1. SGMHA Evaluation Process

2. Purpose
Create a transparent process for all our members to know & understand
Ensure all divisions follow the same process
Ensure correct placement of players
Minimize on-ice issues during evaluations (Strong vs Weak)
Minimize wasted ice slots based on previous evaluation process
Peewee AA and PAC to follow a separate process

3. Evaluators Qualified evaluators
Send out requesting applications – Develop questions
Credit towards fees or concession shifts
Evaluators must commit to attend all skates in session or scores do not count
Plan to have training session including COO, Division Directors and Evaluators

4. Scoring System Same sheets as used in past
All divisions to use same 5 point system
Ensure understanding of point system
Can use 0.5 increments as needed
Comments are Important
Eliminate names from the sheets
Educate evaluators on the process

5. SGMHA General Evaluation Flow

6. Random Placement (Alphabetical) Pre-Grouping of Players
Random vs Pre-Group
Random Placement (Alphabetical)
Pre-Grouping of Players
Discourages weaker players
Allows weaker players to play the game
Showcases weaker players
Puts equivalent skilled players together
Showcases strong players ability to be individuals
Difficulty in grouping first year players with second year players
Peewee used 12 hours of ice to determine bottom 30 and top 30.
More effective use of evaluation ice
Max two skates with equal skill level to determine placement
Potentially four skates with equal skill level to determine placement

7. Sample Pre Group (assume 120 skaters for Atom)
Age Category
Previous Team
# Players
Pre Rank Position
60 2nd Year Players
Atom AA 8
Top 32 (32)
Atom A
Atom House 1
60 1st Year Players
Novice 1
Atom House 2 10
33-67 (34)
Atom House 3
Novice 2
Novice 3
Atom House 4
68-94 (26)
Novice 4
Novice 5
Atom House 5
(28)
Novice 6
Novice 7-8
Age Category
Previous Team
# Players
Pre Rank Position
2nd Year
Atom AA 8
Top 30+
60 Returning Players
Atom A
Atom House 1
Atom House 2 10
31-60
Atom House 3
Atom House 4
61-90
Atom House 5
91-120
1st Year
Novice AA
60 1st Year Players
Novice A
Novice House 1
Novice House 2
Novice House 3
Novice House 4
Novice House 5

8. Evaluation Teams
Avoid Confusion for Members utilizing following evaluation team naming:
Group 1 – Team White / Team Black
Group 2 – Team White / Team Black
Group 3 – Team White / Team Black
Group 4 – Team White / Team Black

9. Sample Schedule - Atom

10. Player Selections *Below example based on 15 player teams*
Based on results of evaluations
Up to ten removed from skates 1 and 2 are not automatically on Team 1
Top 10 overall must be selected to Team 1
Coaches have input on remaining players for team – Players 11 to 15 (see example below)
Division director to review rankings with selected Coach
Coach should be allowed to select an extra forward over defense
Allow a 0.5pt difference max when choosing between remaining players
Player Rank
Score 11
3.75 12 13
3.7 14
3.6 15
Player Rank
Score 16
3.6 17
3.5 18 19 20
3.4
Player Rank
Score 21
3.4 22
3.35 23
3.25 24 25

11. Player Selection Process *Example based on 15 player teams*

12. Goalies Skill session scores to SUPPORT overall goalie ranking
Skills alone do not rank the goalies from 1-10
Skill session score to be worth 25% of overall score
Game play score to be worth 75% of overall score

13. Coach Selections Interview coaches as necessary
Select coaches based on qualifications and results
Where does child rank
Needs to happen as early as possible