HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:12 pm**

Question....what happens to the "top level 9 year old" with parents that can't afford to pay summer team tuition, hotel and food for 7 days and travel expense?

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:21 pm**

Also of note - Check with ANY successful high level hockey player (HS, COLLEGE, JUNIORS, NHL etc, etc. . .) and ask any one of them if they were one of the best players in their league, team or association from the time they were a squirt all the way up to age 15 when they go beyond bantam age and you'll soon find out that almost all of them were one of the best players at each level. The number of players that "blossomed" later is definitely in the minority. Just refer to the last NHL draft and look at the highlight clips they ran of each draftees from the first round while they were on their way up to the stage. Most if not all those clips were of when they were 9, 10, 11 or 12 years old dominating a bunch of ankle skaters! That's what kills me about all this "wait till they hit Select 14s and 15s, blah, blah, blah . . . fact is that if the kids are at the top now, they have a MUCH better chance of being one of the top players when they do hit the Select 14s and 15s. Sure kids drop down or drop out all together but I just love it how people always seem to talk about "the kid that was a B level player" his whole life and then made it big! Everyone loves an underdog and I guess that's why it's always talked about though.

This is why USA hockey is pushing ADM which is an extension of LTAD. Plenty has been written about those who achieve early have an advantage due to better coaching a better opportunities along the way. A lot of that advantage comes from relative age. You are literally shrinking the pool of potential standouts by having late developers give up too soon. No doubt that the chances of that a current top level player was very good when they were young is very high, however, the thinking is that it is skewed to greater than it should be. Several Soviet era studies show that late bloomers can be better in the long run if given the chance. I know that if you look at a lot of the top AAA teams, the teams are dominated by early in the birth year kids.

IN other parts of the country, where the financial investment is much larger than here, many kids do drop out if there is not early signs of "greatness". I probably would not have my kids playing now if we had to pay $10K+ a year to play the game. Therefore, the late bloomer does not get the chance to get better and catch up if the plug gets pulled early.

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:37 pm**

Pylon, the Sask Jr Pats Team is a 2 tournament team, the Subway and the Brick. It is comprised of kids from different programs thru out Saskatchewan. there will not be an "02 Jr Pats team until next year. [/quote]

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:35 pm**

mackjogger wrote:Question....what happens to the "top level 9 year old" with parents that can't afford to pay summer team tuition, hotel and food for 7 days and travel expense?

They don't go.

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2011 6:40 pm**

sorno82 wrote:IN other parts of the country, where the financial investment is much larger than here, many kids do drop out if there is not early signs of "greatness". I probably would not have my kids playing now if we had to pay $10K+ a year to play the game. Therefore, the late bloomer does not get the chance to get better and catch up if the plug gets pulled early.

That may be true. I also see a reverse phenomenon here because so few kids play that it doesn't take a lot to be the best or one of the top in your program. Parents get real excited, which probably wouldn't happen for these same kids when you could easily find a few handfuls that are much better.

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:18 pm**

JSR wrote:
MrBoDangles wrote: Also of note - Check with ANY successful high level hockey player (HS, COLLEGE, JUNIORS, NHL etc, etc. . .) and ask any one of them if they were one of the best players in their league, team or association from the time they were a squirt all the way up to age 15 when they go beyond bantam age and you'll soon find out that almost all of them were one of the best players at each level. The number of players that "blossomed" later is definitely in the minority. Just refer to the last NHL draft and look at the highlight clips they ran of each draftees from the first round while they were on their way up to the stage. Most if not all those clips were of when they were 9, 10, 11 or 12 years old dominating a bunch of ankle skaters! That's what kills me about all this "wait till they hit Select 14s and 15s, blah, blah, blah . . . fact is that if the kids are at the top now, they have a MUCH better chance of being one of the top players when they do hit the Select 14s and 15s. Sure kids drop down or drop out all together but I just love it how people always seem to talk about "the kid that was a B level player" his whole life and then made it big! Everyone loves an underdog and I guess that's why it's always talked about though.
It's more of a who will be 6'0" to 6'5" and can skate than who was dominant in squirts.. Every kid has some highlight tapes that mommy took back in the day.

