Saskatchewan Minor Hockey Thread II

[SaskRinkRat]

How about not keeping up with pace, or physically not strong enough, let alone playing fearful, not fearless. I can see that your opinion is stationary, and so is mine. You have your saskatoon glasses on pretty tight and won't bother to look beyond. A reminder to you, look at the players from your city that are doing well with other teams, some of which were told to leave because they weren't good enough. That alone should raise some questions!

I think if you read what I've written carefully you'll see that I haven't even disagreed with your conclusion. All I've done is asked you to justify it with some sort of tangible reasoning. Yet all you've provided is opinion and conjecture. Your justification is embarrassing.

 

[nah68]

I think if you read what I've written carefully you'll see that I haven't even disagreed with your conclusion. All I've done is asked you to justify it with some sort of tangible reasoning. Yet all you've provided is opinion and conjecture. Your justification is embarrassing.

Embarrassing is the fact you keep asking how I came up with my conclusion, really have no other idea how I would assess players. What would be tangible reasoning? I'm sure a sugar coated answer is what your looking for, but this is the way I see the game and the players involved.

Just to let you know, I wouldn't have been this harsh towards the river king kids and program. It was the way some of that group conducted themselves at the rink....and not players. They made themselves out to be the saviors of both aaa teams, and set themselves up for some ridicule if they didn't. On one account I had a parent tell me that they could probably beat a lot of the aaa teams. Not out to bury the kids that are playing, because in some aspects I do believe that they will all be ready to play, and all will be as 17yr olds. Not sure if some understood the difference and how hard the midget aaa league is to play in. If I offended you I apologize.

 

[SaskRinkRat]

Embarrassing is the fact you keep asking how I came up with my conclusion, really have no other idea how I would assess players. What would be tangible reasoning? I'm sure a sugar coated answer is what your looking for, but this is the way I see the game and the players involved.

Just to let you know, I wouldn't have been this harsh towards the river king kids and program. It was the way some of that group conducted themselves at the rink....and not players. They made themselves out to be the saviors of both aaa teams, and set themselves up for some ridicule if they didn't. On one account I had a parent tell me that they could probably beat a lot of the aaa teams. Not out to bury the kids that are playing, because in some aspects I do believe that they will all be ready to play, and all will be as 17yr olds. Not sure if some understood the difference and how hard the midget aaa league is to play in. If I offended you I apologize.

You haven't offended me. You're just making yourself look silly.

If you were arguing this case in court, your position would basically boil down to "he's guilty because he's guilty". You haven't provided a shred of reasoning for your conclusion that these players "don't compete" and are "unhelpful". You don't talk about how they play, or provide examples, or point to any sort of hard reasoning whatsoever. You don't lay out any criteria on which you judge the success / need for the Riverkings program. You don't even seem to have a firm grasp on what the program was designed to achieve.

After a quick check of the AAA website, it looks to me that there are 12 players in the league that were on the Riverkings last year - 12 out of 18. Is there another group of 18 fifteen year old players of which 12 made AAA the following year? That would be one way to judge the success of the program. Another might be this: did the average fifteen year old non-Riverking develop to the extent that the average Riverking developed? Maybe 12 of every 18 fifteen year olds IS playing AAA this year. Maybe non-Riverkings DID develop as much as Riverkings, but you haven't even hinted at whether these things might matter to you when critiquing the program.

 

[nah68]

You haven't offended me. You're just making yourself look silly.

If you were arguing this case in court, your position would basically boil down to "he's guilty because he's guilty". You haven't provided a shred of reasoning for your conclusion that these players "don't compete" and are "unhelpful". You don't talk about how they play, or provide examples, or point to any sort of hard reasoning whatsoever. You don't lay out any criteria on which you judge the success / need for the Riverkings program. You don't even seem to have a firm grasp on what the program was designed to achieve.

After a quick check of the AAA website, it looks to me that there are 12 players in the league that were on the Riverkings last year - 12 out of 18. Is there another group of 18 fifteen year old players of which 12 made AAA the following year? That would be one way to judge the success of the program. Another might be this: did the average fifteen year old non-Riverking develop to the extent that the average Riverking developed? Maybe 12 of every 18 fifteen year olds IS playing AAA this year. Maybe non-Riverkings DID develop as much as Riverkings, but you haven't even hinted at whether these things might matter to you when critiquing the program.

