Year long hockey

[lkool]

I have a question of the parents of kids who play hockey year round. Are your kids playing other sports? At what age did they start playing summer hockey?

My mite is currently in three sports and none of them are Hockey. He loves hockey, but he insists that he will not play summer hockey. Not a league or a camp. I don't really want him in a league at this point, but training would be good. I could force him, but what a waste of time and money that would be.

[Air Force 1]

My boys play other sports. One also plays baseball, football, and golf. The other plays lacrosse and golf.

My older son started playing summer hockey after his first year of Pee Wees, my younger started after his last year of mites.

I have a feeling his mind will change, especially if his friends play summer hockey, when he hears about what they are doing at the tournaments. BUT, if he doesn't want to, don't make him. Summer hockey is an option, it is NOT mandatory. Let him do what is fun for him and he will probably go farther than some or all of his buddies that do play hockey in the summer.

[muckandgrind]

Here we go again......

[HockeyGuy81]

Yep, I think this is only the 2nd time ever this discussion has came up on the youth hockey forum. Looking forward to this turning into a 55 post thread

[sorno82]

This is usually a set up question, but you need to remember that skill without passion does not go very far. If the kid does not want to play summer hockey, then he should not play. Sounds like he is active enough the way it is. One of my kids wants to play summer hockey, so he plays, the other one doesn't, so he doesn't. Rather simple.

[ilike2score]

Year round is not just hockey. If you want to be good you have to do it all the time. My examples that are very near and dear to me: My niece is a top level gymnast for her age where it is mandatory to train year around and the cost is double that of hockey. My daughters best friend is a Soccer Stud. She plays year around soccer at triple the cost of hockey.(don't ask me why, cause I do not know) My daughter is into Dance. Dance easily tops hockey in regards to time committment and expense. In comparison my hockey experience has been relatively inexpensive...and that is with both winter and summer hockey.

[O-townClown]

Year round is not just hockey. If you want to be good you have to do it all the time. My examples that are very near and dear to me: My niece is a top level gymnast for her age where it is mandatory to train year around and the cost is double that of hockey. My daughters best friend is a Soccer Stud. She plays year around soccer at triple the cost of hockey.(don't ask me why, cause I do not know) My daughter is into Dance. Dance easily tops hockey in regards to time committment and expense. In comparison my hockey experience has been relatively inexpensive...and that is with both winter and summer hockey.

I like, you've made an extremely broad generalization. So because early-sport specialization is important for gymnastics "you have to" for other sports?

No.

It tends to be that participants in individual sports benefit from early specialization. In your example, gymnastics, it is due to the young age when the athlete peaks and incredibly high skill component.

For team sports, it is not necessary to specialize at a young age if your main concern is being as good as you can be as an adult. This is important: if you are talking about having a kid that is the best Squirt or Pee Wee you absolutely benefit from a year 'round focus.

Take a look at basketball. Recent MVPs were not playing basketball as their primary sport as kids. Dirk Nowitzki and Steve Nash played soccer. Ditto the not as recent Akeem Olajuwon.

The success of Sweden's hockey players can also be attributed in part to an emphasis on soccer. NHL teams regularly warm up before games by kicking a ball around. All sports require excellent lower-body coordination and this is better developed through a complementary sport like soccer or tennis than it is by playing more hockey.

Hard to imagine a top pianist or elite tennis player that didn't have an almost singular focus on their craft from a young age through childhood. There's enough evidence that hockey players don't need this to safely say you can become a world-class player despite taking time off and having other interests. (In fact, all studies I've seen stress the importance of those.)

[InigoMontoya]

For team sports, it is not necessary to specialize at a young age if your main concern is being as good as you can be as an adult. This is important: if you are talking about having a kid that is the best Squirt or Pee Wee you absolutely benefit from a year 'round focus.

Why wouldn't your kid shoot to be the best squirt or peewee while he or she is a squirt or peewee? A bunch of kids spend way more hours than I would ever spend pouring through the dictionary every night with the goal of being the best speller. The goal is to be the best as a ten or twelve year old, not to look forward to being the best speller as an adult; heck Microsoft has made it so we don't need to be able to spell a lick as an adult - this forum is usually proof of that.

Take a look at basketball.

I'm in the camp with those that say the skating element of hockey makes this comparison null and void. Soccer and hockey may indeed have a similar skill set - if hockey comes naturally for a kid, soccer may come naturally for him, as well. I don't think that correlates to 'play soccer and you'll be a better hockey player'.

