Johns Hopkins 2022

[51percentcorn]

87 team was Larry LeDoyne who transferred from UVA.
Can't recall if he scored in the NC game, but he played an instrumental role that season and had some big games for the Jays that year.
Re: Johns Hopkins 2022Quote Sagittarius A*
by Sagittarius A* » Thu Apr 28, 2022 8:47 am

Nice pull - credit where credit is due

It's hard to compete for the top players in the portal when you are not a playoff contender.

A statement with some truth to it - 2 for 2 - stop - don't mess it up. I agree 100% - if you are a higher profile transfer that many programs would want from a lacrosse standpoint - especially if you have not won a title - then looking at programs where that appears to be a greater probability undoubtedly enters the equation. So from that standpoint Hopkins is on the debit side of the ledger right now - if you think that is entirely RD's/JB's and PM's fault - I disagree. Look at some realities:
- There are 40ish programs for graduate studies at Johns Hopkins - there are 230 and 11,000 people in graduate studies at the University of Maryland. 20% of Hopkins graduate programs are in Biotechnology - I don't want to insult anybody's intelligence but I will say it would be pretty hard to be a DI athlete and get your masters in regenerative and stem cell technologies. People can obviously do it - but that's not Accounting 201 in the business school.
- There's money - both in how much the school costs and the availbility of scholarship money. If you are a BSD on the lacrosse field you probably want some money - who has it? Who can orchestrate some capology to give it to you? I know '06 thinks its easy cheesy lemon squeezy to kick people off the team and do whatever you want - SEC football right - doesn't work that way.
- Roster Size - I just did the math earlier - you are starting at 56/57 total in possible returnees + enrollees - how much room do you really have? This isn't SEC football - Milliman took alot grief for cutting players over the last two years - I think the roster is too big by ALOT - but the reality is he can't cut 6+ kids every year - it will impact recruiting big time
- Team Chemistry and recruiting - it's worked out great for Maryland this year - it doesn't always. One year rentals can cause alot of resentment. Are you kicking the can down the road and if you are a consistent/aggressive transfer player - what do recruits thinks?
- Two way street - hey we all can name the obstacles to Hopkins as a destination. If they are applicable to a recruit - they are possibly even more applicable to a transfer because he didn't choose Hopkins in the first place - whether it's Petro Milliman whomever - the player also has to want to come here

[wgdsr]

doc,
didn't think you could have hotter takes than transformative class, top 10 yr end 2021 and by osmosis 2022 hopkins, but... kudos!!!

Thank you, thank you very much.

It takes a special skill and talent.

DocBarrister

now with emmert stepping down, there is "the transformation committee".
https://www.si.com/college/2022/04/27/n ... ee-changes

maybe we will test if daniels, alum $, et.al. want to get hopkins back in the top 10.

[Big Dog]

There was a recent article on Major League Baseball. Apparently, MLB still takes in huge amounts of money from selling broadcasting rights. However, the ratings are terrible on the cable and streaming chanels. But ratings are not where the profitability comes from … instead, it’s the mandatory bundling of those MLB games as filler with other products that people actually watch.

In other words, people may only want to watch content A, B, and C, but the bundler also requires them to buy unpopular D, E, and F if they want the popular three. That’s where MLB games are—D, E, and F, which few people (except mostly old geezers) watch.

College lacrosse can be bundled the same way. You want college basketball and college football? You’ll need to pay for college lacrosse, college bowling, and college softball as well. Just a hypothetical example.

DocBarrister

That sounds like an interesting article, Doc. I'd enjoy reading it if you still have the link handy.

I'm an economic nitwit, really, but in general I'm not sure you can (lawfully) raise the value of stuff nobody wants to buy just by "bundling" it.

