Will your son leave HS early to play Jrs?
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 7:55 pm
How many of think that they would encourage their son to leave HS early to play Jr. Hockey? What will be the trend in the coming years?
The Largest Prep Hockey Message Board Community on the Web
https://www.ushsho.com/forums/
Couldn't disagree more. Typical canned answer to a very complicated question.Shinbone_News wrote:
Any parent who confesses to this juniors-before-graduation strategy is living out their fantasy through their kids.
I think you took that statement out of context. When you read everything he wrote in the context he wrote it I think he is agreeign with you. I think what he meant was anyone professing to know exactly what they'd do right now without even having a kid in that situation is living out a fantasy. I think he means there are alot of different answers and rights and wrongs out there but good parents cross that bridge whe they get to it and make an informed decision at that point, they don't adamantly say they definitely would do this or this without their kid even being there yet..... atleast I think that is what he meant and is how I read it.auld_skool wrote:Couldn't disagree more. Typical canned answer to a very complicated question.Shinbone_News wrote:
Any parent who confesses to this juniors-before-graduation strategy is living out their fantasy through their kids.
Just like there's no one right skate or stick there's no one right answer to this question.
Or a parent is looking at possible opportunities based on their kids interest and dedication toward the sport of hockey. My kid won't go anywhere unless my kid wants to go. Just as my kid will only get as good as he wants to get and only my kid can put in the time and dedication needed to reach is dreams. The only thing I can do is to help facilitate and support opportunities for him to reach his full potential, based on HIS interest and dedication. What part of that is me living a fantasy through my kid?Shinbone_News wrote:Depends on what his intentions and wishes are, duh!
Plenty of kids set their sights on making the HS varsity team, and if possible making it to state. And that's enough for them -- and they can play hockey the rest of their lives in any case.
If the kid has skills and passion to play at a higher level, we cross that bridge when we get to it.
Agree with JSR on this one. Any parent who confesses to this juniors-before-graduation strategy is living out their fantasy through their kids. In Minnesota, the question is probably relevant only to the Justin Klooses and Hudson Faschings of the world, exceptional players on mediocre teams with marginal chances of post-season success and exposure. One chooses to stay at home and carry his team to State, the other takes the bait for the NTDP. Both will play at a higher level than high school hockey, but for one of those guys there are 10 other skilled players who will be lucky to play D3 even if they play juniors after high school.
I guess my big question is: Why the rush? It's not like taking one extra year to finish high school is going to prevent that kid from getting his shot at the NHL, if he's a real contender. So many hockey dads are paranoid that some other kid is getting ahead somewhere.
No, I read what he wrote and I disagree with him. He's not saying anything I agree with.JSR wrote:I think you took that statement out of context. When you read everything he wrote in the context he wrote it I think he is agreeign with you. I think what he meant was anyone professing to know exactly what they'd do right now without even having a kid in that situation is living out a fantasy. I think he means there are alot of different answers and rights and wrongs out there but good parents cross that bridge whe they get to it and make an informed decision at that point, they don't adamantly say they definitely would do this or this without their kid even being there yet..... atleast I think that is what he meant and is how I read it.auld_skool wrote:Couldn't disagree more. Typical canned answer to a very complicated question.Shinbone_News wrote:
Any parent who confesses to this juniors-before-graduation strategy is living out their fantasy through their kids.
Just like there's no one right skate or stick there's no one right answer to this question.
This I agree with.Outoftowner wrote:
Or a parent is looking at possible opportunities based on their kids interest and dedication toward the sport of hockey. My kid won't go anywhere unless my kid wants to go. Just as my kid will only get as good as he wants to get and only my kid can put in the time and dedication needed to reach is dreams. The only thing I can do is to help facilitate and support opportunities for him to reach his full potential, based on HIS interest and dedication. What part of that is me living a fantasy through my kid?
I've had my shot; even won the big MN show. What I do know is the big show is a pipe dream for the majority of hockey players in MN today. Yet this pipe dream drives most of those players to share some kind of association/school loyalty that has them forgo better playing and development opportunities and stay with teams that will never make it due to their lack of depth and skill. You don't win the MN state tourney with one line of good forwards. You win it with top to bottom talent and a hot goaltender.
Better, higher skilled competition is what drives the majority of competitive players to get better. The odds are much better for the majority of players to reach their full potential if they find the highest competitive environment that will challenge their skills. This is irrefutable. The odd one man show superstar coming from nowhere is an anomaly and a poor example to give potentially great players reason to stay with their sucky high school team.
