Americans-Canadians

[granddaddyscout]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Even if you talk globally re numbers last year 104 US kids scholarships vs 80Canadian scholarships. Under 60000 registered USA hockey players and throw in the 200 Minnesota girls teams ( assuming they aren't usa hockey registered and you are under the 85000 + canadian girls heck Ontario alone has over 46000 players . Ontario has more scholarships proportional to the amount of Canadian players because of their compettion levels. BTW forget the Quebec bias a whole 5 girls went D1 which is not unlike Conneticut or New York or Wisconsin

These numbers are consistent with what I have seen which is why I always wonder why people talk about this Canadian bias. The college coaches that I have talked to would all take a US player over a Canadian player if all other aspects are equal. At the end of the day they have budgets to deal with and paperwork to process and Canadian players cost more and create more work.

In addition the idea that "they will find you" is not true. They will only find you generally if you are playing somewhere where they are looking. There are a lot more coaches watching in Minnesota, Ontario, and the Boston areas. Look at the number of players that go to the lower level D1 schools from those places. Playing for NAHA, in the PW, for Little Caesars, Mission, provides a much better chance that girls will be seen if you aren't from Minnesota or Boston where there are lots of local D1 schools.

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

If you are good enough they will find you. It's inevitable. GOOD enough.

 

[sillywench]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Your response is pathetic and shallow. My daughter is just 1 of thousands of Canadian girls given the same attention every year. It is inevitable with the enormous enrolment in Canadian hockey that there will always be more talent coming out of the Great White North simply because there are rinks in every village, town and city and multiple levels in hockey programs to accommodate anyone who wants to play and no gender discrimination. Our love of this game is a "Canadian Thing" that is impossible for you to understand.

I expect you to be true to your name

Dude, you call me pathetic and shallow for saying that you are too close to the situation to see the big picture? um... no.

I might just get the 'Canadian Thing' better than you get the 'American Thing'. The only reason I'm saying this is so you no longer shame yourself by saying weird things like - "Our love of this game is a "Canadian Thing" that is impossible for you to understand.'

I do now know that I get the 'Math thing' better than you do.

Quantity of players - which I think is actually not that different for us v canada - means that you have a much higher percentage of your girls playing than we do.

It also means most likely that as the percentage of the population playing goes up, a higher proportion of girls play who are not necessarily great high end 'hockey athlete' material. In plain language, having 'more' playing options and a higher percentage of the population playing does not necessarily translate into having a 'better' high end.

A large part of high end athletes is genetics - you can't really develop someone who does not have 'it' available to develop.

There are some other aspects of your thinking which really provide a very good example of unfounded bias. You are actually reinforcing the point of those of us who are suggesting that the 'Canadian girls are better' refrain is a ingrained 'pseudo-truth' that colors the subjective evaluation of players.

Thank you very much for chatting about this, unfortunately I must toddle along now.

 

[SeymoreHockey]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Thank you very much for chatting about this, unfortunately I must toddle along now.

Try toddling off a cliff!

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Dude..........

Quantity of players - which I think is actually not that different for us v canada - means that you have a much higher percentage of your girls playing than we do.

It also means most likely that as the percentage of the population playing goes up, a higher proportion of girls play who are not necessarily great high end 'hockey athlete' material. In plain language, having 'more' playing options and a higher percentage of the population playing does not necessarily translate into having a 'better' high end.

A large part of high end athletes is genetics - you can't really develop someone who does not have 'it' available to develop.
.

Dude, to use your terminology, you are way off the mark with some of your comments....

USA population is 10 times the size of Canada. Canada has more female hockey players than the US. Off course the percentages of Canadian girls playing hockey is much higher. It is actually OVER 10 times higher. Therefore the awareness of the sport is much more widespread than in the US. This is a Canadian thing, as hockey is Canada's first sport. Does not mean some US folks don't get it, but it does mean more Canadians get it.


