The practice went well. Coaching is solid. Not aware of any people leaving It seemed there was a full team. Plus 2 goalies. To early to tell on team chemistry. Substituting players from Ice. Would not be fair to the kids. Unless we were short handed for an event To me short handed would be not having 2 full lines of defense or middy
Think about B team is there room for improvement. And at this age there still getting hair on the B_lls.
And if they scrimmage Black Ice it always good to play the best
Athletes and good coaching. It just a matter of time
"not aware" doesn't mean it isn't happening (or already happened!) - I know one player by name that is leaving and he said there was at least one other player leaving (and they both weren't at the practice). Reasoning given was that the team was weaker than than they were comfortable with/accustomed to playing with. Doesn't mean that's a bad thing - seems to indicate that your "B team" comment is more in line with what they have. The problem will be if that is NOT the expectations (realistic or nor) of others on the team. Repeat: there is nothing wrong with playing on a B level team. BTW, 6 poles is too many unless you play the entire game in your own end! Same rationale with A! Most teams optimally look for 9 M, 5 D, 5 A and 2 G (unless you're Express, and then you just double most of these numbers!); you can add in 1 more M for LPM and 1 of your poles should also be able to play LPM.
Agreed on the whole premise. This is a B team. One of my son's friends was really excited to make it. He is a great athlete and raw talent, and this will be perfect for him. They will do well, and play B tournaments outside of the area for the most part.
I disagree with the 5 poles and 5 attack. You need 6 and 6 in case anyone gets hurt. I have seen it before where teams show up with 3 poles because two kids were hurt and when one of the poles has a penalty you're handing a pole to a middie. Rotate on time, there are 3-4 games in a tournament.
Maybe it's because my sons' teams have never had any injuries at either position, but all of their teams have had only 5 at both positions and in both cases the 5th D and A see very little time. Also, the LPM(s) on their teams have always been able to play D, and at least 1 or 2 M could play A if needed. I stand by the 21 - 22 roster being optimal.
If they are good at evaluating talent, they would rotate the 2 lines of defense and attack. The first line will usually see more playing time than the second. My son's team just lost 2 attack because and 2 mids because they weren't happy with their playing time. The team picked up better players and I can see playing time being pretty even between the lines now. When you play 4 games in a row, having the subs is really good. I guess it depends on how deep the team is and what the philosophy of the coach is.
