Johns Hopkins 2020

[WOMBAT, Mod Emeritus]

Plus it was cold, which per the coefficient of thermal expansion, caused the pipes to shrink and be slightly less that 6’ x 6’.

Ruined Hopkins whole day.

[a fan]

Their shooting is WORSE than last year. And that's saying something.

Is it? Is it saying something? What it's saying is that they are missing two of their best shooters, one of whom is also the engine of the entire offense. When you take a 36% and a 31% shooter out of an offense that shot around 29% last year, do we think overall team shooting percentage goes up or down (and, again, the presence of one of those guys puts his teammates in better shooting positions)? What do we think folks? Might have to call in the researchers at APL for this one.

Regardless, you're talking about a two-game sample size, in which one bad shooting day by one player can seriously skew the team's numbers. Flatly saying the shooting is "worse than last year," based on two games, without acknowledging the gargantuan loss of the team's best offensive player (and another one of its perennial 30%+ shooters), is, what's the word? Oh yeah, stupid!

Stupid?

So having Epstein out there with an injury made it so that Williams and Zinn couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, eh?

Neat.

And I'm fairly certain that everyone here knows this is game #2 for your team. Thanks, though.

Well, sounds like you have it all figured out, as usual. Carry on....

[HopFan16]

Their shooting is WORSE than last year. And that's saying something.

Is it? Is it saying something? What it's saying is that they are missing two of their best shooters, one of whom is also the engine of the entire offense. When you take a 36% and a 31% shooter out of an offense that shot around 29% last year, do we think overall team shooting percentage goes up or down (and, again, the presence of one of those guys puts his teammates in better shooting positions)? What do we think folks? Might have to call in the researchers at APL for this one.

Regardless, you're talking about a two-game sample size, in which one bad shooting day by one player can seriously skew the team's numbers. Flatly saying the shooting is "worse than last year," based on two games, without acknowledging the gargantuan loss of the team's best offensive player (and another one of its perennial 30%+ shooters), is, what's the word? Oh yeah, stupid!

While your reasoning on the 'why' is sound, I think a fan was simply saying that 29% was miserable...and 26.5% is worse.
No more or less than that.

Thank you Count von Count.

Also, this isn't the point, but 29% isn't exactly "miserable." It's not good for a team with playoff aspirations, but, objectively, it's above average. Pretty sure Yale's was actually worse entering the NCAA tournament last year.

[HopFan16]

Their shooting is WORSE than last year. And that's saying something.

Is it? Is it saying something? What it's saying is that they are missing two of their best shooters, one of whom is also the engine of the entire offense. When you take a 36% and a 31% shooter out of an offense that shot around 29% last year, do we think overall team shooting percentage goes up or down (and, again, the presence of one of those guys puts his teammates in better shooting positions)? What do we think folks? Might have to call in the researchers at APL for this one.

Regardless, you're talking about a two-game sample size, in which one bad shooting day by one player can seriously skew the team's numbers. Flatly saying the shooting is "worse than last year," based on two games, without acknowledging the gargantuan loss of the team's best offensive player (and another one of its perennial 30%+ shooters), is, what's the word? Oh yeah, stupid!

Stupid?

So having Epstein out there with an injury made it so that Williams and Zinn couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, eh?

Neat.

And I'm fairly certain that everyone here knows this is game #2 for your team. Thanks, though.

Well, sounds like you have it all figured out, as usual. Carry on....

Yeah, it was a stupid comment, lacking any context whatsoever, based on two games. But about par for the course.

[MDlaxfan76]

Their shooting is WORSE than last year. And that's saying something.

Is it? Is it saying something? What it's saying is that they are missing two of their best shooters, one of whom is also the engine of the entire offense. When you take a 36% and a 31% shooter out of an offense that shot around 29% last year, do we think overall team shooting percentage goes up or down (and, again, the presence of one of those guys puts his teammates in better shooting positions)? What do we think folks? Might have to call in the researchers at APL for this one.