[muckandgrind]

Year round is not just hockey. If you want to be good you have to do it all the time. My examples that are very near and dear to me: My niece is a top level gymnast for her age where it is mandatory to train year around and the cost is double that of hockey. My daughters best friend is a Soccer Stud. She plays year around soccer at triple the cost of hockey.(don't ask me why, cause I do not know) My daughter is into Dance. Dance easily tops hockey in regards to time committment and expense. In comparison my hockey experience has been relatively inexpensive...and that is with both winter and summer hockey.

I like, you've made an extremely broad generalization. So because early-sport specialization is important for gymnastics "you have to" for other sports?

No.

It tends to be that participants in individual sports benefit from early specialization. In your example, gymnastics, it is due to the young age when the athlete peaks and incredibly high skill component.

For team sports, it is not necessary to specialize at a young age if your main concern is being as good as you can be as an adult. This is important: if you are talking about having a kid that is the best Squirt or Pee Wee you absolutely benefit from a year 'round focus.

Take a look at basketball. Recent MVPs were not playing basketball as their primary sport as kids. Dirk Nowitzki and Steve Nash played soccer. Ditto the not as recent Akeem Olajuwon.

The success of Sweden's hockey players can also be attributed in part to an emphasis on soccer. NHL teams regularly warm up before games by kicking a ball around. All sports require excellent lower-body coordination and this is better developed through a complementary sport like soccer or tennis than it is by playing more hockey.

Hard to imagine a top pianist or elite tennis player that didn't have an almost singular focus on their craft from a young age through childhood. There's enough evidence that hockey players don't need this to safely say you can become a world-class player despite taking time off and having other interests. (In fact, all studies I've seen stress the importance of those.)

Isn't it ironic that we always want to tell parents that the chances of their kids playing D1 (let alone the NHL) is extremely small and we should basically tell our kids to abandon the dream so they won't be let down when it doesn't happen...yet, on the other hand, we tell parents that they should be focusing the development on their player for that very goal. It's always long-term development, over short term gain.

It's my opinion that the focus should be on the here and now as it pertains to what happens on the ice, and the long term goals (post high school) should be for what happens OFF the ice.

Doesn't that make more sense??

[old goalie85]

Good point, all the talk is about "the american developement model' skills skills skills I think my kids enjoy playing games and yes as terrible as this may sound they like to win as well.[ Some of my kids differ skill wise but all five perfer playing games to skating cones] I understand kids need practice, and they don't improve much playing games. My wife and I enroll our children in sports for the FUN, teamwork,family time part of the deal. Not for The american development part.

[O-townClown]

Why wouldn't your kid shoot to be the best squirt or peewee while he or she is a squirt or peewee? A bunch of kids spend way more hours than I would ever spend pouring through the dictionary every night with the goal of being the best speller. The goal is to be the best as a ten or twelve year old, not to look forward to being the best speller as an adult; heck Microsoft has made it so we don't need to be able to spell a lick as an adult - this forum is usually proof of that.

I'm in the camp with those that say the skating element of hockey makes this comparison null and void. Soccer and hockey may indeed have a similar skill set - if hockey comes naturally for a kid, soccer may come naturally for him, as well. I don't think that correlates to 'play soccer and you'll be a better hockey player'.

Inigo, the word is actually "poring". I only bring that up because you used the analogy. It illustrates a good point. How you define what is important greatly affects your views. You say spelling only matters as a pre-teen, but in my line of work it is important to have strong writing skills as an adult. Use of bad spelling or poor grammar means being perceived as less credible as a consultant.

Regarding Microsoft's spell check, your comment indicates that you don't even know what it does. Or maybe you don't know what kids learn form a Spelling Bee. "Pouring" is not spelled incorrectly. You have used a bad homonym. No spell check will catch that. When kids learn spelling, they also learn what words mean, in hopes they can then use them correctly. Contrast that with competitive Scrabble, where the top players are usually engineers or similar because they aren't wordsmiths, just merely people proficient at playing a game with a formulaic approach.

