HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

rmmaiv123 wrote:

bafata88 wrote:

rmmaiv123 wrote:laker9, i agree with you on some of these things but i don't think a girl would not come because of her pool. Tomorrow are crossover games and all 4 games will be looked at by both D1 and D3 coaches.

If some girls in B pool really belong in A pool they will have their chance to prove that tomorrow.

Obviously one will need to wait to see how things work out; however, the A pool teams should be able to dominate these crossover games making it unlikely any stronger B pool player will be able to shine; one player rarely can make things happen without some help from linemates; if lines are overmatched, it will just likely be ugly hockey for one team. Bottom line, the players should have been treated equally across the board. But as we all know, life is not fair and Minnesota Hockey always has a way of annointing players from very early ages as the Advanced or Select in boys and girls and these lists typically do not change; and if a parent does not know how this game is played begining in squirts or u-10, their kid ends up behind and it aint easy to catch up. Once again, this Jr. Fest is just more of the same; cheesy.

The B pool teams were not blown out of the water.

Sky vs. Yellow 3-2 ;sky
Black vs. Green 5-0 ; black (more of a blow out)
Red vs. White 3-4; white- White being a pool B team

have they posted rosters yet

I thought there was a noticeable difference in the flow between the two pools. I am not convinced that this format led to better quality of games or looks by the coaches, but MGHCA has their reasons for wanting to do it this way. Glad the opportunity is there for the girls.

My daughter said the organizers told them that the D1 coaches requested this format.

Congrats to the B pool girls. It must have been awesome and rewarding for them to play such close games.

Like I said anything can happen. Motivation is HUGE!

Refreshing results which then bring into question the evaluation process and the A pool/B pool placement process; I would say these game results support the idea that there should not have been an effort to differentiate talent/skill levels by creating a group labeled "better." It is no secret that typically the same players get the best competitive opportunities over and over and over. Some certainly deserve these opportunities due to their commitment and hard work; but there are other just as deserving players that never get a sniff because they are not on "the" list. Trying to create A pool/B pool differences perpetuates this seeming unequal treatment.

I am truly not completely negative about this stuff. Jr. Fest is proving to be a wonderful opportunity for many girls to play hockey at a fun competitive level; more girls than in the past; that is good. I firmly believe it makes more sense if the team placements were made without trying to create these somewhat artificial differences.

And ultimately what matters is whether the players are having fun and what I've seen, it looks like they are having fun. Other than this question about the "pooling" great job putting on a fun event.

girlshockey wrote:Junior Fest is not a Minnesota Hockey event, it is a Minnesota Girls Hockey Coaches Association program and is run totally by the girls high school coaches. Place the blame on the high school coaches for the selection process, not Minnesota Hockey who is the governing body for amateur hockey.

Btw, when I referred to Minnesota Hockey, I was not meaning the organization, I am referring to hockey in Minnesota generally, run by the people who show up; sorry for the inartful rant.

The win of a 'B' pool team over an 'A' pool team only proves that anything can happen in hockey and that it is more than skill that influences who wins on the ice. It definitely reminiscent of the line in the movie Miracle -- I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right players.

There also is much more than team placement on Junior Fest that determines who is a D1 recruit. Girls that are potential D1 recruits are scouted over a period of many years and many games. If a player is on a D1 coaches list, pool placement would not deter them from scouting her. If a girl is not on the D1 coaches list already, it is not too likely that being on a team in the "A" pool will will all of a sudden turn them into a D1 recruit. Remember that they are recruiting girls from across the country, or potentially across the world. Having the two pool format does greatly increase the likelihood that the girls that are D1 recruits have a better opportunity to showcase their talents and improve their chances to have an opportunity to play D1. So instead of focusing on the one girl out of 30 that might have been incorrectly placed in the B pool, we should think about what is better for the 29 girls out of 30 that are D1 recruits and have been correctly placed in the A pool.

Further support for my original post; things are geared up primarily for the A pool players, players who typically have been pegged Advanced or potential DI recruit or A pool since the time they were u-12s. These players are placed on the competitive pedestal over and over and over through Advanced, Select, AAA, Minn Meltdown, International Cup, Two Nations, SSM Pinnacle, and on and on. Many good players do not get the development opportunities these players always get. Jr. Fest, in hindsight, seems like a nice opportunity to treat the players with some equality instead of labeling a very deserving group of players as "lesser" than players. How many times does a college coach need to see Rosie Alleva skate like the wind or Maggie Pendleton hammer a slap shot, against each other, to know how good they are. If the system is meant to highlight these girls over and over and over, then where is the opportunity for development and advancement for many other deserving hard working players?

bafata88 wrote:Further support for my original post; things are geared up primarily for the A pool players, players who typically have been pegged Advanced or potential DI recruit or A pool since the time they were u-12s. These players are placed on the competitive pedestal over and over and over through Advanced, Select, AAA, Minn Meltdown, International Cup, Two Nations, SSM Pinnacle, and on and on. Many good players do not get the development opportunities these players always get. Jr. Fest, in hindsight, seems like a nice opportunity to treat the players with some equality instead of labeling a very deserving group of players as "lesser" than players. How many times does a college coach need to see Rosie Alleva skate like the wind or Maggie Pendleton hammer a slap shot, against each other, to know how good they are. If the system is meant to highlight these girls over and over and over, then where is the opportunity for development and advancement for many other deserving hard working players?