Regardless, you're talking about a two-game sample size, in which one bad shooting day by one player can seriously skew the team's numbers. Flatly saying the shooting is "worse than last year," based on two games, without acknowledging the gargantuan loss of the team's best offensive player (and another one of its perennial 30%+ shooters), is, what's the word? Oh yeah, stupid!

While your reasoning on the 'why' is sound, I think a fan was simply saying that 29% was miserable...and 26.5% is worse.
No more or less than that.

Thank you Count Chocula.

Also, this isn't the point, but 29% isn't exactly "miserable." It's not good for a team with playoff aspirations, but, objectively, it's above average. Pretty sure Yale's was actually worse entering the NCAA tournament last year.

Not sure of the Count Chocula reference(?) (now edited to Count von Count?), but sure 29% is marginally 'above average' for the entire spectrum of the competition, but as you say, it's sure not 'above average' for a 'team with playoff aspirations'.

And you're right, if you win a huge disproportion of face offs and otherwise regularly win the GB battle, then you can get away with a lower shooting %. (ala Yale). I'd add, same if you have such outstanding goaltending, defense and takeaway %, thus gaining a big margin differential in those areas, you can make up for low scoring %'s. You do some combination of those, of course, and you have a very real shot at Championships, Final Four, right?

Bottomline, we're talking about Hopkins and what should be expected for this program's offensive efficiency, shooting % etc.
Is 29% 'above average' for Hopkins?

[MDlaxfan76]

Last exceptional Hopkins goalie? Schwartzman?

Bassett

I was wondering if anyone would put him up there.

Very good goalie.
Not sure "exceptional" by Hopkins goaltending historical standards, but a very good tender, the caliber typically needed to win championships.

Schwartzman seemed to find another gear in the biggest games and thus may come to mind more easily in that regard.

[WOMBAT, Mod Emeritus]

Bob-positive upbeat-didn’t go to Hopkins

62AF0AD1-5F8D-4A88-9F28-34B849400A41.jpeg (81.19 KiB) Viewed 2360 times

[HopFan16]

Is 29% 'above average' for Hopkins?

I mean, in 2018 when they went 12-5, won the Big Ten and made the NCAA quarterfinal, it was 29.4%.

It's not above average for Hopkins, but don't move the goal posts. You said 29% was "miserable." Including playoff games, it was all of 2% worse than national champion Virginia. It was less than 1% worse than Syracuse. Entering the playoffs they were less than half of a single percentage point from Notre Dame and Towson. You're talking about the difference of literally a couple goals over the course of 15+ games/600+ shots between Hopkins and several other playoffs teams. It wasn't good—it wasn't "miserable" either. And, again, they are now without their best player and one of their most accurate shooters, but I suppose that isn't worth mentioning when assessing the first two games of 2020 vs. the entirety of 2019.

[MDlaxfan76]

Is 29% 'above average' for Hopkins?

I mean, in 2018 when they went 12-5, won the Big Ten and made the NCAA quarterfinal, it was 29.4%.

It's not above average for Hopkins, but don't move the goal posts. You said 29% was "miserable." Including playoff games, it was all of 2% worse than national champion Virginia. It was less than 1% worse than Syracuse. Entering the playoffs they were less than half of a single percentage point from Notre Dame and Towson. You're talking about the difference of literally a couple goals over the course of 15+ games/600+ shots between Hopkins and several other playoffs teams. It wasn't good—it wasn't "miserable" either.

Fair enough as to "miserable". Perhaps "poor" would have been the better chosen word...

Just not good enough.
And if lower than that?

I do quite agree that when your best guy, especially a feeder, isn't in the mix, shooting % is likely to suffer as the shots are less likely to come from high % locations.

And of course when your guys taking a large % of the total shots themselves don't stick the ball in the back of the net, that's going to skew the #'s.

It's just not a sustainable path to winning. (again, unless you are so dominant in other areas that it makes up for it).

