2014 Duluth IceBreaker's Tourney Predictions

hockeychopper · Post by **hockeychopper** » Thu Jan 09, 2014 1:49 pm

The Duluth IceBreaker's Tourney is coming up in a week, any predictions? Looks like a strong field as usual at all the levels.

HockeyStorm · Post by **HockeyStorm** » Thu Jan 09, 2014 4:33 pm

10A - Edina
10B - Superior
12A - Roseau
12B - Wayzata
14A - Duluth
14B - Dryden

lrugland · Post by **lrugland** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 7:26 pm

Not liking the way the pool play works. You could have 3 strong teams in the same pool and they never get to play each other. The top team in each pool should be the best team while playing against the teams in that pool.

In the Duluth pool play you could have all 3 teams with 3 wins and it could be decided by fewest penalties. Not the best way to have a team advance. But we will have to see how it all works out.

Any team can win this tourney as we have seen in the past. Just depends on which team is healthy and ready to play.

U14ABystander · Post by **U14ABystander** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:33 pm

I agree that the pools are set up poorly. It seems every year that the Duluth tournament organizers figure out a way to ensure that the top teams in the tournament cannot possibly meet in the championship round. Once is a coincidence. Every year is purposeful. Let's Play Hockey rankings aren't always exactly right obviously, but they are usually pretty close with the 1st five teams. Why not grab a copy of LPH before you set up your pools so that come Sunday, you have the best teams competing for championships rather than a couple good teams and a couple other teams that were lucky enough to be pooled in weaker pools?

skateittillyouloseit · Thu Jan 16, 2014 11:56 pm

The Icebreaker used to be the premier winter tourney. Last year at 12A alone, 18 of the top 20 teams in the state participated. Now with the odd format, poor seeding and less of the top talent, it is just another out of towner.

Bluewhitefan · Post by **Bluewhitefan** » Mon Jan 20, 2014 11:56 am

skateittillyouloseit wrote:The Icebreaker used to be the premier winter tourney. Last year at 12A alone, 18 of the top 20 teams in the state participated. Now with the odd format, poor seeding and less of the top talent, it is just another out of towner.

Interesting that a team that goes 1-2 in pool play gets to the championship round based on goal differential, but a team that goes 3-0 has to play in the Silver bracket - format needs some work.

And at 12B, what is the Farmington association thinking? The team outscores their opponents 33-2 vs. a pretty good B field. Challenge these girls and play A. They are getting nothing out of it. Except, of course, trophies. Congrats.

Cdale · Post by **Cdale** » Mon Jan 20, 2014 2:57 pm

Bluewhitefan wrote:
skateittillyouloseit wrote:The Icebreaker used to be the premier winter tourney. Last year at 12A alone, 18 of the top 20 teams in the state participated. Now with the odd format, poor seeding and less of the top talent, it is just another out of towner.
Interesting that a team that goes 1-2 in pool play gets to the championship round based on goal differential, but a team that goes 3-0 has to play in the Silver bracket - format needs some work.

And at 12B, what is the Farmington association thinking? The team outscores their opponents 33-2 vs. a pretty good B field. Challenge these girls and play A. They are getting nothing out of it. Except, of course, trophies. Congrats.

It's Farmington.....enough said.

Gophers2487 · Post by **Gophers2487** » Thu Jan 23, 2014 2:18 pm

Bluewhitefan being that you are so knowledgeable about Farmington's U12B situation I am surprised you would be so judgmental. First off 5 girls that were eligible to play U12 hockey went to the boys side leaving Farmington with a team of 16 skaters. On that team there are 8 girls that have never played A hockey at any level, so would it help their development to play A level when many of them are struggling to keep up at the B level? 90% percent of the scoring comes from one line and that is the reason that the games are lopsided. Nobody had a crystal ball to see into the future to know this would happen. If on the A side that line would maybe be plus one or two a game the second line would be minus probably one or two and the third line would be minus 3 to 4 each game and have no development at all because they would be so over matched all they would do is chase. Farmington had to make a decision that wasn't taken lightly but I guess they should have called and got your opinion because you know best.

hockeychopper · Post by **hockeychopper** » Thu Jan 23, 2014 3:18 pm

Gophers2487, that's a lose/lose situation. No matter what way you would have gone people aren't going to agree and be happy. At the end of the day you have to do what's right for the majority of the kids not just 3 or 4. So I applaud whoever made the decision and stuck to their decision, even though my guess is there was a group of parents who were upset about the decision. At the end of the day we have to keep in mind, this is a game and these are kids. Granted we all pay a lot of money to have our kids play hockey, and for those handful of A players they won't be as challenged playing against B teams but they need to be the example and set the bar for the less experienced kids. A great opportunity for development! Although, those A players must be very good after looking at some of the scores put up by the Farmington 12B team, wow!