99% of kids will "drop down"

Rau is one that breaks out of this mold

If you are talking NHL in regards to your comment about being 6' to 6'5" then I might agree agree. If you are talking High School, Juniors or college then I completely disagree. The AVERAGE height of a Division 1 college hockey player (based on 2009 data, so pretty recent) was 71.9 inches, in other words just under 6 feet tall and in fact there were 31 teams who's average height was under 6 feet tall, meaning only 27 teams had averages of 6 feet tall or taller and the tallest was right around 6'1" and their stats were a bit skewed by two players, take those two players out and that team was averaging under 6 feet tall. So apparently there are quite alot, in fact MORE than HALF of D1 college players under 6 feet tall to get those numbers. So it seems you can be 5'10" and be just fine, in fact you would probably represent close to a majority at that height. Now if D1 college is averaging under 6 feet tall, and they basically represent the best amateur hockey out there, then to think the best high school players are averaging over that is ridiculous and also I doubt the NAHL or USHL are averaging more than that either. As for your assumption that 99% of players "drop down", where do you get that stat and from where are they dropping? What ranking service is rating squirt players (and doing it so well they know them all?)? I am not aware of it myself. I was sort of under the impression that for the most part (exceptions to every rule) kids don't start getting rated/ranked until around freshman year of high school (whether that be bantams or high school or AAA hockey). And it has been my observation that the best kids in freshman year are usually the best kids senior year, again the majority of the time and noting here are exceptions to every rule. And again it's been my observation that those kids were usually amongst the best players as squirts. Perhaps 99% of kids are not "dropping down" but rather a good majority of kids are incorrectly looked upon as special at a young age because alot of times they really have no real comparison for making that assumption outside of their own association, when in relaity they are still about as good, relative to others, as they always were they are just now part of a much bigger pond from which to assertain their skills..... just a thought.[/quote]
JSR, RMWCHOCKEY brought up the NHL........

More than 99% of Mn players drop off before the NHL.

I quoted RMWCHOCKEY when he said "drop down".

A 6'4" goon that is a decent skater is more likely to make the NHL than a 5' 10" guy that had a good to great D-1 career. What percentage of NHL players are 5'10" and under? It's just the facts......

RMWCHOCKEY commented about the NHL and the draft and I commented on that. Try to read through next time so that you don't sound "ridiculous".

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 8:01 am**

Since this thread has morphed into a thread about physical size, don't let anybody tell your son he has to be a giant to make it to the next level to play up front, i.e. college. For the 2010-11 season, there were 892 players listed as forward or center. Of those 892, 471 were listed as being 5-11 or shorter (53%) and 303 were listed as being 5-10 or shorter (34%). A lot of times, especially at youth tournaments, you will hear poeple rave about a kid's size. If he is a forward, has the ability, determination and drive to put in the work, he doesn't have to massive to play at the next level.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 8:58 am**

South Sask Hockey wrote:Pylon, the Sask Jr Pats Team is a 2 tournament team, the Subway and the Brick. It is comprised of kids from different programs thru out Saskatchewan. there will not be an "02 Jr Pats team until next year.

[/quote]

Thanks South Sask. I don't think there are any teams that run full time with the exception of the Blades, Bulldogs and Pro Hockey.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 9:17 am**

Pylon wrote:Thanks South Sask. I don't think there are any teams that run full time with the exception of the Blades, Bulldogs and Pro Hockey.

Blades and Bulldogs are not full time. Don't know about Pro Hockey.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:01 am**

HockeyDad41 wrote:Lord Baltimore

If I'm not mistaken, 02 teams have been together for what...about 10 or 12 weeks total? Taking into consideration most 02 teams are new this year and most teams are on some sort of mid summer break now. Cohesion is something that develops over long periods of time so I'm fairly certain there isn't any panic about cohesion just yet. Are there reported coaching changes already for the 02 Blades?
The core of the Canadian teams will have been together for 2 seasons prior to entering the Brick.

