Looking for some dialogue on HEP points.
To be honest, this year’s standings were minimally impacted. Most seeds can be traced to win totals. Obviously Minnetonka had as many wins as Wayzata, but the “Lady Bing” Trojans were considerably better with the “fair play”, so Mtka would have had to significantly improve their HEP point total to catch up.
Most teams lost between 3-7 HEP points, with 8 teams losing 5 or more. This means that 53% of the MHL teams violated HEP standards in at least 20% of their games. Centennial is the outlier with 11 HEP points lost. Both Centennial and Stillwater would have seeded higher with better HEP showings, but those are really the only two teams that fall out of line.
So some questions:
Is the 53% / 20% issue indicative of the players and/or level of play?
Is this more an issue of referee-ing? (i.e. Youth level refs that ‘forget’ this is a HS game)
Can/should MHL look at this for future consideration? Is there really anything they can do?
Not drawing any judgements. Many of our MHL league games were very well officiated. Just throwing out some conversation fodder!
HEP Impact
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, karl(east)
-
Patchy the Pirate
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:29 pm
Good topic
I like this topic because I think there can be some good fine tuning of this whole process. First-things-first, the introduction of the fair play point has dramatically improved the level of play at the JG level of hockey. Even in the five years I've had kids playing, I've seen much better play, at a higher skill level and it has created a better league. Metro Hockey should be very proud of the product they are putting on the ice.
I'd like to see the value of wins and ties doubled, cutting the impact of the HEP in half. It's still enough to matter, but I think it should be minimized a bit. I think the intent would still be served, but it scales the point a little bit.
I think the HEP is essential in this league, there are still plenty of guys who would rather destroy someone rather than play the game the way it's intended to be played and the HEP (and three penalty rule) keeps things in order very well.
The other point I'd like to make is the checking-from-behind call. This is a very important penalty for refs to call and all too often I get the feeling that officials feel like they can only call it once per game. This is simply a penalty that keeps skaters safe and it should be called whenever it happens. I was at a recent game where there was a CFB call early, and then later in the game there were two very bad checks from behind (one by our team) that weren't called and certainly should have been.
I'd like to see the value of wins and ties doubled, cutting the impact of the HEP in half. It's still enough to matter, but I think it should be minimized a bit. I think the intent would still be served, but it scales the point a little bit.
I think the HEP is essential in this league, there are still plenty of guys who would rather destroy someone rather than play the game the way it's intended to be played and the HEP (and three penalty rule) keeps things in order very well.
The other point I'd like to make is the checking-from-behind call. This is a very important penalty for refs to call and all too often I get the feeling that officials feel like they can only call it once per game. This is simply a penalty that keeps skaters safe and it should be called whenever it happens. I was at a recent game where there was a CFB call early, and then later in the game there were two very bad checks from behind (one by our team) that weren't called and certainly should have been.
-
aroundtherink
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:11 pm
I am lead to believe that the HEP point is to "control the game" If teams are allowed 7 penalties. 7 x 90 is 630 seconds of penalties. Or 10 minutes and 30 seconds. That is 23% of the game. Now if you are in the penalty box for 25% of the game i believe that you should lose a point.
Alot of the penalties that are called are unsafe hits, hacking, slashing, boarding, head contact. Which all need to be called because of safety.
Remember, a penalty is when you gain a competitive advantage over your opponent by other means than skating.
I do believe that some of the refs from the "youth" level forget that it is high school, perhaps they should look into the 2 ref/1 linesman system. But that will just get more penalties called.
Alot of the penalties that are called are unsafe hits, hacking, slashing, boarding, head contact. Which all need to be called because of safety.
Remember, a penalty is when you gain a competitive advantage over your opponent by other means than skating.
I do believe that some of the refs from the "youth" level forget that it is high school, perhaps they should look into the 2 ref/1 linesman system. But that will just get more penalties called.
-
YeahhhBuddayyy
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 1:29 pm
I think it is good there are HEP points but i think they should change the amount of time they give for a checking from behind because once you get one of those you are very close to the limit. Checking from behind should obviously have a bigger penalty but i think that 10 min plus a 2 min minor is a little too much.
-
YouthHockeyDad
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:17 am
Thanks for the responses so far. A few opinions of my own to add…..and yes, they are simply my personal opinions. I think the HEP rules are good, and though I only have two years of Jr. Gold experience (well, my son has 2 years experience, I have only coached/watched), it seems clear they have had an impact on the improvement in the reputation and play within MHL. Having said that, I think a bigger impact can be traced to the efforts of the coaches and the league itself. Regardless:
To the extent that the players have some culpability for HEP violations (and clearly they DO), that is an issue that HEP points can’t resolve. My belief is that, on their own, players don’t pay attention to the impact of lost HEP points. Penalties are simply part of the game, but some are more egregious than others. In another thread Centennial was mentioned as a team that needs to draw some attention from MHL. Two players were listed specifically. I don’t know anyone associated with Centennial hockey, so I won’t pass any judgment or pretend I know the truth in that respect. But I will use that situation as an example. IF, in fact, there are two players spoiling an otherwise good season for a decent MHL team, it is up to the players and coaches to police that problem. IF coaches don’t hold those players accountable for those actions, then that team deserves a lower seed, and the likelihood that they will make an early exit from the post season. If a player is that big of a problem, and shows the tendency to pile up time in the box, then simply get rid of them. Especially if those penalties prove to be of the ‘cheaper’ variety. Harsh, but simple and reasonable.