Back to hockey. You can say skating is an essential skill in hockey, rendering comparisons to basketball null and void. Even though I won't concede that point, we are just sharing opinions. (My argument is that lower body coordination is good for all sports. Maybe we substitute tennis for soccer. It also helps teach tremendous lower-body agility. NHL teams regularly juggle a soccer ball in a circle before games. The European influence in elite leagues can't be ignored. Does it help them as hockey players that they cross trained? People smarter than us say yes.)

Sweden, a small nation, is able to win medals at world competitions. Why? They don't play year 'round like kids at Minnesota Made. To excel in hockey you need to have great spatial understanding. I think that is better learned through soccer. Tactically, consider the Torpedo style fashioned by their national team. It could only have been born in a soccer-playing nation. Also, the Swedes I play with are far likely to back-pass...even into their own zone...to regroup. Clearly an approach favored in soccer. To this point North Americans tend to think in a linear fashion when it comes to hockey. As evidenced by tournament results, it isn't clearly superior to other approaches.

I have no problem with kids that want to focus on hockey. My problem is when adults say it is "the only way".

[muckandgrind]

Sweden, a small nation, is able to win medals at world competitions. Why? They don't play year 'round like kids at Minnesota Made.

Just that simple, huh? Don't play year-round and you win medals?

Funny side note....my son's AAA team played a visiting team from Sweden....LAST SUMMER.

To this point North Americans tend to think in a linear fashion when it comes to hockey. As evidenced by tournament results, it isn't clearly superior to other approaches.

Did you pay attention to the Olympics, World Juniors and the World U-17's over the past year?

I have no problem with kids that want to focus on hockey. My problem is when adults say it is "the only way".

I'm in complete agreement with you here.

[O-townClown]

Isn't it ironic that we always want to tell parents that the chances of their kids playing D1 (let alone the NHL) is extremely small and we should basically tell our kids to abandon the dream so they won't be let down when it doesn't happen...yet, on the other hand, we tell parents that they should be focusing the development on their player for that very goal. It's always long-term development, over short term gain.

It's my opinion that the focus should be on the here and now as it pertains to what happens on the ice, and the long term goals (post high school) should be for what happens OFF the ice.

Doesn't that make more sense??

Muck, this is why I underlined the part I did. Our family was in Boston this weekend for my son's first "AAA" hockey tournament. There is no way to watch kids that are 7-8 years old and conclude that the best approach if they are going to be the best at 9 is to play less hockey. No way.

I refrain from telling people what they need to do, so your point is well taken. ADM is a concept, how we process the recommendations will ultimately determine whether they improve our children as players. (Am I the only one that keeps saying the ADM is really no different than USA Hockey's prior age recommendations?)

When people talk about long-term success - which I'll define as playing HS hockey in Minnesota, Prep School hockey in the Northeast, or AAA Midget or NAHL/USHL level Junior hockey - I am quick to tell them I am not worried about that. Most kids don't play serious competitive hockey past Bantams, so youth hockey is all they have. (This certainly was the case for me.)

My son thanked me for making the trip possible and I gave him a hug and said, "you'll have memories from this for the rest of your life." I know I do from my youth sporting activities.

This much I know: there will be disagreement over the best way to develop athletes forever. A friend sent me a recent Sports Illustrated story on some baseball phenom named Jason Heyward. It talks about a new paradigm in player development and how he is the poster child for early specialization. New paradigm? Really? Why? The reining MVP was the National Player of the Year in football and All-Metro in basketball - his third sport - as a HS senior.

But kids need to specialize because it is the only way.

No.

[O-townClown]

Just that simple, huh? Don't play year-round and you win medals?

Funny side note....my son's AAA team played a visiting team from Sweden....LAST SUMMER.


Did you pay attention to the Olympics, World Juniors and the World U-17's over the past year?

Muck, you oversimplified it! My comment is that the Swedish model differs from what other countries do. Ask yourself why does Sweden do well and then try to figure out if anything can be learned from their approach. Actually, don't need to! That is the process that led to ADM recommendations.

Sweden's success in international competition speaks for itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_II ... _medalists

Remember when talking about "World Juniors" or "U17" that other countries may not emphasize them as much. The US has been successful? They better be! After all, the NTDP - which takes children from their mothers - has been around for more than a decade. Americans were quick to deride similar "athlete identification programs" in Australia, East Germany, old Russia, new China and other nations and often cited their evils when losing Olympic medals to other nations.

I think we agree on most of this. I Like's first post is what I take exception with because it proclaims the death of the multi-sport athlete.

