AAA teams for next season

[Beer Leaguer]

Bears beat kings 05 aaa according to MHR. Anyone see it?

[SkatingDad]

I know nothing about the 11's, but a few things to consider...
- The 04 Jr Kings lost 10 players this year (for a lot of reasons, one contributor no doubt being some issues you may have read in the press last year, and because a couple are playing up at 16's.) I will assume they picked up the best AA players they could get. They went from MHR in the 20's to #71. So much for "Anyone can find 3 more teams of equally competitive AAA players!"  Given the fact that AAA teams like the Kings would expect to turn over %15-%25 of the kids any year anyways, you are talking about finding an additional 5 or 6 kids at the same level. And they failed at staying at the same level competitiveness. In frigging LA.

Lots of reasons players do not want to join the Jr Kings 15O AAA team. Club, Coach, driving distance, previous bad reputation, etc... I know many people that would rather play HS than paly there.  The fact that they are struggling is more a reflection of this than available players.

[SkatingDad]

Ugh...

A 4 star player might never make the top 50 for the big 3, but what if that player got to train on a team of AAA 5 star players...  I bet you would make another 5 STAR PLAYER!!! 
What if that 4 star player is limited to playing on his team with 3 and 4 star players.  Together, there is a chance one might become a 5 star, but more likely these players will plateau and hit a lower ceiling than they actually had potential for achieving.

Nice thought, but that's just not how it works. In practice, that 4 star player is going to :


- Play on the third line. At best. Where on most AAA teams he's going to get half the ice time that he would on the AA team.
- Not get PP or PK time.
- Be last up on the drills as the coach focuses on the top 2 lines.
- Potentially be ridiculed by his teammates. Never get passed to ("because that guy can't take a pass").
- Not get the fundamentals training he needs because everyone else is past him.
- Basically feel like crap the whole year.
- Fall further behind

And after all that, there is a good chance that they simply won't make it. Because they aren't big enough, or strong enough, or have enough hockey sense, which is the biggest difference between AA and AAA. They will be part of that %20 turn over next year.

Compare that to:
- Being on the first line of an AA team.
- Getting more ice time than anyone else
- Being on PK, PP, maybe both
- Getting more drill time
- Getting more coach focus
- Spending the saved money on private coaching
- Feeling like a star.

This is more dependent on coaching.  If you have a development focused coach the 3rd line player will get plenty of development and game time.  A good coach will be able to see if your player is at a point where they can play AAA and develop at that level regardless of the "line" they are on.


However, players do not develop in games they develop in practice. Games are just for fun. If you do not believe me then, calculate how much time your player has the puck on their stick during a game versus practice. The problem is that Clubs and Parents egos are too big to accept that development is more important than winning.

[notTHATdad]

Ugh...

A 4 star player might never make the top 50 for the big 3, but what if that player got to train on a team of AAA 5 star players...  I bet you would make another 5 STAR PLAYER!!! 
What if that 4 star player is limited to playing on his team with 3 and 4 star players.  Together, there is a chance one might become a 5 star, but more likely these players will plateau and hit a lower ceiling than they actually had potential for achieving.

Nice thought, but that's just not how it works. In practice, that 4 star player is going to :


- Play on the third line. At best. Where on most AAA teams he's going to get half the ice time that he would on the AA team.
- Not get PP or PK time.
- Be last up on the drills as the coach focuses on the top 2 lines.
- Potentially be ridiculed by his teammates. Never get passed to ("because that guy can't take a pass").
- Not get the fundamentals training he needs because everyone else is past him.
- Basically feel like crap the whole year.
- Fall further behind

And after all that, there is a good chance that they simply won't make it. Because they aren't big enough, or strong enough, or have enough hockey sense, which is the biggest difference between AA and AAA. They will be part of that %20 turn over next year.

Compare that to:
- Being on the first line of an AA team.
- Getting more ice time than anyone else
- Being on PK, PP, maybe both
- Getting more drill time
- Getting more coach focus
- Spending the saved money on private coaching
- Feeling like a star.

This is more dependent on coaching.  If you have a development focused coach the 3rd line player will get plenty of development and game time.  A good coach will be able to see if your player is at a point where they can play AAA and develop at that level regardless of the "line" they are on.


However, players do not develop in games they develop in practice. Games are just for fun. If you do not believe me then, calculate how much time your player has the puck on their stick during a game versus practice. The problem is that Clubs and Parents egos are too big to accept that development is more important than winning.

