HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Leagues > Canadian Junior Hockey > WHL
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2

Saskatchewan Minor Hockey Thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-09-2012, 07:04 PM
  #176
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
HL & Dickie.... Looks like we differ from 3rd through 5. It'll be interesting to see how everything plays out. I may eat crow on zone 5 at 3rd.... And you may be right Dickie, can't rely too much on one player but I've seen Draude make others better. Fiala brings some zip from the back end too, along with a few Prairie Storm alumni. The zone is a real crap shoot. I am not familiar with alot of the local non AA kids and perhaps that will be the zones downfall with an overall lack of supporting cast members.

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-10-2012, 01:48 PM
  #177
WesternHockeyScout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
Don't under-estimate Zone 2.

They have the best goaltending options of all the zones and will be anchored on D by Eskra and Tesarowski.

Upfront, they might not have a "franchise" type forward, but they may be the deepest Zone in terms of 4 balanced lines stocked with very good hard working forwards.

My best guess is that they will compete in every game and shouldn't finish worse than the 3rd place game.

WesternHockeyScout is offline  
Old
02-10-2012, 05:39 PM
  #178
pucktalk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 13
vCash: 500
As far as Zone 2 goaltending goes, don't forget about Flodell. Season stats may not look that great but lets face it - a GAA is a team stat. If your team is weak on D, you can only do so much as a tender. You may face 40-60 shots/game, stop 90% and lose because the other goalie only saw 15 shots. You also need to consider which opposition that tender is in net against. Some only get to play in the easier games. If you notice, the top teams have the top goaltenders or do the top goaltenders have the top teams? Which is the chicken and which is the egg? I'd rather judge a player or goaltender by watching a game rather than a website. We all know how stats can be bolstered by ice time and opposition. I bet there are some surprise picks in every zone.

pucktalk is offline  
Old
02-10-2012, 08:20 PM
  #179
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternHockeyScout View Post
Don't under-estimate Zone 2.

They have the best goaltending options of all the zones and will be anchored on D by Eskra and Tesarowski.

Upfront, they might not have a "franchise" type forward, but they may be the deepest Zone in terms of 4 balanced lines stocked with very good hard working forwards.

My best guess is that they will compete in every game and shouldn't finish worse than the 3rd place game.
Western... Thanks. Like I mentioned, I'm not close to the Regina situation so thanks for the input. I don't know if their goal tending is as strong or stronger than some of the other zones though. You can only rely on two D for so long. Overall, without depth upfront it really puts any goalie in a bind if the majority of play is carried inside your own blue. It'll be interesting... Maybe a sleeper zone?

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-10-2012, 08:45 PM
  #180
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pucktalk View Post
As far as Zone 2 goaltending goes, don't forget about Flodell. Season stats may not look that great but lets face it - a GAA is a team stat. If your team is weak on D, you can only do so much as a tender. You may face 40-60 shots/game, stop 90% and lose because the other goalie only saw 15 shots. You also need to consider which opposition that tender is in net against. Some only get to play in the easier games. If you notice, the top teams have the top goaltenders or do the top goaltenders have the top teams? Which is the chicken and which is the egg? I'd rather judge a player or goaltender by watching a game rather than a website. We all know how stats can be bolstered by ice time and opposition. I bet there are some surprise picks in every zone.
For sure... That's why I've got zone 5 in 3rd. Rationale: Decent goal tending (granted on decent clubs but I know for fact the decent goalies are playing in the tough games), reliable D (Fiala) (Karakochuk - 2nd team scoring Humboldt) plus a contingent of other Viper D men (so, come from good team, will be decent and familiar)... Up front you've got the overall scoring leader in Draude... Slobashan, Brockman (leading scorer Humboldt), Litwin and Atamanchuk can provide some offense for Draude to work with.

True GAA is a team stat but overall Regina teams are not showing well. The top GAA appears to belong to Fleming (3.00) followed by Rainville (3.97 - who happens to be playing on the top Regina team). So outside of Eskra (on the top Regina team) and Tesarowski can you validate any other D men and what Regina brings to the table that would change some opinion? From what I see, Eskra arguably the best (who isn't on the ice 60 min a game), still his tender is at a 3.97 GAA... So it tells me that there is no depth at D and no one carrying the load up front. So yes GAA is a team stat but zone 2 is all Regina. If you can validate some of the other players it would be great. One goalie, regardless of who it is, will only give his team a chance to win. Still need the supporting cast to make that happen. I think that's where we're coming from, but I'm only speaking for myself on this one.


