A Peewee players points

[Nobodyonya]

I know this is not the most important objective in youth hockey, but realizing how some coaches keep stats of the players throughout the season how does one know how well a player has performed? I understand each district is going to be different due to the stronger dist.'s vs. weaker. Obviously, if a player has improved there game mentally and physically from beginning to end they have accomplished there goals, but what I am looking for is if a 1st year A Peewee player finishes the year with 30 points is this classified as a good season in the coaches mind? What will the player have to reach in his 2nd year as an A Peewee? I think alot of High school coaches put alot of stock in this gearing up for the future years on who are the goal scorers. What is a good year for a 1st year A Peewee (points)? 2nd year A Peewee (points)? I am sure there are a few factors to be considered, but keep it general

[O-townClown]

Nobody:

I'm sure you'll have lots of people tell you not to worry about points in Pee Wees, but I understand the point of your question. One player - drafted by an NHL team - told me once, "your role players in the NHL were big scorers in college; role players in college were big scorers in HS."

The point is that you seldom move up as a forward based on intangibles. Sure, there are big rugged wings in the NHL, but they tended to be productive power forwards in junior or D1.

A point per game is good at any level, so maybe that's the answer to the question for what is pretty solid as a 2nd year player. 1/2 point per game as a 1st year is pretty good.

If you are from a strong association where teams are winning most games and score 5-10 goals per outing you may need to double those guidelines. Some kids don't play on good teams that may be scoring more like 2-3 per game.

100+ points as a Pee Wee probably isn't that rare. With nearly 50 games I'm sure someone will tell us of a kid that tallies 150 or even 200. You aren't talking about a kid like that obviously since nobody would need to ask.

One reason I feel all kids should play both forward and defense is that the rearguards aren't expected to score. If you can stop the other team and break the puck out of your zone you'll give yourself a lot more opportunity to make teams. Too many good Pee Wee forwards don't skate well backward.

[tomASS]

I don't know too many HS school coaches that even care about the point totals of Pee Wee players.

As far as performance goes, a better judge of the players contribution to the team should +/- , ability to stay out of the sin bin, and practice/game attitude.

[skatehardordie]

And then there is the whole accuracy issue:

1 -- Strictly by scoresheet?
2 -- Strictly by a team stat keeper? don't underestimate the impact a player's dad will have on how many points his kid "earns."
3 -- How accurate are refs getting second assists, any assists, or even the right goal scorer (tips, jersey numbers that get mixed up, etc)?
4 -- Tournament shootout goals count?

It's a mess, to say the least, and any hard numbers at the PW level are not to be considered credible.

[watchdog]

the refs make mistakes but it genrally happens to all. its gona be worse for a player that gets more points since you have an increased oppertunity for mistakes but over all its gona be fairly close.

[GF Hockey #2]

How about +/- for stats? Do many people keep track of these?

An example of why I think this is important is in a previous game we lost 9-4 where our first line was -5 and our second line was +2, what does that say about the top line where the leading goal scorer has about twice as many goals as the next kid?

A guy needs to play some defense also doesn't he?

[egf hockey1]

If a high school coach is basing his future team on what they did in Peewees, that coach is an idiot. Every kid improves at different levels. A kid that scores 9 goals a game at squirts could very well get cut in high school and vice versa. Points mean very little to me at any youth age mite-bantam, because what they did when they were young has nothing to do with what they do as 10th-12th graders. If you were going to rate players on a team on ability by the number of points they score, a kid like Colton Poolman or Gage Ausmus from EGF would not be high on anybodies list. Anybody who has played EGF, I am willing to guarentee, knows who they are though.

[watchdog]

egf- you are way off on this one. well not way off. points have some tale of the tape on players however your best players on any given team through youth hockey 90% of the time are gona be your best players in high school. youll see about a 10% turn around which is to say a top player falling off and others steping up. as for poolman and ausmus they as you say may not have a ton of points but they are your best players on your team and will probley remain that way all the way through high school if they dont fall in that 10%. people dont like to here that. their is other little stipulations for example some kids are younger than the majority on there team and can emerge at the high school ranks when they start playing with kids their own age. i have a 94 bantam that you dont even know is on the team but i have a feeling when hes a junior in high school and the rest of his bantam team has graduated youll know hes their. the fact is however the better kids on that team will probley remain so until their gone.

[egf hockey1]

Watchdog, I absolutely agree with your statement. For the most part your best atheletes are always going to be your best atheletes. I was just commenting on the fact that the thread started with how many points a peewee needs to call it a successful year. I was just trying to emphaise that the stat sheet doesn't make a player a good player or a bad player, and how many goals they score in PeeWees doesn't translate into success at the high school level.

[skatehardordie]

And my point, chiseled down is: There are too many factors regarding accuracy to make anything believable that you may read or are told about a player and his points. As for plus-minus, that's even more of an accuracy crapshoot. if you don't see right away on the ice, that stat keeper is screwed. and there's no scoresheet as a safety net.

[nahc]

A Pee Wee player could score a hat trick a game but if the team is losing does that mean the playeris having a good year? The team concept needs to be included in this scenerio. How many assists did he/she have? Does he/she backcheck and hustle their tails off each shift? Is the skater respectful of coaches, other players, and parents? Do they do those things (ie make the check, move a player out of in front of the net, block a shot, etc) that fans all around this great state of hockey would say, "Nice Play" and "That young man/woman really knows the game"......THAT is what impresses serious observers, not cold stats.....cold stats would bring a coach/scout/spectators out once to see the player and that would be it if they didn't bring anything else to the table......

Just my 2 cents............

[watchdog]

well said nahc.....

[DMom]

As a Dmom I am a huge fan of backchecking forwards, I also love the forecheck--just not when it's the other team doing it!!

There is, however, nothing like watching a great athlete scoring goals. Sometimes you wish for more out of them and than they pull off something amazing and you forgive them, there are just kids. Now Gaborik, that's a different story.

[watchdog]

gaborik thats funny i still love the player but not alot of defense in that boy!