HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

If a late birthdate kid is playing on a AAA team with almost all the other kids a grade older........

I would think this would be a huge advantage going into the high school years.

What are your thoughts?

MrBoDangles wrote:If a late birthdate kid is playing on a AAA team with almost all the other kids a grade older........

I would think this would be a huge advantage going into the high school years.

What are your thoughts?

I kind of thought that too. On the other hand it can hurt those kids Junior prospect (aka USHL). These kids graduate "late" for their birth year and it costs them USHL eligibility and many times, because USHL teams can only roster so many "older" players these kids are left to the NAHL or even Tier 3 junior ranks despite their ability. Not impossible to overcome by any means but it is a problem. On the other hand a "late" birthdate AAA kid who is in with his normal grade and is one of the youngest in his class (assuming his skill set is good enough) has a huge advatnage when it comes to after high school opportunities because he has so much eligibilty left. But if we take that out of the equation, LOTS of parents hold their kdis back a year just so they'll have an athletic advantage in high school. It happens in all sports not just hockey. How much advantage it actually ends up being I am not sure, but I know atleast a dozen kids jus tin our small town who's parents have done this. I am at the other end of the spectrum in that two of my three kids are the youngest kids in their grade in the school district and the third kid is a January birthday (good for hockey, just average for school not young not old )

in mn you are lucky in that you can have it both ways...

Take a march for example...youngest 1/3 for mn oldest 1/3 for AAA

Sept is oldest 1/3 for mn and youngest 1/3 for AAA

So if the march is talented enough to make winter A teams he gets a longer season of tougher competion...so i say the 1st half kids have the advantage IF they have some natural talent

For the Sept it can be a catch becasue you use your age advantage for the longer winter season then you are young for AAA or USA events

I think is where you see kids sometimes have great association seasons then shine less at the advance events or AAA...but this effect lessens as they age

If the goal is post high school you don't want to be a mature 19yr old...you will get bypassed for a less mature equal talent 17 yr old

black sheep wrote:in mn you are lucky in that you can have it both ways...

Take a march for example...youngest 1/3 for mn oldest 1/3 for AAA

Sept is oldest 1/3 for mn and youngest 1/3 for AAA

So if the march is talented enough to make winter A teams he gets a longer season of tougher competion...so i say the 1st half kids have the advantage IF they have some natural talent

For the Sept it can be a catch becasue you use your age advantage for the longer winter season then you are young for AAA or USA events

I think is where you see kids sometimes have great association seasons then shine less at the advance events or AAA...but this effect lessens as they age

If the goal is post high school you don't want to be a mature 19yr old...you will get bypassed for a less mature equal talent 17 yr old

Yep, your last sentence was the one I focused on (and I agree with you obviously) because it seems like the original post was mostly projecting about high school and not youth hockey as much

The premise of the hockey parts in "Outliers" isn't simply that older kids are better in youth hockey, it's that the late birthdays in a place like Ontario get cut annually, receive less training, and become discouraged to the point of dropping out before reaching their ultimate potential. (Which you can assume is the same if you are January or December.)

In a less-populated city in Minnesota you could argue that the late birthday gets "pulled up" and benefits from competing against the earlier birthdays.

As posted above, a Minnesota kid has in-season and off-season opportunities on different cuts. NHL Draft is the same because the hockey cut is Jan 1 and then the draft uses Sept 1. Imagine how much that helps the kids at age 17/18 when they get lumped in with the class behind them.

receive less training, and become discouraged to the point of dropping out before reaching their ultimate potential.

I think this is a fair point in the 'a little extra ice as a mite' discussion, as well. The extra ice does make the kid a little better than a kid that doesn't get any - I don't think that point is disputed. If it is enough to edge that kid onto an A team rather than a B team, then the gap widens; even the largest associations put their best coaches on the A team, not the B1 or B2 team - in small associations, the disparity is even greater. Will the head start be enough to get kid A onto the varsity rather than kid B? Not if kid A is 5'2" 125lbs and kid B is 6'2" 225, but if they're both 5'11" 195, that could be a big difference compounded over six years.

