I agree with the majority of the post until the bolded bit. I'm a deliberate practice > genetics kind of guy though
I liken hockey sense to someone who is musically inclined or someone who can sing...a lot of those gifts are natural...they can be improved....but a guy like Gretzky was given a gift...his vision and hockey sense are unteachable...
Some players are more naturally skilled than others, but hockey sense is the great equalizer...players with great hockey sense tend to get the most out of their talents.
I liken hockey sense to someone who is musically inclined or someone who can sing...a lot of those gifts are natural...they can be improved....but a guy like Gretzky was given a gift...his vision and hockey sense are unteachable...
Some players are more naturally skilled than others, but hockey sense is the great equalizer...players with great hockey sense tend to get the most out of their talents.
I'm not so sure on Gretzky. He had a mind for the game like no other but in my opinion it was all through deliberate practice. He spent countless hours perfecting his craft and here's a beauty example from Gretzky's autobiography:
In his autobiography, Gretzky describes how at practices, his Dad would quiz him on the fundamentals of smart hockey:
"Him: ‘Where's the last place a guy looks before he passes it?.’
Me: ‘The guy he's passing to.’
Him: ‘Which means.’
Me: ‘Get over there and intercept it.’
Him: ‘Where do you skate.’
Me: ‘To where the puck is going, not where it's been.’
Him: ‘If you get cut off, what areyou gonna do.’
Me: ‘Peel.’
Him: ‘Which way?’
Me: ‘Away from the guy, not towards him.’
He spent so much time learning the game that he didn't have to think to react to the play around him.
Another good example would be Pavel Datsyuk. I don't have an exact quote but I remember reading an interview where he says growing up, while playing pond hockey there was always a ton of kids but only one puck. That's where he said he learned how to, not only keep the puck, but retrieve the puck. With all that practice, Datsyuk doesn't even have to think when he has or wants the puck, he just gets it.
Beauty of the deliberate practice vs. genetics debate is that there is no way to prove which one plays the biggest role.
I'm not so sure on Gretzky. He had a mind for the game like no other but in my opinion it was all through deliberate practice. He spent countless hours perfecting his craft and here's a beauty example from Gretzky's autobiography:
In his autobiography, Gretzky describes how at practices, his Dad would quiz him on the fundamentals of smart hockey:
"Him: ‘Where's the last place a guy looks before he passes it?.’
Me: ‘The guy he's passing to.’
Him: ‘Which means.’
Me: ‘Get over there and intercept it.’
Him: ‘Where do you skate.’
Me: ‘To where the puck is going, not where it's been.’
Him: ‘If you get cut off, what areyou gonna do.’
Me: ‘Peel.’
Him: ‘Which way?’
Me: ‘Away from the guy, not towards him.’
He spent so much time learning the game that he didn't have to think to react to the play around him.
Another good example would be Pavel Datsyuk. I don't have an exact quote but I remember reading an interview where he says growing up, while playing pond hockey there was always a ton of kids but only one puck. That's where he said he learned how to, not only keep the puck, but retrieve the puck. With all that practice, Datsyuk doesn't even have to think when he has or wants the puck, he just gets it.
Beauty of the deliberate practice vs. genetics debate is that there is no way to prove which one plays the biggest role.
i agree with Lalaprise here it is hockey sense that sets people apart...players can practice and have all the skills they want...but the ones who work hard AND have hockey sense are going to make it further....and it was gretzky's hockey sense that set him apart from everyone...no one at that time anticipated the play like he did and pass to where players where going to be rather then to them...that is hockey sense his understanding of the game is hocek ysense.
You're exactly right about Alex Mann. He has the potential to be a top end player in the Q by the age of 19 if he adds that element to his game consistently without changing any other of his strengths. I say consistently because I have seen him play with offensive instincts and confidence, rushing the puck at that right times, pushing the play to make odd man numbers on the atatck for his club, especially when he played Major Bantam AAA last year with Western. He is a PP QB for sure though. Scoutman, where do you see him drafte ? I think he is a steal if he goes beyound the third round.
