The CAHA AA Flight system sucks again (2019 Bantam AA Edition)

[Hockey sophist]

Great post Icadad.   Let me quote part of it:
"ALL hockey leads to Beer league if you play the game long enough.  For some people the Beer league includes ex-NHL and former D1, Jr. and euro, swedish and finnish pros.  Meaningless defeatist slogan truth be told.  There is nothing wrong with kids having a dream, and goals that might exceed their grasp when all is said and done.  And yet there are kids who grew up playing youth hockey in Cali who have been in the NHL recently, will eventually be in the NHL, or are in the NHL currently.  I'm not going to list them, and it's also besides the point.  Many kids play AAA in states around the country, and California is the only state I know of that artificially restricts and depresses the number of teams.  The ratio of AAA players to total players is far below that of the more established hockey leagues and systems and the guidelines set out by USA Hockey.  Once again, CAHA is run by people who think they know something that nobody else around the country does."
Our son, a Bantam '05 had the good fortune to play in the SCAHA and CAHA selects.  Both experiences were the best and most fun he has had in 7 years of hockey.   He would not be sad to see more of that kind of hockey experience for players who do not fit the AAA profile.   

At the SCAHA selects there were 4 teams of about 22-24 players including goal keepers.  There were some A players and a good sample of AA and AAA players.    The quality of play seemed to me to be definitely better skill than either flight 1 or 2 in terms of passing, skating, and shooting albeit not as physical as the top 4 or 5 of flight 1 CAHA teams.  Some of that is just physical maturity.   The AAA players probably pulled the AA closer to their quality and style of play.  If correct, that may be the key. 

At least 4 AAA '05 teams could be created in SCAHA and since there were a number of very good players who did not tryout, there is probably enough talent for a 5th and maybe a 6th team.   

We have attended summer camps in Minnesota and Canada and our better AA players can hold their own with their AAA cohort outside of California.   

If the big clubs feel threatened by this expansion of AAA hockey, let them field two teams in each birth year if they can attract the talent.   The Saints, OC, Wave, Ice Dogs, Gold Rush and maybe others could, in time, field competitive AAA teams for each age group.   

At the CAHA selects, the play was slightly but not necessarily dramatically better.    There was a goal keeper from a remote part of Northern Cal hockey-wise who plays Bantam B.   There are hidden gems out there and one of the goals of the associations should be to create a ways to recognize and nurture that talent.    The current system may recognize talent through selects but is not nurturing it effectively.
 
Six AAA '05 AAA teams would go a long ways toward upgrading the quality of play and the development of individual talent.   It would allow current AAA parents to save money on travel and keep their sons at home for a few more years before juniors or university.    If there is fear about dilution of play, the best teams travel still travel as much as they do now.  My guess is that there would be fewer blowouts than with the existing system of tier play.
 

[Pop]

California only has about 10 kids a year with the skills to play real jrs and D1. So what purpose would more AAA teams provide?  Skilled kids make a team AAA, a AAA team won’t give a unskilled kid skills. CA should only have 1 AAA team. There is no way AA CA kids are equal or better then MN top kids.  MN does not play AAA during the winter except for Gentry.  They have a fall tier 1 league representing the MN Hockey Districts that play enough games against each other to qualify for nationals.  Each fall MN sends some regular association bantam AA teams to the Chicago Invite and they play in the elite division. There are no CA AA teams playing at that level. The CA AAA teams don’t even do very well in that division. MN high school hockey is 2 classes AA and A.  Some of the AA teams have more D1 commits then the whole stat of CA. If CA players could compete with MN players, CA teams would go to MN and play MN teams.  Instead of going to MN and playing non MN teams. Tahoe has a MN team in their league Northstar academy, which has blown Tahoe out both times they’ve played.  Northstars goalie wasn’t even the starter for his mid level class A high school team(that’s why he went to Northstar).  The teams that MN sends to the high school nationals are made up of kids that were cut from their respective high schools jv teams, meaning the team is the third highest team in that town.  And they play against the best HS’s in CA.  That’s how far CA is from competing against real hockey markets.  It’s not a organization that’s holding back CA hockey players, it’s the skills of the CA hockey player that is holding them back. There is a CA kid playing on UofMN hockey team, proving that good kids will move on.

