Girls hockey players 5 years ago vs today

Tigerhockey2012 · Post by **Tigerhockey2012** » Thu May 16, 2013 10:57 am

I had a local college coach tell a group that I was a part of that girl's hockey is no where near what it was 5 years ago. There are no Krissy Wendell's coming up. I was wondering what the prevailing opinion on this statement is? I'll hold my feedback until I see some other replies as not to influence the direction of the conversation.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Thu May 16, 2013 12:27 pm

Is Amanda Kessel a Krissy Wendell?

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Thu May 16, 2013 12:42 pm

Is Hannah Brandt?

Also, what would be so terrible if there was never another Krissy?
My two cents would be that there are great players coming up, they are just playing with and against other great players, so they don't stick out so much.

hockeyFam5 · Post by **hockeyFam5** » Fri May 17, 2013 8:55 am

Is it because players as a whole are better than they were 5 years ago? I had someone tell me that skill levels of girls at the U10 and U12 age levels are more advanced than that of girls at those levels 5-10 years ago.

observer · Post by **observer** » Fri May 17, 2013 9:39 am

I had a local college coach tell a group that I was a part of that girl's hockey is no where near what it was 5 years ago.

What? You or the coach are confused. Or he's right, girls hockey today is nowhere near what it was 5 years ago. It's significantly better today. Female hockey players today are light years ahead of female hockey players 5 years ago. There are so many more and better players it's not even a discussion. Were there special players years ago? Yes. Are there 10 times as many special players today? Yes. A huge growth in numbers and quality of play. There used to be a few special female players and almost no special girl teams. Now there's a much bigger number of outstanding players and several very good youth and HS teams. In fact, most top girls teams can beat the top team older than them. The speed of improvement in the girls game is double the improvement in the boys game. A much steeper trajectory of improvement in the girls game.

Tigerhockey2012 · Post by **Tigerhockey2012** » Fri May 17, 2013 2:17 pm

observer wrote:
I had a local college coach tell a group that I was a part of that girl's hockey is no where near what it was 5 years ago.
What? You or the coach are confused. Or he's right, girls hockey today is nowhere near what it was 5 years ago. It's significantly better today. Female hockey players today are light years ahead of female hockey players 5 years ago. There are so many more and better players it's not even a discussion. Were there special players years ago? Yes. Are there 10 times as many special players today? Yes. A huge growth in numbers and quality of play. There used to be a few special female players and almost no special girl teams. Now there's a much bigger number of outstanding players and several very good youth and HS teams. In fact, most top girls teams can beat the top team older than them. The speed of improvement in the girls game is double the improvement in the boys game. A much steeper trajectory of improvement in the girls game.

I couldn't agree more. It floored me when I heard this. It took all of his creditability away as far as I was concerned. I don't think there is a sport around where the level of play doesn't improve over the course of five years. Particularly one as young as girls hockey. I played varsity hockey in the late 80's for a very established program. I don't think I could even make our small town varsity now. I think the level of improvement over the course of 25 years in boys hockey is amazing. I think girls hockey has come as far in 5 years as the boys have in 25 years. I mean rate of improvement. I think you only need to look at the Gophers to see how good these girls are. Krissy Wendell never played on any Gophers teams as good as this one the past season.

hockeychopper · Post by **hockeychopper** » Fri May 17, 2013 3:06 pm

Girls hockey has made huge strides over the years. No doubt Krissy Wendell was a super-star during the years she played. Would she be today, it would have been interesting to see how she would match up to the level as it is today. The one thing I really appreciate though as it pertains to the growth of girls hockey the past 5 years is seeing these former female hockey super-stars giving back to the young girls today. You look at people like Krissy Wendell, Winny Brodt, Natalie Darwitz, just to name a few and what they offer the young girls today. There's nothing better than having a 10 year old girl being coached by one of these women. I believe we have only scratched the surface when it comes to former female players giving back to the youth.

Coachk · Post by **Coachk** » Wed May 22, 2013 3:21 pm

Really, what does comparing Krissy to the girls today prove. Maybe its that you want to think your daughter is in a better group of players. My daughter played against Krissy and the others mentioned and they were and still are something special. Comparing accomplished nothing. Maybe you should forcus your efforts on the keeping the progress going and maybe how to change the mentality of high school teams who concentrate on 1 or 2 players and use the rest as fill ins. I am sure I'll get all the cheap shot comments this forum is famous for, because I am speaking poorly of Girls HS hockey, how dare me. The comments like "light years better", what game are you watching. Just be advised there are many other states that are developing good hockey players and not to mention the Canadians (I wouldn't go there if I were you). But if you want to make yourself feel good about your player you can say, Darwitz or Wendell wouldn't of made my daughters team.

observer · Post by **observer** » Wed May 22, 2013 11:31 pm

"Darwitz or Wendell wouldn't of made my daughters team."

What? Nobody said that.

Darwitz and Wendell likely would be the best players on their teams today. What I'm saying is that they could have 6-8-10 very solid team mates today, maybe even a couple close to them in skill. They didn't have that. Depth, and quality of it, is what I'm saying.