Scoutman, I see your rankings of Highmore, MacDonald, MacIntyre, Trickett (who I really like and should have been on NS Canada Games squad last year), Nickerson, Gibson, Messenger, Moody and Blanchard from Nova Scotia. Here are a few other 95's and 96's that I think will get real good looks as draft prospects. If you agree, give me your opinion on what round and let mw know if you don't think there name will be called.
HFX - Mullally (95 Forward, incredible speed), Ryan MacEachern (96 Def)
South Shore - Mark Jollimore (96 Def, hurt most of year but big upside)
Pictou - Josh Pugsley (96 For) and Denver Lynds (96 For)
Cole Harbour - Anthony (96 Def with size, some grit, decent puck mover. Have seen him twice and liked his game) and Chase Marchand (solid season)
Valley - Tyler Brown (95 For), Garrett Nicholson, Booker and Graham (all 95 Def)
Mullally a good player, good speed, good grit, never gives up, not a natural on offense but works hard and is not scared nor gritty, he should be a pick from round 6 on type thing.
Jollimore well he is small, weak, he is good with the puck and that is it, im not sure about the big upside with him, he is too small, too weak when guys rush up on him he gets scared and will bail on a play which is something that does not fly well with QMJHL teams...he needs to be more poised, not rush plays, and play better in his own zone along with get a lot stronger than he is.
Pugsley puts up maga points, im still not sure about his offense though, he is a little small size (skinny wise) he is inconsistant, a potential good gritty player, very good work ethic, not he, smart, but with offensive ability he is a no flash player, makes solid plays, does the little things right....for the style game he plays he needs to get a lot stronger, but more consistant...he will be a guy picked from about round 3-4, he has upside for sure, he has good vision and playmaking as well as good skating...it is just something is missing with his offensive game that is hard to pinpoint.
Lynds I question his offensive ability at the next level, he is never in good position to recive a pass, he works hard, good skater, good shooter, needs to up his offensive awareness.
Anthony is not the best dman at all, not so great in his own zone, needs to improve understanding of the game, I do not think he is drafted before round 8 on.
Brooker and Brown I really like....Nicholason is ok, he looks good if your watching as a fan but when you start picking his game apart he collapses in own zone, has bad defensive positioning, on the plus he is a good skater and excellent puck mover but his passing on the rush he is 50-50 he might make the pass and look really good but he blows passes too. Graham is too slow his skating is a bit of a problem for him...
Marchand is ok, I am not a fan of him myself but I can see how some scouts would be.
Hey Scoutman. a little OT but along the lines of your statment on hockey IQ. With players that you know a bit of their "back story", what do you think develops the hockey IQ of the top IQ players you scout?
(I feel that many players with above average hockey IQ have played some other sports like basketball and soccer. I coached a kid a few years ago that had great hockey IQ. The list of sports he played when younger was endless. Not all at a high level but just enough to get his feet wet.
I have also coached a kid who was absolute brain dead when it came to understanding/reading/reacting. The kid played no other sports and even when it came to hockey, his dad was too busy taking him to private lessons and not taking him to the team organized "pond hockey" sessions.)
myself for a player to have a good IQ i do not think there is any way to really improve it, a player has to react off of instinct and not every player can do that, the player needs a deep understanding of the game there is nothing a player can do to develop it really...it is like school some kids have to study harder than others to get the same marks, it is not something that the kids do to get good hockey sense im with Lalaprise the kid either has hockey sense or he doesnèt nothing he can do to get better at it...as for gretzkys father quizing him on what to do well that is fine, but that did not improve his hockey sense quiz all you want he has to react naturally on the ice to the situation which is totally different than answering what he should do.
i agree with Lalaprise here it is hockey sense that sets people apart...players can practice and have all the skills they want...but the ones who work hard AND have hockey sense are going to make it further....and it was gretzky's hockey sense that set him apart from everyone...no one at that time anticipated the play like he did and pass to where players where going to be rather then to them...that is hockey sense his understanding of the game is hocek ysense.