No doubt true. Practice is critical. And most AAA teams have a poor practice/game ratio. But there will always be a 'top level' where winning is important. If it didn't exist, it would be invented. That level is AAA.


So... where do these magical new AAA coaching staffs come from? AA? Ok, if it's the same people, then what does being a bad AAA team do for you then, apart from allowing you to spend more money? Again, aren't you really just talking about taking the same clubs, with the same coaching staffs, and the same players, and sticking another A in front? And paying more, traveling more, and being less competitive?


Seems kinda dubious, at least beyond what CAHA is already doing.

[Hamacher Checking Camp]

notthatdad, your paternalistic lecture is uninformed. dozens of kids in the 01/02/03 years who the jk and jd didn’t “pick” left the state and made rosters of high-end aaa and prep school squads. two recently made ncaa d1 commits. there used to be a lot more aaa slots; when caha forcefully eliminated those slots, kids went elsewhere to pursue those opportunities. pretty simple.  i am guessing your kid is younger, otherwise you’d be well aware of what happened after caha forced gulls, wave, titans and bears out of the aaa business. there is zero evidence that despite the participation numbers increasing every year, the quality of the kids below the 35 picked by jd and jk is declining and not “worthy” of aaa.

^^^^^ TRUTH ^^^^


Here are some numbers for you that I have been working on and not quite ready to share on my FB page.


5     3      ~34
5     0      ~71




Those numbers are NCAA DI, WHL and pool of AAA players at U12 and U14 (only 2 AAA back then and ONLY major BY.  Minor played AA)
The bottom row numbers are NCAA DI, WHL and pool of AA players at U12 and U14


These numbers vary BY to BY and I am looking at the numbers that I will share on my FB later but my older son's year is an interesting study


Hockey people I respect are 100% convinced "the best at 10 are the best at 18."  It is nice to believe and project on to hockey culture and there is some truth to it for sure.  BUT, if it's only 50% true, then what?

[lcadad]

Of all the things I've read in this (often interesting and enjoyable) thread, this is the one that is the most audaciously hilarious "What I am saying is that I/anyone could personally hand-pick 50 players not 11UAAA in this state and put together an ADDITIONAL three EQUALLY competitive teams AAA teams."  ... offered completely without evidence, like it should just be assumed.

I know nothing about the 11's, but a few things to consider...
- The 04 Jr Kings lost 10 players this year (for a lot of reasons, one contributor no doubt being some issues you may have read in the press last year, and because a couple are playing up at 16's.) I will assume they picked up the best AA players they could get. They went from MHR in the 20's to #71. So much for "Anyone can find 3 more teams of equally competitive AAA players!"  Given the fact that AAA teams like the Kings would expect to turn over %15-%25 of the kids any year anyways, you are talking about finding an additional 5 or 6 kids at the same level. And they failed at staying at the same level competitiveness. In frigging LA.

- In the case of the 06 Jr Sharks, I believe they were hit mid season a year or two with an exodus which caused a lot of problems, but I have no inside info. All clubs get faced with the decision occasionally to either drop or muscle through a bad year, and there is no easy answer. They are MHR #71 too - ironically just like the Kings 04's. Are they competitive in CA? No, and the rest of their record is pretty bad too. But the CA games are 6 games out of a schedule of 35 or 40 travel games. Judging a CA AAA team based solely on CA results is silly.

-  And AAA is very, very different than AA in ways that honestly a lot of AA parents don't see. And again, I'll point out that %15-%25 turnover DOES happen, every year, and those kids are often (but not always) coming up from AA. The best of the AA's, those ready to step up, are grabbed. The time for your kid to prove they are a AAA player is tryouts. They happen every year. The coaches have a lot more experience picking the right kids out than the parents.

And who knows, maybe some of those one-offs become part of the set of stable teams that have fewer questions asked. That would be great - we all want more actual AAA orgs and teams. But being a stable AAA org takes a track record.

It's very hard not to see a lot of this as 'Butt-hurt AA parents who's little Johnny's didn't make AAA again'. ;-)

Please no more about the sage GSE decision not to go '04 AAA.  We all know that Norcal has far less players to draw from than SoCal.  Even with the relative competitive disparity between the SoCal and NorCal AAA teams in most of the age groups over the last few years, they manage to produce some very good players.  What continues to amuse me is how the "funnel to AAA" believers conveniently choose to excuse this disparity and claim that the system works in gathering ALL the best players into AAA.   



