HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Its certainly possible that Taylor could have accomplished those things at STA this year but if you look at the talent at the forward position at STA this year I find it hard to believe that he pushes aside either Issackson or Reid to play center on one of the two top lines. When Jordan played he was the focal point of their offense. I believe Taylor is the best 95 forward in the state...just my opinion...just think he needs to show that at the next level before we can put him in the same group with Mr. Schroeder.

[quote="keepyourheadup"]Its certainly possible that Taylor could have accomplished those things at STA this year but if you look at the talent at the forward position at STA this year I find it hard to believe that he pushes aside either Issackson or Reid to play center on one of the two top lines. When Jordan played he was the focal point of their offense. I believe Taylor is the best 95 forward in the state...just my opinion...just think he needs to show that at the next level before we can put him in the same group with Mr. Schroeder.[/quote]

Keep basically summed up all I meant by my statement, didn't mean to pick it apart so much.

I think at this level it is still a who you know and who you schmooze. There was a kid on one team I watched did not score a goal, did not have an assist, and had a minus three on a plus/ minus in all five games played. Of the 12 forwards I would have put him at six or seven on his team. Yet he got an invite over four other harder working and productive (goals and assists) individuals on his team. His father was never very far away from the coach or the evaluators with a comment and a pat on the back good old boy style.

Backcheck1 wrote:There was a kid on one team I watched did not score a goal, did not have an assist, and had a minus three on a plus/ minus in all five games played. Of the 12 forwards I would have put him at six or seven on his team.

Nice, what did the other 5 or 6 players put on the scorecard if he was a minus three? What district did this performance come from?

there may be some issues in the Advanced program. but its by far better than any local program i've heard of. and i believe they usually get it right

keepmeoutofit wrote:there may be some issues in the Advanced program. but its by far better than any local program i've heard of. and i believe they usually get it right

I agree with that. Someone tell me where the "perfect tryouts" are always held.

http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/docu ... ls__2_.pdf

Funny, no players from the State Champ Woodbury Bantam team listed....and no Elks. Great job D10!

karl(east) wrote:

hockeyfan893 wrote:

karl(east) wrote:Does anyone have all the results from the Festival?

I'm curious to see how Team Duluth Ea--err--D11 did.

Team Duluth beat Team WBL 4-0 in the Consolation Chip after losing to D3 in the first round, and beating D16(?) Roseau area and such in the second round.

Thanks!

Not bad, considering 10 of the 20 players on the roster came from one program.

Yeah not bad except the guys chosing/coaching are from East, so I guess what else would you expect.

I was at all of the games of the A15 tourney last weekend and there were NO (Zero) players from Woodbury or Elk River who even made their District teams, so they must have been cut during the weeding out process.

Districts started with 45 and then went to 20 for the tourney and out of the 240 that remained, (20 x 12), 102 were picked for St. Cloud.

F14 wrote:I was at all of the games of the A15 tourney last weekend and there were NO (Zero) players from Woodbury or Elk River who even made their District teams, so they must have been cut during the weeding out process.

Districts started with 45 and then went to 20 for the tourney and out of the 240 that remained, (20 x 12), 102 were picked for St. Cloud.

Those teams must've been heavy with '94 birth year players.

[quote="F14"]I was at all of the games of the A15 tourney last weekend and there were NO (Zero) players from Woodbury or Elk River who even made their District teams, so they must have been cut during the weeding out process.

D8 #14 Josah French / Woodbury

In the spirit of understanding legitimate tryouts for the advanced 15, let's peel this onion back a little more. For a non-profit hockey network, this is looking more like a Acorn structure under D10.

If you had a successful season, under the D10 handbook this would allow a certain number of participants towards this social event. How did 4 Blaine skaters make the team of which two are directly related to the coaching staff of the A bantam team? What does Blaine have over D10's head?

Maybe they were deserving but without any representation from D8 - The State Champions and ER - D10 who also made a state run, the question should be asked.

Oh, and good job Edina on having two make the team...give me a break.

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/docu ... ls__2_.pdf

Funny, no players from the State Champ Woodbury Bantam team listed....and no Elks. Great job D10!

Unbelievable. Just goes to show that excelling at team play is not a requirement, or even a desire of the "selection committee"

They are trying to ruin hockey just a little more every year.

So witch Blaine kids dont belong there and witch kids are you talking that there dads coach.

muckandgrind wrote:

F14 wrote:I was at all of the games of the A15 tourney last weekend and there were NO (Zero) players from Woodbury or Elk River who even made their District teams, so they must have been cut during the weeding out process.

Districts started with 45 and then went to 20 for the tourney and out of the 240 that remained, (20 x 12), 102 were picked for St. Cloud.

Those teams must've been heavy with '94 birth year players.

Not sure about Elk River, but Woodbury had a lot of '94's....

PoniesDad45 wrote:

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/docu ... ls__2_.pdf

Funny, no players from the State Champ Woodbury Bantam team listed....and no Elks. Great job D10!

Unbelievable. Just goes to show that excelling at team play is not a requirement, or even a desire of the "selection committee"

They are trying to ruin hockey just a little more every year.

Before spouting off again...maybe you should do a little research and find out the birth years of the players on those teams. They may have been carried by their 1994 birth years. moreso than the '95-age players. For example, Woodbury's best player (by far), Jake Guentzel, is a '94. You might even say that he really carried that team this season.

