Minor Hockey Talks - Hockey Forum

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 2:33 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:37 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:26 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Systems and development have nothing to do with one another.

Regardless of your skill level everyone plays the same "system".

All kids will "develope" from the beginning to the end of a season, it's up to your child how much they want to develope. That doesn't mean time on ice either, it means their focus and drive with the time spent on the ice. There is a big difference.

I know kids who arw on the ice all day everyday and don't get better than others not on the ice as much. It all starts upstairs, if that's not focused then being on the ice won't help much.

Systems and development are different and in this instance, systems hinder development. Coaches should be isolating smaller scenarios, such as defencemen being able to retrieve the puck while somebody is on their heels, or defencemen being taught how to look for open teammates and advance the puck up the ice. It doesn't come naturally to kids to fight for the puck in a corner - they need to be taught how to best position their body, use their feet and how to help other teammates in that position. That's what should be highlighted in practices over and over again until every defenceman is comfortale with it in a lower pressure environment, then they can apply it in a game. If your whole practice is systems then you are not learning these types of fundamentals.

There might be a handful of players in AA that don't put in the many hours extra on the ice because they are very athletically gifted or lucky. For everyone else, time on ice is very important. Maybe not every day, but you all want to go to AAA...if you think that those players aren't putting in the work, well, you will find out. Of course, it is important to find good quality ice time.

A lot of what you describe can be developed by exposing the kids to sports outside of hockey. Body positioning, compete, confidence, spacing, vision etc are all things you can improve by playing other sports at whatever level makes sense for the kid.

Have you considered this?

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 2:54 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 2:33 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:37 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:26 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Systems and development have nothing to do with one another.

Regardless of your skill level everyone plays the same "system".

All kids will "develope" from the beginning to the end of a season, it's up to your child how much they want to develope. That doesn't mean time on ice either, it means their focus and drive with the time spent on the ice. There is a big difference.

I know kids who arw on the ice all day everyday and don't get better than others not on the ice as much. It all starts upstairs, if that's not focused then being on the ice won't help much.

Systems and development are different and in this instance, systems hinder development. Coaches should be isolating smaller scenarios, such as defencemen being able to retrieve the puck while somebody is on their heels, or defencemen being taught how to look for open teammates and advance the puck up the ice. It doesn't come naturally to kids to fight for the puck in a corner - they need to be taught how to best position their body, use their feet and how to help other teammates in that position. That's what should be highlighted in practices over and over again until every defenceman is comfortale with it in a lower pressure environment, then they can apply it in a game. If your whole practice is systems then you are not learning these types of fundamentals.

There might be a handful of players in AA that don't put in the many hours extra on the ice because they are very athletically gifted or lucky. For everyone else, time on ice is very important. Maybe not every day, but you all want to go to AAA...if you think that those players aren't putting in the work, well, you will find out. Of course, it is important to find good quality ice time.

A lot of what you describe can be developed by exposing the kids to sports outside of hockey. Body positioning, compete, confidence, spacing, vision etc are all things you can improve by playing other sports at whatever level makes sense for the kid.

Have you considered this?

All of our kids play hockey and all are athletic, including time spent on dryland sports every day.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 2:33 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:37 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:26 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Systems and development have nothing to do with one another.

Regardless of your skill level everyone plays the same "system".

All kids will "develope" from the beginning to the end of a season, it's up to your child how much they want to develope. That doesn't mean time on ice either, it means their focus and drive with the time spent on the ice. There is a big difference.

I know kids who arw on the ice all day everyday and don't get better than others not on the ice as much. It all starts upstairs, if that's not focused then being on the ice won't help much.

Systems and development are different and in this instance, systems hinder development. Coaches should be isolating smaller scenarios, such as defencemen being able to retrieve the puck while somebody is on their heels, or defencemen being taught how to look for open teammates and advance the puck up the ice. It doesn't come naturally to kids to fight for the puck in a corner - they need to be taught how to best position their body, use their feet and how to help other teammates in that position. That's what should be highlighted in practices over and over again until every defenceman is comfortale with it in a lower pressure environment, then they can apply it in a game. If your whole practice is systems then you are not learning these types of fundamentals.

There might be a handful of players in AA that don't put in the many hours extra on the ice because they are very athletically gifted or lucky. For everyone else, time on ice is very important. Maybe not every day, but you all want to go to AAA...if you think that those players aren't putting in the work, well, you will find out. Of course, it is important to find good quality ice time.

A lot of what you describe can be developed by exposing the kids to sports outside of hockey. Body positioning, compete, confidence, spacing, vision etc are all things you can improve by playing other sports at whatever level makes sense for the kid.

