Sammy is correct. Good player, not great. Not playing last winter really hurt him. 27 and 28 much better.
IMO, his first Blades coach did him a real disservice, by having him be the center of their offense. 17 doesn't have a physical presence. Will not work down low. No grit to his game.
Very nice kid though...
what happened to 2000 Blades?
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
foil_up wrote:Sammy is correct. Good player, not great. Not playing last winter really hurt him. 27 and 28 much better.
IMO, his first Blades coach did him a real disservice, by having him be the center of their offense. 17 doesn't have a physical presence. Will not work down low. No grit to his game.
Very nice kid though...
Very easily a top 10 00 and probably higher, IMO that would probably make him "great" at this time. Or is there less than 10 "great" players in MN at this level in your opinion? That says nothing about the future - only time will tell.
1st Blades coach a disservice? Really? At 8 years old he should have known he was a winger not a center? You are the cats meow.
Heard about this thread and almost died laughing, Foil.
17 is a great player by ALL accounts. I have no ties to any of his teams, parents, or coaches. I know the Blades coach you reference (and he's never coached my kid) and to question him for using him as 9 year old at Center qualifies as Bad Post of the Year material.
Imagine if he played him (arguably the best 9 year old at the time) at wing and then they lost? The criticism would have been, "how come 17 isn't a Center???" It's nearly impossible coaching 9 year old AAA hockey especially if they are in the top 1% because if they don't win then it's bad coaching, and if the do win it's the talent (not the coaching). Losing breeds discontent, discontent breeds leaving.
17 is a great player by ALL accounts. I have no ties to any of his teams, parents, or coaches. I know the Blades coach you reference (and he's never coached my kid) and to question him for using him as 9 year old at Center qualifies as Bad Post of the Year material.
Imagine if he played him (arguably the best 9 year old at the time) at wing and then they lost? The criticism would have been, "how come 17 isn't a Center???" It's nearly impossible coaching 9 year old AAA hockey especially if they are in the top 1% because if they don't win then it's bad coaching, and if the do win it's the talent (not the coaching). Losing breeds discontent, discontent breeds leaving.
-
DOUG GLATT
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:18 pm
Respectfully disagree with you snyper12 and completely agree you foil-up! I'll take it further though and say I can think of 15 - 20 kids at the 2000 level just in the metro area alone that are better "players" than #17. Heck, there are at least three kids on his own team that are much better! Two years ago his size made him better. Now, he has lost that edge and has fallen off the pace of the top players in the all the other skill categories also - he's a below average skater at best and his stick skills have dropped off (or maybe just a bunch of players have surpassed him) not to mention that he hasn't checked anyone in two years!
The bigger question that begs to be discussed though is where does he and a bunch of his team mates land for the 2013 season!!!!!!
The bigger question that begs to be discussed though is where does he and a bunch of his team mates land for the 2013 season!!!!!!
snyper12 wrote:foil_up wrote:Sammy is correct. Good player, not great. Not playing last winter really hurt him. 27 and 28 much better.
IMO, his first Blades coach did him a real disservice, by having him be the center of their offense. 17 doesn't have a physical presence. Will not work down low. No grit to his game.
Very nice kid though...
Very easily a top 10 00 and probably higher, IMO that would probably make him "great" at this time. Or is there less than 10 "great" players in MN at this level in your opinion? That says nothing about the future - only time will tell.
1st Blades coach a disservice? Really? At 8 years old he should have known he was a winger not a center? You are the cats meow.
DOUG GLATT wrote:Respectfully disagree with you snyper12 and completely agree you foil-up! I'll take it further though and say I can think of 15 - 20 kids at the 2000 level just in the metro area alone that are better "players" than #17. Heck, there are at least three kids on his own team that are much better! Two years ago his size made him better. Now, he has lost that edge and has fallen off the pace of the top players in the all the other skill categories also - he's a below average skater at best and his stick skills have dropped off (or maybe just a bunch of players have surpassed him) not to mention that he hasn't checked anyone in two years!
The bigger question that begs to be discussed though is where does he and a bunch of his team mates land for the 2013 season!!!!!!
snyper12 wrote:foil_up wrote:Sammy is correct. Good player, not great. Not playing last winter really hurt him. 27 and 28 much better.
IMO, his first Blades coach did him a real disservice, by having him be the center of their offense. 17 doesn't have a physical presence. Will not work down low. No grit to his game.
Very nice kid
Very easily a top 10 00 and probably higher, IMO that would probably make him "great" at this time. Or is there less than 10 "great" players in MN at this level in your opinion? That says nothing about the future - only time will tell.
1st Blades coach a disservice? Really? At 8 years old he should have known he was a winger not a center? You are the cats meow.
Doug Glatt/snyper12/foil-up
You know your talking about your own son someday right... What are you going to say next summer when your kids lost an edge? Don't worrie I'm sure someone else will...
-
DOUG GLATT
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:18 pm
Yah MNM JMH - and if I have a kid that has fallen off I definitely WON'T shield him from this criticism or any other feedback or comparisons - I'll SHARE IT. If it's the truth, it's the TRUTH and I believe the adversity would only work in my kid's favor as a motivational tool. It's how the real world works and just because they are kids doesn't mean they aren't able to handle someone telling the truth. Fortunately there is a place in youth hockey where everything is good and comparisons don't need to be made and kids don't need to be motivated - it's called association C teams.
MNM JMH wrote:DOUG GLATT wrote:Respectfully disagree with you snyper12 and completely agree you foil-up! I'll take it further though and say I can think of 15 - 20 kids at the 2000 level just in the metro area alone that are better "players" than #17. Heck, there are at least three kids on his own team that are much better! Two years ago his size made him better. Now, he has lost that edge and has fallen off the pace of the top players in the all the other skill categories also - he's a below average skater at best and his stick skills have dropped off (or maybe just a bunch of players have surpassed him) not to mention that he hasn't checked anyone in two years!
The bigger question that begs to be discussed though is where does he and a bunch of his team mates land for the 2013 season!!!!!!
snyper12 wrote:
Doug Glatt/snyper12/foil-up
You know your talking about your own son someday right... What are you going to say next summer when your kids lost an edge? Don't worrie I'm sure someone else will...
DOUG GLATT wrote:Yah MNM JMH - and if I have a kid that has fallen off I definitely WON'T shield him from this criticism or any other feedback or comparisons - I'll SHARE IT. If it's the truth, it's the TRUTH and I believe the adversity would only work in my kid's favor as a motivational tool. It's how the real world works and just because they are kids doesn't mean they aren't able to handle someone telling the truth. Fortunately there is a place in youth hockey where everything is good and comparisons don't need to be made and kids don't need to be motivated - it's called association C teams.What number is your johnny? Oh I will be sure to Wat h him ever so close.MNM JMH wrote:DOUG GLATT wrote:Respectfully disagree with you snyper12 and completely agree you foil-up! I'll take it further though and say I can think of 15 - 20 kids at the 2000 level just in the metro area alone that are better "players" than #17. Heck, there are at least three kids on his own team that are much better! Two years ago his size made him better. Now, he has lost that edge and has fallen off the pace of the top players in the all the other skill categories also - he's a below average skater at best and his stick skills have dropped off (or maybe just a bunch of players have surpassed him) not to mention that he hasn't checked anyone in two years!
The bigger question that begs to be discussed though is where does he and a bunch of his team mates land for the 2013 season!!!!!!
Doug Glatt/snyper12/foil-up
You know your talking about your own son someday right... What are you going to say next summer when your kids lost an edge? Don't worrie I'm sure someone else will...