I never said hockey sense wasn't vital for a hockey player or what separates one player from another and I completely agree with what you said here and most of what Lalaprise said. What I disagreed with was that hockey sense is something that you're born with. I was saying that hockey sense is very much a teachable tool, if it wasn't, I doubt there'd be sports psychologists in the world Hockey sense is something that is picked up through a ton of practice or game situations where you see a certain play and you learn how to react to it. Personally, I don't think a player is born with hockey sense. That's not to say one player can't have better hockey IQ than another while playing or practicing the same amount of time. Obviously some players will pick up on things and understand things quicker than others but at the end of the day I think hockey sense is something that is developed by doing.
I never said hockey sense wasn't vital for a hockey player or what separates one player from another and I completely agree with what you said here and most of what Lalaprise said. What I disagreed with was that hockey sense is something that you're born with. I was saying that hockey sense is very much a teachable tool, if it wasn't, I doubt there'd be sports psychologists in the world Hockey sense is something that is picked up through a ton of practice or game situations where you see a certain play and you learn how to react to it. Personally, I don't think a player is born with hockey sense. That's not to say one player can't have better hockey IQ than another while playing or practicing the same amount of time. Obviously some players will pick up on things and understand things quicker than others but at the end of the day I think hockey sense is something that is developed by doing.
well it is picked up by doing BUT it comes naturally to the player, it can not be taught, you can not teach a player how to think the game, you show them plays and have them play in situations and in games and practise and you do what ever you have to to teach these guys everything but hockey sense just comes naturally to players, sports psychologists do not teach players hockey sense, they are there to help out with situations the players have as in dealing with injuries, dealing with obsticals they have with the game as attitude issues maybe, confidence what ever but they do not teach them hoceky sense...that is the saying as well with most scouts and teams "you can teach a player to play the game but you can not teach them hockey sense"...look at Anthony Duclair, there is a kid with all the skill in the world, dedicated to the game, works hard, and gets by with skill alone but he works hard, and his hockey sense is not great might hurt him a bit next year...it is many reasons why players with major skill have not turned out in the NHL guys who were picked 1st round but just they lack the hockey sense...if it was teachable teams im sure they would have been taught it by the NHL teams...you really can not teach it, if a player has low hockey IQ in Major Midget he will have it in the QMJHL he will not all of a sudden get the game and see it a different way, just never happened, it either comes natural or it doesn't.
well it is picked up by doing BUT it comes naturally to the player, it can not be taught, you can not teach a player how to think the game, you show them plays and have them play in situations and in games and practise and you do what ever you have to to teach these guys everything but hockey sense just comes naturally to players, sports psychologists do not teach players hockey sense, they are there to help out with situations the players have as in dealing with injuries, dealing with obsticals they have with the game as attitude issues maybe, confidence what ever but they do not teach them hoceky sense...that is the saying as well with most scouts and teams "you can teach a player to play the game but you can not teach them hockey sense"...look at Anthony Duclair, there is a kid with all the skill in the world, dedicated to the game, works hard, and gets by with skill alone but he works hard, and his hockey sense is not great might hurt him a bit next year...it is many reasons why players with major skill have not turned out in the NHL guys who were picked 1st round but just they lack the hockey sense...if it was teachable teams im sure they would have been taught it by the NHL teams...you really can not teach it, if a player has low hockey IQ in Major Midget he will have it in the QMJHL he will not all of a sudden get the game and see it a different way, just never happened, it either comes natural or it doesn't.
I agree with you, Duclair is a better player then Jon Drouin, but Drouin's hockey sense is through the roof, however I saw an improvement in Duclair's hockey sense over the course of last years playoffs.
