Your Elite Prospects means NOTHING

Hey Hockey Hacks Community

There’s a difference between what you’ve done, and showing what you can do.

I came across this idea from Codie Sanchez (unfortunately, I can't recall the exact source), and it's a game-changer.

Here's the gist: receipts are what truly matter. It's about showing what you can do, not just relying on what you've done in the past (your resume).

Basically what this means is that she looks to hire anyone who can show what they can do, not by looking at what they’ve done before, but by giving them an opportunity to succeed. That’s the RECEIPTS.
That is why she’s NOT a fan of anyone’s resume. It’s an unreliable PREDICTOR for how good a new hiring is.
Think about it —— do you want someone who boasts about their past achievements or someone who can demonstrate their skills and potential to succeed?

That's why I'm not a fan of resumes. They're unreliable predictors of future success.

Now, let's apply this to your Elite Prospects profile.

Sure, Elite Prospects is like your hockey resume. Coaches and scouts check it out to get a glimpse of your past achievements.

But here's the thing – how accurate is it in predicting your future performance?

Can you really determine a player's potential just by looking at their past stats?

I have my doubts.

One major issue with Elite Prospects is its ability to predict how well someone will perform in the future. Past performance doesn't always guarantee future success.

So why would you use a metric that does not predict what will happen next or how well someone will do?

If your system makes you happy and does a good job of predicting, then you have a good system for training and/or building your team. If you don’t have that, you have a flawed system.

The reason you need predictability is simple and straightforward - you won’t be able to build a competitive, championship team without knowing EXACTLY what you’re getting out of your players.

And then there's the challenge of communication. Great players often struggle to articulate the intricacies of their skills and mechanics. It's what my friend Jason Yee of Train 2.0 Hockey calls the "Demi-God" effect.

Ever tried asking Connor McDavid or Nathan MacKinnon to break down their moves? It's not that they don't care – it's that they're speaking a different language, one that doesn't always translate to explaining their kinesthetics and movements in great detail.

Coaches (at least the good ones) are great at articulating the language of skills and mechanics that the great players otherwise could not articulate.
And you see this articulating of skill problem everywhere in hockey; great players often don’t develop the ability to communicate exactly what they do that makes them great.
A classic “Demi-God” effect as my friend Jason Yee of Train 2.0 Hockey says.

If you ask McDavid or Mackinnon about what skills they are good at, they won’t be able to articulate the KINESIOLOGY of their movements. It’s not that they don’t care about explaining what they do (maybe), it’s that they’re speaking a language that doesn’t translate deeply to what exactly they’re doing.

So, when it comes to evaluating coaches or players, relying solely on resumes or past accomplishments might not give you the full picture.

Take me, for example. If you judged me based on my past, you'd think I was a terrible hockey player. But through dedication and strategic training, I've transformed my game completely.

I’m going to link to my Elite Prospects page, just so you can see the fallacy of resumes.
Compare that with my case study of how exactly I transformed my hockey abilities.
And also look at this success story from John so you can see the work we produce instead of obsessing over past achievements or failures.

If you're ready for a transformation of your own, check out the Hockey Hacks System.

Let's focus on receipts, not resumes.

Yours in Hockey Hacks,
Mason