Have you considered this?

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 6:29 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Very interesting topic. While I agree that playing rigid systems at the age of 9 or 10 will only harm kids development. At the same time it can be an effective tool for achieving short-term results. That’s why I don’t fully agree that FT won solely because they avoided structured systems. In my opinion, their success—and the lack of it from VP and MNS—came down to other factors. For instance, the MNS goalkeeper seemed to enter a temporary slump for some reason, and VP never had a strong goalie to begin with. Additionally, VP’s coach is clearly less capable than Adam from MNS and a few others. In the final third of the season, many teams figured out how to counter VP’s system, but their coach lacked either the tactical knowledge or the motivation to make adjustments. That said, even if FT had finished third or fifth, it wouldn’t have changed my view—they are still on the right path, unlike MNS and VP.
I wouldn’t say that MB played with a strict system either—in fact, I like their approach almost as much as FT’s.

Would be interesting to hear opinions from parents in the east regarding NYK and NT how did coaches it these teams organised training process.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 6:29 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Very interesting topic. While I agree that playing rigid systems at the age of 9 or 10 will only harm kids development. At the same time it can be an effective tool for achieving short-term results. That’s why I don’t fully agree that FT won solely because they avoided structured systems. In my opinion, their success—and the lack of it from VP and MNS—came down to other factors. For instance, the MNS goalkeeper seemed to enter a temporary slump for some reason, and VP never had a strong goalie to begin with. Additionally, VP’s coach is clearly less capable than Adam from MNS and a few others. In the final third of the season, many teams figured out how to counter VP’s system, but their coach lacked either the tactical knowledge or the motivation to make adjustments. That said, even if FT had finished third or fifth, it wouldn’t have changed my view—they are still on the right path, unlike MNS and VP.
I wouldn’t say that MB played with a strict system either—in fact, I like their approach almost as much as FT’s.

Would be interesting to hear opinions from parents in the east regarding NYK and NT how did coaches it these teams organised training process.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 6:29 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Very interesting topic. While I agree that playing rigid systems at the age of 9 or 10 will only harm kids development. At the same time it can be an effective tool for achieving short-term results. That’s why I don’t fully agree that FT won solely because they avoided structured systems. In my opinion, their success—and the lack of it from VP and MNS—came down to other factors. For instance, the MNS goalkeeper seemed to enter a temporary slump for some reason, and VP never had a strong goalie to begin with. Additionally, VP’s coach is clearly less capable than Adam from MNS and a few others. In the final third of the season, many teams figured out how to counter VP’s system, but their coach lacked either the tactical knowledge or the motivation to make adjustments. That said, even if FT had finished third or fifth, it wouldn’t have changed my view—they are still on the right path, unlike MNS and VP.
I wouldn’t say that MB played with a strict system either—in fact, I like their approach almost as much as FT’s.

Would be interesting to hear opinions from parents in the east regarding NYK and NT how did coaches it these teams organised training process.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 6:52 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 6:29 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Very interesting topic. While I agree that playing rigid systems at the age of 9 or 10 will only harm kids development. At the same time it can be an effective tool for achieving short-term results. That’s why I don’t fully agree that FT won solely because they avoided structured systems. In my opinion, their success—and the lack of it from VP and MNS—came down to other factors. For instance, the MNS goalkeeper seemed to enter a temporary slump for some reason, and VP never had a strong goalie to begin with. Additionally, VP’s coach is clearly less capable than Adam from MNS and a few others. In the final third of the season, many teams figured out how to counter VP’s system, but their coach lacked either the tactical knowledge or the motivation to make adjustments. That said, even if FT had finished third or fifth, it wouldn’t have changed my view—they are still on the right path, unlike MNS and VP.
I wouldn’t say that MB played with a strict system either—in fact, I like their approach almost as much as FT’s.

Would be interesting to hear opinions from parents in the east regarding NYK and NT how did coaches it these teams organised training process.

Not from either of these teams but to say that VP and MNS had a lack of success while FT was successful is crackers.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 6:44 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 2:33 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:37 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:26 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Systems and development have nothing to do with one another.

Regardless of your skill level everyone plays the same "system".

All kids will "develope" from the beginning to the end of a season, it's up to your child how much they want to develope. That doesn't mean time on ice either, it means their focus and drive with the time spent on the ice. There is a big difference.

I know kids who arw on the ice all day everyday and don't get better than others not on the ice as much. It all starts upstairs, if that's not focused then being on the ice won't help much.

