In this episode of Puck Academy, host Jason Jacobs discusses player development with Wes Wolfe, the assistant coach of the Redding Royals in the ECHL. Wes shares his extensive coaching journey and insights into the evolving role of modern hockey coaching, emphasizing the importance of relationships and individualized training. They discuss the challenges of current player development practices, especially the lack of emphasis on team play and hockey IQ, which have been affected by the rise of individualized skill coaching. The conversation also delves into the potential of using technology and analytics to better analyze and teach the game. They highlight the need for a balance of human intuition and data to foster better coaching and player development. The episode underscores the importance of joy and satisfaction in sports participation and development.
In this episode of Puck Academy, host Jason Jacobs interviews Wes Wolfe, assistant coach of the Reading Royals in the ECHL, to discuss his comprehensive coaching background and insights on player development. Wes shares valuable lessons he has learned through 15 years of coaching across various levels, from minor leagues to international teams. The conversation dives into topics such as the evolution of coaching, the importance of building relationships with players, and the role of analytics and video in enhancing player performance. Extensive discussion also focuses on the challenges of modern hockey training environments and the potential of using technology to make high-level coaching more accessible. The episode concludes with Wes emphasizing the importance of enjoying the game and finding joy in the process as key factors for achieving high performance.
00:00 Introduction to Puck Academy
00:15 Meet Wes Wolfe: A Coach's Journey
02:26 Diving into Hockey IQ
08:47 The Evolving Role of a Coach
11:13 Analytics in Hockey: Eye Test vs. Data
19:02 Challenges in Modern Player Development
31:06 Team Dynamics and Individualization
37:13 Practical Coaching Strategies
44:17 Understanding Play Away from the Puck
45:58 The Importance of Context in Watching Games
46:40 Self-Discovery vs. Guided Learning
48:49 Learning from Different Levels of Play
50:36 The Role of Commentary and Analysis
53:37 High Frequency, High Failure Rate Areas
56:04 Balancing Individual and Team Development
01:07:30 The Potential of AI in Coaching
01:11:07 Closing the Loop in Player Development
01:12:28 The Future of Hockey Coaching
01:18:50 Barriers to Entry and Access to Resources
01:23:55 Final Thoughts and Parting Words
[Jason]
Welcome to Puck Academy, a show about how hockey players grow on and off the ice. I'm Jason Jacobs, the host. And each week I talk with players, coaches, and experts shaping the future of player development.
Today's guest is Wes Wolf, assistant coach with the Reading Royals in the ECHL, an affiliate of the Philadelphia Flyers. Now, Wes is a coaches coach. He's the son of a hockey coach.
And he's got about 15 years of coaching experience under his belt at various levels across the game. Currently in the ECHL, he was a longtime assistant coach with the Erie Otters and the OHL. He was with the Kubrick Cougars and the OJHL.
And also in minor hockey, 16 under AAA teams and various junior's leagues. He also has international experience with Canada's U17 Team Red, associate coach for Team Ontario for the 2027, Canada Winter Games. And I found Wes because he posts a lot of content around how to coach coaches and how to teach the game.
And I've been on several of the talks that he's given specifically around hockey IQ and teaching in ways that are more translatable to game environments, which are, of course, two topics that are near and dear to my heart. We have a great discussion in this episode about Wes's path in the game, what he's learned about coaching along the way, how coaching varies and what it has in common across different levels, ages, geographies, etc. And we also talk about player development, how that's evolving and the best ways to teach the game.
It's a great discussion and I hope you enjoy it. Wes, welcome to the show. Thanks for having me, Jason.
I'm excited to be here. Thanks for coming. So I got to you because I watched talks that you gave.
I think it was on ice hockey systems, or it was the, it was on ice hockey systems, but it was from the, I think it was the Brock High Performance Summit. Did I get that name right?
[Wes]
Yeah, that's correct. Annual hockey coaching seminar put on by TJ Manistersky, who's also an IHS contributor at Brock University. A couple years ago, I gave a talk on hockey IQ, but I've been there a few years.
It's a great event.
[Jason]
Yeah. And so I'm, I'm thinking a lot about hockey IQ and whether it can be taught and how to teach it and, or maybe that's a leading thing, like not necessarily how to teach it, but like how people can learn it better, right? Because those aren't necessarily the same.
But at any rate, you gave this talk on hockey IQ, and I was really intrigued because you said that it, you said that it's lacking. And you said that while there's a degree of it, that's innate, like it can be learned, but it also can't be taught, right? And that's kind of a fascinating juxtaposition.
So I reached out to you and you were kind enough to take the call. We had a nice chat and you agreed to come on the show. So here we are to dig in on that topic and, and more, but just, yeah, super relevant to the stuff I'm thinking about and really grateful for you making the time.
[Wes]
Yeah. And I think it's a really relevant discussion, obviously in Canada right now, there seems to be, you know, some reprieve going on over the performance of the world junior team the last couple of years. And I've seen a lot of discourse online about this very discussion.
So I'm looking forward to diving into it.
[Jason]
Sounds good. Well, before we jump into the good stuff, maybe, maybe just a little bit of context would be helpful. So it'd be great to understand your journey and sport and your path into coaching.
For sure.
[Wes]
I grew up in a call out of hockey family. I have two older sisters and a younger brother. My dad, long time player and coach volunteer and executive the minor hockey level.
He coached all four of us. You know, me specifically, I, you know, I started playing hockey when I was three years old, like, like so many kids do in Canada and play travel hockey. You know, single A triple A growing up played five years of junior hockey in my hometown.
But really was passionate about coaching my younger brother. He played house league hockey. I used to always go out to his practices.
He's four years younger than I am and go out and push pucks and help demonstrate drills. I was four years older. I really enjoyed doing that.
And so congruently with my playing, I started, I was a head coach for the first time at 16 years old. My brother's 12 year old, house league hockey team. So that was a great learning experience.
I really enjoyed it. And coaching kind of became my primary focus from that point on. So even while I was playing junior C, I still coached on the side.
Single A level select triple A. And then for the first time I became a triple A head coach at 21 years old. Of the U nine hockey team and.
Again, I coach that team with my two best friends that I grew up playing hockey with. We learned a ton. It was a lot of fun.
It was a lot of stress to. And, you know, I kind of decided from that point on that coaching was really what I wanted to do with my life. So fast forward.
I coached four years of triple A hockey in Niagara Falls, Ontario, my hometown. Two years at the junior B level, I got hired as a junior B head coach for the first time at 24 years old and then was hired as an assistant coach by the Erie Otters in in 2016. So I've been a full time hockey coach since then.
But, you know, looking back now at 36, I have 20 years of coaching over half my life. It's kind of hard to believe. But I would say it definitely started pretty young.
Like I said, hockey was a big, big focus in my household growing up.
[Jason]
And one thing that that struck me when I was reading about you and also just listening to you go through your. Your background now is that you've coached at a bunch of different levels, both in terms of. Skills wise, but also age.
And I'm just curious from what you've experienced so far. How much does the role of a coach stay consistent from one age to the next and from one ability level to the next and. And how much does it differ and to the extent it differs?
How does it differ?
[Wes]
Yeah, it doesn't matter whether you're coaching eight-year-olds or professional hockey players like I do now. I think at the end of the day, hockey like life is a people business. And I know one of the core tenets of my coaching philosophy is that you're coaching people not players and put Xs in those and hockey IQ and tactics aside.