[jhu06]

"And I'm fairly certain that everyone here knows this is game #2 for your team. Thanks, though.Well, sounds like you have it all figured out, as usual. Carry on....
[/quote]

It's not game 2 of their careers for a lot of these guys particularly on offense.

[a fan]

It's not above average for Hopkins, but don't move the goal posts. You said 29% was "miserable." Including playoff games, it was all of 2% worse than national champion Virginia. It was less than 1% worse than Syracuse. Entering the playoffs they were less than half of a single percentage point from Notre Dame and Towson. You're talking about the difference of literally a couple goals over the course of 15+ games/600+ shots between Hopkins and several other playoffs teams. It wasn't good—it wasn't "miserable" either. And, again, they are now without their best player and one of their most accurate shooters, but I suppose that isn't worth mentioning when assessing the first two games of 2020 vs. the entirety of 2019.

I thought context was implied, but apparently not. So you want context? Ok. No problem.

First of all, comparing your squad to the national champions is stupid, and acting like Hopkins can get away with a shooting percentage similar to UVA's is stupid.

Second of all, it's implied that we're talking about what you need to make the Final Four. If that's not your goal? Keep doing what you're doing. You're right. It's perfectly ok for the two kids you're relying on for scoring have parents in the stands with better shooting percentages.

Third of all, you have an untested G/D and an untested faceoff squad in 2020. This means it's quite likely that you can't get away with average shooting the way that other teams with far better players can. You have to stick your chances, doubly so against top teams. Again, this assumes you want to make the Final Four.

Fourth of all, why in the world are you looking at Syracuse, Towson, and ND's shooting from last year? Not Final Four teams.

Lastly, you have two proven scorers who can get the D moving, and one hopeful. Proven in the sense of: (hopefully) good enough to carry you to the Final Four. One is hurt, and you have no clue if this injury won't hamper him all season. One has had poor shooting over his career. And one hopeful (Zinn) shot poorly last year.

And the three kids who must find the twine if you're to have any chance of making the Final Four didn't find said twine. And that was against a team that's unlikely to make the Final Four.

But you want to pretend like Zinn and Williams were lights out shooters last year, and this one game is an aberration, rather than a continuation of a long term problem? Ok. Go ahead and whistle past that graveyard. Nothing to see here. Everything is Positive! Boy. I sure am stupid.

[HopFan16]

It's not above average for Hopkins, but don't move the goal posts. You said 29% was "miserable." Including playoff games, it was all of 2% worse than national champion Virginia. It was less than 1% worse than Syracuse. Entering the playoffs they were less than half of a single percentage point from Notre Dame and Towson. You're talking about the difference of literally a couple goals over the course of 15+ games/600+ shots between Hopkins and several other playoffs teams. It wasn't good—it wasn't "miserable" either. And, again, they are now without their best player and one of their most accurate shooters, but I suppose that isn't worth mentioning when assessing the first two games of 2020 vs. the entirety of 2019.

I thought context was implied, but apparently not. So you want context? Ok. No problem.

First of all, comparing your squad to the national champions is stupid, and acting like Hopkins can get away with a shooting percentage similar to UVA's is stupid.

Second of all, it's implied that we're talking about what you need to make the Final Four. If that's not your goal? Keep doing what you're doing. You're right. It's perfectly ok for the two kids you're relying on for scoring have parents in the stands with better shooting percentages.

Third of all, you have an untested G/D and an untested faceoff squad in 2020. This means it's quite likely that you can't get away with average shooting the way that other teams with far better players can. You have to stick your chances, doubly so against top teams. Again, this assumes you want to make the Final Four.

Fourth of all, why in the world are you looking at Syracuse, Towson, and ND's shooting from last year? Not Final Four teams.

Lastly, you have two proven scorers who can get the D moving, and one hopeful. Proven in the sense of: (hopefully) good enough to carry you to the Final Four. One is hurt, and you have no clue if this injury won't hamper him all season. One has had poor shooting over his career. And one hopeful (Zinn) shot poorly last year.