Like, if I go into Starbucks and ask for a coffee, and they say, "Coffee is $2.00, but you can only buy it bundled with a $1.00 DocBarrister cool shades temporary tattoo, so the total price of the bundle is $3.00," that's functionally the same as saying the selling price of the coffee is $3.00. If I'm still OK with buying, you could've just sold me the coffee at that price to begin with, and you wouldn't be out the $0.10 you spent to acquire the tattoo.

If I'm willing to buy a coffee for $2.50, and for some reason I think a DocBarrister tattoo is worth $0.50 but not $1.00, then you've made a sale, and if you want you can allocate $2.00 in revenue to the coffee and $1.00 to the tattoo and pay your suppliers accordingly. Presumably there's a reason for bundlers to do it that way, but the bundling here hasn't actually changed the market value of any item in your inventory.

The obvious complication to this basic model is: what if it's a monopoly seller? Then the upside potential of bundling is obvious! As is the potential illegality. I'm pretty sure I've reached the limits of knowledge when I say that how that would play out in any particular regulated industry "implicates antitrust law."

Here you go.

Casual observers may assume that despite this lack of popularity, baseball is still somehow insanely valuable. This is an illusion. Major League Baseball generated around $11 billion in revenue in 2019, but this figure does not accurately reflect the demand for its product. The astronomical salaries that continue to be enjoyed by the sport’s stars (if that is the mot juste) are a result not of the game’s nonexistent popularity but of the economics of cable television providers, who bundle regional sports networks alongside dozens of other channels so that anyone with cable TV is buying baseball whether he likes it or not.

Mike Trout’s $426 million contract is effectively being paid by millions of grandparents who just want to tune in to Anderson Cooper or “Antiques Roadshow.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/opin ... alize.html

DocBarrister

Doc:

the BiG doesn't think that the men's lax QF are worth televising. (Instead the BiG office must believe that showing replays of last year's football season will garner a greater veiwing audience than Hop-PSU.) So, how in the heck is lax gonna get this big private investment bundle if the current Network -- which already broadcasts on the cheap -- doesn't even think its own championship tournament must-see TV?

[Homer]

Here you go.

Casual observers may assume that despite this lack of popularity, baseball is still somehow insanely valuable. This is an illusion. Major League Baseball generated around $11 billion in revenue in 2019, but this figure does not accurately reflect the demand for its product. The astronomical salaries that continue to be enjoyed by the sport’s stars (if that is the mot juste) are a result not of the game’s nonexistent popularity but of the economics of cable television providers, who bundle regional sports networks alongside dozens of other channels so that anyone with cable TV is buying baseball whether he likes it or not.

Mike Trout’s $426 million contract is effectively being paid by millions of grandparents who just want to tune in to Anderson Cooper or “Antiques Roadshow.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/opin ... alize.html

DocBarrister

Thank you.

Reading the op-ed (not actually an "article," but the line between news and opinion tends to be a bit of a moving target for this particular poster) already knowing Doc's reaction to it was a really glorious DocBarrister moment for me. Anyone who's been enjoying Doc's speculations up to this point is really encouraged to click on the link to the NYT piece. It uses phrases like "current (absurdly inflated) market valuation," and although very much tongue-in-cheek, is clearly based on the normal-person premise that market failures are ultimately unsustainable and sooner than later the selling price for baseball telecasts will revert to reflecting its actual economic value. Doc reads the same words and the dollar signs start popping off like flashbulbs above his head.

That combination of unbridled optimism and instinctive attraction to rent-seeking as an entrepreneurial strategy, it's just -- nobody does it better. Like wgdsr said, a generational talent.

[Hail to the Victors]

...
Reading the op-ed (not actually an "article," but the line between news and opinion tends to be a bit of a moving target for this particular poster) already knowing Doc's reaction to it was a really glorious DocBarrister moment for me. Anyone who's been enjoying Doc's speculations up to this point is really encouraged to click on the link to the NYT piece. It uses phrases like "current (absurdly inflated) market valuation," and although very much tongue-in-cheek, is clearly based on the normal-person premise that market failures are ultimately unsustainable and sooner than later the selling price for baseball telecasts will revert to reflecting its actual economic value. Doc reads the same words and the dollar signs start popping off like flashbulbs above his head.

