned to back float. I've seen too many mite practices where the kids are seperated into four stations, and, depending on which corner the kid skates to, he could spend the hour starting with crossovers around the circle, then to hopping sticks on one foot, then to skating backwards around cones, then finishing with push with your right leg, push with your right leg, push with your right leg - that doesn't seem to make sense to me.

That would be nice to try if you had, to paraphrase a college coach, 'the best job in the world - coach of an orphanage'. It would also have to be a big orphanage with a lot of volunteers - it would take a lot of work to develop the plan, assess the skill level of the kids, continue to monitor skill levels - moving kids up or down as needed - and tweaking the plan to fit the needs of the kids.
HockeyDad41
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:40 pm

Post by HockeyDad41 »

del
Last edited by HockeyDad41 on Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
auld_skool
Posts: 214
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:39 pm

Post by auld_skool »

There are drills that challenge every athlete, from top to bottom. Whether skating or stickhandling, each can develop at his or her own pace. Heck, there are drills that can develop both at the same time.
Interestingly, these same drills don't leave them standing around most of the time. It's all up to the coach.
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

If you were the coach of this team, how would you make sure the kids at either end of the spectrum are receiving quality instruction commensurate with their skill and ability?
So many challenges, so little time. First, the development plan is the basis upon which all of the practices should be based. Most associations have been around for more than six years so they should be familiar with the little kids and have seen where past efforts have been deficient at the squirt level. Hold a hundred meetings during the summer, get it hashed out, and establish a flexible lesson plan for the entire season. That's the easiest part, a lot of work, but easiest; though surprising how many associations have no plan.

Tougher problem is getting the right guys on the ice. No different than baseball or soccer. Most dads that didn't play are fine on the ice - lining kids up, giving encouragement, keeping them from wacking each other; some dads that didn't play will research and provide great hockey input. This happens a lot in soccer; most of us old guys didn't play as kids or even watch it on TV (no ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN deportes in the olden days), some will come to soccer without a clue, some will figure, if I'm going to do this, I'm going to give the kids a good experience by learning the game myself, so I can teach it to them. On the flip side, just because a guy played, he's not immediately knighted as a super coach (especially 5-8). Some guys have been skating and shooting so well for so long that they don't remember not doing it. Some baseball teaching aides break the swing down into over a hundred seperate pieces - that is overkill, especially at the T-ball level, but it illustrates that a guy may have played ball in high school, or even college, but depending on the coaches he's had, not really know the mechanics of his sport, and even if he does, many not be able to communicate that knowledge from his own brain to the brain of another. In mites it's not enough to have him finish the drill, he has to do it correctly (my mind flashes to kids dragging their sticks behind them as they turn around a cone - no one corrects him, so he thinks he did it right. Teaching them to regroup in squirts now becomes a huge challenge because the kid turns and gets the puck in his skates because his stick is hanging out behind him. It's all about building blocks - you can't get a guy out at first, much less turn a double play, if the kids can't catch and throw). The skating stride is not that complicated to learn and teach correctly, however it is often not well coached in mites during the winter, if that was the case Laura Stamm and Robby Glantz wouldn't be charging $50+ an hour in the summer.

There are many more challenges including, but not limited to, the misunderstanding of small area games in many associations which is subsequently destroying hockey in those communities.
play4fun
Posts: 146
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: A question for Mite parents

Post by play4fun »

HockeyDad41 wrote:What expectations do you have for your 5-8 year old's coach?

My son is almost 6 and this year I hope his coach will continue to work on skating but will also try to begin to teach him some passing and stick handling.
HD41,

Look back a few pages on this bored (page 7, or so) and look for a thread entitled "Should Mites Pass?" The responses there will give you some additional perspectives from some seasoned posters.

I think you had it right for your 5 year old when you said in one of your earliest posts, "All I want for my kids is to have fun, learn how to play as part of a team, have fun, develop good habits that can be transferred to their off ice lives, have fun, and be safe."

Be careful that you don't end up being the reason they don't have fun.

It's great that your concerned about their development. I'm not taking shots at you. But it's easy to get too wrapped up in pursuit of the "best" drills, coaches, camps, programs, assocations, etc. at the expense of whether or not the kids are having fun while they're developing.

