HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Posted: **Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:50 pm**

hockey 1919 wrote:We are still talking about a coach that has his assistants go out and recruit. He runs it up against all the teams they play. Not one of there top players is homegrown. He is the so called president of the girls coaches association. Keep running it up, good for the sport

You say not one of their top players is homegrown? What about Seeler or Lambert,Riggs, Petersen. You must be either a Kenedy parent or coach or a Mound parent or coach and judging by your 5 posts its not to hard to figure out!

Posted: **Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:20 pm**

hockey 1919 wrote:We are still talking about a coach that has his assistants go out and recruit. He runs it up against all the teams they play. Not one of there top players is homegrown. He is the so called president of the girls coaches association. Keep running it up, good for the sport

Feste was number 19 at Kennedy, no pun intended.
He has not needed to recruit since he got what he wanted when he talked to Ludwigson and Stoa at a Blomington soccer game. One of the 2 parents were afraid to report him so their daughter would not be blacklisted on the hockey front. What a shame.
Not to mention all of the EP parents girls who will be denied a chance to play high school hockey because of the transfers that came in. Could you imagine playing EP youth hockey with little or no chance of playing varsity hockey?If I were an EP parent, I would be livid!

Ep VS Kennedy
Transfers
7 g 7 a

Homegrown
4g 7 a

Year to date

Transfers
57 g 51 a

Homegrown
29 g 70 a

Obviously I am a former Kennedy parent!

Could Morris be the first 30-0 coach to be replaced?

Posted: **Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:41 pm**

gopher9 wrote:
hockey 1919 wrote:We are still talking about a coach that has his assistants go out and recruit. He runs it up against all the teams they play. Not one of there top players is homegrown. He is the so called president of the girls coaches association. Keep running it up, good for the sport
You say not one of their top players is homegrown? What about Seeler or Lambert,Riggs, Petersen. You must be either a Kenedy parent or coach or a Mound parent or coach and judging by your 5 posts its not to hard to figure out!

Gopher 9

Here is the facts

HEAD COACH LEAGUE RECORD OVERALL RECORD
Eden Prairie Morris 9 - 0 - 0 14 - 0 - 0

TEAM LEADERS All Games League Games
Goals Leaders
Player G
Melissa Feste 20
Maria Stoa 14
Hannah Riggs 9
Assists Leaders
Player Asst
Kelly Seeler 14
Melissa Feste 13
Andrea Green 13
Points Leaders
Player PTS
Melissa Feste 33
Maria Stoa 25
Hannah Riggs 21

MinutesPlayed Leaders
Player MIN
Kristen Elliot 368
Maddie Burke 359
GoalsAgainst Leaders
Player GA
Maddie Burke 8
Kristen Elliot 11
GoalsAgainstAverage Leaders
Player GA AVG
Maddie Burke 1.136
Kristen Elliot 1.524

Printable Team Stats Statistic Definitions
Assists Asst
Kelly Seeler 14
Andrea Green 13
Melissa Feste 13
Hannah Riggs 12
Ashlan Lambert 11
Maria Stoa 11
Andrea Peterson 10
Dy-anna Stewart 9
Kelsey Ketcher 9
Kelsey Christiansen 3
Christina Lacombe 3
Rachel Blader 3
Nikki Ludwigson 3
Carissa Ketcher 2
Megan Riggs 2
Sarah Hellier 1
Caitlin Gustafson 1
Katie Osberg 1
Team Season Totals: 121

Goals G
Melissa Feste 20
Maria Stoa 14
Hannah Riggs 9
Carissa Ketcher 7
Andrea Green 6
Kelsey Ketcher 6
Andrea Peterson 5
Nikki Ludwigson 4
Dy-anna Stewart 3
Kelly Seeler 3
Ashlan Lambert 2
Katie Osberg 2
Kelsey Christiansen 1
Sarah Hellier 1
Rachel Blader 1
Caitlin Gustafson 1
Megan Riggs 1
Team Season Totals: 86

GoalsAgainst GA
Kristen Elliot 11
Maddie Burke 8
Team Season Totals: 19

GoalsAgainstAverage GA AVG
Kristen Elliot 1.524
Maddie Burke 1.136
Team Season Totals: 1.333