That combination of unbridled optimism and instinctive attraction to rent-seeking as an entrepreneurial strategy, it's just -- nobody does it better. Like wgdsr said, a generational talent.

In fairness, the line seems to be a bit of a moving target for the news media as well...

[steel_hop]

Show us a Hopkins "championship" team that did NOT have a transfer scoring goals. You can't.

carry on

Look - I think my opinion of Doc B is pretty clear but you are splitting atoms not hairs by counting Matt Bocklett's 1 goal in 2007 - otherwise everyone else was home grown - his point about transfers contributing greatly to Maryland's success is correct - his opinion that Hopkins can be more "Aggressive" in the transfer portal is Nonsense

Matt Rewkowski started at Duke before transferring to Hopkins. I know he scored some goals in the 2005 season.

[flalax22]

Listening to lacrosse podcast today and that's what the hosts made it sound like

Which podcast? And how would anyone know about a mass exodus yet? If you look at it by class - doesn't make alot of sense. I'm sure there will be a few - only 6 HAVE to be gone and 12 are arriving - if I counted correctly the current roster is 51 so if everyone else returned then you are looking at 57. One would think that Lyne will choose not to try to exercise his 2nd medical red-shirt since he's been here since 2017 so the starting number is 56. But Maher was off the roster and could return so maybe the starting number could then be back to 57 . Then of course there's the annual jhu06/Doc B Hopkins transfer portal draft - oh wait - that really doesn't exist - but maybe Hopkins picks up one or two. So you're starting point could literally be an untenable 59.

So given that Milliman has exhibited some behavior that indicates he believes those numbers don't work - there are very likely some players that will choose to leave the team and others unfortunately may have that choice made for them. That sucks.

The elephant in the room is of course the player that wears a jersey number between 31 and 33. It certainly didn't turn out like I am sure he expected or the fan base after 2019. It's too bad - sports can be mean sometimes. If he wants to play somewhere else - wish him nothing but the best. He's not a quitter - however - I am sure most think if he plays it will be elsewhere - but I wouldn't fall over if he was back.

By reports I’m hearing he’s done. Both with Hopkins and the game.

[51percentcorn]

Matt Rewkowski started at Duke before transferring to Hopkins. I know he scored some goals in the 2005 season.

Rewkowski was a bigger force for Hopkins in '04 - blew out his knee and returned late in '05 and clearly scored some goals though a shadow of the player he was at Duke and the year prior.
Look, I am not denying the impact of transfers in Hopkins NCAA history - I also don't begrudge Maryland - Rutgers or anyone for obtaining transfers. I have no bias to home grown talent - I merely said team chemistry has to be a factor to be considered. Sag came up with a pull for the '87 team - '07 is clear - Hopkins had a very impactful transfer in Bocklett but he did not score goals. '74 - With FW/JT/RK/RH/BN/DK doing virtually all of the scoring that year was there an impactful transfer? Can't recall. Also 79 - I am looking at the box scores - were any of those guys transfers - again 43 years ago - can't remember

[HillsLax]

"maybe we will test if daniels, alum $, et.al. want to get hopkins back in the top 10."

The narrative the lacrosse team is not supported by the administration is nonsense, most likely propounded by someone who still misses Coach Pietramala. I have heard and read this canard ad nauseum, but no one ever offers any proof. Rather the same lame rhetoric is repeated in an echo chamber. The facts are Hopkins gives scholarships to those in need and to lacrosse players, need or not, hired a successful and well-known coach, has a lacrosse center, is a member of a prestigious major conference, and seemingly has success in getting the players it wants into the University. What else would you like to see happen? For those still pining for Petro it is time to accept he is gone (frankly, several years too late), and support the team or give up. Constant carping is c@*p, unless, of course, you have nothing else in life to do.