Last edited by PokeCheck101: 02-11-2012 at 08:05 AM.
PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-11-2012, 12:23 AM
  #181
WesternHockeyScout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
Well, the Regina (Zone 2) situation is a little more complicated than GAA. For starters, the city itself has to many Tier 1 teams. They should have 3, not 4.

That said, even distributing 3 teams worth of talent over 4 teams, how bad are they doing, really? The Top team in Regina has 11 wins in League play(same as Battlefords), which is pretty darn good. Only 3 teams in the South and 3 teams in the North have more. The second team in Regina is right on thir heels. Not so bad, really. The fct is, Zone 2 pulls from all 4 teams, while some other Zones are pulling from jst 1 1/2 AA teams, so the depth of talent is very strong in this Zone.

In net, Flodell and Fleming are two of the best in the Province. Big Rainville at 6'1" and a decent 3.97 GAA will make a persuasive argument at camp as well.

I see 4 solid defensemen in Tesarowski, Bourassa, Senko and Thompson (who is a beast at 6' and almost 200 lb). Add in a flat out stud in Eskra, who has to be considered one of the top 5 defensmen in the Province and mabe the 2nd best offensive threat from the blue line. It's not hard to see that goals against ths group wil be hard to come by.

They don't have a spectacular, 3-4 ppg forward upfront, but there aren't that many in the province. Zone 5 has 1 (Draude), Zone 7 has 2 (Bast & Arnold) and Zone 1 has 5 (Halgbewachs, Cole, Gabrielle, Boutin and Neuls). The fact is, those players are few and far between, and Zone 2 isn't the only Zone without one.

What Zone 2 does have is a wealth of solid AA forwards. In fact, the Zone 2 fourth line should be the best 4th line in the Tournament. The first and second might have their hands full, but 3rd and 4th lines for Zone 2 will do very well.

Of course, I haven't a clue how they will actually set the lines but based on early scouting and ranked 1-12, here's how your Zone 2 lineup might look.

1.) Tippet, Sillinger, Chaulk
2.) Miller, Bohay, Ritchie
3.) Griffin, Braddok, Van Os-Shaw
4.) Gelsinger, Blanchard, Frater

Now, when you compare the top 2 lines with you Top 6 Zone 5 forwards, for example, it's pretty ugly 1-3 vs 1-3. A smaller Zone 5 advantage 4-6 vs 4-6.

1.) Draude, Sloboshan, Schatz
2.) Navrot, Litwin, Beaudry

Once you get past the other Zones Top 2 lines, things even out. The 7-9 forwards on Zone 5, for example, should play straight up with the Zone 2 "third line"

3.) Brockman, Atamanchuk, Eichorst

After that Zone 5 could be looking at Connor Odelein and a couple of house players as 9-12 forwards. Zone 2's 9-12 will dominate that battle.

So really, Zone 2 will be a very balanced team who are very solid defensively with maybe the best goaltnding in the Province and possibly the most truly balanced 4 forward lines in the Tournament. It is stunningly obvious that they don't have a superstar upfront, but if I was coaching this team, we'd rally around that and take pride in our depth. I'd challenge this very talented and very capable group to use each other and to be the best TEAM in the tournament.

Like I said, they will absolutely compete in each game for a full 60 minutes and it would be a mistake to count out this very talented group of players.


Last edited by WesternHockeyScout: 02-11-2012 at 12:44 AM. Reason: grammar
WesternHockeyScout is offline  
Old
02-11-2012, 01:16 AM
  #182
WesternHockeyScout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
I'll buck the trends on this forum and go out on a limb with my pre-final-roster picks, based solely on who I *think* will make these teams.

1 vs 2 Game should be a WAR between Zone 1 and Zone 8. Easy to see why Zone 1 is the favorite, with 3 potential first round draft picks and another handful of 2nd and 3rd round draft picks. They are LOADED with elite offense, plus they have Bear & Riddle on the point. However, Zone 8 has 3 real quality forward lines to counter with, and a decent defense corps led by Lochlan Morrison. Should be a few high picks from this group as well. I like Zone 1 by 2 goals in a high scoring affair.