In the case of a player that can’t get rid of that chip on their shoulder from a Varsity of JV cut prior to the season, and who carries that chip through games to simply exact revenge on the rest of the league, they ought to go, too. Coaches know who these players are. Many times these players are highly skilled, but this skill is overshadowed by the impact of their on-ice choices.
To the extent that referees carry some responsibility, and they DO, the MHL should engage on-ice officials to remind them that this isn’t Peewee hockey. I am NOT advocating that they allow the same level of activity that you would find in a junior game, but stick to the calls that endanger players or impact the actual outcome of the game. Tripping, slashing, head-contact, checking from behind, roughing……all penalties that should be called. But a big hit in the corner, or a collision at center ice, is not necessarily grounds for a power play just because of the spectacular nature of the play. Nor should we call all of the jostling in front of the net after a whistle. I guess I will contradict myself a bit when I mention how actual interference seems to be let go on face-offs and zone-entries. But I will settle for baby steps.
I love to watch Jr Gold hockey. It is fast, skilled and physical. I will reiterate that many, if not most, of our games are well officiated. There is, however, some inconsistency in quality (or at least the philosophies) of the referees. If there is anything for the MHL to address it may be this point alone!
To the extent that the players have some culpability for HEP violations (and clearly they DO), that is an issue that HEP points can’t resolve. My belief is that, on their own, players don’t pay attention to the impact of lost HEP points. Penalties are simply part of the game, but some are more egregious than others. In another thread Centennial was mentioned as a team that needs to draw some attention from MHL. Two players were listed specifically. I don’t know anyone associated with Centennial hockey, so I won’t pass any judgment or pretend I know the truth in that respect. But I will use that situation as an example. IF, in fact, there are two players spoiling an otherwise good season for a decent MHL team, it is up to the players and coaches to police that problem. IF coaches don’t hold those players accountable for those actions, then that team deserves a lower seed, and the likelihood that they will make an early exit from the post season. If a player is that big of a problem, and shows the tendency to pile up time in the box, then simply get rid of them. Especially if those penalties prove to be of the ‘cheaper’ variety. Harsh, but simple and reasonable.
In the case of a player that can’t get rid of that chip on their shoulder from a Varsity of JV cut prior to the season, and who carries that chip through games to simply exact revenge on the rest of the league, they ought to go, too. Coaches know who these players are. Many times these players are highly skilled, but this skill is overshadowed by the impact of their on-ice choices.
To the extent that referees carry some responsibility, and they DO, the MHL should engage on-ice officials to remind them that this isn’t Peewee hockey. I am NOT advocating that they allow the same level of activity that you would find in a junior game, but stick to the calls that endanger players or impact the actual outcome of the game. Tripping, slashing, head-contact, checking from behind, roughing……all penalties that should be called. But a big hit in the corner, or a collision at center ice, is not necessarily grounds for a power play just because of the spectacular nature of the play. Nor should we call all of the jostling in front of the net after a whistle. I guess I will contradict myself a bit when I mention how actual interference seems to be let go on face-offs and zone-entries. But I will settle for baby steps.
I love to watch Jr Gold hockey. It is fast, skilled and physical. I will reiterate that many, if not most, of our games are well officiated. There is, however, some inconsistency in quality (or at least the philosophies) of the referees. If there is anything for the MHL to address it may be this point alone!
-
just a fan of hockey
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:38 am
Very well stated. The classlessness of some players needs to be managed by the coaches and players themselves.Treat these games like high school games, because thats what they are. Don't compromise the game by changing the rules to address the few players that don't get it. Peer pressure and sitting on the bench are what changes attitiudes.YouthHockeyDad wrote:Thanks for the responses so far. A few opinions of my own to add…..and yes, they are simply my personal opinions. I think the HEP rules are good, and though I only have two years of Jr. Gold experience (well, my son has 2 years experience, I have only coached/watched), it seems clear they have had an impact on the improvement in the reputation and play within MHL. Having said that, I think a bigger impact can be traced to the efforts of the coaches and the league itself. Regardless:
To the extent that the players have some culpability for HEP violations (and clearly they DO), that is an issue that HEP points can’t resolve. My belief is that, on their own, players don’t pay attention to the impact of lost HEP points. Penalties are simply part of the game, but some are more egregious than others. In another thread Centennial was mentioned as a team that needs to draw some attention from MHL. Two players were listed specifically. I don’t know anyone associated with Centennial hockey, so I won’t pass any judgment or pretend I know the truth in that respect. But I will use that situation as an example. IF, in fact, there are two players spoiling an otherwise good season for a decent MHL team, it is up to the players and coaches to police that problem. IF coaches don’t hold those players accountable for those actions, then that team deserves a lower seed, and the likelihood that they will make an early exit from the post season. If a player is that big of a problem, and shows the tendency to pile up time in the box, then simply get rid of them. Especially if those penalties prove to be of the ‘cheaper’ variety. Harsh, but simple and reasonable.
