Peewee AA 2017-2018

[Racetonowhere]

Don’t forget the awful reffing.
Why weren’t your kids “ ready to go”? Did somebody give them the wrong starting time for the game?

[ABCDE]

You know this feed's dead when no one's talking about playdowns.  Any surprising results, comments, excuses?

[highhardone]

You know this feed's dead when no one's talking about playdowns.  Any surprising results, comments, excuses?

I don’t think there was anything too surprising. A lot of close games and overall some good clean hockey. States should be a lot of competitive fun. Anyone else see it differently?

[MO-ICETIME]

There were some amazing games with OT and Shootouts! I was a fan of all of the games! I expected GSE1 and Ducks to make it through and I have to say the Bears on principle, LOL!!.. But all of the top 7 battled it out! Yes, the Valencia vs Gulls game was good to watch as well! Lastly.... the Saints vs Kings shootout was amazing and it's a shame it has to end in a Shootout! Props to both of those teams!!!

[hockey2014]

So does anyone want to have fun predicting the top 4 teams for the season? Who will make it pass Labor Day?


My predictions for the top 4 So Cal teams based off of team declarations is (no particular order):


1. Bears
2. Ducks Kohn
3. Kings
4. Gulls

Where is Skates at? Looks like he nailed it but Saints should be added.  Hmmm I don’t see OC1 in that mix. Looks like Skates predicted that OC’s not success too. Their defense struggled.

[hockey2014]

Love the Riley team, but they simply are not at the same level as the Shand team, which has many top PWA players, size, speed, age, and grit, and several players with AA experience.  Riley Dogs did not take a step forward at Squirt A, and having watched the Eagles many times last season, the Dogs just aren't at the same level (unless they added in 4 or 5 PWA/AA studs).  Would have loved to seen Riley Dogs at Carmen Starr, and frankly, would love to be proven wrong on this one.  If anything, Riley Dogs remind me of PWA Wave 1 last year.  The only potential wrinkle I see for Shand is the rumor that he rostered a ton of kids, and finding the right roles and playing time might be a challenge.  I think Skates' comment about team chemistry may turn out to be prophetic about The Shand team.  Don't know anything about the other Ice Dogs team.  What does the roster look like?  How did they play over Memorial Day?

"Somewhere in the middle" of AA will be a very tough place to be, as it probably means top of Flight B (with little chance of the playoffs) or bottom of Flight A, getting your hat handed to you every fourth weekend.   Neither spot is a particularly good place for development.

What? Rostered a ton of kids? I can hear the parents now of the kids sitting the bench.  That's sad, so while your kid sits the bench on your AA team, there is another kid playing A and getting lots of ice time that will surpass your kid at Bantam. Typical story.


Hmmm I guess Shand didn't want to share with Bickley. Bickley sure could use some kids. They do coach for the same club right? Geez. What a waste of money for the fouthliners on PW AA teams. I wonder if parents even know there is tons of kids on their team. That would make a difference for me when picking a team.


I think both ice dogs teams will be in the middle boarderline of the top bracket.

Three complete lines & three sets of D. Not sure if that constitutes "rostered a ton." Quick shifts and strong play for Shand and the boys will see plenty of ice time.


Didn't see how Bickley ended up. My observation would be that they drew players from different pools.

Final roster was 20 kids. Thats 4 complete lines with many parents upset come playdown time with their kids only getting 1 to 2 shifts a period, if that.  Isn’t 20 kids rostered the limit?

[Hockey sophist]

Love the Riley team, but they simply are not at the same level as the Shand team, which has many top PWA players, size, speed, age, and grit, and several players with AA experience.  Riley Dogs did not take a step forward at Squirt A, and having watched the Eagles many times last season, the Dogs just aren't at the same level (unless they added in 4 or 5 PWA/AA studs).  Would have loved to seen Riley Dogs at Carmen Starr, and frankly, would love to be proven wrong on this one.  If anything, Riley Dogs remind me of PWA Wave 1 last year.  The only potential wrinkle I see for Shand is the rumor that he rostered a ton of kids, and finding the right roles and playing time might be a challenge.  I think Skates' comment about team chemistry may turn out to be prophetic about The Shand team.  Don't know anything about the other Ice Dogs team.  What does the roster look like?  How did they play over Memorial Day?

