Page 2 of 2
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:26 am
by Nevertoomuchhockey
Elliot I think you make some valid points.
However, players who make the top 54 who missed one or more festival games (or weren't there at all) and the status quo of using anything but neutral evaluators in every Phase of tryouts (in every section) opens the process up to criticism. No one involved should take that criticism personally. But for new and younger players I think not having more transparency makes taking in $ from hundreds who are extremely unlikely to even be considered makes the system "as is" seem disingenuous. Like an earlier poster said, we all want MN to bring the best team to nationals. That helps ALL of our boys. But tell us they are looking to fill 20 spots. Or 30. Whatever. Not mad some players will make it even if they can't/don't play in the festival. Just don't pretend that's not the case.
A couple ideas toward positive change right there.
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:49 am
by elliott70
Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:Elliot I think you make some valid points.
However, players who make the top 54 who missed one or more festival games (or weren't there at all) and the status quo of using anything but neutral evaluators in every Phase of tryouts (in every section) opens the process up to criticism. No one involved should take that criticism personally. But for new and younger players I think not having more transparency makes taking in $ from hundreds who are extremely unlikely to even be considered makes the system "as is" seem disingenuous. Like an earlier poster said, we all want MN to bring the best team to nationals. That helps ALL of our boys. But tell us they are looking to fill 20 spots. Or 30. Whatever. Not mad some players will make it even if they can't/don't play in the festival. Just don't pretend that's not the case.
A couple ideas toward positive change right there.
Thank you.
I will see if I can change the brochure to indicate just how player selection is made.
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:56 am
by jhpreus123
I was able to watch almost every game for the 17's and I agree that there isn't much of a gap between players until you get a line like Section 2 had (Wait, Meyers, Hanson). The kids that are talented can make things happen quickly and "have another level" in them. I witnessed this in the Championship game against section 5. I happen to be a goalie dad and my kid was one of the Goalies on Section 5. Guys like I mentioned above can make you look silly in a hurry as the level of play really comes down to mistakes and almost always a mistake ends in a point for the other team. I think anyone going into the festival is realistic about chances to move on. Our family/son was thankful for getting the opportunity to play at what undoubtedly was high level hockey. My son wasn't one of the 6 that moved on but he looks at it from a positive, he played right along with (Edquist, Lee, Scites and Weaver) and was just two saves that were goals away from standing on the same platform .9 or above for the weekend. Our son hasn't tendered a Varsity game and with that said I know who will be working hard over the summer to be one of the top.
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:57 am
by ilovemesomehockey
elliott70 wrote:Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:Elliot I think you make some valid points.
However, players who make the top 54 who missed one or more festival games (or weren't there at all) and the status quo of using anything but neutral evaluators in every Phase of tryouts (in every section) opens the process up to criticism. No one involved should take that criticism personally. But for new and younger players I think not having more transparency makes taking in $ from hundreds who are extremely unlikely to even be considered makes the system "as is" seem disingenuous. Like an earlier poster said, we all want MN to bring the best team to nationals. That helps ALL of our boys. But tell us they are looking to fill 20 spots. Or 30. Whatever. Not mad some players will make it even if they can't/don't play in the festival. Just don't pretend that's not the case.
A couple ideas toward positive change right there.
Thank you.
I will see if I can change the brochure to indicate just how player selection is made.
Right. Full disclosure - just like pull tabs (how many winners left in there?). It still won't stop those with rose colored glasses that think that stuff doesn't apply to their future super star (or those with extra cash that just like to watch their kid play hockey)...so your program will still get funded. Took me a while and a few (thousand) $$$ but "I can see clearly now"... I will fund the rest of my kids college accounts and my retirement. What other's plan to do with their's is their business.
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 11:03 am
by Sats81
jhpreus123 wrote:I was able to watch almost every game for the 17's and I agree that there isn't much of a gap between players until you get a line like Section 2 had (Wait, Meyers, Hanson). The kids that are talented can make things happen quickly and "have another level" in them. I witnessed this in the Championship game against section 5. I happen to be a goalie dad and my kid was one of the Goalies on Section 5. Guys like I mentioned above can make you look silly in a hurry as the level of play really comes down to mistakes and almost always a mistake ends in a point for the other team. I think anyone going into the festival is realistic about chances to move on. Our family/son was thankful for getting the opportunity to play at what undoubtedly was high level hockey. My son wasn't one of the 6 that moved on but he looks at it from a positive, he played right along with (Edquist, Lee, Scites and Weaver) and was just two saves that were goals away from standing on the same platform .9 or above for the weekend. Our son hasn't tendered a Varsity game and with that said I know who will be working hard over the summer to be one of the top.
This is a great, realistic perspective. If only the majority could follow this train of thought. Best of luck to you and your son.