It's important that you recognize that you're a human being, not a human doing. I mean, hockey is what we do. But put all those conditions aside, you need to have a relationship.
And I think relationship comes down to building trust, communication. You have to enjoy what you're doing. And so I always put that at the forefront, no matter what I'm doing in coaching and, you know, in the off season, I work with young players still.
And I go to hockey camps. I think it's really important that you set the foundation with a relationship. And that's, you know, relevant no matter what level you're coaching at.
In terms of differences, obviously, you know, expectations change. I think, you know, as you climb the ladder of high performance, results start to factor way more into the discussion than they were. You know, at the level that I currently coach at, this is how people make their living.
And there's a lot more pressure in that environment in terms of being able to pay the bills for the family. It truly is, you know, a means to an end. And I think at a younger level, it's a challenge for coaches because obviously there is a lot of pressure, whether it's from parents or players or, you know, winning is always something that matters.
Otherwise, they wouldn't keep score. But I do think that, you know, in my experience, as I went through my coaching journey, it's a lot easier to remind yourself to focus on the process. When you're working on a development level, then that maybe as you get a little bit higher up development, obviously is always going to be at the forefront and the process is always what produces results.
But I think it's a lot easier to lose sight of it. Like I said, the higher up and higher performance that you go.
[Jason]
I've heard some people say that the role of coaching has changed a lot as the game has evolved a lot. And you, you hear like one, one thread is, oh, like, like that's an old school coach and this is a modern game. For example, do you agree that the role of coaching has changed?
And if so, to what extent and how has the change as the game has continued to evolve?
[Wes]
The role of the coach is definitely constantly evolving. You know, as an example, you know, where I currently am coaches don't just coach, you know, in the ECHL coaches are responsible for a lot of other things. You wear a lot of hats, whether it's player housing, travel, immigration.
There are so many different administrative aspects of coaching that go well beyond just teaching the game or managing a bench. But on top of that, as I alluded to it being a people business, you know, you have to be well versed in psychology. You have to be able to, you know, have discussions outside of the scope of the sport itself.
There's pressure to understand skill development more than there ever used to be. I would say at one time, you know, a hockey coach during the season was really responsible for, like I said, managing the bench and coming up with your tactics and motivating your players. Now there's just so many different areas of information that people have access to that they expect the coach to be able to be well versed in to.
So it's definitely constantly evolving. I think it's, it would behoove any coach to continue to evolve and learn, you know, video obviously was something when I first started that was still pretty new in hockey. I remember attending a conference specifically about how to incorporate video into, you know, your, your daily routine as a coach with your team geared towards junior and professional level coaches.
And now it's, I mean, I would say over half of my job exists on my computer and, you know, with that analytics obviously is taken off and it was a growing area of the sport. And again, I think that's kind of become part of the standard and I'm excited to see what's next, you know, whether it's the incorporation of AI into how we do our jobs. I'm not sure where it's going to go next, but I'm excited to learn it.
That's for sure.
[Jason]
I haven't kept strict track, but you might be the first coach to proactively bring up AI out of all the, the hockey minds that I've had on the show. That's an interesting place to anchor not necessarily AI, but you mentioned analytics. I mean, it used to be that the eye test ruled the day and the eye test is still important, but analytics, of course, are becoming more sophisticated and data is becoming more accessible.
How do you think about the role of each of those and how do they work together?
[Wes]
Well, I was really fortunate to have an opportunity to work with a company called Stathletes, who's founded by John Chica, who was at one time, I believe the youngest general manager in NHL history. I was sort of there at, I don't want to say ground level, but but shortly thereafter hired prior to becoming a full time coach where I really got to learn the inner workings and see how that space was evolving. You know, we worked with a few professional and major junior teams at that time.
And, you know, one of my biggest takeaways from that was, you know, analytics is really just a fancy way of saying information. And I think with any information, it's important that you use it in a way to tell a story. And I think from a coaching standpoint, obviously, you know, there's there's a plethora of information that's available to us, some of it relevant, some of it not.
I think when you have access to that information, the best way to disseminate it is to see number one, does it align with what your eyes are already seeing? Because I think if it doesn't, it probably means that either your information is wrong or you need to reevaluate what your eyes are seeing. And so you can use it to illuminate something maybe that you're not seeing, or more often than not, I would say, a lot of the time, the information we have already tells us something that we inherently already knew or were able to observe.
So, like when it comes to actually using that information, I would say there are a few areas in coaching. Number one is, like from a player development standpoint, using it to be able to reinforce or emphasize a point that you're trying to demonstrate through discussions you've already had or through video you're showing just a crude example would be, you know, a high frequency event for a player entering the offensive zone on zone entries, what the outcome may be, you know, you may have had a meeting with a player already or had a discussion about how they're entering the offensive zone and, you know, driving it wide and protecting the puck, trying to get it deep and generating offensive zone time or shot attempts as opposed to maybe, you know, they're trying to attack sticks one on one and turn in the puck over at the blue line. You see it, you observe it, you know, you've had the discussion. I think the analytics or the information behind that is a good way to reinforce the message that, hey, in the last three games you've had 12 zone entries and 10 of them were turnovers at the blue line that didn't result in shot four.
I think that's a great way to position a story to tell to a player that maybe helps illuminate the message you were already trying to deliver in a way that they understand. And I think actually today's athlete, you know, that resonates with them that the information overload that we have in the world can be overwhelming. You know, you play a video game and it tells you, you know, how many, how many kills you had and how many different weapons you picked up and, or if you post something on Instagram, you can see how far reached and how many views you had and how many people watched it and how many people liked it and people are inundated with this information.
And so I think, you know, analytics and hockey is a good way to have that information that resonates with players that maybe tells a story. And then from a team level, there's obviously other applications, whether it's player acquisition or it's player usage, team evaluation, using it to be predictive against an opponent from a pre scout standpoint. I mean, there's just so many applications that you can use this information for.
And I think it's the coaches job to ultimately, you know, decide what matters most to you and make something really complex into something really simple that you can teach and apply and use in a meaningful way.
[Jason]
As someone who's who's boots are much closer to the ground in terms of what's happening in the field than me. I mean, the closest icon, well, I guess you can count this show, but, but really it's like, as a dad in the stands just watching my kids, right? So that doesn't really count.
But what are you seeing in terms of, in terms of adoption and sophistication of analytics throughout the sport? Like, how, how far along is it? Where is it the furthest along and what are the biggest barriers to adoption?
[Wes]
I would say, at this point, it feels fairly normalized, at least at the, the highest levels. You know, I, I draw my experience in Major Junior in the Canadian Hockey League. Every team has access to extended information that goes so far beyond what's accessible in a public space.
And every team uses it differently. I mean, there are a number of teams that have a director of analytics or a whole team of people who have their own proprietary information. They're collecting.
You know, there's obviously still going to be some resistance from people who are uncomfortable with it or don't have a use for it. But after every game and prior to any game, you get a 25 page report with any information you could possibly want. You know, from basic information, like shot attempts to as specific as shot attempts broken down by off the rush, off the cycle, off the forecheck on a per game level on an individual level against the league mean.
