Calhockey.com
Hockey Discussions => Midget Hockey => Topic started by: notTHATdad on March 24, 2021, 10:30:53 AM
-
I guess everyone in SoCal complaining about the small number of AAA teams will get their wishes. On CAHA site today:
Boys
11U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
12U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Calif. Golden Bears; LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
13O - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
14U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Calif. Golden Bears, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Jose Jr. Sharks
15O - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Anaheim Ice Dogs; Golden State Elite, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Jose Jr. Sharks
16U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Anaheim Ice Dogs, Golden State Elite, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Diego Saints, San Jose Jr. Sharks
18U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, California Wave, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Diego Saints, San Jose Jr. Sharks
Personally, given what I saw this year from the Jr Reign, I don't see how it works. The Reign are ranked #113 out of 119 AAA clubs in the country. The Jr Sharks (who so many in SoCal consider terrible) beat them 9-3 and 10-0 in States, and it wasn't even as close as the scores indicate. Yes, they somehow pulled off a win against the Kings, who only carried over 2 or 3 AAA players from last year, but also lost 6-1 to them. I've always thought that a 3rd AAA team from down south was marginal, and that seems to be what happened this year. Probably worth it, but marginally.
But to add two MORE to 18's? A year when every team struggles to get qualified players? And even more at 16's? California AAA hockey will just be embarrassing. And it has other impacts as like this year, we end up sending players to districts from terrible rosters because "every team wants their best there", instead of better players from other rosters.
California AAA is going to be a national joke next year.
-
I guess everyone in SoCal complaining about the small number of AAA teams will get their wishes. On CAHA site today:
Boys
11U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
12U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Calif. Golden Bears; LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
13O - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
14U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Calif. Golden Bears, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Jose Jr. Sharks
15O - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Anaheim Ice Dogs; Golden State Elite, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Jose Jr. Sharks
16U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Anaheim Ice Dogs, Golden State Elite, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Diego Saints, San Jose Jr. Sharks
18U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, California Wave, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Diego Saints, San Jose Jr. Sharks
Personally, given what I saw this year from the Jr Reign, I don't see how it works. The Reign are ranked #113 out of 119 AAA clubs in the country. The Jr Sharks (who so many in SoCal consider terrible) beat them 9-3 and 10-0 in States, and it wasn't even as close as the scores indicate. Yes, they somehow pulled off a win against the Kings, who only carried over 2 or 3 AAA players from last year, but also lost 6-1 to them. I've always thought that a 3rd AAA team from down south was marginal, and that seems to be what happened this year. Probably worth it, but marginally.
But to add two MORE to 18's? A year when every team struggles to get qualified players? And even more at 16's? California AAA hockey will just be embarrassing. And it has other impacts as like this year, we end up sending players to districts from terrible rosters because "every team wants their best there", instead of better players from other rosters.
California AAA is going to be a national joke next year.
@NotTHATDad ..... you're sure sounding like 'that guy'. My guess is CAHA is trying to stop the bleeding out of California talented athletes to other destinations and give them something to chase...extra AAAAAAAAA's. Having only 3 clubs permitted at AAA level hasn't exactly worked so well... or has it? Comparing California hockey to the rest of the country via myhockeyrankings is clearly a challenge in itself as well.
-
@NotTHATDad ..... you're sure sounding like 'that guy'. My guess is CAHA is trying to stop the bleeding out of California talented athletes to other destinations and give them something to chase...extra AAAAAAAAA's. Having only 3 clubs permitted at AAA level hasn't exactly worked so well... or has it? Comparing California hockey to the rest of the country via myhockeyrankings is clearly a challenge in itself as well.[/size]
I guess everyone in SoCal complaining about the small number of AAA teams will get their wishes. On CAHA site today:
Boys
11U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
12U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Calif. Golden Bears; LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
13O - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, LA Jr. Kings, San Jose Jr. Sharks
14U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Calif. Golden Bears, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Jose Jr. Sharks
15O - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Anaheim Ice Dogs; Golden State Elite, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Jose Jr. Sharks
16U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, Anaheim Ice Dogs, Golden State Elite, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Diego Saints, San Jose Jr. Sharks
18U - Anaheim Jr. Ducks, California Wave, LA Jr. Kings, Jr. Reign Hockey Club, San Diego Saints, San Jose Jr. Sharks
Personally, given what I saw this year from the Jr Reign, I don't see how it works. The Reign are ranked #113 out of 119 AAA clubs in the country. The Jr Sharks (who so many in SoCal consider terrible) beat them 9-3 and 10-0 in States, and it wasn't even as close as the scores indicate. Yes, they somehow pulled off a win against the Kings, who only carried over 2 or 3 AAA players from last year, but also lost 6-1 to them. I've always thought that a 3rd AAA team from down south was marginal, and that seems to be what happened this year. Probably worth it, but marginally.
But to add two MORE to 18's? A year when every team struggles to get qualified players? And even more at 16's? California AAA hockey will just be embarrassing. And it has other impacts as like this year, we end up sending players to districts from terrible rosters because "every team wants their best there", instead of better players from other rosters.
