HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

JSR wrote:

YouthHockeyHub wrote:

JSR wrote: It's been my personal observation that IMHO that the 2000 birth year is a more loaded birth year than the 99's. Though I am lookign at it more through a national scope than just MN but I include MN within that.... just what I have observed

That's a fun debate that would be fun to have over a beer. I could either way. I think that 00 has more star power, but 99 may have more depth. Just my .02. I think that '02 is the best class in youth hockey right now...goaltending is only weak link.

I know they are way too young to definitvely say this BUT, based on what I remember about the 1999's and 2000's when they were the same "age" I have been watching some younger ages recently and the 2003 class seems to lack star power and lacks depth relatively speaking (this is not a rip on these kids it's just a relative observation within this broad based discussion so don't go ballistic), whereas the 2004 and 2005 kids seems like there are tons of good players with tons of potential. Again way too young to definitively say but relative to their older peers this is what I have observed thus far. As for 2002's, I am not as well versed on that class, it sort of hits a "gap" of how old my kids are, and thus also not knowledgeable on them in MN but what little I have seen of them locally they do not appear to be an especially strong group here in WI. Fun to watch and see as they grow older and change though....

I noticed this winter and have noticed already this summer that the 2002 age group is much stronger and deeper than the 2003 group. A generalization, I know, but that's just the way it appears to me.

SCBlueLiner wrote:

JSR wrote:

YouthHockeyHub wrote: That's a fun debate that would be fun to have over a beer. I could either way. I think that 00 has more star power, but 99 may have more depth. Just my .02. I think that '02 is the best class in youth hockey right now...goaltending is only weak link.

I know they are way too young to definitvely say this BUT, based on what I remember about the 1999's and 2000's when they were the same "age" I have been watching some younger ages recently and the 2003 class seems to lack star power and lacks depth relatively speaking (this is not a rip on these kids it's just a relative observation within this broad based discussion so don't go ballistic), whereas the 2004 and 2005 kids seems like there are tons of good players with tons of potential. Again way too young to definitively say but relative to their older peers this is what I have observed thus far. As for 2002's, I am not as well versed on that class, it sort of hits a "gap" of how old my kids are, and thus also not knowledgeable on them in MN but what little I have seen of them locally they do not appear to be an especially strong group here in WI. Fun to watch and see as they grow older and change though....

I noticed this winter and have noticed already this summer that the 2002 age group is much stronger and deeper than the 2003 group. A generalization, I know, but that's just the way it appears to me.

I would agree with that even with my limited knowledge of the 2002's, again not trying to be "mean" but the '03 group just seems like the "weakest" group I have seen in a while, like I said the '04 and '05 groups seem stronger and deeper than the 03's as well.... JMHO though

Shinbone_News wrote:I think it bodes well for Minnesota Hockey, in spite of the the Chicken Littles out there ("we're losing ground to Tier 1 AAA and Canadian Juniors!) as well as the Grumpy Old Men ("kids should be fishing and golfing in the summer!")

I've been doing some research on summer hockey elsewhere in the US, and it either isn't happening in any measurable way, or people don't know how to use the internet in the summer. Some of the Tier 1 teams keep chugging along, of course, and maybe put together tournament teams. Nothing like MN though. On a separate thread, I think we've counted more than 40 AAA summer programs at just the 02 level??? That's approaching like half the total number of winter associations!

Summer Hockey IS the reason we don't lose ground to the Tier 1 development. It used to be rare for a Minnesotan to be in the NHL... because all we used to have was just the short (few games) Winter Minnesota model(head in the sand types). They used to close down the rinks in the Summer. The Canadians have always played a ton of Hockey(games)..., and now we do too. It just takes us the whole year to get them in. It's obvious what the change has been.

Gretzky played 80+ games as a ten year old and that was all in the Winter season. He played other sports in the Summer.

Local Summer Hockey...... is NOT Minnesota Hockey.