Wow! Well said and How true! Sometimes you wonder are the others being invited just ot offset the cost.

How are others ofsetting cost - 31 D1 kids are chosen from HS and about 100 or so for D3.....there are 132 this week.....

The tryouts were split to try and get as many kids in as possible at a low cost - the kids in Phase 2 could be evaluated for the price of Phase II on the first day ($125 I think?) - that was 160 1992 kids. The Juniors who didn't particiapate in Phase didn't advance, were '91 or didn't try out due to spring break or other conflicts had a try out ($60 I think?).

Anyways I think lots of girls have played great hockey this week and had a chance to show their hockey skills. Diverse schools from very demanding Ivy and eastern D3 kids were great grades, test scores and some financial backing from parents will be required to the WCHA schools - I saw all but Ohio State? Someone said there would be 60 schools I counted at least 50 through mid -day Thursday.

Thanks for whoever put all the time in together to do this lots of hours of effort for the girls involved in the week.

Thunderbird77 wrote:The win of a 'B' pool team over an 'A' pool team only proves that anything can happen in hockey and that it is more than skill that influences who wins on the ice. It definitely reminiscent of the line in the movie Miracle -- I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right players.

There also is much more than team placement on Junior Fest that determines who is a D1 recruit. Girls that are potential D1 recruits are scouted over a period of many years and many games. If a player is on a D1 coaches list, pool placement would not deter them from scouting her. If a girl is not on the D1 coaches list already, it is not too likely that being on a team in the "A" pool will will all of a sudden turn them into a D1 recruit. Remember that they are recruiting girls from across the country, or potentially across the world. Having the two pool format does greatly increase the likelihood that the girls that are D1 recruits have a better opportunity to showcase their talents and improve their chances to have an opportunity to play D1. So instead of focusing on the one girl out of 30 that might have been incorrectly placed in the B pool, we should think about what is better for the 29 girls out of 30 that are D1 recruits and have been correctly placed in the A pool.

Love the Miracle quote. Well said!

Unfortunately, the try-out process does not evaluate how hard working a player is. if "hardworking" equals deserving, than the evaluation process does fall short. The try-out process does attempt to evaluate skill, speed and hockey sense.

I also know of no college coaches (at least for girls) that are attending U12 games to determine who they will be recruiting 6 years later. They do come to Minnesota High School games. They do monitor Minnesota High School stats.
D1 coaches also are not easily fooled. Girls that are promoted beyond their ability level are not generally recruited by D1 coaches. The coaches watch their recruits play -- in many games and many different settings. Of the three players on my daighter's U12 team whose fathers promoted them and insured they were on every Select team, one will play D1 next year, one may play D3 next year (not totally sure) and one quit the sport after her sophmore year and no one missed her.

For those who feel they were slighted and in answer to a question where do these other girls get the chance to be seen . The Answer is at SkillFest No tryoouts, no where to move on to. a single low fee that covers meals, housing and ice. lots of fun and above all the chance to interact with D-1 and D-3 coaches . age 9th grade 12th grade 3 days of a chance to be seen on and off the ice. www.minnesotacrunch for sign up sheet. (scroll across the top) college lectures, dryland all with the coaches. D-1 Level practices in the morning games at night. 218-259-2503 with questions August 2nd - 5th in Grand Rapids.

Thunderbird77 wrote:Unfortunately, the try-out process does not evaluate how hard working a player is. if "hardworking" equals deserving, than the evaluation process does fall short. The try-out process does attempt to evaluate skill, speed and hockey sense.

I also know of no college coaches (at least for girls) that are attending U12 games to determine who they will be recruiting 6 years later. They do come to Minnesota High School games. They do monitor Minnesota High School stats.
D1 coaches also are not easily fooled. Girls that are promoted beyond their ability level are not generally recruited by D1 coaches. The coaches watch their recruits play -- in many games and many different settings. Of the three players on my daighter's U12 team whose fathers promoted them and insured they were on every Select team, one will play D1 next year, one may play D3 next year (not totally sure) and one quit the sport after her sophmore year and no one missed her.

You are missing the point; or perhaps I am so unclear that my point makes no sense.