Abit off topic,
Can DeLuca's game translate to the Q ? Will Cusson,Sukumaran and Gavriealtos get drafted ? What do think of Larouche ?
well it is picked up by doing BUT it comes naturally to the player, it can not be taught, you can not teach a player how to think the game, you show them plays and have them play in situations and in games and practise and you do what ever you have to to teach these guys everything but hockey sense just comes naturally to players, sports psychologists do not teach players hockey sense, they are there to help out with situations the players have as in dealing with injuries, dealing with obsticals they have with the game as attitude issues maybe, confidence what ever but they do not teach them hoceky sense...that is the saying as well with most scouts and teams "you can teach a player to play the game but you can not teach them hockey sense"...look at Anthony Duclair, there is a kid with all the skill in the world, dedicated to the game, works hard, and gets by with skill alone but he works hard, and his hockey sense is not great might hurt him a bit next year...it is many reasons why players with major skill have not turned out in the NHL guys who were picked 1st round but just they lack the hockey sense...if it was teachable teams im sure they would have been taught it by the NHL teams...you really can not teach it, if a player has low hockey IQ in Major Midget he will have it in the QMJHL he will not all of a sudden get the game and see it a different way, just never happened, it either comes natural or it doesn't.
Now I'm confused. It seems like your talking about hockey sense as if its definition is ones ability to learn the game of hockey. I thought we were talking about hockey sense as ones ability to read and react to the play around him. Do you honestly think Ryan Ellis was born with the ability to run a power play in Windsor/Canada U20? You don't think it had something to do with him being put on the power play and learning how to react to the defenders? Do you think that if we took away all of Ryan Ellis' history on the PP away and then put him on the PP today for the first time, he'd automatically know how to react to the play?
Have you heard ex-NHL'ers talk about how players are bigger, stronger, and smarter then ever before. Do you think every NHL player is now born with hockey sense that NHLers from 15+ years ago weren't or does it have something to do with better coaching, better accessibility to hockey footage whether it be NHL, AHL, CHL, etc.
Simply doing a google search "is hockey sense teachable" you will get a ton of varying responses from a ton of different people, from hockey coaches to ex-players turned coaches. For example, nhl.com had an article last year: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=550636
They discuss both sides of the hockey sense debate. It ultimately comes down to your individual coaching philosophy.
At the end of the day it's a debate that will never be resolved. If a guy is said to have no hockey sense and then he is taught how to read and react to the play, developing his hockey sense, people will just say he had hockey sense all along There's no real way to prove one or the other.
Now I'm confused. It seems like your talking about hockey sense as if its definition is ones ability to learn the game of hockey. I thought we were talking about hockey sense as ones ability to read and react to the play around him. Do you honestly think Ryan Ellis was born with the ability to run a power play in Windsor/Canada U20? You don't think it had something to do with him being put on the power play and learning how to react to the defenders? Do you think that if we took away all of Ryan Ellis' history on the PP away and then put him on the PP today for the first time, he'd automatically know how to react to the play?
Have you heard ex-NHL'ers talk about how players are bigger, stronger, and smarter then ever before. Do you think every NHL player is now born with hockey sense that NHLers from 15+ years ago weren't or does it have something to do with better coaching, better accessibility to hockey footage whether it be NHL, AHL, CHL, etc.
Simply doing a google search "is hockey sense teachable" you will get a ton of varying responses from a ton of different people, from hockey coaches to ex-players turned coaches. For example, nhl.com had an article last year: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=550636
They discuss both sides of the hockey sense debate. It ultimately comes down to your individual coaching philosophy.
At the end of the day it's a debate that will never be resolved. If a guy is said to have no hockey sense and then he is taught how to read and react to the play, developing his hockey sense, people will just say he had hockey sense all along There's no real way to prove one or the other.
