C/F Aidan Park - Shattuck St.Mary's 14 U AAA (2024 Draft)

[Artorius Horus T]

Top prospect for the 2024 Draft?
- has already quite the following (profile page views) in the Eliteprospects
about 15 000

Aidan Park, half American, half Korean.

From Hermosa Beach, CA or Playa Vista, CA

2006 born

5 foot 11, 170 lbs

Shoots : R

19-20 season : 40 goals, 84 points (96 pims).
- John Reed Bantam : 10 points in 5 games

20-21 season : 55 goals, 133 points (18 pims).


Aidan Park, scouting repost, hockey - Google Search





--

Not to be mistaken with the actor/stand up comic Aidan Park

Click to read more...

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

Hard to say. He is only the third best scorer of his team behind Eiserman and Celebrini.

It's hard to say if he's an elite talent. I think not since I hardly see 3 elite offensive talents playing in the same U14 team while the USA.

It's a name noted for being selectable for the 2024 draft.

 

[57special]

Wonder if he is Richard Park's son?

 

[Hazed Existence]

Wonder if he is Richard Park's son?

There is nothing to suggest that this is the case. Just a common last name.

 

[Al48]

Wonder if he is Richard Park's son?

He’s his nephew.

 

[Artorius Horus T]

He’s his nephew.

Really? That's so cool!.

 

[scoutman1]

Hard to say. He is only the third best scorer of his team behind Eiserman and Celebrini.

It's hard to say if he's an elite talent. I think not since I hardly see 3 elite offensive talents playing in the same U14 team while the USA.

It's a name noted for being selectable for the 2024 draft.

Eiserman and Celebrini play on the same line...Park plays a better two way game though Celebrini is no slouch, is physical plus plays on a separate line than the two big guys...personally there is a chance Park becomes better than the other two

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

Eiserman and Celebrini play on the same line...Park plays a better two way game though Celebrini is no slouch, is physical plus plays on a separate line than the two big guys...personally there is a chance Park becomes better than the other two

What you are saying is statistically very doubtful because it is really improbable.

If Park was playing with Epperson & Lee; these and the defenders did not score enough goals for Park to establish 78 assists.

Rather, I have the impression that it is :

Celebrini-Eiserman-Park

Epperson-Ziemer-Lee

The few videos showing them I saw n ° 18 with n ° 17 on the ice.

The videos seem to be unanimous enough to say that Eiserman is the No.1 on the team.
Just saw a 40 minute interview with Eiserman, it looks like Celebrini is # 2

 

[scoutman1]

What you are saying is statistically very doubtful because it is really improbable.

If Park was playing with Epperson & Lee; these and the defenders did not score enough goals for Park to establish 78 assists.

Rather, I have the impression that it is :

Celebrini-Eiserman-Park

Epperson-Ziemer-Lee

The few videos showing them I saw n ° 18 with n ° 17 on the ice.

The videos seem to be unanimous enough to say that Eiserman is the No.1 on the team.
Just saw a 40 minute interview with Eiserman, it looks like Celebrini is # 2

nope Celebrini - Eiserman and Ziemer

Shattuck Lives Up To Top Billing With Impressive Finals Victory (usahockey.com)

also how is it statistical impossible...there is PP and PK lines as well as Park's full line

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

Sorry the videos don't show # 17, # 19 and # 20 playing together systematically.

I saw Park with Celebrini; Park with Eiserman and Ziemer.

I saw very often N ° 18 playing with N ° 19

The lines aren't set in stone, but statistically, Park could never have scored 78 assists without playing mostly with Eiserman.

It's mathematical.

https://nationals.usahockey.com/tou...mes/60401485c07c4328299a6ed2?referrer=6103789

Here is the match points link referred to in the article that you showed. Park scores 3 assists on 2 goals from Eiserman and 1 from Celebrini.

 

[scoutman1]

Sorry the videos don't show # 17, # 19 and # 20 playing together systematically.

I saw Park with Celebrini; Park with Eiserman and Ziemer.

I saw very often N ° 18 playing with N ° 19

The lines aren't set in stone, but statistically, Park could never have scored 78 assists without playing mostly with Eiserman.