MrBoDangles wrote:

Shinbone_News wrote:I think it bodes well for Minnesota Hockey, in spite of the the Chicken Littles out there ("we're losing ground to Tier 1 AAA and Canadian Juniors!) as well as the Grumpy Old Men ("kids should be fishing and golfing in the summer!")

I've been doing some research on summer hockey elsewhere in the US, and it either isn't happening in any measurable way, or people don't know how to use the internet in the summer. Some of the Tier 1 teams keep chugging along, of course, and maybe put together tournament teams. Nothing like MN though. On a separate thread, I think we've counted more than 40 AAA summer programs at just the 02 level??? That's approaching like half the total number of winter associations!

Summer Hockey IS the reason we don't lose ground to the Tier 1 development. It used to be rare for a Minnesotan to be in the NHL... because all we used to have was just the short (few games) Winter Minnesota model(head in the sand types). They used to close down the rinks in the Summer. The Canadians have always played a ton of Hockey(games)..., and now we do too. It just takes us the whole year to get them in. It's obvious what the change has been.

Gretzky played 80+ games as a ten year old and that was all in the Winter season. He played other sports in the Summer.

Local Summer Hockey...... is NOT Minnesota Hockey.

I get it, it's all about the total number of games. As we all know, that contradicts USA Hockey's explicit views on practice to game ratios, and that brings us back to the same old argument.

Funny thing is, if you go to any Tier 1 AAA website and check their calendars, you see they typically practice 3X per week maximum, 1.5 hours per. (Natural enough, given that parents have to drive from all over to get there.) And then they stack the games on the weekends because they've flown from Chicago to Denver or Toronto just to play a refereed game. A typical Minnesota PWA team practices 6-8 hours per week, and many play 40+ games, which is actually quite a lot.

In 80+ games, 10 year old Gretzky touched the puck about, oh, 1 million times. Everyone else, not so much.

Do Tier 1 AAA players excel because they play so many games, or do they play so many games because they excel? Also, why do they not follow their own NGO's strictures on practice to game ratios?

Yes, it is the only answer to why Minnesota is now developing NHL talent in substantial numbers.

Nothing much had changed in Canada until recently, now they have areas where the number of Summer teams are exploding.

JSR wrote:

SCBlueLiner wrote:

JSR wrote: I know they are way too young to definitvely say this BUT, based on what I remember about the 1999's and 2000's when they were the same "age" I have been watching some younger ages recently and the 2003 class seems to lack star power and lacks depth relatively speaking (this is not a rip on these kids it's just a relative observation within this broad based discussion so don't go ballistic), whereas the 2004 and 2005 kids seems like there are tons of good players with tons of potential. Again way too young to definitively say but relative to their older peers this is what I have observed thus far. As for 2002's, I am not as well versed on that class, it sort of hits a "gap" of how old my kids are, and thus also not knowledgeable on them in MN but what little I have seen of them locally they do not appear to be an especially strong group here in WI. Fun to watch and see as they grow older and change though....

I noticed this winter and have noticed already this summer that the 2002 age group is much stronger and deeper than the 2003 group. A generalization, I know, but that's just the way it appears to me.

I would agree with that even with my limited knowledge of the 2002's, again not trying to be "mean" but the '03 group just seems like the "weakest" group I have seen in a while, like I said the '04 and '05 groups seem stronger and deeper than the 03's as well.... JMHO though

JSR, just curious, what are you basing your opinion on for the 04 and 05's.. 05's are 7 and maybe 8.... How many of these kids have you even seen? How many 05's are even playing in venue's or events that a guy from Wisconsin would see enough of them to form an opinion that they are deeper? Not saying you are not correct (I really don't know as I have not seen enough 05's, but my 07's class sure looks deep! HA) just trying to understand the basis for your opinion???

helightsthelamp wrote:

JSR wrote:

SCBlueLiner wrote: I noticed this winter and have noticed already this summer that the 2002 age group is much stronger and deeper than the 2003 group. A generalization, I know, but that's just the way it appears to me.