"Somewhere in the middle" of AA will be a very tough place to be, as it probably means top of Flight B (with little chance of the playoffs) or bottom of Flight A, getting your hat handed to you every fourth weekend.   Neither spot is a particularly good place for development.

What? Rostered a ton of kids? I can hear the parents now of the kids sitting the bench.  That's sad, so while your kid sits the bench on your AA team, there is another kid playing A and getting lots of ice time that will surpass your kid at Bantam. Typical story.


Hmmm I guess Shand didn't want to share with Bickley. Bickley sure could use some kids. They do coach for the same club right? Geez. What a waste of money for the fouthliners on PW AA teams. I wonder if parents even know there is tons of kids on their team. That would make a difference for me when picking a team.


I think both ice dogs teams will be in the middle boarderline of the top bracket.

Three complete lines & three sets of D. Not sure if that constitutes "rostered a ton." Quick shifts and strong play for Shand and the boys will see plenty of ice time.


Didn't see how Bickley ended up. My observation would be that they drew players from different pools.

Final roster was 20 kids. Thats 4 complete lines with many parents upset come playdown time with their kids only getting 1 to 2 shifts a period, if that.  Isn’t 20 kids rostered the limit?

Having watched both Shand's PWAA team and Gasseau's PWAAA team, a key difference is that the preference in playing time given certain players on the AAA team has had a clear, obvious and rationale basis while on Shand's AA team, it seems unrelated to reality in some cases.   It was clearly the strategy to roster 20 then play a little more than half of them when games were on the line.  This became more pronounced as the season progressed.  The sad thing is that when he rolled the lines, the team mostly did well.   When he became focused on winning only, his favorites failed him.  There is certain poetic justice there. 

He dealt with this reality by scapegoating and blaming certain kids even, at the end, if they were on the ice for very little time or, in one case, nearly saved the day at an out-of-state tournament.   Scapegoating, blame, and threats are not the keys to a positive team culture and his long-time players echoed this behavior.

Shand's team might have been the 2nd or 3rd best in CAHA at the start of season and at Carmen Starr but it finished 7th at the end of the regular season and a tie for 7th and 8th at playdowns.    At the heart of it, it was a strategy of winning over development with promising 12 year old boys and, in the end, the boys got neither.   
There were other dysfunctions on the Shand team but recruitment and playing time strategy was the most basic.

[felixpotvin]

Long time listener, first time caller here.  There have certainly been a few posts regarding Coach Shand on this site, so I would like to add my 2 cents.  My son is a Bantam this year, so I can't comment on what may or may not have happened on the PW AA team this year.  My son has done individual lessons with Coach Shand for several years, and Coach Shand is fantastic in this capacity. He genuinely cares about the player's development and goes out of his way to suggest everything that can be done on the ice and off the ice to assist in that development.  My son also played for Shand's Ontario Eagles in Pee Wee A last year, and it was the best experience he has had in 6+ years playing travel hockey.  Coach Shand is a demanding coach, but he is fair and holds players accountable.  If a player isn't putting in the effort or is playing selfishly, they won't get the same amount of ice time as those that are working hard and playing a team game.  We had a team that was projected to finish somewhere around 10th-12th (perhaps optimistically as high as 8th) that wound up finishing 4th and losing the SCAHA final in OT.  At season's end, we had a group of kids who had bonded into a fantastic team.  They worked hard together on the ice and never gave up.  It was a fantastic journey, and Coach Shand deserves a ton of credit as do the players who bought into his system and worked so hard week in and week out.   My son developed more during that year than in any other year.  Obviously, no coach is perfect, and your mileage may vary as you traverse the travel hockey landscape.  What is a great fit for my son may not be for your son, and vice versa.