In the case of a player that can’t get rid of that chip on their shoulder from a Varsity of JV cut prior to the season, and who carries that chip through games to simply exact revenge on the rest of the league, they ought to go, too. Coaches know who these players are. Many times these players are highly skilled, but this skill is overshadowed by the impact of their on-ice choices.
To the extent that referees carry some responsibility, and they DO, the MHL should engage on-ice officials to remind them that this isn’t Peewee hockey. I am NOT advocating that they allow the same level of activity that you would find in a junior game, but stick to the calls that endanger players or impact the actual outcome of the game. Tripping, slashing, head-contact, checking from behind, roughing……all penalties that should be called. But a big hit in the corner, or a collision at center ice, is not necessarily grounds for a power play just because of the spectacular nature of the play. Nor should we call all of the jostling in front of the net after a whistle. I guess I will contradict myself a bit when I mention how actual interference seems to be let go on face-offs and zone-entries. But I will settle for baby steps.
I love to watch Jr Gold hockey. It is fast, skilled and physical. I will reiterate that many, if not most, of our games are well officiated. There is, however, some inconsistency in quality (or at least the philosophies) of the referees. If there is anything for the MHL to address it may be this point alone!
The HEP point works great. Experienced coaches that have thier head in the game understand that every point counts and coach to win these points.
I have seen several good (but not smart) teams draw lower playoff seeds both here and in Bantams over the years.
The one thing I would like to see is more consistancy on the check from behind calls. I have seen this call made on minor cross checks away from the boards, followed by major non-calls later in the games.
Finally, we need to go back to the 2:00 minor penalty and stop rewarding goon teams.
I have seen several good (but not smart) teams draw lower playoff seeds both here and in Bantams over the years.
The one thing I would like to see is more consistancy on the check from behind calls. I have seen this call made on minor cross checks away from the boards, followed by major non-calls later in the games.
Finally, we need to go back to the 2:00 minor penalty and stop rewarding goon teams.
-
aroundtherink
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:11 pm
My understanding of this was that players were spending too much time in the penalty box. 15:00 is to 20:00 as 1:30 is to 2:00.wildthing wrote: Finally, we need to go back to the 2:00 minor penalty and stop rewarding goon teams.
Think about it. Your spending 1/10th of the period in the penalty box. Doesnt that seem fair?
If you think about peewee's when the periods are 12/13 minutes, with 2 minute penalties your spending 1/6th of the period in there.
I agree, penalties have been 2 minutes forever. Why change it? Well, it is a pilot program only done by us. If the periods are over 15 minutes, then you can use 2 minutes.
-
aroundtherink
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:11 pm
-
Reg Dunlap
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:51 am
I'm no expert, but statistics show hockey isn't even in the top ten for sports related injuries in the US. I don't think that means we shouldn't continue to make the game safer, but considering more people get hurt riding bikes, jumping on trampolines and sledding (just to name a few), it's a pretty safe way to spend your free time.
When Hell freezes over, I'll play hockey there too.
-
aroundtherink
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:11 pm
I think because its organized they will try to control it as much as possible.Reg Dunlap wrote:I'm no expert, but statistics show hockey isn't even in the top ten for sports related injuries in the US. I don't think that means we shouldn't continue to make the game safer, but considering more people get hurt riding bikes, jumping on trampolines and sledding (just to name a few), it's a pretty safe way to spend your free time.
Its my understanding that they are thinking about taking the checking out of peewee's, now thats a concern of mine.
what about a 5 min major non-releasableYeahhhBuddayyy wrote:I think it is good there are HEP points but i think they should change the amount of time they give for a checking from behind because once you get one of those you are very close to the limit. Checking from behind should obviously have a bigger penalty but i think that 10 min plus a 2 min minor is a little too much.
-
just a fan of hockey
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:38 am
I think the timing is fine - but only count the 2 minutes toward the HEP total minutes. Otherwise, that one penalty cost you 12 of our 16 minutes.bardown33 wrote:what about a 5 min major non-releasableYeahhhBuddayyy wrote:I think it is good there are HEP points but i think they should change the amount of time they give for a checking from behind because once you get one of those you are very close to the limit. Checking from behind should obviously have a bigger penalty but i think that 10 min plus a 2 min minor is a little too much.