MinutesPlayed MIN
Kristen Elliot 368
Maddie Burke 359
Team Season Totals: 727

Points PTS
Melissa Feste 33
Maria Stoa 25
Hannah Riggs 21
Andrea Green 19
Kelly Seeler 17
Andrea Peterson 15
Kelsey Ketcher 15
Ashlan Lambert 13
Dy-anna Stewart 12
Carissa Ketcher 9
Nikki Ludwigson 7
Kelsey Christiansen 4
Rachel Blader 4
Christina Lacombe 3
Katie Osberg 3
Megan Riggs 3
Sarah Hellier 2
Caitlin Gustafson 2
Team Season Totals: 207

EP Points ratings
Riggs 21 3rd
Seeler 17 5th
Peterson 15 6th
Lambert 13 8th

You must be an EP parent! The transfers are doing the job well.

Posted: **Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:07 am**

Defensedad

You are obviously very imature and cannot adapt to "change" in life! Get over it and move on. If you need some counceling I would be happy to help you.

Posted: **Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:40 pm**

is'nt funny how this transfer issue brings out the best in all of us!

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:12 pm**

Ok I just have one question... I understand the reasoning behind not playing star players in the third period of whatever, but what is that saying to the player that worked that hard to be that good? I feel like we are telling our kids not to work hard because then you are not going to get to play the whole game. I dont think that kids shoudl be punished for being better then other players. Dont get me wrong I am all about sportsmanship but I dont think completly taking the player out of the game is a reasonable soulution. Just a though.

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:31 pm**

d1wannabe wrote:Ok I just have one question... I understand the reasoning behind not playing star players in the third period of whatever, but what is that saying to the player that worked that hard to be that good? I feel like we are telling our kids not to work hard because then you are not going to get to play the whole game. I dont think that kids shoudl be punished for being better then other players. Dont get me wrong I am all about sportsmanship but I dont think completly taking the player out of the game is a reasonable soulution. Just a though.

If I were you, I would worry more about your academics.

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:12 pm**

d1wannabe wrote:Ok I just have one question... I understand the reasoning behind not playing star players in the third period of whatever, but what is that saying to the player that worked that hard to be that good? I feel like we are telling our kids not to work hard because then you are not going to get to play the whole game. I dont think that kids shoudl be punished for being better then other players. Dont get me wrong I am all about sportsmanship but I dont think completly taking the player out of the game is a reasonable soulution. Just a though.

I've had a number of NDP player parents bring this up to me. Is it fair to those kids that they work so hard year round and only get to play 1.5-2 periods a game come regular season? That's kind of the thought that was brought up.

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:55 pm**

ghshockeyfan wrote:I've had a number of NDP player parents bring this up to me. Is it fair to those kids that they work so hard year round and only get to play 1.5-2 periods a game come regular season? That's kind of the thought that was brought up.

I guess more playing time would be one advantage for the NDP player to stay in her home community and not transferring to a super team. That coach will likely need you to play all three periods at your very best just to keep the score respectable. Having to "throttle back" and bench certain players would never become an issue.

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:08 pm**

So how many NDP players play for B.S.M? Why didn't they stay in their own community? Because their parents can afford a private school. What about the kids that want to play at a higher level and their parents cannot afford a private school?

Posted: **Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:16 pm**

gopher9 wrote:What about the kids that want to play at a higher level and their parents cannot afford a private school?

If playing at a "higher level" is the main goal, I believe kids SHOULD be allowed to do this, whether it be private school or a different public school. The question is at how high of a grade level should unrestricted transfers (without penalty) be allowed. My comment above was just to point out one advantage of staying in your community and playing for a "lower level" team where running up the score (and possibly getting less ice time) does not become an issue.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:37 am**

One other thing that I have to note is that for some kids, without athletics they'd never graduate from HS. I'm not kidding. So, in some ways, there are academic issues associated with athletic considerations in a kid's life.

I don't think that it's even always or often the superstar kid that has such a situation as described above. I will say though that if a superstar becomes so disenchanted with their athletic experience on a poor team that it starts to have an adverse impact on their academics and rest of their life, choices, etc. then maybe an OE with athletic considerations in mind (as to impact on rest of life) isn't entirely wrong...