[Hockey sophist]

California only has about 10 kids a year with the skills to play real jrs and D1. So what purpose would more AAA teams provide?  Skilled kids make a team AAA, a AAA team won’t give a unskilled kid skills. CA should only have 1 AAA team. There is no way AA CA kids are equal or better then MN top kids.  MN does not play AAA during the winter except for Gentry.  They have a fall tier 1 league representing the MN Hockey Districts that play enough games against each other to qualify for nationals.  Each fall MN sends some regular association bantam AA teams to the Chicago Invite and they play in the elite division. There are no CA AA teams playing at that level. The CA AAA teams don’t even do very well in that division. MN high school hockey is 2 classes AA and A.  Some of the AA teams have more D1 commits then the whole stat of CA. If CA players could compete with MN players, CA teams would go to MN and play MN teams.  Instead of going to MN and playing non MN teams. Tahoe has a MN team in their league Northstar academy, which has blown Tahoe out both times they’ve played.  Northstars goalie wasn’t even the starter for his mid level class A high school team(that’s why he went to Northstar).  The teams that MN sends to the high school nationals are made up of kids that were cut from their respective high schools jv teams, meaning the team is the third highest team in that town.  And they play against the best HS’s in CA.  That’s how far CA is from competing against real hockey markets.  It’s not a organization that’s holding back CA hockey players, it’s the skills of the CA hockey player that is holding them back. There is a CA kid playing on UofMN hockey team, proving that good kids will move on.

This is a thoughtful and informed post and maybe correct.   How then do we explain the difference between CA and MN kids?   Is it cold weather and free ice?    Better genes?   Coaching, but if that then access to free ice is less important?   Higher level of competition?   Too many distractions for CA hockey players?   I don't think it is ordained that MN kids will be consistently better than CA kids.   A kid's hockey future is not determined by age 6!   There is a lot that good coaching, ice time, and the highest possible level of competition can do to help CA kids develop.   CAHA and if you are correct, local clubs, isn't getting it done.   Maybe it is self-delusion but I think 5-6 AAA teams would make a difference  but for institutional and internal political reasons, it isn't happening nor are any other initiatives being explored.   Your answer leaves me thinking that if your son or daughter wants to be an ice hockey player, parents should buy them a surfboard.   

[KickSave]

Why does this always come back to D1 or NHL? Many kids just want to keep challenging themselves by  playing at a higher level? Kids that want to work hard- shocking, right? But they exist, and in significant numbers. And they do this despite the “you’re from CA so give up now” stuff they hear.

[Pop]

A level kids work just as hard as AAA level kids. The difference is skill. So why would more AAA teams create better hockey players when the 3 current one only move 10 on a year?  Seems like a waste of money for the rest of the AAA players, when they could have worked just as hard and had just as much fun playing AA hockey.  Playing against better competition didn’t help the majority of current AAA kids that didn’t move on.  Why would more AAA teams help the kids currently playing AA?  In the example above with MN HS having a varsity,jv, and jr gold teams. The jr gold kids work just as hard and have just as much fun playing hockey as do the varsity kids.  They are just not as skilled, but the funny thing is those parents don’t blame MN Hockey for holding their kid back.  The ones that do blame go to places like Northstar Academy and Soiux Falls Power AAA and teams like that. 

[Hockey sophist]

Kicksave, Yes.    That is one of the great benefits of ice hockey or any sport. 

[KickSave]

Oh sorry - I’m not saying kids at A don’t work hard. However... since “hard work pays off”, those kids wind up improving, and they may want a higher level of challenge. I know many such kids. They’re constantly met with, “Oh no one is going pro from California”. It’s ridiculous.

[puckslapper]

You’re delusional if you think an A player works just as hard as a AAA player. Do you really think that the AAA players were just born with that amount of skill? Or is it more probable that they worked harder and dedicated more hours on ice, off ice and in the gym because they wanted to achieve their AAA goal? A goal attainable by very few in California because CAHA limits the spots available. So a lot of kids that are willing to work harder and put in the additional effort and raise their skill to that level will never reap the benefits.

[Knuckle Puck]

California only has about 10 kids a year with the skills to play real jrs and D1. So what purpose would more AAA teams provide?  Skilled kids make a team AAA, a AAA team won’t give a unskilled kid skills. CA should only have 1 AAA team. There is no way AA CA kids are equal or better then MN top kids.  MN does not play AAA during the winter except for Gentry.  They have a fall tier 1 league representing the MN Hockey Districts that play enough games against each other to qualify for nationals.  Each fall MN sends some regular association bantam AA teams to the Chicago Invite and they play in the elite division. There are no CA AA teams playing at that level. The CA AAA teams don’t even do very well in that division. MN high school hockey is 2 classes AA and A.  Some of the AA teams have more D1 commits then the whole stat of CA. If CA players could compete with MN players, CA teams would go to MN and play MN teams.  Instead of going to MN and playing non MN teams. Tahoe has a MN team in their league Northstar academy, which has blown Tahoe out both times they’ve played.  Northstars goalie wasn’t even the starter for his mid level class A high school team(that’s why he went to Northstar).  The teams that MN sends to the high school nationals are made up of kids that were cut from their respective high schools jv teams, meaning the team is the third highest team in that town.  And they play against the best HS’s in CA.  That’s how far CA is from competing against real hockey markets.  It’s not a organization that’s holding back CA hockey players, it’s the skills of the CA hockey player that is holding them back. There is a CA kid playing on UofMN hockey team, proving that good kids will move on.