[Hockey sophist]

Long time listener, first time caller here.  There have certainly been a few posts regarding Coach Shand on this site, so I would like to add my 2 cents.  My son is a Bantam this year, so I can't comment on what may or may not have happened on the PW AA team this year.  My son has done individual lessons with Coach Shand for several years, and Coach Shand is fantastic in this capacity. He genuinely cares about the player's development and goes out of his way to suggest everything that can be done on the ice and off the ice to assist in that development.  My son also played for Shand's Ontario Eagles in Pee Wee A last year, and it was the best experience he has had in 6+ years playing travel hockey.  Coach Shand is a demanding coach, but he is fair and holds players accountable.  If a player isn't putting in the effort or is playing selfishly, they won't get the same amount of ice time as those that are working hard and playing a team game.  We had a team that was projected to finish somewhere around 10th-12th (perhaps optimistically as high as 8th) that wound up finishing 4th and losing the SCAHA final in OT.  At season's end, we had a group of kids who had bonded into a fantastic team.  They worked hard together on the ice and never gave up.  It was a fantastic journey, and Coach Shand deserves a ton of credit as do the players who bought into his system and worked so hard week in and week out.   My son developed more during that year than in any other year.  Obviously, no coach is perfect, and your mileage may vary as you traverse the travel hockey landscape.  What is a great fit for my son may not be for your son, and vice versa.

Good perspective but incomplete.   First, Coach Shand has developed over time some very good players on his PWAA team.    Second, most coaches do a good to great job at sticktimes,  which involve a narrow set of skills compared to coaching a team or teaching a team.  For example, we have found Coach Bickley to be the best of many sticktime coaches out there but not an appropriate team coach for our son.   Coach Shand may be similar but charged twice the rate as other options.    Third, preseason projections are largely meaningless outside a few dominant clubs.   Shand's PWAA team was not simply projected to be good; it demonstrated it in the pre and early season and declined steadily over the season.  There are probably many reasons for that including the better development on other teams.   Fourth, your point on "putting in effort" and "playing selfish" is just plain wrong.   Some of the lower effort and more selfish players were favorites.   "Fairness" is in the eyes of the beholder.   

Happy that you and your son had a great experience with Coach Shand.   We began the season very keen on him as a coach and still see some virtue on his coaching.   Our son learned discipline and attentiveness to peripheral details and commitment to total effort in order to get ice time.   He also learned how to deal with bounded rationale authority figures without buying into their emotion.    That is an important life skill.   As for his development as a hockey player, time will tell.   At this point, the negative stuff outweighs the positive because it affected his confidence on the ice.  When learning is about making mistakes and learning from them, he has learned only that making mistakes is bad and cause to be blamed for team losses. 

[hockey2014]

Love the Riley team, but they simply are not at the same level as the Shand team, which has many top PWA players, size, speed, age, and grit, and several players with AA experience.  Riley Dogs did not take a step forward at Squirt A, and having watched the Eagles many times last season, the Dogs just aren't at the same level (unless they added in 4 or 5 PWA/AA studs).  Would have loved to seen Riley Dogs at Carmen Starr, and frankly, would love to be proven wrong on this one.  If anything, Riley Dogs remind me of PWA Wave 1 last year.  The only potential wrinkle I see for Shand is the rumor that he rostered a ton of kids, and finding the right roles and playing time might be a challenge.  I think Skates' comment about team chemistry may turn out to be prophetic about The Shand team.  Don't know anything about the other Ice Dogs team.  What does the roster look like?  How did they play over Memorial Day?

"Somewhere in the middle" of AA will be a very tough place to be, as it probably means top of Flight B (with little chance of the playoffs) or bottom of Flight A, getting your hat handed to you every fourth weekend.   Neither spot is a particularly good place for development.

What? Rostered a ton of kids? I can hear the parents now of the kids sitting the bench.  That's sad, so while your kid sits the bench on your AA team, there is another kid playing A and getting lots of ice time that will surpass your kid at Bantam. Typical story.


Hmmm I guess Shand didn't want to share with Bickley. Bickley sure could use some kids. They do coach for the same club right? Geez. What a waste of money for the fouthliners on PW AA teams. I wonder if parents even know there is tons of kids on their team. That would make a difference for me when picking a team.