So, I mean, like I said, it can get kind of cloudy because you have so much information that you really need to stream on your focus, what matters to you and your team and, and then, you know, find a compelling way to use it. And I think from discussions I have with coaches at all kinds of levels, like I said, it's become far more normalized. You know, I know there's the famous quote when analytics first started to see it's, you know, come up and some hockey from from Brian Burke about, I think it was analytics or how, you know, a drunk uses a lamppost for support rather than illumination or something to that effect.
I mean, I think, you know, at the end of the day, the eye test is and always will be important in a way that people who are responsible for deploying players or for teaching or for coaching or for putting rosters together. You know, you need to trust your instinct and trust your vision. You've earned that experience and you know what you know based on that.
But I do think that there's value in information and there's a lot of people who are using it in a meaningful way. And so, I would say it's, it's come a long way in a decade. You know, there's probably, at the end of the day, a barrier to how much information you can have, depending on the level you're at, it's expensive.
So unless you're doing it by hand, you know, you have a volunteer who's tracking those things for you after the fact or live. You know, I would say the level of information that a U 14 coach has access to is a lot different than what I may have to at the professional level but. Yeah, it's, it's, it's fairly normalized, I would say.
[Jason]
You hear sometimes people say things in the sport like. Why wouldn't trust that guy as a coach? I mean, he, he barely played.
You know, division three or, or something like that. And so I guess my question is how important is it. For the best coaches to have been the best players and what are the elements that carry over and what are the elements that don't.
[Wes]
It's individual specific. I would say one of the most successful coaches. Probably an NHL history who's going to be the Olympic head coach for, for team Canada, John Cooper played college lacrosse and, you know, was a lawyer prior to becoming a hockey coach full time.
So I certainly don't think that it's a requirement to have been a high level player to be able to coach. I know I have a bit of a bias in that regard. I, you know, played five years of junior C hockey in my hometown and that's as far as my playing career went.
But I also think that just because, you know, just because you, you were a player doesn't mean that you can't coach. I know some fantastic coaches that, you know, played in the NHL. And, you know, at the end of the day, leadership comes in many different forms and different teams require different things.
I think when you're building a staff, it's really important to have diversity in terms of experience and representation. And everyone comes with a different perspective. But as I touched on at the beginning of our conversation, you know, coaching is about people, people first.
And so if you're able to communicate and you're able to lead with awesome authenticity, then I think you can be successful as a coach. And that's regardless of your experience as a player. And in terms of what translates, obviously, I'm never going to be able to have the conversation with a player about my experience.
Going through the ups and downs as a player, you know, at the professional level or anything of that regard. I mean, there are things that players who played, you know, they've been through that maybe I haven't as a coach or maybe, you know, little tricks that they may have learned along the way as a player. You know, again, it's my job to make sure I educate myself on that.
But. I think in order to be able to teach and communicate, you can learn and be able to teach something that you haven't done. And, you know, that's, that's important to understand.
And again, every situation calls for something different. But I would say that coaches, regardless of their experience playing can be successful. And there's plenty of examples to show that throughout the history of the sport.
[Jason]
You mentioned in that rock university talk that you thought that the IQ in the game has really suffered. And I think some of the reasons you cited were that that a player has all these handlers and that there's there's a lot more focus on individualized development. And it's taught in a way doesn't necessarily translate to a game environment.
Did I get that right?
[Wes]
Yeah, I think from all the conversations that I've had and even, you know, watching as the game has evolved over the last five to 10 years, I would say that it's fair to say that the team game truly is suffering. And there are a number of reasons why as you touched on, I call it the entourage, you know, every player has an entourage behind them that that believe they have the individuals. Best interest at heart, whether it's a skills coach, a nutritionist, an agent, a parent, a sibling.
There are all kinds of people behind the player that. That put the player on the ice and that's a good thing. But it also, you know, can start to cloud priorities and success at the team level at the end of the day.
I think I love the most about the sport is, you know, sometimes you're the star and sometimes you're not. It doesn't matter. All your team cares about is that you're a star teammate.
And I think once you hyper focus on individualization, some of that notion of of sacrifice for a team starts to dissipate, you know, beyond that, I would say that in the age of social media, there's far more access to highlights or people breaking down, you know, individual skill that leads to scoring, but it's probably less common that players are watching a full game of hockey start to finish. And I know growing up as cliches, it is, you know, hockey night in Canada on Saturday was an institution. And I remember sitting and watching games with my family and, you know, my dad would kind of talk about the game as it was happening.
But I also had an opportunity to watch as the game developed and not just see, you know, Nathan McKinnon told Reagan around an offensive and driving it wide and roofing it. So I think highlights or highlight reels over, you know, maybe the whole context of a situation has moved the bar in terms of expectations for players. And then, you know, the last part, I would say, as you kind of said, is that the training environment doesn't necessarily replicate the game environment as much as it used to.
In the off season, it was very common that that people would a, participate in a different sport and be when it did come time to hockey in the off season. Usually it would be a focus on conditioning and then five on five play. I specifically remember, you know, being involved in a skate as I got older as a teenager, you know, summer hockey was more common, but we would, you know, do 20 minutes of a full ice drills and then play 30 minutes at scrimmage and finish with a bag skate at the end.
And we did it, you know, twice a week. Now you probably got yelled at too. Yeah.
Oh, yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely.
But, you know, now players can't do that, right? Because then then then player will just go to the portal. Yeah.
Exactly. That's probably a whole different discussion. But I think I watch, you know, and I do think that COVID exacerbated this issue a little bit because we didn't have access to, you know, 20 people being in an arena at once.
It was, you were kind of condensed to small groups of, you know, 10 or less or eight or less at one time. And we kind of evolved how players train. And it's, it's, it's stayed that way where, you know, you're working one on one or in a small group and the micro focus that's being placed on inside body position, puck touch.
I mean, scanning, there's so many different things that are, you know, become a part of the training environment that don't necessarily happen in a team training environment. And, you know, what I see with a lot of skill development is that, you know, we're using repeat mode development where players are expressing skill in a controlled environment going around cones or other contraptions that are lacking any type of decision making or cognition or finding solutions. And it's instead just running routes and really focused on an individual.
It's solo play. It's starting with the puck. It's keeping the puck for 30 seconds through a wrap and focusing on skill expression or skill execution instead of how it's going to be executed in a game.
And so I think that's really changed. And it's really contributed to what I believe is maybe a decline in team play is the best way to put it.
[Jason]
Yeah, I don't have as much visibility beyond say age 13, although again, like bringing all these guests on the show with across the various levels is certainly helping fill in some of the gaps in my knowledge. But it seems that as you get to the more serious levels, you know, older and more advanced right that more of the overall development is gotten from the team, right. Whereas if you look at like the youth level, I mean, of course, now there's these academies and stuff but but like most kids aren't at the academies, most kids, like they go, they go to their team practice, call it a couple days a week, maybe a team skills or something but they're doing a lot of stuff, especially as you get to more AAA and the more competitive levels are doing a lot of extra stuff but that stuff is not through the team and that stuff is more what you're describing. And I just wonder as the sports professionalized right at the younger levels, it's like the kids are training as much as the older, more advanced players do what they're getting much more of it on their own individually versus from the team. And I wonder if that's contributing to the problem.
[Wes]
I think it definitely is. I mean, I would call it over professionalization for one, but what it also does is create more barriers to entry for people. I mean, at the end of the day, it's expensive and not everyone has access to those things.