I would agree with that even with my limited knowledge of the 2002's, again not trying to be "mean" but the '03 group just seems like the "weakest" group I have seen in a while, like I said the '04 and '05 groups seem stronger and deeper than the 03's as well.... JMHO though

JSR, just curious, what are you basing your opinion on for the 04 and 05's.. 05's are 7 and maybe 8.... How many of these kids have you even seen? How many 05's are even playing in venue's or events that a guy from Wisconsin would see enough of them to form an opinion that they are deeper? Not saying you are not correct (I really don't know as I have not seen enough 05's, but my 07's class sure looks deep! HA) just trying to understand the basis for your opinion???

I'ts a combination of things, it's the number of 2004 and 2005 kids who have been playing "up" on 2003 and 2004 teams in the offseason and/or playing "up" even in the winter season. It is the quality of play I have seen at the tournament I have been to both last summer and this summer at the 2003 and 2004 age levels. It's what I have seen over the course of the winter season as we get a chance to see ALOT of kids during our Teir 1 travels, even MN kids and it's also talking to coaches I know, some from your very state. I am not saying I am 100% correct and time may prove me totally wrong but this is my personal observation thus far. Even my tiny microcosm of southern WI has shown me that our age groups for whatever reason tend to mirror those of MN and other places in that we don't have the "depth" of MN but our percentages of quality players from our pool tend to be similar to those elsewhere, why I have no idea but I have noticed it over the course of time. We talked about how strong the 97's were earlier in this thread, that mirrors just our local market, saem with the 99's and the 2000s and I am seeing the same trends in the younger ages right now, a very very small sampling of what I mean (and this is by no means my only observation) but down here there is a certain AAA team at the 2003 level and the top 4 players on that team are all 2004 birth years, the coach of that team has been to alot of tourneys over the last couple of years and he has echoed the same thing on his observations..... Whether those trends stay on the same path who knows but they are what they are right now from my personal observations and conversations, also please note I prefaced my original statement with this quote "I know they are way too young to definitvely say this...."

JSR wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote:

JSR wrote: I would agree with that even with my limited knowledge of the 2002's, again not trying to be "mean" but the '03 group just seems like the "weakest" group I have seen in a while, like I said the '04 and '05 groups seem stronger and deeper than the 03's as well.... JMHO though

JSR, just curious, what are you basing your opinion on for the 04 and 05's.. 05's are 7 and maybe 8.... How many of these kids have you even seen? How many 05's are even playing in venue's or events that a guy from Wisconsin would see enough of them to form an opinion that they are deeper? Not saying you are not correct (I really don't know as I have not seen enough 05's, but my 07's class sure looks deep! HA) just trying to understand the basis for your opinion???

I'ts a combination of things, it's the number of 2004 and 2005 kids who have been playing "up" on 2003 and 2004 teams in the offseason and/or playing "up" even in the winter season. It is the quality of play I have seen at the tournament I have been to both last summer and this summer at the 2003 and 2004 age levels. It's what I have seen over the course of the winter season as we get a chance to see ALOT of kids during our Teir 1 travels, even MN kids and it's also talking to coaches I know, some from your very state. I am not saying I am 100% correct and time may prove me totally wrong but this is my personal observation thus far. Even my tiny microcosm of southern WI has shown me that our age groups for whatever reason tend to mirror those of MN and other places in that we don't have the "depth" of MN but our percentages of quality players from our pool tend to be similar to those elsewhere, why I have no idea but I have noticed it over the course of time. We talked about how strong the 97's were earlier in this thread, that mirrors just our local market, saem with the 99's and the 2000s and I am seeing the same trends in the younger ages right now, a very very small sampling of what I mean (and this is by no means my only observation) but down here there is a certain AAA team at the 2003 level and the top 4 players on that team are all 2004 birth years, the coach of that team has been to alot of tourneys over the last couple of years and he has echoed the same thing on his observations..... Whether those trends stay on the same path who knows but they are what they are right now from my personal observations and conversations, also please note I prefaced my original statement with this quote "I know they are way too young to definitvely say this...."

