Page 1 of 4
Best Associations
Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:40 pm
by pioneer
An open question for all...
Which association does the best job of developing players - TOP TO BOTTOM (i.e., A level to C).
A secondary question - is it "important" to develop players after the A (or B1 ) level?
I would like to evaluate different (successful) association's development methods - in order to improve my own - and I think the best way to start is to determine who the best are and emulate their methods (no rocket science there). What metrics do you use to gauge an association' success?
For instance, we could look at state championships. But clearly, the larger associations have an advantage. So, how do you measure "success"? I, myself being an engineer, tend to lean heavily towards statistics. Statistically speaking, clearly the Edinas and Wayzatas of the world should be "successful" (at least at the 'A' level) by shear numbers alone. But me, I want to look at success as a relative value - as to how an association's teams perform relative to what they should be expected to perform to.
For example, obviously the Edina teams are "successful" - IF you measure success in wins and losses. But I'd argue that an association like Jefferson is far more successful in development if you consider relative success - i.e., their performance relative to expectations.
So - just to kick this off - who does everyone think are the top "developers" of youth hockey talent in MN?
Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:02 pm
by sorno82
Roseau and Moorhead.
Not the best success at the youth levels, though they sneak a championship in here and there-but lots of success in high school and beyond given their numbers.
Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:25 pm
by trippedovertheblueline
burnsville - keep good teams on the ice w/out the benefit of new housing to keep up their numbers.
edina - see burnsville, key here is the ones that grew up there move back and raise their own family, cycle repeats.
jefferson - see burnsville, but taking it one more step and reaching out recently to recruit players. As well some returning players now parents
these three suburb associations have stood the test of time, and overcame the lack of new housing.. all of which won titles in decades past, will still be powerhouses in 2010.
Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:38 pm
by LesHabs
If you are talking "top developers", then it is not even close:
ROSEAU
Population 2500, and they consistently crank out high-end players and teams.
Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:29 pm
by karl(east)
While Roseau is the pretty obvious answer to this question, I don't think you can easily replicate the hockey culture in that town.
I'll throw my biased opinion behind Duluth East--very consistent at every level, and doing it in a city that's shrunk over the past 30 years.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:55 am
by Air Force 1
Roseau and Grand Rapids, maybe Little Falls the last couple years.
I would not even consider a "power house" metro association, all they do is skim the cream off the top of 150 or so players at any level and only 18-20 players get any particular attention all the way through. In outstate programs, you may only have 20-30 players, or less at any level and have to develop ALL those players.
Very Nice Comments
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:11 am
by northwoods oldtimer
No Political Connections wrote:I think you also have to look at how many of your B level players are making it onto successful high school teams when those perennial A players from the squirt level on up are getting cut from that team.
Development is taking that relatively small herd of mites through the system and forming powerhouse high school teams with kids who might or might not go on. The northern teams do this. With those western suburbs teams it is a numbers game and being smart enough to skim off the top kids when they have risen to the top. That is not the sign of a good developmental hockey program, that is a sign of given a large enough number of anything and you can form what ever you want to form with it. You could even get a large enough group of monkeys, give them each a typewriter and given enough time and paper the law of averages says one of them will type a best selling novel. The trick is being good enough to teach a monkey to read, write and type so you don't need a whole bunch of monkeys to luck out and get a best selling author, you just need a few monkeys who want to learn and some good teachers.
You want to evaluate your program to make it a top developer? Do not listen to what that guy once said. Do not "Go West, Young Man". Go North, that is where the developers are. (Be sure to bring your coat though as it looks like winter has finally gotten here)
No P Connections thanks for the nice comments and a nod for the north kids. I tend to agree with you on this very much. Karl from the East is right but he best be very concerned about the District 11 policy of watered down B teams. This will hurt Duluth East a lot in the future if it continues. Roseau and Grand Rapids do a a very good job with getting a solid product out of small numbers, Roseau gets the edge with the community support that just transcends any other program in the state. Virginia and Hibbing do a very good job as well in development when it comes to small numbers.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:26 am
by nobama
I am new to all this outstate stuff.
I am sure that many have made it to the Big time ie NHL.
Who would they be in the last 20 years.
Goligoski and who else.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:36 am
by sorno82
I am sure that many have made it to the Big time ie NHL.
To name a few.
