HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

National Camp Selectees

Last Team
Chase Brand F Park Rapids

Ben Copeland F Edina

Isaac Johnson F Anoka

Peter Johnson F Fergus-Falls

Tommy Klans F Lakeville North

Dylan Mills F Hill-Murray

Grant Mismash F Shattuck

Ryan Poehling F Lakeville North

Austin Pratt F Shattuck

Scott Reedy F Shattuck

Marko Reiffenberger F Hill-Murray

Sam Walker F Edina

Kyler Yeo F Hill-Murray

Matt Anderson D Holy Family

Michael Anderson D Hill-Murray

Joshua Ess D Lakeville South

Jack Harris D Prior Lake

Nate Knoepke D Lakeville South

Carson Kosobud D Moorhead

Connor Mayer D Benilde-St. Margaret's

Jack Begley G Hill-Murray

Ryan Bischel G Benilde-St. Margaret's


National Camp Alternates

Sam Hentges F Totino Grace

Ryan Sandelin F Hermantown

Noah Sullivan F Eden Prairie

Colin Hans D Anoka

Trevor Miklya D Eagan

Noel Parker D St. Paul Academy

Bryce Crowley G Blaine

Mason Lovich G Hastings


Congrats to all

13 forwards and only 7 D...... Why the emphasis on so many forwards? Looking for flash?

Showing that it's a good choice not to play D?

couldnt be more wrong

MrBoDangles wrote:13 forwards and only 7 D...... Why the emphasis on so many forwards? Looking for flash?

Showing that it's a good choice not to play D?

Not at all. There are typically 2X as many forwards than defensemen on any high level roster. Technically, it's the forwards that were shortchanged.

The Exiled One wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:13 forwards and only 7 D...... Why the emphasis on so many forwards? Looking for flash?

Showing that it's a good choice not to play D?

Not at all. There are typically 2X as many forwards than defensemen on any high level roster. Technically, it's the forwards that were shortchanged.

Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

MrBoDangles wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:13 forwards and only 7 D...... Why the emphasis on so many forwards? Looking for flash?

Showing that it's a good choice not to play D?

Not at all. There are typically 2X as many forwards than defensemen on any high level roster. Technically, it's the forwards that were shortchanged.

Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

Don't forget, while more forwards have *always* been picked for all the reebok teams, because after all, there are more of them on any team,there are of course, many more forwards trying out vs. defensemen.

In other words, I wonder if the ratio of forwards trying out vs. make the team, isn't the same or close as the same defensemen ratio ?

Don't know myself off hand.

puckbreath wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:

The Exiled One wrote: Not at all. There are typically 2X as many forwards than defensemen on any high level roster. Technically, it's the forwards that were shortchanged.

Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

Don't forget, while more forwards have *always* been picked for all the reebok teams, because after all, there are more of them on any team,there are of course, many more forwards trying out vs. defensemen.

In other words, I wonder if the ratio of forwards trying out vs. make the team, isn't the same or close as the same defensemen ratio ?

Don't know myself off hand.

The ratio would make sense if it was 4 lines to 3 during the winter association season. Maybe USA/MN Hockey should think about the importance of good defense..?

Do they carry just one goalie to develop?

Just another mistake that needs (you know me) exposing...

MrBoDangles wrote:

puckbreath wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote: Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

Don't forget, while more forwards have *always* been picked for all the reebok teams, because after all, there are more of them on any team,there are of course, many more forwards trying out vs. defensemen.

In other words, I wonder if the ratio of forwards trying out vs. make the team, isn't the same or close as the same defensemen ratio ?

Don't know myself off hand.

The ratio would make sense if it was 4 lines to 3 during the winter association season. Maybe USA/MN Hockey should think about the importance of good defense..?

Do they carry just one goalie to develop?

Just another mistake that needs (you know me) exposing...

Yeah, these days, the common consensus seems to be a good "defenseman" is one who is good at offense, and who cares about the defensive aspect.

p.s. I tend to agree with your opinions on topics quite a bit.

MrBoDangles wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:13 forwards and only 7 D...... Why the emphasis on so many forwards? Looking for flash?

Showing that it's a good choice not to play D?