3 vs 4 Game I like the cities battling it out. Zone 2 vs Zone 6. Both Saskatoon and Regina may be lacking in star power but they more than make up for it in depth, both have a legitimate leader on the blue line and exceptional goaltending. Zone 6 ws a nail-biter.

5 vs 6 Game is a coulda-woulda-shoulda game between Zone 5 and Zone 7. Both teams have a half dozen really exciting payers but both teams have depth problems 7-12 forwards and the 5 & 6 d-man. In a Tournament where the top teams have no depth issues, they will find that you can only ride af horses for so long. Should be a higscring shootout won by Zone 5.

7 vs 8 Game is a battle between Zone 3 and Zone 4. Zone 3 has a decided edge in this game under Nagy's leadership and with reasonable AA depth throughout. Zone 4, however, should be riding house players for depth. Zone 3 decidely - by 4 or more goals.

WesternHockeyScout is offline  
Old
02-11-2012, 08:26 AM
  #183
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternHockeyScout View Post
Well, the Regina (Zone 2) situation is a little more complicated than GAA. For starters, the city itself has to many Tier 1 teams. They should have 3, not 4........
Western, thanks for the detailed analysis, much appreciated. A few of the others still have zone 2 6th at best but perhaps they may be a sleeper zone. Your comments certainly leave something to consider.

I'm curious as to your initial comments on Regina dropping from 4 to 3 teams. I also share the same opinion. Saskatoon has 6 right now and I think they could get away with 4 (however wouldn't be much fun playing in a 4 team league as it stands right now). I've debated this to the nth degree with some and there are people on both sides... 1) Drop two teams increases the talent/compete level, 2) Have MORE teams and develop better coaching.. While the latter would be great, I share your opinion that you can only stretch so far. I would sooner see less teams at the AA level (where you expect good coaching), and have better coaching at the tier II level to develop those weaker kids that would have been marginal tier I.

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-11-2012, 01:18 PM
  #184
WesternHockeyScout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
Teams in Regina and Saskatoon

Regina has 4 Tier 1 teams and Saskatoon has 6. How many can their populations actually support?

- Winnipeg, a city of almost 700,000 people, ices just 4 teams at it's highest level.

- Edmonton, population 750,000, ices just 4 teams at it's highest level.

- Calgary, population over 1 million, ices just 4 teams at it's highest level.

Regina has has roughly 200,000 people and puts 4 teams on the ice. Saskatoon 270,000 and ices 6 teams.

You can look at this from a number of viewpoints, logistical, competitiveness and development. I don't think the three are mutually exclusive of each other.

1.) Logistics

Before the Bantam AA League, it makes sense for both cities to ice as many teams as possible. If nothing else, for the logistics of having enough teams to play.

However, the formation of the Province wide League, along with the acceptance by AA families that travel is part and parcel of playing high level hockey, the logistical need for a high number of teams in one area diminishes.

2.) Competitiveness

If one of the goals behind the formation of the AA Bantam league is to be competitive with respect to the Western Canadian Bantam Championship, then you do want your teams to be both talented and deep. Watering down teams by spreading 3 teams worth of AA talent accross 4 teams would seem contrary to that goal.

Of course, nobody from the SHA would likely admit that competitiveness with the other Provinces is an SHA goal. I think privately, however, that's another matter.

3.) Development

Canadian Cities have no shortage of quality coaching. Both Regina and Saskatoon have enough sharp hockey minds to ice 10 - 12 AA teams at all age groups Novice through Bantam. I would suggest that Tier II teams in Regina and Saskatoon are getting equally qualified coaching at the Bantam level. Once they hit Midget AAA it's a little different story, but at the Bantam AA level there is a wealth of quality coaching available in both cities, and across the Province in the rural areas as well.

Having excessive AA teams for the sake of getting "quality coaching" under the flag of development is a non starter.

I would suggest that players develop best when they are pushed slightly out of their comfort zone, not when they are overwhelmed to the point they can't contribute effectively.

