HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Here's the 94 Minnesota USHL Central Scouting list. I organized it by position and by teams. This is in no ranking order. The complete list can be found at USHL website.

Are there players missing? Are there players on the list that shouldn't be on the list?

Please, don't criticize me on the list. I just posted it, I didn't create it.


Forwards

Dickison Lucas Andover U 14 F
Michaelson AJ Apple Valley Prep F
Anderson Hunter Burnsville U 14 F
Peterson Evan Benilde St Margarets Prep F
Doerring Zack Blake Prep F
Smith CJ Bloomington Jefferson U 14 F
Steman Dylan Buffalo U 14 F
Barnes Tanner Burnsville U 14 F
Bohn Nick Burnsville U 14 F
Colford Matt Champlin Park U 14 F
Kelly Connor Chaska U 14 F
Eklund Kent Chaska U 14 F
Holappa Steve Duluth East U 14 F
Toninado Dominic Duluth East U 14 F
Bell Dan Eagan U 14 F
Buckingham Jimmy Eagan U 14 F
Kuchera Nick Eagan U 14 F
Merchant Will Eagan U 14 F
Kaske David Edina U 14 F
Nanne Louie Edina U 14 F
Faust Andy Hill Murray Prep F
Lavalle Zach Hill Murray Prep F
Splichal George Hill Murray Prep F
Meador Trevor Holy Angels Prep F
Arentz Nate Lakeville North Prep F
Winiecki Blake Lakeville North U 14 F
Osterberg Kyle Lakeville South U 14 F
Mason Alex Maple Grove U 14 F
Paulson Tony Maple Grove U 14 F
Coatta Max Minnetonka U 14 F
Torrel Gage Monticello Prep F
Brenk Eric Moorhead U 14 F
Beckers Cody Northfield Prep F
Oborsky Jacob Red Wing Prep F
Dewitz Justin Rochester U 14 F
Farrell Landon Rochester U 14 F
Vesel Tyler Rochester U 14 F
Broten Chase Roseau U 14 F
Hughes Michael Roseville U 14 F
Montgomery Jake Shattuck St. Marys U 14 F
Jancze Jordan Shattuck St. Marys U 14 F
Commers Andrew St. Thomas Academy Prep F
Johnson Alex Stillwater U 14 F
Horton Jake Tartan U 14 F
Besse Grant Wayzata U 14 F
McFadden Patrick West St Paul U 14 F
Guenztel Jake Woodbury U 14 F
Halbert Easton Woodbury U 14 F


Defense

Manthey Kristian Anoka U 14 D
Horton Jake Benilde St Margarets Prep D
Anderson Hunter Burnsville U 14 RD
Anderson Austen Brainerd U 14 D
Mork Franke Chaska U 14 LD
Moore Meirs Duluth U 14 D
Kuchera Derick Eagan U 14 D
Peterson Will Eagan U 14 D
Bakke Nick Edina U 14 D
Herlofsky Andrew Hill Murray Prep D
Johnson Jonah Hill Murray Prep D
Skjei Brady Lakeville North Prep D
Freemark Joe Lakeville South U 14 D
Stumpf Matt Little Falls U 14 D
Freberg Jordan Maple Grove U 14 D
Johnson Stevie Minnetonka U 14 D
Mostrom Sean Providence Prep D
Kautz Brandon Rochester U 14 D
Bretzman Tony Sibley U 14 D
Pilot Matt South St Paul Prep LD
Click Rob Stillwater U 14 RD
Halverson Matt Wayzata U 14 D
Carney Lance White Bear Lake U 14 RD

Goalies

Olson Collin Apple Valley U 14 G
Koop Kyle Champlin Park U 14 G
Beaupre Conor Edina U 14 G
Franke Anders Elk River Prep G
West Ian Highland U 14 G
Kautz Brock Rochester U 14 G

Looks pretty solid CBOO only 2 quest.
1.how does a kid make the list that didnt play this year( quit on his team. )
2.are there any 94s up north that should be on the list i only see 3 ?

List is pretty good. I do see a few that shouldn't be on here but I will not name names. I wouldn't put to much weight on a list of 94's. There will be lots of changes in the next few years.