California AAA is going to be a national joke next year.
@NotTHATDad ..... you're sure sounding like 'that guy'. My guess is CAHA is trying to stop the bleeding out of California talented athletes to other destinations and give them something to chase...extra AAAAAAAAA's. Having only 3 clubs permitted at AAA level hasn't exactly worked so well... or has it? Comparing California hockey to the rest of the country via myhockeyrankings is clearly a challenge in itself as well.
-
AAA has to mean something.
The Reign (who I'm saying are not a bad idea... but marginal) have a 7-21-1 record against AAA teams that, frankly, mostly nobody has heard of, plus a few better-known-but-bad teams (Renegades, Bobcats, Sundevils...) . To their credit, they have been playing teams of their caliber mostly, and not getting stomped, which makes sense as a "growth" AAA org. It's a good strategy - stay away from the T1EHL teams, and the east coast monsters while you grow.
Can we afford as a state a team in that 'growth' state? Maybe. Probably.
Are there the horses to support 3? Forgetaboutit. The players just aren't there.
-
Well, AAA in California is merely AA/A/B hockey in many other destinations. Found some intriguing posts on this subject from prior that might stir it up a bit even more, hope you can open and read these.
https://www.calhockey.com/index.php?topic=4391.0
-
Meh.
You can't totally base it on clubs, because each year is different, but there is some consistency...
Ducks are almost always in the 20's nationally.
Jr Sharks are often ranked in the 40's
Kings are often in that area or better (recent implosions aside)
That's real AAA.
In general the AAA ranking list can almost always be split into 3 zones (again, with exceptions):
"Elite" AAA teams. Usually starts somewhere between 15-20 ranked teams. Cream of the crop.
"Regular" AAA teams. Starts where Elite leaves off. Ends somewhere around #60-70
"AAA Wannabe's". Starts where "Regular" leaves off, goes to the bottom. Either teams having really bad years, or not really AAA caliber.
Teams are usually competitive within those groups. And typically on a "1 out of 5" or so basis can beat one level up or down. Almost never beyond that. It's remarkably consistent year over year (at least for the 10 years I've been watching it)
The question is how many teams do you really want in that third group. And at some point are you just pulling players away from the first 2 groups and damaging the situation.
-
Thank you CAHA! Now the Kings and Ducks will have to compete on price.
-
Competition is DEFINITELY good. And I'd love to see it (in Norcal especially!), but only if the players are there.
BTW, a lot of the content in that thread from a couple of years ago is absolute horse crap, including the premise that started it off. I can think of few worse measures for 'how well a state is doing' than national championships (or even appearances). The rules change over the years. The politics change over the years. The other states change over the years. It's not a strict 'ladder'. The ones that make it are always the ones that win multiple 1-game deciding games in previous rounds, which we all know in hockey is not a great predictor (thus 7 game series in real leagues, and even up in Canadian youth hockey.)
And it's kind of like saying the only reasonable NHL teams are those that make the conference-finals... Uh... no. Rankings (which at least have SOME data behind them, and usually a 30-40 game sample size) are a much better mechanism. In my experience, the myhockeyrankings are damn good predictors. The people who don't like them are typically just pissed off that their bad AAA teams are ranked low, or their AA teams are shown as way behind the AAA teams in the combined rankings (news flash - they are). Butt hurt parents.
The other thing you are going to see with too many teams is a whole lot of players playing 'up' who shouldn't be. Count on it. That was the plan for the aborted GSE attempt a couple of years ago, because when coaches look at players that clearly aren't AAA, versus 'stars' from the previous year, that's where they go. MAYBE they can hack it, but mostly what it means is one less year of development. Where you typically see that is in reduced hockey-sens - just less experience. Players playing 'up' should the in the top 4 or so players of the team they are play up TO, not just 'good enough to keep up'. If they are forced up due to lack of players, they end up as bench fillers losing valuable development while getting no ice time, and/or you are going to see more injuries as underdeveloped kids play 16AAA and 18AAA. AAA is about winning, because if that level isn't, what level is?. They will sit.
-
BTW, a lot of the content in that thread from a couple of years ago is absolute horse crap, including the premise that started it off.
Hmm... guess we'll see. ;)
-
Ducks are almost always in the 20's nationally.
Jr Sharks are often ranked in the 40's
Kings are often in that area or better (recent implosions aside)
"Elite" AAA teams. Usually starts somewhere between 15-20 ranked teams. Cream of the crop.
"Regular" AAA teams. Starts where Elite leaves off. Ends somewhere around #60-70
"AAA Wannabe's". Starts where "Regular" leaves off, goes to the bottom. Either teams having really bad years, or not really AAA caliber.
The question is how many teams do you really want in that third group. And at some point are you just pulling players away from the first 2 groups and damaging the situation.
The damage has already been done, and it's ongoing. Kids leaving Cal to play elsewhere. This being an unprecedented year, whilst simultaneously terribly limiting, Covid also stemmed the bleeding and artificially propped up teams, because a fair number of prep bound kids deferred/played in Cal because hockey was locked out of many schools either for the entire year, or most of it. Obviously, the Sharks didn't even launch, until just prior to states. I guess that the dates and CAHA bylaws were just thrown out this year, which again I understand, however, realistically, CAHA apparently just allowed the Sharks teams to form with whomever wanted to join literally at playoff time.
