HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Ive seen Walker from Edina, Pitlick from Wayzeta, Sullivan from EP, and Gersich from Chaska. Those 4 stand out to me. I think Sullivan has the best shot, but Walker is the best player. I havent seen the Fargo Flyers though. Do they have anybody that is really good?

Pitlick and Walker. The other two are good I've seen both of them play as well, but I wouldn't put them in the same category as Pitlick and Walker.

Someone please tell me - this thread is a joke, right?

Maybe I should start a super Mite thread so I can talk about my 7 year old's D-1 offers.

HockeyMN1 wrote:Gersich from Chaska

Frank Gersich's son?

Walker is GREAT, but see how he'll take to checking. He is small, but very explosive speed, great hands, and very smart player.

You got to love it, people getting mad about people talking about Squirts. Pucktime do you think that the AAA Coaches or MN Made Staff, or Pee Wee and Bantam A Coaches don't watch and talk to the Squirt A players Coaches to see how these kids are coming along. If a coach see's a good player for his AAA team he is going to get info on that player. The Pee Wee A Coaches are looking to see who is coming up and how they are developing. It is just a fact of life these days. If we are going to talk MN youth hockey you have to start at Squirts if you don't want a Squirt thread then lets take down the Pee Wee abd Bantan Threads and only have HS threads. It is fun and a good time every team in the metro and maybe the state hears how great Edina SA our and want to messure their team to Edina, so don't get all worked up because your sons name didn't make it on the thread. We don't know that those top Squirts will be great at Pee Wee's yet or we don't know if the great Pee Wee's will be great at Bantams. But it is fun to talk about it and to have a place where everyone can talk about their team, association and hockey in the State Of Hockey!

Messier wrote:You got to love it, people getting mad about people talking about Squirts. Pucktime do you think that the AAA Coaches or MN Made Staff, or Pee Wee and Bantam A Coaches don't watch and talk to the Squirt A players Coaches to see how these kids are coming along. If a coach see's a good player for his AAA team he is going to get info on that player. The Pee Wee A Coaches are looking to see who is coming up and how they are developing. It is just a fact of life these days. If we are going to talk MN youth hockey you have to start at Squirts if you don't want a Squirt thread then lets take down the Pee Wee abd Bantan Threads and only have HS threads. It is fun and a good time every team in the metro and maybe the state hears how great Edina SA our and want to messure their team to Edina, so don't get all worked up because your sons name didn't make it on the thread. We don't know that those top Squirts will be great at Pee Wee's yet or we don't know if the great Pee Wee's will be great at Bantams. But it is fun to talk about it and to have a place where everyone can talk about their team, association and hockey in the State Of Hockey!

Not mad at all - just unreal to think about people talking up a 9 or 10 year old kid that could either be way better after a few more years or have already hit his peak. Chances are they will be different players at a Peewee or Bantam level than they are as a squirt, so how much "scouting" are coaches really doing.

There are always going to be a couple of kids that stand out as Squirts, that barring injury or whatever, you just know they are good enough to play at the highest level in college. Blake Wheeler comes to mind, watched him play in the Squirt A tournament in Rochester, he was a man amongst boys.

It can be fun to follow a players steps throughout their career to see how they are doing.

HockeyMN1 wrote:Ive seen Walker from Edina, Pitlick from Wayzeta, Sullivan from EP, and Gersich from Chaska. Those 4 stand out to me. I think Sullivan has the best shot, but Walker is the best player. I havent seen the Fargo Flyers though. Do they have anybody that is really good?

The best Squirts are not even playing Squirt hockey how about Wallin with WBL or Norman with the 96 Fire.

MoreCowBell wrote:

HockeyMN1 wrote:Ive seen Walker from Edina, Pitlick from Wayzeta, Sullivan from EP, and Gersich from Chaska. Those 4 stand out to me. I think Sullivan has the best shot, but Walker is the best player. I havent seen the Fargo Flyers though. Do they have anybody that is really good?

The best Squirts are not even playing Squirt hockey how about Wallin with WBL or Norman with the 96 Fire.

The 96 Fire aren't even in squirts. They are pw. 97 Fire are squirts.

Elk River has a 96 Squirt playing on the A PW team also. Deremko (sp), I think he is one of their top scorers.

brand from park rapids moved up to squirts in 2nd grade he is one of their best players

girsich is the best i've seen.

This thread is ridiculous.....

ice00breaker wrote:This thread is ridiculous.....

Oh boy, do you realize you just asked for a little more cow bell? You may have hit a nerve.

cutanddrive wrote:

ice00breaker wrote:This thread is ridiculous.....