ahhhhh hockey sense is learning the game and understanding it that IS HOCKEY SENSE, as in bold above you are speaking of the same I was...a player is taught how to play his position but some never learn how to properly see the ice, use there teammates, react the way they should, it just does not click in there head...and to be able to teach a player to understand is one thing, I know a ton of players who KNOW what to do when you ask them, but put them on the ice and everything is a different story, you can show them and there hockey sense will improve a little bit but for a player to have NATURAL ability hoceky sense yoyu can not teach that....you can not take Nazime Kadri and make him into Steve Stamkos...if you could teach hockey sense to the degree you are I think talking about then every player should be beyond smart on the ice because why wouldn't teams if they can give a player better hockey sense....it is the same as why some players can score better than others, because they just can, everyone is different, hockey sense is understanding the game and knowing the ice and reacting smartly to what is going on...you can not teach that, you can tell a player, you can practice it and players will improve at it the more they do it, but for the hockeky sense Lalaprise is talking about you can not teach that level of sense, that is just with the player, that is what makes guys like Giroux, Chara, Sedins ahead of the other players becaue they have that type of hockey sense that is natural...and if you think you can teach players that then we should have a ton of gretzkys out on the ice...you can only show a player how to do something and what he should do...and some situations you are shown one way but then thinking fast you have to change what you are shown and do something else that is hockey sense, you can not teach a player that...you can not teach a player to rush or pass on certain plays and where to move, you can show what you know and with his understanding of the game he reacts the way he will...im not sure what you getting to with your example of Ellis he was never the smartest player on the ice his shot is his bread and butter and that would do well on any power play it is not like Ellis stratigacly passes the puck to a guy in side and opens up room for himself to streak in, he uses his cannon....
it is the same as why do some players just run around the offensive end and do not know how to find position well as to others to understand where to go and makes things easy for themselves...you can not teach that it is just in the player and that does not mean oh he never played a day in his life and throw him on the ice and he should be good because he was born with good hockey sense, no one ever said...born with it means he has a natural understanding of the game, he was shown the game and plays LEARNED the game and it came easy to him, he thinks the game at a different level and you CAN NOT TEACH THAT at all...it can not be done, you can do all the google searches you want and half of those are people trying to sell schools to teach players what do to...what do you think we do in the QMJHL we put players in situations, we practice every day, put them to watch video do everything but if a player does not get it, he just doesn't get it...you just can not teach that...that is why when im scouting my teams main concern is hockey sense on the ice, because they do not want anyone who can not think the game...and i have a championship ring and my team has been to the finals a few times in my short time with my team so it must work because players I pass on that have all the talent in the world they never turn out...WHY...because you can not teach them to think at a higher pace.
As the article is conserned well of course you have to show the kid what to do, even gretzky you can not throw on the ice for hte first time and he would dominate...we all know that, no one is saying that...what we are saying is there is a way of showing people what to do how to do it, and some never get it some do not know how to pass when they should, some go rushing down the ice everytime trying to do everything themselvels, some make the NHL doing this because of there good work ethic and natraul ability...but you can not teach hockey sense...all kids are taught what to do and do repetitive things on the ice to try to get there brain to make it natural, but again you can not teach them on the ice itself when they are playing...some people just know where to go, what to do to make things easy for themselves, things you can not teach like knowing where a guy is going to be when you are almost blind on the iceand can not see through traffic, knowing that if you pass up on this shot the other people will have a better scoring oppertuinity than you...knowing that if you move right and not left you will have a clear lane to the net, that is not shown that is unteachable.
Now I'm confused. It seems like your talking about hockey sense as if its definition is ones ability to learn the game of hockey. I thought we were talking about hockey sense as ones ability to read and react to the play around him. Do you honestly think Ryan Ellis was born with the ability to run a power play in Windsor/Canada U20? You don't think it had something to do with him being put on the power play and learning how to react to the defenders? Do you think that if we took away all of Ryan Ellis' history on the PP away and then put him on the PP today for the first time, he'd automatically know how to react to the play?
Have you heard ex-NHL'ers talk about how players are bigger, stronger, and smarter then ever before. Do you think every NHL player is now born with hockey sense that NHLers from 15+ years ago weren't or does it have something to do with better coaching, better accessibility to hockey footage whether it be NHL, AHL, CHL, etc.
Simply doing a google search "is hockey sense teachable" you will get a ton of varying responses from a ton of different people, from hockey coaches to ex-players turned coaches. For example, nhl.com had an article last year: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=550636
They discuss both sides of the hockey sense debate. It ultimately comes down to your individual coaching philosophy.
At the end of the day it's a debate that will never be resolved. If a guy is said to have no hockey sense and then he is taught how to read and react to the play, developing his hockey sense, people will just say he had hockey sense all along There's no real way to prove one or the other.