Whether your kids skate with an association and volunteer coaches, or you pay for a program like MM, unless you're actually the one on the ice doing the coaching, you just need to sit back and provide whatever positive reinforcement you can away from the ice. But that's a whole different subject.

I don't claim to know as much as many of the posters on this site, but I can say the following when it comes to development -- there is no single, secret formula that works for every kid. It's a process of trial and error. Enjoy the ride. It goes way too fast.
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

Absolutely. There is no magic formula. It takes hard work: from your child, his coach, the association, and you. If your kid is lucky enough to participate in a good program, then I agree, sit back and relax. There is no better feeling than to turn your kid over to someone that understands what he's talking about, can help the kid understand it, too, and can motivate your child to achieve - not necessarily to win, but to improve, to give full effort. Hang on to that guy; if another parent doesn't like him because he has bad breath or does the ol' farmer blow onto the ice, then fight for him.

On the other hand if your boardmembers are padding their resumes, oblivious to the needs of the kids, and a former 4th line high school hack is skating your bantams around cones and tires, then feel free to sit back, but be prepared - the time will never pass fast enough (and get back to us to let us know how much fun he's having).
PanthersIn2011
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:27 am

Post by PanthersIn2011 »

gdahl wrote:I responded to this original question assuming the poster was talking about his 6 year old. When a six year old gets a shift on the ice...how much of that time is spent handling the puck...whether stickhandling or passing? It is obvious that as a six year old if you have superior skating skills you will dominate and the stickhandling passing skill are not as important. I believe at the younger ages it is critical to only develop excellent skating...and as you get older the more the shift of focus to stickhandling to passing to neutral regroups to gap control to team systems. I admit I did become Irate when I saw pucks in the first half of a first and second year Mite practice last winter. The first drill after the kids did a couple of laps was for the coaches to shoot pucks down the ice and these 5 and 6 year olds were to avoid being hit. The second drill was for the kids to do circles around the face off circles while carrying a puck. Not one of them could even skate a circle properly much less skate with a puck in a straight line. I stand by my belief that at the 6 year old level you teach almost exclusively skating. 7 and 8 year olds...sure introduce some stickhandling and passing...but the skating to puckhandling ratio in practice still should be about 75percent skating...and if it becomes more than 50 percent puckhandling at the mite age I do become irritated. I have never never never seen any mite age kid handle the puck 50 percent or more of the time during a game....but I have seen a mite age kid handle it about 25 percent of the time during a game, scoring a couple 13 or 14 goals....and guess what? He was the best skater on the ice.
Perhaps I'm misinterpreting you. Do you really believe that 45 minutes out of every hour for the entire mite season needs to be dedicated to skating drills? This might work in places with very strong numbers and deep hockey history. But if you're trying to grow numbers and retain kids, that's a pretty tough way to do it.

I have the great pleasure of watching kids that I coached as mites grow into Bantams and high schoolers. I can think of 3 specifically that were terrible skaters as mites. But they had a love for the game. Fast forward 8-10 years, and they are now big, strong young men and fine hockey players. They still aren't great skaters, but they play with passion and intelligence. No one ... and I mean no one who was watching those mite practices could have guessed that these kids would grow into "A" level players. It seems like every coach I speak with about this has a similar story.

With all youth players, but especially with mites: we need to strike a balance between instructing them in technical skills and fostering a love of the game. Being a pretty skater at 6 might allow them to dominate (your word) mite games, but who cares? Let's not spend all of our time & energy creating robots ... we need rink rats.

P.S. The drill that you described above (in bold) .... if you think about it, that is really a skating drill. The players didn't have the pucks. The coaches did. The point of the drill was to evade the pucks. It was an agility drill.
HockeyDad41
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:40 pm

del

Post by HockeyDad41 »

del
Last edited by HockeyDad41 on Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jBlaze3000
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:25 pm

Post by jBlaze3000 »

InigoMontoya wrote:Probably the most common sense approach I've heard was from a hockey mom who asked why it doesn't work like Red Cross swimming lessons - certain skills are required to be passed as adequate or mastered before moving on to the next level.
I completely disagree with this line of thinking at the mite level. This is how my association does it and we always end up with 8 year olds playing with 4 year olds simply because the 8 year old doesn't know how to stop with both feet or do backwards crossovers. Nevermind that the 8 year old is twice the size of the 4 year old, loves hockey, and is way more aggressive so by the end of the season his skill level is so much better than the little kids it's silly.