Silly hmmm, what kind of reasoning do I have to provide you? Do you want me to tape a game and power point the reasoning I feel some of these kids can't compete. What part of not being able to keep up to the play, or physically strong enough don't you get? Question my opinion, go ahead, but call me silly and I'm talking nonsense makes me believe your only intent is to protect someone personally off that team.

 

[hockeyviewer]

I don't think the river kings developed the 99 kids better or worse than any other AA team. They just took 18 first year players and put them on one team. If they were split up between 5 teams in the citywide league there would have been 3 or 4 first years on each team with 2 or 3 making AAA in their second year. This would be equal to what north east did. They had 4 first years and 3 of them made AAA. I think the reason the RK were so successful last year is the 99 were more familiar playing with each other from previous years(spring hockey included) that they jelled together very quickly and easily. I think there are some parents and others from the city who believed their kids would also dominate in AAA but are finding out there are some very good players from outside of Saskatoon as well.

 

[hockeykid87]

Saw Barlage with my own eyes yesterday. Three goals four assists in a 7-5 win. Highlight was after the Barons scored on a penalty shot, player skated by and taunted Barlage/Humboldt bench and gets an unsportsmanlike penalty. Barlage proceeds to score on the power play.

They had him playing the point on the power play, probably because he can shoot twice as hard as anyone else. Really wish he had made the jump to midget this year instead of next, would have loved to see what he could do against much older competition.

 

[Fonzerelli]

Saw Barlage with my own eyes yesterday. Three goals four assists in a 7-5 win. Highlight was after the Barons scored on a penalty shot, player skated by and taunted Barlage/Humboldt bench and gets an unsportsmanlike penalty. Barlage proceeds to score on the power play.

They had him playing the point on the power play, probably because he can shoot twice as hard as anyone else. Really wish he had made the jump to midget this year instead of next, would have loved to see what he could do against much older competition.

I don't typically agree with kids playing up, but I 100% agree with you here. When you are a man child like Barlage is, I think it's the only way to go. Nothing to be learned dominating kids that much smaller. Only bad habits to be picked up and needlessly increasing the odds of injury to every kid he plays against. Not just because of his size, but his speed, power and strength in battles.

 

[lefthook]

Yes he could play up with no issues , but the debate is would it help him with the draft ? would he get lost in the mix playing midget , not stand out like he does in bantam ! what is the best move ?

 

[Fonzerelli]

Yes he could play up with no issues , but the debate is would it help him with the draft ? would he get lost in the mix playing midget , not stand out like he does in bantam ! what is the best move ?

Standing out in bantam as a big kid doesn't help. Just look at Terell Draude. Drafted higher than he should've been, yes, but still a bust.

Rightly or wrongly, WHL teams take note of any bantam playing in midget and it always seems to help their draft stock, weather they dominate like Alex Forsberg did, or they are just there, like Jordan Thompson and Thomas Lenchyshyn.

Like Draude, (who stayed in bantam and averaged 4 points per game), Forsberg (Beardy's), Thompson (Westman) and Lenchyshyn (Eastman) all busted out to some degree anyways.

One has to wonder how many bad habits these "man-childs" pick up when they are so much bigger than their child-like competition. When the other kids catch up in size/weight, it's a whole new game for them to learn. It's almost a hockey curse to be that much bigger at such a young age.

 

[lefthook]

So whats happening with the NE Wolfpack ? i had them and Humboldt at the top of the pile this year .

 

[hockeyviewer]

The drop off in the wolfpack does not surprise me because I think the talent level in the northeast is in a decline the last few years and peoples expectations of them are based on previous years. I only see 2 or 3 of this years team making AAA midget. In 2014-15 there are 3 playing with 2 more probable. On 2013-14 team there are 10 playing AAA with 1 more that I can see playing. On the 2012-13 team 13 played AAA regularly and another 4 have ap'd quite a few games. As you can see advancement to the next level is dropping off drastically. I hope this is just a low spot in the normal cycle which will rebound. The melfort-Tisdale peewee aa teams are in top 4 of c4 league so maybe better times coming.