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:47 am**

gopher9 wrote:. What about the kids that want to play at a higher level and their parents cannot afford a private school?

What is a higher level, when you still play the same teams as before or even where you came from?
If you go from one lake conf to another your compitition has not changed.

Isn't this why AAA and NDP to play at and equally higher level?

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:27 am**

I think practice is the main advantage these good programs have. They get more practice ice with better players to practice with and against. How good a passer will you be if nobody on your team can catch or make a pass? We produce too many "solo" players in this state as it is.

If you go from one lake conf to another your compitition has not changed.

The upper 3 Lake teams have a more competitve schedule than the bottom 3 by far. The best conference to be in (for scheduling purposes) is the Classic Lake, you only have 4 conference foes, they are all good to great and you get to make a lot non conference games against whatever kind of competition the coach sees best for their team. The Lake is the worst (scheduling wise) as it is just too big.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:37 am**

ghshockeyfan wrote:One other thing that I have to note is that for some kids, without athletics they'd never graduate from HS. I'm not kidding. So, in some ways, there are academic issues associated with athletic considerations in a kid's life.

I don't think that it's even always or often the superstar kid that has such a situation as described above. I will say though that if a superstar becomes so disenchanted with their athletic experience on a poor team that it starts to have an adverse impact on their academics and rest of their life, choices, etc. then maybe an OE with athletic considerations in mind (as to impact on rest of life) isn't entirely wrong...

Great comment GHS! This is so true!

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:54 am**

xk1 wrote:I think practice is the main advantage these good programs have. They get more practice ice with better players to practice with and against. How good a passer will you be if nobody on your team can catch or make a pass? We produce too many "solo" players in this state as it is.

If you go from one lake conf to another your compitition has not changed.
The upper 3 Lake teams have a more competitve schedule than the bottom 3 by far. The best conference to be in (for scheduling purposes) is the Classic Lake, you only have 4 conference foes, they are all good to great and you get to make a lot non conference games against whatever kind of competition the coach sees best for their team. The Lake is the worst (scheduling wise) as it is just too big.

I think OE/Privates talk about practice improving as much as anything when they move. I never realized this when I first thought about why kids may move & how they benifit, but it's the thing that I hear cited as much as anything as a positive in a move.

Also interesting sometimes is that some that do move cite "great practices" and sometimes wrongly may attribute this to the quality of a coach. To be honest, it's likely as much - if not more - about having so many skilled players as it is about the person running the practice...

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:16 am**

ghshockeyfan wrote:
xk1 wrote:
To be honest, it's likely as much - if not more - about having so many skilled players as it is about the person running the practice...

GHS I believe you are so right on this.

I have so much more respect for a coach who can take nothing and turn it into something. By teaching a team how to play the great game of hockey rather than call a program great because they have great talent brought in.

I believe Herb Brooks was the master at this, he saw the talent and he did not need the big names to prove his point he found the chemistry.

A team is only as good as their weekest player work with that player and create a better team!

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:10 pm**

[quote="hockeya1a"][quote="ghshockeyfan"][quote="xk1"]

To be honest, it's likely as much - if not more - about having so many skilled players as it is about the person running the practice...[/quote]

GHS I believe you are so right on this.

I have so much more respect for a coach who can take nothing and turn it into something. By teaching a team how to play the great game of hockey rather than call a program great because they have great talent brought in.

I believe Herb Brooks was the master at this, he saw the talent and he did not need the big names to prove his point he found the chemistry.

A team is only as good as their weekest player work with that player and create a better team![/quote]

I agree but also disagree... Herb Brooks had many very talented teams at the University of Minnesota. The 1980 Olympic team was maybe the most talented group of amateurs American has ever assembled. He's the list of guys that went on to play in the NHL... Yes, there were guys like Mike Eruzione that played huge roles, but for the most part these guys were all pros in the making!