And I think it's a major problem because we are creating a smaller funnel for access to the sport at the highest levels. I mean, it's very, very uncommon to hear of someone from a small farm town making it to the NHL level because they just don't have access to the professional training that others do. But to your point, a lot of that training exists outside of the team environment.
And, you know, I do think that this generation of athlete, you know, Gen Z and now is Gen Z is getting older, Gen Alpha, the generation after them. The research has been done to show that they do value individualization more than generations previous. I mean, you see it in how younger people express themselves and their clothing.
I mean, I look at like dress code, you know, that was something, you know, growing up, everybody had the same team issued suit or shirt and tie or turtleneck or track suit or whatever it is. And at the NHL level, you'd watch, I mean, I grew up watching Don Cherry, you know, show highlights of the players walking in in their suits and talking about how, you know, how hockey was great that everybody, you know, dressed professionally and they came in and it was about the team and they put their ego aside and that was part of the preparation and the narrative around it. And, you know, now in the new CBA, the dress code has been abolished and you look at how players are expressing themselves.
And I don't think it's a bad thing necessarily. I think it's great that, you know, we're creating room for people to be themselves and to be their authentic selves and show themselves in ways that maybe the sport didn't allow before. But it certainly contributes to this idea that I'm an individual and in a team sport, that's a challenge that coaches face that, you know, embracing individuality while also being able to accept that you're a part of a team is a great challenge to overcome and is certainly something that I think a lot of people are talking about right now.
[Jason]
On that team and cohesiveness topic, what do you think about systems and how do you or don't you embrace them in your coaching?
[Wes]
I think it's context specific for sure. But, you know, this is a discussion that we continue to have even at, you know, the professional level is, you know, I think the game is moving more towards a concepts over systems belief. You know, at the end of the day, if you put the system aside, any system can be successful.
It only works if you do and you're working together. So a four check, whether it's a one, two, two, a two, one, two, a skinny one, one, three. It doesn't matter if the same principles or concepts don't apply that you have good stick detail that your F1 is skating.
They have the ability to steer the puck to angle, you know, that other players are working above their check. I mean, none of those systems matter if you don't do those things. So I think it's really important at any level that the foundation of, you know, your team and your team's style of play is rooted in habits and concepts over the system itself.
I mean, I think it's important to be organized on the ice. And again, as you climb the ladder of call it high performance, you know, from, from U8 to U20. The needs of a team are different.
And there's a pyramid that exists where how much of your time should be allotted to different things. I think at the youngest levels, there's an overemphasis in systems. It's probably because of previously alluded to pressures of winning.
And I think you can lose track of what really matters. So, you know, systems systems definitely matter. And I think, you know, it would be silly to suggest otherwise.
But concepts and habits and execution are what drives systems to begin with. So at any level, I would say it's more important to focus your time on those things than it is to. Drawing X as a nose and creating basically a team of robots.
[Jason]
Given that the state of the state is that players are developing with this team of handlers, as you mentioned, not exclusively, but, but they're a meaningful part of the path. And I get that it varies from player to player team or age to age or whatever, but just like in the aggregate, right. So, I mean, one path is like, well, we need to like, you know, put that back in the box somehow like rewind to a point in time where that didn't exist.
Like, you know, life doesn't work that way. Like the cats kind of out of the bag. I don't know what the right expression is.
So I guess my question is, given that. If you want to compensate when it comes to things like IQ. Is it more effective to try to address that with the team as a group in terms of what you're doing on the ice or should these players just add another handler?
That's like an IQ handler.
[Wes]
Getting back to, you know, the relationship coach has a relationship with their players individually, but they also have a relationship with the team. To me, there's three C's in your relationship. Number one is.
Communication, which we talked about. And one is connection. And the third one to me is collaboration.
And I think given the state. That we're in with, you know, this entourage behind a player. To help deepen that relationship, not just with your players, but with your team.
Having a collaborative environment is something that will help. Deepen that relationship. And so as you said, now that the cat's out of the bag.
I think it would benefit any coach to find ways to collaborate with those people and get a better understanding of what is it that you're working on. And how can we help incorporate the elements of that into what we're trying to accomplish as a team. So, I mean, I think there are certainly coaches who are out there who are, you know, working on elements of hockey IQ and teaching it.
There's a lot of great content out there that the people are sharing and certainly is something that you can seek externally from the team environment. But I also think that, you know, a good coach will do all three of those sees that they will, you know, connect with their players, they'll communicate with their players and they'll collaborate with their players and the people behind them. You know, to help mold the curriculum of what your team is working on.
And there's a way to accomplish that. You know, without being defensive. And I think that's probably, you know, a mistake that I've made even in the past is being defensive that, you know, as a, as the coach of your team.
Or as an assistant coach, you know, there are all of these people who have something valuable to offer to a player. And a player may have a preconceived notion based on something they've been taught that maybe doesn't align with your beliefs. But if you're, you know, defensive about it or judgmental, instead of curious asking questions, then I think it's a bad recipe.
So being open to knowing you don't have to agree and there's certainly conversations to be had about how to be open minded and have a growth mindset as opposed to a fixed mindset in the team environment that maybe everybody will be more open to learning and communicating with your team. With each other, if you're willing to go a little bit deeper and figure out exactly what it is that, that all of these players have been taught before or, or are being communicated with from external sources, you know, to create a more collaborative environment.
[Jason]
In your talk. I mean, I really enjoyed your talk because it kind of framed the problem. It talked about some of the contributors to the problem.
And then you showed a bunch of clips of examples from game scenarios that kind of illustrate the problem. And then you alluded to some examples of what my coach, what coaches might do in practice, for example, to try to address it. But what I would have loved to see it and maybe this exists somewhere and I just didn't find it is a similar talk to what you gave, but on the actual, like kind of double clicking on the what the coach should do part instead of just a casual example here and there.
It's like, I want to hear a whole talk on on again, I have to choose my words, not how to teach it, but like how to help your players learn it.
[Wes]
I think that's something that obviously in a 30 to 40 minute presentation, there's only so many limits that you can get to, but I do think in terms of what coaches, you know, can do. There is a whole other presentation to be hard about that. And I saw a really interesting one at the coaches site a couple years ago.
They were two gentlemen whose names elude, evade me right now, but they're from Germany. They work with the German ice hockey Federation and they talked a lot about contextual interference and. You know, it's one thing to come up with a drill design and focus on habits and execution within it, but the game environment is constantly changing.
And there's context that players need to be able to apply or express the skill or or even the habits that drive the execution. And so there's a whole list or litany of ways that that you can provide contextual interference and practice. You know, an example that I could come up with would be, you know, setting a drill, but part of your communication is providing how much time is left in there.
You know, what the score is and, you know, what, what the stakes are for the team. I mean, very seldom is that something that I think a coach talks about in practice. It's like, okay, there's five minutes left in the game.
We're short a goal and we're doing a diesel and face off drill. You know, what are we trying to accomplish? I think providing that context, you know, may help develop an awareness around what types of skill you're trying to express in that moment.
That's not the time that you're looking for players to. Create it or turn the puck over at the red line. I mean, you want to get the puck past the red line and get it deep, establish a four check, maybe be able to get your goalie out to be able to pull the goalie in a one goal game.
Or maybe you're winning by a goal and you're doing a three on two drill. And so instead of saying to your team, no turnovers at the blue line, you provide the context for why that's important in that moment. So, you know, that that's one way of doing it.