 

[northernwanderer]

2017 Westerns

According to the western elite the vipers got the bid for westerns next season. are they going to be that strong? I thought they were going to get split up? regardless, will be interesting to see if there is any movement from the city like the year that west central hosted

 

[nah68]

According to the western elite the vipers got the bid for westerns next season. are they going to be that strong? I thought they were going to get split up? regardless, will be interesting to see if there is any movement from the city like the year that west central hosted

There not dominating this year with some top end forwards. Hardly think that next year will change. Would think that team would be on a lock down to split, but you never know what sha has in mind. They cater so much to the 2 citys that it wouldn't surprise me that they try weaken SV just cause they can.

 

[dickiedunnwrotethis]

There not dominating this year with some top end forwards. Hardly think that next year will change. Would think that team would be on a lock down to split, but you never know what sha has in mind. They cater so much to the 2 citys that it wouldn't surprise me that they try weaken SV just cause they can.

What's a down year for Sask Valley? Apparently it's being tied for second place in the North (while having what would have been its best defenseman - and possibly best player overall - play midget AAA hockey). Oh the ignominy! How do they endure?

I'm sure the West Centrals and Battlefords of the world are completely devastated by this unexpected turn of events. I mean, second place! And now more city treachery! It's too much. I'm confident that once the shock has worn off they will bravely wipe away their tears over the injustice their rural cousins are suffering and make a sacred vow to fight this latest urban gambit. To the end! And honestly, it's in their own interests. What with all the success they've enjoyed against Sask Valley over the years it's obvious they have everything to lose and nothing to gain with this proposal.

 

[nah68]

To dickie
Why is there the allowance for both saskatoon and regina to reduce the amount of teams in the league so they can compete? Yet they want to split other centers cause there too strong? The provinces population is half owned by these 2 centers....and I really don't care about registration numbers. It only proves that smaller communities are willing to involve there kids in a active sport and that usually is the rink. It's embarrassing cause when the cities whine action is sure to follow. What's next to try weaken other teams? Make top end players like barlage play in nd??? Or force!!! You don't hear any aa teams saying the riverking program should be quashed? There's a unfair advantage.

 

[dickiedunnwrotethis]

To dickie
Why is there the allowance for both saskatoon and regina to reduce the amount of teams in the league so they can compete? Yet they want to split other centers cause there too strong? The provinces population is half owned by these 2 centers....and I really don't care about registration numbers. It only proves that smaller communities are willing to involve there kids in a active sport and that usually is the rink. It's embarrassing cause when the cities whine action is sure to follow. What's next to try weaken other teams? Make top end players like barlage play in nd??? Or force!!! You don't hear any aa teams saying the riverking program should be quashed? There's a unfair advantage.

In regard to the top half of your post you asked and answered your own questions.

 

[nah68]

In regard to the top half of your post you asked and answered your own questions.

You couldn't answer any questions cause you don't care past what happens in saskatoon. Your so locked into what happens in the city you can't see that there is parody in the league this year! You achieved what you guys whined and cried over cause your reps have the ears of sha. Be happy saskatoon will dominate the north for years to come and if any other teams try to improve by reduction it will be quashed by people like yourself who care more about destroying progressive programs than trying to model them!!

 

[SaskRinkRat]

You couldn't answer any questions cause you don't care past what happens in saskatoon. Your so locked into what happens in the city you can't see that there is parody in the league this year! You achieved what you guys whined and cried over cause your reps have the ears of sha. Be happy saskatoon will dominate the north for years to come and if any other teams try to improve by reduction it will be quashed by people like yourself who care more about destroying progressive programs than trying to model them!!

What sort of year is this for Saskatoon, though? From what I gather, it's a very strong year in the city. So if Sask Valley is on a "bad year", and they're ahead of 3 out of 4 Saskatoon teams having a good year, how do we conclude that "Saskatoon will dominate the north for years to come"?

Do you think maybe it's ever worthwhile to take a step back and think about what is good for the whole league rather than viewing it as different centres competing for an advantage? Granted, the system is unfortunately designed to encourage everyone to try to fight for those advantages (i.e., allowing majority votes on whether to make a minority stronger or weaker), so I can see why you're coming at it from that angle. However, do you really think it's a better league if Sask Valley's average year is 100% certain to be better than Saskatoon's good year? Because that's how it was before this year.

I don't know if splitting Sask Valley is the solution. Certainly, this year, a broken Sask Valley probably would have trouble (even if they hadn't lost the player to AAA). But maybe there isn't a need to break it totally in half, or even to create two teams. Maybe drawing boundaries that would allow for some leakage to the western teams (Battleford and West Central) would do enough to prop those teams up and level off the average Sask Valley year.