I think both ice dogs teams will be in the middle boarderline of the top bracket.

Three complete lines & three sets of D. Not sure if that constitutes "rostered a ton." Quick shifts and strong play for Shand and the boys will see plenty of ice time.


Didn't see how Bickley ended up. My observation would be that they drew players from different pools.

Final roster was 20 kids. Thats 4 complete lines with many parents upset come playdown time with their kids only getting 1 to 2 shifts a period, if that.  Isn’t 20 kids rostered the limi

Shand's team might have been the 2nd or 3rd best in CAHA at the start of season and at Carmen Starr but it finished 7th at the end of the regular season and a tie for 7th and 8th at playdowns.    At the heart of it, it was a strategy of winning over development with promising 12 year old boys and, in the end, the boys got neither.   
There were other dysfunctions on the Shand team but recruitment and playing time strategy was the most basic.

Let me give you some insight, Shand’s team did okay at the Carmen Star tournament because he had few kids on there that made a difference but decided not to play for him during the season. They left and moved on to another team that is doing very well. Someone had previously said that because of the loss of players that some kids were picked up just for PDR numbers. I think he never had intentions of playing everyone equally except for his previous Eagle kids. But that’s just my opinion but seems to what have happened.

[jvreagan]

When learning is about making mistakes and learning from them, he has learned only that making mistakes is bad and cause to be blamed for team losses.

I don't know about Socal, but in Norcal its neigh impossible to find coaches - let alone associations - that understand failing is fundamental to the learning process and to embrace the concept failing faster.  Hockey knowledge seems to be valued over knowing how to coach/teach.


Where we moved from this USA Hockey banner was hung in the rinks to serve as a reminder to us coaches about our role in the development process.


ADM_Banner_RedWhite_1170A30.jpeg

[felixpotvin]

Long time listener, first time caller here.  There have certainly been a few posts regarding Coach Shand on this site, so I would like to add my 2 cents.  My son is a Bantam this year, so I can't comment on what may or may not have happened on the PW AA team this year.  My son has done individual lessons with Coach Shand for several years, and Coach Shand is fantastic in this capacity. He genuinely cares about the player's development and goes out of his way to suggest everything that can be done on the ice and off the ice to assist in that development.  My son also played for Shand's Ontario Eagles in Pee Wee A last year, and it was the best experience he has had in 6+ years playing travel hockey.  Coach Shand is a demanding coach, but he is fair and holds players accountable.  If a player isn't putting in the effort or is playing selfishly, they won't get the same amount of ice time as those that are working hard and playing a team game.  We had a team that was projected to finish somewhere around 10th-12th (perhaps optimistically as high as 8th) that wound up finishing 4th and losing the SCAHA final in OT.  At season's end, we had a group of kids who had bonded into a fantastic team.  They worked hard together on the ice and never gave up.  It was a fantastic journey, and Coach Shand deserves a ton of credit as do the players who bought into his system and worked so hard week in and week out.   My son developed more during that year than in any other year.  Obviously, no coach is perfect, and your mileage may vary as you traverse the travel hockey landscape.  What is a great fit for my son may not be for your son, and vice versa.



Good perspective but incomplete.   First, Coach Shand has developed over time some very good players on his PWAA team.    Second, most coaches do a good to great job at sticktimes,  which involve a narrow set of skills compared to coaching a team or teaching a team.  For example, we have found Coach Bickley to be the best of many sticktime coaches out there but not an appropriate team coach for our son.   Coach Shand may be similar but charged twice the rate as other options.    Third, preseason projections are largely meaningless outside a few dominant clubs.   Shand's PWAA team was not simply projected to be good; it demonstrated it in the pre and early season and declined steadily over the season.  There are probably many reasons for that including the better development on other teams.   Fourth, your point on "putting in effort" and "playing selfish" is just plain wrong.   Some of the lower effort and more selfish players were favorites.   "Fairness" is in the eyes of the beholder.   