your observations about MN are absolutely true. but california is not minnesota, nor is any other state. let's stick with southern california.

your estimate that 10 kids per year have the talent is low. the number is closer to two-and-a-half to three times that, going back to at least the 95s. obviously, some birth years are stronger than others, but right now in the 1998 class,  I count 18 playing or committed to NCAA D1, 3 playing D3 and 8 playing junior A in NAHL& BCHL -- total of 29 kids. The numbers in the 1999 class are virtually identical: 18 D1, 3 D3 and 10 in legit jrs (including 2 in USHL).  2000 class is weaker, but 2001 class is strong: there already are 15 D1 commits, 2 kids in the WHL, and easily another dozen with at least junior a/d3 potential.

now, if you historically have at least 30 kids per year with sufficient talent, and a goal to grow the number in future years, where do those kids go to get the crucial first-line/first d-pairing opportunities when there are only 2 aaa teams in so cal? where does the third best goalie in the class go? where does the talented kid stuck behind the son of nhl-dad coach go? unless caha permits more teams, those kids go elsewhere. that's a shame. 

the rationale behind kneecapping the titans, wave and gulls aaa teams was crap. every one of those clubs moved kids to the next level, which is the *only* thing that should matter at aaa. if jk didn't want to play those clubs 3 times a year, fine, eliminate regular season games and just hold a february tournament weekend to determine who moves on to districts. then you could spend all your time jetting back east to play t1elite, while letting the other clubs do what they do. 

[Pop]

MN examples were used cause previous poster said CA AA kids match up well with MN AAA players. I was showing how the best CA high school teams(with ex NHLr kid and AAA players) gets beat by MN kids cut from jv.  Everyone say you can’t use MN as a example but why not?  Paul Martin coms from a town of 15000 that last year had 3 players players in the NHL. The association has 3 bantam teams and all district games are within a hour drive. They play 3-4 tournaments with 1-2 being a 2-4 hour drive away and the other ones being local.  Every year a couple of teams from their will dominate and a couple will get blown out. No big deal it’s not about winning but development. Why couldn’t CA have city leagues with A,B,and C. Balance teams at the clubs based on those levels and have the kids play each other. City champs move on to state. Ice time will always be expensive in CA, but take away all the travel time and money and you might grow the game. I used 10 cause CA has roughly 40 kids currently playing D1.
If a kid currently playing 3rd line can’t make 2nd line is it cause he’s not working hard or not as skilled.  If only 30 kids are going to move on to the next level from 3 AAA teams. How come the other 30 aren’t, Lack of hard work or they didn’t have a he skill set?  Or maybe the 30 that didn’t only had the goal of playing AAA and not higher.  If you take the current bottom AAA kids and form another team are those kids now skilled AAA first liners or will it be a weak AAA team?  Yes there top kids currently playing AA that could replace the bottom AAA kids. The end result will be the same with those kids not moving on either. 

[Landshark]

Read Gladwell. You’ll find out that everything you are saying here is false. A kids don’t work as hard.  If they do. they move up. The better competition and coaching makes a difference. A system run by people who work half as hard or are half as creative with their desire to see Caha rise would prosper. A system that blames its own failings on the kids they have to work with is a lost cause. Lost CaHa.

[RandomTask]

I wish I had bought my kid a surfboard.

[lcadad]

Pop,

I don't even know what to say to you.  Minnesota doesn't even play the same age groups as the rest of the country.  For example, Peewee in Minnesota is kids who have birthdays between June 30, 2007 and July 1, 2005.  What this means is that kids that would be midgets elsewhere are Bantams in MN, depending on their birthdate.  Everything in Minnesota is community based, since the apex of the system is high school hockey.  That is not the case pretty much anywhere else in the country.   There is no point in comparing or talking about minnesota youth hockey in comparison to the rest of the country, because the system is different and not applicable or replica-table anywhere that doesn't have hundreds of community rinks where schools play their hockey.

[area51]

MN has almost 19,000 kids playing hockey at 8U, CA has about 3500.

[daddyo]

Any thoughts on Kings 1 winning play-in over Kings 2 to qualify for playdowns?  Kings 1 was originally slated to be the '04 Kings AA team (in flight 1) and Kings 2 to be '05 (in flight 2).  Internal politics, etc changed that plan and Kings 1 ended up winning flight 2 & Kings 2 placed 8th with 2-3 wins in flight 2 (only against the 9th place & 7th place teams).