The term "Development" is grossly over-used, and usually thrown around in a vague sense to bolster specific agendas that have nothing to with development.

The number 1 thing we want to develop at this age group is their individual passion for the game. We want to develop lifelong hockey players who love the game.

Confidence is a HUGE part of young athlete development, and they get that confidence by being in challenging situations they can succeed at. It's important that 14 year old boys feel like their coaches have confidence in them. It's important to be surrounded by team mates who respect them and their contributions to the team.

When we ask Tier II players to play on Tier 1 teams for the sake of filling rosters, are we really doing them any favors? Is it really their development that we are worried about? If so, then how come the puck drops and they sit on the bench. We tout how great these coaches are, but they aren't great enough coaches to teach a 14 year old how to contribute on a power play, or how to kill a penalty.

Don't get me wrong - coaches are a big part of the puzzle, but development happens in the right environment, and part of that environment is ensuring that kids are challenged, but not overwhelmed.

Tier II players are best served playing Tier II hockey in Tier II leagues, soaking up a fair share of ice and playing key roles in all situations. That's what is best for their development.

The only interests served by Tier II players playing on Tier I teams is the interests of administrators in fielding teams and perhaps some parental egos. The only thing we are really developing in this scenario is the gap in disparity.

There are really three ways to look at it.

You can look to the bigger cities and follow their population model. That's the easy way. Winnipeg puts out 1 team per 175,000 people. Edmonton slightly higher. Calgary 1 team per quarter million. By those standards, Saskatoon would ice 2 teams and Regina 1. They would be excellent teams that would compete annually at the highest levels.

You can look at the smaller centers and ice teams accordingly. Red Deer ices two top teams with a population of 90,000. Brandon is 1/2 that size and puts out 1 team at the highest level.

Rural populations do even better in terms of icing teams from small numbers. However, it's also the norm on rural teams to ride it's top players for 40 minutes a game. So, you might have 16 guys on the roster, but 5 carry the load. That's just part of the culture of rural AA, which is an extension of the culture of non-tiered rural house hockey where a couple of star players have the puck the whole game and everyone else chases - or worse - watch from the bench. It's not an ideal situation for the players who ride the pine, is centered solely around the development of a few and probably not one that Regina and Saskatoon should be copying.

Ultimately, I think the long term solution for Regina and Saskatoon is somewhere in the middle. Perhaps 1 team per 75,000 with a real emphasis on fun ice time from early ages.

Spark the passion, then encourage them by building their skills and ultimaqtely putting them in good situations where they regulary contribute, which builds confidence through accountability and success. That's development, regardless of your numbers.


Last edited by WesternHockeyScout: 02-11-2012 at 01:23 PM.
WesternHockeyScout is offline  
Old
02-12-2012, 10:03 AM
  #185
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Western, very very true. We're on the same page when it comes to the issue. Sadly I too have been around the rinks long enough to realize that some folks get on executives, AA co-ordinator positions simply to press forward with an agenda (generally fueled by having their own child in the same division). The SBAAHL could look at improving even more, ie) combine Weyburn/Estevan, bring in Saskatoon at 3 teams.

On your point of logistics and icing as many teams as possible, I see the rationale. There was talk going around at the pee wee AA level about Warman and Martensville possibly joining (due to non-compete, drawing from same area) but from what I understand it was shot down at the Warman corner. One has to wonder if some egos got in the way and thoughts of their own child having less of a chance to make a team crept into the equation. What bothers me about icing as many teams as possible is then the need to have more games when in reality the kids in pw and bantam AA need more practice. Take a look at SMHA model for this pee wee AA season. It was a terrible model. Full of games, games, games. Having 11-12 yr old kids playing 8-10 games in one month is too much. SMHA would be wise to start earlier, spread out games and get the focus back on practices.

I agree, SHA should simply call a spade a spade... That they are trying to compete better.... Somewhere along the lines we have been conditioned not to admit that we like to win or at least admit that in public. Absolutely hockey must always remain FUN but when a player has reached the AA level the focus should be about competing to win. Accomplished through dedicating coaching, a dynamic learning environment, goal setting, and positive feedback. This ensures confidence = more fun. IP, novice, atom and lower tier's at higher levels should be about fun and development. AA should be about preparing players for the next level. Most parents agree with this behind closed doors. Keep w's and l's in perspective yes but compete for success.