Thanks, I tend to agree with you on 04's, but will totally agree on the they are way to young to definitvely say this about the 05's. That said, I do think the younger groups will be even stronger and deeper as they get older as they seem to be getting more opportunity for additional ice time at a much younger age.
Food for thought, how many of the 99 and 00's were part of the depth of those age groups when they were 7-9 when compared to the depth now at 99 and 00 levels? I would suspect many have improved drastically that has added depth to the top tier players (not the elite few, but depth of kids that contribute at invite level) which may be based upon opportunities for additional ice time. It will be interesting when the now 04 and 05's are at the age of the 99 and 00's, I would suspect they will be even deeper as it seems to me even more kids are getting more opportunities at a much younger age.

helightsthelamp wrote:

JSR wrote:

helightsthelamp wrote: JSR, just curious, what are you basing your opinion on for the 04 and 05's.. 05's are 7 and maybe 8.... How many of these kids have you even seen? How many 05's are even playing in venue's or events that a guy from Wisconsin would see enough of them to form an opinion that they are deeper? Not saying you are not correct (I really don't know as I have not seen enough 05's, but my 07's class sure looks deep! HA) just trying to understand the basis for your opinion???

I'ts a combination of things, it's the number of 2004 and 2005 kids who have been playing "up" on 2003 and 2004 teams in the offseason and/or playing "up" even in the winter season. It is the quality of play I have seen at the tournament I have been to both last summer and this summer at the 2003 and 2004 age levels. It's what I have seen over the course of the winter season as we get a chance to see ALOT of kids during our Teir 1 travels, even MN kids and it's also talking to coaches I know, some from your very state. I am not saying I am 100% correct and time may prove me totally wrong but this is my personal observation thus far. Even my tiny microcosm of southern WI has shown me that our age groups for whatever reason tend to mirror those of MN and other places in that we don't have the "depth" of MN but our percentages of quality players from our pool tend to be similar to those elsewhere, why I have no idea but I have noticed it over the course of time. We talked about how strong the 97's were earlier in this thread, that mirrors just our local market, saem with the 99's and the 2000s and I am seeing the same trends in the younger ages right now, a very very small sampling of what I mean (and this is by no means my only observation) but down here there is a certain AAA team at the 2003 level and the top 4 players on that team are all 2004 birth years, the coach of that team has been to alot of tourneys over the last couple of years and he has echoed the same thing on his observations..... Whether those trends stay on the same path who knows but they are what they are right now from my personal observations and conversations, also please note I prefaced my original statement with this quote "I know they are way too young to definitvely say this...."

Thanks, I tend to agree with you on 04's, but will totally agree on the they are way to young to definitvely say this about the 05's. That said, I do think the younger groups will be even stronger and deeper as they get older as they seem to be getting more opportunity for additional ice time at a much younger age.
Food for thought, how many of the 99 and 00's were part of the depth of those age groups when they were 7-9 when compared to the depth now at 99 and 00 levels? I would suspect many have improved drastically that has added depth to the top tier players (not the elite few, but depth of kids that contribute at invite level) which may be based upon opportunities for additional ice time. It will be interesting when the now 04 and 05's are at the age of the 99 and 00's, I would suspect they will be even deeper as it seems to me even more kids are getting more opportunities at a much younger age.

All completely reasonable, won't argue with you on any of it

In our association this winter our class of 5th graders (older 02s some younger 01s) was huge by our standards. Our class of 4th graders (older 03s some younger 02s) is tiny. Maybe 1/4 the size of the 5th grade class. Other associations see this? If so, might explain why the 03 class is not as strong. If the overall numbers are down significantly, the talent pool is not as deep.