Minor Hockey Talks - Hockey Forum

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 7:18 pm

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.

VP and MNS had no choice but to play systems:

VP had one of the worst goalies in the league they had to be very disciplined to move the puck up and to not spend any time in their own zone. They had excellent defenceman but the coach made an error in not going with 6 as his lines were gassed by the third.

MNS had a bunch of HL level Applewood kids plus 19 (best goal scorer in league), 10 (underager who was the only other forward th that scored) and 9 (defenceman who plays like Pronger but not dirty). Thats it, 3 assets probably all playing +20 minutes. Other kids had to be disciplined in system.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:46 pm My son was/is on the Panthers and I have no idea what you people are talking about. What games did you watch? Creeps!

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:49 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 7:18 pm

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.

VP and MNS had no choice but to play systems:

VP had one of the worst goalies in the league they had to be very disciplined to move the puck up and to not spend any time in their own zone. They had excellent defenceman but the coach made an error in not going with 6 as his lines were gassed by the third.

MNS had a bunch of HL level Applewood kids plus 19 (best goal scorer in league), 10 (underager who was the only other forward th that scored) and 9 (defenceman who plays like Pronger but not dirty). Thats it, 3 assets probably all playing +20 minutes. Other kids had to be disciplined in system.

So the rest of the west aside from FT and almost them too got trashed by 3 9-year-olds, is that what I'm reading?

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:49 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 7:18 pm

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.

VP and MNS had no choice but to play systems:

VP had one of the worst goalies in the league they had to be very disciplined to move the puck up and to not spend any time in their own zone. They had excellent defenceman but the coach made an error in not going with 6 as his lines were gassed by the third.

MNS had a bunch of HL level Applewood kids plus 19 (best goal scorer in league), 10 (underager who was the only other forward th that scored) and 9 (defenceman who plays like Pronger but not dirty). Thats it, 3 assets probably all playing +20 minutes. Other kids had to be disciplined in system.

So the rest of the west aside from FT and almost them too got trashed by 3 9-year-olds, is that what I'm reading?

No it wasn't 3 players.....MNS had 3 of the strongest D with different skill sets that led to alot of success limiting scoring chances. We would look to take advantage of the 2 other D.

Up front their top kids created majority of the offence but throughout the year some others stepped up and the offence from 9 and 15 were always very helpful in games.

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:29 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:49 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 7:18 pm

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

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

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.

VP and MNS had no choice but to play systems:

VP had one of the worst goalies in the league they had to be very disciplined to move the puck up and to not spend any time in their own zone. They had excellent defenceman but the coach made an error in not going with 6 as his lines were gassed by the third.

MNS had a bunch of HL level Applewood kids plus 19 (best goal scorer in league), 10 (underager who was the only other forward th that scored) and 9 (defenceman who plays like Pronger but not dirty). Thats it, 3 assets probably all playing +20 minutes. Other kids had to be disciplined in system.

So the rest of the west aside from FT and almost them too got trashed by 3 9-year-olds, is that what I'm reading?

No it wasn't 3 players.....MNS had 3 of the strongest D with different skill sets that led to alot of success limiting scoring chances. We would look to take advantage of the 2 other D.

Up front their top kids created majority of the offence but throughout the year some others stepped up and the offence from 9 and 15 were always very helpful in games.

You people take this way to seriously. It’s 10 year old hockey. Parents out there remember the numbers of kids on each team what systems they played is wild. Get a life people.

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 10:35 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 10:29 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:59 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 9:49 pm

Guest wrote: ↑Tue May 20, 2025 7:18 pm

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

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

VP and MNS had no choice but to play systems:

VP had one of the worst goalies in the league they had to be very disciplined to move the puck up and to not spend any time in their own zone. They had excellent defenceman but the coach made an error in not going with 6 as his lines were gassed by the third.

MNS had a bunch of HL level Applewood kids plus 19 (best goal scorer in league), 10 (underager who was the only other forward th that scored) and 9 (defenceman who plays like Pronger but not dirty). Thats it, 3 assets probably all playing +20 minutes. Other kids had to be disciplined in system.

So the rest of the west aside from FT and almost them too got trashed by 3 9-year-olds, is that what I'm reading?

No it wasn't 3 players.....MNS had 3 of the strongest D with different skill sets that led to alot of success limiting scoring chances. We would look to take advantage of the 2 other D.

Up front their top kids created majority of the offence but throughout the year some others stepped up and the offence from 9 and 15 were always very helpful in games.

You people take this way to seriously. It’s 10 year old hockey. Parents out there remember the numbers of kids on each team what systems they played is wild. Get a life people.

Says the guy who watched Game 7 Sunday night with a Leaf Jersey on at a bar in public! Who's the Not allowed loser???