[muckandgrind]

Just that simple, huh? Don't play year-round and you win medals?

Funny side note....my son's AAA team played a visiting team from Sweden....LAST SUMMER.


Did you pay attention to the Olympics, World Juniors and the World U-17's over the past year?

Muck, you oversimplified it! My comment is that the Swedish model differs from what other countries do. Ask yourself why does Sweden do well and then try to figure out if anything can be learned from their approach. Actually, don't need to! That is the process that led to ADM recommendations.

Sweden's success in international competition speaks for itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_II ... _medalists

Remember when talking about "World Juniors" or "U17" that other countries may not emphasize them as much. The US has been successful? They better be! After all, the NTDP - which takes children from their mothers - has been around for more than a decade. Americans were quick to deride similar "athlete identification programs" in Australia, East Germany, old Russia, new China and other nations and often cited their evils when losing Olympic medals to other nations.

I think we agree on most of this. The first post is what I take exception with because it proclaims the death of the multi-sport athlete.

Hey, I'm all for kids playing multiple-sports...if that's what they want to do. However, I'm not convinced that playing another sport (like baseball) will necessarily improve a kid's hockey skills. My opinion is that if a kid is a good athlete, he will most likely be good at multiple sports...so it's really more of the "chicken or the egg", IMO. Did playing multiple sports make the kid a better athlete, or was the kid predisposed to be good at multiple sports?

In Joe Mauer's case, my bet is that with him it was all genetics. He was just born to be a good athlete and had the drive and determination to excel at everything he did. IMO, if his only interest was baseball, he would still be the player he is today. Just my opinion,

[lkool]

Hey, I'm all for kids playing multiple-sports...if that's what they want to do. However, I'm not convinced that playing another sport (like baseball) will necessarily improve a kid's hockey skills. My opinion is that if a kid is a good athlete, he will most likely be good at multiple sports...so it's really more of the "chicken or the egg", IMO. Did playing multiple sports make the kid a better athlete, or was the kid predisposed to be good at multiple sports?

In Joe Mauer's case, my bet is that with him it was all genetics. He was just born to be a good athlete and had the drive and determination to excel at everything he did. IMO, if his only interest was baseball, he would still be the player he is today. Just my opinion,

I certainly think a persons genetics play a role in many areas of life weather it is art, music, sports, computer programming, ETC...

With that said early development of certain athletic skills are also extremely important.

Baseball is a great compliment to hockey. Baseball is a great way to develop Hand/Eye coordination and the idea of shifting weight from one foot to another is crucial in skating and batting.

[O-townClown]

Hey, I'm all for kids playing multiple-sports...if that's what they want to do. However, I'm not convinced that playing another sport (like baseball) will necessarily improve a kid's hockey skills. My opinion is that if a kid is a good athlete, he will most likely be good at multiple sports...so it's really more of the "chicken or the egg", IMO. Did playing multiple sports make the kid a better athlete, or was the kid predisposed to be good at multiple sports?

In Joe Mauer's case, my bet is that with him it was all genetics. He was just born to be a good athlete and had the drive and determination to excel at everything he did. IMO, if his only interest was baseball, he would still be the player he is today. Just my opinion,

Agree completely. Regarding baseball, duh! Cross-training sports for hockey could be soccer, tennis, football, basketball. I don't think playing baseball makes you better at anything other than patience.

What you say about Mauer and baseball is probably true, but remember he had chances to be professional in two sports as a result of his participation in more than one as a teen. Just say he had a vision problem in his right eye and could no longer hit at a .300+ clip...he'd still have been able to pursue football. Chris Weinke actually started games as an NFL QB. He doesn't get that by focusing on just baseball as a kid.

People that coach at college levels are very frustrated by the limitations certain kids have because they can't do things athletically. They are the first to tell young athletes to play more than one sport. (Their advice changes when they are close to college age.)

Like you, I see the hypocrisy. USA Hockey preaches game limits, but the NTDP will recruit kids that blew through those as Squirts. Yeah, the kid that played 80 games then winds up being better as a Bantam if you compare him to someone with just 35 ice touches a year that played six things in moderation.

[O-townClown]

With that said early development of certain athletic skills are also extremely important.

Baseball is a great compliment to hockey. Baseball is a great way to develop Hand/Eye coordination and the idea of shifting weight from one foot to another is crucial in skating and batting.