The old adage "exceptions don't make the rule" is highly applicable to these arguments.  You seem to think that the mass rebuild of a decimated Kings '04 team, and that team's not surprising struggles says something profound about the pool of talent.  That team may indeed have some players who are not up to the current challenge of AAA, although I have not seen them play.  Either way, a team that has been playing together for a several years under the same coaches (and again assuming competent coaching) with all things being equal, is going to have a significant advantage over a comparable team that was thrown together for the first time that season.  This same thing happens in AA and even A. 


Here's some things you glossed over about that team.  There are 3 former "AA" players on that team, that I happen to know or know of and my kid has played with or against in AA.   None of the 3 ever tried out for AAA previously.  All 3 were chosen as '04 SCAHA selects.  Of the 3, 2 are forwards.  Those 2 forwards are leading the team in scoring and are both in the top 8 in CAHA division scoring.  Interesting that the team also managed to beat both the Ducks and Sharks in an actual CAHA game.  What a disgrace for a team that had to be entirely reconstituted from scratch.     You say these kid wouldn't have made AAA if they weren't replacements, and to that I say you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, and people who know the '04 year have known that both those kids were really good for years now.


There are kids who most people know would walk onto the 1st line of either of the AAA teams if they were interested, but just aren't.  Not everyone has the means, availability or interest in playing AAA.  Some people bide their time, or choose a different path for their kid's development that's focused on a coach they want to play for, or the fact that they can't justify a 3 hour one way commute to practice. 


Anecdotally, I know of a kid who went club -> 1st line AAA Kings (leading scorer) -> big name prep school -> 1st line of AAA Ducks.  This kid did not even play on the 1st line of the club team he played for the year prior.  Anecdotes are fun!


Even people who have kids who have played AAA often know of a kid or 2 in AA that would make either of the AAA teams if they ever tried out.  Over the previous 3 years my kid played AA,  we have 4 former teammates who joined either the Ducks or Kings.  They all made the teams on their 1st attempt right off of a tryout.  And that is JUST FROM 1 "MEDIOCRE" AA TEAM!!! 

I know of kids that have moved back and forth between AAA and AA for various reasons.  I only know of 1 or 2 kids who have tried out for AAA and didn't make it and one of those kids is a Goalie.  Talk about a sucky situation for that family.  They travel a good distance to play AA at the club while they wait in line for the day that their kid will get the nod over one of the other 2 kids who have played for the AAA team for years.  It's a gamble that may or may not ever pay off for them, but the clock is certainly ticking.     

This idea that the AAA team tryouts are packed with AA's aspiring to join the AAA teams is a myth.  Not surprisingly open slots are often pre-filled with kids in the club program who have played AA and are known to the coaches via workouts and privates.  AA is in no way different from AAA in this regard.  In the summer a "AA" coach commented to me that he knew the "AAA coach is going to take some kids from my team next year that he shouldn't be."   This same coach had worked hard on recruiting an '06 for his '05 AA team who he had promised "will be the center of my 1st line all year".  That kid ended up signing to play on an '06 team.  Stories!
 
Now that the Ducks play out of Irvine there is going to be even less flexibility as the distance to Irvine makes it untenable for a lot of people to even consider the Ducks, or the Kings if you would need to be going South to north. 

I could go on at length about the '05 year -- the 2nd place AA team has beat both the Kings and Ducks '05 AAA teams and tied the Sharks.  I expect a fair number of players from AAA and AA will be leaving the state for prep schools next season if things go the way they appear they will.  I'm willing to bet a few of the top '06 players will also leave. 

There is more than enough evidence of the untapped potential of CA to roster AAA capable players in the '06 year.  You are in some sort of serious denial if you can't admit that a brand new AAA team out of KHS that didn't even have ALL the best '06 kids AT THEIR CLUB, managed to have a pretty serviceable first year. 

Personally I really find all this talk of winning and losing and records and MHR and the out of hand dismissal of lots of talented kids who are developing their game and getting some excellent coaching to be distasteful and unimportant.  The belief that your team is superior to another team across the board, and that you're just far too good to get on the ice with some other group of kids of the same age can also come with unpleasant lessons, especially in the teen years.  If you hold those beliefs, maybe look at your bias.  It's a lot easier to prove that by limiting AAA to a couple of teams, so you don't have to play other californian kids I guess.  Keep telling yourself that if they were any good, they would be lining up for spot on your team.