Secondly, contrary to your statements, more players at the grass roots leads in general to a better quality level at the top. Numbers don't lie. Ontario has 40K of female players and supplies the largest portion of D1 players (25%), plus about 50% of the CIS players in the Canadian College system. About half of the players in the the Canuck U18/U22 system are from Ontario. This is a clear correlation to the grass roots numbers in Canada. Some in Ontario would argue that despite the lack of elite level development by the governing body, Ontario still churns out loads of talent, purely based on the numbers. (Many involved in the Ontario system are not happy with the leadership of the OWHA, specially WRT elite player development.).

As far as your comments about genetics. Sure genetics play a role, but in the end the players with the commitment, the drive and doing the hard work are the ones that succeed. Lots of examples of kids from non-athletic parents being a success.

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Genetics. I swear, the wench sounds more and more like the creasedonk every day.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Americans-Canadians

As far as your comments about genetics. Sure genetics play a role, but in the end the players with the commitment, the drive and doing the hard work are the ones that succeed. Lots of examples of kids from non-athletic parents being a success.

I've been trying to stay out of this debate, because I really don't want to contribute to prolonging a protracted chest-thumping US vs Canada war.

But unfortunately I can't stay out of it any more. The fact that more than 10x as many Canadians (and even that much moreso in Ontario) play hockey makes a huge difference in one key area--which is actually far more important than mere athletic ability/genetics: hockey sense.

We watch a ton more hockey. We grow up in households where everyone generally understands the game and passes on that knowledge. We play on teams where the majority of our teammates (at least if we are on a good team) also have well-developed hockey sense.

Being a really good hockey player isn't just about what you can do with the puck when you get it. It's even more importantly about what we do when we don't have the puck. It's about reading and reacting. It's about being in the right place at the right time. It's about thinking one play ahead.

Unfortunately, many people who watch hockey games only ever notice the puck carrier, and don't really appreciate the finer points of the game.

That's where Wayne Gretzky was head and shoulders above his contemporaries. He wasn't very big or very strong. He wasn't a very good skater, or exceptionally fast. But he had brilliant hockey sense.

I have watched a large number of D1 games, including many games among top-ranked D1 teams. Yes, the speed of the game and the athletic abilities among D1 players as a whole is higher on average than that in the PWHL. But what I actually was truly surprised at, is that despite the exceptional genetic athletic gifts of most of these D1 athletes, there is a quite notable relative lack of hockey sense overall versus what I would have reasonably expected to be the case at the next level. Frankly, it's significantly better among good teams in the PWHL.

Perhaps if you have not lived and breathed hockey your whole life, this nuance would not be obvious when comparing athletes. From a pure individual skill standpoint, I have no doubt that a great many players do compare very favourably on both sides of the border.

Though there are lots of obvious exceptions both ways, as a group, the PWHL athletes tend to win hands down in terms of hockey sense. I believe this is actually why they are recruited in far greater numbers proportionally versus their counterparts elsewhere, where no significant advantage in athletic ability might be obvious.

 

[granddaddyscout]

Re: Americans-Canadians

I've been trying to stay out of this debate, because I really don't want to contribute to prolonging a protracted chest-thumping US vs Canada war.

But unfortunately I can't stay out of it any more. The fact that more than 10x as many Canadians (and even that much moreso in Ontario) play hockey makes a huge difference in one key area--which is actually far more important than mere athletic ability/genetics: hockey sense.

We watch a ton more hockey. We grow up in households where everyone generally understands the game and passes on that knowledge. We play on teams where the majority of our teammates (at least if we are on a good team) also have well-developed hockey sense.

Being a really good hockey player isn't just about what you can do with the puck when you get it. It's even more importantly about what we do when we don't have the puck. It's about reading and reacting. It's about being in the right place at the right time. It's about thinking one play ahead.

Unfortunately, many people who watch hockey games only ever notice the puck carrier, and don't really appreciate the finer points of the game.

That's where Wayne Gretzky was head and shoulders above his contemporaries. He wasn't very big or very strong. He wasn't a very good skater, or exceptionally fast. But he had brilliant hockey sense.