Not at all. There are typically 2X as many forwards than defensemen on any high level roster. Technically, it's the forwards that were shortchanged.

Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

By high level, I mean juniors, college, and pros.

I guess I misunderstood the intent of your post. But still, the point of the national camp is to identify top players FOR higher levels of hockey. So it's still an appropriate ratio for that purpose.

The Exiled One wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:

The Exiled One wrote: Not at all. There are typically 2X as many forwards than defensemen on any high level roster. Technically, it's the forwards that were shortchanged.

Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

By high level, I mean juniors, college, and pros.

I guess I misunderstood the intent of your post. But still, the point of the national camp is to identify top players FOR higher levels of hockey. So it's still an appropriate ratio for that purpose.

Sounds like avoiding playing the D position is a good idea from reading your posts...

Hence, my post.. "Why the emphasis on forwards"? They're just better and more important?

puckbreath wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:

puckbreath wrote: Don't forget, while more forwards have *always* been picked for all the reebok teams, because after all, there are more of them on any team,there are of course, many more forwards trying out vs. defensemen.

In other words, I wonder if the ratio of forwards trying out vs. make the team, isn't the same or close as the same defensemen ratio ?

Don't know myself off hand.

The ratio would make sense if it was 4 lines to 3 during the winter association season. Maybe USA/MN Hockey should think about the importance of good defense..?

Do they carry just one goalie to develop?

Just another mistake that needs (you know me) exposing...

Yeah, these days, the common consensus seems to be a good "defenseman" is one who is good at offense, and who cares about the defensive aspect.

p.s. I tend to agree with your opinions on topics quite a bit.

You guys are correct on your observation.

i thought of the kids that make the summer camp the % that go to the national camp is the same for f,d and g. 16%.

The Exiled One wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:

The Exiled One wrote: Not at all. There are typically 2X as many forwards than defensemen on any high level roster. Technically, it's the forwards that were shortchanged.

Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

By high level, I mean juniors, college, and pros.

I guess I misunderstood the intent of your post. But still, the point of the national camp is to identify top players FOR higher levels of hockey. So it's still an appropriate ratio for that purpose.

For the Rbx 15's...they took 13 forwards, 7 D and 2 goalies the past 3 years (1997, 1998 and 1999 birth years) If you look it up, that's what you will find.

If you play in the HS Elite Development, HS Elite league, Junior hockey, College hockey...they typically roll 4 lines and 6 D. Usually they healthy scratch 1 or 2 forwards and a least one D.

AND for a high end kid...and argument can be made that it is actually an advantage to be a D...that they are more coveted.

For example...of the MN 1998 birth years who have verbally committed to a D1 school (so far) one is a goalie (Edquist) four are D (Lindgren, Hellickson, Kierstad, Rossini) and four are forwards (Anderson, Tufte, Mattson, Bellows).

Nice job fellas the program has sucked for over 10 years..

You know I like your forum name nobama, but what type of hockey is any good for you? You have said the Western League is nothing special, USHL is crap, USNTDP is only out for gold, and the Selects Program is scat, Tier 1 is dying..... That pretty much just leaves Edina Association, but there are too many praise obama signs in those neighborhoods for you to hang a nobama name on yourself. Where is the hockey Nirvana for you??

Your average college hockey team has 15 forwards, 8 defense, and 3 goalies (though 3rd string goalie is mainly a practice guy). I guess I don't see the ratio of kids being taken to NY to be all that out of whack in comparison.

They take more forwards but there are many more players competing for spots at that position too. A quick glance at the tryout rosters would tell you that.

imlisteningtothefnsong wrote:That pretty much just leaves Edina Association, but there are too many praise obama signs in those neighborhoods

You sure you're talking about the right city?

MrBoDangles wrote:

The Exiled One wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote: Exiled....?

There are 4 lines +1 of forwards and 3 lines + 1 of D.

A kid playing what position in this state has better odds of making the team?

What association teams carry four lines of forwards?

I don't really care how one sided other teams have been....

By high level, I mean juniors, college, and pros.

I guess I misunderstood the intent of your post. But still, the point of the national camp is to identify top players FOR higher levels of hockey. So it's still an appropriate ratio for that purpose.