It's mathematical.

https://nationals.usahockey.com/tou...mes/60401485c07c4328299a6ed2?referrer=6103789

Here is the match points link referred to in the article that you showed. Park scores 3 assists on 2 goals from Eiserman and 1 from Celebrini.

i actually sent the article where it said the top line of Eiserman, Celebrini and Ziemer dominated....the games I watched on webcast this was also the line...I only watched 5 games on webcast but this was the line and the article said it as well...that is not saying Park was never sub in on the top line here and there through the season until they found who meshed well but all the games i saw and the playoffs the top line was Eiserman, Celebrini and Ziemer....your only thinking Math if there is no such thing as PP or PK where Park with his big shot would have been on the point...I personally do not remember if he was on that but im just saying...Math is thrown out the window with PP and PK units getting points as well. Watch clips and you also see number 9 on the line too in some clips with Zimer and Eiserman so Math would suggest if Waterfield played on the line full time he would have more points than he does....so take Math when trying to figuer out line combos and send it out the window there is no relevance as you do not know juggling, PP, PK, when lines are transitioning and player jumps on or off points generated by a not full transitioned line.

Ziemer also had 60 assists, which he would have to assist on every goal scored by his line if you want to look at Math...so all 4 big guys can not play together, yet all 4 generated good points...Park does play on the PP with Eiserman and Ziemer as well so tons of points come from there as well

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

i actually sent the article where it said the top line of Eiserman, Celebrini and Ziemer dominated....the games I watched on webcast this was also the line...I only watched 5 games on webcast but this was the line and the article said it as well...that is not saying Park was never sub in on the top line here and there through the season until they found who meshed well but all the games i saw and the playoffs the top line was Eiserman, Celebrini and Ziemer....your only thinking Math if there is no such thing as PP or PK where Park with his big shot would have been on the point...I personally do not remember if he was on that but im just saying...Math is thrown out the window with PP and PK units getting points as well.

Game 1 North Dakota 13-0

Park 3 G (1 in PP)
Ziemmer 3 G 2 A

Game 2 Saint-Louis Blues 8-2

Park 4 A (1 in PP)
Ziemmer 2 G, 1 A

Game 3 NJ Colonials 8-1

Park 1 G (in PP)
Ziemmer 2 G, 3 A (1 A in PP)

Game 4 Chicago Mission 4-1

Park 1G (empty net)

Game 5 LA Kings 5-1

Park 1G (empty net)
Ziemmer 2 G, 2 A (2 G, 1 A in PP)

Game 6 Buffalo Saints 7-2

Park 3 A (2 in PP)
Ziemmer 4 A (3 in PP)

Total : Park 13pts (6 G, 7 A) ; Ziemmer 21 pts (9 G, 12 A)

Tournament matches only represent 10% of the season's overall statistical sample.

Looking at the match tables I just saw, it seems there is a turnover in the squad between lines 1 and 2 but that Ziemmer has generally moved ahead of Park in the squad hierarchy.

Most of Park's points are in e.n or p.p with the best ones next to him. It seems he wasn't able to tell the difference like Eiserman did (5 goals in final).

 

[scoutman1]

Game 1 North Dakota 13-0

Park 3 G (1 in PP)
Ziemmer 3 G 2 A

Game 2 Saint-Louis Blues 8-2

Park 4 A (1 in PP)
Ziemmer 2 G, 1 A

Game 3 NJ Colonials 8-1

Park 1 G (in PP)
Ziemmer 2 G, 3 A (1 A in PP)

Game 4 Chicago Mission 4-1

Park 1G (empty net)

Game 5 LA Kings 5-1

Park 1G (empty net)
Ziemmer 2 G, 2 A (2 G, 1 A in PP)

Game 6 Buffalo Saints 7-2

Park 3 A (2 in PP)
Ziemmer 4 A (3 in PP)

Total : Park 13pts (6 G, 7 A) ; Ziemmer 21 pts (9 G, 12 A)

Tournament matches only represent 10% of the season's overall statistical sample.

Looking at the match tables I just saw, it seems there is a turnover in the squad between lines 1 and 2 but that Ziemmer has generally moved ahead of Park in the squad hierarchy.

Most of Park's points are in e.n or p.p with the best ones next to him. It seems he wasn't able to tell the difference like Eiserman did (5 goals in final).

i still do not know what this proves? there is no right and wrong it is predicting the future with these guys...I personally feel Park has a chance to be the best overall from the lines and Eiserman the best offensive player...im also a believer in spreading your talent...we did it in Gatineau when i was there to make two great lines rather than one all star line...just because ziemer is on the 1st line does not mean he is the best...he is by chance the best fit for his two wingers...but again that is my prefrence.....just an fyi, speaking from doing scouting as a job...Math and Stats without personal viewing means nothing, there are players that scored 20 points in 30 games as a forward and still went 1st round ahead of guys who got 40 points in 30 games....stats only tell a small section of the game...