Langenbrunner
Cullen x2
Peluso
Lee
Blake
Niskanen
Fairchild
Neilson
bufglyuin (sp)
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:47 am
by PowerForward25
A few good metro associations are Edina, Minnetonka, and Woodbury.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:17 am
by PoniesDad45
delete
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:28 am
by nobama
Langenbrunner left high school hockey to play in Canada
Cullen X1 yes 7goals 8assist this year cullenX2 ?
Peluso yes very short lived
Blake yes 2goals with leafs this year long career winding down
Niskanen yes great player 1 goal 6 assist this year
Lee yes sent to the farm after 13 games
Neilson ???
Byfuglien born in MPLS WHL Brandon and Prince George
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:40 am
by yeahyeahyeah
I think the answer to what makes a good association is easy, you need passion for the game behind the leadership effort. Frustration and anger cannot be the reason people volunteer for leadership positions although it is usually what gets people involved.
The interesting thing to me is that you need "administrators" just as much as you need "Hockey People". Too often associations are bogged down when the balance falls too far one way or the other. Associations with too many "hockey guys" can experience a down turn in registrations and sometimes overall organization. Hockey people want to push the development envelope without thinking about the consequences. "Administrative types" bog down development because they are more concerned with feel good stuff.
Both sides need to uderstand the importance of the other.
I appreciate associations that draw a line between the two, each realizing the passion of the other. Associations that have Hockey advisory committees and Adminstrative committees seem to do well.
I envy the northern associations because passion is what fuels everyone's efforts. Community pride is a major factor. In the cities it seems most are more concerned about their individual kid that the team.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:41 am
by davinci
PoniesDad45 wrote:I'm going to throw in a plug for Stillwater. Our girls program is obviously tops and the future continues to look bright. Our boy's program has put a very good team on the ice this year and we also provide Hill Murray and St Thomas with key talent.
Yep, Ponies all the way
........
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:13 pm
by areaman
I'm think you need to put a big * in front of any discussion of the Edina Hockey Association and development.
First, I think all of the A team players from Squirt (really, some Mites too when I think about it) on up, play hockey year round. That's in addition to various breakfast clubs, 3 on 3 teams, one-time tourney teams, etc. These kids are being "developed" year-round, starting at age five. And most of that development has nothing to do with EHA.
Next, on to the B and C level players. Many of them skate year round, as well. Not on the Blades or Machine, but there are plenty of other teams to play for. And mom and pop will spend thousands of dollars a year, especially at the squirt and first year peewee level, trying to help their kid get into group 1 or 2 during the next round of try-outs.
So yes, Edina is a place to look when you talk about development. But I'm not sure it's a model that can/should be replicated elsewhere.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:28 pm
by InigoMontoya
DON'T PACK YOUR BAGS YET though, because of course nobody up here uses "move ins" so that option is out, you cities kids are stuck playing on your cities teams, sorry about that.
I've heard you might get offered a well-paying, cushy job at a window manufacturer if your kid can play.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:43 pm
by ontheglass
It seems a lot of people want to reference HS success as the measure of a programs ability to develop. It seems there are several private schools in the Metro area that find pretty decent talent. Holy Angels, Cretin, St. Thomas, etc. These schools have historically pulled their kids from the Woodbury, Richfield, Edina, Bloomington, Eagan, and other hockey associations. If you measure the success of a program based on retaining the kids they develop - then you could question their success. If you measure them based on an ability to develop quality HS players - I think there are plenty of associations in the metro area that could be considered successful.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:43 pm
by ontheglass
It seems a lot of people want to reference HS success as the measure of a programs ability to develop. It seems there are several private schools in the Metro area that find pretty decent talent. Holy Angels, Cretin, St. Thomas, etc. These schools have historically pulled their kids from the Woodbury, Richfield, Edina, Bloomington, Eagan, and other hockey associations. If you measure the success of a program based on retaining the kids they develop - then you could question their success. If you measure them based on an ability to develop quality HS players - I think there are plenty of associations in the metro area that could be considered successful.
Re: Best Associations
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:11 pm
by elliott70
[quote="pioneer"]An open question for all...
Which association does the best job of developing players - TOP TO BOTTOM (i.e., A level to C).
[quote]
Roseau is a very unique situation.
Out-state program to emulate would be Grand Rapids.