Happy that you and your son had a great experience with Coach Shand.   We began the season very keen on him as a coach and still see some virtue on his coaching.   Our son learned discipline and attentiveness to peripheral details and commitment to total effort in order to get ice time.   He also learned how to deal with bounded rationale authority figures without buying into their emotion.    That is an important life skill.   As for his development as a hockey player, time will tell.   At this point, the negative stuff outweighs the positive because it affected his confidence on the ice.  When learning is about making mistakes and learning from them, he has learned only that making mistakes is bad and cause to be blamed for team losses. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------


Actually Sophist, with all due respect, my perspective is accurate and complete from my perspective.  That's the great thing about perspectives...we each have our own unique perspective.  I offered it as another perspective on a different team coached by the same person who you criticized in an earlier post.  You will note that I did not label any of your assertions as "wrong" or "incorrect" because my son didn't play on your son's team this season. Similarly, as your son did not play on my son's team last season, I don't see how you can weigh in on "projections" or whether or not kids "put in effort" by comparing your son's experience to my son's experience. It's apples and oranges.  Obviously, you are dissatisfied with your son's experience this past season, and I'm sorry your son didn't have a great experience.  I hope your son has a better experience next season.   

[M@sshole]

Long time listener, first time caller here.  There have certainly been a few posts regarding Coach Shand on this site, so I would like to add my 2 cents.  My son is a Bantam this year, so I can't comment on what may or may not have happened on the PW AA team this year.  My son has done individual lessons with Coach Shand for several years, and Coach Shand is fantastic in this capacity. He genuinely cares about the player's development and goes out of his way to suggest everything that can be done on the ice and off the ice to assist in that development.  My son also played for Shand's Ontario Eagles in Pee Wee A last year, and it was the best experience he has had in 6+ years playing travel hockey.  Coach Shand is a demanding coach, but he is fair and holds players accountable.  If a player isn't putting in the effort or is playing selfishly, they won't get the same amount of ice time as those that are working hard and playing a team game.  We had a team that was projected to finish somewhere around 10th-12th (perhaps optimistically as high as 8th) that wound up finishing 4th and losing the SCAHA final in OT.  At season's end, we had a group of kids who had bonded into a fantastic team.  They worked hard together on the ice and never gave up.  It was a fantastic journey, and Coach Shand deserves a ton of credit as do the players who bought into his system and worked so hard week in and week out.   My son developed more during that year than in any other year.  Obviously, no coach is perfect, and your mileage may vary as you traverse the travel hockey landscape.  What is a great fit for my son may not be for your son, and vice versa.



Good perspective but incomplete.   First, Coach Shand has developed over time some very good players on his PWAA team.    Second, most coaches do a good to great job at sticktimes,  which involve a narrow set of skills compared to coaching a team or teaching a team.  For example, we have found Coach Bickley to be the best of many sticktime coaches out there but not an appropriate team coach for our son.   Coach Shand may be similar but charged twice the rate as other options.    Third, preseason projections are largely meaningless outside a few dominant clubs.   Shand's PWAA team was not simply projected to be good; it demonstrated it in the pre and early season and declined steadily over the season.  There are probably many reasons for that including the better development on other teams.   Fourth, your point on "putting in effort" and "playing selfish" is just plain wrong.   Some of the lower effort and more selfish players were favorites.   "Fairness" is in the eyes of the beholder.   

Happy that you and your son had a great experience with Coach Shand.   We began the season very keen on him as a coach and still see some virtue on his coaching.   Our son learned discipline and attentiveness to peripheral details and commitment to total effort in order to get ice time.   He also learned how to deal with bounded rationale authority figures without buying into their emotion.    That is an important life skill.   As for his development as a hockey player, time will tell.   At this point, the negative stuff outweighs the positive because it affected his confidence on the ice.  When learning is about making mistakes and learning from them, he has learned only that making mistakes is bad and cause to be blamed for team losses. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------


Actually Sophist, with all due respect, my perspective is accurate and complete from my perspective.  That's the great thing about perspectives...we each have our own unique perspective.  I offered it as another perspective on a different team coached by the same person who you criticized in an earlier post.  You will note that I did not label any of your assertions as "wrong" or "incorrect" because my son didn't play on your son's team this season. Similarly, as your son did not play on my son's team last season, I don't see how you can weigh in on "projections" or whether or not kids "put in effort" by comparing your son's experience to my son's experience. It's apples and oranges.  Obviously, you are dissatisfied with your son's experience this past season, and I'm sorry your son didn't have a great experience.  I hope your son has a better experience next season.   