I have watched a large number of D1 games, including many games among top-ranked D1 teams. Yes, the speed of the game and the athletic abilities among D1 players as a whole is higher on average than that in the PWHL. But what I actually was truly surprised at, is that despite the exceptional genetic athletic gifts of most of these D1 athletes, there is a quite notable relative lack of hockey sense overall versus what I would have reasonably expected to be the case at the next level. Frankly, it's significantly better among good teams in the PWHL.

Perhaps if you have not lived and breathed hockey your whole life, this nuance would not be obvious when comparing athletes. From a pure individual skill standpoint, I have no doubt that a great many players do compare very favourably on both sides of the border.

Though there are lots of obvious exceptions both ways, as a group, the PWHL athletes tend to win hands down in terms of hockey sense. I believe this is actually why they are recruited in far greater numbers proportionally versus their counterparts elsewhere, where no significant advantage in athletic ability might be obvious.

I think you are spot on with these comments. I have always noticed that many of the PWHL teams appear smaller and frankly less blessed with athletic talent than their US counterparts (talking the high end teams), yet they still prevail often times on the ice. Hockey is clearly a game where the team concept is paramount and one where the best players are not always the best athletes. Gretzky is a great example, Larionov, Hull, Chelios, Bourke, etc... are all examples of Hall of Fame players more as a result of their mental excellence than pure athleticism. I agree that a lot of that come from growing up with hockey such a part of your culture. I would also ad that hockey seems to have a much greater rate of success with NHL players kids becoming NHL players as well, siblings too. I think that speaks to the "hockey sense factor as well"

 

[Trillium]

Re: Americans-Canadians

I think you are spot on with these comments. I have always noticed that many of the PWHL teams appear smaller and frankly less blessed with athletic talent than their US counterparts (talking the high end teams), yet they still prevail often times on the ice. Hockey is clearly a game where the team concept is paramount and one where the best players are not always the best athletes. Gretzky is a great example, Larionov, Hull, Chelios, Bourke, etc... are all examples of Hall of Fame players more as a result of their mental excellence than pure athleticism. I agree that a lot of that come from growing up with hockey such a part of your culture. I would also ad that hockey seems to have a much greater rate of success with NHL players kids becoming NHL players as well, siblings too. I think that speaks to the "hockey sense factor as well"

To add to that, a disproportionate percentage of the D1 female players from the PWHL actually had dads and older brothers who played junior hockey and coached them on the way up.

 

[sillywench]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Try toddling off a cliff!

I have tried it, it was fun!

 

[sillywench]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Dude, to use your terminology, you are way off the mark with some of your comments....

USA population is 10 times the size of Canada. Canada has more female hockey players than the US. Off course the percentages of Canadian girls playing hockey is much higher. It is actually OVER 10 times higher. Therefore the awareness of the sport is much more widespread than in the US. This is a Canadian thing, as hockey is Canada's first sport. Does not mean some US folks don't get it, but it does mean more Canadians get it.

No dispute there whatsoever.

Secondly, contrary to your statements, more players at the grass roots leads in general to a better quality level at the top. Numbers don't lie. Ontario has 40K of female players and supplies the largest portion of D1 players (25%), plus about 50% of the CIS players in the Canadian College system. About half of the players in the the Canuck U18/U22 system are from Ontario. This is a clear correlation to the grass roots numbers in Canada. Some in Ontario would argue that despite the lack of elite level development by the governing body, Ontario still churns out loads of talent, purely based on the numbers. (Many involved in the Ontario system are not happy with the leadership of the OWHA, specially WRT elite player development.).

Key words being 'in general'. Yes, you would expect certain numbers at grassroots to yield certain results at the other end of the pipeline. Unless, of course, if other factors significantly affected this formula - in either direction.

As far as your comments about genetics. Sure genetics play a role, but in the end the players with the commitment, the drive and doing the hard work are the ones that succeed. Lots of examples of kids from non-athletic parents being a success.

Totally agreed, I brought up genetics - really meaning anatomy/physiology - to suggest that the us/canada are working off similar pools of physical 'talent', and there are limits to the thinking that the higher the number of players the higher yield of additional DI/D3 players at the other end of the development cycle. If you take the most suited 1.5% your back end yield 'should' be slightly lower per grassroots player than if you take your most suited .15%.