I can't speak to Elk River, maybe someone else can do that for us.

maybe kids from woodbury and elk river chose to play baseball, had enough hockey for this year, or were recovering from injury.
Or just maybe they made a decision with their parents they didn't want to participate. with the vitriol being spewed toward the selection/eval process who wouldn't want to play.

just a thought.

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:In the spirit of understanding legitimate tryouts for the advanced 15, let's peel this onion back a little more. For a non-profit hockey network, this is looking more like a Acorn structure under D10.

If you had a successful season, under the D10 handbook this would allow a certain number of participants towards this social event. How did 4 Blaine skaters make the team of which two are directly related to the coaching staff of the A bantam team? What does Blaine have over D10's head?

Maybe they were deserving but without any representation from D8 - The State Champions and ER - D10 who also made a state run, the question should be asked.

Oh, and good job Edina on having two make the team...give me a break.

I think you meant there is 5 players from Blaine that made the team, obviously by no error on your part the player from CR will be wearing the blue and white in the future. His dad is on the Blaine Varsity coaching staff. Sometimes it does matter who your dad is and if you had a brother that came up through the ranks. Taking a look at there winter website he had quite a few assists and a good +-. I think CR could have fielded 2 players in St. Cloud, but the other '95 was playing injured during tryouts due to a previous arm injury and didn't make the cut

[quote="murray"]maybe kids from woodbury and elk river chose to play baseball, had enough hockey for this year, or were recovering from injury.
Or just maybe they made a decision with their parents they didn't want to participate. with the vitriol being spewed toward the selection/eval process who wouldn't want to play.

just a thought.[/quote

you even spelt my name correct

muckandgrind wrote:

PoniesDad45 wrote:

Ugottobekiddingme wrote:http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/docu ... ls__2_.pdf

Funny, no players from the State Champ Woodbury Bantam team listed....and no Elks. Great job D10!

Unbelievable. Just goes to show that excelling at team play is not a requirement, or even a desire of the "selection committee"

They are trying to ruin hockey just a little more every year.

Before spouting off again...maybe you should do a little research and find out the birth years of the players on those teams. They may have been carried by their 1994 birth years. moreso than the '95-age players. For example, Woodbury's best player (by far), Jake Guentzel, is a '94. You might even say that he really carried that team this season.

I can't speak to Elk River, maybe someone else can do that for us.

It's obvious you really don't know a lot about the Woodbury team-I do. To say that Guentzel "carried" the team just is ridiculous.

But thanks for giving us a clear view of the thinking of people who dreamed up this garbage.

PoniesDad45 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

PoniesDad45 wrote: Unbelievable. Just goes to show that excelling at team play is not a requirement, or even a desire of the "selection committee"

They are trying to ruin hockey just a little more every year.

Before spouting off again...maybe you should do a little research and find out the birth years of the players on those teams. They may have been carried by their 1994 birth years. moreso than the '95-age players. For example, Woodbury's best player (by far), Jake Guentzel, is a '94. You might even say that he really carried that team this season.

I can't speak to Elk River, maybe someone else can do that for us.

It's obvious you really don't know a lot about the Woodbury team-I do. To say that Guentzel "carried" the team just is ridiculous.

But thanks for giving us a clear view of the thinking of people who dreamed up this garbage.

Let me ask you two simple questions......How many points did Guentzel score this season? Does Woodbury even SNIFF the State Title without him?

"Carried" might be a strong word, I'll agree. But he was definitely the straw that stirred the drink on that team. You can't deny that fact.

The point is that Woodbury only had 3 or 4 95's on the team the rest being 94's. And I believe 2 out of the 3 95's that the coach nominated made it on the district final 30. And 1 of them made it to tthe festival. Nice players but were not the go to players. But if all 3 are back this year for the Bantam A's the will be the go to guys.

PoniesDad45 wrote:
It's obvious you really don't know a lot about the Woodbury team-I do. To say that Guentzel "carried" the team just is ridiculous.

But thanks for giving us a clear view of the thinking of people who dreamed up this garbage.

Which Woodbury kids should have made it?

You may know a lot about the Woodbury team, but it seems you don't know too much about things you don't like. How one can arrive at a conclusion that targeting advanced players (so they can train as a team) means ignoring team play is beyond me.

GapControl wrote:The point is that Woodbury only had 3 or 4 95's on the team the rest being 94's. And I believe 2 out of the 3 95's that the coach nominated made it on the district final 30. And 1 of them made it to tthe festival. Nice players but were not the go to players. But if all 3 are back this year for the Bantam A's the will be the go to guys.

You are correct me boy...

Gems wrote:

GapControl wrote:The point is that Woodbury only had 3 or 4 95's on the team the rest being 94's. And I believe 2 out of the 3 95's that the coach nominated made it on the district final 30. And 1 of them made it to tthe festival. Nice players but were not the go to players. But if all 3 are back this year for the Bantam A's the will be the go to guys.

You are correct me boy...

Who is correct? All I see are a bunch of pundits calling out kids names and deciding who is the go to guy from a selection process....and no, next year for these cut kids will be a miracle to even be considered for the advanced 16 because that list has already had their names removed. For the 20% of people on this forum looking for "the perfect" tryout, start with the evaluation process and plug in qualified (not personally involved) evaluators. That will get your heads spinning. This topic is being avoided like the swine flu....