OC1's finish was disappointing - but not the gloom & doom that I'm seeing on here.  There were a lot of 1 or 2 goal losses in the second half of the season to teams that seemed to develop more throughout the season.  Kudos to those teams - and there's certainly room for reflection on OC1.  Coaching is part of that.

Rather than throw stones from semi-anonymity, does anyone have any coaches and/or clubs they are more than 90% happy with?  If so, can you give them a shout out so we can collectively gain from your experience...

[Landshark]

This is closer to my neck of the woods, but Pavel S in Valencia does a great job with skills and discipline.  He is Bantam AA and Midget AA.


Peter T has a great reputation with the Bears. He is Squirt and Bantam AA.


There are great skills coaches at almost every rink.  Head coaches are harder to come by it seems sometimes.  I really like my sons high school coach.  The OC high school teams seem to have good structure and commitment too.

[Hockey sophist]

 This issue at hand is how we might evaluate ice hockey coaching.  Some seem to thing it is just a matter of perception or perspective.  If you kid is good and plays a lot, you love the coach; if you kid sucks, then it is the coach's fault.  I think that data could be collected or created to evaluate youth coaches not that this will ever happen.   Let's explore this question.    This is not about Coach Shand who is a “love him” or “not” type coach. The larger issue how we might objectively measure the quality of hockey coaching.   

 
The factors of evaluation are divided into four categories:   Team strategy and performance, player development, team culture, and role modeling for youth players.

 
Team or Season strategy

 
 

• How many players are rostered and why?    Does a coach, like parents on signing day, take his chances with 3 lines and several keepers or approach recruitment of players like a box of chocolates?   Take 20 and maybe find 15 or less he likes for big games at the end of the season.   
  The latter clearly seems more pragmatic in terms of wins and losses but probably weakens player development in terms of attention at practice or ice time during games.
• How does the team performs over the course of a season.   Does it win games early and then decline relative to its competition or does it steadily improve its relative rank through a season.   
  Expectations before the season are largely meaningless except perhaps for a few big clubs but early season performance compared to end of season performance is important. 
• Are lines rolled?   When not rolled, does the team do better or worse?
• Is there a rational basis for playing some players more and other players less. 

 
Player development

 
 

• How much focus in practice on skill and tactical development?
• How much time at practice is spend with the coach talking or sending players on penalty skates for messing up a drill (not planned skates for fitness).

 
   Is the methodology teaching-by-talking or chalk boarding or teaching-by-   doing with corrections made “on the fly,”

 
  7. How many players move on to the next level and, in particular outside the    club​?

 
   The Reign for example seems to argue that they are the true advocates of player development even though their teams generally suck.   Few of their    U-12 players move and especially outside the club.   Placing kids at higher    competitive levels is perhaps more important than W-L records although this    is not a simple linear continuum.   

 
Team Culture

 
 

• Is the team culture one of blame and scapegoating or one in which the coach assumed responsibility for mistakes and losses?
• Do long-time members of the team mimic or reflect the blame culture of the  coach or accept responsibility for their own mistakes?
• What is the level of authoritarianism by a coach?   

 
   If the larger goal of parenting is the prepare our children to live responsibly    in a free a    free society, do we want them to learn to live with authoritarian    behavior?   It would be interesting to know how each coach scores on the    Adorno F-scale for authoritarian personality.

 
    11. To what extent does the coach encourage creativity (not selfishness) in their players?   How does this manifest itself?
    12 To what extent does playing time depend on paying a coach for private     lessons?  At or above the market rate?

 
Role Modeling

 
    13 Does the coach reflect the values we would want our children to emulate or    does coach direct profanity at referees, volunteer personnel at games?
    14 Does the coach exhibit good sportsmanship in wins and losses?
    15 How is the coach regarded by peers at the same competitive level?