Bluewhitefan · Post by **Bluewhitefan** » Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:27 pm

Gophers2487 wrote:Bluewhitefan being that you are so knowledgeable about Farmington's U12B situation I am surprised you would be so judgmental. First off 5 girls that were eligible to play U12 hockey went to the boys side leaving Farmington with a team of 16 skaters. On that team there are 8 girls that have never played A hockey at any level, so would it help their development to play A level when many of them are struggling to keep up at the B level? 90% percent of the scoring comes from one line and that is the reason that the games are lopsided. Nobody had a crystal ball to see into the future to know this would happen. If on the A side that line would maybe be plus one or two a game the second line would be minus probably one or two and the third line would be minus 3 to 4 each game and have no development at all because they would be so over matched all they would do is chase. Farmington had to make a decision that wasn't taken lightly but I guess they should have called and got your opinion because you know best.

I find it hard to believe, based on their scores, that they have anyone that "can barely keep up" at the B level. I suspect they had a fairly good idea how it would turn out - 4 or 5 championships plus a state title. And so what if 8 of them had never played A? Seems to me they had a strong B team last year. Those girls should have gotten the chance to play A.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:35 am

I assume since 3 of them made the peewee A team, they would have made a 12A team. It also looks like they went to state as a 12 A team last year.

At the risk of sounding nosey, why wouldn't these 5 want to skate in a successful program that would be fielding competetive A and B teams? It may be a microcosm of what is happening state wide.

Gophers2487 · Post by **Gophers2487** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:15 pm

Bluewhitefan, the Duluth tournament was not a pretty good field. Two teams in that field were ranked in the top ten, Farmington and Wayzata. They played in the semi's in a very competitive game. Wayzata moved through the field pretty easy as well. Your belief that playing A hockey regardless of who you leave behind shows how little regard you have for development, playing up is fine if you are in the ballpark to compete if not they just become overwhelmed and there is no skill development and that is where half the Farmington team is skill wise. If you are going to make judgments on Farmington's U12B talent pool then why don't you use the time you have used to belittle 12 year old girls accomplishments to come out and watch a game, then break down what is best for them.

Tigerhockey2012 · Post by **Tigerhockey2012** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:20 pm

Gophers2487 wrote:Bluewhitefan, the Duluth tournament was not a pretty good field. Two teams in that field were ranked in the top ten, Farmington and Wayzata. They played in the semi's in a very competitive game. Wayzata moved through the field pretty easy as well. Your belief that playing A hockey regardless of who you leave behind shows how little regard you have for development, playing up is fine if you are in the ballpark to compete if not they just become overwhelmed and there is no skill development and that is where half the Farmington team is skill wise. If you are going to make judgments on Farmington's U12B talent pool then why don't you use the time you have used to belittle 12 year old girls accomplishments to come out and watch a game, then break down what is best for them.

Did you seek out a co-op? Sounds to me like you had the perfect team for such an arrangement and doing so may have kept some of your high end girls in girls hockey. I've been through pretty much the exact same scenario and co-ops have worked great for us. I do however understand that the word co-op is a dirty word to some. And there are those around here who would say it was not a good thing. But I can tell you, the girls that have stuck it out with us, have benefited from it. They would not have gotten near the development playing 12B as top end 12B players as they did in 12A as bottom end 12A players. These girls were ready to lead in 12A when they hit their second year. Two years of 12A made them so much more ready to compete than two years of 12B would have. Co-ops are the answer when you have funny numbers and a mix of A and B talent.

C_R · Post by **C_R** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 5:01 pm

InigoMontoya wrote: At the risk of sounding nosey, why wouldn't these 5 want to skate in a successful program that would be fielding competetive A and B teams? It may be a microcosm of what is happening state wide.