And the three kids who must find the twine if you're to have any chance of making the Final Four didn't find said twine. And that was against a team that's unlikely to make the Final Four.

But you want to pretend like Zinn and Williams were lights out shooters last year, and this one game is an aberration, rather than a continuation of a long term problem? Ok. Go ahead and whistle past that graveyard. Nothing to see here. Everything is Positive! Boy. I sure am stupid.

If the context was implied, then your statement that the shooting is worse this year—through two games and without Epstein and Concannon—than last year is perhaps even dumber (and disingenuous), because that means you knew it didn't make any sense to make the comparison and yet did so anyway.

I compared our shooting percentage to UVA's last year to refute MDlax's claim that it was "miserable." There really isn't that much separating the top half of D1 in shooting (outside of Penn State, which had a historic season). Obviously Virginia is better in many other phases besides shooting. No one has ever argued otherwise.

Nor has anyone argued against pretty much anything else you're saying. I'm seeing a whole lot of straw men here. Yes, we've got problems. Point me to the post where I've implied otherwise. Just a post full of straw men. Try and do better. Never said anything of the sort about Williams or Zinn.

What about Connor DeSimone? He shot 11% last year. He's at 40% through two games. Do we think he worked on his shooting over the offseason? A 30% jump is pretty big. I'd say that two games is not nearly enough to judge one way or the other.

This is on the players, imho. Or, if you prefer, the recruiting of players who are horrible shooters, and not D1 material.

Remind me—which players exactly are not "D1 material"? Feel free to name names.

[a fan]

If the context was implied, then your statement that the shooting is worse this year—through two games—than last year is perhaps even dumber (and disingenuous), because that means you knew it didn't make any sense to make the comparison and yet did so anyway.

A post full of straw men?

You're the one who called my post stupid. Now you're telling me that you agree that your team has problems, and no one is saying different. Maybe pick a lane here?

You dropped a game, you're grumpy, and you're trying to take it out on me. Yep, it's just two games. Yep, it's still February. Yep, we all get that.

All I do is point out that a problem that plagued your team all last year is rearing its head again this year....and you go bananas.

Relax.

[HopFan16]

If the context was implied, then your statement that the shooting is worse this year—through two games—than last year is perhaps even dumber (and disingenuous), because that means you knew it didn't make any sense to make the comparison and yet did so anyway.

A post full of straw men?

You're the one who called my post stupid. Now you're telling me that you agree that your team has problems, and no one is saying different. Maybe pick a lane here?

You dropped a game, you're grumpy, and you're trying to take it out on me. Yep, it's just two games. Yep, it's still February. Yep, we all get that.

All I do is point out that a problem that plagued your team all last year is rearing its head again this year....and you go bananas.

Relax.

I said a specific comment you made was stupid, and I stand by that. You haven't done much to refute that besides arguing a bunch of other things that no one has disagreed with. Neither I nor anyone else to my knowledge here has ever said that the team's overall shooting has been acceptable. It certainly was not this weekend, and I've already said as much.

No one is going bananas. If calling one comment "stupid" is going bananas then I'm not really sure what else to say. There's been lots of criticism the last few days—much of it warranted—but I singled yours out because, well, it was just extra special.

You didn't simply point out that a problem was rearing its head again this year. If that's what you wanted to say, then you would have said it. But you said that shooting is WORSE—in all caps—and then cryptically said "and that's really saying something," which I can only assume was meant to imply that players somehow regressed from last year. What else could that possibly mean? You haven't yet clarified. Definitively claiming that a two-game sample size without a team's best player is worse than the whole of a previous season with that player is, and I repeat, a stupid thing to do.

You also haven't clarified which players are not, and I quote, "D1 material."

[jhu08]

You also haven't clarified which players are not, and I quote, "D1 material."

If this is the case that Hopkins has some (many?) players seeing the field who aren't D1 level, Petro has to be the greatest coach of all time.