Hockey sense is not a set definition, but I would compare it to a game of chess. A great quote it "Gretzky played 30 MPH chess". I would define it as a players ability to see, read and execute plays, and ability to read the game before events take place.
And it is something that you are born with, otherwise we would have a league full of 1st liners, the fourth liners got just as much practice as the other guys, so why don't they have the ability? Just because Ryan Ellis was given opportunities to play on the PP growing up does not mean that is how he is good on the PP, because if it did there are literally hundreds of defense who have played on the PP just as much, or more who are not even near the capabilities of Ellis, it is because of his hockey sense he is able to strive in that role, not the amount of practice
Hockey sense is not a set definition, but I would compare it to a game of chess. A great quote it "Gretzky played 30 MPH chess". I would define it as a players ability to see, read and execute plays, and ability to read the game before events take place.
And it is something that you are born with, otherwise we would have a league full of 1st liners, the fourth liners got just as much practice as the other guys, so why don't they have the ability? Just because Ryan Ellis was given opportunities to play on the PP growing up does not mean that is how he is good on the PP, because if it did there are literally hundreds of defense who have played on the PP just as much, or more who are not even near the capabilities of Ellis, it is because of his hockey sense he is able to strive in that role, not the amount of practice
agree it is really something you are born with, to understand at levels others don't, does not come wityh practice, it comes with just that god given talent.
Hockey sense is not a set definition, but I would compare it to a game of chess. A great quote it "Gretzky played 30 MPH chess". I would define it as a players ability to see, read and execute plays, and ability to read the game before events take place.
And it is something that you are born with, otherwise we would have a league full of 1st liners, the fourth liners got just as much practice as the other guys, so why don't they have the ability? Just because Ryan Ellis was given opportunities to play on the PP growing up does not mean that is how he is good on the PP, because if it did there are literally hundreds of defense who have played on the PP just as much, or more who are not even near the capabilities of Ellis, it is because of his hockey sense he is able to strive in that role, not the amount of practice
One doesn't come to life with «chess sense»... even though one can learn faster.
Also, I would say hockey sense is a mindset. Practicing makes you learn what to do and makes you physically able to do so, that's the part you can concretely observe. Hockey sense is putting it all together, it's not knowing as much as feeling what you have to do, and do it as if it were the only logical thing to do. Although it certainly do come more easily to certain people, I don't agree it's just a genetic thing and that there's nothing one can do about that. Mindsets can be develloped. Because it isn't directly teachable
doesn't mean it's unchangeable.
One doesn't come to life with «chess sense»... even though one can learn faster.
Also, I would say hockey sense is a mindset. Practicing makes you learn what to do and makes you physically able to do so, that's the part you can concretely observe. Hockey sense is putting it all together, it's not knowing as much as feeling what you have to do, and do it as if it were the only logical thing to do. Although it certainly do come more easily to certain people, I don't agree it's just a genetic thing and that there's nothing one can do about that. Mindsets can be develloped. Because it isn't directly teachable
doesn't mean it's unchangeable.
I did not mean that you are born with an ability to dominate chess. I mean that having great Hockey Sense is like being a champion chess player, you know what you are planning on doing three moves before you do it. I do not believe that is a skill you can teach a hockey player, you can show him what to do in practice, but you cannot teach him how to anticipate something happening before they do, like some players are able to.
This is getting old. Nobody can prove that a kid is born with hockey sense or not. It seems like people are still referring to hockey sense as ones ability to learn the game rather than ones ability to read & react to the play but then they define it as ones ability to read & react to the play.
@Scoutman I got to see Mitch Balmas play vs. Bedford the other day. Looked like the kid was playing an age group down when in fact he's the younger group for Major Bantam lol
Do you think he'll actually stay on the island or take off to a prep school to be taken a lot more seriously?
One doesn't come to life with «chess sense»... even though one can learn faster.