Early on, late birth years are usually at a disadvantage physically since tehy may indeed be close to a year younger than those they are playing against. I would much rather have my skater play "up", ie against older and better competition. They might struggle earler on, but each year when fall hockey starts they are way ahead of those kids who are older and playing against younger kids. Can think of examples right now where kids who were days away from being a 95 could not participate in the elite 15 tryouts but are MUCH better than a lot of the kids who made it to St. Cloud............I think it all evens out and if you have the talent, they will find you no matter if you make these "elite" teams, are drafted by the USHL, etc........

nahc wrote:Early on, late birth years are usually at a disadvantage physically since tehy may indeed be close to a year younger than those they are playing against. I would much rather have my skater play "up", ie against older and better competition. They might struggle earler on, but each year when fall hockey starts they are way ahead of those kids who are older and playing against younger kids. Can think of examples right now where kids who were days away from being a 95 could not participate in the elite 15 tryouts but are MUCH better than a lot of the kids who made it to St. Cloud............I think it all evens out and if you have the talent, they will find you no matter if you make these "elite" teams, are drafted by the USHL, etc........

Well said!!

nahc wrote:Early on, late birth years are usually at a disadvantage physically since tehy may indeed be close to a year younger than those they are playing against. I would much rather have my skater play "up", ie against older and better competition. They might struggle earler on, but each year when fall hockey starts they are way ahead of those kids who are older and playing against younger kids. Can think of examples right now where kids who were days away from being a 95 could not participate in the elite 15 tryouts but are MUCH better than a lot of the kids who made it to St. Cloud............I think it all evens out and if you have the talent, they will find you no matter if you make these "elite" teams, are drafted by the USHL, etc........

It does all even out for the uttermost talented. For example Sidney Crosby is an August birthday, no doubt it was never a disadvantage for him. However, I have been thinking about it and the "opportunity' thing is still such a huge component. I have to imagine there are hundreds of kids in MN that are every bit as good as my a kid from Southern WI for example and just as many that are better, however it's likely this WI kid will get opportunities most of those kids will never get at younger ages because he is not competing with the depth of talent those MN kids are. Consequently this kid will get opportunities at younger ages which will beget opprtunities at older ages which will allow this kid to advance his skills at a rate others will not just ebcasue of where they were born or who they know. Yes to get to teh D1 level or beyond still will require a certain amunt of geneetic kindness as well as a work ethic that will allow for the amount of practice necessary to reach those levels but there is still that important "opportunity" component that cannot be overlooked, so kids who are 'older" for their birth year seem to get those early advantages and it compunds form there, BUT this "age" related advatnage seems also to depend on region and the other opportunity components within that region. We discussed this elsewhere when I made the comment that Wisconsin has a Team Wisconsin at the high school age that competees in the Elite League and that Team is as good as really any team in MN or the country, the difference being that WI can only field ONE of those teams where MN can field four.

Here is the breakdown of birthdates from the Advanced 15's (1995) National Camp held in Rochester the past week. 77% of the players in the camp had first half of the year birthdates. It would be interesting to see how this broke down for the 16's and 17's to see if this patern holds true as the players mature.


Total # of Percentage
Players By Month Cummulative
Jan 40 18.5% 18.52%
Feb 33 15.3% 33.80%
Mar 22 10.2% 43.98%
Apr 34 15.7% 59.72%
May 18 8.3% 68.06%
Jun 20 9.3% 77.31%
Jul 10 4.6% 81.94%
Aug 12 5.6% 87.50%
Sep 10 4.6% 92.13%
Oct 7 3.2% 95.37%
Nov 5 2.3% 97.69%
Dec 5 2.3% 100.00%
Total 216 100.0%
[/img]

Those numbers are just that, numbers. There is not enough data to start any meaningful analysis with it. 5-10 years of advanced roster birthdays would be a good start to look at before drawing any sort of conclusions.
But thanks for the info.

Just curious what was the breakdown with the Mn players?

Keep in mind that these are just numbers, but here is the breakdown of the Minnesota players. It closely follows the National numbers with 77% of the players being born in the first half of the year.

