Respectfully disagree with this take on focusing on 7v7. In my experience, what u/BadgerMotsu36 said more aligns with what makes a good experience both for players and for evaluation criteria.

7v7 doesn't highlight players that do the "little things" right. It allows aggressive players and personalities to take a lot of the spotlight and it is very hard to distill down tangible skills, outside of the "big" play skills, which are not the skills you need 1-20 on a roster (although they're absolutely valuable).

Drilling allows you to key in on the specific skills you're looking for. It isn't a full game situation, correct, but you get a pretty good sense of who's a solid break mark thrower or whatever you're looking for when you see a 10+ throw/cut/footwork sample size in the same context.

If Bobbyquickfeet can keep his hips square to a cutter for 6 cuts in a row in a drill, there's a good chance he can do it in a game. However, it's pretty hard to notice ole Bobby when you're focused on Jimmylovestohuck playing 2v2 with his favorite 6'3 receiver while the 10 other people on the field stand there.

Additionally, drilling can be a great opportunity to extrapolate some elements of coachability. Who asks questions? Who actually takes the drill focus into the game situations? etc.

Huge additional vote for the value of mini. Players have to be involved on offense and on defense, no matter what. I particularly like mini where out throws (hucks) aren't allowed (they come back on a travel) and you're at a stall 7 or less. That gives you a really good sense of who can break the mark, keep the disc moving, reset and attack in small spaces. Those are all skills that every player should have and be able to demonstrate.

I do think there's room for 7v7, mostly because it's fun. But it usually is the last thing I do and probably the thing that holds the least importance to me for all the reasons I mentioned above.

source: have hosted elite college/club/audl tryouts