[DocBarrister]

Don’t know what all the fuss is about. Blue Jays have a talented team this season. Good speed, size, and athleticism all over the field. Also improved depth compared to past seasons.

Blue Jays also have injuries to key people, lots of new starters and contributors, and a tough schedule. Hopkins is going to be inconsistent for a while.

Vast majority of coaches around the country would love to have guys like Zinn and Degnon on their midfields. DeSimone, Zinn, and Degnon are all on pace for about 20 goals or more this season. I’ll take that.

Zinn is generating a lot of offensive opportunities for himself and others off the dodge. For a lot of players, averaging an additional assist or goal per game is an unrealistic ask. Not so for Zinn ... well within his capabilities to be averaging four points a game (All-America caliber production) versus his current three.

I’m not sold on Darby yet, especially on whether he can ever be a vocal leader of the defense. Issues with clears may be a sign of that. Still, I think our defense is playing better as a team than last year.

If the young men put the work in and Epstein can work his way back to form (and who would wager against him?), this could be a pretty special Hopkins team. Don’t be surprised if that special team takes a few weeks more to develop.

DocBarrister

[a fan]

You didn't simply point out that a problem was rearing its head again this year. If that's what you wanted to say, then you would have said it. But you said that shooting is WORSE—in all caps—and then cryptically said "and that's really saying something," which I can only assume was meant to imply that players somehow regressed from last year.

They have. Do you have a magic wand I don't have? I'm telling you what has actually happened on the field in 2020. What else are we supposed to go on besides actual game results? IL HS recruiting issues?

It cost them a W against Loyola. That means that lack of scoring either cost them a QW, or will count as a bad loss. Take your pick.

[OCanada]

Wombat, You indeed didn’t pick a final score. If memory serves you did predict the goalie and D would collapse or words to that effect.

[Peter Brown]

Don’t know what all the fuss is about. Blue Jays have a talented team this season. Good speed, size, and athleticism all over the field. Also improved depth compared to past seasons.

Blue Jays also have injuries to key people, lots of new starters and contributors, and a tough schedule. Hopkins is going to be inconsistent for a while.

Vast majority of coaches around the country would love to have guys like Zinn and Degnon on their midfields. DeSimone, Zinn, and Degnon are all on pace for about 20 goals or more this season. I’ll take that.

Zinn is generating a lot of offensive opportunities for himself and others off the dodge. For a lot of players, averaging an additional assist or goal per game is an unrealistic ask. Not so for Zinn ... well within his capabilities to be averaging four points a game (All-America caliber production) versus his current three.

I’m not sold on Darby yet, especially on whether he can ever be a vocal leader of the defense. Issues with clears may be a sign of that. Still, I think our defense is playing better as a team than last year.

If the young men put the work in and Epstein can work his way back to form (and who would wager against him?), this could be a pretty special Hopkins team. Don’t be surprised if that special team takes a few weeks more to develop.

DocBarrister

Ring a gosh-darn cow-bell; I agree with a post from DocB!!!!! This is the first, and possibly only post of his, that makes sense, especially the highlight above.

I'm no friend of this program, but my respect is deep. DocB captures this team well with the highlighted sentences above. The boys will recover despite the coach, heck maybe even in spite of the coach! I look forward to them pasting those Tar Heel interlopers this weekend! Get at it!

[WOMBAT, Mod Emeritus]

Wombat, You indeed didn’t pick a final score. If memory serves you did predict the goalie and D would collapse or words to that effect.

Over on the Loyola thread I said the Hop D would get “Ridled” a play on Ridley.

I didn’t specify D or G in making that statement, but I was thinking of Hopkins D-men if you are curious as to what I was thinking at the time I typed that. Specifically, I thought the D-men, two of whom would probably not be playing if certain things had been handled far differently in the offseason, were going to have a much harder time against Loyola than Towson.

That turned out to be fairly true. 10-4 and then could call off the dogs. I mean hounds.