Other factors apply - you site the benefits of 'immersion' in the hockey culcha' in Canada. In the US - especially in areas without much support for girls hockey - there may be something of the opposite where only highly motivated girls especially suited to hockey self select for the sport. Might be hard for you to imagine this, being Canadian and all, but I've seen it over and over.

Either way - these factors are not measurable or major - but may have some effect on the 'yield' and worth bearing in mind when talking numbers.

 

[LG4]

Re: Americans-Canadians

No dispute there whatsoever.



Key words being 'in general'. Yes, you would expect certain numbers at grassroots to yield certain results at the other end of the pipeline. Unless, of course, if other factors significantly affected this formula - in either direction.



Totally agreed, I brought up genetics - really meaning anatomy/physiology - to suggest that the us/canada are working off similar pools of physical 'talent', and there are limits to the thinking that the higher the number of players the higher yield of additional DI/D3 players at the other end of the development cycle. If you take the most suited 1.5% your back end yield 'should' be slightly lower per grassroots player than if you take your most suited .15%.

Other factors apply - you site the benefits of 'immersion' in the hockey culcha' in Canada. In the US - especially in areas without much support for girls hockey - there may be something of the opposite where only highly motivated girls especially suited to hockey self select for the sport. Might be hard for you to imagine this, being Canadian and all, but I've seen it over and over.

Either way - these factors are not measurable or major - but may have some effect on the 'yield' and worth bearing in mind when talking numbers.

there are limits to the thinking that the higher the number of players the higher yield of additional DI/D3 players at the other end of the development cycle
The Canadian scholarships seem to agree with your assessment although we have more numbers it clearly does not transfer to more then a fair share of scholarships which is what so many posters seem to imply .

 

[brookyone]

Re: Americans-Canadians

there are limits to the thinking that the higher the number of players the higher yield of additional DI/D3 players at the other end of the development cycle
The Canadian scholarships seem to agree with your assessment although we have more numbers it clearly does not transfer to more then a fair share of scholarships which is what so many posters ie you and brookyone seem to imply .

Don't know when where I made any such implication. Don't know why I would imply as much since I don't even think it's true.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Don't know when where I made any such implication. Don't know why I would imply as much since I don't even think it's true.

I think you get misquoted a lot Trout... cause nobody has a clue what your talking about most of the time or like me they only read the first sentence of your posts cause the rest is usually Bob Loblaw....

 

[brookyone]

Re: Americans-Canadians

I think you get misquoted a lot Trout... cause nobody has a clue what your talking about most of the time or like me they only read the first sentence of your posts cause the rest is usually Bob Loblaw....

Another constant example of your infantile psyche...the "trout" thing for approximately 100 times now. Not too childish or anything. Are you stuck on the playground in the 2nd grade?

I know that just like all your other posts, you're stupid enough to think it's some sort devastating insult. Yep...I'm devastated each time I read it. You're a freak.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Another constant example of your infantile psyche...the "trout" thing for approximately 100 times now. Not too childish or anything. Are you stuck on the playground in the 2nd grade?

I know that just like all your other posts, you're stupid enough to think it's some sort devastating insult. Yep...I'm devastated each time I read it. You're a freak.

Hah! See what I mean...Bob Loblaw

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

US beats Canada 3-2 in a shootout. First win in 12. Do ya think they'll meet again later.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Americans-Canadians

US beats Canada 3-2 in a shootout. First win in 12. Do ya think they'll meet again later.

Betting money sais they'll meet again in the final.

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Americans-Canadians

Well, there you have it. Good job girls.

 

[osualum86]

Re: Americans-Canadians

It was a good tournament, well, at least for the US and Canada. There appears to still be a bit of a gap between the North American countries and the Scandanavian countries. The best team won this edition of the 4 Nations Cup. Hats off to Team Canada. Quick question from us Ohio State fans ... can we please have Natalie Spooner back now (and Annie and Minttu)?