[Sagittarius A*]

Matt Rewkowski started at Duke before transferring to Hopkins. I know he scored some goals in the 2005 season.

Rewkowski was a bigger force for Hopkins in '04 - blew out his knee and returned late in '05 and clearly scored some goals though a shadow of the player he was at Duke and the year prior.
Look, I am not denying the impact of transfers in Hopkins NCAA history - I also don't begrudge Maryland - Rutgers or anyone for obtaining transfers. I have no bias to home grown talent - I merely said team chemistry has to be a factor to be considered. Sag came up with a pull for the '87 team - '07 is clear - Hopkins had a very impactful transfer in Bocklett but he did not score goals. '74 - With FW/JT/RK/RH/BN/DK doing virtually all of the scoring that year was there an impactful transfer? Can't recall. Also 79 - I am looking at the box scores - were any of those guys transfers - again 43 years ago - can't remember

'79 may have been Scott Baugher, I seem to recall, but I'm not 100% sure on that.
Pretty incredible player by the way. He had a worm burner that was just about impossible to stop.

[jhu06]

I tried listening to crease dive earlier this year and I have to say a lot of the lacrosse podcasts are absolute garbage. The drunk one w/Rambo and Rabil was ugly for them and whatever it is they think they represent, this larken kemp guy is not bright, dixon spends his time talking about eating his face off at tailgates and saying absolutely nothing that would hurt the feelings of anyone he knows, and the syracuse guys are basically pravda. For such an elitist sport the content does not really match up.

Rabbi Erez Sherman @RabbiESherman Tomorrow, 10 am PST, join me as I speak with Mark Greenberg, Hall of Fame of Johns Hopkins and one of the co-founders of Lacrosse in @israel_lacrosse https://www.youtube.com/user/SinaiTemplePresents/videos . I think the fastest man in lacrosse as one poster once claimed lee coppersmith has played for them.

calan and degnon picked up some nice big ten awards today.

51 makes a good point about the numbers crunch and I wonder especially after that maryland loss if there are guys who have just burned their last bridges with this staff where after two years of trying to develop them they just say this is not going to get better and we'll try something else. especially offensively. Epstein clearly loves the program and school and seems like a wonderful kid, but having a 3x captain back next year scrapping for playing time is not ideal. As I said you have PM cornell jameson b1g/umbc grant jr air force and the amherst assistant, those are very different scouting and recruiting backgrounds from around the country and they should've been able to reach nationally plus the hopkins brand and network to unearth kids. This is not a staff of 4 people at a caa program who've spent their lives on long island and have danowski and gait standing over them for anything that pops up.

[1766]

There was a recent article on Major League Baseball. Apparently, MLB still takes in huge amounts of money from selling broadcasting rights. However, the ratings are terrible on the cable and streaming chanels. But ratings are not where the profitability comes from … instead, it’s the mandatory bundling of those MLB games as filler with other products that people actually watch.

In other words, people may only want to watch content A, B, and C, but the bundler also requires them to buy unpopular D, E, and F if they want the popular three. That’s where MLB games are—D, E, and F, which few people (except mostly old geezers) watch.

College lacrosse can be bundled the same way. You want college basketball and college football? You’ll need to pay for college lacrosse, college bowling, and college softball as well. Just a hypothetical example.

DocBarrister

That sounds like an interesting article, Doc. I'd enjoy reading it if you still have the link handy.

I'm an economic nitwit, really, but in general I'm not sure you can (lawfully) raise the value of stuff nobody wants to buy just by "bundling" it.

Like, if I go into Starbucks and ask for a coffee, and they say, "Coffee is $2.00, but you can only buy it bundled with a $1.00 DocBarrister cool shades temporary tattoo, so the total price of the bundle is $3.00," that's functionally the same as saying the selling price of the coffee is $3.00. If I'm still OK with buying, you could've just sold me the coffee at that price to begin with, and you wouldn't be out the $0.10 you spent to acquire the tattoo.