This list has around 77 kids 25+or- Mn High School kids were drafted last year in the 2008 Ushl draft. None in the first round check the list and you will see that to get to the 25 Mn total most were selected between the 10th to the 18th rounds. That equates to about 2 Mn per team drafted for 2008. Now you need to make it to the roster..

5thgraders wrote:This list has around 77 kids 25+or- Mn High School kids were drafted last year in the 2008 Ushl draft. None in the first round check the list and you will see that to get to the 25 Mn total most were selected between the 10th to the 18th rounds. That equates to about 2 Mn per team drafted for 2008. Now you need to make it to the roster..

Isn't part of being drafted or not drafted the odds you will even go vs staying in High School? I don't know. If they are drafted does that team retain rights all the way through high school??

who makes this list?

Everyone likes lists, but I think Central Scouting does themselves a disservice by putting out a list of second year bantams when they obviously haven't done the work themselves. Sixty percent of this list is accurate and could be put together, by any one of us, just how it is (by walking into any arena and asking the couple of self-proclaimed team experts hanging around the glass who the horses are). The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends.

As has been stated here already, there are more than a few missing. Expect many changes to this list over the next few years. Better to be last on the list than first.

Jimbo99 wrote:Everyone likes lists, but I think Central Scouting does themselves a disservice by putting out a list of second year bantams when they obviously haven't done the work themselves. Sixty percent of this list is accurate and could be put together, by any one of us, just how it is (by walking into any arena and asking the couple of self-proclaimed team experts hanging around the glass who the horses are). The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends.

As has been stated here already, there are more than a few missing. Expect many changes to this list over the next few years. Better to be last on the list than first.

Where's the evidence of that?

Of course, there are a few missing....but this will evolve as ALL scouting lists do. This is something to start from and then it gets fleshed out over time, some added and some dropped.

People ought not be surprised that lists get put together of 2nd year Bantams, in Canada they start even sooner.

muckandgrind wrote:

Jimbo99 wrote:Everyone likes lists, but I think Central Scouting does themselves a disservice by putting out a list of second year bantams when they obviously haven't done the work themselves. Sixty percent of this list is accurate and could be put together, by any one of us, just how it is (by walking into any arena and asking the couple of self-proclaimed team experts hanging around the glass who the horses are). The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends.

As has been stated here already, there are more than a few missing. Expect many changes to this list over the next few years. Better to be last on the list than first.

Where's the evidence of that?

Of course, there are a few missing....but this will evolve as ALL scouting lists do. This is something to start from and then it gets fleshed out over time, some added and some dropped.

People ought not be surprised that lists get put together of 2nd year Bantams, in Canada they start even sooner.

The evidence is in knowing a lot of the kids on the lists for 92, 93, & 94. Anyone is free to make their own observations. I've made mine. And I've got no problems with lists of '94s. I just think Central Scouting should put more effort into ensuring more accuracy than is evident here. This list strikes me as no more special than many of the "best of" lists posted on this board. It's fun. It's interesting. But that's about it.

I know people have already said this, but there are quite a few names that are on there that shouldn't be. Otherwise, all the top players who should be on there, are.

Jimbo99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

Jimbo99 wrote:Everyone likes lists, but I think Central Scouting does themselves a disservice by putting out a list of second year bantams when they obviously haven't done the work themselves. Sixty percent of this list is accurate and could be put together, by any one of us, just how it is (by walking into any arena and asking the couple of self-proclaimed team experts hanging around the glass who the horses are). The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends.

As has been stated here already, there are more than a few missing. Expect many changes to this list over the next few years. Better to be last on the list than first.

Where's the evidence of that?

Of course, there are a few missing....but this will evolve as ALL scouting lists do. This is something to start from and then it gets fleshed out over time, some added and some dropped.

People ought not be surprised that lists get put together of 2nd year Bantams, in Canada they start even sooner.

The evidence is in knowing a lot of the kids on the lists for 92, 93, & 94. Anyone is free to make their own observations. I've made mine. And I've got no problems with lists of '94s. I just think Central Scouting should put more effort into ensuring more accuracy than is evident here. This list strikes me as no more special than many of the "best of" lists posted on this board. It's fun. It's interesting. But that's about it.

So this is your evidence that "The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends".

You may disagree with the list, just as you disagree with the CSS Mid-Term rankings for the NHL draft, but don't go throwing accusations like that around unless you have the facts to back that up.

Believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, have a lot of faith in Central Scounting who put effort into putting these scouting reports together and, believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, use these rankings as one of their references for further scouting those players. I know some of the people responsible for putting this list together and if you think they are just putting their kids and their friends kids on the list, than you are as clueless as you come off in your post. YOU may not like some of those players, but your opinions don't really matter when it comes to whom the USHL is scouting....as evidenced by the success the USHL has had in finding good players to grow their league in stature as the premier Tier-I junior league in the United States.

muckandgrind wrote:

Jimbo99 wrote:

muckandgrind wrote: Where's the evidence of that?

Of course, there are a few missing....but this will evolve as ALL scouting lists do. This is something to start from and then it gets fleshed out over time, some added and some dropped.

People ought not be surprised that lists get put together of 2nd year Bantams, in Canada they start even sooner.

The evidence is in knowing a lot of the kids on the lists for 92, 93, & 94. Anyone is free to make their own observations. I've made mine. And I've got no problems with lists of '94s. I just think Central Scouting should put more effort into ensuring more accuracy than is evident here. This list strikes me as no more special than many of the "best of" lists posted on this board. It's fun. It's interesting. But that's about it.

So this is your evidence that "The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends".

You may disagree with the list, just as you disagree with the CSS Mid-Term rankings for the NHL draft, but don't go throwing accusations like that around unless you have the facts to back that up.

Believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, put effort into putting these scouting reports together and, believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, use these rankings as one of their references for further scouting those players. I know some of the people responsible for putting this list together and if you think they are just putting their kids and their friends kids on the list, than you are as clueless as you come off in your post. YOU may not like some of those players, but your opinions don't really matter when it comes to whom the USHL is scouting.

I fully agree with what you are saying, but I still don't get what they see in second year Bantam B players and fourth line bantams

starmvp wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

Jimbo99 wrote: The evidence is in knowing a lot of the kids on the lists for 92, 93, & 94. Anyone is free to make their own observations. I've made mine. And I've got no problems with lists of '94s. I just think Central Scouting should put more effort into ensuring more accuracy than is evident here. This list strikes me as no more special than many of the "best of" lists posted on this board. It's fun. It's interesting. But that's about it.

So this is your evidence that "The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends".

You may disagree with the list, just as you disagree with the CSS Mid-Term rankings for the NHL draft, but don't go throwing accusations like that around unless you have the facts to back that up.

Believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, put effort into putting these scouting reports together and, believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, use these rankings as one of their references for further scouting those players. I know some of the people responsible for putting this list together and if you think they are just putting their kids and their friends kids on the list, than you are as clueless as you come off in your post. YOU may not like some of those players, but your opinions don't really matter when it comes to whom the USHL is scouting.

I fully agree with what you are saying, but I still don't get what they see in second year Bantam B players and fourth line bantams

Like who?

muckandgrind wrote:

starmvp wrote:

muckandgrind wrote: So this is your evidence that "The other 40% represent the expert's own kids and their friends".

You may disagree with the list, just as you disagree with the CSS Mid-Term rankings for the NHL draft, but don't go throwing accusations like that around unless you have the facts to back that up.

Believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, put effort into putting these scouting reports together and, believe it or not, the USHL DOES, in fact, use these rankings as one of their references for further scouting those players. I know some of the people responsible for putting this list together and if you think they are just putting their kids and their friends kids on the list, than you are as clueless as you come off in your post. YOU may not like some of those players, but your opinions don't really matter when it comes to whom the USHL is scouting.

I fully agree with what you are saying, but I still don't get what they see in second year Bantam B players and fourth line bantams

Like who?

Can't say names. I'll let you can figure it out.

I can endorse the accuracy of what starmvp is saying. Take some of the possible names, cross them with some B1 rosters and you'll see that he's right.

Amazing.

rudy wrote:I can endorse the accuracy of what starmvp is saying. Take some of the possible names, cross them with some B1 rosters and you'll see that he's right.

Amazing.

Depends on what B1 roster you are talking about. There are some B1 teams that will beat 80% of any "A" team in the state.

muckandgrind wrote:

rudy wrote:I can endorse the accuracy of what starmvp is saying. Take some of the possible names, cross them with some B1 rosters and you'll see that he's right.

Amazing.