Kool, I retract my statement then! I just don't like baseball. Agree with hitting, which is why it might be better to just take your kid to the batting cage rather than get on an actual team.

If you don't like baseball.

Like me.

[lkool]

Kool, I retract my statement then! I just don't like baseball. Agree with hitting, which is why it might be better to just take your kid to the batting cage rather than get on an actual team.

If you don't like baseball.

Like me.

I like baseball, but he plays because he enjoys it. It's more relaxed than hockey and a fun social experience.

[InigoMontoya]

I will never understand why there are those that assume that if a kid plays a little hockey in the summer that he doesn't play baseball or go swimming or ride his bike. It is well documented that Joe sells a bazillion hitting aids because we all want our kids to spend the winter in the garage or in the basement working on their swings - just like Joe did.

I Like's post doesn't proclaim the death of anything. It simply states that if you want to be good at something, you should practice. It also mentions that other activities are far more demanding than summer hockey in Minnesota. I agree, as I have friends that pay more money per year to have their kids swim competitively 12 months per year and friends that fork over $3-5,000 for summer volleyball plus the expense of traveling to the corners of the US.

[JSR]

I know this, that is all walks of life there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Some kids may do very well skating year round with little or no break and may have the desire and passion and love for the game grow by doing so. They may even develop just fine atheltically etc...

On the other hand I would say these kids are few and far between and the reason coaches, USA Hockey and others suppor the idea of the ADM and the idea of playing multiple sports is because too many kids who do not flourish playing year round are being forced to by overzealous parents trying to create the next Crosby, when in fact those kids might develop into a better hockey player by cross training in other sports.

I am not sure how you identify which kids are which but I would dare say there is no right or wrong way in general. Just right and wrong for a particular child, but who's to say what is right and what is wrong for that child except for that child and his/her parents. There are actually might even be multiple right ways for a particular child.

That said, I think the the experts believe cross training through multiple spros early on will lead to the majority of children developing physically and mentally better under their model and that the minority will still do what they are doing regardless. I don't know that they are right for sure, but for my parenting style it seems to make some sense. It may not for others.

But as I said initially, there is always more than one way to skin a cat and none are inherently right or wrong.

[muckandgrind]

I know this, that is all walks of life there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Some kids may do very well skating year round with little or no break and may have the desire and passion and love for the game grow by doing so. They may even develop just fine atheltically etc...

On the other hand I would say these kids are few and far between and the reason coaches, USA Hockey and others suppor the idea of the ADM and the idea of playing multiple sports is because too many kids who do not flourish playing year round are being forced to by overzealous parents trying to create the next Crosby, when in fact those kids might develop into a better hockey player by cross training in other sports.

I am not sure how you identify which kids are which but I would dare say there is no right or wrong way in general. Just right and wrong for a particular child, but who's to say what is right and what is wrong for that child except for that child and his/her parents. There are actually might even be multiple right ways for a particular child.

That said, I think the the experts believe cross training through multiple spros early on will lead to the majority of children developing physically and mentally better under their model and that the minority will still do what they are doing regardless. I don't know that they are right for sure, but for my parenting style it seems to make some sense. It may not for others.

But as I said initially, there is always more than one way to skin a cat and none are inherently right or wrong.

As I and other have said, I would have more respect for these so-called "experts" if they had some data to back up their theories and practiced what they preached....what I'm seeing are these same "experts" recruiting kids for their NTDP in Ann Arbor who have been playing year round hockey and bring them to their facility at the age of 16 to focus strictly on hockey the whole year. I doubt they are encouraging the players on their U-17 and U-18 teams to play football and baseball.

[InigoMontoya]

D1 college coaches are included in this group - lots of rhetoric about multisports and making sand castles in the summer, but rosters full of kids that skated a bunch.

[muckandgrind]

D1 college coaches are included in this group - lots of rhetoric about multisports and making sand castles in the summer, but rosters full of kids that skated a bunch.

Speaking of which...Is Troy Jutting (Mankato head-coach) still on the bench for the 97 Blades? Yes...I checked and he's still there.

[old goalie85]

I talked to a parent at New Hope on sun. He has a 01 Blade. Team is a who's who of hockey names. [Chorske, Nevers, Jutting, Pitlick,Fairchild] This parent told me that coach Jutting comes and runs some of the practices. These guys all played alot of hockey at ahigh level and I'm sure they know what they are doing in terms of skating kids year round.