In one example, at U15 this year looking at the rankings within the Pacific district as we speak:
Team Alaska (41st)
JD (53)
Saints (66)
JK (86)
Sharks (92)
NW Stars [Seattle area] (101)
This is the 1st year I really took a hard look at myhockeyrankings, and the reality is that the algorithm does favor socal teams in a subtle but important way. Quality of competition is one of the most important factors. It is hard to move up or down for many teams that play top level teams and are competitive, but also due to league play, must play a significant number of games against teams with lower quality of competition. Unless you are blowing out everyone, you often lose points even when you win, and slip in the rankings.
With the artificial constraint of local limitation, the franchised AAA teams from Cali must travel the majority of the year, to play other teams, and they can avoid playing games against teams that are likely to drain some of their ranking score. Of course you do have to be able to compete with top notch teams, but you can also avoid playing "middling" teams that might beat you on a given day, and keep your ranking a bit higher than other locales. If you are playing mostly high ranked teams you can lose the majority of your games and still maintain a relatively high ranking, so long as you can avoid playing teams with a low ranking. Again you can't get blown out, but things like better than average goaltending can help keep scores close even if you really are getting pretty soundly outplayed by a team. The rankings don't factor that in at all.
It's also a lot easier for the Cal teams to win states and districts and gain a national berth when you don't have to beat out any number of top 50 teams, and in some places 1 or 2 top 20 or better teams from your district. Yes in some years past at some age groups there was some parity and competition, but this year not so much. In most of the age groups there is one team that is a clear front runner from a ranking standpoint.
As for Butt hurt AA parents -- umm, no, sorry. How many do you know? Again, at the '05 level, last year in Bantam, the Bears1 team beat every AAA team in California as I recall, and were actually the 2nd ranked AA team, as they were unable to beat the Saints. An extreme example for sure, but another harbinger of the results of recent CAHA policies, because those teams had multiple AAA players who chose to play AA on those teams for that season. And no, the teams were not just made up of AAA refugees, even though they had some former AAA players.
Also the AA people, don't complain about their rankings relative to AAA teams, nor in my experience do they really think about it or care much.
With that said, this year at 16U if you just look at the combined 15/16u rankings for california, JD is highly ranked but then you have:
Sharks 16uAAA (80th) based on 6 whole games of which 3 were against the JK :)
JK 16uAAA (140th)
Bears 16uAA (167th)
Ice Dogs 16uAA (184th)
How much money would you be willing to bet that the JK beat the Bears if they were to have played a game this year? Ice Dogs are also pretty good. I'd be nervous if it was my money -- and this is again 16u.
And one final comment in defense of the Reign 16u --- again I don't know every kid, but I do know a significant chunk of their roster, perhaps even the majority of it, was 15u players.
Perhaps if the Reign had more flexibility, they might have rostered a 16u AND 15u team, and the 15u team might have emerged from the state championships, as the Saints 15u did -- going undefeated btw. Yes the Saints 15u team, who will likely present a significant challenge for the JD in the District playoffs, and were up to this year a AA team, even though in several prior years, they played and defeated quite a number of AAA teams in tournaments.
CAHA's opening up the field to more AAA options could be looked at as giving into letter chasing parents, which some have persistently argued, or it could just be recognizing what was plainly evident to a lot of people.
Cali has 2 '06 14u teams this year in the top 20:
JK #9
Ice Dogs #15
It kinda speaks for itself, that CAHA rules made it difficult for JD, the Saints, ID and Bears to field AAA teams when they were plainly good enough to do so, often for seasons at a time.
I take no pleasure in this, as I know it had to be miserable for norcal families who love hockey and in the past year, were unable to form due to local restrictions, but the '06 Jr Sharks AAA team, with their 0-19 record, are for good reason, ranked behind the Rose City Pats AA -- a club that was literally formed this season. :o
-
LOL. Let's actually start with facts.
First - I'm not saying the Reign are a bad idea, even though they are uncompetitive. There is a middle ground between "just the three NHL clubs" and "Hey... let's add 3 more in a year". If you look up above, that was my original point. I worry particularly at 18's where it's really tough to get players, because a lot of the best AAA players move on to Jr.
On your other points...
The Jr Sharks teams were formed last year at the normal time last year. The Roster date was extended one month by CAHA, but the Sharks to my knowledge did not take advantage of that.
Santa Clara county wielded a huge amount of influence on the Jr Sharks. In addition to the state Covid restrictions, they put in place a county law which said, effectively, that any youth organization caught organizing or participating in any event, even out of county, would henceforth not be able to do business in Santa Clara county. Basically, you lose your business license. Bad. And when you find out that the Santa Clara considers the Jr Sharks and BIG Sharks one organization... Really Bad. The club's hands were tied. Apart from the 18's that made it to a single tournament before that decree, they played zero games as a club. But this all happened late in the game. I hope your assertion isn't that CAHA should have PULLED the teams from the Jr Sharks?