As far as more teams, develop more quality players, I can't figure out that logic. There are only so many skilled players at the top level. Your input with respect to Winnipeg, Calgary, etc, spells that out. Right now, SK is watered down. Some people would like to convince me they can turn an apple into an orange. While that is a great philosophy it simply does not work. I would sooner see less teams at the higher levels, if a player doesn't make it he either focuses on getting to the next level or is content at the level he is currently at. There is nothing wrong with that. As coaches we are trying to develop a lifelong passion for the game. Is that orange really going to get that sitting on the bench; The most icetime they see is in the warm up? Also, reducing the number of teams at the top level reduces coaching pool and actually ensures you are getting the absolute best coaching (hopefully), leaving more of the other quality coaches to look at tier II options, making those programs better. Win, win all around. Thanks for the discussion Western.

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-12-2012, 12:08 PM
  #186
WesternHockeyScout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokeCheck101 View Post
As far as more teams, develop more quality players, I can't figure out that logic.
Correct. That's ilogical.

However, BEFORE the Province wide AA League, as a matter of logistics for AA Leagues existing in the vacuum of their own small city, I can see how it was attractive to ice 4-6 teams just so you have someone to play.

Now that the League is Province wide, they should be looking at scaling that back and focussing on quality rather than quantity.

I would think this will be a call eventually made by HRI & GSHHL themselves, as they will continually get left out of the Provincial Championship picture under the current configuration, and if that goes on for some years, their own boards will feel pressure to reduce the number of teams.

WesternHockeyScout is offline  
Old
02-12-2012, 01:23 PM
  #187
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternHockeyScout View Post
Correct. That's ilogical.

However, BEFORE the Province wide AA League, as a matter of logistics for AA Leagues existing in the vacuum of their own small city, I can see how it was attractive to ice 4-6 teams just so you have someone to play.

Now that the League is Province wide, they should be looking at scaling that back and focussing on quality rather than quantity.

I would think this will be a call eventually made by HRI & GSHHL themselves, as they will continually get left out of the Provincial Championship picture under the current configuration, and if that goes on for some years, their own boards will feel pressure to reduce the number of teams.
On the GSHL web site they are already canvassing their membership for inclusion into the SBAAHL... It's on a rolling ticker banner at the top of their web page. Doesn't look like it took them too long.

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-12-2012, 04:37 PM
  #188
WesternHockeyScout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokeCheck101 View Post
On the GSHL web site they are already canvassing their membership for inclusion into the SBAAHL... It's on a rolling ticker banner at the top of their web page. Doesn't look like it took them too long.
Now if they cut their teams from 6 to 3, they'll raise the bar for quality AA teams in the Province

WesternHockeyScout is offline  
Old
02-12-2012, 10:50 PM
  #189
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternHockeyScout View Post
Now if they cut their teams from 6 to 3, they'll raise the bar for quality AA teams in the Province
Trying to convince them to cut down to three would be one interesting battle. I'd like to be a fly on the wall! Knowing several parents involved in city wide already, I'm sure the sheer mention of it would result in wide spread panic and anxiety (for the parents that is)... However for some it would serve as a reality check.

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-13-2012, 10:22 AM
  #190
SaskRinkRat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 396
vCash: 500
Not having any kids involved in minor hockey any more, or any formal connection to minor hockey in Saskatoon, I'm still not totally convinced that reducing the number of AA teams would be a good idea.

Obviously it would increase the calibre of the teams - this goes without saying. But when you look at the rate Saskatoon has been producing junior hockey players lately, is increasing the calibre of bantam AA teams the primary goal of bantam hockey? It seems like competitive teams is probably a secondary goal to player development, and if you measure player development by the number of players that end up getting drafted into the WHL, then it's pretty difficult to argue with the current GSHL setup.

Competing with the other western provinces (in terms of winning at the bantam level) does not really seem to be a feasible goal for Saskatchewan. In order to ACTUALLY compete on an ongoing basis, you would have to reduce the total number of teams to something like 1 per 100,000 population, which would mean a total of 10 teams in the province all together. This would be a logistical nightmare, and would not likely result in any better player development.