The Bulldogs will be together for the full spring. Why are you saying the Blades will not be? With the exception of a few possible imports. What Canadian teams are you referring too then?

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:03 am**

O-townClown wrote:
mackjogger wrote:Question....what happens to the "top level 9 year old" with parents that can't afford to pay summer team tuition, hotel and food for 7 days and travel expense?
They don't go.

So are you really getting the best MN has to offer if a bunch of top level players choose not to go and then another group of top level players cant afford to go?

good chance the 15 best MN 10 year olds were tubeing, fishing, swimming in a lake over the July 4th holdiay, no?

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:15 am**

mackjogger wrote:
O-townClown wrote:
mackjogger wrote:Question....what happens to the "top level 9 year old" with parents that can't afford to pay summer team tuition, hotel and food for 7 days and travel expense?
They don't go.
So are you really getting the best MN has to offer if a bunch of top level players choose not to go and then another group of top level players cant afford to go?

good chance the 15 best MN 10 year olds were tubeing, fishing, swimming in a lake over the July 4th holdiay, no?

I hope going forward the Minnesota team can manage more than fighting for last place. Sadly I suspect it will only get worse.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:18 am**

Confusion.

You said "full time" which to several people would mean together 12 months of the year.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:20 am**

Pylon wrote:
HockeyDad41 wrote:Lord Baltimore

If I'm not mistaken, 02 teams have been together for what...about 10 or 12 weeks total? Taking into consideration most 02 teams are new this year and most teams are on some sort of mid summer break now. Cohesion is something that develops over long periods of time so I'm fairly certain there isn't any panic about cohesion just yet. Are there reported coaching changes already for the 02 Blades?
The core of the Canadian teams will have been together for 2 seasons prior to entering the Brick.
The Bulldogs will be together for the full spring. Why are you saying the Blades will not be? With the exception of a few possible imports. What Canadian teams are you referring too then?

Sorry - I think we are coming from two different directions on this. I think I may be defining full time a bit differently than you are. No worries.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:34 am**

HockeyDad41 wrote:
mackjogger wrote:
O-townClown wrote: They don't go.
So are you really getting the best MN has to offer if a bunch of top level players choose not to go and then another group of top level players cant afford to go?

good chance the 15 best MN 10 year olds were tubeing, fishing, swimming in a lake over the July 4th holdiay, no?
I hope going forward the Minnesota team can manage more than fighting for last place. Sadly I suspect it will only get worse.

Are the 02's or even 03's that weak? can you really tell this early? is that team already together and practicing?

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:44 am**

mackjogger wrote:
HockeyDad41 wrote:
mackjogger wrote: So are you really getting the best MN has to offer if a bunch of top level players choose not to go and then another group of top level players cant afford to go?

good chance the 15 best MN 10 year olds were tubeing, fishing, swimming in a lake over the July 4th holdiay, no?
I hope going forward the Minnesota team can manage more than fighting for last place. Sadly I suspect it will only get worse.
Are the 02's or even 03's that weak? can you really tell this early? is that team already together and practicing?

I don't think the Blades are getting the majority of Minnesota's top kids any more. The Miracle Gold and Easton Synergy programs will reduce the pool of top talent even more.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:53 am**

HockeyDad41 wrote:
mackjogger wrote:
HockeyDad41 wrote:
I hope going forward the Minnesota team can manage more than fighting for last place. Sadly I suspect it will only get worse.
Are the 02's or even 03's that weak? can you really tell this early? is that team already together and practicing?
I don't think the Blades are getting the majority of Minnesota's top kids any more. The Miracle Gold and Easton Synergy programs will reduce the pool of top talent even more.

If you look at some of the other teams from the states.....they are pulling kids from a region (3 or 4 different states). Pretty hard to match up if your not even getting the best "the state of hockey" has to offer. Seems the top Canadian teams are reaching pretty far as well.

Whats the solution?

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:08 am**

mackjogger wrote:If you look at some of the other teams from the states.....they are pulling kids from a region (3 or 4 different states). Pretty hard to match up if your not even getting the best "the state of hockey" has to offer. Seems the top Canadian teams are reaching pretty far as well.