Sounds like avoiding playing the D position is a good idea from reading your posts...

Hence, my post.. "Why the emphasis on forwards"? They're just better and more important?

My experience in having done evaluations down here for similar things is that there are ALOT fewer defenseman than forwards at these tryouts. The percentage of defenseman taken compared to those who tried out are usually ALOT higher than forwards. And the "ratio" is proepr given the number of players used in a normal high level game or even the ratio compared to tryouts numbers. That said, it's my OPINION that the reason the numbers are so much higher is more of a scoial and media thing, I mean who are the media "darlings" of the NHL... Ovechkin, Kane, Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Stamkos... hence kids are subliminally told forwards are more important, scoring goals are more important than stopping them, hence "I want to be a forward not a defenseman".... so it's not the national camp telling kids not to be a defenseman, I think it's the opposite, I think they've been indirectly told it all their lives so the numbers just reflect society, not the other way around

MrBoDangles wrote:13 forwards and only 7 D...... Why the emphasis on so many forwards? Looking for flash?

Showing that it's a good choice not to play D?

I'm guessing that USA Hockey dictates the number of forwards and D from each region based on the national camp roster make-up. Looking at rosters from the past few years, each camp team had 10 forwards, 6 defenseman, and 2 goalies. It seems odd to have teams carry an extra forward, but I doubt it has anything to do with undervaluing defenseman.

Seriously Bonin, drive north up France right t past the prestigious 50th and France and count the Subaru's with equal,sings and the obama-Biden signs and you will puke!!

4 lines +1 and 3 lines +1

Most winter association teams go 3 and 3 lines.

Few are getting it..

( Different subject) I remember quite a few years with the Wild having hurt defensemen and the Wild struggling to fill those roles. Why would a pro team shoot themselves in the foot with only nine D, but then have six lines of forwards?

There seems to be a lack of recognition for the D position at all levels.

energy efficient light bulbs to boot..

There seems to be some confusion here, Minnesota isn't sending a team to NY, the players are split up onto different teams for the NY camp. As a result, there is no "extra" forward or d-man.

MrBoDangles wrote:4 lines +1 and 3 lines +1

Most winter association teams go 3 and 3 lines.

Few are getting it.

Let me see if I've got you now...

• Your odds of making the National Select Camp are better if you are a forward, because they take a higher percentage of Minnesota forwards.
• After you've made the camp, your odds of getting exposure to higher levels of hockey are the same whether you're a forward or a defenseman, because the ratio AT camp is the same at the ratio on higher level rosters.

Basically, it depends how you view the camp... as a destination/honor unto itself or as just another exposure opportunity.

The Exiled One wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:4 lines +1 and 3 lines +1

Most winter association teams go 3 and 3 lines.

Few are getting it.

Let me see if I've got you now...

• Your odds of making the National Select Camp are better if you are a forward, because they take a higher percentage of Minnesota forwards.
• After you've made the camp, your odds of getting exposure to higher levels of hockey are the same whether you're a forward or a defenseman, because the ratio AT camp is the same at the ratio on higher level rosters.

Basically, it depends how you view the camp... as a destination/honor unto itself or as just another exposure opportunity.

He already made up his mind, your logic has no place here.

While this is an enjoyable argument, the group of Minnesota kids that are selected at 15s, 16s and 17s do not play together as a team. They are split up at the camp in NY. The teams at the camp play with 10F, 6D and 2G. At 15s, there are 12 teams (x18 per team = 216 kids in camp).

The numbers are generally based on participation and talent--Minnesota is its own USA Hockey "District" (and if we send 21 kids it represents 10% of the camp). The other USA hockey Districts send kids based on talent and lobbying as well. The Central District, for example includes WI, IL, IA, MO, NE, KS, would also send a fair number of kids (IL and WI primarily). The Southeast would include FLA up to Washington DC--it would be alot harder to find large numbers of elite kids in the SE.

At 16s and 17s, there are only 10 teams at the camps (180 kids total), so you see less Minny kids sent because they narrow the pool.

USA Hockey can also select kids to attend that are not selected by thier home district (see famous last name category...).