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

If you were a real recruiter, you would know that we cannot definitively assess the profile of U14 players. Especially in the context of a team that outrageously dominates its competition. At this age, we can only highlight the names of very dominant players like Kiviharju or Jecho are in their countries. But you can't determine how they play best, how they're going to evolve.

I already had serious doubts about you from your first message on the topic and the more you talk, the more you reinforce my doubts.

A recruiter would also have understood a mathematical logic obvious to anyone, knowing a minimum of ice hockey. I was reporting the points to show a dynamic that shows Park probably played the rest of the season with Celebrini and Eiserman.

Afterwards you may be a recruiter, but for me, you are not a good one, from what you tell me. 0 credibility.

 

[bigdog16]

If you were a real recruiter, you would know that we cannot definitively assess the profile of U14 players. Especially in the context of a team that outrageously dominates its competition. At this age, we can only highlight the names of very dominant players like Kiviharju or Jecho are in their countries. But you can't determine how they play best, how they're going to evolve.

I already had serious doubts about you from your first message on the topic and the more you talk, the more you reinforce my doubts.

A recruiter would also have understood a mathematical logic obvious to anyone, knowing a minimum of ice hockey. I was reporting the points to show a dynamic that shows Park probably played the rest of the season with Celebrini and Eiserman.

Afterwards you may be a recruiter, but for me, you are not a good one, from what you tell me. 0 credibility.

If you are referring to scoutman he has been around these boards for years. Very respectable poster. Everything you just described him as is blatantly incorrect

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

A good recruiter tries to make the effort to understand others, listen to them. Includes obvious hockey math logic.

This is not the case on this thread. He is only in the contradiction and the war of ego by wanting to go against the grain of a general opinion. Everything a recruiter doesn't have to be.

His rare argument (Park is a two-way player) doesn't work in U14. In this category, the players who stand out try to crush the opposing competition. Players only specialize in puckless play once they encounter the wall that prevents them from dominating.

If you don't dominate at 15 in a U14 league, you have no chance of being the best American player of tomorrow. That was the subject, I will remind you.

I just saw a match from this tournament and the positioning of the camera absolutely does not allow a deep analysis of everyone's games. If he can peremptorily perceive superior skills in defensive play during outrageously dominated matches with such a camera angle, he is a genius.

Like every year, there are a lot of good players in this team but the star is clearly Cole Eiserman.

 

[scoutman1]

A good recruiter tries to make the effort to understand others, listen to them. Includes obvious hockey math logic.

This is not the case on this thread. He is only in the contradiction and the war of ego by wanting to go against the grain of a general opinion. Everything a recruiter doesn't have to be.

His rare argument (Park is a two-way player) doesn't work in U14. In this category, the players who stand out try to crush the opposing competition. Players only specialize in puckless play once they encounter the wall that prevents them from dominating.

If you don't dominate at 15 in a U14 league, you have no chance of being the best American player of tomorrow. That was the subject, I will remind you.

I just saw a match from this tournament and the positioning of the camera absolutely does not allow a deep analysis of everyone's games. If he can peremptorily perceive superior skills in defensive play during outrageously dominated matches with such a camera angle, he is a genius.

Like every year, there are a lot of good players in this team but the star is clearly Cole Eiserman.

LOL you can make what ever logic you want...no recruiter would ever pay attention to stats and if they did no other scout would listen to them, it would be hard to justify a scouting report based on numbers and stats lol...all i know is you can think what you want...but your credibility with numbers and stats just went out the window to me...your puckless play slogan you have shows again ZERO credibility...when I watched Sidney Crosby play midget hockey...LOL the year he dominated with like 184 points or something like that, he played a good two way game for a kid 14 years old, was also selfless....so again if that is the way you think, well that is what you believe (dont ever let anyone tell you, you are wrong). In no way did i say Eiserman was not the best player...I SAID long term Park could turn out better, never said he would, said he has a chance, his two way play with his offense makes it interesting for later down the road. Eiserman is amazing with his size, hands, puckhandling and scoring but has to learn to use his teammates more. Still not sure how two way play does not work in U14, not sure that comment, I have to say that is just crazy to even think, The subject to the post was Aiden Park....nothing of dominating the U14 league as a 15 year old...105 points in the league seems to be a bit of dominating...not sure where you think his stats are anything to sneeze at....also i was not watching clips i was watching the live games that Shattuck Shows that you can tune into and watch the whole game from start to finish, not just clips...Personally though just so you know, I think Christian Humphrys could turn out better than all of them on Shattuck...but your using stats to make assumptions when i watched the games and the lines where how they were, not sure your argument I watched the games i watched and saw it with my own eyes and your using stats to try to prove me wrong LMAO have fun getting credibility with that one...again your stats do not show PP and PK where Park played with Eiserman...