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 11:18 am
by HockeyTalk18
with the exception that the line was not (Wait, Meyers, Hanson)
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:57 pm
by hockey59
Sats81 wrote:jhpreus123 wrote:I was able to watch almost every game for the 17's and I agree that there isn't much of a gap between players until you get a line like Section 2 had (Wait, Meyers, Hanson). The kids that are talented can make things happen quickly and "have another level" in them. I witnessed this in the Championship game against section 5. I happen to be a goalie dad and my kid was one of the Goalies on Section 5. Guys like I mentioned above can make you look silly in a hurry as the level of play really comes down to mistakes and almost always a mistake ends in a point for the other team. I think anyone going into the festival is realistic about chances to move on. Our family/son was thankful for getting the opportunity to play at what undoubtedly was high level hockey. My son wasn't one of the 6 that moved on but he looks at it from a positive, he played right along with (Edquist, Lee, Scites and Weaver) and was just two saves that were goals away from standing on the same platform .9 or above for the weekend. Our son hasn't tendered a Varsity game and with that said I know who will be working hard over the summer to be one of the top.
This is a great, realistic perspective. If only the majority could follow this train of thought. Best of luck to you and your son.
My son was a skater on the Section 5 17 team too. Highlight of the weekend was putting LN players on the Section 1 team 32-1
BTW...Bauer Neudecker was actually centering the line for Section 2 (with Wait & Meyer) that accounted for the majority of S2's goals. The game Sunday would have been closer...if the Section 5 evaluators wouldn't have left 2 All NWSC D along with( at least 1 ) All NWSC Goalie ---OFF the team. Suffice it to say...this omission...finally showed on Sunday in the 6-1 loss. That said, my son had a great time playing all 3 days...and it was nice to see Section 5 take 2nd place at both the 17 & 16 level!
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:57 pm
by hockey59
Sats81 wrote:jhpreus123 wrote:I was able to watch almost every game for the 17's and I agree that there isn't much of a gap between players until you get a line like Section 2 had (Wait, Meyers, Hanson). The kids that are talented can make things happen quickly and "have another level" in them. I witnessed this in the Championship game against section 5. I happen to be a goalie dad and my kid was one of the Goalies on Section 5. Guys like I mentioned above can make you look silly in a hurry as the level of play really comes down to mistakes and almost always a mistake ends in a point for the other team. I think anyone going into the festival is realistic about chances to move on. Our family/son was thankful for getting the opportunity to play at what undoubtedly was high level hockey. My son wasn't one of the 6 that moved on but he looks at it from a positive, he played right along with (Edquist, Lee, Scites and Weaver) and was just two saves that were goals away from standing on the same platform .9 or above for the weekend. Our son hasn't tendered a Varsity game and with that said I know who will be working hard over the summer to be one of the top.
This is a great, realistic perspective. If only the majority could follow this train of thought. Best of luck to you and your son.
My son was a skater on the Section 5 17 team too. Highlight of the weekend was putting LN players on the Section 1 team 32-1
BTW...Bauer Neudecker was actually centering the line for Section 2 (with Wait & Meyer) that accounted for the majority of S2's goals. The game Sunday would have been closer...if the Section 5 evaluators wouldn't have left 2 All NWSC D along with( at least 1 ) All NWSC Goalie ---OFF the team. Suffice it to say...this omission...finally showed on Sunday in the 6-1 loss. That said, my son had a great time playing all 3 days...and it was nice to see Section 5 take 2nd place at both the 17 & 16 level!
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:34 pm
by HSHockeyFan08
The evaluators are very good at picking out the top talent. I have been in the room when selections are made and it is a fair process. It is both a combination of coaches evaluations and Minnesota Hockey evaluations. Most of the guys in the room are NHL scouts and know more about hockey than 99% of the people on this board. There are 10-15 spots that are up in the air that coaches and evaluators argue about. Beyond that it is pretty easy to pick out your top 40 kids.
Posted: Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:43 pm
by Nuts&Bolts
When officially do the 16s and 17s get announced? Another thread indicates names are on YHH premium site which I'm not buying literally.
Post critical error thought the 16s got consistently pounded more than the past in the crossover games. A few of the more noticeable 16s weren't the expected names from powerhouse schools. Red 17s with a lot of NY invites from last year wasn't competitive giving up a ton of goals. Some goalie surprises. Will we see 50% turnover from last year?
Posted: Fri May 01, 2015 9:25 am
by Sats81
Nuts&Bolts wrote:When officially do the 16s and 17s get announced? Another thread indicates names are on YHH premium site which I'm not buying literally.
Ask "Tony Scott" !!
Post critical error thought the 16s got consistently pounded more than the past in the crossover games. A few of the more noticeable 16s weren't the expected names from powerhouse schools. Red 17s with a lot of NY invites from last year wasn't competitive giving up a ton of goals. Some goalie surprises. Will we see 50% turnover from last year?
BTW...Bauer Neudecker was actually centering the line for Section 2 (with Wait & Meyer) that accounted for the majority of S2's goals. The game Sunday would have been closer...if the Section 5 evaluators wouldn't have left 2 All NWSC D along with( at least 1 ) All NWSC Goalie ---OFF the team. Suffice it to say...this omission...finally showed on Sunday in the 6-1 loss. That said, my son had a great time playing all 3 days...and it was nice to see Section 5 take 2nd place at both the 17 & 16 level!