MN Selects 2010
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, karl(east)
possible tryouts for selects 2011
Hey Nighttrain. I was at the selects this past weekend and heard rumors of having tryouts for teams next year and not have the same kids on teams. this would eliminate the good old boys club and get new blood in the tournamnet. have you heard anything on this?
-
Passthefoil
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 9:39 am
It is really unfortunate from both sides (boys & girls) that the teams are not formed with the "best" players from every region. Some parents say no more, hockey season is done, some kids say no more as well, but mostly (IMHO) it is a collective network of parents that pat each other on the back and make the effort to "we will take your player, if you take my player". This tradition has been going on for some time now and is no mirage to anyone who has been involved with the formation of teams.
It was clear this past weekend that not all of the top talented kids were not playing again in this years Select Tournament. When I asked where "Billy" or "Suzie" was there was never a clear answer to why. Shoulders being shrugged and the proverbial, "I dont know". It comes down to the all important issue, is Selects for the parents or the kids? It also begs another question; do the elite players need Selects, or does the Selects program need the Elite players?
Many knowledgable coaches of various competitive levels and competant fans of the youth programs say that the divide is about 65/35, so it begs the question is Selects really "select"?
This topic is highly debatable. I am sure we will hear from others on this subject and we will see emotional responses as well as backers of the selects process and even admirers of this post. Lets figure it out and make it better, if possible.
It was clear this past weekend that not all of the top talented kids were not playing again in this years Select Tournament. When I asked where "Billy" or "Suzie" was there was never a clear answer to why. Shoulders being shrugged and the proverbial, "I dont know". It comes down to the all important issue, is Selects for the parents or the kids? It also begs another question; do the elite players need Selects, or does the Selects program need the Elite players?
Many knowledgable coaches of various competitive levels and competant fans of the youth programs say that the divide is about 65/35, so it begs the question is Selects really "select"?
This topic is highly debatable. I am sure we will hear from others on this subject and we will see emotional responses as well as backers of the selects process and even admirers of this post. Lets figure it out and make it better, if possible.
-
girlshockeyrocks
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:27 pm
I'd be curious how you'd do tryouts for Selects? The Selects tourney was run the week after MN hockey state/district tourneys ended. Selects rosters are due long before then (programs/jerseys have to be done)
Other suggestions? There is already limits on how many years for a coach (2 I think) and changing coaches always gets some new players.
Other than that, it's just by recommendations (from the aforementioned 'good ole boys' network I'm sure) and scouting.
I think the superstars are all generally sought after and invited and well represented at the festival. After that, you get into a lot of equal players across the region and it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. I know coaches are 'encouraged' to invite new players but there's no strict rule toward this. I'd guess on average the teams end up with 3-5 new players per year which is not bad when you consdier that the top 6-7 are not easily replaced because they are truly 'Select' level players.
Other suggestions? There is already limits on how many years for a coach (2 I think) and changing coaches always gets some new players.
Other than that, it's just by recommendations (from the aforementioned 'good ole boys' network I'm sure) and scouting.
I think the superstars are all generally sought after and invited and well represented at the festival. After that, you get into a lot of equal players across the region and it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. I know coaches are 'encouraged' to invite new players but there's no strict rule toward this. I'd guess on average the teams end up with 3-5 new players per year which is not bad when you consdier that the top 6-7 are not easily replaced because they are truly 'Select' level players.
Why isn't EACH coach in the designated teams district make-up contacted at Xmas time to suggest their best 2-3 players for consideration? Then asked if their goalie is worthy of consideration too.
From there, that list is accumulated in January and then sent out for a 2nd vote to EACH coach again to vote on what kids should represent the designated districts for ALL teams. I am sure this would curtail some of the "buddy" network and get the best players participating in the tournament. This may also get some coaches to participate in selections as opposed to not caring since it is checkbook hockey anyway and let that kids parents decide. Final roster and selections are up to the coach based on voting totals and their input.
This would also alleviate the onus that parents put on their traveling team coaches as to how come my kid didn't get selected as opposed to suggested. The traveling team coaches would be able to answer the initial inquiry on whether they were even suggested before their inquiry reached the why wasn't he/she chosen when the season ends.
From there, that list is accumulated in January and then sent out for a 2nd vote to EACH coach again to vote on what kids should represent the designated districts for ALL teams. I am sure this would curtail some of the "buddy" network and get the best players participating in the tournament. This may also get some coaches to participate in selections as opposed to not caring since it is checkbook hockey anyway and let that kids parents decide. Final roster and selections are up to the coach based on voting totals and their input.
This would also alleviate the onus that parents put on their traveling team coaches as to how come my kid didn't get selected as opposed to suggested. The traveling team coaches would be able to answer the initial inquiry on whether they were even suggested before their inquiry reached the why wasn't he/she chosen when the season ends.