Whats the solution?

I believe you wouldn't have to reach much further than 7300 Bush Lake Road to win the Brick.

As long as the Brick people don't care that our teams are not competitive enough to break out of the cellar, absolutely nothing of significance will change.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:24 am**

HockeyDad41 wrote:
mackjogger wrote:If you look at some of the other teams from the states.....they are pulling kids from a region (3 or 4 different states). Pretty hard to match up if your not even getting the best "the state of hockey" has to offer. Seems the top Canadian teams are reaching pretty far as well.

Whats the solution?
I believe you wouldn't have to reach much further than 7300 Bush Lake Road to win the Brick.

As long as the Brick people don't care that our teams are not competitive enough to break out of the cellar, absolutely nothing of significance will change.

That statement should start a riot shortly!

Thats fine, but how do you get the made/synergy kids to sign up for "brick team" only. Cant there be a 1 summer release then kid goes back to orig org? just a thought

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:32 am**

Only if Bernie has the Brick free pass, Because it's always ok if you skate with the Machine but not the other way around, Only he knows how to develpoe players. Remember hockey players are not born he make them.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:56 am**

mackjogger wrote:
HockeyDad41 wrote:
mackjogger wrote: So are you really getting the best MN has to offer if a bunch of top level players choose not to go and then another group of top level players cant afford to go?

good chance the 15 best MN 10 year olds were tubeing, fishing, swimming in a lake over the July 4th holdiay, no?
I hope going forward the Minnesota team can manage more than fighting for last place. Sadly I suspect it will only get worse.
Are the 02's or even 03's that weak? can you really tell this early? is that team already together and practicing?

The 02 Blades went winless in Winnipeg this past June.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:07 pm**

mackjogger wrote:That statement should start a riot shortly!

Thats fine, but how do you get the made/synergy kids to sign up for "brick team" only. Cant there be a 1 summer release then kid goes back to orig org? just a thought

I believe that was the intention this year. The Brick team was supposed to skate for a set time prior to the tournament and after everyone goes back to their original teams after.

I suspect the 01 Machine kids parents who may have had an interest in this tournament decided that long term it was a better choice to stay with their team. Given the results of this year's Brick team, I would bet it will be an even easier decision for the 02 Machine parents next year.

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:09 pm**

mackjogger wrote:So are you really getting the best MN has to offer if a bunch of top level players choose not to go and then another group of top level players cant afford to go?

Mack, the affordability issue is the same for almost every team, no?

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 1:17 pm**

Blades earned the invitation, let them do as they wish. What would it take to get a 2nd Minnesota charter?

Posted: **Wed Jul 13, 2011 1:23 pm**

HockeyDad41 wrote:
mackjogger wrote:That statement should start a riot shortly!

Thats fine, but how do you get the made/synergy kids to sign up for "brick team" only. Cant there be a 1 summer release then kid goes back to orig org? just a thought
I believe that was the intention this year. The Brick team was supposed to skate for a set time prior to the tournament and after everyone goes back to their original teams after.

I suspect the 01 Machine kids parents who may have had an interest in this tournament decided that long term it was a better choice to stay with their team. Given the results of this year's Brick team, I would bet it will be an even easier decision for the 02 Machine parents next year.

Here ya go again pickin on the fat kid... Cmon HD the Machine wouldn't have won the brick either. If you look at the scores the Blades competed against the best of the best. If they were going up and getting blown out I think you could spout you made balogna but the fact remains that the only two AAA programs in MN are the Blades and Machine. If you go any deeper than that you are kidding yourself. So when your precious kid makes a machine B squad and you come on the forum and start downgrading what another legitimate AAA team does you sound like the nutbag you were when you first came on this board. You don't see Me the so called Bernie hater breaking down one or two tourneys and blasting the machine for losing or winning a couple of games. I thought that you were turning the corner on talking a half bit intelligent but your true colors are showing through...

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Brick Schedule for the Blades

BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK

Re: BRICK