Do the Jr Sharks 06's suck? Yup. No news there. The 04 Jr Kings also suck (relative to other JK years and, honestly, the JK 04's 3 years ago). In both cases due to (very different) internal issues - that all clubs go through some times.
On the stats, there are interesting aspects. You actually pay a huge price in the myhockeyrankings for playing bad teams because there is a goal limit. For instance, The 04 Sharks played the Reign twice, and beat them 9-3 and 10-0. There is a 5 goal expected differential between them. They SHOULD beat them by 5 goals. In fact they beat them by 6 and 10, so that should move the Jr Sharks up in the rankings. But to explicitly avoid this 'hack', of just playing shitty teams, they limit the diff calculation. I can't remember the number, but I think it's 3 or 4 goals. What teams realize is that if you care about rankings, you don't even play shitty teams, because there is no way to win. They just drag you down.
Note that the ducks RARELY play shitty teams. I've always assumed that was intentional, or at least part of the calculation.
But... my observation remains. Within the three groups I identified, competition is always good. The rankings work. I can pretty much look at a game my kids team is going into and know if it is going to be tough based on them, and I've been able to do it for years. It's certainly better than some notion of 'national championships' as being meaningful.
On the Reign, you mention one of my fears - that with too few players, too many players will 'play up'. That leads to bad hockey and broken development, something that both the Reign and the Jr Kings are experiencing. Not every kid playing up shouldn't, but it has an impact. And if your team is a struggling one down in the 100's... probably nobody is good enough to play up unless they are the absolute superstars on the team. It also hurts the team they are leaving - one of the reasons the 05 Jr Sharks are struggling is two of their best players are on the 04 Jr Sharks this year (In that case though, they are both kids that were drafted, etc. I'll leave it to their parents and the coaches to decide if it's been a good thing for them though.)
And yeah, I have multiple kids that play, and have experienced everything between in house to AAA, to HS, as a hockey dad, a manager, a coach... too much. I've met WAY TOO MANY butt hurt AA parents in my time :-) In fact, I'd say (present company clearly excepted! :-) ) AA is where 'peak butt-hurt' occurs. But that's just my observation (and said in jest... mostly...) ;-)
-
five to ten years ago, there were this many teams in aaa, quite a few were nationally competitive, only a handful of kids left the state before they turned 17, and most every club could boast of graduates to major junior and d1.
in 2015, caha started actively restricting the number of aaa teams. the exodus of midget players started immediately thereafter, and now every birth year sees 40-50 kids leave before 16u eligibility ends. the exodus of talent has turned aaa midget hockey into a poor value for those who stay.
perhaps the thinking is that going back to "the way it was" will encourage more quality kids in the '07 and younger birth years to stay home longer. personally, i think the horse has long since left the barn. i think the only way to keep the majority of top talent home through u16 is the building of a competitive regional circuit (la, sd, norcal, vegas, phoenix) that offers high level competition, less costly travel and missed school, and attracts scouts to watch. you know, something similar to what is available in other parts of the continent. but i dont see that happening with the current lack of vision and every-club-for-itself mentality out here. sad.
-
Well, there is one thing we can agree on.
We need AAA teams in Seattle and Vegas. That would make a nice circuit and would change everything.
-
san diego and vegas would be better because driving. vegas now with 4 rinks should be able to support aaa in a few years. sd already produces enough quality players if they would just stay home and aggregate at one club. a legit elite sports academy in socal that includes a hockey division is ultimately what will be needed to keep the best talent home. we can dream, right?
-
On the stats, there are interesting aspects. You actually pay a huge price in the myhockeyrankings for playing bad teams because there is a goal limit. For instance, The 04 Sharks played the Reign twice, and beat them 9-3 and 10-0. There is a 5 goal expected differential between them. They SHOULD beat them by 5 goals. In fact they beat them by 6 and 10, so that should move the Jr Sharks up in the rankings
It's actually 7 goals. They cap it at 7, so in your example the Goal differential on those 2 games was 13 -- very close to the maximum you could have.
That is not what I'm talking about though, I'm talking about the socal teams, mainly the Kings and Ducks, have enjoyed a subtle advantage compared to teams in other districts where they have played numerous top 10 teams, even getting wins and ties against those opponents, but due to having to play league opponents with a lower quality of competition, lose points and ranking position. It's a subtle weakness of the algorithm. Overall, I don't disagree that the computation does a good job of providing you a general idea of the relative strength of teams you are going to be playing, but it's certainly not cut and dry, nor a substitute for actually playing games.
First - I'm not saying the Reign are a bad idea, even though they are uncompetitive. There is a middle ground between "just the three NHL clubs" and "Hey... let's add 3 more in a year". If you look up above, that was my original point. I worry particularly at 18's where it's really tough to get players, because a lot of the best AAA players move on to Jr.
In fact, that is one of the very best things about AAA -- that you play in your birth year. It's not that the Reign chose to have 11 '05's playing up on their team. It's that they were only sanctioned to have a U16 team, and the group of '05's, many of whom have played together on various A and AA teams previously, went as a group to the Reign.