I think creating more opportunities for players to explore boundaries that that allow them to, you know, determine their own limits. One way is definitely through unstructured play. I mean, again, not to lax politically about the old days, but, you know, I remember a time when going to, you know, an outdoor rink.
In the winter time was was easy to do and you'd get a group of guys and you go out and you just, you play three on three or four on four on the outdoor rink. And there were no coaches, no one telling you what to do, what not to do. You had to learn on your own how to protect the puck.
I mean, I remember being, you know, nine or ten years old, playing with guys that were six, seven years older and having to learn, you know, how to, how to protect the puck against bigger, stronger, older players. Those are skills that help you explore your own boundaries that you don't necessarily need a coach to teach you. And, you know, ice time is expensive.
Obviously with, with climate change, outdoor ranks are a lot harder to accomplish in some parts of the world, or you may not have access to winter at all. So it's like, how can we incorporate unstructured play in a practice to utilize those benefits that players can explore their own boundaries. And then I would say, again, video or analytics as a teaching tool are great and they can help, you know, accelerate decision making processes for players, but, you know, athletes still need to grasp it through experience.
And I think the biggest mistake that a lot of coaches make is immediately limiting ice time or putting a player in the bench because they're not buying into. You know, what the coach is saying. And that's definitely a big problem, you know, watching, watching the world juniors this past December, early January.
I mean, you could see a lot more hyper individual play regardless of what the game score was calling for for players. I think players have a hard time understanding. You know, how to express all of these skills they possess in a meaningful way in a game.
And I think, you know, in a short term tournament, it's completely different. But in a long term athlete development plan, it's really important that coaches foster an environment that's permissive and allows your players to make mistakes and learn through them. So that, again, they can explore the boundaries that allow them to determine their own limits, but also, you know, how that looks in a team environment and what it looks like on an individual level because I think player expectation to themselves have never been higher because of how much goes into just getting to the point of being on the ice for a game.
[Jason]
You mentioned that video in analytics to be tool you also mentioned earlier in the discussion that kids aren't watching as much hockey anymore full games and they're watching clips and that that might also be contributed to the, to the lack of IQ in today's game. I guess my question is, I get that that on ice matters to and you can without on ice it's not going to reinforce it and won't turn into habits and if it doesn't earn into habits and it won't be sustainable. But given your your comments about video and about watching hockey.
You know, passive has some role to play too. So I guess what is it about about watching full length hockey that that players are missing out from in terms of learning IQ.
[Wes]
I think it's to play away from the pocket more than anything else. When you watch a when you watch a hockey game live in person or on TV, there are 10 skaters on the ice. There are two goalies on the ice.
There are anywhere from two to four referees on the ice, depending on the level that you're at. So, or officials to two refs to linesman or, you know, at the youth level might just be two officials on the ice clips often focus on just play with the puck and the individual player making the play with it. But there are so many other conditions that exist on the ice beyond just the placement of the puck or the player who's making the play.
And I think challenging players when they watch or when they're watching a game, it's understanding not just the play as it happens, but the play before it happens. And I think hockey IQ, you know, to bring it back to that, you know, is largely understanding your positioning and everyone else's position on the ice. When a play is made, you know, I think a really smart hockey player, two things, you know, when it comes to passing is number one, they make themselves available for the puck in a meaningful way when they don't have it.
But number two, when they're passing it to somebody, they're giving it to someone who's in an advantageous position. They're not passing to a player under pressure. They're not giving it to them on their back end, you know, when the play called for it to be on their forehand or whatever the conditions of the play are.
A lot of that is lost when you condense it into a seven second clip focusing on the player with the puck. So, I think probably the greatest benefit of just watching a game is having the context for all of the things that are happening on the ice, all at the same time beyond just where the puck is.
[Jason]
If there's two scenarios, one is a player just sits and watch with the game. And the second is a player sits and you or someone else who's knowledgeable sits next to them and, and provides commentary in their ear and maybe ask them questions with a socratic method or whatever. Are they comparably effective or do you think that one or the other, you know, like, like how much does the commentary help?
[Wes]
I think they work in concert with each other. As I kind of said with unstructured play, I think there's self discovery that is really important. That, you know, if you're watching a game, being able to, you know, being able to watch it and learn for yourself and discover.
Is the best way to have any type of sticky learning, but I say this all the time. All of our players have access to their shifts to be able to watch at home. And, you know, I don't this year, but have coached on many teams that have an iPad on the bench.
A lot of the time the players to have no idea what they're looking for. They just want to, you know, focus on again what they've been conditioned to focus on, which is like their play with the puck. A guy will come off the ice after, you know, being on a two on one and passing it and the defender breaks it up and they'll come back and they'll be like, let me see that again.
And it's like, well, what is it that you want to look at? So I think being able to watch a game on your own is important, but it is important to have some sort of context or commentary of someone with any type of value to add to the conversation to help guide them towards. This is what, you know, you could be looking at, or, or you should be looking at, or, you know, you can look at to challenge, you know, again, some sort of perspective that a player can gain from watching something beyond just what's happening with the puck.
And, you know, I would say that that a valuable way to do it as like a homework experience would be, again, maybe not necessarily telling exactly what to look for, but it's like watch a game and come up with three takeaways beyond what happened with the puck in the game and just see what they come up with. Because I would bet that if you gave your whole team that same homework experiment, you would have 20 different lists of three takeaways that would be interesting and areas to explore and maybe help guide a player in their self learning or self discovery.
[Jason]
Is it much different from a learning standpoint, watching generic shifts or NHL shifts or D1 shifts or whatever versus your own shifts.
[Wes]
It is. And I, you know, I struggle with this sometimes as a coach, you know, every morning I watch the highlights of NHL games and often look at how offense is created or what happened on a play. Those are NHL players and their ability to execute and do some of those things doesn't necessarily translate to any other level in the world.
So there's definitely learning to be able or takeaways to be had from from watching an NHL game. But kale macar is a lot different than, you know, your average 13 year old double a hockey player and his ability to express his skill in a game environment is a lot different than anybody else. So there's takeaways and there's definitely something to learn from it.
But at the same time, I'm a firm believer that learning at the level you're at is is equally if not far more important because, you know, that's the level that you're at. And, you know, I had a coach once say to me that, you know, when you're you're climbing climbing the ladder, make sure you hit every single step on the way you don't want to skip one. And I think it's really important that player does the same that, you know, it's it's important to learn the level that you're at before you're ready to move to the next one.
And what's happening on the ice at an NHL game. While there's lessons to be learned and something that you can take away from it, you know, it doesn't necessarily mean that that's relevant at the level that you're currently at.
[Jason]
If you took, let's say, the top 100 minds in the sport. Around IQ or thinking the game. And they each watched the same game and the same shifts, how much consistency do you think you would find across those 100 minds in terms of their analysis and how much disparity and then how much of that is right versus wrong or good versus bad versus just.
You know, different ways to get to the same outcome.
[Wes]
I think there are probably some commonalities that you would find across the board, whether it's, you know, where a player scanned the ice or how they check their shoulder or how they protected a puck or. I mean, there are conditions that are probably universal that I think most people would be able to disseminate. I think part of the beauty of it is that, you know, no two plays are ever the same.
And there are endless possibilities. You know, on the ice and like some of that's why, you know, in that presentation I gave, I talked about an eightness and just as the example, how does a spider. We've a web without ever being taught how to do it.