 

[DatDude44]

Not for nothing, James Hagens is and will be much better than Cole Eiserman

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

LOL you can make what ever logic you want...no recruiter would ever pay attention to stats and if they did no other scout would listen to them, it would be hard to justify a scouting report based on numbers and stats lol...all i know is you can think what you want...but your credibility with numbers and stats just went out the window to me...your puckless play slogan you have shows again ZERO credibility...when I watched Sidney Crosby play midget hockey...LOL the year he dominated with like 184 points or something like that, he played a good two way game for a kid 14 years old, was also selfless....so again if that is the way you think, well that is what you believe (dont ever let anyone tell you, you are wrong). In no way did i say Eiserman was not the best player...I SAID long term Park could turn out better, never said he would, said he has a chance, his two way play with his offense makes it interesting for later down the road. Eiserman is amazing with his size, hands, puckhandling and scoring but has to learn to use his teammates more. Still not sure how two way play does not work in U14, not sure that comment, I have to say that is just crazy to even think, The subject to the post was Aiden Park....nothing of dominating the U14 league as a 15 year old...105 points in the league seems to be a bit of dominating...not sure where you think his stats are anything to sneeze at....also i was not watching clips i was watching the live games that Shattuck Shows that you can tune into and watch the whole game from start to finish, not just clips...Personally though just so you know, I think Christian Humphrys could turn out better than all of them on Shattuck...but your using stats to make assumptions when i watched the games and the lines where how they were, not sure your argument I watched the games i watched and saw it with my own eyes and your using stats to try to prove me wrong LMAO have fun getting credibility with that one...again your stats do not show PP and PK where Park played with Eiserman...

You just justified the fact that you are not a good recruiter.

Rather than make the effort to understand the person in front of you who brings you the mathematical explanation which assumes that Park played the majority of the season next to Celebrini and Eiserman rather than Ziemmer, you are stubborn in wanting to contradict him. by stepping away from the heart of the matter and trying to make him look like a fool without really knowing where to go.

Personally, you are everything I don't want on my team.

 

[57special]

You just justified the fact that you are not a good recruiter.

Rather than make the effort to understand the person in front of you who brings you the mathematical explanation which assumes that Park played the majority of the season next to Celebrini and Eiserman rather than Ziemmer, you are stubborn in wanting to contradict him. by stepping away from the heart of the matter and trying to make him look like a fool without really knowing where to go.

Personally, you are everything I don't want on my team.

You come off as a know it all who is making himself feel important by insulting one of the most knowledgeable posters on these boards.

 

[Ryan Van Horne]

nope Celebrini - Eiserman and Ziemer

Shattuck Lives Up To Top Billing With Impressive Finals Victory (usahockey.com)

also how is it statistical impossible...there is PP and PK lines as well as Park's full line

I saw highlights earlier in the year where Park and Eiserman were linemates at even strength, as well as on special teams. Later in the year, and at natonals, Celebrini was Eiserman's centre at even strength.

 

[Ryan Van Horne]

Not for nothing, James Hagens is and will be much better than Cole Eiserman

James Hagens is a late birthday and is not eligible until 2025. I've heard his name touted, but haven't seen him play so I can't comment on how he compares to Eiserman.

 

[scoutman1]

James Hagens is a late birthday and is not eligible until 2025. I've heard his name touted, but haven't seen him play so I can't comment on how he compares to Eiserman.

personally i have heard of him...and saw on boards people rank him right there with Eiserman with some who think at this moment in time he is better...all my recruiter friends have not seen him either....but it will be interesting this year to see or get more info on him.

 

[Trojans86]

Ive seen this guy a ton in socal aaa circuit. Total stud 2way player. He always seemed a bit more physically mature than other guys. Not sure how he has grown in MN but curious if he is still physically so dominant and how that projects for him long term.

 

[mazmin]

Tearing it up as one of only three 2006 born players on his team