Not sure how you can disagree with the idea that players and parents should make up their own minds on what is best for them when and if they have that opportunity rather than speculating on something that has not and likely will not happen? That's the most reasonable and logical thing anyone can do in any situation I would think. Not sure how that is debateable?auld_skool wrote:This I agree with.Outoftowner wrote:
Or a parent is looking at possible opportunities based on their kids interest and dedication toward the sport of hockey. My kid won't go anywhere unless my kid wants to go. Just as my kid will only get as good as he wants to get and only my kid can put in the time and dedication needed to reach is dreams. The only thing I can do is to help facilitate and support opportunities for him to reach his full potential, based on HIS interest and dedication. What part of that is me living a fantasy through my kid?
I've had my shot; even won the big MN show. What I do know is the big show is a pipe dream for the majority of hockey players in MN today. Yet this pipe dream drives most of those players to share some kind of association/school loyalty that has them forgo better playing and development opportunities and stay with teams that will never make it due to their lack of depth and skill. You don't win the MN state tourney with one line of good forwards. You win it with top to bottom talent and a hot goaltender.
Better, higher skilled competition is what drives the majority of competitive players to get better. The odds are much better for the majority of players to reach their full potential if they find the highest competitive environment that will challenge their skills. This is irrefutable. The odd one man show superstar coming from nowhere is an anomaly and a poor example to give potentially great players reason to stay with their sucky high school team.
You got your shot and won the Big Show. Good for you. 20 kids per year get to do that, roughly 1000 kids have ever gotten to do that. But that doesn't keep 3000 from trying every year. Odds are overwhelmingly that most kids will never rise above their varsity HS teams, nor as you say even make "The Tourney." Odds are overwhelmingly that if they want to make that team badly enough, they will. All I'm saying is that this is a perfectly legitimate and noble and achievable goal for Minnesota youth hockey players, and fantisies about winning "the Big Show" are just that -- fantasies. And that's just fine. For many kids that play juniors, the dream of D1 or the NHL turns out to be a pipe-dream too.Outoftowner wrote:Or a parent is looking at possible opportunities based on their kids interest and dedication toward the sport of hockey. My kid won't go anywhere unless my kid wants to go. Just as my kid will only get as good as he wants to get and only my kid can put in the time and dedication needed to reach is dreams. The only thing I can do is to help facilitate and support opportunities for him to reach his full potential, based on HIS interest and dedication. What part of that is me living a fantasy through my kid?Shinbone_News wrote:Depends on what his intentions and wishes are, duh!
Plenty of kids set their sights on making the HS varsity team, and if possible making it to state. And that's enough for them -- and they can play hockey the rest of their lives in any case.
If the kid has skills and passion to play at a higher level, we cross that bridge when we get to it.
Agree with JSR on this one. Any parent who confesses to this juniors-before-graduation strategy is living out their fantasy through their kids. In Minnesota, the question is probably relevant only to the Justin Klooses and Hudson Faschings of the world, exceptional players on mediocre teams with marginal chances of post-season success and exposure. One chooses to stay at home and carry his team to State, the other takes the bait for the NTDP. Both will play at a higher level than high school hockey, but for one of those guys there are 10 other skilled players who will be lucky to play D3 even if they play juniors after high school.
I guess my big question is: Why the rush? It's not like taking one extra year to finish high school is going to prevent that kid from getting his shot at the NHL, if he's a real contender. So many hockey dads are paranoid that some other kid is getting ahead somewhere.
I've had my shot; even won the big MN show. What I do know is the big show is a pipe dream for the majority of hockey players in MN today. Yet this pipe dream drives most of those players to share some kind of association/school loyalty that has them forgo better playing and development opportunities and stay with teams that will never make it due to their lack of depth and skill. You don't win the MN state tourney with one line of good forwards. You win it with top to bottom talent and a hot goaltender.
Better, higher skilled competition is what drives the majority of competitive players to get better. The odds are much better for the majority of players to reach their full potential if they find the highest competitive environment that will challenge their skills. This is irrefutable. The odd one man show superstar coming from nowhere is an anomaly and a poor example to give potentially great players reason to stay with their sucky high school team.
Tell that to Backes, Jackman, Johnson, Kloos, Hanowski, Benike, et al.The odd one man show superstar coming from nowhere is an anomaly and a poor example to give potentially great players reason to stay with their sucky high school team.
