Building a Player Development Plan

By Joe Sawicki, Director of Sports Medicine, Shattuck-St. Mary's School

The Long Term Athlete Development Plan

This plan started in the fall of 2015 when I first arrived at Shattuck-St. Mary's. I walked into a newly created position where my responsibility would be to bridge the gap between sports medicine and sports performance. The administration had been looking for someone who spoke the languages of both sides and could help integrate the two into a cohesive high-performance unit.

There was already fantastic programming in place in the weight room. However, after speaking with the athletes and coaches it was clear there was no definitive progression plan. My first mission was to create a plan that looked at development through the age groups and logically progress the athletes from one group to the next.  Prior to coming to SSM, I had spent 15 years helping high school postgraduate athletes transition into collegiate athletes.  With this background, I had a pretty good idea what the finished product should look like.  The challenge now was to reverse-engineer the process into a logical, progressive program that would take a U14 level 8th or 9th grader and get them to a college-ready U18 level 12th grader.  

The result was the first Shattuck-St. Mary's LTAD Program.  It created achievement goals for the end of each semester as the athlete moved aged through the program.  This process allowed for flexibility given our national-level game schedules and the unpredictability of athlete readiness and recovery.  We felt that if we were able to achieve these goals by the end of each semester, we could feel confident that the athlete would be ready to move onto the next set of goals and ultimately be proficient in any program they moved onto from here. 

This is the first model:

The Player Development Program

Like most private schools, Shattuck-St. Mary's is expensive to attend and play sports.  We have some very business savvy parents and there is always a question on their return on investment.  At the end of each year, the hockey staff meets to discuss how the past year went and plan for the upcoming year.  Four years ago, the question was brought up as to how to quantify what we do.  We can say that we know we know our program works but can we really show how much it works?  This was the genesis of the Player Development Program.  It quickly became the comprehensive approach to long term athlete development and monitoring progress through our program.

The program is comprised of three parts.  The first part is what they do on the ice.  In addition to team practices, we run optional skill sessions several times per week.  These range from power skating to position-specific topics to age-specific topics.  The second part is what they do off the ice specific to hockey.  This includes individual and team video sessions, mental training, and special opportunities like video chat with an alum or other key member of the hockey community.  The last part is off-ice physical development.  

Our physical development program follows a similar framework as our on-ice work.  We have two scheduled team workouts per week.  These sessions will include age and time specific topics ranging from small group instruction for exercise technique and theory for our younger ages to more advanced topics for our older athletes.  We also provide optional open times for our U18 and U16 age groups to work on areas we have identified as weaknesses or for the athletes to perform exercises we do not have time to complete during our team sessions. 

The Player Development Program (PDP) Form was created to monitor our athlete's strengths and weaknesses and provide opportunities for them to improve the strengths and correct the weaknesses.  This form tracks all the optional opportunities the athlete takes part in.  It also features physical testing results done over the course of the year.

Physical Development Evolution

After the first year, it was clear that our LTAD model needed an update.  The first draft proved to be too simple and we were able to move our athletes through these stages with a pace I did not expect.  Our athletes, in addition to being outstanding hockey players, proved to be sponges which is a true testament to their coachability.  With the inclusion of the PDP form, we were able to changes lanes and create a newer, more logical LTAD program for our athletes.  

This is the revised 2018 model:

We also changed the testing protocols.  In 2015, we tested at the start of preseason with a tabata-style bodyweight only regiment and then nothing for the rest of the year. In the spring of 2017, we dabbled with some post-season testing power movements (vertical jump, SBJ). In the fall of 2017, we decided we would conduct 3 sessions of strength testing during the year. In order to be inclusive of both girls and boys at all age levels, we needed a battery of tests that would accommodate everyone. We agreed that 5RM Bench Press, 1 Arm DB Row, Back Squats, and max time Elbow Plank could give us a good picture of athletic development. I enlisted the help of the coaches to administer the testing and we set it in motion. The process went well, but not perfect. First, we maxed out the weight on 1 Arm DB Row during the first testing session. Second, the max time Elbow Plank proved to be way too competitive and created friction within the players. Last, Back Squat form became a point of contention among the coaches and safety of the athletes became a concern as well.  

Year two provided us with the framework we currently use.  We swapped out Back Squats for Hex Bar Deadlift and Neutral Grip Pullups for 1 Arm DB Row.  We also added Safety Bar Rear-foot Elevated Split Squat (RFESS) as a second lower body exercise.  We also changed the protocol for a couple of exercises.  We still perform 5 RM for Bench Press, Hex Bar Deadlift, and Safety Bar RFESS.  We changed the Neutral Grip Pullups protocol to 4 sets of AMRAP.  We also changed the protocol for Elbow Plank by doing 1:00 on/:30 for 3 sets followed by a pass/fail 2:00 final set.  

We quickly found our strength testing numbers were improving, which we expected, but it did not give us a full picture of athletic performance.  In spring 2019, we incorporated vertical jump into our testing protocol and in the fall of 2019, we began doing static start laser timed 10 yard sprint testing as well.  

The Future of Shattuck-St. Mary's Player Development

One of the aspects of professional development I constantly impress upon my staff is the need to continue to look forward.  With technology continuing to adapt and improve it is easy to fall behind.  However, Shattuck-St. Mary's Hockey was built upon sweat equity and will continue to place that value above all else.  That being said, we continue to evaluate our program and look for ways for technology to aid in our process, not drive it.  We are always looking at technology and protocols that will help us show our constituents the success and value of our program.

-------------------------

Continue the conversation about long-term athlete development by listening to Joe's two appearances on the hockey strength Podcast (links below).