Also, I would say hockey sense is a mindset. Practicing makes you learn what to do and makes you physically able to do so, that's the part you can concretely observe. Hockey sense is putting it all together, it's not knowing as much as feeling what you have to do, and do it as if it were the only logical thing to do. Although it certainly do come more easily to certain people, I don't agree it's just a genetic thing and that there's nothing one can do about that. Mindsets can be develloped. Because it isn't directly teachable
doesn't mean it's unchangeable.
im sorry im going to say I think you are wrong, I have never seen a player like Duclair who's hockey sense is not great all of a sudden get great hockey sense...my coach does not want guys with low hockey sense because you can not teach them he says and he won coach of the year in the CHL and is one of the best coaches outside of the NHL and that is him saying that, and I would say i agree with him, u can practice all you want and play all the situations u want but hockey sense is what seperates the good and great players from the guys who are not the top and if u can teach it to players im sure all teams would be teaching there players how to think the game better...hockey sense is either something you have or don;t and it is why players are consistantly always top in scoring or the best defenseman from the guys who play on the 4th lines or guys who are getting sent up and down all the time...so if u can explain players getting better give me examples of players who have gotten all of a sudden better hocke ysense to become good hockey players.
This is getting old. Nobody can prove that a kid is born with hockey sense or not. It seems like people are still referring to hockey sense as ones ability to learn the game rather than ones ability to read & react to the play but then they define it as ones ability to read & react to the play.
@Scoutman I got to see Mitch Balmas play vs. Bedford the other day. Looked like the kid was playing an age group down when in fact he's the younger group for Major Bantam lol
Do you think he'll actually stay on the island or take off to a prep school to be taken a lot more seriously?
I am hopping he stays and maybe plays for the Tradesman as an underager which I think might happen, I hate when players go away to play...I hope he stays, because he is going to be a good one.
I am hopping he stays and maybe plays for the Tradesman as an underager which I think might happen, I hate when players go away to play...I hope he stays, because he is going to be a good one.
Do you happen to know what seems to be the most successful route for Cape Bretoners?
I've noticed it's all over the place with Tradesman alum such as Shaw and Sparling, Junior A alumni like Kirkpatrick, or even Notre Dame alumni like Cuzner and most recently Duncan MacIntyre.
Do you happen to know what seems to be the most successful route for Cape Bretoners?
I've noticed it's all over the place with Tradesman alum such as Shaw and Sparling, Junior A alumni like Kirkpatrick, or even Notre Dame alumni like Cuzner and most recently Duncan MacIntyre.
Im not scoutman1...but I think it comes down to the player. There isnt 1 route that will lead to more success...if you are talented you will make it, as long as you work hard. Whether thats in Midget AAA or Notre Dame or Jr A I dont think it really matters.
Al MacInnis played Midget AAA when the league was just starting up and he is the greatest player to ever come from Cape Breton so I dont think going to Notre Dame will automatically make someone a better prospect.
So many kids are deciding to go into different leagues rather than play Midget AAA in the Maritimes and that is fine as everyone needs to make their own choices, but I dont think Cuzner playing at ND made him into the player he is today...if he played for the Tradesmen hed probably be just as successful as he is now.
Im not scoutman1...but I think it comes down to the player. There isnt 1 route that will lead to more success...if you are talented you will make it, as long as you work hard. Whether thats in Midget AAA or Notre Dame or Jr A I dont think it really matters.
Al MacInnis played Midget AAA when the league was just starting up and he is the greatest player to ever come from Cape Breton so I dont think going to Notre Dame will automatically make someone a better prospect.
So many kids are deciding to go into different leagues rather than play Midget AAA in the Maritimes and that is fine as everyone needs to make their own choices, but I dont think Cuzner playing at ND made him into the player he is today...if he played for the Tradesmen hed probably be just as successful as he is now.
Al MacInnis went to Saskatchewan to play in the SJHL with Regina (Same league as Notre Dame )
Sidney Crosby and Nathan MacKinnon also left for Shattuck St. Mary's to play against tougher competition, probably same for MacIntyre & Cuzner. That's usually why they leave. My question could be reworded as: "Would you be more inclined to take a player doing good in a competitive league like the SJHL or a top player from a weaker league such as NSMMHL.
