yzerman19

Source on Thompson?

The program boys especially won't want college to be a distraction. I predict just a couple August commitments, then some more after Jan 1, then a bunch next May-September.

Agreed on the 2010s. Unless it's a Godfather offer from a kid's dream school or a foregone conclusion I.e Cullen to Minny. I expect Schultz, Pue, Daley, and Thompson to take a little time and really think it over. There is no rush. Many of them will influence/be influenced by where others go as well...both as attractors and detractors.

Hastings?

They have an elite coach that prospects want to play for

AI is kinda fun

I ran an AI model that generated this list of Americans at the top: Revised Top 10 U.S. Board Tier 1 1. Drew Daley (D) — Grade: A Why #1 Daley scores at or near the top in every major bucket. Elite evidence against older competition Premium defense position Excellent skating Strong offensive production context High-end processing Strong physical projection Excellent validation There are very few weaknesses in his profile. Projection: Top-pair NHL defenseman. 2. Joey Cullen (C) — Grade: A The highest offensive ceiling in the class. elite offensive production elite consistency outstanding skill evaluation improving pro-style details legitimate success against older competition His ceiling remains the highest among U.S. forwards. Projection: Dynamic first-line NHL center. 3. RJ Thompson (C) — Grade: A Thompson has perhaps the strongest demonstrated evidence in the class. He grades exceptionally in: consistency older competition impact skating adaptability transition pro-style center habits He is no longer simply productive—his game projects extremely well. Projection: First-line or high-end second-line NHL center. Tier 2 4. Will LoSauro (F) — Grade: A- One of the safest forward projections. Excellent balance of: skating production consistency projectability role certainty Very few weaknesses. 5. Mason Schemenauer (D) — Grade: A- Large mobile defenseman. Excellent combination of: structure skating survivability defense scarcity older competition success One of the biggest risers. 6. Chase Schulberger (D) — Grade: A- The revised model rewards his physical projection much more heavily. He possesses: NHL frame mobility reach survivability projectable role certainty Exactly the profile NHL organizations covet. 7. Carter Morris (F) — Grade: B+ / A- The biggest reason Morris remains here is that his demonstrated evidence is outstanding. He consistently impacts older competition while maintaining offensive effectiveness. Tier 3 8. Henry Meier (F) — Grade: B+ One of the more underrated players in the class. Strong pace, good consistency, and proven ability to contribute in stronger environments. 9. Maverick McKinnon (F) — Grade: B+ McKinnon moves ahead of many in this model. Why? Better demonstrated impact Stronger offensive evidence Proven effectiveness against older competition Better validation of current play Although his projected size caps his ceiling somewhat, he has earned his ranking through performance. 10. Cameron Evans (F) — Grade: B+ Evans makes the Top 10 because his offensive skill and skating are exceptional. The model still discounts him for: smaller physical projection less evidence against older competition But those penalties are no longer enough to offset his high-end skill package. Just outside the Top 10 Brooks Suter (D) — B+ Easton Dozark (D) — B+ Griffin Carver (D) — B+ Jack Queally (F) — B+ Sam Lee (F) — B+

I'm thinking we want to get 3 out of this list of high end guys that aren't long shots: Maddox Schultz, Liam Pue, RJ Thompson, Reid Nicol, Carter Morris, Nash Roed.

Not that there aren't some good players up in Canada, there certainly are a few excellent players, and they happen to be western Canadian kids which is right in our recruiting wheelhouse

Americans in 2010 are better than Canadians in 2010. honestly it's not really close. Covid hurt Canada hockey more than USA Hockey

These kids all obviously loved playing, have good athletic genes, had some great support and were given opportunities to keep getting better. The higher up the ladder it becomes all about athleticism, skating, and hockey IQ.

Here's a recipe that I have seen work: kid loves hockey at a young age, loves watching it, turns things into hockey sticks and just plays. Don't start organized hockey too early (I have seen 3 year olds in Mites)...start them in skating lessons (can definitely be with figure skaters). Move to a learn to play hockey model at 5 or 6 where it isn't organized, but they are introducing some hockey. Keep watching hockey. At 6 they can start Mite hockey...they should definitely be focused on other sports too and athleticism, the program should be about the on ice agility, balance, and coordination. If the kid is showing the desire, more advanced skating and camps and private lessons can become part of it. Kid has to be loving it. If they don't want to go to the rink, you can't make them. At 7 they will start showing if they truly love going to the rink to get better. If they do, then you might have a player. The biggest thing is that wheel of success. The better they feel, the more they will want to do it, the more they do it, the better they will get. Then the better they will feel...

The hard part though is being really good at 13-15 is what sets you up for that 16-20. If you look at the NTDP and the list Schloss put out all these kids were dominant at 13-15.

I always laugh to myself on early puberty efficacy in squirt and peewee. Especially where the player is playing a power game and then you see dad is 5'9 and mom is 5'3. Driving the net is going to be a little harder in a couple years lol. I say this from a scouting and development lens. From my parent lens...who cares and have fun. For 99% that is what it should always be about. For the 1% that are in Schloss's article, different story.

100%. The scouts see through that fast

Thompson it appears went other direction here. Elite Prospects shows him as August of 2010. He was a freshman so he turned 15 a couple weeks before he started high school, but he accelerated; so he is still 15 right now... but is now going into his junior year. He appears to be aligning things so he graduates from high school and the NTDP, potentially gets drafted in the NHL, and starts NCAA hockey all in the same summer. I realize he's a different case study as he is a top prospect in his sport, but it seems like he started kindergarten as an older kid, then adjusted.

My comment on looking at the competition was about after the fact and that a 17 year old senior and a 19 year old senior are not the same and neither is one conference or league the same as the other in terms of competition

and SCPA was calling out the major holding back out east

I think you misunderstood what I was writing there...the lol is made in jest regarding the people who do the kindergarten redshirt and actually contemplate it at 4/5

SCPA and I both called out the athleticism...there's a reason he ate big minutes in the Lake conference and made the NTDP!

Love Schemenauer's game. I wouldn't label him as just physical and mean. He is highly athletic and shows good offensive instincts too. I love his upside too.

The old kindergarten redshirt program lol. Its why you have to look at actual birthday and who the competition is so closely....

4 year old boys in a classroom for several months would be rough....

Ellingson has impressed me in limited viewings. He is another kid that I think would've had a look at the NTDP if he hadn't committed to the WHL pre-draft.

The USHL expansion will further that initiative. Youth hockey in SoCal has produced quite a few good players. They just tend to lose them at 14.