I am talking "opportunity" for development and competition [and yes, now to be seen by college coaches]. Most players will get better if they get to compete against better competition. My guess is you go back to look at IceCats or Blades or Whitecaps from u-12 or u-14 and here four or five years later, all of the same girls still play together now; they play with and against each other at every opportunity. And there are lots of deserving girls [and I am not just saying hardworking here; girls who are just as fast and strong and smart and whatever] that rarely if ever get those opportunities.

Goodness, I never suggested college coaches are scouting u-12s; I believe, from what I have seen for many years now, that some parents are better clued in how the game or system works and they've positioned their daughters with the top players at an early age; some parents do not know the system and their daughters [this is true in boys hockey as well] end up being behind and ultimately ignored by the decision makers at most every step of the way. I am quite confident there is little to distinguish many of the players in relation to speed, strength and rink sense except for the top top girls who are so obviously better players than everyone [i'm thinking like 15 maybe 20 players at any given birth year or grade level]; after that top group it is pretty much a crap shoot to distinguish talent levels. Except............., some girls get labeled as Advanced and other don't; and it seems to me that these labels stick.

Again, outside of those top top 15 players, you will never convince me that even the college opportunity, D1 and D3, is going to be based on very subjective criteria. Again, the subjective nature of the labeling goes back to when these players are pretty young.

Holy smokes, I've spent way too much time on this subject and I promise I will not post anything for a long long time.

And in the end, it is really fun to watch all these young women competing in this cool game. Next year's senior class will be pretty exciting.

bafata88 wrote:

Thunderbird77 wrote:Unfortunately, the try-out process does not evaluate how hard working a player is. if "hardworking" equals deserving, than the evaluation process does fall short. The try-out process does attempt to evaluate skill, speed and hockey sense.

I also know of no college coaches (at least for girls) that are attending U12 games to determine who they will be recruiting 6 years later. They do come to Minnesota High School games. They do monitor Minnesota High School stats.
D1 coaches also are not easily fooled. Girls that are promoted beyond their ability level are not generally recruited by D1 coaches. The coaches watch their recruits play -- in many games and many different settings. Of the three players on my daighter's U12 team whose fathers promoted them and insured they were on every Select team, one will play D1 next year, one may play D3 next year (not totally sure) and one quit the sport after her sophmore year and no one missed her.

You are missing the point; or perhaps I am so unclear that my point makes no sense.

I am talking "opportunity" for development and competition [and yes, now to be seen by college coaches]. Most players will get better if they get to compete against better competition. My guess is you go back to look at IceCats or Blades or Whitecaps from u-12 or u-14 and here four or five years later, all of the same girls still play together now; they play with and against each other at every opportunity. And there are lots of deserving girls [and I am not just saying hardworking here; girls who are just as fast and strong and smart and whatever] that rarely if ever get those opportunities.

Goodness, I never suggested college coaches are scouting u-12s; I believe, from what I have seen for many years now, that some parents are better clued in how the game or system works and they've positioned their daughters with the top players at an early age; some parents do not know the system and their daughters [this is true in boys hockey as well] end up being behind and ultimately ignored by the decision makers at most every step of the way. I am quite confident there is little to distinguish many of the players in relation to speed, strength and rink sense except for the top top girls who are so obviously better players than everyone [i'm thinking like 15 maybe 20 players at any given birth year or grade level]; after that top group it is pretty much a crap shoot to distinguish talent levels. Except............., some girls get labeled as Advanced and other don't; and it seems to me that these labels stick.

Again, outside of those top top 15 players, you will never convince me that even the college opportunity, D1 and D3, is going to be based on very subjective criteria. Again, the subjective nature of the labeling goes back to when these players are pretty young.

Holy smokes, I've spent way too much time on this subject and I promise I will not post anything for a long long time.

And in the end, it is really fun to watch all these young women competing in this cool game. Next year's senior class will be pretty exciting.

bafata88, do not apologize for your beliefs, I think you will find you are not alone in what you think and believe.

I have a question for anyone who may know the answer.

It seems that the MGHCA went to great lengths to make sure that none of the girls played on teams with HS teammates. It was even stated in the paperwork.

Why would it then be okay to have as many as 6 Jr White Caps playing on the same team, 3-4 Ice Cats, etc.....?

It would seem to be a similar if not greater advantage to play on a team with your elite teammates -vs- HS teammates if they were looking to cut the advantage.

Just wondering.....anyone?