Don't admit that the AAA teams are full of kids who started at clubs and eventually migrated to the Kings and Ducks and Sharks.  It speaks for itself that statistically there are a significant number of other kids who are just as capable and maybe even better than any number of current AAA players scattered throughout the 35+ AA and AAA teams who aren't going to line up.  Only someone delusional or in deep denial would dismiss what is both historically evident and statistically likely. 

[notTHATdad]

I actually didn't say "these kid wouldn't have made AAA if they weren't replacements, "   I've been adamant that AAA teams should have (and do have) %20-%25 turnover year to year. So of course you'd expect a few to step up, and that's great. The 04 kings have also improved over the year, and that's great too.

But they have also dropped 30-45+ points in MHR. That has to means something as well in terms of overall level of the team.

I'm still not sure what the whining is about. CAHA IS adding more teams next year - more than there have been in a few years. Let's see how it goes.

But are there entire teams of AAA players out there 'unfound'? I sure haven't seen it in the AA games I've watched.

(As an aside - does anyone else have issues with the board eating replies when you try to post? Sometimes all I get is random formatting)

[lcadad]

And I gave some obvious reasons that explain exactly why the team should have been expected to struggle.  That was not the point.


I also have never, nor have I seen anyone else, ever argue that there are whole AA teams that should just transfer to AAA.  Most of the teams my kid has played on were close to 50/50 hybrids. 


With that said, a couple of AAA teams have essentially emerged from AA.  It took time and stability, and birth year play.  What I believe is poor CAHA stewardship with rules that are limiting and disruptive, makes any new AAA teams less viable in the short and long term, in that that those teams will have to justify their existence every year when 3 other clubs do not. 


What I have said repeatedly going on about 3 years now, is that there is enough AAA caliber players scattered throughout the large number of AA and A teams to support a few more AAA teams.  Consolidation to those teams may or may not happen.  I don't have a crystal ball, but what I do know is that currently, the CAHA Tier 1 system is a self fulfilling prophecy of failure.  The teams haven't existed although I certainly will be rooting for the success of those that are wading through the red tape and fighting the uphill battle.

[BladesofSteel66]

Raise your hand if you were a full scholarship D-1 athlete.  Oh, ok.  If you want "evidence" and full APA documentation for sources, are you offering a CEP Lv 5 also?  Last place I had to post sources on a board post, I earned another throwaway Master's degree.  If you know, you know.  If not, stay in your bubble.   
My #1 goal: hope my kids don't live in my basement in a few years as "adults" because they didn't make the local 3v3 mall tournament team.

but when your kid comes back early from college and is living in your basement, will you be paying for his Beer League fees?

ABSOLUTELY!  Just so I could run him into the boards and not have CPS question my parenting methods. 

[BladesofSteel66]

Raise your hand if you were a full scholarship D-1 athlete.  Oh, ok.  If you want "evidence" and full APA documentation for sources, are you offering a CEP Lv 5 also?  Last place I had to post sources on a board post, I earned another throwaway Master's degree.  If you know, you know.  If not, stay in your bubble.   

My #1 goal: hope my kids don't live in my basement in a few years as "adults" because they didn't make the local 3v3 mall tournament team.

You have a basement ?

He can live underground.  Yes.  *The world needs ditch-diggers too, Danny. 

[notTHATdad]

"Hockey people I respect are 100% convinced "the best at 10 are the best at 18."  It is nice to believe and project on to hockey culture and there is some truth to it for sure.  BUT, if it's only 50% true, then what?"


From what I've seen thats really untrue, and I'd question anyone that claimed it apart from in a few special cases. Again... %20-%25 yearly turnover for most AAA teams. Teams at 16's are unrecognizable from teams at 10's. Many of the superstars at 10 (with a few exceptions) are gone completely by 16's. Sometimes hockey related, sometimes not. Other sports, other interests. You just have to look at the rosters. I know my kids AAA team has 2 players left from when it was originally put together.


There is a ton of opportunity to step into roles. The teams change significantly every year.

[BladesofSteel66]

Lots of stuff here.  I knew posting late after golfing (and a frost delay which equals more drinking) would light a match...