As for the Sharks, I get that they were in a tough spot, and as I said, I take no pleasure in the restrictions to any of the many norcal hockey families. With that said, the problems they face due to county restrictions, is in no way different to the restrictions that closed any number of community/city owned rinks, and which have kept them closed to this day. The Pats I mentioned came out of Pasadena, and the Pasadena rink they expected to play in, closed at the start of Covid restrictions, and as we speak is still closed. Should the Sharks been allowed to form teams in 2021 just in time to play in the state championships? I personally don't see the harm, but something tells me that if it was a small club somewhere -- the existing rules regarding team formation and rostering dates might have been enforced. In other words, are the Sharks teams, actual teams, or just tournament teams that have to win 2 small regional weekend tournaments to get a bid to the national championship?
We need AAA teams in Seattle and Vegas. That would make a nice circuit and would change everything.
Neighboring states with far fewer hockey players and teams having AAA would be a game changer, but Cali having 5 or 6 AAA teams at age group would not?
Last I looked, LA to Seattle is about the same drive as LA to Texas, so I'm not sure how that's going to change a whole lot. Seattle teams are already capable in normal years of playing Vancouver teams.
It's a lot more likely that a regional circuit will evolve if there's a healthy California AAA league that can provide a baseline of games that don't require expensive air travel.
-
Just watched a kid from the not nationally competitive California Titans AAA program score a goal against Wisconsin in the NCAA tournament.
-
The Jr Reign have 22 players on their roster.
Does ANYONE seriously think that's a good idea? How much ice time are they getting?
They have 11 05's and 11 04's. Not enough for either birth year level.
Just not enough kids.
-
Just watched a kid from the not nationally competitive California Titans AAA program score a goal against Wisconsin in the NCAA tournament.
;D
-
The Jr Reign have 22 players on their roster.
Just not enough kids.
It was a weird year, and the Reign were having to bounce around to various rinks. It seems that throughout the year it was more like a tournament team with families picking and choosing which tournaments to attend, and which practices. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that it was not a year to really judge any program by.
Hockey clubs are like the field of dreams. "Build it and they will come." Some teams will be also rans and non-contenders next year without a doubt, but that is hockey pretty much everywhere. Over time, having more AAA will allow AA to actually be AA, rather than AA with quasi AAA teams at the very top, blowing the doors off all the actual AA teams.
Families committed to playing AAA will have a few more options, at least in Socal. All AAA programs will have to earn their clients by providing a quality program. There will be more CAHA games for AAA.
It took a long time for this to happen, but the people with kids at mite/squirt and peewee will benefit from this increase in access in years to come, and perhaps less people will feel compelled to send their teenagers across the country to play hockey.
-
Hilarious! Haven't been back here to read anything all pandemic. Glad I found this place again.
To all the know-it-alls,
No matter how many AAA teams CA has, there will always be AAA talent playing on AA teams. FACT. Hockey isn't for EVERYONE, especially AAA. It is for those who live close enough to a rink w/ a AAA team, have enough money to travel, and sometimes it is about player talent.
You are an absolute fool if you do not think there is enough talent in CA to fill all the AAA teams. The problem is the square mileage these teams cover.
As for the MyHockey rankings. Some teams played 40, 50+ games, while other clubs played a bare minimum due to Covid. Other clubs played an infinite amount of scrimmages that were never on the books.
Unless you have seen the AAA competition live and understand what it is about, don't waste time whining about where teams are "RANKED." No one cares. Playing Tier hockey is about player exposure and finding a path to juniors or college hockey whatever that next step may be. Limiting AAA clubs because you want CA to look good is the dumbest stance to take I have ever heard. It should be about player development and advancement... FOR ALL.
-
Another argument used by some of the naysayers, is that all the clubs just want to have AAA teams as a money grab, and don't care about fielding a competitive team. In just the last few seasons there are at least 2 teams that were granted AAA and decided not to form after all -- GSE previously and the Saints this season at 16U. Best of luck to everyone at upcoming tryouts, and hopefully california will have a return to some degree of a normal season, with actual sanctioned games in the state!
-
Another argument used by some of the naysayers, is that all the clubs just want to have AAA teams as a money grab, and don't care about fielding a competitive team. In just the last few seasons there are at least 2 teams that were granted AAA and decided not to form after all -- GSE previously and the Saints this season at 16U. Best of luck to everyone at upcoming tryouts, and hopefully california will have a return to some degree of a normal season, with actual sanctioned games in the state!
And GSE has dropped from 16AAA again.
Not enough players.
-
Hilarious! Haven't been back here to read anything all pandemic. Glad I found this place again.
To all the know-it-alls,
No matter how many AAA teams CA has, there will always be AAA talent playing on AA teams. FACT. Hockey isn't for EVERYONE, especially AAA. It is for those who live close enough to a rink w/ a AAA team, have enough money to travel, and sometimes it is about player talent.
You are an absolute fool if you do not think there is enough talent in CA to fill all the AAA teams. The problem is the square mileage these teams cover.
As for the MyHockey rankings. Some teams played 40, 50+ games, while other clubs played a bare minimum due to Covid. Other clubs played an infinite amount of scrimmages that were never on the books.