Well I will take a stab at it, My guess is that contrary to what many may believe many of the Mghc's dont 1) know who plays on the ice cat or jr white caps etc. If you tried to separate every player that played on a AAA team together it would be near impossible. Especially at that level .2)The only identification on registration I would guess is what high school do you attend. Not what AAA team do you play for. seems logical to me anyway .

i agree it would be very hard to seperate girls on select teams. but i think that i should be taken into consideration, that would ultimately make the teams fair

I watched many games and rarely were these Jr White Caps or Ice Cats girls on the same lines. Coaches were told to switch lines every period and did so. Next you'll be saying these girls shouldn't even be invited. All games were back and forth hockey. Shots were pretty even in all games.

JR Whitecaps have had 0 practices and played only 4 games together 3 weeks ago. Just a great group of girls who play TEAM hockey. Not ME hockey.

Nobody was saying no fair when the St Croix Saints had 5 or 6 JR White Cap players in the 2 Nations league. At NDP there were 9 Stillwater girls on the same team and I'm pretty sure they only won one game.

All of these teams were great! When I looked at the rosters they all looked loaded. I strongly feel if they held this tounament again next week there would be a different result.

Hockey is a game of making the most of your chances. Example: B pool White over A pool Red. Let's not make excuses everytime there is a tournament/Tryout/Game. Does anyone really think the D1 and D3 coaches care who won these games. They're looking at these girls and seeing how they adjust to different situations. Not who wins!

All the girls played GREAT!

good point melvin. now that i look at it again teams no matter what pool seemed to have good girls on each team. it was a great tourney!

bafata88 wrote:
....... Most players will get better if they get to compete against better competition. .........some parents are better clued in how the game or system works and they've positioned their daughters with the top players at an early age; some parents do not know the system and their daughters [this is true in boys hockey as well] end up being behind and ultimately ignored by the decision makers at most every step of the way. I am quite confident there is little to distinguish many of the players in relation to speed, strength and rink sense except for the top top girls who are so obviously better players than everyone [i'm thinking like 15 maybe 20 players at any given birth year or grade level]; after that top group it is pretty much a crap shoot to distinguish talent levels. Except............., some girls get labeled as Advanced and other don't; and it seems to me that these labels stick.

This is absolutely true in my experience. From youth 'select' teams up through various HS-age AAA teams the rosters are loaded with coaches' kids and kids whose parents are in the know. But if a kid has been placed in the 'advanced' or 'elite' group only through the machinations of the adults in the shadows, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear--eventually the wheat will be separated from the chaff. (How's that for a double cliche' whammo??)

Well said, Bensonmum. You may have had to invent a new part of speech, but you've hit the nail on the head. The silk purses (D1 prospects) playing in Junior Fest were silk purses before it took place. They did not become silk purses because they got an early label or because their parents were in the know. Development is not as much as what team you are on as it is what you do with the ice time you have and what you put into it off-ice. Talent also helps, but it is not everything.

All of the girl's playing in Junior Fest were given a wonderful opportunity to play a sport they (hopefully) love. College coaches got the opportunity to get another look at the players they are already scouting. An "B" team got the opportunity to win against a team with arguably the most D1 talent on it. All in all, it was a great weekend. Hopefully, all of the participants will continue to play, either in college or as a life-long sport.

Bensonmum wrote:

bafata88 wrote:
....... Most players will get better if they get to compete against better competition. .........some parents are better clued in how the game or system works and they've positioned their daughters with the top players at an early age; some parents do not know the system and their daughters [this is true in boys hockey as well] end up being behind and ultimately ignored by the decision makers at most every step of the way. I am quite confident there is little to distinguish many of the players in relation to speed, strength and rink sense except for the top top girls who are so obviously better players than everyone [i'm thinking like 15 maybe 20 players at any given birth year or grade level]; after that top group it is pretty much a crap shoot to distinguish talent levels. Except............., some girls get labeled as Advanced and other don't; and it seems to me that these labels stick.

This is absolutely true in my experience. From youth 'select' teams up through various HS-age AAA teams the rosters are loaded with coaches' kids and kids whose parents are in the know. But if a kid has been placed in the 'advanced' or 'elite' group only through the machinations of the adults in the shadows, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear--eventually the wheat will be separated from the chaff. (How's that for a double cliche' whammo??)

Interesting comments by everyone. There was a study done related to this topic with soccer players. "The Relative Age Effect among Elite American Youth Soccer Players http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qs ... 5002583617.

The study found that elite players tend to be born early in the calendar year (i.e. are older) which follows another study that found that most professional hockey players in Canada were also born early in the calendar year. The study says that in development years age is a strong factor. As little as 6 months can make a difference in the early years. On top of this, the more developed older kids get put into elite programs at an early age and get better coaching and development because they play with better players. Therefore I think you can make a case that kids with more opportunities to play with the elite get better development regardless of how they got there. Yes the wheat will eventually separate from the chaff but at what point is the question. The Canadian study seems to indicate that advantages at a young age is a building block to greater advantages in later years. This may explain why in Girls Hockey you are seeing may of the same kids year after year.