Adv 17 tryout results

rudy · Post by **rudy** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:01 pm

Let's try this: separate topics for Adv. 15, 16 and 17 rosters.

Here is section 2

F - Bianchi
F - Nanne
F - CJ Smith
F - Hernon
F - Meador
F - Fellner
F - Willson
F - Tapani
F - Hunter Anderson
F - Walsh
F - Colford
F - Hunt
D - Mork
D - Janco
D - Baker
D - Nelson
D - Bigaouette
D - Mostrom
G - Miller
G - Nichols

Alternates - Zins, Doerring, Weiss, Kenney

observer · Post by **observer** » Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:07 am

A few more of the 17 teams (94s) are now posted on the Hub.

http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/page/show/31 ... -17s-2011-

rudy · Post by **rudy** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:53 am

They seem to be slow in coming. Anyone have any of the rest?

woodley · Post by **woodley** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:31 pm

All the 16s and 17s are posted on Hockey Hub

rudy · Post by **rudy** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 7:20 am

Any surprises -- those who are there or those who aren't?

observer · Post by **observer** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:53 am

3 solid 94s from Hill Murray but no Zach Lavalle on the Section 4 team. Injured, spring break, ACT?

http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/page/show/31 ... ason=43881

The Best in the Bizz3 · Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:03 pm

observer wrote:3 solid 94s from Hill Murray but no Zach Lavalle on the Section 4 team. Injured, spring break, ACT?

http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/page/show/31 ... ason=43881

Did not make the team

observer · Post by **observer** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:31 pm

That seems a little wierd. I'd rank him ahead of the three that did. Got any dirt? Behavior? Yelled at the Coach or something? There must be more to the story than your simple explanation.

The Best in the Bizz3 · Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:52 pm

observer wrote:That seems a little wierd. I'd rank him ahead of the three that did. Got any dirt? Behavior? Yelled at the Coach or something? There must be more to the story than your simple explanation.

I have heard this from players who tried out for the section team. Not only does he belong in that group, but the Final 54 and possibly the National Team. There are several explanations to why he didn't make it.

1) He wanted the ice but was unable to attend this weekend

2) They wanted to give another kid a shot

3) He got hurt (doubtful)

4) He didn't bring his A game (also doubtful)

I'm assuming they wanted to give another kid a shot, but I guess we might eventually find out.

observer · Post by **observer** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:55 pm

Did not make the team

Suggests he tried out.

GreekChurch · Post by **GreekChurch** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 6:15 pm

I have to agree with Observer - that he should be there before the other 3 plus a few other. I heard he tried out, but got cut. To me there's got to be more to it, he has been there in the past, and to NY, not to mention a very visible season at Hill.

Oldtimehockeyguy23 · Post by **Oldtimehockeyguy23** » Sun Apr 10, 2011 9:48 am

the advanced program is becoming ridiculous if Lavalle actually tried out and didn't make it. Kid was a stud in the ELITE league this past fall... should have been on the national team. great character kid too.

12to14 · Post by **12to14** » Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:54 pm

Oldtimehockeyguy23 wrote:the advanced program is becoming ridiculous if Lavalle actually tried out and didn't make it. Kid was a stud in the ELITE league this past fall... should have been on the national team. great character kid too.

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you picked by how you try out and not by what you've done in prior years and during your school season??? I don't know who this Lavalle kid is but it's sounds to me he just didn't have a great try out. It's a good lesson to learn, you have to work hard if you want it.

CrashDaNET · Post by **CrashDaNET** » Sun Apr 10, 2011 10:15 pm

Oldtimehockeyguy23 wrote:the advanced program is becoming ridiculous if Lavalle actually tried out and didn't make it. Kid was a stud in the ELITE league this past fall... should have been on the national team. great character kid too.

Every year some (and it is not only one) kids left off the list. That is just the way it is. This is not the first time...nor is it the last time. Anyone that is missed can only move on and except it..Right or Wrong.

And yes...He is a good player

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 1:43 pm

What players stoodout?? I wasn't able to go to any. When do they pick the 54.

Jimbo99 · Post by **Jimbo99** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 2:08 pm

old goalie85 wrote:When do they pick the 54.

Two hours ago.

trev2k1 · Post by **trev2k1** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 2:31 pm

http://www.minnesotahockey.org/page/sho ... -16-and-17

final 54

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 3:20 pm

Shattuck has 4 kids, East 3, A couple w/2. Looks like it was pretty fair.

puckster15 · Post by **puckster15** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:04 pm

The great poliitical lovefest. 33 teams represented out of 54 spots. Maple Grove with 4 ties SSM with the most. Duluth East and BSM with 3 each. Stillwater sends a goalie who never played a game in the Advanced 17 weekend. Hill Murray sends one.

old goalie85 · Post by **old goalie85** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:28 pm

Don't forget FL w/one.[The kid never played summer hockey] So no politics w/ C.J.

cooper26 · Post by **cooper26** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:59 pm

puckster15 wrote:The great poliitical lovefest. 33 teams represented out of 54 spots. Maple Grove with 4 ties SSM with the most. Duluth East and BSM with 3 each. Stillwater sends a goalie who never played a game in the Advanced 17 weekend. Hill Murray sends one.

That's about the distribution I'd expect. Why do you think it should be different? And, I can't imagine too many people arguing about the goalie that didn't play - most would say he's easily top two if not the best picked. Do you really believe they should throw out everything that's known about a kid coming in??!!

rudy · Post by **rudy** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:00 pm

For those who attended, I'd be interested to hear from people about how teams performed in the Festival and how that squares with how many players those teams advanced.

Should the section teams' success even be a factor? Just cuz a team performs poorly in the W-L columns, that doesn't mean there aren't six or more worthy Final 54s on that roster, or should that tell evaluators something?

puckhead21 · Post by **puckhead21** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:04 pm

Forest Lake's CJ was All Conference in Football as running back AND All Conference in Hockey this year. He turned down Fall Elite 1 hockey to be a real multi-sport athlete. He is a rare bread now days. Just imagine how good he would be if he just focused on hockey 9 to 12 months a year. FYI, I'm not a relative or family friend of CJ, I just respect his athletic talent and balls to be a multi-sport athlete and not follow the desparate crowd.

cooper26 · Post by **cooper26** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:05 pm

rudy wrote:For those who attended, I'd be interested to hear from people about how teams performed in the Festival and how that squares with how many players those teams advanced.

Should the section teams' success even be a factor? Just cuz a team goes 0-3 doesnt mean there aren't six or more worthy Final 54s, or should that tell evaluators something?

I think it should probably be skewed slightly less than it is but the concept is good. They all know team success is important and play harder and smarter because of it.

Jimbo99 · Post by **Jimbo99** » Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:10 pm

puckhead21 wrote:Forest Lake's CJ was All Conference in Football as running back AND All Conference in Hockey this year. He turned down Fall Elite 1 hockey to be a real multi-sport athlete. He is a rare bread now days. Just imagine how good he would be if he just focused on hockey 9 to 12 months a year. FYI, I'm not a relative or family friend of CJ, I just respect his athletic talent and balls to be a multi-sport athlete and not follow the desparate crowd.

One successful multi-sport athlete (regardless of bread or breed) does not define everyone else as desperate (or desparate).

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Adv 17 tryout results

Adv 17 tryout results

Remaining rosters

17s

54

Re: 54