Leaderboard

For ease of reference, I started a new topic for teams to post supplemental tryouts. SCIR will have the following supplemental tryouts at Alpha Ice Complex: 12U Mixed Year Thursday 5/11/2023 - 6:00 PM We have room on our mixed year rosters for additional skaters and goalies 16U A Major and A Minor Thursday 5/11/2023 - 8:00 PM We have openings on both of our 16U Mixed Year teams including one goalie position 18U Mixed Year Monday 5/15/2023 - 6:00 PM We have player positions available on our 18u Mixed Year 1 team Please contact coaching@scirhockey.org for all of the above or fill out the player inquiry form

They cut Johnny Gaudreau years ago and they make light of it as if he wasn't actually good enough and "slipped through the cracks". RJ, you seem to be the new expert on the block but your naivete is obvious. I don't feel as though my player was slighted. he made the 68 camp as someone in the top 25% or so but was never going to be selected to go further and that's okay. He got to evaluate himself against those players and knew exactly where he stood. He knew Mitch Miller was a freaking stud but he also knew he was a scumbag for what he did to that kid. Yes, they knew, everyone knew wayyy back then but MidAm didn't care. Send him through. Lots of lessons to be learned if you pay attention.

I thought I'd add my two cents regarding the mid-am camp tryout process with hopes of helping future families navigate the situation. Full disclaimer, my son is an '08 and this was his second year at the tryout...He did not advance to the mid-am camp either year. I can only comment knowledgably on the 2008 group. My understanding (which could be incorrect) is that this year the number of players a coach could nominate was loosely determined by the team's ranking at the end of the year. Obviously, with two strong national-finalist squads in the Pens and Vengeance, both teams deservedly had many players attend. I say loosely determined, however, because there were a couple of lower-ranked Western PA organizations that seemed to have a disproportionate number of players in attendance. I'm not fully certain whether or not something changed from last year, but in 2022 we noticed nearly entire teams present for some low-ranked WPA squads. Fortunately, that wasn't the case this year. My son's team had eight players at the most recent tryout. I'd be remiss if I failed to mention that it was clear that there were a number of high quality players that were not among the roughly 175 players that attended the tryout. Also worth mentioning is that as part of the registration process parents are asked how many points the player scored in the most recent season, as well as where, and what level he/she played in the most recent season and seasons prior. As a coach and evaluator myself (not hockey), I fully understand that tryout/Evaluation process is difficult and flawed by nature. That said, I was disappointed to see only ONE evaluator present during each of my son's four games. The evaluation areas were clearly marked and it was easy to determine that just one evaluator was trying to take notes on roughly 35 players across a 45-minute running-clock game. Evaluating is difficult...it's imperfect...it's stressful...But having the expectation that ONE person can objectively and effectively evaluate 30+ players, let alone in such a short time, is absurd. I can't speak to whether or not the single-evaluator model was in place for all games, but can only speak to my son's games. While I watched many games that weren't my son's, I didn't pay attention to the evaluator situation for those games. Unfortunately, I don't recall the evaluation situation in 2022. With all of that in mind, I firmly believe that a player's full body of work should be a factor (clearly not the only one) in situations like this with his/her most recent season's performance given the most weight. If there were five evaluators present for each game, I'd suggest the weight should be low; but with just one evaluator present the weight has to be higher. Part of the problem is that the talent divide among all players trying out is ENORMOUS! Contrary to popular belief, the hockey is not very good at the tryout. This is where it seems clear that certain organizations and individuals (namely coaches) have superior, and sometimes undue, influence. The list of players advancing in 2022 supported that, and by looking at the '08 list of advancing players this year, it seems clear as well. Don't get me wrong, the vast majority of players on the '08 list are fully deserving, but there are more than a few head scratchers on there--Players that looked completely lost. Certain organizations/teams had an improbable number of players that advanced to the camp. It's no coincidence that those organizations/teams had a strong presence and influence at the tryout. tl;dr Tryouts are imperfect in nature and evaluators have a very difficult job. Mid-am makes the job more difficult by not having enough evaluators present for each game. Not all of the region's best players attend the mid-am camp tryout. Certain organizations/teams/coaches have more influence in the mid-am district than others. If making the mid-am camp is your lone goal find an organization/team/coach with mid-am influence. One goalie showed up for the first night, played 12 minutes, faced three shots, and then left the tryout. He advanced to the mid-am camp. Is he deserving based on his body of work? Absolutely!! Is his selection "fair" based on the tryout? You be the judge. Anecdotal evidence as discussed by many parents suggests that if you're a forward and you get your name in the goal column a couple of times...you're going to advance. All goals are reported to the evaluator in real time.

Yeah, I’d be upset too if at 15u a coach recruited my kid to play for him and then after committing find out he won’t be the coach (unless for a good reason). 15u is a big year and the coach is a huge part of selecting the right team for your player. I’d be even more upset to find out it was to accommodate a younger BY.

Ok I think I'm right on the 7+ evaluators. I only know this because I've counted. Maybe it's not true across the board but it has been for me after multiple trips. I'm sure "gold buckets" get the nod at a higher rate than most organizations, but that's because they are generally the best players. Just like I'm sure the Barons move through the process at a higher rate than Team Ohio kids. They just have better players. For anyone crying foul on the whole process, throw out some specific ways it could be improved. What are your ideas? Looking at the 08 and 09 list, I do see some AA kids from Pittsburgh that were selected over Esmark AAA and Preds AAA kids. There aren't many, but they are there. Isn't that the type of thing we want to see? Having evaluators actually look at performance and potential vs the number of letters? And looking at the PPE kids on the 08 and 09 list, they absolutely deserve it. I'm sure the process isn't absolutely perfect, but I still think it's better than any Tier I or Tier II local tryout process. I really don't get all the hate, unless it's become personal for some reason. UPDATE: My only suggestion is to get a few evaluators from Michigan. It's close by, and there's less of a chance those evaluators will be familiar with a kid or have coached a kid in the past.

There are usually 7+ evaluators over the course of the weekend. And the evaluators don't know the kids. It's a good process.

My quick takeaways without dissecting - there are kids who aren't on the list who should be (no idea why they may have declined or whatever) and there are kids who are on these lists who were literally cut from their teams which tells me they shouldn't be on the list.

PAHL would solve a lot if issues if they had AA Major and AA Minor divisions at 12U, 14U (already exists), and 16U. Prevents the scenario mentioned here and also prevents peewee minor teams from going independent, which is when that nonsense starts to happen. PAHL needs to understand that the birth year model is here to stay whether they like it or not. Adapt or become irrelevant.