I think Sask Valley should be able to win the north on a cyclical basis. I just don't think the setup of the league should dictate that they're almost certain to win every single year.

 

[nah68]

This is probably a fairly up year for sask valley. There is 4 point difference from 1st to 7th.... That's parody. Sask valley is third in league if they were split they'd hold down the bottom 2 spots. That's reality, so not quite seeing how that helps the league. In the end sask valley has won the north 2 out of 4 years with no city teams present for 2 of those 4. And 0 provincial titles to there name. Yorkton has 2 balgonie 1 so who the dominant one? If yorkton wins this year then what?

It's simple the 2 teams that have been targeted to be split are ps and sv both of which border the cities.... Is that ironic or what?

 

[SaskRinkRat]

This is probably a fairly up year for sask valley. There is 4 point difference from 1st to 7th.... That's parody. Sask valley is third in league if they were split they'd hold down the bottom 2 spots. That's reality, so not quite seeing how that helps the league. In the end sask valley has won the north 2 out of 4 years with no city teams present for 2 of those 4. And 0 provincial titles to there name. Yorkton has 2 balgonie 1 so who the dominant one? If yorkton wins this year then what?

It's simple the 2 teams that have been targeted to be split are ps and sv both of which border the cities.... Is that ironic or what?

I feel like you're maybe arguing the other side of the argument now. If it's reasonable to expect what we have right now to continue (i.e., parity) then I think there is little argument for change. However, if this is an off year (either because the city is substantially better than can be expected on an ongoing basis or because Sask Valley is considerably worse) then that's an argument for making some additional changes.

I think it's a pretty simple question: what alignment provides the best chance for structural parity on an ongoing basis?

 

[nah68]

My point is since saskatoon dropped to 4 team it has tightened up top 7 teams drastically, which means a lot of parody in the north. So I'm wondering why the split of Sv? And sv in not in first generals are so I think they achieved a more even playing field already why mess with it some more?

 

[SaskRinkRat]

My point is since saskatoon dropped to 4 team it has tightened up top 7 teams drastically, which means a lot of parody in the north. So I'm wondering why the split of Sv? And sv in not in first generals are so I think they achieved a more even playing field already why mess with it some more?

I think that's reasonable. I'm not totally convinced this year is a reasonable representation of years to come, but if it is then I think your point is fair. If we can expect Saskatoon teams (with four) to stay at about the same level as Sask Valley (in its current form) then I don't see a reasonable argument for splitting Sask Valley. I suspect, though, that Sask Valley isn't on quite as strong a year as people think, and I also suspect Saskatoon is on a better than average year.

Leaving things the same also doesn't really address the problem of Battleford and West Central. They are clearly at a disadvantage in the current setup.

 

[nah68]

Leaving things the same also doesn't really address the problem of Battleford and West Central. They are clearly at a disadvantage in the current setup.

Yes and those 2 are a huge problem.....know more about NB, its not that they don't have enough bantam kids, its the fact that travel becomes a huge, huge problem.

 

[northernwanderer]

I think that's reasonable. I'm not totally convinced this year is a reasonable representation of years to come, but if it is then I think your point is fair. If we can expect Saskatoon teams (with four) to stay at about the same level as Sask Valley (in its current form) then I don't see a reasonable argument for splitting Sask Valley. I suspect, though, that Sask Valley isn't on quite as strong a year as people think, and I also suspect Saskatoon is on a better than average year.

Leaving things the same also doesn't really address the problem of Battleford and West Central. They are clearly at a disadvantage in the current setup.

I don't think people realize this, or want to realize it, but Sask Valley will not be as strong next year as they are this year. The forward group this year, and goaltending is much stronger than it will be next year. The defence will improve next year but they are not going to get stronger next year. And look at their pee wee team, .500. Not much to look forward to if we are expecting top end. Pillar and Saleski will have to carry the team next year.

 

[Franksredhot]

Yes and those 2 are a huge problem.....know more about NB, its not that they don't have enough bantam kids, its the fact that travel becomes a huge, huge problem.

OK guys. How would SV becoming 2 teams help anyone? It means there are 19 less kids available to other teams. Plus, Warman would now have a center that would pull kids away from Humboldt. Has no purpose other than weaken the league.