I'll stick by what I said. "Just like there's no one right skate or stick there's no one right answer to this question."JSR wrote:
Not sure how you can disagree with the idea that players and parents should make up their own minds on what is best for them when and if they have that opportunity rather than speculating on something that has not and likely will not happen? That's the most reasonable and logical thing anyone can do in any situation I would think. Not sure how that is debateable?
Michaelson, Fasching, Osterberg, Skjei, Lucia, C.Olson, Reilly Brothers, Hunter Miska, Gage Asmus, Clint Lewis, Luke Voltin, derek Forbort, Justin Faulk, Matt Van Voorhis, Travis Boyd, Dan Carlson, Ian McCoshen, McQueen, Zach Stepan, Bennie Walker.25 sheet power wrote:Who are the big name kids who left early in the last five or six years? Seems the best minnesota kids, (nhl draft) are the ones who are staying.
I'm talking about having proved that the move worked out.D6Rocks wrote:Michaelson, Fasching, Osterberg, Skjei, Lucia, C.Olson, Reilly Brothers, Hunter Miska, Gage Asmus, Clint Lewis, Luke Voltin, derek Forbort, Justin Faulk, Matt Van Voorhis, Travis Boyd, Dan Carlson, Ian McCoshen, McQueen, Zach Stepan, Bennie Walker.25 sheet power wrote:Who are the big name kids who left early in the last five or six years? Seems the best minnesota kids, (nhl draft) are the ones who are staying.
McBain, Okposo, Erik Johnson, Mueller......
I am sure there are more. Just can't think of any more off the top of my head.
Which is what I said in the beginning. Our HS team will be horrible. If my kid is good enough to play juniors early and wants to go, I will help facilitate the opportunities. Still though it is not my fantasy, it is my kid's dream to be good. Which is what I was refuting from the beginning. If a kid has the potential and desire, I disagree with their parents keeping them on a low caliber HS team and saying "Well if you're good enough, you should be like Kloos". That is not the best way for the player to develop to his/her full potential.Shinbone_News wrote:You got your shot and won the Big Show. Good for you. 20 kids per year get to do that, roughly 1000 kids have ever gotten to do that. But that doesn't keep 3000 from trying every year. Odds are overwhelmingly that most kids will never rise above their varsity HS teams, nor as you say even make "The Tourney." Odds are overwhelmingly that if they want to make that team badly enough, they will. All I'm saying is that this is a perfectly legitimate and noble and achievable goal for Minnesota youth hockey players, and fantisies about winning "the Big Show" are just that -- fantasies. And that's just fine. For many kids that play juniors, the dream of D1 or the NHL turns out to be a pipe-dream too.Outoftowner wrote:Or a parent is looking at possible opportunities based on their kids interest and dedication toward the sport of hockey. My kid won't go anywhere unless my kid wants to go. Just as my kid will only get as good as he wants to get and only my kid can put in the time and dedication needed to reach is dreams. The only thing I can do is to help facilitate and support opportunities for him to reach his full potential, based on HIS interest and dedication. What part of that is me living a fantasy through my kid?Shinbone_News wrote:Depends on what his intentions and wishes are, duh!
Plenty of kids set their sights on making the HS varsity team, and if possible making it to state. And that's enough for them -- and they can play hockey the rest of their lives in any case.
If the kid has skills and passion to play at a higher level, we cross that bridge when we get to it.
Agree with JSR on this one. Any parent who confesses to this juniors-before-graduation strategy is living out their fantasy through their kids. In Minnesota, the question is probably relevant only to the Justin Klooses and Hudson Faschings of the world, exceptional players on mediocre teams with marginal chances of post-season success and exposure. One chooses to stay at home and carry his team to State, the other takes the bait for the NTDP. Both will play at a higher level than high school hockey, but for one of those guys there are 10 other skilled players who will be lucky to play D3 even if they play juniors after high school.
I guess my big question is: Why the rush? It's not like taking one extra year to finish high school is going to prevent that kid from getting his shot at the NHL, if he's a real contender. So many hockey dads are paranoid that some other kid is getting ahead somewhere.
I've had my shot; even won the big MN show. What I do know is the big show is a pipe dream for the majority of hockey players in MN today. Yet this pipe dream drives most of those players to share some kind of association/school loyalty that has them forgo better playing and development opportunities and stay with teams that will never make it due to their lack of depth and skill. You don't win the MN state tourney with one line of good forwards. You win it with top to bottom talent and a hot goaltender.