It's, it's an eight. I mean, you can watch a play and a hundred people would predict that a player is going to do one thing or another and that player is going to do something completely unpredictable that nobody else could have ever foreseen. And that's why I'm not so sure that, you know, you can teach that or file it under hockey IQ that that can be learned because it's just, it's innate.
And there are some people who have a special gift to create or see something that nobody else does. So, you know, if you get a hundred people in a room to break down a play or watch a game together, again, they're universal takeaways, but, you know, everyone has a different perspective. And I guess to bring a full circle, we're talking about coaching and the coaching space and building a coaching staff.
That's why it's important to have such a broad range of perspective because everybody's going to bring a different perspective to that. And it doesn't make it right or wrong. Oftentimes, the right play ends up being the wrong play.
And so, you know, like, I think it's important as a coach, you set your foundation for what matters to you. What does matter to you or to your team? Because that's kind of, I mean, that's the process over the outcome.
It's easy to get wrapped up in the outcome of a play and say, yeah, that was the right play and I'm not going to worry about it. But I think having all those different perspectives is important and you probably would have a lot of different takeaways if you got all those people together.
[Jason]
You mentioned before the importance of identifying high frequency, high failure rate areas for development and then isolating those areas to work on. Maybe isolates the wrong word because you should work on them in ways that are translatable to the game environment, so maybe don't isolate them, but try to address them through non isolation. Maybe that's a better way.
But my question is to actually identify those, how much of that is the eye test and what role does data play, if any. They work together.
[Wes]
Some of the best coaches in history that are still coaching today don't need analytics to be able to tell them what their eyes have seen and how to coach a player through those high frequency events. I mean, what I would say is the teacher appears when the student is ready. And for me, it's a whatever it takes mentality just because I have a way that I want to communicate or coach something doesn't mean that the message is being heard.
The analytics piece may be something that is required from an athlete who responds well to data and they value information. There are other players whose value system or belief system doesn't want you to drive on to facts and figures and want more anecdotal evidence. I think they work together, they work hand in hand, but there's not necessarily a right or wrong answer.
So when you're looking at those, again, high frequency events, the information is a way to deliver the message or maybe to learn about it again. I think that's one thing that with this access to information we have, there's been numerous occasions where something's been illuminated to me just based. It's like, wow, I had no idea.
I mean, like your eyes, your eyes miss things that happen. I think that's the best part of having access to information is like, as I said, there's 10 players and two goalies on the ice. There's a lot happening that you're going to miss and we know the information is a good way to illuminate some of what you're missing and then be able to come up with a plan to address some of those situations.
[Jason]
I know you can't do this because you have a whole team and you got to get them playing as a unit and winning games and et cetera. And as you said, there's a lot of other duties to have a coach at your level besides just the on ice and the bench and not. I mean, it's like all the other stuff, you know, some of which has nothing to do with the sport, right?
But let's say, yeah, all the time in the world, then you're going to point it all at just optimizing one player's development. So you're going to watch their games. You're going to watch their shifts.
You're going to, you know, work with them and create environments for them to address those things, et cetera. If you had all the time in the world and you could do that for each player, do you think that it would play a meaningful role in accelerating their games and collectively the game of the team?
[Wes]
I think it would. Absolutely. But I also think that part of that process would have to be, again, contextual interference about how does that fit into a team system or a team environment.
And that applies not just to on ice, but I would say, you know, part of that optimizing individual is mental performance. I would say. I don't even have a concrete number.
So this is just a made up number, but over 90% of individual mental performance skills or teaching is about. The individual and hockey is a team sport and sometimes what's best for one person isn't what's best for the team. And I would say my challenge to anyone because because those roles do exist.
In the sport. I mean, every every NHL team has a robust player development team. Who are broken up into regions or leagues.
That are responsible for, you know, the draft picks or the players playing in the American hockey league to help them with their individual development to get to the NHL. But part of that is, is context. And, you know, I coached a player, you know, in Major Junior who was a, you know, high NHL draft picks that.
Their, their needs at the Major Junior level to help the team be successful didn't necessarily meet the needs that they were going to have. According to their NHL team to get them to play in the NHL. And that's a balance that you need to have at that level two is.
You know, what might be a high frequency event for them at Junior that's going to drive team success may not be what helps them. Drive success at the next level. And it's balancing those two things.
I mean, that's a common, you know, that's a common challenge that coaches in Junior hockey or at, you know, the youth level experiences. How can this player help our team win today? And is that what's best for the player long term to help them be successful at the next level?
So if you could focus all your time on that, I think it would still be important to provide context for what you're learning now and how it applies tomorrow and how it applies for yourself, but also how it applies for a group and a group environment. Sometimes you have to throw it all out the window. Everything you know and everything you're good at and everything you do might not exist on a day.
You might just show up and have a bad day. And then how can you be a good teammate? And what is, you know, how do you back that up?
So, yeah, it's, I mean, we could probably talk about that for a really long time.
[Jason]
So I'm curious your reaction to this statement. Hockey has not had its Billy Bean moment. So that's the statement.
And then what I'm interested in is, do you agree that it hasn't had its Billy Bean moment? Would it be a good thing for it to have its Billy Bean moment? And what would it look like for hockey to have a Billy Bean moment?
[Wes]
I'm not sure that it's a relevant statement for the sport. And the reason I say that is, you know, basketball is a sport that is rooted in statistics. And, you know, like, I mean, I think basketball, for example, maybe has had its Billy Bean moment with the value of the three-point shot.
Hockey doesn't have stop and start like a lot of other sports do. It's constantly moving. I mean, the game hasn't changed.
At the end of the day, there are two nets that are four by six, and you need to put the puck inside that four by six, more than the other team in order to win the game. That doesn't change. And I guess the longer that I coach, the more I see things happening in cycles, what's old becomes new again.
And then what's new becomes old again. There's been a lot of evolution on the ice and off the ice. Whether it's through training or strength development, you know, skating and, you know, like possession play became a huge buzz term in the late 2000s, 2010s.
But, you know, like some of those things don't change. So I just, I don't know, maybe I just can't see it, but I don't know that hockey has a Billy Bean moment in the waiting that's happening. It just, to me, you know, that the sport is evolving, and it all will continue to evolve.
And I'm curious what it looks like in 10 years, but, you know, the objective of the game is going to stay the same. And the other team is going to try and stop you from scoring more goals than they do. And in baseball, you know, you first base isn't as valuable as being on second base and it isn't as valuable as being on third base and being on bases, you know, at the end of the day, what helps drive offense, but hockey doesn't really have that structure built into it.
And the same as basketball, three points is more valuable than two points. Hockey doesn't have that. So if someone is able to figure out that Billy Bean moment, all the power to him, but I have a really hard time.
I have a really hard time conceptualizing what that could even look like.
[Jason]
A similar question, but if you were to remove any constraints of human behavior, habits, resistance to new things, et cetera, and you were just to look at what's possible as early as the technology, and you could lean as hard as as you wanted, you know, pedal to the floor or into what's possible without any human resistance or constraints, you know, like build a team in a lab, for example, and just do that, right? How different would that look like to how teams are run today?