Tinkering around the edges by reducing the total to 20 teams is only going to reduce the size of the blowouts at Westerns, not the fact that the Sask representative will lose every game every year.

As someone who enjoys watching bantam hockey, I'm half excited at the notion of fewer teams and therefore higher calibre hockey - no doubt things would get very interesting. But from a player development standpoint (which is inarguably the standpoint minor hockey should be taking) I'm not convinced that fewer teams is better.

SaskRinkRat is offline  
Old
02-13-2012, 10:58 AM
  #191
NotTooLate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
When I coached Bantam AA in Sask there were the 4 AA leagues, Saskatoon, Regina, North and South. It should have stayed that way. The kids benefited from that system the most. At best right now, just under 2 kids per AA team will get drafted or listed by a WHL team. Even less will actually play there. So you are telling me that the province should have a league that caters to these few individuals? Not realisitic is it.

We should be more worried about keeping kids playing hockey and giving them the chance to experience playing on a AA team, not worrying about who has the best stacked team. The cream will rise to the top eventually.

I have watched several games this year and you can tell which teams "develop" players and which teams don't. SV will play Draude all game long and shortens the bench even with a 10 goal spread in their favour. Weyburn and Yorkton have much less top end talent with the exception of Nagy and these coaches basically roll the lines. That's the way I coached and that's why I can still look my players in the face today when I run into them at the rink.

Quit with the Sask league talk and just let the kids play.

NotTooLate is offline  
Old
02-13-2012, 12:24 PM
  #192
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
SaskRinkRat & NotTooLate...

Looking for some feedback: Considering strictly development, what is wrong with having fewer teams at a higher level and focus on developing kids at the lower level to assist in developing them to get to the higher level? There are several great people out there that are excellent coaches at the club level. What I see though, regardless of how many teams are at the top level, is the coaching sometimes completely drops off the map for the tier II and III kids. This is totally unacceptable. Almost as if tier II/III is not worthy of exceptional coaching. While I agree, we need to focus on developing all players if we focused more on who we get coaching we may have an argument to then have more teams at the AA level. We'll produce more skilled players. Conversely, there are some pretty exceptional kids who have no desire to play AA, stay at home and play with their friends. Certainly they deserve fair attention to tune up their skills, so let's promote and develop coaches for everyone's sake. In my opinion the SASK FIRST program is also (or should be) to recognize some of those skilled club kids (non AA) under an impartial microscope, who deserve a second look.

I also agree that playing 4-6 power kids an entire game is not appropriate. But, to be fair, if people have issue with it go to the local executive. If executives don't know about it, nothing can be done.

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-13-2012, 01:03 PM
  #193
SaskRinkRat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokeCheck101 View Post
SaskRinkRat & NotTooLate...

Looking for some feedback: Considering strictly development, what is wrong with having fewer teams at a higher level and focus on developing kids at the lower level to assist in developing them to get to the higher level?
I'm not suggesting that there would be anything wrong with that sort of developmental structure, I'm just suggesting that if development is the #1 priority, then why are we having this conversation in the first place? If Saskatchewan (and specifically Saskatoon) was having trouble developing players, this debate about team numbers, league structures, etc would make more sense. But from what I can tell, the province and the city are having no trouble producing high calibre hockey players for the junior ranks, and it might be argued they're doing it even more effectively than other western provinces (on a per capita basis).

You might still develop kids as consistently and to the same degree if you cut the number of teams down, but why bother with a huge overhaul if you're already doing well at minor hockey's #1 goal?

This is why I think the argument for fewer teams is coming from a different place - one that places winning at the Bantam level ahead of player development. The problem is that without a drastic reduction in the number of teams (to about 10), Saskatchewan's representative will not be consistently competitive at Western's anyway.

I think I would be MORE in favour of a drastic reduction than a minor one like what we're moving toward. Create a AAA league with 10 teams (2 in each major city, and 6 throughout the rest of the province). Then you get the ultra-elite kids into the AAA league, and you develop the rest in the AA league.

But cutting to 20 or even 18-19 is not going to solve the underlying competitiveness problem.

Great conversation!