If I'm willing to buy a coffee for $2.50, and for some reason I think a DocBarrister tattoo is worth $0.50 but not $1.00, then you've made a sale, and if you want you can allocate $2.00 in revenue to the coffee and $1.00 to the tattoo and pay your suppliers accordingly. Presumably there's a reason for bundlers to do it that way, but the bundling here hasn't actually changed the market value of any item in your inventory.

The obvious complication to this basic model is: what if it's a monopoly seller? Then the upside potential of bundling is obvious! As is the potential illegality. I'm pretty sure I've reached the limits of knowledge when I say that how that would play out in any particular regulated industry "implicates antitrust law."

Here you go.

Casual observers may assume that despite this lack of popularity, baseball is still somehow insanely valuable. This is an illusion. Major League Baseball generated around $11 billion in revenue in 2019, but this figure does not accurately reflect the demand for its product. The astronomical salaries that continue to be enjoyed by the sport’s stars (if that is the mot juste) are a result not of the game’s nonexistent popularity but of the economics of cable television providers, who bundle regional sports networks alongside dozens of other channels so that anyone with cable TV is buying baseball whether he likes it or not.

Mike Trout’s $426 million contract is effectively being paid by millions of grandparents who just want to tune in to Anderson Cooper or “Antiques Roadshow.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/opin ... alize.html

DocBarrister

Doc:

the BiG doesn't think that the men's lax QF are worth televising. (Instead the BiG office must believe that showing replays of last year's football season will garner a greater veiwing audience than Hop-PSU.) So, how in the heck is lax gonna get this big private investment bundle if the current Network -- which already broadcasts on the cheap -- doesn't even think its own championship tournament must-see TV?

Crazy talk. Every B1G game was televised on the network or ESPNU.


You guys are way behind the times. Bundle sports? It's called the Big Ten Network and adding Rutgers and Maryland created $20MM a year from previous years payouts. Why? In the NY/NJ/SoConn market, you want to watch the Yankees on the YES network all summer? Great, your paying for the Big Ten Network too.

Books will be written on the genius that is Commissioner Delany and what he was able to do. Starting the network in the first place was against all odds. Then to monetize it like he was able to was just incredible vision and execution. The next contract the Big Ten signs is going to be stratospheric. Early estimates are $100MM per member schools/yr. Just incredible.

[78Jay]

Matt Rewkowski started at Duke before transferring to Hopkins. I know he scored some goals in the 2005 season.

Rewkowski was a bigger force for Hopkins in '04 - blew out his knee and returned late in '05 and clearly scored some goals though a shadow of the player he was at Duke and the year prior.
Look, I am not denying the impact of transfers in Hopkins NCAA history - I also don't begrudge Maryland - Rutgers or anyone for obtaining transfers. I have no bias to home grown talent - I merely said team chemistry has to be a factor to be considered. Sag came up with a pull for the '87 team - '07 is clear - Hopkins had a very impactful transfer in Bocklett but he did not score goals. '74 - With FW/JT/RK/RH/BN/DK doing virtually all of the scoring that year was there an impactful transfer? Can't recall. Also 79 - I am looking at the box scores - were any of those guys transfers - again 43 years ago - can't remember

Scott Baugher

[jhu06]

according to the the school website the game is still at 1 and now on big ten plus. according to big ten plus the game will air at 4pm. So a tape delayed home game on a network where the program receives no revenue. to all those of you who beat me up here for the ridiculousness of our games on big ten plus take a victory lap.

[HopFan16]

It's not tape delayed, I think the B1G+ site is just wrong. Game is at 1pm

[1766]

Zero chance it's "tape delayed" lol.

It's on BTN+ live. As will the other first round game be.

[wgdsr]

"maybe we will test if daniels, alum $, et.al. want to get hopkins back in the top 10."