Total # of Percentage
Players By Month Cummulative
Jan 3 13.6% 13.64%
Feb 4 18.2% 31.82%
Mar 1 4.5% 36.36%
Apr 1 4.5% 40.91%
May 5 22.7% 63.64%
Jun 3 13.6% 77.27%
Jul 2 9.1% 86.36%
Aug 0 0.0% 86.36%
Sep 2 9.1% 95.45%
Oct 0 0.0% 95.45%
Nov 1 4.5% 100.00%
Dec 0 0.0% 100.00%
Total 22 100.0%

95Dad wrote:Keep in mind that these are just numbers, but here is the breakdown of the Minnesota players. It closely follows the National numbers with 77% of the players being born in the first half of the year.

Total # of Percentage
Players By Month Cummulative
Jan 3 13.6% 13.64%
Feb 4 18.2% 31.82%
Mar 1 4.5% 36.36%
Apr 1 4.5% 40.91%
May 5 22.7% 63.64%
Jun 3 13.6% 77.27%
Jul 2 9.1% 86.36%
Aug 0 0.0% 86.36%
Sep 2 9.1% 95.45%
Oct 0 0.0% 95.45%
Nov 1 4.5% 100.00%
Dec 0 0.0% 100.00%
Total 22 100.0%

isnt the really good play from av varsity a august b-day?

trippedovertheblueline wrote:

95Dad wrote:Keep in mind that these are just numbers, but here is the breakdown of the Minnesota players. It closely follows the National numbers with 77% of the players being born in the first half of the year.

Total # of Percentage
Players By Month Cummulative
Jan 3 13.6% 13.64%
Feb 4 18.2% 31.82%
Mar 1 4.5% 36.36%
Apr 1 4.5% 40.91%
May 5 22.7% 63.64%
Jun 3 13.6% 77.27%
Jul 2 9.1% 86.36%
Aug 0 0.0% 86.36%
Sep 2 9.1% 95.45%
Oct 0 0.0% 95.45%
Nov 1 4.5% 100.00%
Dec 0 0.0% 100.00%
Total 22 100.0%

isnt the really good play from av varsity a august b-day?

No he has a July birthday...

I have a Dec.1 and it sucks for summer hockey. He is one of the better kids in the winter, but in the summer he has to play with the older kids who played up one level all season. I also have a june B-day that we started school late. so he is the oldest in his class but has to play winter hockey with the kids one and two grades ahead of him. He will have to play high school hockey in 9th grade.I think it will all work out in 10th grade and may even be an advantage.

One big advantage, for late birthdate summer kids, is the two Summers of checking before the winter programs even start to.

dakotakid wrote:I have a Dec.1 and it sucks for summer hockey. He is one of the better kids in the winter, but in the summer he has to play with the older kids who played up one level all season. I also have a june B-day that we started school late. so he is the oldest in his class but has to play winter hockey with the kids one and two grades ahead of him. He will have to play high school hockey in 9th grade.I think it will all work out in 10th grade and may even be an advantage.

You should be happy for your December child...he gets to dominate in the winter and be the go to guy, then come summer, he gets challenged by more skilled players which in time will make him a better player...I know this because I have a late December child and I believe this has made him a better player overall...it's all good.

Reg7 wrote:

dakotakid wrote:I have a Dec.1 and it sucks for summer hockey. He is one of the better kids in the winter, but in the summer he has to play with the older kids who played up one level all season. I also have a june B-day that we started school late. so he is the oldest in his class but has to play winter hockey with the kids one and two grades ahead of him. He will have to play high school hockey in 9th grade.I think it will all work out in 10th grade and may even be an advantage.

You should be happy for your December child...he gets to dominate in the winter and be the go to guy, then come summer, he gets challenged by more skilled players which in time will make him a better player...I know this because I have a late December child and I believe this has made him a better player overall...it's all good.

I agree with Reg7. I have a mid Dec kid and have seen the same thing. I think playing against mostly kids who are a year ahead of him (in the summer) has made him a better player. In the summer I'd rather have him be a decent player at a higher level than a top player at a lower level because I think it will make him a better player in the end.