Unless you have seen the AAA competition live and understand what it is about, don't waste time whining about where teams are "RANKED." No one cares. Playing Tier hockey is about player exposure and finding a path to juniors or college hockey whatever that next step may be. Limiting AAA clubs because you want CA to look good is the dumbest stance to take I have ever heard. It should be about player development and advancement... FOR ALL.
Totally agree.
-
Thanks,
...and by FOR ALL, I mean to say for all who can play at the AAA level, but don't live within 2+ hours of a AAA club. Sure, adding more teams to AAA results in rosters possibly taking players that are not AAA talent, but how do you know when at age 12 or 14 you "write them off" as if no one ever develops when given the chance?
Saying the priority should be CA reputation, so limit teams takes away the opportunity for MORE AA players to experience AAA hockey and, who knows, maybe they actually become... wait for it... AAA talent. :o
-
Distance is clearly (and should) be a factor in the number of AAA teams. SoCal is big. But I don't think that means having 5 at 18AAA in SoCal though, when two of the three 16AAA teams feeding those teams last year in SoCal were frankly really bad :-)
It's a balance. And CAHA does have to play a role. It can't be a free-for-all.
What I have seen (over and over ... I'm not speculating ) is those AA kids that are put on AAA teams to 'fill' them have miserable years. They are stuck on the 3rd line and/or hidden as wingers and get 2-3 shifts a period on average (at best). Because AAA is always going to be a lot about winning (if not AAA, then where does winning matter?). They can't keep up in practices, and honestly, in %80 of the cases I've seen, they last 1 year in AAA and go back to AA. They aren't helping the team, apart from numbers, and aren't helping themselves. If it's exposure they are looking for, that's not the exposure you want. They just look bad.
Compare that to being a first line player in AA, and getting huge amounts of ice time playing with their peers. That's how you develop players.
There are always going to be marginal AAA players at the bottom of lineups. The question is how many. That's just math. How many teams, and how many kids good enough. How do you know when they are ready? They actually make a reasonable team, at tryouts.
-
Interesting to see how teams are doing to start the season. Very unpredictable.
-
18AAA is always interesting, because some powerhouse teams (like the Thunderbirds) loose most of their good players to Jr, so you often have changes in who is good. But the early signs are not positive:
Ducks: 2-2-0
Wave: 2-5-1
Kings: 3-4-0 (incl. 1 AA game)
Reign: 1-3-0 (incl. 2 AA games)
Saints: 3-3-1 (inc. 1 AA game)
Sharks: Have not played
Not one winning record against AAA teams amongst them. The quality of competition has also been pretty poor in general. Most of the wins have been against each other, or teams that are pretty much unknowns. Traditionally poor teams like the Rocky Mountain Roughriders have been riding roughshod over the division.
-
What, no mention of THA's "Tier I" teams? :) sorry, couldn't resist
-
Update... 2 ranking weeks in.... after expansion of the number of 18AAA teams from 2 to 5
Ducks ranked #69 ( a good 40+ places below where they have been historically )
Of the other 4 SoCal teams? EVERY one ranked 90th or worse. In 7 years of tracking AAA I've never seen a single 04 or 03 CA team ranked lower than 90.
(Sharks don't play for another week and a half)
But really, there is PLENTY of talent down south for 5 AAA teams...
-
this shouldn't be a suprise. most of our top players leave before they reach 16. the majority of the current mhr top ten at both 16u and 18u roster kids who used to play here; i prolly could rattle off 25 just off top of my head. many at shattuck obviously, but also at selects, mount, nashville, yale, pittsburg, li gulls, boston eagles, cya. good for those kids, but losing 70+ hi-level kids every birth year stunts the competitiveness of the local clubs.
-
That happens with every good 16AAA team going 18's. By my count, 4 Jr Ducks 16AAA's left for Jr clubs. 2 Jr Sharks left. And they are the best players on the teams typically. Not sure about the Kings or Reign from last year (as neither were competitive, in the case of the Kings from the previous years nonsense, and in the case of the Reign because they were a AA caliber team, so I don't know who would end up in Jr's. But I could be wrong).
But it is universal. It's not a CA thing. Case in point, the Colorado Thunderbirds 18AAA's. Usually top 15 or better at 16AAA, but this year at 18's #86, because their top players are off playing jr.
There is an exodus every year of top players from 16's from good clubs.
That doesn't explain an entire state plummeting to the bottom of the rankings though. What does explain it is too many teams with diluted talent. And if you want to progress from 16's and 18's to Jr, as most of these kids at AAA do, you want visibility. And nobody watches a 90+ ranked team. Those scouts are off at the same tournaments watching the #25 ranked team.
I agree with many above that SoCal can probably use another AAA team to serve the south. But going from 2 to 5 is doing nothing but hurting kids. Particularly at 18's. An over reaction that makes CA hockey look horrible.