SaskRinkRat is offline  
Old
02-13-2012, 02:12 PM
  #194
NotTooLate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
If the league cut back to only say 10 teams province wide, there would be way too much travel time for 13-14 year olds. Kids would be traveling up to 2 hours or more to practice, not feasible for anyone. The only way it would work is if the league was set up like the Midget AAA's and had billeting and that is absolutely ridiculous for kids this age.

Saskatchewan does not have the population to support AAA and AA leagues at the bantam level. AA bantam has served its purpose for as many years as I can remember and I don't see why it needs to change it just to have a competitive team at Westerns, our kids get scouted enough in Sask.

The draft age should move up to 16 years when the kids are actually old enough to play in the league. The O & Q are questioning their draft age and theirs is a year older than ours.

NotTooLate is offline  
Old
02-13-2012, 03:13 PM
  #195
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Sask and NotToo.....

Excellent points and well taken. At the end of the day it's all about development. I get frustrated as much as you guys probably do with the elitest attitude some take. For discussion sake it's nice to throw around ideas to get everyones perspective. I think most people with clear intentions always take the side of development.

Can't argue, Saskatoon is putting out some exceptional players and to that I would say they are getting excellent coaching. Again, back to what I mentioned, we need to focus on retaining good quality coaching at ALL levels. I do feel that if they join the SBAAHL, they'll have to reduce as it is a sheer numbers game. I really think they would be very competitive at 4 teams in that league.

Here's another one I'd throw out.... Any thoughts on paid coaching in SK? It's happening elsewhere with success... It may be the way of the future. Not just incidentals but actual paid coaching. Thoughts guys?

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-13-2012, 03:30 PM
  #196
NotTooLate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Sorry, right now I don't agree with paid coaching in Bantam at any level. Midget AAA is early enough to start with semi-pro type hockey.

It could open the door for corruption that would be extremely detrimental to minor hockey. I would like to have more information on the "success" of paid coaching before I would even consider this being a good idea. If success is only based on winning then I won't agree. Also, if it involves having players move away from home at 13-14, I won't agree.

NotTooLate is offline  
Old
02-14-2012, 07:29 AM
  #197
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
I would surmise there are some examples of under-handedness we could all come up with when it comes to shananigan's on minor hockey boards//coaches//co-ordinators and they don't get paid. A paid coach may have an even higher obligation of accountability. It's not about producing wins it's about finding people who are there for the sake of skill development AND who are at arms length from the team. Parents right now pay high fees at the bantam level and in some areas are not really getting anything but headaches watching players run through entire practices with zero correction on basic, basic, core skill errors. AND over zealous coaches who run their top 4-6 players 40+ min... No one wants to raise too much stink though because it could black list their kids (in their minds).

If a non parent, not associated to the players, has proper credentials and a solid background I don't see it as much of an issue if the parents compensate the coach. So long as the understanding at tryouts was that if your son/daughter made the team there would be an additional up front cost (and actually tell them what that cost would be). It seems like such a rarity to find a positive non parent coaching staff these days at pee wee, bantam and even midget that actually stick around for more than a few seasons. Maybe it brings incentive?

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-14-2012, 07:45 AM
  #198
PokeCheck101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Zone Results

Switching gears...

Anyone have any feedback on zone 5 or any/all zones for that matter?

PokeCheck101 is offline  
Old
02-14-2012, 10:23 AM
  #199
IDC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 50
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotTooLate View Post
Sorry, right now I don't agree with paid coaching in Bantam at any level. Midget AAA is early enough to start with semi-pro type hockey.

It could open the door for corruption that would be extremely detrimental to minor hockey. I would like to have more information on the "success" of paid coaching before I would even consider this being a good idea. If success is only based on winning then I won't agree. Also, if it involves having players move away from home at 13-14, I won't agree.

You don't agree with paid coaching at Bantam level??? What about Peewee AA?? That's what Lloydminster Peewee AA's did this year. (Center Four Hockey League).
Isn't that outrageous?

On the other note, I have heard rumblings from Zone 7, but nothing firm.

IDC is offline  
Old
02-14-2012, 10:49 AM
  #200
hockeylocker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 41
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokeCheck101 View Post
Switching gears...

Anyone have any feedback on zone 5 or any/all zones for that matter?
I am wondering the same thing, with my interest in Zone 5,6, 7, and 8.

hockeylocker is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.