Maybe it's in part because a great female hockey player on a boys team is identified as "the next big thing" ... and the many great female hockey players playing on girls' teams continue to go unnoticed in the "media" and at their local rink:

http://www.youthhockeyhub.com/news_arti ... _id=967184

observer · Post by **observer** » Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:24 am

Almost all teams and associations lose players and it can be a bummer. The only solution is to grow instead of fussing about player loses that you don't control. If it's a thin mite group you will face challenges in the future.

Bluewhitefan · Post by **Bluewhitefan** » Tue Jan 28, 2014 8:21 am

Gophers2487 wrote:Bluewhitefan, the Duluth tournament was not a pretty good field. Two teams in that field were ranked in the top ten, Farmington and Wayzata. Your belief that playing A hockey regardless of who you leave behind shows how little regard you have for development, playing up is fine if you are in the ballpark to compete if not they just become overwhelmed and there is no skill development and that is where half the Farmington team is skill wise. If you are going to make judgments on Farmington's U12B talent pool then why don't you use the time you have used to belittle 12 year old girls accomplishments to come out and watch a game, then break down what is best for them.

I didn’t know that the measure of a pretty good field was how many teams were in the top 10. There were some decent true B teams in the field, and there are many outside of the top 10. The fact that the only competitive game for Farmington was against the second ranked team in the state only adds to my argument.

I did watch them – twice during the tournament. Development? Please. The team is 31-1 and has outscored their opponents 145-20. Don’t preach to me about development. That’s a group of girls that should be playing A. Of course they have a bottom end, every team does. When did I belittle 12 year old accomplishments? I’m saying they're good – too good to play B hockey – the stats don’t lie. I think you’re doing the belittling when you say that half the team is overwhelmed and struggling to keep up at the B level. If that’s really true, and I saw no evidence of it in Duluth, then you’re coach must surely be shortening the bench, which is a completely different issue at 12B. Maybe the answer, as Tiger suggested, would have been a co-op, then ALL the girls could have gotten development – of course they probably wouldn’t be 31-1.

Gophers2487 · Post by **Gophers2487** » Tue Jan 28, 2014 1:43 pm

All knowing Bluewhitefan,
"And at 12B, what is the Farmington association thinking? The team outscores their opponents 33-2 vs. a pretty good B field. Challenge these girls and play A. They are getting nothing out of it. Except, of course, trophies. Congrats." That sounds pretty condescending to me. I said that of the 8 girls that had never played A level hockey before many were struggling to keep up at the B level. That is not an insult it is where their skill level is at. Those girls are an important part of the Farmington team and are working hard and developing because they are at a level that gives them a chance, but you would know that because you are an expert on development and what is best for the Farmington team.

Farmington looked into several options for coops but all fell through, that obviously would have been a much better situation but there has to be someone to coop with, should have called you as I am sure with all of your backseat knowledge you could have found one. As far as what makes a pretty good field I would think having only 2 of the top ten teams in the state would be a pretty good indicator of the strength of the field, of course there were many other good teams but if you are trying to grade Farmington by scores than maybe you should do it against top ten teams, as they are a top ten ranked team.

Stats don't lie you say well then lets take a look at the numbers you used. Farmington is 31-1 outscoring their opponents 145-20, so that is an average of 4.53 goals for to .6 goals against per game. I looked up Wayzata Blue's numbers and they came into their game against Farmington 25-0 outscoring their opponents 117-15 that is an average of 4.68 goals for to .6 goals against. Correct me if I am wrong but that is slightly better than Farmington's numbers and as you say stats don't lie. How come you aren't questioning Wayzata's choice to not have a second A team? They have four teams which is the same as Edina has, and they have two A teams. Wayzata would have 40 some girls to chose from not just 17 that all would have to move up. Their are several other very good teams that could beat Farmington on any given day but you aren't mocking them for the tournaments they are winning and questioning their associations. You obviously have something against Farmington and that is fine because your opinion is probably coming from a very biased position.

hockeychopper · Post by **hockeychopper** » Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:37 pm