-
18aaa hasn't been good in cal for 4-5 seasons now, is not a serious vehicle for "exposure" and i thought everyone knew this. the kids seeking exposure leave. most of today's caha 18aaa are career aa-level kids who are playing out their last hockey dream before retiring and going to college -- let them have their fun, i'm fine with that. hope you didn't spend $$$ on this expecting something different.
-
That is CERTAINLY what having 6 AAA teams in California will guarantee. Glorified AA. You are seeing it this year. And the same thing will happen with 16's if AAA is allowed to expand with no control.
The national numbers are clear. Roughly the same number of kids go to Jr's from 18's as 16's. Most clubs don't want to look at 16's beyond those that they have identified early - too young, too small, too risky. It's common to go to USHL main camps and watch every 16 (except those drafted by the club) get summarily cut in the first round, leaving a dozen or more 18's. I've watched it happen. Turning 18AAA into AA cuts opportunities for kids.
You can give up on CA hockey, or you can try to set the conditions to make it better. This is the wrong direction.
-
gonna have to disagree with your premise. most of the top kids at 18 already assembled at jd. how many kids on reign, wave, jk and saints could supplant a kid on the jd roster and actually would have interest in going to jd? imo, not enough to make jd a scouts-must-see nat'l level competitor. if you want "exposure" for your kid, he has to go back east. caha tried consolidating the midget divisions down to build up the quality of the jk/jd squads - the experiment clearly didn't work.
-
gonna have to disagree with your premise. most of the top kids at 18 already assembled at jd. how many kids on reign, wave, jk and saints could supplant a kid on the jd roster and actually would have interest in going to jd? imo, not enough to make jd a scouts-must-see nat'l level competitor. if you want "exposure" for your kid, he has to go back east. caha tried consolidating the midget divisions down to build up the quality of the jk/jd squads - the experiment clearly didn't work.
That may be true for the first line of players in being unseeded by other kids in So Cal. After that, i think it it depends if parents are willing to pay an additional $30k per year to go to OL.
-
"If you build it, they will come..." One of the best movies, but most misused concepts. Detroit is not the place to "Become a Movie Star", just as much as LA is not the place to make it to the NHL. Yes there are exceptions, but overall - people go to where the concentration of talent and opportunity exists. No amount of AA/AAA teams (or lack of teams) is going to move this needle. Not every state can be a "hotbed" of hockey. It is what it is here. If you are not plugged into the powerhouse programs out East by Bantam Age.. well... its going to be central casting for you. So get used to being "Third Guy In Line" in the next Taco Bell Commercial.
Just some humor to kill a long day here
-
Another week or two of rankings, and CA teams continue to plummet down the rankings. Now with the 16's too.
Remember the following comment from above?
"You are an absolute fool if you do not think there is enough talent in CA to fill all the AAA teams."
LOL.
For context, remember that CA teams have rarely placed below the 70's in the past, and are more typically #50 and above (top half of the rankings).
With about 110 teams reporting...
At 18's, the Ducks have improved slightly to #57, but only by beating other CA teams - nothing else since the last rankings. JK #97, Wave #98, Saints #103, Reign #107.
At 16's, Anaheim is doing fine at #21, but historically a 20's would not be seen as super successful for that org. Reign #77, Ice Dogs #81, JK #90
These are all bad, diluted teams. Literally some of the worst AAA teams in the nation. Having 5 AAA teams for 13AA teams (at 18's) and 5 AAA teams for 18 AA teams (at 16') guarantees that way too many AA players will be trying to play AAA.
A couple of years of this and you will see the "exodus" accelerate. Because NOBODY that wants to do anything with hockey going forward wants to be on a #80+ ranked team.
-
many people don't buy what the jd and jk sell; when caha eliminated other options (gulls, titans, wave, wildcats), those people left.
history -- until the middle of the last decade, only a handful of kids would leave the state before major midget. the "exodus" started with the 2001s; three dozen of them left before they turned 16 y.o., at precisely the same time that caha (rather than the market) started deciding which clubs were worthy of aaa. that number doubled by the 2003 birth year. leaving socal now has become the rule, not the exception, for players striving for next level.
if the clubs were allowed to develop their aaa programs/kids over a multi-year span, without fear that caha will come and kill them off after one bad year, more kids will stay and the circuit will build back up. give kids a good reason to stay other than coercion.
my opinion. thanks.
-
Knuckles. I agree with that viewpoint. Once the Bigger programs decided they wanted to jump into AAA - it seemed to get to be pretty mediocre. Back in the early Mid 2000's, I believe the Wave was the powerhouse. Then LA Hockey Club/Selects, then LA Jr Kings kinda absorbed LAHC. Then it has become the bridge to nowhere these days. If a club can get a small group of coaches with a great birth year of players, and manage to keep them together for 4-6 years - you will have a very good team.
-
There are outside influences also exerting pressure on these kids to leave the state. For one USA Hockey, USHL, NAHL, and other higher level leagues are promoting the education path vs the Canadian Major Junior path. Along this path way they promote the prep school route heavily to prepare the players for college when they are 20. The prep schools are providing financial aid to these families so the total cost comes out to an amount equal to or less than the AAA cost in socal with significantly less travel. When constantly hearing this noise it is almost impossible for the top kids to not leave.