Mark Johnson
Position: Forward
1979-82 Pittsburgh Penguins, 1981-82 Minnesota North Stars, 1982-85 Hartford Whalers, 1984-85 St.-Louis Blues, 1985-90 New-Jersey Devils

Rob McClanahan
Position: Forward
1979-81 Buffalo Sabres, 1981-82 New-York Rangers, 1981-82 Hartford Whalers, 1982-84 New-York Rangers

Steve Christoff
Position: Center
1979-82 Minnesota North Stars, 1982-83 Calgary Flames, 1983-84 Los-Angeles Kings

Neal Broten
Position: Center
1980-1993 Minnesota North Stars, 1993-95 Dallas Stars, 1994-97 New-Jersey Devils, 1996-97 Los-Angeles Kings, 1996-97 Dallas Stars

Mark Pavelich
Position: Forward
1981-86 New-York Rangers, 1986-87 Minnesota North Stars, 1991-92 San Jose Sharks

Dave Silk
Position: Forward
1979-83 New-York Rangers, 1983-85 Boston Bruins, 1984-85 Detroit Red Wings, 1985-86 Winnipeg Jets

Dave Christain
Position: Right Wing
1979-83 Winnipeg Jets, 1983-90 Washington Capitals, 1989-91 Boston Bruins, 1991-92 St.-Louis Blues, 1992-94 Chicago Blackhawks

Jack O'Callahan
Position: Defense
1982-87 Chicago Blackhawks, 1987-89 New-Jersey Devils

Mike Ramsey
Position: Defense
1979-93 Buffalo Sabres, 1992-94 Pittsburgh Penguins, 1994-97 Detroit Red Wings

Bill Baker
Position: Defense
1980-81 Montreal Canadiens, 1980-82 Colorado Rockies, 1981-82 St.-Louis Blues, 1982-83 New-York Rangers

Ken Morrow
Position: Defense
1979-89 New-York Islanders

Jack Hughes
Position: Defense
1980-81 Colorado Rockies

Les Auge
Position: Defense
1980-81 Colorado Rockies

Tim Harrer
Position: Right Wing
1982-83 Calgary Flames

Jim Craig
Position: Goalie
1979-80 Atlanta Flames, 1980-81 Boston Bruins, 1983-84 Minnesota North Stars

Steve Janaszak
Position: Goalie
1979-80 Minnesota North Stars, 1981-82 Colorado Rockies

Very talented team if you ask me! I do agree though... a coach who can take some talent and bring them to a higher level is a great coach, and yes, the Team USSR was far superior in talent to Team USA.

Not to take away from any of the coaches from these schools, but EP, Edina, Roseville, Wayzata and many others may have good high school coaches, although those players and teams were good as U10's, U12's and U-14's. They'd probably be good with other coaches at the helm too.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:10 pm**

hockeya1a wrote:
ghshockeyfan wrote:
To be honest, it's likely as much - if not more - about having so many skilled players as it is about the person running the practice...

GHS I believe you are so right on this.

I have so much more respect for a coach who can take nothing and turn it into something. By teaching a team how to play the great game of hockey rather than call a program great because they have great talent brought in.

I believe Herb Brooks was the master at this, he saw the talent and he did not need the big names to prove his point he found the chemistry.

A team is only as good as their weekest player work with that player and create a better team!

I think building a program is really what coaching is all about. Inheriting ready-made championship teams with little challenge except keeping everyone happy aren't really my thing I guess - but that's personal preference. What I have looked at is does a community have the tools & resources to build a nice program. Does it have some potential with the right atmosphere, hard work, etc.

Sometimes too though as a young coach you don't have the option to take on the best coaching jobs. Note that I applied 2x @ NSP (Magil & Marshal), @ SW (Scheid), & @ HM (Krey) and never got those jobs obviously but was beat out by great coaches I believe... I also was 22-23 years old at the time with little head-coaching experience to my credit...

I have a ton of respect for coaches that build/rebuild programs from scratch/within and are willing to take on this challenge. It's often hard to get through the "tough" early building/rebuilding years in a program as often parents have unrealistic expectations for the immediate future.

I will also say though that it's hard for me to criticize good coaches that build such strong programs that they start to attract outside talent. In the end, it's all about getting the most out of your players I believe and making them believe, work together, etc.