Note: I'm not trying to call out the NSMMHL, they've developed some good players recently such as Brad Marchand, James Sheppard but it's no secret that the league isn't as competitive
Al MacInnis went to Saskatchewan to play in the SJHL with Regina (Same league as Notre Dame )
Sidney Crosby and Nathan MacKinnon also left for Shattuck St. Mary's to play against tougher competition, probably same for MacIntyre & Cuzner. That's usually why they leave. My question could be reworded as: "Would you be more inclined to take a player doing good in a competitive league like the SJHL or a top player from a weaker league such as NSMMHL.
Note: I'm not trying to call out the NSMMHL, they've developed some good players recently such as Brad Marchand, James Sheppard but it's no secret that the league isn't as competitive
I was under the impression Al played Midget close to home, guess I was wrong.
I think for kids who are elite than it makes sense...Crosby dominated Midget AAA at 14...there was no point to him playing there at 15...but there are some marginal talents going to play at ND or Prep Schools that arent really benefiting from it.
To be perfectly honest I think its about prestige with parents....its kind of like a 'ooo look my kid goes to Notre Dame' ...
And about your question...when I evaluate a player I also look to see how they are doing compared to the league they are in and their competition level, but it never comes down to taking a kid just because he played at Notre Dame.
To be perfectly honest I think its about prestige with parents....its kind of like a 'ooo look my kid goes to Notre Dame' ...
And about your question...when I evaluate a player I also look to see how they are doing compared to the league they are in and their competition level, but it never comes down to taking a kid just because he played at Notre Dame.
lol I know a goalie from Cape Breton who did exactly what you just said... What his parents left out was that he was playing Midget AA and barely getting ice time
That's kind of what I expected for an answer to the question. It kind of goes without saying that no team would pick a player just because he played for a certain team like Notre Dame but like I said if he's excelling at a higher competition level, he's obviously going to get more notice. So when talking about an exceptional player such as Mitch Balmas, who is playing in an area that is not known for producing exceptional players, he may be better off bolting to a more competitive league if it gets him more notice and better competition to develop his game. Honestly, I'd rather be able to watch him in the Maritimes but I can't deny that it would be understandable if he left for a more competitive league.
Al MacInnis went to Saskatchewan to play in the SJHL with Regina (Same league as Notre Dame )
Sidney Crosby and Nathan MacKinnon also left for Shattuck St. Mary's to play against tougher competition, probably same for MacIntyre & Cuzner. That's usually why they leave. My question could be reworded as: "Would you be more inclined to take a player doing good in a competitive league like the SJHL or a top player from a weaker league such as NSMMHL.
Note: I'm not trying to call out the NSMMHL, they've developed some good players recently such as Brad Marchand, James Sheppard but it's no secret that the league isn't as competitive
lol Al MaacInnis actually played for Cape Breton West I know the coach from back then who by chance started Midget AAA in Nova Scotia, him and Al are good friends and I have proof that Al played for Cape Breton West which is why he owns the team.
lol I know a goalie from Cape Breton who did exactly what you just said... What his parents left out was that he was playing Midget AA and barely getting ice time
That's kind of what I expected for an answer to the question. It kind of goes without saying that no team would pick a player just because he played for a certain team like Notre Dame but like I said if he's excelling at a higher competition level, he's obviously going to get more notice. So when talking about an exceptional player such as Mitch Balmas, who is playing in an area that is not known for producing exceptional players, he may be better off bolting to a more competitive league if it gets him more notice and better competition to develop his game. Honestly, I'd rather be able to watch him in the Maritimes but I can't deny that it would be understandable if he left for a more competitive league.
Mitch is a 1998...so it would probably be in his best interest to play Midget AAA at 14...it didnt seem to hurt Crosby If he is truly as good as people are saying than he should dominate Midget at 14 and than the big decisions comes when he is 15...if he has already dominated AAA at 14 than he should move on to a higher level...whether thats ND or Shattuck or something else.
)
If he is truly as good as people are saying than he should dominate Midget at 14 and than the big decisions comes when he is 15...if he has already dominated AAA at 14 than he should move on to a higher level...whether thats ND or Shattuck or something else.