I will never be mad my kid didn't make AAA because I have never once bothered to take him.  I have never even considered it as an option.  Does it strike you odd and rare that a parent would be arguing for a case that he has no personal gain or investment towards?  I only see what is the right thing to do and that is call out the BIAS and "boys club" traditional in the sport of ice hockey.  I stand for opportunity, youth sports, and player development that someday leads to the players having a choice on how important hockey is to their futures. 


AAA coaches must be Level 5 certified to coach at the Tier 1 level.  The next symposium is in Duluth Aug. 2020.  That's where you get these coaches from.  Find Level 4 guys and send 'em.  Give them a reason to go. 


I was using simplistic numbers in my example, but it is the truth - players with the potential to become a level 5 talent must be pushed and challenged by that same talent.  No one wakes up one day the best of the best.  Equally, if you have that potential, but are never pushed or challenged by better (level 5 worthy) competition on a regular basis (in practice on and off the ice) you will eventually plateau as a level lower than 5.  The fact that this is not common knowledge is due to the lack of personal experience on the behalf of many, many parents.  Did you NOT read my post about ROB BROWN!!?!!? 


There is another board talking about 09AAA and I love the group-region idea.  I will personally slice up SoCal, group clubs, and provide my list of AAA opportunities locally.  STAND BY FOR THAT AMAZING POST!!!   

[notTHATdad]

AAA coaches must be Level 5 certified to coach at the Tier 1 level.  The next symposium is in Duluth Aug. 2020.  That's where you get these coaches from.  Find Level 4 guys and send 'em.  Give them a reason to go. 
 

You mean all I had to do, all these years, to become a AAA coach was upgrade my level 4 to a level 5? Four days work? What have I been waiting for!!!


You are kidding right? USAHockey training is a bare minimum to become any coach. It's a joke. Certainly not enough to be any kind of AAA coach. When Sullivan coached the Penguins to the Stanley cup, he was asked what level USAHockey training he had: "Level 2".

[BladesofSteel66]

Too often, USA Hockey claims to be learning from the greatest European hockey programs, but are they actually using the "best strategies" when it comes to player development? 
Here is an excerpt from an article written by - Victor Hedman:

To a lot of people, this might seem strange. I hear stories about youth hockey in America and Canada, and kids jumping around from team to team. There’s all kinds of travel teams you have to try out for, and expensive camps, and coaches to impress.

But in Sweden, it’s more of a family atmosphere. At least when I was young. I know it has changed a bit lately. Until I was 14, there were no “tryouts.” If you’re born in O-vik, you play for MoDo or one of the other local teams. In fact, the Sedin twins and Markus Naslund played for a team called Järved, on an outdoor rink. There are different levels, but you are never cut. When people talk about Swedish hockey, they often mention the “chemistry” of the players. But really, it’s a total philosophy of community that starts when you’re young.

The rest of the article is here if you want to grow your mind... the rest will follow. 
https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/victor-hedman-lightning-sweden-hockey

[TheFourthA]

IcaDad, looking through your posts here, you are creating strawman arguments.  I don’t read any of the posts arguing against radical expansion of AAA as seeing AA as so talent deprived that it can’t produce kids each year capable of being impact players at AAA.  What I see them as arguing, is that AAA can’t be expanded greatly without changing the level of the competition it provides.  I also read them as adopting a different standard - it’s not just can a player make the back end of the AAA roster, but how many players would succeed at AAA.  Players don’t develop by failing at AAA and decent AAA teams are not put together with 15 average or back end players.  So the real question isn’t whether there are back end, average (or even impact) AAA players scattered throughout AA in California, it’s whether there are critical masses of a mix of good and average AAA players concentrated in the likely areas of expansion.  And we can dream about the days of the Old Republic, but we can’t seriously argue that formerly great clubs like OC should have an AAA team
When they can’t put together a good AA team.


The closest thing I watched to an expanded AAA division was the CAHA pre select camp with 6 teams of 06s.  The  overall level of play wasn’t anywhere close to AAA or
Even top AA.  I think it’s  what AAA parents wish to avoid AAA becoming. 


There’s another argument you made that I wish to address as well.  You argued that the AAA teams are regularly scheduling scrimmages against AA teams.  I can only speak definitively about the 06 Ducks, and tell that’s just not accurate.  The Ducks scheduled two pre-season or early season scrimmages against O5 AA teams.  Apart from that,they have sought out AAA competition, even flying to Detroit to play Michigan AAA teams.  Trust me when I say that AAA parents wish that AA here was as strong as you think.