-
Ufeelshame
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 4:17 pm
I was there and it is good hockey. 90% of the kids deserve to be there. I agree. While the kids are definitely talented it is not universally the best talent. Also some kids because of the affilation with certain associations get asked when others don't. More non-parent coaches would certainly help. Then no appearance of favoritism. IMHO. Still a very nice weekend and wonderful for the kids.
-
drop the puck
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:12 am
These tournaments are not all-star games they are better kids that are selected by coaches to play. Looking at the list of girls it is obvious most are on the top line of their teams, but they are not necessarily the best player on their team nor the better players in the district.Ufeelshame wrote:I was there and it is good hockey. 90% of the kids deserve to be there. I agree. While the kids are definitely talented it is not universally the best talent. Also some kids because of the affilation with certain associations get asked when others don't. More non-parent coaches would certainly help. Then no appearance of favoritism. IMHO. Still a very nice weekend and wonderful for the kids.
This is especially true for '96, and '97 where previously ability to be tops at U10 does not translate to the highest calibre play at 12U and 14U.
I can only comment on my experience having coached Super Series teams. My process of team formation is straightforward: I identify the top 20-25 players in the region by talking to the A coaches AND watching games. To do it right, you have to both listen to coaches AND watch games, period. Some association coaches won't give you the straight scoop, opting instead to champion one kid over another. As they say: Seeing is believing. Reality is, some of the kids will be on spring break, others will either attend the Selects tournament or move on to baseball or softball or whatever. You typically end up with 10-12 of the top 15 skaters and then add 3-5 skaters from the next 5-10 best. The approach is admittedly subjective - in other words, its one person's opinion of a player versus a voting system - and some good players may be left out. But from my experience, not many. Usually if a player is left out, the coach failed to use an objective process and selected kids based on other reasons - they play on his/her assocation team, AAA team, play soccer with his/her kid, etc. That's unfortunate as the level of play then suffers and worthy players are left out.
As to which tournament has better talent? They are somewhat apples and oranges. Super Series is based on Minnesota hockey and school age (July 1 of XXXX to June 30 of the next year). Selects is based on birth year (Jan 1 to Dec 31). I would bet most Selects players are born in the first half of the given birth year (read Malcom Gladwell's book, "Outliers" if you are curious as to why I would make that bet). And I would bet most Super Series players are born between July 1 and December 31 - the oldest of that age range. I know 80% of my Super Series players were born in that second-half. To answer the question, you would have to decide whether a Major Squirt team in the Super Series - kids who just finished their second year of Squirts - would beat a 1998 birth year team -mostly kids that just finished their first year of Pee Wees. Size, strength and experience, favors the older (in this case 1998 Selects) team. Likewise, the same Major Squirt team should have the edge on the 1999 boys' Selects team.
For me, the point of the tournament is (i) to raise money for the Blades - like it or not, its a fundraiser; and (ii) to create a fun showcase of top Minnesota talent battling it out at the end of the winter association season.
As to which tournament has better talent? They are somewhat apples and oranges. Super Series is based on Minnesota hockey and school age (July 1 of XXXX to June 30 of the next year). Selects is based on birth year (Jan 1 to Dec 31). I would bet most Selects players are born in the first half of the given birth year (read Malcom Gladwell's book, "Outliers" if you are curious as to why I would make that bet). And I would bet most Super Series players are born between July 1 and December 31 - the oldest of that age range. I know 80% of my Super Series players were born in that second-half. To answer the question, you would have to decide whether a Major Squirt team in the Super Series - kids who just finished their second year of Squirts - would beat a 1998 birth year team -mostly kids that just finished their first year of Pee Wees. Size, strength and experience, favors the older (in this case 1998 Selects) team. Likewise, the same Major Squirt team should have the edge on the 1999 boys' Selects team.
For me, the point of the tournament is (i) to raise money for the Blades - like it or not, its a fundraiser; and (ii) to create a fun showcase of top Minnesota talent battling it out at the end of the winter association season.
Phish, thanks for mentioning the Matthew Effect written about in Outliers. Not to change the subject here, but it's great the there are opportunities other than for straight birth years. It varies by sport - soccer, baseball, hockey, depending on what the cutoff date is. ODP soccer came up with a partial solution to this in that they formed Jan-Jun and Jul-Dec teams at the younger age groups. Of course, regular season youth hockey after Mites is in 2-year age bands.
At the more elite levels, though, you're effectively eliminating a sizable portion of your talent pool based on birthdate. If the goal of Hockey USA and MN Hockey is to develop more high-caliber players, they may wish to consider a solution similar to ODP. I think that there are sufficient numbers that this might be workable for at least a few of the age groups.
At the more elite levels, though, you're effectively eliminating a sizable portion of your talent pool based on birthdate. If the goal of Hockey USA and MN Hockey is to develop more high-caliber players, they may wish to consider a solution similar to ODP. I think that there are sufficient numbers that this might be workable for at least a few of the age groups.