Better, higher skilled competition is what drives the majority of competitive players to get better. The odds are much better for the majority of players to reach their full potential if they find the highest competitive environment that will challenge their skills. This is irrefutable. The odd one man show superstar coming from nowhere is an anomaly and a poor example to give potentially great players reason to stay with their sucky high school team.
If your kid is Junior/D1/NHL caliber, good for you. Knock yourself out and get him out of high school and into some billet home far away from friends and family just as soon as you can.
Personally, I'll wait to see if my kid is anywhere near that top 1% to even consider such a plan.
The odd one man show superstar coming from nowhere is an anomaly and a poor example to give potentially great players reason to stay with their sucky high school team.
Tell them what? They they are on a short list? Or that their teams were not exactly horrible? Your little list does not exactly refute my point, that the superstar coming from a sucky HS team is an anomaly. The MAJORITY of the best HS players coming out of MN, had an at least moderately good team to play on and competed against moderate to good competition. The other route has been Juniors, Open enrollment, Development team, or to move. Either way these players went in search of competition or were fortunate enough to be living where there is competition to develop to their full potential.Tell that to Backes, Jackman, Johnson, Kloos, Hanowski, Benike, et al.
Thanks for the spelling lesson. I'll return the favor and offer a reading comprehension lesson in that the quote you just put up was not mine, it was another posters, nor did I agree with that exact statement, especially when taken out of the context in which I believed it was intended... guess that makes us even....auld_skool wrote:I'll stick by what I said. "Just like there's no one right skate or stick there's no one right answer to this question."JSR wrote:
Not sure how you can disagree with the idea that players and parents should make up their own minds on what is best for them when and if they have that opportunity rather than speculating on something that has not and likely will not happen? That's the most reasonable and logical thing anyone can do in any situation I would think. Not sure how that is debateable?
It's complicated. Throwing off inane comments like "Any parent who confesses to this juniors-before-graduation strategy is living out their fantasy through their kids" doesn't add to the discussion in any meaningful way.
And by the way, it's spelled "debatable."
You're quite welcome. In regard to the misguided reading comprehension lesson, please read my post. Nowhere did I say that the particular idiotic statement was yours. We're not even and I'm not guessing, although I think we might agree to some extent about how involved a decision like this is.JSR wrote:
Thanks for the spelling lesson. I'll return the favor and offer a reading comprehension lesson in that the quote you just put up was not mine, it was another posters, nor did I agree with that exact statement, especially when taken out of the context in which I believed it was intended... guess that makes us even....
Well, when you quote someone in a message board it is presumed you are talking directly to that person and only that person, so you can see where things went awry there. And yes, it is a complicated decision with no right or wrong answers, which is what I thought I said just in a different wayauld_skool wrote:You're quite welcome. In regard to the misguided reading comprehension lesson, please read my post. Nowhere did I say that the particular idiotic statement was yours. We're not even and I'm not guessing, although I think we might agree to some extent about how involved a decision like this is.JSR wrote:
Thanks for the spelling lesson. I'll return the favor and offer a reading comprehension lesson in that the quote you just put up was not mine, it was another posters, nor did I agree with that exact statement, especially when taken out of the context in which I believed it was intended... guess that makes us even....
Excellent post - USHL teams operate as businesses (as I suspect the NAHL and BCHL do). They can (and do) make a lot of promises of ice time and enhanced development that can make kids and their families "drool" about the prize at the end. Bottom line, if you aren't helping them win (and make money) they'll cut you loose so fast it'll make your head spin. It's always going to be an individual player/family decision, but unless a player is an unquestioned superior talent (i.e. Taylor Cammarata) I don't think finishing your H.S. career is this huge obstacle that can't be overcome. I think if a player has the skill and desire, once he graduates he'll be able to make a team in juniors and earn a scholarship. If not, he probably wasn't and isn't that good to begin with. IMHOblack sheep wrote:this is an incredibly difficult question - and i would hope most would not pass judgement until you have been through it, or have been close to a family that has.
when recruiting junior & college coaches are suggesting such and such, it is very easy to get caught in the wash. It is important to remember that once you leave HS, hockey is a business and very few "advisors" have your personal intrests in mind.
IF your goal is to play D1, if you are good enough you will get a chance, regardless if you take the HS or Juniors route. There is not a fast path to success.
In the end it just a game and we all end up in the same beer league, some just take a longer path to get here.