Oh boy, do you realize you just asked for a little more cow bell? You may have hit a nerve.

CutNdrive, nice 13th post, have you ever posted anything positive, or do you just like to throw potshots at people, and your potshots are kind of lame. When your not cutting and driving what do, watch in house Jr. Gold games?

squirts??????????????? it has nothing to do with how they will end up

i second that... peewees is the youngest we should talk because thats how u know skill is when they can get hit.

Third that!

Years ago I was at the State Tournament and I put stars by three players I thought were unbelieveable. Turns out they were; Broten, Broten, & Erickson.

3 years later I noticed a 9th grader with a weird # who didn't leave the ice for the whole 1st period; Housley - he gets a star in the program.

People putting their kids out there as the best, people naming kids from their association, and coaches picking their players is what these "best" threads seem to come down to, usually. They are generally ridiculous!

At least have some guts and insight and enlighten us with a someone who really lights the world on fire, who really is, possibly, the best.

So why is it that people who post questions like this always get jumped on? Could it be that they are simply curious to know if there are any boys out there that have excelled to this point?
I think this is an acceptable question. I don't think the original post said anything about where the kids will be in 2-4 or 6 years?
In hockey I coach by a moto I am pretty proud of, "Enjoy the moment but plan for the future". Could it be that this person has a kid that is a squirt and is curious to know who or where kids are that are perfomirng above the curve?

I have seen kids at teh mite level that are absolutely amazing, guess what? They are fun to watch as long as you enjoy them for what they are. A youngster that has a lot of talent that probably loves the game.

Fun to watch at any age.

skateguymn wrote:So why is it that people who post questions like this always get jumped on? Could it be that they are simply curious to know if there are any boys out there that have excelled to this point?
I think this is an acceptable question. I don't think the original post said anything about where the kids will be in 2-4 or 6 years?
In hockey I coach by a moto I am pretty proud of, "Enjoy the moment but plan for the future". Could it be that this person has a kid that is a squirt and is curious to know who or where kids are that are perfomirng above the curve?

I have seen kids at teh mite level that are absolutely amazing, guess what? They are fun to watch as long as you enjoy them for what they are. A youngster that has a lot of talent that probably loves the game.

Fun to watch at any age.

Well Said!

It is fun to see who the above average kids at the squirt level are and see how they develop when they get older. I have a Fargo International book from many years ago. It is interesting to look back at the kids that I had stars by and see how they are doing at the high school level. It isn't about the next great one, because these kids are way to young for that. They are just good Squirt players, period.

By the way the Squirt years are July 1, 1996 - June 30, 1998. Quit calling them 96 and 97 or 99. They are Squirts, PeeWees, Bantams from September to March.

skateguymn wrote:So why is it that people who post questions like this always get jumped on? Could it be that they are simply curious to know if there are any boys out there that have excelled to this point?
I think this is an acceptable question. .

Because their motive is generally to mention their kid, a kid that they coach, or someone from their association. This is boring, and if you read these "best" threads for the next 6 months, you will see a pattern.
I have read more than one instance where a player/parent either talks about themselves/player, or asks a "loaded" question with the intention of getting their name printed. Go right ahead if you want.

I find nothing wrong with talking about talented young players.

I think it's important to note: For as much ice time these kids receive. They better be the talk of the town. No one panic! Other kids will catch up and surpass these kids someday.

I know many kids at the same age almost same ability doing great. The difference? These kids have not gone through the stick handling, shooting drills these other kids have gone through. They might not have the same amount of ice time. When it all comes down to it. Ice time, ice time and ice time is a huge factor at this age. If kids at this age spend 3-4 hours a day on the ice. Then yes they should be on top of the curve. Eventually talent will take over.
Lou Nanne was on KFAN yesterday. He was asked what he thought of kids playing hockey all year long. He said he didn't care for it. He said his grandkids play all year long. He understands why people do it. But he also said that if a kid loves the game enough and has the talent. He doesn't need to skate all year. He also mentioned that the kids should be playing other sports to fine tune their skills. The skills they fine tune will help them in the long run in hockey.

My point: Don't get too excited about Squirts.

Some will pan out to be superstars.
Some will burn out.
Some will just quit.
And some will have decent hockey careers.


Let them have fun.

hockey129 wrote:squirts??????????????? it has nothing to do with how they will end up

Ya, it does. Maybe not in D1 or pros, but do you think that some huge squirt on some B team that can't skate will be a 2 year peewee A because he can hit? I don't. The great squirts will be good peewees too. Besides, its not like the squirts dont throw a check or two. The refs allow kids to bend the rules a little at that age.