-
Look at the rosters of the prep schools - they are mostly available online.
They are NOT loaded up with CA players. They are from all over. There is nothing CA specific about kids leaving AAA to go to prep, or NA3HL, NCDC, etc. It happens everywhere. And it has increased enormously over the last 15 years as the 'hockey academies' have entered the game. It's a huge problem up north. Kids literally trying to succeed at high school doing classes in the back room of a rink. Betting it all on a 'hockey career' at 15. Idiots.
FWIW, I hear this 'exodus' story all the time. One of my kids is an 01 and I didn't see it happen in NorCal, so maybe it was SoCal specific. What usually happens when you see a bulge like that though, is some small number of coaches leaves for somewhere else, and people follow.
I don't care whether it's the Kings, or Ducks, or Sharks running AAA - selection of clubs that is a different issue. And there is probably a space for a team closer to SD. But there just can't be too many, and that's what we have all of a sudden.
The Tri-Valley 18AA team is now ranked higher than every AAA team in CA except for the Ducks and the Sharks (who aren't ranked yet). How is that good for anyone?
-
I think we are part of a Laffer Curve experiment at the moment. :)
-
It's ridiculous to attack the loosening of AAA restrictions because it didn't immediately repair a situation that took years to create. And to be accurate for a moment, there aren't lots of AAA teams.
11u: 3
12u: 3
13u: 3
14u: 4
15o: 6
16u: 5
18u: 5
When there were only 3 California AAA teams, lots of kids left the state to play elsewhere. Take the top 5-6 players from just about any team, and have them leave year over year, starting around age 12, and tell me that there won't be a big impact to that team's competitive performance.
Looking at the rankings at this point in the season, is a pretty poor way to judge anything, but unless you are a parent with a kid on a particular team, who gives a crap what the team's national ranking is? These teams play schedules based on the leagues they participate in, so there are limits to the value of a ranking, but it's absolutely ridiculous to expect that at 16's and 18's, california hockey is a failure because we don't have any top 20 teams from the state.
Currently, the #1 ranked SSM U16 team has 5 California players and 2 kids from AZ. The 16's Ducks have multiple kids who were at SSM as well as other out of state programs, who returned this season to play for the Ducks, most likely for this season only. Overall, the trend will likely continue, with kids leaving California for other hockey programs, and having 3 teams or 6 or 8 AAA teams isn't going to make a difference to the kids who are highly recruited and leave.
It might make a difference to a lot of the other families who plan to stay in the state, and perhaps in 3-5 years time, we'll see more people choosing to stay in state, and correspondingly, more competitive teams, purely from a ranking perspective, although again, rankings only give you a general idea of the relative capability of a team.
What's a lot more important to a particular family is the experience of their kid, and not the ranking or reputation of a team. What's more important than playing on a highly ranked team, is experiencing competition, training and improving. If a kid is getting better at the sport, and that is motivation for other things they do in their lives, like academic preparation and achievement, goal setting, teamwork and camaraderie, these are the tangible benefits that go along with a successful hockey experience. If that leads to higher levels of hockey, then that is a bonus.
-
FWIW, I hear this 'exodus' story all the time. One of my kids is an 01 and I didn't see it happen in NorCal, so maybe it was SoCal specific. What usually happens when you see a bulge like that though, is some small number of coaches leaves for somewhere else, and people follow.
around a dozen 1999s left socal before they finished 16u.
over 80 2003s left before finishing 16u. the 2004s and 2005s both had around 75 leave.
the trend has nothing to do with coaches moving away and kids following them.
-
This is quickly turning into the worst thread on the site.
:-X
-
In my view, the issue isn't and never should have been the number of AAA teams at 16U and 18U. The issue is the lack of more AAA teams at the Squirt and Peewee levels. When California hockey was at its best, there were more teams developing AAA 1st line forwards, defensemen and goalies. More teams develops a larger pool of elite players. Those player ultimately will look to join teams with Tier1 Elite membership for the exposure. The consolidation which eliminated LA Hockey Club eliminated one of those elite programs, the Wildcats, OCHC and the Gulls consistently developed players who would ultimately join the Kings/Ducks teams to create nationally competitive teams. It is elite game speed development at the younger levels where California is missing the boat. In my opinion.
-
good Lord.... none of at matters at this point. if you're on trivalley 18 AA 18 GSE or the Jr Ducks 18 AA they're all very good teams with kids that aren't "butt hurt" but possibly don't want to miss school and know they will play NA3 or ACHA and are definitely over the chase and are truly enjoying the game. These kids will ALL end up in the same place. the earlier you can accept this, the better. Last two seasons of 18AA has been the most fun my son has had. The national competition is really good hockey and they're all relaxed enjoying the game.
-
That is the upside of U18AA. The downside is that upwards to half your CA games will be against powerhouses like the Moose or Ice Dogs that you will easily beat by double digit scores. Imagine how much fun those kids on the Moose and Ice Dogs are having.
The problem with U18 AA is that one-third of the teams should not exist.
Giving up the chase is positive. But as with younger players the quality of the coach and team culture are still incredibly important along with being part of a competitive team.