[Wes]
I think it would depend on who's building the team first and foremost. You know, I look at the success of the LA Kings when they were on the run of winning Stanley Cups and they were built on being heavy and possessing the puck below the goal line, you know, and wearing teams down with their physicality, the people responsible for building that team would tell you something completely different than the people responsible for building the Pittsburgh Penguins run of Stanley Cups, you know, built on team speed and, you know, having mobile defenders. I look at how the Carolina hurricanes are constructed today with, you know, shot volume defenseman with a group of forwards that all play the same way with high octane speed puck recovery for checking skills. I mean, there's so many different ways to build a winning hockey team, and it looks differently.
For me specifically, you know, I really tend to lean more towards the offensive side of the game, which. I probably, you know, maybe at times overvalue some of the offensive skills. I mean, for, for defenseman, your objective is to defend the rush and protect your net and having players who can do that are important.
But I also think that it's really important to have players who can drive possession and break the puck out of your zone. And the best defense to me is, is a good offense being on the offensive zone. So, using a lab to develop the perfect hockey team probably changes person to person and what they value and what they think winning hockey looks like.
But that's, that's the beauty of the sport is that it can look so many different ways. And I don't think there is a, you know, a one-off answer to that question.
[Jason]
Well, if you ask any person in any profession, they probably say that their resource constrains. So I'm, I imagine that you feel similarly although correct me if, if I'm wrong, but, but assuming that when you think about player development and helping to develop each of the players on your team and collectively as a unit. What are the things that if you had more bandwidth, you would be doing that you're unable to do today?
[Wes]
The one is a problem that I can't solve. And that's time. Time is this finite.
I wish I had more time. And when I say that, it's because again, the many hats that you're responsible for wearing, you know, as a coach. It eats into your time.
And so the time you can allocate towards actually focusing on coaching sometimes is, is really tough. Just to use an example, two days ago, day before a game, I got to the rink at, you know, six, six in the morning to watch some more video, you know, and prepare for the weekend. We had three games in three days.
But there was three injured players who I skated with from nine to 9.45. I got off the ice. We had a team meeting at 10.05. And then there was an optional skate at 10.15, which I went on the ice for a second time in the day. And so by the time 12 o'clock hit, you know, I missed out on a span of almost four hours of being able to.
Work individually, you know, create, I created some individual clips and have individual meetings with players or with special teams going into the weekend that, you know, you can only have your players at the rink for so long. So, you know, by the time I got off the ice from the optional skates, some of the guys I wanted to meet with had already left and you lose track your day. And then to add on top of it, you know, we're leaving on the road tomorrow for a road trip.
So I was finalizing a rooming list and meals at the hotel and. Making sure that we had our ice time booked for, you know, our road practice. There's, there's just all kinds of different responsibilities.
So maybe if I could clone myself to be able to do some of those things, that would be great. But I do think. You know, we really briefly touched on on AI at the beginning of this.
It's a really interesting discussion to have about, you know, what. What AI is capable of and how we can incorporate it into our day to day. I mean, I firmly believe just because you can doesn't mean you should, and I have probably a moral opposition to responsible use of.
Of AI. It's, it's a, it's a scary, robust technology that I think we need to be careful with. But I also think that it would be ignorant to think that there aren't utilizations that could actually optimize what our day looks like.
Again, I don't have a, I don't have a clear vision for what that would be necessarily. I've certainly, you know, dipped my toes into using it for some of the administrative parts of my job that certainly streamline the process and create more time for myself. But then what it looks like from a player development standpoint or a team standpoint.
You know, maybe developing, developing software that starts to think, think for itself based on. You know, your own inputs if video could be clipped by a eye looking for some of the patterns or habits or skills that you're actually manually breaking down. And being able to create notes would be a pretty cool way to provide players quicker access to.
You know, some of your own thoughts or evaluations of their game that. You know, technology may be able to provide for you, but I will say. You know, even in my, you know, eight to 10 years coaching in the OHL, the amount of resources that I had access to.
Evolved so immensely that it can almost get overwhelming, like we. At one time had, you know, our analytics performance analytics from a from a hockey analytics company. We worked with a behavioral analytics company that did assessments with our players.
You know, about communication style about their behaviors about their. Adapted style about their values and how to communicate with them. You know, we had access to video of every player you could possibly imagine in the world through instant.
You know, we had iPads on the bench. We had. Three different, you know, video platforms that we could use from a teaching standpoint or evaluation standpoint.
I mean, there's just, there's so much. Available that I think it's really important. That you don't get lost in.
Or you lose yourself in all of the resources that are available. I bring it back to hockey is a people business coaching is a people business. I think there's no amount of resources or technology that will.
Ever take that away that, you know, human performance is driven through humans. And I think it's really important that a good coach never loses sight of the fact that. It's relationship first.
It's it's a person first. It's a player centered holistic development. That focuses on the individual and.
I think that's the most important thing.
[Jason]
I've really been thinking about this concept of closing the loop where. You go out and play and then. You assess your performance and then you identify high frequency high failure rate things to work on.
And then you work on those things in ways that are translatable to a game environment and then you play again, right? It's not necessarily every game in between, but just at some cadence over the course of a season over the course of a career, right? That's closing the loop like you perform you assess you iterate and then you perform again, right?
And that that closing that loop is important to long term development. So I'm going to stop there. Do you agree or disagree with that?
[Wes]
Yeah, no, I think that's a good summary.
[Jason]
And it seems like today, I mean, and again, my perspective is more at the youth level. And also I certainly am not at the youth level in every club or team across every level in every geography around the world. Right.
So I'm trying to learn, right? But like I, you know, in my own little bubble, right? It seems like you play and then you run around to a bunch of individual skills and then you play and then you run around to a bunch of individual skills, but that largely that loop is not getting close as effectively as it could or should be.
Agree or disagree? Yeah, without a doubt. Okay.
So, so it seems like in terms of framing the problem slash opportunity were aligned so far. Now there's these video coaches starting to pop up, right? And they might review your shifts and give you feedback and maybe that's helpful.
But one, there's a wide range of quality of these video coaches and their backgrounds, right? Two, there's not continuity where you might hire them for a game, right? But they're not like with you throughout a season.
And then three, they're not, you know, there's no coordination between them and the people that are actually getting you on the ice for all those individual skills. So therefore, whatever they observe, even if they're telling to you, it's not getting reinforced in ways that turns to habits. And as you said earlier in this question, without turning to habits, what's the point with me so far?
Yeah. Okay. So, I, it's not like I'm jumping to, you could build this or you could build that.
But if you just start with, how do we close the loop more effectively for more people over time? And if you could do that at scale, it would help those individuals and it would help the game. Agree?
For sure. Yeah. So that's what I've become obsessed with, right?
Is finding a way to tackle that problem, right? Especially because it's not a problem you need to hockey. I mean, talk to football families, talk to basketball families, talk to soccer families, talk to field hockey families, talk to lacrosse families, talk to like a lot of sports I haven't even thought about.
Like, it's all the same, like maybe to different degrees, maybe it's different flavors, but like that whole concept of like the loop not getting closed. And if we could close the loop more effectively, it would, you know, help bring the game back into balance by helping people think the sport holistically as a team better. Like, that seems consistent, right?
So anyways, it's like, all right, well, how do you do that, right? And so, well, now there are coaches out there that are closing the loop for players, but those coaches tend to be high end player development consultants. They're very expensive.
It's very manual. And, you know, because if it's a lot of work per player, it means they can only, you know, they have to charge a lot of money and then who pays a lot of money to either really high end players, or it's really wealthy people, right? But in that own little bubble, right, it seems like a pretty powerful concept for those that get access to it.