Systems and development are different and in this instance, systems hinder development. Coaches should be isolating smaller scenarios, such as defencemen being able to retrieve the puck while somebody is on their heels, or defencemen being taught how to look for open teammates and advance the puck up the ice. It doesn't come naturally to kids to fight for the puck in a corner - they need to be taught how to best position their body, use their feet and how to help other teammates in that position. That's what should be highlighted in practices over and over again until every defenceman is comfortale with it in a lower pressure environment, then they can apply it in a game. If your whole practice is systems then you are not learning these types of fundamentals.

There might be a handful of players in AA that don't put in the many hours extra on the ice because they are very athletically gifted or lucky. For everyone else, time on ice is very important. Maybe not every day, but you all want to go to AAA...if you think that those players aren't putting in the work, well, you will find out. Of course, it is important to find good quality ice time.

A lot of what you describe can be developed by exposing the kids to sports outside of hockey. Body positioning, compete, confidence, spacing, vision etc are all things you can improve by playing other sports at whatever level makes sense for the kid.

Have you considered this?

Of course, other sports can be great complements to hockey—especially soccer, lacrosse, and basketball. Dryland training is essential, but it needs to be the right kind: no dumbbells or heavy strength training at this stage. Right now, the focus should be on speed and agility.

The problem with rigid systems is that kids don’t truly develop—they don’t learn to think, be creative, or make decisions on their own. At this age, they need to play with joy, improvise, learn how to pass and move into space, and figure things out independently with some help from coaches of course. It might be messy at first, and the results might not be great right away, but that’s okay. The results will come eventually.

On the other hand, those who are taught to be just a cog in the machine—following strict patterns like going from point A to B on offense and from B to A on defense and always pass to X—will miss a crucial window for development. And once that window is gone, it’s very hard to catch up. It’s just a waste of time for the kids.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:29 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 6:44 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 2:33 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:37 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 11:26 am

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:14 am It's a good idea to have more discussion here than Dads arguing about how their player's team is going to be #1!!!!!

One thing that I have found to be concerning last year is that some coaches are pushing "systems" on their players. Hockey USA, which we are seeing now is possibly the best organization in the world, discourages this until at least 12-14 years old, translating to U13 or older. They believe the focus should be on player development: skills, positioning, individual improvement. At least three of the "top" teams in U10 relied heavily on systems: MB, MNS, VP. Curiously and proving Hockey USA's point, FT did not. They developed their kids instead and were ultimately the most successful for it.

Something to keep in mind when thinking about your player's best interests in the next year or two.

Systems and development have nothing to do with one another.

Regardless of your skill level everyone plays the same "system".

All kids will "develope" from the beginning to the end of a season, it's up to your child how much they want to develope. That doesn't mean time on ice either, it means their focus and drive with the time spent on the ice. There is a big difference.

I know kids who arw on the ice all day everyday and don't get better than others not on the ice as much. It all starts upstairs, if that's not focused then being on the ice won't help much.

Systems and development are different and in this instance, systems hinder development. Coaches should be isolating smaller scenarios, such as defencemen being able to retrieve the puck while somebody is on their heels, or defencemen being taught how to look for open teammates and advance the puck up the ice. It doesn't come naturally to kids to fight for the puck in a corner - they need to be taught how to best position their body, use their feet and how to help other teammates in that position. That's what should be highlighted in practices over and over again until every defenceman is comfortale with it in a lower pressure environment, then they can apply it in a game. If your whole practice is systems then you are not learning these types of fundamentals.

There might be a handful of players in AA that don't put in the many hours extra on the ice because they are very athletically gifted or lucky. For everyone else, time on ice is very important. Maybe not every day, but you all want to go to AAA...if you think that those players aren't putting in the work, well, you will find out. Of course, it is important to find good quality ice time.

A lot of what you describe can be developed by exposing the kids to sports outside of hockey. Body positioning, compete, confidence, spacing, vision etc are all things you can improve by playing other sports at whatever level makes sense for the kid.

Have you considered this?

Of course, other sports can be great complements to hockey—especially soccer, lacrosse, and basketball. Dryland training is essential, but it needs to be the right kind: no dumbbells or heavy strength training at this stage. Right now, the focus should be on speed and agility.

The problem with rigid systems is that kids don’t truly develop—they don’t learn to think, be creative, or make decisions on their own. At this age, they need to play with joy, improvise, learn how to pass and move into space, and figure things out independently with some help from coaches of course. It might be messy at first, and the results might not be great right away, but that’s okay. The results will come eventually.

On the other hand, those who are taught to be just a cog in the machine—following strict patterns like going from point A to B on offense and from B to A on defense and always pass to X—will miss a crucial window for development. And once that window is gone, it’s very hard to catch up. It’s just a waste of time for the kids.

What is this rigid system you speak of that MNS or VP played?