By the way, there was a great article in today's Ppress about another legendary East Side coach that I even use some material from to this day that was passed down through my father who played for him (as did Brooks...):
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincitie ... 515589.htm

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:36 pm**

ghshockeyfan wrote:By the way, there was a great article in today's Ppress about another legendary East Side coach that I even use some material from to this day that was passed down through my father who played for him (as did Brooks...):
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincitie ... 515589.htm

Neat, neat article.

Old goats like me lament the sea change in kid's hockey and the demise of the neighborhood rink. As these legendary figures grow old and pass from the earth, we need to keep their legacys alive somehow. I think Herbie would have approved of "Hockey Day in Minnesota" and kudos to the Wild for recognizing the uniqueness and tradition of hockey in Minnesota by honoring pioneers like coach Cotroneo.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:53 pm**

ghshockeyfan wrote:I think OE/Privates talk about practice improving as much as anything when they move. I never realized this when I first thought about why kids may move & how they benifit, but it's the thing that I hear cited as much as anything as a positive in a move.

Also interesting sometimes is that some that do move cite "great practices" and sometimes wrongly may attribute this to the quality of a coach. To be honest, it's likely as much - if not more - about having so many skilled players as it is about the person running the practice...

I think this hits the nail on the head. I for one don't believe that most OE players have a state championship in mind as the reason for their transfer. While there are hundreds of reasons, they, and their parents, simply may be seeking the optimum environment for their continued development. And that, right or wrong, is perceived as being the teams with the most highly skilled players. What they surrender is the opportunity to lead their home program, which has significant intangible benefits as well, especially in personal development. This is the quandry of the elite player and the temptation of those who aren't at that level and somehow fault the home program for their stifled development.

Great coaches can build great programs from a reasonable foundation; whether the parents have the patience to stick it out, understanding the program's success may not arrive until their daughter's time is over, is often the challenge.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:01 pm**

keepitreal,

Very well said. The "parent problem" seems to be a theme of late on this board - parents living vicariously thru their kids - it's kind of disgusting when you think about it. What is our hope for these young ladies - they go D1, and then what ??? There is no WNHL, and even if there were, they wouldn't be paid much. What's wrong with a kid playing HS sports for the experience and life lessons, playing some D3 or club hockey in college, while they are gaining an education that will provide them a means to make a living the rest of their lives ???

The other contributing factor to the O/E mania is AAA hockey. The high level players get to know each other thru AAA - the breeding ground for O/E. I have heard the conversations in the locker rooms at AAA events. I hope most these kids can enjoy the AAA experience, and still appreciate their hometown buddies on their HS team, even though they probably are not as skilled as the AAA teammates.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:38 pm**

hockeyrube wrote:keepitreal,
I hope most these kids can enjoy the AAA experience, and still appreciate their hometown buddies on their HS team, even though they probably are not as skilled as the AAA teammates.

Very nicly put,
the only thing that I do not agree with totaly is the above part on not as skilled as AAA teammates. There are many kids out there whos parents do not have the funds to alow them to play AAA hockey and some of them are just as good athletes that might need a little more work.

And I cannot help but wonder how many of those are being pushed out because of OE, I am not sure how many OE that EP has 4-6 More
They have plenty of kids to choose from with out the outsiders coming in.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:47 pm**

I can't blame people for seeking out the best developmental opportunities - athletic, &/or educational - in many respects that's what our freedoms are about dating back to the very foundation of our country. Obviously though through history there have been sacrifices that have had to be made to pursue these freedoms/opportunities...

I also want to say that I hate rules that make kids sit out unless they broke a law.

That aside, I think there are some fair compromises that can be made relative to maintaining freedoms yet not promoting AAA-like HS teams.

A couple other thoughts...

1) If we had an established true non-profit based HS Elite League like the boys I think we'd see less movement rather than more. While I agree that AAA hockey may create issues OE/Private wise it also may prevent kids from leaving in that it offers something to those that stay in their home areas as far as high level hockey outside the regular season.

2) I think that AAA hockey should be regulated - and somehow worked to support a HS Elite League.

Posted: **Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:51 pm**

GHS,

The boys have such a league and it has had no impact on OE/Private transfers, it's purpose is to keelp them in HS rather than Juniors and from what I have read has not succeeded in doing that either.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

ep?

Re: EP

Re: EP

Re: EP

Transfers

OE

Re: OE

Re: OE

Re: OE