No matter what you do at the mite level there are going to be discrepencies in ability simply because the learning curves are so different at that age. Even if everyone on the team is of equal ability at the beginning of the season they likely won't be at the end. I say have an "A" team for the very best kids and then group the rest of the kids by age. That way they can play with their friends and have a better opportunity to enjoy the game (and thus keep wanting to play it).
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

Why don't you move the 8 year old up to the next group after he's learned to stop both ways?
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

Even if everyone on the team is of equal ability at the beginning of the season they likely won't be at the end.
so even after the start of the season the skills within a particular group start to seperate.
It looks like we agree. The solution could be to freely move them to their ability.

I say have an "A" team for the very best kids and then group the rest of the kids by age.
Would a 4 year old be able to make the "A" team?
If your 8 year old didn't make the "A" team, would he be playing with the 4 year olds?
3GoonsWest
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:37 am

Post by 3GoonsWest »

Why is there an 8 year old that can't stop both ways or crossover backwards?
Those aren't skills that are needed if the kid is being told to camp in front of the crease and shoot for the entire 3 minutes of their shift.
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

Good point, the inability to stop in an aggressive 8 year old that loves hockey reflects on the program, not the kid.

3GW, are you saying that small area games stunt mite skaters? Backward skating is not needed playing 3-on-3 in the faceoff circle for 4 years of mite hockey?
3GoonsWest
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:37 am

Post by 3GoonsWest »

3GW, are you saying that small area games stunt mite skaters? Backward skating is not needed playing 3-on-3 in the faceoff circle for 4 years of mite hockey?[/quote]

I'll use your swimming analogy. If you fall out of a boat in the middle of the lake, but all you have ever worked on at the pool was treading water, you had better hope someone saw you fall and is going to turn the boat around. If you are not a proficient swimmer, you drown, severe consequence. On the other hand, if you are not proficient at basic hockey fundamentals, everyone says "Too bad, the kid could've been good if he had learned to skate", lesser consequence.
Small area games are only part of the entire game of hockey. Until the game is changed and the entire game is played on a 70 foot sheet of ice, the kids need to learn the entire game.
play4fun
Posts: 146
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:01 pm

Post by play4fun »

Think about the question posed above for a second. "Why is there an 8 year old that can't stop both ways or crossover backwards?"

Are we saying that kids need to be proficient skaters by the age of 8 or they should simply forget the sport of hockey? What if a kid doesn't start skating in organized hockey until the age of 8 or 9?

While it will take some hard work to catch up to the other "veteran" 8 year olds on the ice, it can be done.

Inigo hit part of the issue. Associations need to be flexible enough to move kids along at the mite age in cases where older kids start late and progress rapidly during the course of a season.

That's the simple solution.

Now let's hear from the grownups about why it's impossible for associations to be flexible with mites -- you know, rules and registration deadlines that stand in the way of common sense, and limit opportunities for 8 year olds to fall in love with the sport -- simply because it's too much work for the grownups to juggle kids among different teams during the season. Really, it's just too hard. Sorry little Johnny and Suzy.

A pet peeve of mine is watching associations place kids in their last year of mite eligibility strictly based on abilities at the beginning of a season. If the kids are going to be moving up to squirts the following year, and they don't have the fundamentals down, it's time to push them along as quickly as possible. Holding these kids back with beginning skaters for an entire season doesn't do the kids or the association any good over the long haul. jBlaze3000 also got part of the issue right, in my opinion, when pointing out that 8 year olds progress much faster during a season than 4, 5, or even 6 year olds.

So, combine some of the logic of Inigo, and a little bit from jBlaze3000, and all of the sudden your chocolate is in my peanut butter -- no, your peanut butter is on my chocolate. Point is, both opinions are spot on and are better when taken into account together, rather than separately.

I've used up my slack time for the day -- out for now.
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

Now let's hear from the grownups about why it's impossible for associations to be flexible with mites -- you know, rules and registration deadlines that stand in the way of common sense, and limit opportunities for 8 year olds to fall in love with the sport -- simply because it's too much work for the grownups to juggle kids among different teams during the season. Really, it's just too hard. Sorry little Johnny and Suzy.
So that's it?

