Satow, Clay wrote:
> Especially if that "tons of ice time" means lots of GAMES.
>
> One of the excellent points made in the Toronto Globe and Mail series was
> that European hockey development was more skills and practice based than
> North American hockey, which is competition and game based. (snip)
Actually, the European system you are discussing is more practice based
at a younger age (6-13/14). Using a pyramid philosophy, the practice
time should lessen with the advance to junior/college level--and game
time to utilize skills should improve.
Our problem in North America is most parents want to see their
7-year-old kid play 40 games. And they certainly don't want to sit
through practices. These are the key years for skill development--the
tools as coaches call them. The late teenage years are the time to
polish the tools and develop the toolbox (brain).
I believe that a 17-20 year old player should be playing a bit more than
a college schedule (30-40), but a bit less than a typical junior sked
(up to 80). There is a happy medium there, and college could really
help itself if it increase the schedule by even 4-6 games.
> What does this say for college hockey? Well, most college hockey teams have
> game schedules that are relatively light during the week. They practice,
> learn new things. They aren't on the road a lot. The good coaches are good
> teachers. So college hockey more closely resembles a European system than
> the major juniors.
Yes and no, because by the time they are 18 in Europe--top players are
in their pro leagues, playing against older competition (like
college), but in a longer schedule (50-60 games with
tournaments/international events). They are also playing against MUCH
older competition.
> Rather than looking at the draft, let's look at actual performance.
> According to the NHL website, the top rookie scorers are:
>
> 1. Muckalt
> 2. Drury
> 3. Morrison
> 4. Hejduk
> 5. Parrish
> 6. Sharifijanov
> 7. Kaberle
> 8. Hrdina
> 9. Watt
> 10. Maneluk
>
> Mostly US Collegians and Europeans. Now it's fair to note that the US
> Collegians are "old rookies" but at least with the case of Muckalt, Drury,
> and Morrison, they have been successful in the NHL without needing the "tons
> of ice time" that they might have gotten in major juniors or in the minor
> leagues.
This is a very positive sign for college development. However, watch
the next two months--as players who have only seen a 40-45 game season
get into games 60 through 80. If they keep going, that's awesome.
It's definitely a key point to watch, though.
S. Monaghan
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
|