Depends on what B1 roster you are talking about. There are some B1 teams that will beat 80% of any "A" team in the state.

If they are on the list, how could they not be playing A level hockey in their association?

MrBoDangles wrote:

muckandgrind wrote:

rudy wrote:I can endorse the accuracy of what starmvp is saying. Take some of the possible names, cross them with some B1 rosters and you'll see that he's right.

Amazing.

Depends on what B1 roster you are talking about. There are some B1 teams that will beat 80% of any "A" team in the state.

If they are on the list, how could they not be playing A level hockey in their association?

Again, this is a projection. But, theoretically, there are many "A" players in this state who wouldn't make Wayzata's "A" Bantam team. Conversely, not all associations even have "A" teams.....

I'm still looking for an example. I don't have access to all the rosters some of you do....if you don't want to name names, than PM me and I won't post it. But my guess is that if there ARE some B1 players on that list, they are most likely 1st year players playing on some in some of the larger associations.

Even still, I can give you examples of players who have played D1 or even in the NHL who never made a youth "A" team in Minnesota.

OK,

I'm still learning about hockey, as my hockey kids get older. So....can someone explain why this is a list of only 2nd year 1994 Bantams?

I personally saw a LOT of outstanding 1994 1st year Bantam A's this year, especially Edina, Eagan, Jefferson, Burnsville, Woodbury, Lakeville South, and Apple Valley. (Relax, my oldest kid is a 3rd line BB1, so I am not trying to HYPE my own son)

What is this list used for? Does the USHL draft off of this list, or is this a list of players the USHL is scouting that may someday end up on a draft list?

I read this forum to learn stuff, and to me - this is a very interesting topic.

Thanks all,

HH.

HudsonHawk wrote:OK,

I'm still learning about hockey, as my hockey kids get older. So....can someone explain why this is a list of only 2nd year 1994 Bantams?

I personally saw a LOT of outstanding 1994 1st year Bantam A's this year, especially Edina, Eagan, Jefferson, Burnsville, Woodbury, Lakeville South, and Apple Valley. (Relax, my oldest kid is a 3rd line BB1, so I am not trying to HYPE my own son)

What is this list used for? Does the USHL draft off of this list, or is this a list of players the USHL is scouting that may someday end up on a draft list?
I read this forum to learn stuff, and to me - this is a very interesting topic.

Thanks all,

HH.

There you go....it's a PRELIMINARY scouting list. USHL teams only use this as a guide, but still rely on their own scouts.

This is not just second year Bantams.

rudy wrote:I can endorse the accuracy of what starmvp is saying. Take some of the possible names, cross them with some B1 rosters and you'll see that he's right.

Amazing.

I don't want to spend 4hrs going through rosters- amaze us- The names are there so tell us who plays B-1.

This list looks like the checkbook hockey club.

Compare the nominees with the rosters of:

Minnesota Blades (Black)
Minnesota Blades (Grey)
Team Midwest
Easton Synergy

I believe most of these players have played in the Prospects Tourney in Toronto or NAPS in Rochester, NY. The USHL basically takes the rosters of the kids from the tourneys and puts them 'on the list'.

Some of these kids were nice squirts but are average bantam As. There are a lot of Bantam As, JV, or varsity players that could replace about 30% of this list. The other 70% is pretty sound.

conditioningsucks wrote:This list looks like the checkbook hockey club.

Compare the nominees with the rosters of:

Minnesota Blades (Black)
Minnesota Blades (Grey)
Team Midwest
Easton Synergy

I believe most of these players have played in the Prospects Tourney in Toronto or NAPS in Rochester, NY. The USHL basically takes the rosters of the kids from the tourneys and puts them 'on the list'.

Some of these kids were nice squirts but are average bantam As. There are a lot of Bantam As, JV, or varsity players that could replace about 30% of this list. The other 70% is pretty sound.

Exactly. I think 60/40 may be a little steep. There are some really good players on the list but you get to 20 or 25 percent of them, and they don't make sense. If they're going to go that deep into the rosters for some of these kids, then there's a whole bunch missing. It makes the entire list seem a lot less credible. I think that's the only point they're trying to make above. Many will drop off this list in the next few years. Many will be added.

Three names that I see missing from this "list"

Griffin Wangen goalie Albert Lea
Auston Larson D/F Albert Lea
Isaac Gorman F Austin