Stats don't lie you say well then lets take a look at the numbers you used. Farmington is 31-1 outscoring their opponents 145-20, so that is an average of 4.53 goals for to .6 goals against per game. I looked up Wayzata Blue's numbers and they came into their game against Farmington 25-0 outscoring their opponents 117-15 that is an average of 4.68 goals for to .6 goals against. Correct me if I am wrong but that is slightly better than Farmington's numbers and as you say stats don't lie. How come you aren't questioning Wayzata's choice to not have a second A team? They have four teams which is the same as Edina has, and they have two A teams. Wayzata would have 40 some girls to chose from not just 17 that all would have to move up. Their are several other very good teams that could beat Farmington on any given day but you aren't mocking them for the tournaments they are winning and questioning their associations. You obviously have something against Farmington and that is fine because your opinion is probably coming from a very biased position.[/quote]

Gopher2487 there is absolutely no need to justify why Farmington has only 1 U12 team this year and it happens to be a U12B team. No need to go through the stats and compare what others are doing. Farmington did what they had to do in order to allow the 16 or 17 families to have an option for their kids to play girls hockey. Kudos for doing that. Some decided the boys program would be better for them and that's OK too. At the end of the day, this is a game. There isn't 1 girl on any of these teams that will make a living playing the sport of hockey. This is a means for the kids to get some exercise, stay healthy and an opportunity to play a game with their friends. Those of us with kids who are healthy and able to play should be grateful for the opportunity. There is a group of volunteers trying to do the right thing for the kids, allowing them this opportunity to play a game and enjoy time with their friends. It doesn't matter if they go 50-0 or 0-50, these kids will make the best out of it and shared the experience with friends. Good luck the remainder of the season and enjoy the heck out of it!

a-rod · Post by **a-rod** » Tue Jan 28, 2014 8:56 pm

I had a similar thought about this but at the U10 level. Hastings has two U10b teams both of whom are undefeated in district play. I found it weird that they don't have a u10a team, you would think with 2 undefeated B teams you could have take the top 7 from each and make an A team.
Doesn't seem good for development but good for win column.

observer · Post by **observer** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:09 am

I had a similar thought about this but at the U10 level. Hastings has two U10b teams both of whom are undefeated in district play. I found it weird that they don't have a u10a team, you would think with 2 undefeated B teams you could have take the top 7 from each and make an A team.

Doesn't seem good for development but good for win column.

That is an unusual one. Someone from Hastings will have to advise us but maybe scheduling? But, District 8 should have sufficient numbers of both 10A and 10B teams. It tried to go to the D8 website but it's a joke. Updated this year but didn't use Ngin platform which is stupid. Not near the information of other District sites including standings.

I think you're right and they should have, based on what they know today, had an A team and a B team. Smells like funny parent stuff trying to protect spots for their daughters but even that is difficult to understand. Sometimes coaching crews want to stay together at the expense of the players. The hockey development director, or girls director, should have handled this different.

Sometimes associations just don't know because of peaks and valleys in numbers. Maybe this is a bubble of first year girls and they thought A would be a big jump. Hopefully next season Hastings can offer both U10A and U10B. They do have both A & B at U12 which also makes it confusing.

a-rod · Post by **a-rod** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 6:11 pm

To answer the one part of your question there are more than enough a and b teams in d8. Eagan has an A and a B and if anyone should have gone with 2 B teams. I think every other team that has the numbers for 2 teams has one of each. A couple only have numbers for one team so went B which makes sense.

Benfishin · Post by **Benfishin** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 10:14 pm

[quote="a-rod"]I had a similar thought about this but at the U10 level. Hastings has two U10b teams both of whom are undefeated in district play. I found it weird that they don't have a u10a team, you would think with 2 undefeated B teams you could have take the top 7 from each and make an A team.
Doesn't seem good for development but good for win column.[/quote]

Hastings had to take 4 of their top U10's to play U12B to fill spots and they thought it was going to be more like 5 or 6. Hindsight says they still could of have had an A and B team. They have a few talented U-8's that have helped as well. Lessoned learned. Next year they will have A teams at both U12 and U10.

a-rod · Post by **a-rod** » Fri Jan 31, 2014 8:50 am

Thanks benfishin, was just curious how those decisions worked as I am sort of new to the sport. Sort of felt bad for their top end girls having to play vs some new to skate girls. We tied them anyway, so this isn't sour grapes