We know we should:
1) evaluate the kids' current abilities
2) divide them into groups based on skill set (and age if possible depending on numbers)
3) put together a practice plan that gives kids what they need to improve
4) return to step 1

However, we are so lazy that we can't implement a process as simple as 1) lather, 2) rinse, 3) repeat?
play4fun
Posts: 146
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:01 pm

Post by play4fun »

InigoMontoya wrote:
Now let's hear from the grownups about why it's impossible for associations to be flexible with mites -- you know, rules and registration deadlines that stand in the way of common sense, and limit opportunities for 8 year olds to fall in love with the sport -- simply because it's too much work for the grownups to juggle kids among different teams during the season. Really, it's just too hard. Sorry little Johnny and Suzy.
So that's it?

We know we should:
1) evaluate the kids' current abilities
2) divide them into groups based on skill set (and age if possible depending on numbers)
3) put together a practice plan that gives kids what they need to improve
4) return to step 1

However, we are so lazy that we can't implement a process as simple as 1) lather, 2) rinse, 3) repeat?
I've not seen nor heard of many associations that apply your winning formula for personal hygiene to mite progression throughout the season. Most do an admirable job of following the steps you outlined at the beginning of the season, but then fail to repeat the steps during the course of the season. So yes, most are too lazy to implement step 3) repeat. Once kids are placed on a team, their they remain and languish, along with their unkept and unwashed locks, for failure to repeat.

From your tone, I'm glad to hear you and your association handle mites and their progression better than most.
InigoMontoya
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:36 pm

Post by InigoMontoya »

The subtlety of tone is tough to communicate, so a direct response would be, "No, far from it." It doesn't really matter much how the kids are evaluated or dispersed, they'll all get pretty much the same drills, taught to the middle, year after year. Since we don't seem to have any idea what we're doing, so we over-react to published material as it suits us. For example, Lucia mentioned once that mites shouldn't skate full ice - MNH ran with it, so we locked it down tight - the 8-year olds get 6 or 7 hours of full ice instruction, that's it. A couple years ago the Zamboni was busy on the 2nd sheet of ice when it was time for the 7 & 8 year olds to be finished; the rink attendent offered to give them 5 "extra" minutes, so the coaches moved the goals back and offered full ice pond hockey to those who wished to stay. The kids went nuts. However, the self-appointed head of player development happened to have a kid on the ice, who apparently didn't touch the puck during his 3 shifts over 5 minutes, and he stood yelling red-faced, spit flying. No one dares move the nets again. The dark ages of association hockey.
SECoach
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:29 am

Post by SECoach »

InigoMontoya wrote:The subtlety of tone is tough to communicate, so a direct response would be, "No, far from it." It doesn't really matter much how the kids are evaluated or dispersed, they'll all get pretty much the same drills, taught to the middle, year after year. Since we don't seem to have any idea what we're doing, so we over-react to published material as it suits us. For example, Lucia mentioned once that mites shouldn't skate full ice - MNH ran with it, so we locked it down tight - the 8-year olds get 6 or 7 hours of full ice instruction, that's it. A couple years ago the Zamboni was busy on the 2nd sheet of ice when it was time for the 7 & 8 year olds to be finished; the rink attendent offered to give them 5 "extra" minutes, so the coaches moved the goals back and offered full ice pond hockey to those who wished to stay. The kids went nuts. However, the self-appointed head of player development happened to have a kid on the ice, who apparently didn't touch the puck during his 3 shifts over 5 minutes, and he stood yelling red-faced, spit flying. No one dares move the nets again. The dark ages of association hockey.
We dont play in a small area with mites because Lucia said it once. We do it because USA Hockey and others have spent years researching hockey development here and around the world and has determined that there is little to no benefit in mites playing full ice....whether it be from a developmental standpoint or to promote fun. On top of that it was discovered playing in small areas benefits not only mites but players up to the highest levels of hockey. Although there are hundreds of parental experts who feel otherwise.....USA Hockey, which Minnesota Hockey is an affiliate of, confidently promotes small area and cross ice with younger players while trying to educate the masses. Do some take it too far? Yes. Do others take them somewhere else where they can get what they feel will serve their child better? Yes. Will USA Hockey take a different direction with development because some parents don't think cross ice is big time enough? No.
HockeyDad41
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:40 pm

Post by HockeyDad41 »

del
Last edited by HockeyDad41 on Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply