HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Eden Prairie - 4
Prior Lake - 3

Osseo\Maple Grove - 5
Spring Lake Park - 0

silentbutdeadly3139 wrote:

itsjustkidshockey wrote:Farmington does have 4 decent D players and a good goalie, beyond that they are just 6 more forwards. They keep the scoring the low but don't blow teams out. If you could combine Edina's forwards with Farmington's D and goalie, that would be a nice team.

Mark my words, Farmington will find themselves on the short-side of the scoring when other teams realize to adjust and their play to put more physical players at D and look for 3-4 opportunities a game.

But right now they are #1 or #2. Credit where credit is due. Although D5 would eat them up....

I'm guessing tongue must be planted firmly in cheek given the scores in that district and seeing as how your team lost 4-0 to them. Imagine if they opened up there offense what they would have done to your team

Ya I'm glad you could hear the sarcasm. To be the best, you need to play the best and hopefully our paths will cross again.

Would love to see their offense unleashed - that would mean they'll need to move a couple of those D up to forward which will open up for us with the weaker players moving back to D.

D5 Game

STMA 3
MAML 0

D10 Game Last Night

Champlin Park - 2
Princeton - 0

itsjustkidshockey wrote:

silentbutdeadly3139 wrote:

itsjustkidshockey wrote:Farmington does have 4 decent D players and a good goalie, beyond that they are just 6 more forwards. They keep the scoring the low but don't blow teams out. If you could combine Edina's forwards with Farmington's D and goalie, that would be a nice team.

Mark my words, Farmington will find themselves on the short-side of the scoring when other teams realize to adjust and their play to put more physical players at D and look for 3-4 opportunities a game.

But right now they are #1 or #2. Credit where credit is due. Although D5 would eat them up....

I'm guessing tongue must be planted firmly in cheek given the scores in that district and seeing as how your team lost 4-0 to them. Imagine if they opened up there offense what they would have done to your team

Ya I'm glad you could hear the sarcasm. To be the best, you need to play the best and hopefully our paths will cross again.

Would love to see their offense unleashed - that would mean they'll need to move a couple of those D up to forward which will open up for us with the weaker players moving back to D.

Many teams do that, including your team. But some of Farmingtons best players play forward ( see thread on top peewee A players ) Heard your coach and others say it all starts at the net and works its way out from there.

Maple Grove 6
Crow River 0

STMA 1
St Cloud 2

Forest Lake3 Highland 2

silentbutdeadly3139 wrote:

itsjustkidshockey wrote:

silentbutdeadly3139 wrote: I'm guessing tongue must be planted firmly in cheek given the scores in that district and seeing as how your team lost 4-0 to them. Imagine if they opened up there offense what they would have done to your team

Ya I'm glad you could hear the sarcasm. To be the best, you need to play the best and hopefully our paths will cross again.

Would love to see their offense unleashed - that would mean they'll need to move a couple of those D up to forward which will open up for us with the weaker players moving back to D.

Many teams do that, including your team. But some of Farmingtons best players play forward ( see thread on top peewee A players ) Heard your coach and others say it all starts at the net and works its way out from there.

SBD - I'm glad you agree with me! It does start at the net and Farmington is very good there and ave at the F. hope to see them again as our coach has some changes planned - after all it was a 1-0 game last time after the first period.

silentbutdeadly3139 wrote:

itsjustkidshockey wrote:

silentbutdeadly3139 wrote: I'm guessing tongue must be planted firmly in cheek given the scores in that district and seeing as how your team lost 4-0 to them. Imagine if they opened up there offense what they would have done to your team

Ya I'm glad you could hear the sarcasm. To be the best, you need to play the best and hopefully our paths will cross again.

Would love to see their offense unleashed - that would mean they'll need to move a couple of those D up to forward which will open up for us with the weaker players moving back to D.

Many teams do that, including your team. But some of Farmingtons best players play forward ( see thread on top peewee A players ) Heard your coach and others say it all starts at the net and works its way out from there.

I have a question to all the experts out there and I know my thoughts but would like to get some feedback. I know that Minnetonka does it all the time and looking at Farmington Peewees this year it is evident that they are buying into the same notion. 12-13 kids on the A team? Good for development at squirts and peewees or hurting the long term development of the program. I saw Farmington play 4 D and basically two lines with the third line going out every fourth or fifth shift? Is this selling out to win at Peewees? How are they going to compete at Bantams when you need 15 kids to get through the grind of a 50 game physical season?

dogeatdog1 wrote: I have a question to all the experts out there and I know my thoughts but would like to get some feedback. I know that Minnetonka does it all the time and looking at Farmington Peewees this year it is evident that they are buying into the same notion. 12-13 kids on the A team? Good for development at squirts and peewees or hurting the long term development of the program. I saw Farmington play 4 D and basically two lines with the third line going out every fourth or fifth shift? Is this selling out to win at Peewees? How are they going to compete at Bantams when you need 15 kids to get through the grind of a 50 game physical season?

I can see the 12-13 players per team when players are on appropriate level for there skill, or playing a little above there head for development sake. But what I can't stand is when the short the bench all the time. Sure may want to do that in title game a little in third period but to do that more than that is wrong IMHO. Kids like to play in a game, its their reward, and to take that away is wrong. Put them on a team where they will play. Very unfair assuming they are working hard and trying given they paid the same amount of $. Probably a major reason the drop in participation at Bantams.

I'm NOT an expert. But my 2 cents.

Our board requires Pee-wees play equal in first 2 & a .5 periods. Then coaches can short the bench. Most don't however.

[/quote]

I have a question to all the experts out there and I know my thoughts but would like to get some feedback. I know that Minnetonka does it all the time and looking at Farmington Peewees this year it is evident that they are buying into the same notion. 12-13 kids on the A team? Good for development at squirts and peewees or hurting the long term development of the program. I saw Farmington play 4 D and basically two lines with the third line going out every fourth or fifth shift? Is this selling out to win at Peewees? How are they going to compete at Bantams when you need 15 kids to get through the grind of a 50 game physical season?[/quote]

As a coach, the decision to take 13 - 15 players is always one of the toughest I'll make (or push for). There are a number of factors, but the largest factor for me is that whether the last kids taken to get to 15 are A players. There is nothing worse for a team than having a hugely disparate drop off at 14 or 15 skaters. It benefits no one and usually results in two things: (1) Coaches spend huge amount of time with the last one or two kids at the neglect of the other players, and (2) those last kids do not have the puck on their stick enough to develop properly. The last point is the reason why B1 is the best place for such kids - they get to be "the guy" or have pressure (or no pressure depending how you look at it) to do something for the team rather than just not "screw up" or not back check.

The beauty about having 13 or 14 rather than 15 is that you can have one or two spots in the lineup that go every other (or 5 Defensemen) which allows you to easily reward great play with ice time and to do so without benching someone.

That all being said, I just won't take 13 or 14 just to do it if there's not a difference between kids 11/12/13 and 14/15. But to be honest, there almost always is unless you have major numbers in your association (think Wayzata/Edina numbers not everyone else's)

Sorry to continue this non-scoring info on this thread... I'll take anymore comments elsewhere but this is an important topic in my mind.

There is a singular reality at peewee hockey. The A level and B1 levels are more competitive then the B2 and C levels. Competition means the goal is to win. Triple AAA fans want this type of competition and Minnesota hockey has evolved to this type of play at the A and B1 levels.

The higher level teams match lines and good coaches’ look constantly for an edge during a game especially when a team is alive deep into a tourney. For those boards who want coaches to roll lines at all costs (Woodbury is an example), their teams will always end up coming in second at best to the Edinas, Eden Prairies and Wayzata’s.

And the message delivered to the more talented kids by the board is to not recognize the talent. The talented kids then look elsewhere. Woodbury will soon find that most of the talented kids in their program will be playing for East Ridge or some private school.

frederick61 wrote:There is a singular reality at peewee hockey. The A level and B1 levels are more competitive then the B2 and C levels. Competition means the goal is to win. Triple AAA fans want this type of competition and Minnesota hockey has evolved to this type of play at the A and B1 levels.

The higher level teams match lines and good coaches’ look constantly for an edge during a game especially when a team is alive deep into a tourney. For those boards who want coaches to roll lines at all costs (Woodbury is an example), their teams will always end up coming in second at best to the Edinas, Eden Prairies and Wayzata’s.

And the message delivered to the more talented kids by the board is to not recognize the talent. The talented kids then look elsewhere. Woodbury will soon find that most of the talented kids in their program will be playing for East Ridge or some private school.

Interesting points as usual Frederick61 and I agree completely, although I will say that you can get around having to short shift players (more than 1/3 shifts) by having 13 or 14 skaters per team.

It will be interesting to see how East Ridge affects the Woodbury program.

Btw, when is your new column coming out? Holding us all in suspense I see!

Fred,
Just because talented players don't play every other shift doesn't mean their talent isn't recognized.
If teaching 12 yr olds that hockey is a team game costs a couple of wins then so be it.

Please let me chime in-As a newcomer to this site this is a sublect we always deal with in Moorhead-my son is a PWA-we have 15 skaters, 2 goalies and everyone plays equally 99% 0f the time. This is typically why our PWA teams arent usually in the top 10 as our assn's philosophy is to develop more players at younger ages and hope it pays of at Bantams and High School, which it usually does. But there is no doubt our last 3 or so kids are definitely not A players but do get regular shifts. And up here our kids dont have many options to leave and play for privates and other high school teams especially considering our district and section teams as a whole are not that good. That is why our high school team travels alot in order to get quality competition ie. duluth and twin cities teams. Our PWA team is highly ranked but we surely arent as battle tested as the cities teams because we simply dont have the district comp like the cities. So playing those last few kids on our team vs. a weak district team usually doesnt hurt us but it may kill us when we go up against the big guys. It is frustrating at times to watch the lower level kids on an A team but maybe the good thing is it teaches the better players to try to make plays with those players-which helps the better player too by teaching him to pass and to be a playmaker. I'm not always crazy about our philosophy at all, but I guess we have to be patient. We will have a good idea how we stack up with some of the top teams this month in the Roseau tourney when we play Edina, GRapids,Stillwater. Would also like to hear more comments about this

Concerned Hockey Coach wrote:

frederick61 wrote:There is a singular reality at peewee hockey. The A level and B1 levels are more competitive then the B2 and C levels. Competition means the goal is to win. Triple AAA fans want this type of competition and Minnesota hockey has evolved to this type of play at the A and B1 levels.

The higher level teams match lines and good coaches’ look constantly for an edge during a game especially when a team is alive deep into a tourney. For those boards who want coaches to roll lines at all costs (Woodbury is an example), their teams will always end up coming in second at best to the Edinas, Eden Prairies and Wayzata’s.

And the message delivered to the more talented kids by the board is to not recognize the talent. The talented kids then look elsewhere. Woodbury will soon find that most of the talented kids in their program will be playing for East Ridge or some private school.

Interesting points as usual Frederick61 and I agree completely, although I will say that you can get around having to short shift players (more than 1/3 shifts) by having 13 or 14 skaters per team.

It will be interesting to see how East Ridge affects the Woodbury program.

Btw, when is your new column coming out? Holding us all in suspense I see!

[/quote]I have a question to all the experts out there and I know my thoughts but would like to get some feedback. I know that Minnetonka does it all the time and looking at Farmington Peewees this year it is evident that they are buying into the same notion. 12-13 kids on the A team? Good for development at squirts and peewees or hurting the long term development of the program. I saw Farmington play 4 D and basically two lines with the third line going out every fourth or fifth shift? Is this selling out to win at Peewees? How are they going to compete at Bantams when you need 15 kids to get through the grind of a 50 game physical season?[/quote]

I think most people agree that player development is the primary goal at the peewee level. Assuming that to be true, the question seems to come down to whether the 2-3 bubble kids will develop better on the A or B1 team. I believe that most kids develop skill and confidence by making plays and having some success. Very few people thrive in a competitve environment if they are rarely successful. Unfortunately, the bubble kids in most associations cannot consistently have success against the stronger A players. Thus, most of those kids are probably better serverd, from a developmental perspective, by playing B1. However, the quality of coaching at each level can change that developmental dynamic. Hopefully, associations and coaches examine more than simply "wins/losses" in making decisions about the roster sizes.

frederick61 wrote:There is a singular reality at peewee hockey. The A level and B1 levels are more competitive then the B2 and C levels. Competition means the goal is to win. Triple AAA fans want this type of competition and Minnesota hockey has evolved to this type of play at the A and B1 levels.

The higher level teams match lines and good coaches’ look constantly for an edge during a game especially when a team is alive deep into a tourney. For those boards who want coaches to roll lines at all costs (Woodbury is an example), their teams will always end up coming in second at best to the Edinas, Eden Prairies and Wayzata’s.

And the message delivered to the more talented kids by the board is to not recognize the talent. The talented kids then look elsewhere. Woodbury will soon find that most of the talented kids in their program will be playing for East Ridge or some private school.

Here I go with my thoughts. I think that teams like farmington have 2-3 b1 type players at the bottom of their 13 man roster? Should they keep 10? Prior lake is sort f in the same situation What do you do with those kids. My view is that you see many of those kids that are low end A players lose out if the coach chases the almigty win so they can say they are a top 5 team. I sit and watch those games and see the third line sit and ponder to myself how selfish and short sighted the coaches are. I understand that during a run at state or late in a game one would have a reason to shorten the bench but 10 kids for the majority of the game? It shows in the upper levels and again Prior lake is a good example. No sustained pride of playing for their school in Bantams or Highschool. The reason that you see EP in the state at peewee- then bantams -then Highschool is they have competition for the Last two-three on a 14-15 man roster and cotrary to everones thought more Numbers isn't alway better or Edina would run away with the state title every year at highscool. Don't get me wrong Numbers have something to do with success but it isn't an automatic gimme if you have tons of #s...MY 2 Cents.

dogeatdog1 wrote:

frederick61 wrote:There is a singular reality at peewee hockey. The A level and B1 levels are more competitive then the B2 and C levels. Competition means the goal is to win. Triple AAA fans want this type of competition and Minnesota hockey has evolved to this type of play at the A and B1 levels.

The higher level teams match lines and good coaches’ look constantly for an edge during a game especially when a team is alive deep into a tourney. For those boards who want coaches to roll lines at all costs (Woodbury is an example), their teams will always end up coming in second at best to the Edinas, Eden Prairies and Wayzata’s.

And the message delivered to the more talented kids by the board is to not recognize the talent. The talented kids then look elsewhere. Woodbury will soon find that most of the talented kids in their program will be playing for East Ridge or some private school.

Here I go with my thoughts. I think that teams like farmington have 2-3 b1 type players at the bottom of their 13 man roster? Should they keep 10? Prior lake is sort f in the same situation What do you do with those kids. My view is that you see many of those kids that are low end A players lose out if the coach chases the almigty win so they can say they are a top 5 team. I sit and watch those games and see the third line sit and ponder to myself how selfish and short sighted the coaches are. I understand that during a run at state or late in a game one would have a reason to shorten the bench but 10 kids for the majority of the game? It shows in the upper levels and again Prior lake is a good example. No sustained pride of playing for their school in Bantams or Highschool. The reason that you see EP in the state at peewee- then bantams -then Highschool is they have competition for the Last two-three on a 14-15 man roster and cotrary to everones thought more Numbers isn't alway better or Edina would run away with the state title every year at highscool. Don't get me wrong Numbers have something to do with success but it isn't an automatic gimme if you have tons of #s...MY 2 Cents.

Please let me chime in-As a newcomer to this site this is a sublect we always deal with in Moorhead-my son is a PWA-we have 15 skaters, 2 goalies and everyone plays equally 99% 0f the time. This is typically why our PWA teams arent usually in the top 10 as our assn's philosophy is to develop more players at younger ages and hope it pays of at Bantams and High School, which it usually does. But there is no doubt our last 3 or so kids are definitely not A players but do get regular shifts. And up here our kids dont have many options to leave and play for privates and other high school teams especially considering our district and section teams as a whole are not that good. That is why our high school team travels alot in order to get quality competition ie. duluth and twin cities teams. Our PWA team is highly ranked but we surely arent as battle tested as the cities teams because we simply dont have the district comp like the cities. So playing those last few kids on our team vs. a weak district team usually doesnt hurt us but it may kill us when we go up against the big guys. It is frustrating at times to watch the lower level kids on an A team but maybe the good thing is it teaches the better players to try to make plays with those players-which helps the better player too by teaching him to pass and to be a playmaker. I'm not always crazy about our philosophy at all, but I guess we have to be patient. We will have a good idea how we stack up with some of the top teams this month in the Roseau tourney when we play Edina, GRapids,Stillwater. Would also like to hear more comments about this

Spring Park Lake - 3
Anoka - 2

scores from new ulm tournament


New Ulm 5
St Louis Park 3


Crow River 3
Apple Valley 2


Sibley 8
Marshall 0

Dodge County 3
St Francis 1

Interesting scores from the opening round of the Geyer tourney in St. Cloud:

Black Division:
Minnetonka-4
STMA-1

Mpls Storm-5
Hermantown-4

Blue Division:
St. Cloud-2
Rogers-0

Burnsville-5
Hopkins-3

Red Division
Andover-8
Sartell-2

Farmington-6
Bemidji-0

Champlin Park - 11
Albert Lea - 0

Champlin Park - 7
Rochester Gold - 0

Champlin Park - 1
Centennial - 4

Championship Group

Rochester Red (1) vs. Champlin Park (wild card)
Centennial (2) vs. Jefferson (3)