They have a few more numbers so it could be comparable to some metro area associations.
In the metro, Edina.
Roseau is tough to duplicate because as someone mentioned so much a part of the entire community.
IF, you could photocopy a program and community, this would be the best place to go.
But there are a lot of good programs...
don't reinvent the wheel, but you need to work with what you have.
Roseau has three things you need...
1) quality people that put time into making a good program (both on and off the ice)
2) plenty of available ice
3) they draw (for the most part) the best and most of the athletes to the sport (tradition)
If you find a way to do those 3 things, your program will have success.
But, if your kids are having fun, learning the game, and respecting the game and everything around it....
you have a successful program.
If you don't have that first the other three things don't really matter.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:39 pm
by nofinish
Roseau has three things you need...
1) quality people that put time into making a good program (both on and off the ice)
2) plenty of available ice
3) they draw (for the most part) the best and most of the athletes to the sport (tradition)
If you find a way to do those 3 things, your program will have success.
Keep in mind no. 2 on your list (available ice) in most cases requires money. Roseau and others may be the exception but around the metro the successful programs tend to be the ones where players have sufficient $$$.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:46 pm
by HockeyGuy81
Elliott, your response filled with far too much logic and reason for this forum.
Remember, the topic of this post is Best Associations which means like 99% of the topics on the youth hockey forum, this particular topic should be turned into a large metro association ripfest.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:59 pm
by elliott70
nofinish wrote:Roseau has three things you need...
1) quality people that put time into making a good program (both on and off the ice)
2) plenty of available ice
3) they draw (for the most part) the best and most of the athletes to the sport (tradition)
If you find a way to do those 3 things, your program will have success.
Keep in mind no. 2 on your list (available ice) in most cases requires money. Roseau and others may be the exception but around the metro the successful programs tend to be the ones where players have sufficient $$$.
Excellent point, so to accomplish some things when you don't have available ice (not there, can't afford it or whatever) is to look for alternatives.
Class rooms for hockey concepts and using video to teach (Kevin Hartzell is excellent at this).
Of course, using outdoor ice.
But also using outdoor parking lots for boot hockey.
Using a gym for hockey and team concept teaching.
I am sure everyone can throw something at this.
Was it the 1957 Thief River Falls team that skated on the Thief river all winter to work on their conditioning before going on to win state with like 9 players?
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:01 pm
by elliott70
HockeyGuy81 wrote:Elliott, your response filled with far too much logic and reason for this forum.
Remember, the topic of this post is Best Associations which means like 99% of the topics on the youth hockey forum, this particular topic should be turned into a large metro association ripfest.
The one bad thing here is people want to rip on others.
I hope no one thinks I was ripping on Edina (or large programs).
They produce quality players/teams. They perhaps have some advantages over the rest of us, but they get it done.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:05 pm
by elliott70
Sorry it was the 1956 Thief River Falls team.
1957 was another Falls team.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:10 pm
by sorno82
Langenbrunner left high school hockey to play in Canada
Cullen X1 yes 7goals 8assist this year cullenX2 ?
Peluso yes very short lived
Blake yes 2goals with leafs this year long career winding down
Niskanen yes great player 1 goal 6 assist this year
Lee yes sent to the farm after 13 games
Neilson ???
Byfuglien born in MPLS WHL Brandon and Prince George
Are you talking current NHL stars or guys who have played in the NHL in the past 20 years? Peluso has around 500 games, matt cullen 800, Mark Cullen around 30. Neilson played at GR and UofM as well as the wild. Few NHL stars, but that has a lot to do with genetics rather than hockey association. Langenbrunner and Byfuglien went through the local youth hockey associations before moving on, though I do remember watching Langenbrunner play in the state tourney as a Junior.
The problem with large associations is that the best coaches are usually with the best kids (early developers) since that is where their kids are. They do not have as much contact with the lower end player since of the sheer numbers, hence the lower end kid may never have the benefit of better coaching due to the numbers involved. In small, hockey tradition rich associations, the best coaches have direct access to the lower end kids since they may only be 30 to 40 kids at the level. The lower end kids will have a much better chance to develop into a top end teen or adult due to the exposure to better coaching and better quality ice time. Kids have less pressure to develop fast since they are not competing against 130 other kids, and can develop at their own pace.