The narrative the lacrosse team is not supported by the administration is nonsense, most likely propounded by someone who still misses Coach Pietramala. I have heard and read this canard ad nauseum, but no one ever offers any proof. Rather the same lame rhetoric is repeated in an echo chamber. The facts are Hopkins gives scholarships to those in need and to lacrosse players, need or not, hired a successful and well-known coach, has a lacrosse center, is a member of a prestigious major conference, and seemingly has success in getting the players it wants into the University. What else would you like to see happen? For those still pining for Petro it is time to accept he is gone (frankly, several years too late), and support the team or give up. Constant carping is c@*p, unless, of course, you have nothing else in life to do.

from my own end, post was suggesting that maybe we'd get a resolution to this years-long debate if proposals in consideration go thru. wasn't taking sides, not from my perch. i wouldn't know daniels from andy griffith.

[GSP]

"maybe we will test if daniels, alum $, et.al. want to get hopkins back in the top 10."

The narrative the lacrosse team is not supported by the administration is nonsense, most likely propounded by someone who still misses Coach Pietramala. I have heard and read this canard ad nauseum, but no one ever offers any proof. Rather the same lame rhetoric is repeated in an echo chamber. The facts are Hopkins gives scholarships to those in need and to lacrosse players, need or not, hired a successful and well-known coach, has a lacrosse center, is a member of a prestigious major conference, and seemingly has success in getting the players it wants into the University. What else would you like to see happen? For those still pining for Petro it is time to accept he is gone (frankly, several years too late), and support the team or give up. Constant carping is c@*p, unless, of course, you have nothing else in life to do.

from my own end, post was suggesting that maybe we'd get a resolution to this years-long debate if proposals in consideration go thru. wasn't taking sides, not from my perch. i wouldn't know daniels from andy griffith.

...would that make Jennifer Baker, Aunt Bee?

[Wood Sticks 4ever]

Matt Rewkowski started at Duke before transferring to Hopkins. I know he scored some goals in the 2005 season.

Rewkowski was a bigger force for Hopkins in '04 - blew out his knee and returned late in '05 and clearly scored some goals though a shadow of the player he was at Duke and the year prior.
Look, I am not denying the impact of transfers in Hopkins NCAA history - I also don't begrudge Maryland - Rutgers or anyone for obtaining transfers. I have no bias to home grown talent - I merely said team chemistry has to be a factor to be considered. Sag came up with a pull for the '87 team - '07 is clear - Hopkins had a very impactful transfer in Bocklett but he did not score goals. '74 - With FW/JT/RK/RH/BN/DK doing virtually all of the scoring that year was there an impactful transfer? Can't recall. Also 79 - I am looking at the box scores - were any of those guys transfers - again 43 years ago - can't remember

Scott Baugher

Sorry if I missed the mention, but didn't Desimone (on the '78 team) transfer from Navy?

[jhu06]

"maybe we will test if daniels, alum $, et.al. want to get hopkins back in the top 10."

The narrative the lacrosse team is not supported by the administration is nonsense, most likely propounded by someone who still misses Coach Pietramala. I have heard and read this canard ad nauseum, but no one ever offers any proof. Rather the same lame rhetoric is repeated in an echo chamber. The facts are Hopkins gives scholarships to those in need and to lacrosse players, need or not, hired a successful and well-known coach, has a lacrosse center, is a member of a prestigious major conference, and seemingly has success in getting the players it wants into the University. What else would you like to see happen? For those still pining for Petro it is time to accept he is gone (frankly, several years too late), and support the team or give up. Constant carping is c@*p, unless, of course, you have nothing else in life to do.

from my own end, post was suggesting that maybe we'd get a resolution to this years-long debate if proposals in consideration go thru. wasn't taking sides, not from my perch. i wouldn't know daniels from andy griffith.

...would that make Jennifer Baker, Aunt Bee?

It's been put out there by petro in a number of interviews, quint repeatedly, carc and other media members in stories. Thanks.

yes it's absurd the school bowed to the big ten on this.