[Wes]
Agree or disagree? I definitely agree with that.
[Jason]
Okay. Well, I've observed that as I've met more of these people in my travels on the show and, you know, starting to watch how they work up close and stuff like that. It's like, I've just developed conviction in the power of closing the loop.
And I'm seeing an action in this kind of microcosm for the privileged few, the loop getting closed, right? And so it's like, all right, well, how do you close the loop for more people at a more affordable price point, right? And there's a lot of different ways to do it.
But for starters, if you just sat with these coaches over time and any time they saw something in video, you annotated, you know, here's the clip that they saw. Here's what they saw in it. And then here's, you know, here's what they liked or didn't like about it.
And then here's an example of someone doing it better. And you just started building a database of all of those clips alongside the annotations, alongside example clips of others doing it better, right? With enough reps and with enough edge cages and with enough scale, you could start to, like, you know, have this army of information you could hand in machines and teach them maybe not in a reliable way, especially not initially, but to at least start directionally doing some of that legwork on behalf of the coach.
Now, there's a number of issues there. One is back to that philosophically. Well, each coach might have a different philosophy and there's no right or wrong.
So it's like, okay, so is it one? Well, you know, is it like one methodology that you're using or is it choices of different methodologies or some blend of different methodologies and best practices and some of that depends on how much consistency there is across these, these minds, right? And then another is like, well, how do you deliver it?
Could you deliver it in a digital only way that makes a difference? Should you have to get a monies? And if you get a monies as well, like, do you have, you know, physical coaches that get the monies with?
Do you have a hand off that you hand to whoever they do their skills with in person? You know, is this something delivered individually to players and families or is it delivered by coaches to teams? Like, I don't know, right?
But again, it's just back to that kind of core issue of like, how do you close the loop more effectively and use technology to do that to reach more people at a lower price point per player and family? So I'd love to just get your reaction to that general theme.
[Wes]
Yeah, I mean, it sounds a little bit like what we started to talk about when you asked me about having resources to help me do my job. I mean, I think even for just a coach to be able to do their day to day, that type of resource would be extremely valuable. I think there's a lot of coaches who are already building those types of databases on their own.
I know I certainly have, I've lost track of how many external hard drives I have with, you know, video.
[Jason]
But it's all silo though, right? No one's sharing with each other and there's no kind of mothership that's like incorporating the knowledge across to build a machine that can kind of democratize that information at scale. It's, it's really hard to find that information.
There's a lot of, I know, because I'm trying to find it, you know, just as a dad for my own kid and it's unbelievable like the information's out there, but it's so siloed and black box and it's, you know, even the people that are doing it. It's like, it's hard to kind of gather all of that material to chart a, almost like a curriculum or development path for any player through each, you know, through the progression through their game. And that's, and that's, you know, that's not just age it's also position, right?
Then it's also like, well, what style of coach do they work with because you don't want to, you don't want to conflict with whatever they're getting from their team. I don't know. It's a lot to think about, but like, I feel like to your point, the information is there, but it's siloed and it's not, you know, it's not harnessed in a way that could be most effective if you take away individual agendas and IP and self interest.
[Wes]
Yeah, without a doubt. And I do think touched on earlier, barrier to entry in the sport of hockey is a major challenge. That's just to even participate in the sport.
Never mind to be able to succeed in the sport or thrive in the sport in a way that, you know, I think a lot of people who participate dream of being able to get to the highest level they possibly can. And so there's not just a barrier to entry, but there's a barrier to entry to the next level of it. I mean, I still believe perspective is extremely important and what the goal of participation for most people should be having the best experience you possibly can at the level you're at.
And whatever that looks like, you know, the best experience you could possibly have, that should be at the forefront of any coach or anyone who's responsible for delivering that experience. There is an imbalance access to resources, training, information that exists. And I think it's a worthy endeavor of anybody to help level the playing field.
And to me, you know, that's something that it's honorable and certainly something that that I've, you know, been passionate about myself and my coaching career is trying to help deliver, you know, because I've been fortunate to have access to great resources and great experiences and great mentors and great teachers. And, you know, I want everybody who participates to be able to have the same level of access and that probably doesn't exist right now. And it's a major challenge in the sport.
So it's worthy to be able to look into how we can help level the playing field or deliver access. To those resources to people in a way that so few have access to now.
[Jason]
I mean, technology is not there, but it's improving rapidly. I mean, the need seems there and the knowledge seems there. I think, I think a big thing that I don't have an answer to is incentives, because, because each, each coach is like, well, I'm not, I'm not going to share, you know, even with my fellow coaches, let alone with, you know, like with a platform that's going to serve millions of people like that.
It's like, what's in it for me, right? And I don't blame them. That's their livelihood, right?
But at the same time, I don't think it doesn't displace the high end coaches, it just opens up the kind of thing that, you know, that their clients get access to two people that would never be their clients right. And it, and it also, you know, could, if incentives were right, it could, you know, provide them an incremental revenue stream beyond their core business. It could essentially, like, give them away to make more money without more hours in the day.
It would enable them to build their brands and reach more people, right? But, but, but, but, but, like, yeah, but what's the model and how, and is it one of them, or is it all of them, or is it handpicked ones, or, you know, it's like just, I don't know, it's a lot to think about. And as smart as the machines get, like, even if the machines were right, like, to your point, like, people still want to deal with humans because there's a whole people part, like the, you know, the Socratic method, question asking, trust building, you know, really getting to know someone as a player building that chemistry, camaraderie, like, all that is always going to matter, right?
And so, it's like, just because you can doesn't mean you should, and like that, that's true too. So, I don't have answers to any of the stuff. This is just kind of the general area where I'm kind of trying to steep in as I talked to, you know, have more great discussions like this and keep learning.
[Wes]
Yeah, they're big questions that, you know, I think in my experience, a lot of people are asking similar ones, and having a similar experience and frustration with what their experience in the sport is. And, you know, I think, you know, seeking answers is worthy. And I also think having more questions is probably, you know, the best way to go about finding a good way.
I certainly, you know, as much and as long as the discussion we've had is I have far more questions than I have answers, and I just do my best to chime in with my perspective.
[Jason]
Yeah, no. And I mean, I just get up every day and try to just push the push the ball forward a little bit, right? And, and just do that consistently over a long period of time and, you know, it's the best you can do.
Absolutely. Well, West, this has been awesome. We've covered so much.
I've learned a ton. Anything I didn't ask that you wish I did or any parting words you'd like to leave with listeners.
[Wes]
I think if, if nothing else for anybody listening, whether it's a parent, a player, or, or a coach, and I just not to be repetitive, but I really think. The objective of participating in any, in anything, nevermind sports, but in anything is to enrich your experience and enjoy it. Don't forget to enjoy what you're doing.
If you can't enjoy it along the way. And I think when you do find a way to find the joy that I got, you know, I worked with a coach who repeated often that, that work without joy is, is drudgery and work with joy is high performance and fighting the joy and the work and just participating is a really good way to get to where you want to go.
[Jason]
Well, great point to end on West. Thanks again for making the time and wishing best of luck to you and, and the team in the, in the remainder of the season and, and looking forward to keeping the dialogue open as well as as we both get further along on our own journeys in the sport.
[Wes]
Awesome.
[Jason]
Thanks you for having me, Jason. And share it with someone serious about their game. See you next week.